Skip to content

Question for commenters: What’s the hardest team to support?

May 14, 2013, 1:33 PM EDT

Maple Leafs fans AP

Just for fun, I thought we’d piggyback off a poll question they’re asking today on TEAM 1040 radio in Vancouver following last night’s Maple Leafs meltdown in Boston.

The poll question is:

What’s harder — being a Leafs fan, or being a Canucks fan?

At last glance, it was a dead heat at 50 percent each. Which makes sense, because it’s been pretty hard to be a fan of either team.

For Leafs fans, not only did they have to suffer through seven straight seasons of missing the playoffs, when they did finally make them, it ended in nightmare fashion. Toronto is the richest team in the league. It should be a powerhouse.

But hey, at least the Leafs have won the Stanley Cup before (the last one came in 1967, the last year there were only six teams in the NHL). Canucks fans have never been able to celebrate a championship, despite three trips to the finals, two of which went to Game 7. Vancouver is also one of the most hated teams in the league, meaning when the Canucks lose, there’s not a ton of sympathy from other fans.

Of course, Toronto and Vancouver aren’t the only places where hockey fans have agonized over their teams:

—- St. Louis, Buffalo and Washington have never won the Stanley Cup despite being in the league since 1967, 1970, and 1974, respectively

—- Columbus has only made the playoffs once since entering the league in 2000, and has never won a series

—- Florida hasn’t won a series since 1996 and has only been to the playoffs four times in franchise history

—- The Coyotes and Islanders have been consistent laughingstocks for their off-ice issues

—- Flyers fans might have a few complaints about their goaltending through the years

OK, so have your say below. Think of this as group therapy maybe.

  1. fivetozeroingame7 - May 14, 2013 at 1:35 PM

    The choking Washington Capitals

    • sabatimus - May 14, 2013 at 5:16 PM

      If this weren’t PHT I’d say the Miami Marlins.

      • handsofsweed - May 14, 2013 at 5:38 PM

        Dude. If it doesn’t have the word “Cleveland” in it, there’s no way it can compare.

      • imleftcoast - May 14, 2013 at 6:11 PM

        Cleveland Barons?

      • blackhawksdynasty - May 14, 2013 at 9:08 PM

        If you’re gonna go there, I’m a Cubs fan. 1908. Need I say more?

  2. rsl22 - May 14, 2013 at 1:38 PM

    The Flyers are hard to place, since they’ve lost 6 times in the Finals since their last Cup…..but I’d have to go:

    Leafs
    Flyers
    Canucks
    Capitals
    Blues
    Sabres

    Capitals ahead of Blues and Sabres just because of how many times they’ve blown 2-0 series leads and lost Game 7s, etc.

    • DonkeyStick - May 14, 2013 at 1:40 PM

      The Flyers are hard to place….then you place them 2nd? Wasn’t that hard for you was it?

      • rsl22 - May 14, 2013 at 1:42 PM

        If you went by just Stanley Cup futility, they’d be 6th. They won a cup more recently than the Leafs, Canucks, Caps, Blues, and Sabres.

        Therefore, they are hard to place, but I went with 2nd instead of 6th because drought is made worse by 6 blown appearances.

      • rsl22 - May 14, 2013 at 1:45 PM

        In fact, the mere winning of a Cup ever could place them below the other four. So yes, they are hard to place.

      • DonkeyStick - May 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM

        Was just curious

    • flyeredup202 - May 14, 2013 at 1:48 PM

      How can you even put the Flyers in the top 5….. They are always in the playoffs…. this is the 4 time they have missed in like 20 years….. this team is always a contender. Yes our goaltending is supspect at times but only because we are hard on them and want a winner.
      Leafs
      Sharks-Choke every year in the playoffs…. its coming….
      Capitals
      Canucks-Must be hard having great talent and seeing it fall appart
      Sabres- good years in the past….. oh wait they havnt been deep in the playoffs since…. hasek?
      Blues- young team still working on becoming great

      • laxman1944 - May 14, 2013 at 2:04 PM

        Simple……The Flyer is HATED…..for the playing style they used over HALF a century ago…..and many just can’t seem to let it go. But if you new a little back story blame the Fleeger brothers of St. Louis……check out the HBO documentry “Broad Street Bullies”…..an excellent piece.

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:20 PM

        yeah the only hard part of watching the Flyers is the offseason, after we’ve been knocked out… and 29 out of 30 teams could say the same every year. i thoroughly enjoy watching my team come out with a winning record year after year. I don’t want to get too caught up in that fact (because they could always end up like the Eagles), but aside from the final round of their playoffs that year, I find myself satisfied with how my boys play just about every year.

        idk, I think trying to come up with a team whose fans have a hard time is tough if you aren’t a fan of those teams. but I can say, as the Caps are my 2nd team, that loss last night was tough to take.

      • tarotsujimoto74 - May 14, 2013 at 2:23 PM

        Sabres went to ECF in 06 and 07

      • tfaltin - May 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM

        flyeredup – just curious, you don’t think the Flyers should be in the top 5 because they’re always in the playoffs but come up short, and you have the Sharks second because..they’re always..in the playoffs..and…come up…short….

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:40 PM

        tfaltin: that confused me too. I personally wouldn’t put the sharks near the top, but if I had to guess, flyeredup probably has a different definition of “choke” than you…. or hasn’t done his research. sure they went out early last year, but they make it past the 1st round quite a lot.

      • tfaltin - May 14, 2013 at 2:44 PM

        If you want to take it a step further, the offensively minded Sharks fell short for years because of what? Suspect goaltending?! Now that they have goaltending from Niemi and their young kids have officially arrived, I think they might be a rather fun team to root for.

      • flyeredup202 - May 14, 2013 at 2:49 PM

        I have nothing against the Sharks, I would love to see them make a run, but based on whats the hardest team for a fan to support it has to be the under performance of the Sharks…. sure my flyers are not the best at doing so, but they beat the teams they should in the playoffs….. and have made the finals in the past 10 years….. the sharks have had a core in place for the past 10 years and have not done anything with it…..

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:58 PM

        @flyeredup:

        Fun Fact. The Sharks have been in two more playoff series than our Flyers since the 03-04 season.

        The more you know.

      • flyeredup202 - May 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM

        since 03-04…. go back further my friend….. look back 20 years…. see where your sharks land… And I am cheering for them too. Sharks/Boston and Sharks to win… but hardest team to support was the topic…. Sharks have to be up there…. alot of disappointing exits from the playoffs.

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:59 PM

        but ya, I’m rooting for a Sharks/Sens final, just to appease the hater in me.

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 3:26 PM

        First, I’m a Flyers fan through and through. you’re just making it really hard for us Flyers fans to talk about any other team on this post, so I’m trying to equalize that… for what it’s worth.

        ok from 91-92, Flyers have played in 34 playoff series. Sharks 29. Keep in mind that the Sharks STARTED as a team in 91… the Flyers were in full swing for over 20 years.

        and as much as this pains me to put on a PHT post…. fu**….. they have the same amount of cups in that timeframe. I kinda defended you at first lower down this post, but your insistence that the Sharks fans are worse off than the Flyers is kind of ridiculous. it could boil down to this: Flyers are from PA, part of hockey country. Sharks are from Cali. if one team is supposed to win more than the other, it’s the Flyers.

  3. imleftcoast - May 14, 2013 at 1:51 PM

    Columbus. It’s easier when the franchise has had some success. Certainly worse being a Canucks fan in 80/81 than 83 after a SCF appearance. 17 years to think about Harold Snepts feeding Mike Bossy point blank in Game 1.

    • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:22 PM

      too soon to call Colombus. give them 20 years to say they’re really tough to be a fan of. (is 20 years too much? can’t tell if i used that # only because it’s the next benchmark, or if that’s an accurate timeframe to put together a playoff team)

  4. oquintero99 - May 14, 2013 at 1:56 PM

    The Stars. Middle of the pack. Great arena, fans show up only when they win (in spite of the cheap tickets), and a couple of points from getting into the playoffs.

  5. bcisleman - May 14, 2013 at 1:57 PM

    A lot of folks, in and out of the media, like to PRETEND that the Isles have been consistent laughingstocks. Some of the media in question have been Toronto-based and have an understandable need to deflect attention away from their home team’s failings. The most persistent and clueless of these is Steve Simmons who even now insists that John Tavares was foolish not to pull an Eric Lindros on the Islanders and insist on being traded to the Leafs.

    For the record, the Isles had some incompetent and even criminal owners in the 1990s as well as arguably THE WORST GM in history–Mike Milbury. Charles Wang came onto the scene in 2000 with the intent of rescuing a badly mismanaged franchise. He made the mistake of keeping Milbury as GM. Milbury proceeded to make some of THE WORST decisions ever made by any GM–trading away Luongo and Jokinen for inferior talent, passing on Heatley for RDP, trading away Chara and the Spezza pick for Yashin, passing on Zack Parise.

    Wang tried to reassure Isles fans with another bad decision, The Contract. It was meant to assure Isles fans that the Milbury days of trading away the best talent were over. The Smith debacle made Wang look bad, but his replacement, Garth Snow, has done a solid job of rebuilding the team from virtually nothing. The arena problems were more on local politicians. Wang did his best to try to resolve it and never really had any viable negotiating partner among those pols.

    Obviously the rebuild is bearing fruit and some of the best talent is still in the system. The Isles have their arena with a long term, iron clad lease. It should now be obvious to all reasonable people what a fool Steve Simmons (and other Islander haters) is.

    • Jason Brough - May 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM

      So they had awful ownership, management made a bunch of horrendous decisions, the team struggled badly on the ice, but the media was “pretending” the Islanders were a laughingstock?

    • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:25 PM

      that damned media…

      they’re just guys with opinions like you and I, except their opinion is their job.

    • dp2310 - May 15, 2013 at 9:51 AM

      I wouldn’t give Garth Snow a lot of credit either. Both him and Wang are idiots too. How about that Ryan Smyth trade? Definitely one of the worst ever. Hopefully Wang decides to sell the team to Prokhorov and he’ll pump some money into it.

  6. sjsharks66 - May 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM

    Flyers fan calling the Sharks chokers? 1975? Made the playoffs 16 times out of the last 20 years? Lost in the Finals to the Hawks? Did not even come close to the playoffs this year? Goalie cant even stop a beach ball?

    Yeah the sharks are the chokers…

    • loinstache - May 14, 2013 at 2:08 PM

      wow real convincing argument, try some more deflecting questions maybe?

    • chicagobtech - May 14, 2013 at 2:10 PM

      I wouldn’t call the Flyers loss to the ‘Hawks for the Cup a choke job. They gave the ‘Hawks a great series, a Game 6 OT win along with another OT game did not make for an easy victory.

      • phillyphanatic77 - May 14, 2013 at 5:28 PM

        Yeah and the Hawks were favored by most. The Flyers gave them a solid run for their money considering we had Michael Leighton in net. And he gave up, quite possibly, the worst goal in NHL playoff history. Still hate Leighton to this day for that. But they were a 7th seed anyway, so it’s hard to call it a choke job.

      • laxman1944 - May 14, 2013 at 7:12 PM

        seriously it’s not like the Detroit series where they were just totally out classed…..

    • bcs1283 - May 14, 2013 at 2:15 PM

      Yes the Sharks are chokers. The only reason why the won their first round series is because they were matched up with even bigger chokers.

    • bcs1283 - May 14, 2013 at 2:15 PM

      Yes the Sharks are chokers. The only reason why they won their first round series is because they were matched up with even bigger chokers.

      • flyeredup202 - May 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

        The Flyers are competitive every season….. the Sharks are a lock to be knocked out in the first round if they play any team that has heart…… Flyers lost over 350 Man games this year due to injury, second highest in the league. We dressed 17 AHL players to fill those spots, how can you even compare that to a fairly healthy Sharks team who should have just rolled over and in the first round and let Vancouver lose it in the next round, the goalie issues would have been more interesting to watch.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - May 14, 2013 at 5:32 PM

      The Sharks have been close to the top of the standings, winning the division several times, yet have never translated that success into anything of note in the playoffs other than losing in the conference finals to teams inferior to them (in two cases at least) 2004 lost to the Flames 4-2, the Flames were nowhere near as good as the Sharks. 2006 lost to the Oilers 4-2, the Oilers were nowhere near as good as the Sharks. 2010 lost to the Hawks 4-0, Hawks were as good as them but the Sharks couldn’t even win a game? 2011 lost to the Canucks 4-1, the Canucks were better than the Sharks and I guess at least the Sharks won a game.

      You can take shots at the Flyers (it’s pretty easy) but at least they’ve been to the finals, in the one year they had a common opponent they lost to the Hawks 4-2 going to OT in game 6, meanwhile the Sharks just rolled over and didn’t even put up a fight.

  7. sjsharks66 - May 14, 2013 at 2:19 PM

    Im not calling it a choke job. When you have had little to no success in 38 years, you really have no room to talk about other teams under performing.

    • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:29 PM

      …except that the article asked PHT readers to voice their opinion on which team is tough to be a fan of.

      “EVERYBODY SHUT UP UNLESS YOU’RE GONNA NAME YOUR OWN TEAM!”
      -sjsharks66

    • ml3939 - May 14, 2013 at 3:34 PM

      This troll is just a Pens fan parading under a Sharks monitor. 5 of the Flyers 6 Cup losses are to teams that won a minimum of 4 Cups during that incarnation of their team. They were the seventh seed in the East when they lost to the Blackhawks. I guess they have not reached the ultimate success in some time but the Sharks have not even experienced a Cup final, ever. The Flyers have the second highest winning percentage all time in NHL history. Only the original six teams have more total wins. The Rangers and Blackhawks have been around for 41 more years than the Flyers and only have 2 more Cups each and both teams played in eras with far less teams. Only four non-original six teams have more Cups than the Flyers and two of them only have three Cups. Only 3 teams have won their division more than the Flyers have in the history of the league. I think they average a trip to the conference finals about every three years. So please Sharks/wannabe Pens fan, define little to no success.

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 3:43 PM

        holy s***. you even schooled me.

      • fbothharbaughs - May 14, 2013 at 4:24 PM

        Correct me if I’m wrong, ml3939, but isn’t it more difficult to win the Stanley Cup when there’re less teams, you know, ’cause the talent isn’t so diluted?

        And if your Flyers average a trip to the conference finals every 3 years, what exactly since 1975 do they have to show for it? And ask any Caps fan how exciting it is to win their division on a regular basis…

        Boom!

      • laxman1944 - May 14, 2013 at 4:27 PM

        Dam…..that was pretty good…….pass the potatos…

      • ml3939 - May 14, 2013 at 5:28 PM

        There is no comparison between the Flyers and Caps, Cups or no Cups.

        And yes the talent was less diluted with less teams but there were virtually no Europeans which is a huge portion of the talent now and teams also had to win far fewer games overall in the playoffs so a fluke run was much more possible.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - May 14, 2013 at 5:35 PM

      Wouldn’t the same be true about the Sharks? It’s been 21 years, what noteable achievements do they have, besides number of conference finals appearances without winning?…I’m just joking, they don’t even have that!

  8. lonespeed - May 14, 2013 at 2:20 PM

    How can an argument be made against Phoenix?

    Every year your team is under the threat of being moved. The team is in a warm climate where no one cares about hockey. Even when you have success, like the previous year, no one pays attention and now that your team is out of the playoffs they are effectively irrelevant.

    I can’t see how you could be a proud supporter of that franchise. I would take a dreadful team in a good market any day over Phoenix. Although, Florida isn’t that far behind them.

    Just like when Atlanta moved to Winnepeg and no one noticed. The league could move / collapse Phoenix and Florida, and no one would care.

    “The Phoenix Coyotes have great hockey tradition and future,” said no one ever.

    • jpelle82 - May 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM

      i still think the only reason there is any support for phoenix is because its where rich canadians go to retire. i’ve done more business for canadians in arizona than any other area of the US, and 90% of them are in their 60’s and snowbirds.

    • kitshky - May 14, 2013 at 2:48 PM

      I’d say the question is directed at people who actually are emotionally attached to their team, and feel actual pain when they either lose (again) or get trashed in the public eye (again) and that reflects upon you (again)… hard to say the Phoenix fanbase even comes close to the top.

      If the question was most pitied, you’d have a case.

  9. har21441 - May 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM

    I want to say the Capitals, but their supporters lack the IQ to understand that are rooting for a perennial loser (let alone the game of hockey) so it doesn’t feel fair.
    I have to go with the Flyers, because even with their low IQ they have to realize how bad it is when the only break they take from drowning puppies is to support that bunch of clowns.

    • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:34 PM

      good input. that’s exactly the type of real, thought-provoking conversation the writer was going for on this post.

      …di**head.

      • har21441 - May 14, 2013 at 2:43 PM

        Well formed response. In my defense, it’s hard to believe the writer was really looking for any “thought-provoking conversation” by asking for input from the comment section.

        Now – hard to place which team you support. Your negativity and immediate jump to insult screams Flyers fan, but the lack of understanding sarcasm and poor punctuation might indicate you are a Caps fan.

        Either way, it’s safe to say your team sucks. Have fun supporting them.

      • fivetozeroingame7 - May 14, 2013 at 2:44 PM

        don’t be mad just because you lost five to zero in game 7

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:50 PM

        there’s people here capable of actually talking about the subject at hand, not just jumping to insulting other teams. THAT’S what I think Jason was going for. not calling a team’s fanbase puppy-drowners…. whatever the f that means.

        for the record, I’m a fan of both teams. also for the record, sarcasm usually includes humor.

        and please point out my misuse of punctuation. there wasn’t any.

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:52 PM

        also, I’m aware of the punctuation error in that last comment =X

    • laxman1944 - May 14, 2013 at 4:31 PM

      Drowning puppies is real sharp there big fella and a pretty sh*tty way to lump an entire fan base…..you sir are quite the jerk.

      • har21441 - May 15, 2013 at 7:09 AM

        It’s actually a step up from booing Santa Claus.

    • phillyphanatic77 - May 14, 2013 at 5:41 PM

      Our “negativity and immediate jump to insult screams Flyers fan”… that may be one of the most hypocritical comments I’ve ever read considering your preceding comment was: “I have to go with the Flyers, because even with their low IQ they have to realize how bad it is when the only break they take from drowning puppies is to support that bunch of clowns.”

      Haha wow. What a complete and total dbag.

      • har21441 - May 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM

        Maybe slightly hypocritical given the context, but it’s not like the Flyers fan base is known for their calm and rational behavior.

      • ml3939 - May 15, 2013 at 10:52 AM

        Really, tell me about every incident you are aware of where Flyers fans were calm or irrational beyond the incident after the Winter Classic against the Rangers.

  10. sjsharks66 - May 14, 2013 at 2:41 PM

    Yeah, because that is exactly what i said. Haha

    Your right they ask which team is hard to be a fan of. It does not ask point out teams with no success while defending your own team. Which is why i replied to that comment.

    Yeah, the sharks are set to lose in the first round every year. Except in 2010….2011 and 2013. That makes a lot of sense. Since it has only happened once in the past 4 years.

  11. myroncopesflask - May 14, 2013 at 2:47 PM

    The Flyers have to be a lock for number 1 right? With the resources they had during the non salary cap era it has to drive the fans crazy that they have made it no further than 3rd base since Gerald Ford was in office. I understand they get to feel the boobie(make the playoffs) just about every year. I understand they get to see the goodies maybe even get to touch some kitty(make it to SCF) every 5 years or so. To be teased like that over a period of almost 40 years and never get to take a trip to pound town(WIN A CUP) would be terrible. The very idea that after all this time they have not figured out the game has changed is a joke in itself. No wonder a vast majority of their fans are miserable humps. 1975

    • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM

      I’m not gonna lie, the SC blueballs is pretty tough to deal with. but there’s teams that not only have funding, have the fanbase, have history, but also find a way to miss playoffs with a losing record almost every year. THAT’S gonna be the #1. but I wouldn’t contest a top 5 placement of the Flyers by you.

      • myroncopesflask - May 14, 2013 at 3:20 PM

        ahh Stanley Cup Blueballs… that would have been the perfect ending to my post.. Don’t worry many of us fans from Pittsburgh understand what you are going through. The Steelers went almost 30 years between Super Bowl titles.

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 3:30 PM

        honestly, when I went to type it, i checked your post and was surprised you didn’t use it.

  12. slammed81 - May 14, 2013 at 2:53 PM

    One thing I kno sjsharks66 hates the flyers always comments in flyers articles as for being a tough to be a flyers fan I can’t imagine missing the playoffs for like 5 yrs straight so look at those teams first sj has made it consistently so I would put then to high I’d rather lose in the playoffs then not make it all

  13. r8rbhawk - May 14, 2013 at 2:58 PM

    I know I am posting this on PHT, but for me, its the Oakland Raiders. As you can tell from my username, I am a Raider and Blackhawk fan. Certainly the years of 2003-2007 were pretty crappy for me, with the Raiders and Hawks playing so terribly. Hell, the Raiders have sucked for a decade now. Nonetheless, win, lose, or tie, Raider and Blackhawk fan till I die.

    • imleftcoast - May 14, 2013 at 7:35 PM

      As a Raiders, can you comment on how damaging a coach like Art Shell can be. People on here seem to hold coaches in a reverent state above rocket scientists and brain surgeons.

  14. blackhawkslove - May 14, 2013 at 3:20 PM

    Washington or San Jose have to be the worst two franchises. Aside from Minny and Columbus which are only a decade only, the former two franchises have been around for 30+ years. Neither team has made it to the SCF and have a long storied history of choking and suckage. At least the rest of the god awful teams on the list have made SCF appearances or won SCF’s.

    • dmfc1112 - May 14, 2013 at 11:26 PM

      Caps were in the finals in 1998. (at least all the papers said they were slated to be there, not sure if they showed up)

      • blackhawkslove - May 15, 2013 at 1:19 AM

        I forgot about that series. They were so terrible in that four game sweep. Although I don’t know who was worse: The Panthers in their four game sweep for the Av’s first championship or the Caps sweep against defending champs Detroit.

  15. comeonnowguys - May 14, 2013 at 3:21 PM

    Are we talking internally or externally?

    Externally, the amount of grief Coyotes (all three of them–wait, see? I’m doing it, too!) and Canuck fans (every other comeback seems to be “Sedin sister this” or “Riot that.”) take seems pretty hard to match. Flyers would be up there too, I guess, if that grief wasn’t mostly coming from one other fanbase.

    Internally, that’s a bit tougher. The expectations the Canucks and their fans have had over the last few years only to fall short is strong.

    Other than that, it has to be those teams that are perennially right around the playoff but never have the horses to go deep in the playoffs. Too good for the lottery, not good enough to be a contender.

  16. pastabelly - May 14, 2013 at 3:31 PM

    This is revisiting Cubs vs Red Sox before 2004.

    Was it harder rooting for the lovable losers or the team that always got so close, yet failed every time. I’ll say Canucks first and Sabres second because they are better hockey towns than the other losing cities. The Leafs haven’t been good enough to break anyone’s hearts. They are like the Cubs.

  17. ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 3:35 PM

    took me a while to formulate my answer, and even though I said it’s tough to pick one…. I gotta go Leafs.

    the amount of times they miss playoffs or don’t go deep in them is amazing. seeing as how Toronto fans are superfans (whereas a lot of American cities have football to fall back on if their hockey team sucked that year), along with the lack of a cup and so many early exits, that’s gotta be a tough life.

    • laxman1944 - May 14, 2013 at 4:35 PM

      Toronto is paying for the bad karma Darcy Tucker brought to their franchise………

      • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 4:51 PM

        what, in the 90s? I hated the guy too (and Domi’s gotta be one of my most hated players ever), but they’ve been paying for some sort of bad karma for waaaay longer than Tucker’s been around. hell, their last cup was prly 10 years+ before he was born.

        but my Maple Leafs history isn’t THAT up to snuff to know who cursed them. Babe Ruth?

      • atwatercrushesokoye - May 14, 2013 at 5:22 PM

        They’re paying for the bad karma that Harrold Ballard brought to the team. He makes Charles Wang look like Bob Kraft.

  18. tridecagon - May 14, 2013 at 3:39 PM

    The Blues spent the first 30-ish years of their existence ending every season with playoff heartbreak. Then Blues fans suffered through the Mike Keenan era, as he destroyed the popular nucleus of the team. They employed guys like Brett Hull, Adam Oates, Brendan Shanahan, Grant Fuhr, Al MacInnis, Wayne Gretzky for a bit… still no Cup. Then they went through a long period (really they’re still in it) with one of the lowest payrolls in the league, despite strong fan support. Now we’ve got a load of players who have shown great potential (for years) but haven’t been able to get it done in the playoffs. We’ve had teams capable of winning the President’s Trophy… but we haven’t even been to the Finals since ’70. I think I’m starting to understand what it must feel like to be a Cubs fan.

    • phillyphanatic77 - May 14, 2013 at 5:49 PM

      Very good points. As a Flyers fan born well after the 70s I can certainly empathize with the pain of Blues fans.

    • cardsandbluesforever - May 14, 2013 at 7:03 PM

      our playoff cheer is ” there’s always next year!”

      seems like no matter who we have on the team they seem to play good, but never great.

  19. goodellisruiningtheleague - May 14, 2013 at 4:00 PM

    Washington ABSOLUTE CRAPitals

  20. therealjr - May 14, 2013 at 4:36 PM

    Very easy, the answer is the Caps.

    Never won a Cup.
    Been choking leads for their entire playoff history.
    Had 4 HOF on the team in the 80s and won 3 playoff series, never twice in one season.
    Prior to the lockout had several years they were the popular pre-season pick to win it and failed miserably, choking again.
    Ovechkin and Backstrom count over $16M towards the cap and are fresh off a combined 2g, 3A in a seven game playoff series.
    Because so many people in Washington come from other places, always have to deal with annoying fans of other teams in your building.

    All those other teams have their points, but none is the complete package like the Caps. Just don’t tell them they are going to win this competition or they’ll f*cking blow it.

    • ibieiniid - May 14, 2013 at 4:47 PM

      you didn’t get me until the very last sentence. lmao.

    • sabatimus - May 14, 2013 at 5:23 PM

      The HOF and Ovi/Backstrom points sold it for me.

    • phillyphanatic77 - May 14, 2013 at 5:53 PM

      Haha great arguement, especially the last line. It’s easy for me to point to the Flyers, as I live it everyday, but I think you’re right. The Caps take the cake.

  21. hushbrother - May 14, 2013 at 6:58 PM

    It’s the Maple Leafs, and that’s a no-brainer. Canada’s largest city’s hockey team hasn’t been to a Stanley Cup Finals since 1967? While Montreal and Edmonton and Calgary have won like 847 Stanley Cups between them in that time span?

    How has the Leafs’ cursedness/suckiness flown under the radar for this long? They’re the Cubs of the NHL.

  22. johnstone17 - May 14, 2013 at 7:43 PM

    How about the Islanders. After their run in the ’80’s they have been plagued with poor ownership ( Spano ) poor management ( Milbury ) & some incredible bad luck.

  23. jdvalk - May 14, 2013 at 8:39 PM

    C! A! P! S! Caps! Caps! Caps!

  24. omegalh - May 14, 2013 at 11:58 PM

    I’ll end the conversation in two words:

    NO GOAL!

  25. jacketsfan7 - May 15, 2013 at 7:20 AM

    Avalanche

  26. gaborik104life - May 15, 2013 at 12:32 PM

    My son’s 7 year old pal team. That’s the hardest team to support. How I manage not to throw my beer on the ice after a game is a miracle. It’s disgraceful to the sport I love so much how bad they are. Especially my son, I have seen pirates with two peg legs skate better.

  27. micklethepickle - May 15, 2013 at 2:08 PM

    Definitely the Bruins – I don’t like to associate with racists, so I can’t talk hockey with anyone in this city. It sucks!

  28. kaptaanamerica - May 16, 2013 at 2:36 PM

    hardest team to support would be the maple leafs. they let the fans down year after year. never get to the SCF final round. never compete for the cup. make bonehead management decisions. have the most annoying fans. have the most expensive seats. fans get milked every year by ownership. sheeple fans keep lining up to get milked. overhyped and overpromoted to the point of embarrassment.

  29. drewsylvania - May 19, 2013 at 7:20 PM

    Habs, because they’re routinely vile POSes.

  30. kendog1 - May 20, 2013 at 10:15 PM

    NBC’s announcing team with Olczyk WORST!

Sign up for Fantasy hockey

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. C. Giroux (1119)
  2. B. Ryan (1107)
  3. J. Quick (1081)
  4. J. Drouin (1073)
  5. N. Horton (1056)