quietbruinfan
Salt and light
Apologies, the Adams/railroad and Jacobs ownerships indeed chose not to spend. You phrased it well with an "almost but not quite team." I still think they have consistently overachieved relative to their own talent and the talent level in the league since 1950.Calling one of the top 5 teams in the US in terms of their market size, income, fanbase etc. the underdog is certainly a choice. And how could they 'not afford' the top skill players when they've been owned by a very wealthy family since the 70s and have always spent to the cap since that was introduced?
Rather, the Jacobs chose not to spend that bit extra back in the day, and in the cap era have always prioritized a model of perpetual competitiveness, which has its advantages but also consequences, including paucity of high draft picks which makes it more difficult to acquire and develop top talent affordably.
The Bruins are an arch-typical 'nearly but not quite' team. Pretty much all the major sporting leagues in the world have them. For all the times they have gone close, one Cup in over 50 years is ultimately underachieving for a team with the prestige and opportunities Boston have had. For the Bruins, has ever been thus.
Last edited: