El_Scoobo said:
Buffalo's historic rivalry with the leafs??? I had no idea that something that's less then 40 years old was "historic". I'm pretty sure the Bruins have more "historic" rivalries with both Toronto and Montreal.
Now you're just setting an arbitrary year that supports your argument. From their founding, and the days of Punch Imlach and Tim Horton, the Sabres have had a natural geographic rivalry with the Leafs. You can argue almost anything to make your case. I could point out that Boston and Montreal spent most of the 70s in different divisions, while Buffalo and Toronto were in the same division. That's history.
Face it, almost 40 years, by the standards of this league, is historic. 40 years is older than most of the teams in this league. Heck, people treat Detroit-Colorado as if it were a sacred rivalry that can't be broken up, but that's barely 10 years old. Edmonton-Calgary is only 20-some years old.
Let me use another analogy. No one would ever dream of putting the Rangers and Isles in different divisions. They have a natural geographic rivalry. Most people would consider Rangers-Isles to be a historic rivalry, though it's not as old as Sabres-Leafs, since the Isles came into the league later.
Sabres-Leafs are nearly as close geographically as Rangers and Isles. Tons of people cross the border for these games. The league would be insane to separate them into different divisions.