A sports economics lecturer who makes Edmonton his home is cheering Calgary on in what he calls the NHL’s greatest rivalry..Moshe Lander grew up in London, ON, but became a Flames fan because the franchise drafted so many London Knights of the Ontario Hockey league. Today he hangs his hat in Edmonton, but teaches sports economics and public finance to students at Concordia University in Montreal..In Lander’s expert opinion, the Flames-Oilers rivalry was “right place, right time” for numerous reasons. Gretzky and the Oilers joined the NHL in 1979, then Calgary acquired Atlanta’s Flames in 1980. Lanny McDonald scored 66 goals in 1982–'83. Alberta teams reached the Stanley Cup finals every year from 1983 to 1990 — and on four occasions had to eliminate their provincial rival to do it..“Calgary and Edmonton had a fighting chance with each other,” Lander says..“It just took on this extra significance that, say, the Battle of Quebec or the Battle of Pennsylvania, or the Battle of New York didn't. There's just that power imbalance [in those other rivalries].."The Islanders were vastly better than the Rangers, and the Penguins with Lemieux were vastly better than the Flyers, and the Flyers with Bobby Clarke were vastly better than the Penguins.”.In the playoffs, at least, that battle has been dormant a long time. The last encounter was the Smythe division finals of 1991. An Esa Tikkanen goal launched the Oiler comeback from a 3-0 deficit in game seven, and his overtime goal ended the Flames’ playoffs before a disappointed Saddledome crowd. Kurri, Coffey, Gretzky, and McDonald were already gone by then, and soon the remaining stars of both teams scattered elsewhere..Now that the clash of hockey titans has returned, those old days have also gotten a fresh look..“It's rekindling all of those highlights of Theoren Fleury's overtime goal from 30 years ago, and Esa Tikkanen with his goal, and, going back further, [Steve Smith] putting it in his own net so the Flames could advance to their first cup final, and things like that,” Lander says..“This is reminding everybody that's the way it used to be. This is a way that it could be again. … You realize that this could be the renaissance of this rivalry and the stakes involved in it.”.The professor admires Connor McDavid for his “smoothness” and “unbelievable talent,” and says Calgary’s recent failures against Edmonton have brought back some unwanted, almost-forgotten feelings of all the times it happened before. On the brighter side, he says the current NHL is demonstrating the apex of hockey performance..“Good training, good diet. … It's faster, it's crisper, the strategies are more advanced than they were. So it's a much more superior product — and not just for the Battle of Alberta, but the entire league. It's great to watch,” Lander says..Lander is spending late spring as a guest lecturer at Dalhousie University. He also lectures in Calgary in the summers even though his home is in Edmonton. When asked if it’s hard to be a Flames fan in the provincial capital, he says no..“There are so many people that live in Edmonton but work in Calgary, or go to school in Calgary, or vice versa that it has that intensity when it comes to the actual game itself, but it doesn't spill over into the street, let's say,” Lander explains..“It's a serious event, but it's not like wearing a Cowboys jersey in Philadelphia, right? It doesn't spill over into the street.”.Maybe so, but the economist can’t help but see the north-south rivalry play out in aspects that transcend sport as much as they overlap it..“The cities themselves are in constant conflict with each other. Edmonton is the seat of government, but Calgary is the seat of business. It's an interesting tension financially, as well, between the two cities,” Lander said..“Because [Edmonton has five] Stanley Cups to Calgary's one, there's already this big brother-little brother approach to the series. But now … the politics of the arena play out in Calgary. It's almost like throwing a temper tantrum that, 'Well, it's not fair, they've got one, why don't we get to?'”
