<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<BODY.CONTENT>
<UID>
8701220623
</UID>
<PUBLICATION>
DETROIT FREE PRESS
</PUBLICATION>
<DATE>
870506
</DATE>
<TDATE>
Wednesday, May 06, 1987
</TDATE>
<EDITION>
METRO FINAL CHASER
</EDITION>
<SECTION>
SPT
</SECTION>
<PAGE>
1D
</PAGE>
<ILLUSTRATION>

</ILLUSTRATION>
<CAPTION>

</CAPTION>
<BYLINE>
MITCH ALBOM
</BYLINE>
<AFFILIATION>

</AFFILIATION>
<MEMO>
REPRINTED IN STATE EDITION May 7, 1987
</MEMO>
<COPYRIGHT>
Copyright (c) 1987, Detroit Free Press
</COPYRIGHT>
<HEADLINE>
OILERS TOO MUCH, RIGHT? WELL, YOU THOUGHT WRONG
</HEADLINE>
<SUBHEAD>

</SUBHEAD>
<CORRECTION>

</CORRECTION>
<BODY>
EDMONTON, Alberta -- If you thought the Red Wings would come out here and
die, go splat, give up . . . 
If you thought the Red Wings would be intimidated by the aura of Edmonton,
by the tradition,  by the name, by the championship banners hanging from the
ceiling . . . 

  If you thought the insults would bother them, or the arrogance, or the
signs in the rafters, like: "The few . . . The Proud  . . . The Oilers . . . "
  If you thought the names Gretzky and Messier and Kurri would send the Red
Wings all a-shiver, leave them gasping for breath, choking on their very
existence, unable to concentrate  as the great ones skated right past en route
to easy goals, all night long . . . You were wrong.
  Red Wings 3, Oilers 1.
  Sorry.
  If you thought Jacques Demers was kidding when he said Tuesday  morning,
"Hey, we came here to win, not just to play . . . 
  If you figured the newspapers here were correct when they predicted a
four-game sweep, and the radio stations that wondered if the people  here
could stay awake for an Edmonton- Detroit series were correct, absolutely
correct . . . 
  If you figured the "best team in hockey" is always going to beat a former
"worst team in hockey" even  if the labels no longer apply . . . 
  You went awry.
  Red Wings 3, Oilers 1.
  Sorry.
 No wakeup call for Oilers 
  If you figured the first period Tuesday night was a fluke, a joke, that
the Red Wings could never hang on to a 2-1 lead over this team, that a 2-1
lead meant a 10-2 loss . . .
  If you figured the Oilers  would wake up in the second period and send the
pucks into the Detroit  net as often as TV commercials, that they would defend
their home turf, that they would not tolerate what had happened in the first
period . . . 
  If you figured the Oilers  would wake up in the third  period and send the
pucks into the Detroit net as often as TV commercials, that they would defend
their home turf, that they would not tolerate what happened in the second
period . . . 
  If you figured  that the Oilers  would wake up in the fourth period . . . 
  Uh . . . 
  There is no fourth period.
  Red Wings 3, Oilers 1.
  Sorry.
  What did you think? Names like Yzerman and Gallant and  Kocur did not
belong on the ice with names like Fuhr and Coffey and Gretzky?
  That the goalie situation would wreak havoc on Detroit, Greg Stefan would
throw a tantrum in the net, Glen Hanlon would  be exhausted from the Toronto
series,  Jacques Demers would be forced to go with Mark Laforest, and the
Oilers would go through Laforest like Latrees?  . . . 
  Did you think that this was all a dream,  a hockey purist's nightmare, that
it would all go away in the morning light . . . 
  You were not right.
  Red Wings 3, Oilers 1.
  Sorry.
 Leave those brooms at home
  If you thought that Edmonton  was too good to be affected by rust, by a
layoff . . . 
  If you thought that Edmonton was beyond defeat, that the people here who
left 628  seats empty for the Campbell Conference Final knew what  they were
doing . . . 
  If you thought that this Thursday night would be Detroit's final visit to
this northern town . . . 
  Step down.
  So this is one game, and the Edmonton team that the Red Wings face Thursday
will not be as cocky or as rusty. So as Demers said afterward, "We're just a
one-game success. All we proved tonight was that there would not be a sweep."
  And someone asked, "Either  way?"
  And Demers answered: "Either way."
  So? So now you know. If you went with tradition, statistics, history, if
you went with Edmonton not having  lost to Detroit since 1983 . . . if you
went  with records, if you went with front-runners, if you went with
doomsayers who always seem to know what they're talking about . . . if you
went with the guy on your left, who was going with the guy on  his left, who
was going with the guy on his left, who was going with Edmonton to sweep it .
. . 
  You went astray.
  Now go away.
  Red Wings 3, Oilers 1.
  Anybody want to play Game 2?
</BODY>
<DISCLAIMER>

</DISCLAIMER>
<KEYWORDS>
COLUMN; REACTION;HOCKEY;GAME;RESULT;DREDWINGS;EDMUNTON OILERS;Red Wings
</KEYWORDS>
</BODY.CONTENT>
