That I can’t answer… at least not fully. The CFL site only has division records from 2005 on.
From 2005-2009, Montreal went 20-22 against the West. B.C. went 26-23-1 against the West, and 32-8 against the East.
And another stat… from 2005-2009 (including playoffs), B.C is 7-5 against Montreal, and they also beat them in the 2000 Grey Cup. If you put B.C. in the East, I don’t think you’d see Montreal in 7 Grey Cups.
Can't decide yet as the decade doesn't end for another year. Ask the same question a year from now.
It’s over in 8 days. Decade 10 years , 2000 2009 ! :roll: :roll:
Without question the Saskatchewan Roughriders are the team of the decade. In fact they are the best team over the last 13 years , oops I mean 12 years!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: 
:rockin: :cowboy:
ahhh...right...sure
That depends on how you look at it. If one takes the perspective that there was no year 0, then the decade could technically be over December 31, 2010, with the new one starting in 2011.
Technically a tomato is a fruit, but I probably wouldn’t put one in a fruit salad.
...and I don't put melons in a fruit salad either. Got a point in there?
And you have the audacity to call it a fruit salad?
Wrong this decade does not end until December 31 2010 at 24:00 hrs, period.
It is very simple, a decade is 10 years, the first decade B.C. was years 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, you can use your fingers to help you count them, there are 10. This decade is 2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010. Again count them, there are 10. Not a technicality, simply the truth!
Unless we're talking about the decades like the 1980's, 1990's etc. You wouldn't say the 1990's started in 1991, would you? No. The 90's go from 1990 to 1999. In that sense, this decade would be 2000-2009.
Actually, unless you define what decade you are choosing to pick from then technically a decade could be any 10 year period. Historically, as pointed out a decade runs from 1-10. If you are picking a decade based on Grey cups you could run from 9-8 as the first 10 years of grey cup existence was from 1909-1918. For the Cfl a decade could run from 4 to 3 or 8 to 7 depending on whether you difine 1954 or 1958 or some year as the first year of CFL existence. Take your pick, it is a totally subjective arguement so how you define a decade, defines who your choice is.
I would've thought it was obvious... 
We're talking 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, etc.
Again, historically the 60's run fron 1961-1970, 70's from 1971-1980, so we are back at this decade doesn't end until the end of 2010.
Nooo! Pull your head out of your behind. The 60’s go from 1960 to 1969. If you don’t want to accept that, then you’re just being ridiuclous.
have to agree, try telling someone the 60's includes 1970 isn't going to go far, no one counts a decade a year into it and a year out.
Then call it the team of the 60’s or 70’s or whatever because historically a decade is from 1-10 not from 0-9 because although you don’t seem to be able to grasp the concept, there was no year 0, so historic timelines start from 1 and move on from that point, whether you are 1 BC or 1AD. There is no year zero. Just like historically, the year 2000 is the last year of the 20th century, not the first year of the 21st century.
Oh Geez, this pointless argument again :roll: . I knew this subject would come up and that somebody would want to impress us with this no year zero stuff.
Definition of Decade:
[i] decade (dèk´âd´, dè-kâd´) noun
Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.[/i]
No where do I see there that a decade has to run from a particular set of dates. Considering the inaccuracies between the Julian and Georgian calenders the concept of no year zero is pointless. It has been commonly accepted (at least as far as I can remember) that the the decade runs from 0-9, at least until the new millennium came around in 2000. Then a lot of people wanted to impress everyone else how smart they were by coming up with this no year zero stuff.
Now back on topic and I have to say Montreal is the team of the decade. Not a whole lot of championships to show for it, but a great record of consistency.
No, we understand the concept. It’s you that’s having a difficult time understanding how we’re counting. :roll:
It is only pointless if you don’t agree with it. Yes if you read the posts, I stated earlier that a decade can be any 10 year period. All I have said that if you are picking the team of the decade, then we should define what that decade is since like it was with the millenium, not everybody agrees on what it means. As for being commonly accepted it is anything but as even scholars will argue one side or the other of the arguement and as is the case with scholars they probably argue both sides depending on the audience.