HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   St. Louis Blues (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=32)
-   -   Thoughts on Realignment (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1358785)

sh724 02-23-2013 09:45 PM

Thoughts on Realignment
 
Newest proposal from the NHL:

http://i.imgur.com/EGpgP5o.png

Blues would be with Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, and Winnipeg. Colors are current divisions, circles are proposed 4 conferences with no divisions.

I do not like not being with Detroit anymore but only having one team out of our timezone instead of two is going to help with travel but having to go to Canada for a divisional game has its drawbacks. Any realignment is probably just temporary though since more people believe expansion is coming soon. But lets try to keep discussion on the leagues proposal and not expansion. :)

Freyj 02-23-2013 10:08 PM

The futility with all of this is that Detroit and Columbus will likely end up back in Central by the time Phoenix moves and we have the two team expansion (+ Seattle, Quebec City, Toronto 2). Colorado back to West.

Robb_K 02-23-2013 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sh724 (Post 60351029)
Newest proposal from the NHL:

http://i.imgur.com/EGpgP5o.png

Blues would be with Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, and Winnipeg. Colors are current divisions, circles are proposed 4 conferences with no divisions.

I do not like not being with Detroit anymore but only having one team out of our timezone instead of two is going to help with travel but having to go to Canada for a divisional game has its drawbacks. Any realignment is probably just temporary though since more people believe expansion is coming soon. But lets try to keep discussion on the leagues proposal and not expansion. :)

I think that Phoenix will relocate. So, The League's proposal will need to change. That map shows 16 teams in The East and 14 in The West. So they propose NO East/West conferences, and just using 4 "divisions"?
I think that Phoenix will relocate to Québec. Then, Winnipeg could just move to The Western Conference and one team divisional shifts could be made to keep the divisions geographical.

Stealth JD 02-23-2013 10:36 PM

I think it's fair that the West divisions have a slightly easier chance of making the playoffs having only 7 teams in each division, considering the East has the much easier travel. No matter what they propose, some teams are going to be unhappy.

Overall, it doesn't seem like an awful proposal.

Linus 02-23-2013 10:48 PM

Not being in the same division as Detroit would be weird. Chicago and Detroit not being in the same division would be weird. But I like this plan better than the previous 4-division plan. It makes more sense to have the eastern divisions with 8 teams because there are more teams in the Eastern time zone.

Dolph Ziggler 02-23-2013 10:55 PM

Should have 15 in both sides.

Don't like splitting up from Detroit personally.

Robb_K 02-23-2013 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Inglorious One (Post 60355479)
Should have 15 in both sides.

Don't like splitting up from Detroit personally.

I don't either, and neither do The Blackhawks. Detroit should stay, and Columbus should move east.

sh724 02-23-2013 11:20 PM

In this proposal at least we do not have to be in a division with a JD and Jarmo built team, I hear those teams are really good...

Mike Liut 02-23-2013 11:25 PM

We finally have a better team and a better future than Detroit and they want to split us up? I want to kick their ass for the next 10 years like they did ours.

JustOneB4IDie 02-24-2013 02:36 AM

I belive Phoenix will relocate, but not to Quebec. I'll say they are going to Seattle, and Colorado will go to the Western Division, then either Columbus or Detroit will go to the Midwest Division.

Alklha 02-24-2013 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robb_K (Post 60355865)
I don't either, and neither do The Blackhawks. Detroit should stay, and Columbus should move east.

Both Columbus and Detroit move East under these proposals. Winnipeg are moved into the West.

The last proposal was terrible for us, we'll always have the increased travel but to also have an 8 team Conference was brutal. This at least makes more sense for all teams involved, but I still wouldn't be happy if I was a fan of an Eastern Conference team.

I don't think there is any realistic talk of expansion either. If expansion was on the cards, then it is probably safe to assume that there would be 1 new team in each Conference area; Seattle/Portland/Kansas in the West and Hamilton/Quebec in the East. Going ahead with this now and then having to push Columbus/Detroit back West when expansion came about wouldn't make any sense.

JustOneB4IDie 02-24-2013 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alklha (Post 60365297)
Both Columbus and Detroit move East under these proposals. Winnipeg are moved into the West.

The last proposal was terrible for us, we'll always have the increased travel but to also have an 8 team Conference was brutal. This at least makes more sense for all teams involved, but I still wouldn't be happy if I was a fan of an Eastern Conference team.

I don't think there is any realistic talk of expansion either. If expansion was on the cards, then it is probably safe to assume that there would be 1 new team in each Conference area; Seattle/Portland/Kansas in the West and Hamilton/Quebec in the East. Going ahead with this now and then having to push Columbus/Detroit back West when expansion came about wouldn't make any sense.

Very good points when you look at big picture for the future.

Robb_K 02-24-2013 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alklha (Post 60365297)
Both Columbus and Detroit move East under these proposals. Winnipeg are moved into the West.

The last proposal was terrible for us, we'll always have the increased travel but to also have an 8 team Conference was brutal. This at least makes more sense for all teams involved, but I still wouldn't be happy if I was a fan of an Eastern Conference team.

I don't think there is any realistic talk of expansion either. If expansion was on the cards, then it is probably safe to assume that there would be 1 new team in each Conference area; Seattle/Portland/Kansas in the West and Hamilton/Quebec in the East. Going ahead with this now and then having to push Columbus/Detroit back West when expansion came about wouldn't make any sense.

If Phoenix is moved to either Québec or Hamilton/Toronto, Detroit or Columbus would need to be moved back. I don't see Seattle chosen over Québec for Phoenix's relocation, IF there will be no expansion soon.

MattyMo35 02-24-2013 03:29 PM

You can't split up the Wings, Hawks, and Blues. Too many great games have taken place between these three teams and the fanbases are so so invested in the rivalry. I don't care if the Wings and Hawks are dynasties or bottom five teams, games with them are always intense and a great experience. I really don't feel the same way with Winnipeg and Minnesota. It would make for too much neutral hockey. Maybe a rivalry would build eventually, but why take the chance with three franchises that already hate each other are right there.

417blues 02-24-2013 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattyMo35 (Post 60385047)
I really don't feel the same way with Winnipeg and Minnesota. It would make for too much neutral hockey. Maybe a rivalry would build eventually, but why take the chance with three franchises that already hate each other are right there.

Norris Division (1981-1982): STL, DET, CHI... MIN, WPG, TOR

Norris Division (1982-1992): STL, DET, CHI... MIN, TOR

Norris Division (1992-1993): STL, DET, CHI... MIN, TOR, TBL

Just saying. I get that these are new franchises and that it would be weird not seeing Detroit in our division, but you can be certain that the rivalry with Minnesota will pick up right where it left off. Every time I see those third jerseys, the eighties-kid in me still thinks "Stupid North Stars with their beautiful all-green uniforms." On a related note, 7-year-old boys love chanting TAKKO. Delicious!

Winnipeg... might not be so obvious. And I definitely agree with your point where applied to Dallas and Colorado; the emotions just aren't there, and won't be until our first post-lockout playoff series involving either of those two teams.

I don't think any team can generate the spite and vitriol which we as Blues fans reserve for Detroit, but between Chicago and Nashville, we will have some excellent old school Central Division rivalries to keep us engaged... throw in Minnesota and we've got one contentious sub-conference.

No Fun Shogun 02-24-2013 04:34 PM

Looks like the Hawks/Blues and the Jets/Wild are going to be the two main regional rivalries in our conference if this realignment is true.

MattyMo35 02-24-2013 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 417blues (Post 60390129)
Norris Division (1981-1982): STL, DET, CHI... MIN, WPG, TOR

Norris Division (1982-1992): STL, DET, CHI... MIN, TOR

Norris Division (1992-1993): STL, DET, CHI... MIN, TOR, TBL

Just saying. I get that these are new franchises and that it would be weird not seeing Detroit in our division, but you can be certain that the rivalry with Minnesota will pick up right where it left off. Every time I see those third jerseys, the eighties-kid in me still thinks "Stupid North Stars with their beautiful all-green uniforms." On a related note, 7-year-old boys love chanting TAKKO. Delicious!

Winnipeg... might not be so obvious. And I definitely agree with your point where applied to Dallas and Colorado; the emotions just aren't there, and won't be until our first post-lockout playoff series involving either of those two teams.

I don't think any team can generate the spite and vitriol which we as Blues fans reserve for Detroit, but between Chicago and Nashville, we will have some excellent old school Central Division rivalries to keep us engaged... throw in Minnesota and we've got one contentious sub-conference.

I don't think a 20 year old rivalry will renew itself all that quickly. Especially since both Winnipeg and Minnesota are completely different organizations now.

sh724 02-24-2013 06:31 PM

The first two rounds of the POs would be in the conference/division/whatever you want to call it, so rivalries would build fairly quick with PO battles every year. Could you imagine the hate if we play Chicago in the POs several years in a row. Also according to NBCSN COL is already our rival

Big Al 2 02-24-2013 08:35 PM

Anyone else for taking two teams away instead of adding. Too many teams dilutes the talent pool

bleedblue1223 02-24-2013 09:00 PM

Expansion would be dumb. They should either keep it the same and relocate teams or consolidate and see the league thrive.

28 teams is a hell of a lot better than 32, but 30 is fine with me.

2 Minute Minor 02-24-2013 09:10 PM

I'd love to be in a division with Minnesota and Winnipeg. Those are two great atmospheres.

I want to root for Columbus because of JD and Jarmo, and I feel no real sense of rivalry with them....so losing them to the East is fine with me.

I don't like Detroit moving East, but as long as the Blues keep Chicago as their rival, I can live with it.

So....the league went from making an imbalanced East<West to now West<East. I just think every team should have the same difficulty making the post-season. I don't like the imbalanced divisions (or however you want to describe it). Its hard to know whether this is drawn up in anticipation of 2 team expansion...but I really don't see how the league is in a good position to expand at the same time they're dropping the salary cap. Seems...odd. I think the expansion talk may be more fan-driven and not based on plausible scenarios.

CarvinSigX 02-24-2013 10:45 PM

Now would be a cheap time to expand. As the sport grows once again, the teams would be on a much more even playing field than in the beginning, but the low cap (and parity that comes with it) would help them starting out as well.

Robb_K 02-25-2013 12:47 AM

Being a Winnipegger, I can state, with some authority, that there has been a rivalry between Minnesotans an Manitobans since the 1870s. I doubt that the fact that The new Jets are a different franchise from the old Jets, and The Wild are not The Northstars, will lesson that old rivalry.

JustOneB4IDie 02-25-2013 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sh724 (Post 60402399)
The first two rounds of the POs would be in the conference/division/whatever you want to call it, so rivalries would build fairly quick with PO battles every year. Could you imagine the hate if we play Chicago in the POs several years in a row. Also according to NBCSN COL is already our rival

Exactly.

Going back to the first two rounds with a division opponent will remind me of the old ( Chuck ) Norris Division when we had the Blues, Jets, Hawks, North Stars Red Wings and Leafs. I always despised Bettmann from changing the Playoff format more then anything to Conference seeding when Bettmann became Commish.

As for the Detroit going to the east, It's where they belong along with Columbus when you think about it. I remember when the Blues had a Decent rivalry with the Leafs, Blues played the leafs frequently in the Playoffs. I'm sure once the Blues play Colorado, Nashville, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Dallas and of course Chicago, new rivalries will be born.

frostyflo 02-25-2013 04:17 AM

Winners and losers

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/stor...le-hockey-team

Detroit owes us a few years of payback but I guess the NHLs golden child will move, they are pushing the league for years now and it makes sense anyways


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.