View Single Post
04-24-2012, 01:43 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,610
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by 101st_fan View Post
Simple fact is the Yotes won their division ... we did not win ours. The Pacific's worst team won ten divisional games .... the Central all beat up on Columbus ... the NW all sucked.
Yeah, I think that's my problem too with not seeding division winners in the top 3 spots -- the unbalanced schedule. If you want to do something different like seeding based solely on record, I'd be for it only if they balance the schedule. That said, the fact that the Preds' division included extra games against the Blue Jackets didn't make up for the fact that their other extra division games were against very tough opponents.

But, in the end, I just don't think you can keep the schedule unbalanced and not make the division more meaningful. Just guaranteeing that a division winner makes the playoffs doesn't seem to be enough to me -- it's hard to imagine a division winner actually coming in 9th. I know it's been close a few times, but I don't think it's realistic, and to the extent it happens one day that miniscule possibility is not enough to keep divisions relevant. I actually am fine with unbalancing the schedule and taking the top 8. I know that's a much bigger deal, though, to fans in the NE USA and SE Canada.

With the current system, you sort of have to look at it over the long haul. Coyotes finished with something like 107 points a few years ago, and got tagged in 4th and had to play the red hot Wings. I think it balances over time. Where it gets bad is if you have two teams that are the conference's best by a wide margin in the same division year after year. That doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, for the third place team, it really only works in the second round if something unexpected happens, like an 8 beating a 1. And what does "works out" even mean? Road teams are dominating these playoffs.

CitizenCoyote is offline   Reply With Quote