Realignment: Did the CBA address this?
View Single Post
01-28-2013, 04:37 PM
Join Date: Nov 2011
Originally Posted by
But that just provides another reason why the NHL voted to scrap the two-conference, six-division alignment.
Correct. You move PHX to QUE and you get big problems. So, why fight to work out a 2-conference, 6-division alignment, only to need to fight all over again?
If I am NHL now, I wait to see about Jamison and the Coyotes. If PHX moves to QUE, then we all know the 6-division is basically toast.
And, we can keep arguing about which 4-conference alignment is best.
WEST: Van, Cal, Edm, Col, LA, SJ, Ana
CENT: Win, Minn, StL, Chi, Dal, Nash, Det, Cmb
EAST: Que, Mont, Bos, Ott, Tor, Buff, Car
ATL: NYR, NYI, NJ, Phil, Pitt, Was, TB, Flo
(Although I don't like any options here for Cmb and Car) And, I don't want to put both in the EAST, because:
WEST and CENT make Campbell Conference. Top 8 make the playoffs. Division winners get 1 and 2 seeds. Higher seeds in all 4 matchups choose travel format (2-3-2 or 2-2-1-1-1). Reseed by regular season points after first round. (Means that if division winners advance, they are not guaranteed home ice in Round 2) Again, higher seeds choose format. Conference finals: Again, higher seed chooses format.
EAST and ATL make Wales Conference. Top 8 make playoffs. Division winners get 1 and 2 seeds. No choosing of formats. It's always 2-2-1-1-1. Reseed by points after Round 1 (Means that if division winners advance, they are not guaranteed home ice in Round 2).
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MNNumbers