View Single Post
Old
02-10-2013, 06:40 PM
  #52
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinalera View Post
I agree that the East teams should be willing take a little more time/money to travel like the West teams do so it's more equal (then again, I'm one of those nuts who think the playoffs should be league rankings, not conference. That means of course a lot of transcontental playoffs, but both sides should be willing share the costs IMO)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
I don't think the "most hated rival" of any team will change regardless of what format is used. That's why I prefer the current format. It allows the stronger playoff teams (1 and 2 seeds) to play the bubble teams that just squeaked into the playoffs.



I get what you're saying, but it can't be all about fairness. I'm not sure it's good for the NHL if everybody has to share the misery.

I think the cost and travel aspect, when you're playing for the championship itself should become the least of everyone's concerns. It really stacks the deck against the Western Conf teams as well.


Here's the thing. Why is that the paramount consideration? Are we not talking about the ultimate culmination to a grueling season and then grueling playoff rounds? It should be mainly about two things:

*Rewarding the teams with the best records over the course of a full season (to actually put some meaning back into every game played)
*Keeping as level a playing field as possible, absent the luck of the draw based on the playoff seedings

This would mean a league-wide ranking of teams to seed them for the playoffs, absent of other alignment issues. (more on that later)

You can add increasing fan interest because it makes it possible to have Boston face Philly in a Cup final, for example.... in other words, you don't really know how it's going to work out if you re-seed, so anything is possible. This would also balances out the inequity you see in conferences from time to time, where a team that's really just not very good can get an easier schedule because the other conference was far tougher that year. Those teams kill other during their playoffs and limp in to face a team that probably couldn't have gotten as far had they been on the other side.


This puts the objective on producing the best possible competition with each advancing round. As fans, we should prefer this to results produced by the various alignments and tinkering with schedules and time zones when you weigh other factors far too heavily in setting things up in the first place.

The question then remains of how you set up the regular season schedules at all. Heck, even dividing the league in half but having a schedule that tries to get as close to balancing things out as possible (where you can give some consideration to the travel concerns of the teams who would be the most affected by it).

Finally, having the teams share travel costs also evens things out. The NHL wants a national footprint. They want teams in every corner. They want the benefits of being a national entity. Fine. But let's let everyone share in the misery of that, in addition to the financial benefits.

Fugu is online now