View Single Post
02-28-2013, 09:00 PM
Nanabijou's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,328
vCash: 50
Originally Posted by Dr. Fire View Post
what is wrong with 3, 10 team conferences. East, Central, and West. The games that you are not playing teams in your conference can be easily divided up between the other two.

Play-offs could easily remain at 16 teams. How, you ask? Easy. The top 5 teams in each conference make the playoffs. Of the remaining teams in all three conferences, the two teams with the best record, regardless of conference get in as wild cards and play each other in a three game series, or one game winner takes all, for the final spot. Why not just take the team with the best record of the rest? Why money, of course. It expands the play-off pool just a tad, and makes the league and two other cities a little more money.
Originally Posted by leesmith View Post
That's what I proposed three years ago. What's wrong with it is this - it's perfect for 30 teams. Not so much for 32.
Yep, I've also been on board with this for awhile. It seems weird to have 3 conferences, but hockey is the only game with 3 periods instead of a half-time. Let's embrace the number 3.

The playoffs get a little wonky, but with a little creativity, they could get something that doesn't mess up what's great about the playoffs now.

Nanabijou is offline   Reply With Quote