Would the NHL be better off with a 50 or 60 Game Schedule
View Single Post
04-02-2013, 10:29 AM
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Originally Posted by
The excitement for me this year is not coming from the fact that every game is more meaningful, but that the games are closer together on the schedule and it feels very division-heavy.
I'll never understand why the NHL feels compelled to have every team play each other at least once. Most out-of-conference games are deadweight. Is there more value-add in having Crosby & Malkin make one-time stops west of the Mississippi during a season than to have more rivalry games on the schedule league-wide?
We older fans like seeing every team in the league. There is little benefit to the NHL in cloistering their best players in niches, especially if those niches also have the highest market penetration for hockey already in place.
The way to address the out-of-conference deadweight games would be to make all games meaningful. Make every point count and dispense with all the subdividing of rankings.
I'm with the poster who said he'd be happy if every team played one home and one away game against everyone else.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Fugu