I'm a big proponent of going back to 4 divisions, but I'm not sure I want to see the old format return where you have to play within your division to start the playoffs. I agree that it would be the most effective way to spark as many rivalries as possible around the league, but from a selfish standpoint I don't like that it would greatly reduce our chances of meeting Edmonton or San Jose in the playoffs.
It's weird, because almost all the teams that generate regular season interest here are currently in the Central. But our old playoff rivals would end up being in the westernmost new division.
I have a feeling that if we were placed back in the old Norris with Toronto, Detroit, Chicago, St.Louis, and then Minnesota and maybe toss Phoenix in there, it wouldnt take long to build animosity, especially if the divisional playoff format was brought back.
Originally Posted by Rune Forumwalker
I meant the late-90's, or rather only one season that I checked on: 1997-1998. The year before the switch to six divisions. The playoff standings clearly looked like a top 8 in each conference rather than top 4 in each division.
Also the current system isn't that bad on rivalries as even with the system being more random, several teams have meet each other in the playoffs the last few years, which is what you stated is what creates rivalries. Those teams being Chicago/Vancouver, San Jose/Detroit, and Boston/Philadelphia are the first three that come to mind. No doubt there are more.
You are correct there sir. They did seed the 2 div winners one and two then seeded the next six. To me though that's no different than the current format. It pretty much diminishes the point of the divisions.
As far as the current rivalries, most of them are built by chance and are short lived. Take for example our rivalry with Edmonton going back a few years. Imagine that wasn't just by chance, but it was brought on because we were pit in the same division and rather than the rivalry fizzling out, we've played say 4 more times in the playoffs since that last math-up in '03. It would still be strong. Of course I'm not proposing we should be in the same division as them, but you get what I'm saying. Substitute Edmonton for Chicago or St.Louis for example. There would be real hate and it would be on going and carry in to every regular season game against each other because we not only played last year in the playoffs but we're in each other's way to advance to the conference final again.
Ellipses are three dots, and they indicate a continuation of a thought or the omission of words that are implied and understood.
Much thanks; I had no idea the true definition, as opposed to what I was actually talking about, which was what people often use them for. People often use ellipses either on their own, or after a sentence to show they either don't understand, or would like whoever they are quoting to elaborate. I was under the impression you were using four dots, as opposed to three, to signify the above. People often times don't choose to utilize their knowledge of grammar on forums such as these, so I thought it was a fair assumption. But again, thanks for letting me in on the dictionary definition.
So we should probably know by Tuesday whether the NHL is going to let the Stars out of the Pacific. You'd think it would make the most sense for the health of the league to help the new owner with the struggling franchise, but you never know.
Reading an article last night that we need 20 out of 30 teams to agree to it, just really shot my hopes of us actually getting out of the Pacific. Hoping for the most but definitely not confident we'll get out of it.