One small thing I like is that "winning the division" will be a lot more meaningful in the new system. Today you can win the division and not make it as far in the playoffs as others in your division. Under the new format, we can use the playoffs to determine the "actual" division winner
The main thing I don't like about this doesn't even have to do with the divisions/conferences or the playoff format.
With all these home and homes, won't we be getting more late game times than now, especially the 9PM and 10PM games?
Only a handful at most. WE will play every team on the road in the other conferences once, and we already play some teams in the other time zone on the road right now. So maybe 5-8 more later games a year.
Not sure how I feel about this. Sounds good now, but I will be pissed if we miss the playoffs one year, but had more points than 1 or more teams in the other conference. When I have the time, I want to go back and look at last year's standing and see how things would have played out under these rules.
I know it will never happen, but instead of adding 2 teams, I'd love to see them contract 2. 4 divisions of 7 teams.
I do like that we play every team at least twice, but it does suck that it includes Bos, Tor, Mtl, etc.
Unfortunately, I know there's no way to please everyone.
Not sure how I feel about this. Sounds good now, but I will be pissed if we miss the playoffs one year, but had more points than 1 or more teams in the other conference. When I have the time, I want to go back and look at last year's standing and see how things would have played out under these rules.
I know it will never happen, but instead of adding 2 teams, I'd love to see them contract 2. 4 divisions of 7 teams.
I do like that we play every team at least twice, but it does suck that it includes Bos, Tor, Mtl, etc.
Unfortunately, I know there's no way to please everyone.
Under last years standings the only thing that changes is LA with 98 points would not make the playoffs and Dallas with 95 would
The main thing I don't like about this doesn't even have to do with the divisions/conferences or the playoff format.
With all these home and homes, won't we be getting more late game times than now, especially the 9PM and 10PM games?
conversely, the western teams get less 4 and 5 PM start times without having to play in detroit, columbus, st louis, nashville, etc twice a year.
this was pushed by the western teams, and they probably got the east on board with the 8-8-7-7 split. personally, i like that we get to play in every market once a year. the flyers have substantial followings in almost every (former) western conference market.
We only have 7 teams in the conference, and 4 make it in.
...safe to say the Flyers win this realignment?
Nope. Boston is sitting pretty in the weakest Conference...not only are they pretty much guaranteed a PO spot for the next couple of years; but they also have a REALLY good chance every year at winning their Conference and moving on to the top 4.
Nope. Boston is sitting pretty in the weakest Conference...not only are they pretty much guaranteed a PO spot for the next couple of years; but they also have a REALLY good chance every year at winning their Conference and moving on to the top 4.
I think you are either giving Boston too much credit or not giving the other teams enough. TB is solid, Buffalo is solid, Toronto is good getting better, Montreal should be in a year or two. It's basically the same deal we got. Five good teams, two crappy ones. Not to mention that Boston probably wasn't in any real danger of missing the playoffs over the next few years anyway.
What happens to the prince of wales trophy and the Clarence s. Campbell bowl? With no eastern and western conference, is there no designation for the achievement of te two teams who meet for the cup?
What happens to the prince of wales trophy and the Clarence s. Campbell bowl? With no eastern and western conference, is there no designation for the achievement of te two teams who meet for the cup?
Well everyone was acting like little girls anyway, not wanting to touch it, so they might have just as well done away with it.
As far as the realignment, the one thing that I don't like too much is the fact that the playoffs are always going to start within the conference. I kind of preferred the chance of getting any of the teams in the East, but now I fear it's going to get boring always seeing the same teams year after year at the start.
Well everyone was acting like little girls anyway, not wanting to touch it, so they might have just as well done away with it.
As far as the realignment, the one thing that I don't like too much is the fact that the playoffs are always going to start within the conference. I kind of preferred the chance of getting any of the teams in the East, but now I fear it's going to get boring always seeing the same teams year after year at the start.
That is how it has been in the AHL for years and, IMO, your fears will become reality. Ironically, the AHL this year is going to a playoff format like the NHL's is/was.
What happens to the prince of wales trophy and the Clarence s. Campbell bowl? With no eastern and western conference, is there no designation for the achievement of te two teams who meet for the cup?
this is probably one of the reasons the NHL hasn't decided on a playoff format past the first two rounds.
this is probably one of the reasons the NHL hasn't decided on a playoff format past the first two rounds.
Would it be beneficial to have 2 "leagues" with 2 conferences? Kind of similar to the existence of the national league and the American league in baseball?
Then for each separate "league" you could have the top 4 teams from each conference make the playoffs and then in the 3rd round have the 2 teams from each respective conference battle for the title of the "league" and then battle the other champion for the cup.
I say "league" because I don't know what else to call it considering they're already calling these 4 groups conferences
I think you are either giving Boston too much credit or not giving the other teams enough. TB is solid, Buffalo is solid, Toronto is good getting better, Montreal should be in a year or two. It's basically the same deal we got. Five good teams, two crappy ones. Not to mention that Boston probably wasn't in any real danger of missing the playoffs over the next few years anyway.
Toronto and Florida are both overachieving...they haven't even made the PO and people are already talking as if they're Contenders. You're right they are playing well, but they're not even close to putting a consistent effort year after year to call themselves contenders. Montreal...I don't even know where to begin with those guys, Ottawa's a mess. Then there's Tampa and Buffalo; Tampa I don't think has the D or the goaltending to get pass Boston. Buffalo can potentially be an issue for Boston if Miller starts playing like he did in 2010.
At the end of the day can you honestly sit here and say that any of those teams (healthy) will win a 7 game series against Boston(healthy)...if your answer is 'yes' than I guess we just don't have the same opinion on this.
Would it be beneficial to have 2 "leagues" with 2 conferences? Kind of similar to the existence of the national league and the American league in baseball?
Then for each separate "league" you could have the top 4 teams from each conference make the playoffs and then in the 3rd round have the 2 teams from each respective conference battle for the title of the "league" and then battle the other champion for the cup.
I say "league" because I don't know what else to call it considering they're already calling these 4 groups conferences
if they were to do something like this, they'd have to change the regular season scheduling to make the existence of two separate "leagues" believable.
i like the idea of reseeding the four conference winners after the second round. two useless trophies shouldn't be a deciding factor against that. who wouldn't want to see the flyers take on any of our former NE division rivals for the cup?
Another aspect I don't like is with the amount of good teams in our conference, and only 1 team coming out of each conference, there's a high chance that the teams that lose in the divisional series in our conference will be significantly better than the team that may come out of the other conferences. It seeks very unfair. The playoffs, and especially the conference finals now are the two best teams meeting for a chance to play for the cup.
Toronto and Florida are both overachieving...they haven't even made the PO and people are already talking as if they're Contenders. You're right they are playing well, but they're not even close to putting a consistent effort year after year to call themselves contenders. Montreal...I don't even know where to begin with those guys, Ottawa's a mess. Then there's Tampa and Buffalo; Tampa I don't think has the D or the goaltending to get pass Boston. Buffalo can potentially be an issue for Boston if Miller starts playing like he did in 2010.
At the end of the day can you honestly sit here and say that any of those teams (healthy) will win a 7 game series against Boston(healthy)...if your answer is 'yes' than I guess we just don't have the same opinion on this.
My bad, I thought you were talking just about making the playoffs, not winning the conference. Yeah Boston has a much better shot at getting a stranglehold on their conference than the Flyers do.
it'll be interesting to see how the NHL plans to even these conferences out. if the yotes end up moving to QC, that'll knock the "snowbird" conference up to 8. this leaves the western(most) conference and our conference at 7 teams a piece. years down the road, an expansion team in a market like seattle would make sense for the west, but there are less options for our conference. i wouldn't be surprised if the nhl gave atlanta another shot if they can find an ownership group committed to icing a good team. another possible solution would be a team in houston/kc and one of detroit/columbus joining our conference. pure speculation here, but you have to think the nhl is considering expansion within 10-15 years given this new layout.
Another aspect I don't like is with the amount of good teams in our conference, and only 1 team coming out of each conference, there's a high chance that the teams that lose in the divisional series in our conference will be significantly better than the team that may come out of the other conferences. It seeks very unfair. The playoffs, and especially the conference finals now are the two best teams meeting for a chance to play for the cup.
Maybe I'm not making any sense.
Don't tell that to people who say the Flyers got to the SCF two years ago based on lucky matchups.
Nope. Boston is sitting pretty in the weakest Conference...not only are they pretty much guaranteed a PO spot for the next couple of years; but they also have a REALLY good chance every year at winning their Conference and moving on to the top 4.
We're certainly not the only winners of the realignment, but I'd 100% say we gained. Cut it any way you want, but this gives us a 57% chance to make the playoffs even if the Islanders, Canes, and Devils were as good as us. Less travel, better chance of making the playoffs...the first two rounds of the playoffs are the only thing that gets worse for us.
I really think that the possible relocation of the Coyotes to Quebec is taken care of with this format.
Right now, there are 2 new western conferences in place of the current western conference. Both those conferences would field 8 teams, while the 2 new eastern conferences would field 7 teams each. Should the Coyotes relocate, just put them into the Northeast division with MTL, TOR, OTT and the others. Then you have an 8 team and a 7 team conference in place of the current conferences each. That's the fairest distribution without expanding or contracting 2 teams.
...and a return to the old Montreal-Quebec rivalry!
If the playoff format gets boring, they can just change it. Clearly the league isn't afraid of making quick changes like this.
Some possible changes:
1. Limit the intra-'conference' portion of the playoffs to just being the 1st round instead of being the first two rounds.
2. Give the higher-remaining seeds after each round the right to choose their opponents, from either the east-east/midwest-west groupings or from wherever...for example do you go for an easier squad with perhaps a brutal travel arrangement? Do you take on a different opponent to delay facing a hot goalie?
3. Wildcards
4. Soccer-style two-game playoffs between the 4 and 5 teams with weighted away goals, in order to give a chance to those number 5 seeds who may be getting shafted by schedule imbalance
5. All games being worth 3 points
