HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Is the time right for a 20 team playoff field?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2013, 04:26 PM
  #76
Acesolid
The Illusive Bettman
 
Acesolid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyNYR View Post

2- You make the 7th and 8th place teams "earn it" a little more by requiring them to get through a 1 game play-in. This actually increases the "integrity" of playoff teams slightly even though more teams have a shot at getting in. And hey, they aren't facing the 1st place team, they're facing #9 or #10. If they can't get into the 6th or higher ceed or win the one-game play-in, I don't see them as being robbed of something they earned.
A hockey game isn't a week long Cricket with a final score of 250 to 175! It's just 60 minutes. And so the best team doesn't win 100% of the time against a weaker team. However, over a 7 game series, the best one should come on top.

Like I said before, a single game playoff will eventually end in disaster. It's playing with fire.

Acesolid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 04:31 PM
  #77
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,563
vCash: 500
League wide playoffs please

CerebralGenesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 04:48 PM
  #78
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyNYR View Post
2- You make the 7th and 8th place teams "earn it" a little more by requiring them to get through a 1 game play-in. This actually increases the "integrity" of playoff teams slightly even though more teams have a shot at getting in.
Yea, that mere 82-game Regular Season isn't really enough to truly prove that a team "earned" anything, especially the 7th and 8th seeds. If a team is a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th seed, you know those teams earned those spots, but 7th and 8th, come on, those seeds are gimmes.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 04:51 PM
  #79
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,456
vCash: 500
I think the current amount is perfect. It eliminates half the teams before going into the playoffs. However, more teams means more interested markets, and potentially more games, and more revenue.... so its really a matter of time.

Integrity takes a backseat to cash, unfortunately.

Hackett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 05:52 PM
  #80
saskganesh
Registered User
 
saskganesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the Annex
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,047
vCash: 500
I think a sudden death game for lowly seeds is fine.

Of course, this sudden death series could eventually become a best of 3, then 5 and 7. And then we have another two weeks added on the payoffs (sic). Yawn.

I liked those best of 3 first rounds they had in the late 70's. Let's bring those back. For everyone.

saskganesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 06:21 PM
  #81
AprilMayandJune
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
this new proposed playoff alignment has some interesting scenerios to it.

All potential contenders will be playing to acheive at LEAST 6th in their conference- no teams will really want the 7- 10 seeds(until thats the only option available) when the possibility of their season ending depends on a good or bad bounce in a 1 game elimination...if it is a best of 3 i think the 3 games should be played on a Fri.,Sat,Sun format doing theses lesser seeds no favours.

Also there would be much less meaningless games as the season winds down as teams in 11,12 maybe as far low as 14 and 15 might have a possible shot in the last week of the season

AprilMayandJune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:30 PM
  #82
NickWIHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Port Washington, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 118
vCash: 500
I'm fine with having a playin round much like what was done in the late 70s, when you had 1-16, 2-15, etc series. i think what you should do is have it be best of 3 and call it the ' opening round' much like NCAA called the play-in game in Dayton or the NIT called the round when it had 40 teams. so team 7 lays teams 10 and 8 plays 9 with the winners either retaining their seeding, or being reseeded as 7 or 8.Baseballs playin game is dumb, baseball not only should have it be a best of three, but they should have 12 teams n thier playoffs.three division winners three wildcards, much like the NFl did it from 1990-2002.

NickWIHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:38 PM
  #83
Capsized
Parity is a Disease
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,363
vCash: 500
Put all the teams in. It will work well with the whole parity scheme. Why should just the good teams have a chance?

Capsized is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:04 PM
  #84
Mightygoose
I Am Groot
 
Mightygoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ajax, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,368
vCash: 514
I'm really hoping the league does not consider adding the extra playoff teams until at least expansion happens.

If I'm not mistaken, the league has never increased the number of playoff teams without a subsequent expansion in the same season.

Inagual season 1917-18 - 2 playoff teams with 4 in the league (used split season champs in the early years.

Increase to 3 playoff teams in 1924-25 - league expaded to 6

Increase to 6 playoff teams in 1926-27 - league grew from 7 to 10

Decrease to 4 playoff teams in 1942-43 - league over time contracted to original 6 era

Increase to 8 playoff teams in 1967-68 - league grew from 6 to 12

Increase to 12 playoff teams in 1974-75 - league grew from 16 to 18

Increase to 16 playoff teams in 1979-80 - league grew from 17 to 21 due to WHA merger.

So they should keep it as it is for now.

Mightygoose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:22 PM
  #85
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightygoose View Post
I'm really hoping the league does not consider adding the extra playoff teams until at least expansion happens.

If I'm not mistaken, the league has never increased the number of playoff teams without a subsequent expansion in the same season.

Inagual season 1917-18 - 2 playoff teams with 4 in the league (used split season champs in the early years.

Increase to 3 playoff teams in 1924-25 - league expaded to 6

Increase to 6 playoff teams in 1926-27 - league grew from 7 to 10

Decrease to 4 playoff teams in 1942-43 - league over time contracted to original 6 era

Increase to 8 playoff teams in 1967-68 - league grew from 6 to 12

Increase to 12 playoff teams in 1974-75 - league grew from 16 to 18

Increase to 16 playoff teams in 1979-80 - league grew from 17 to 21 due to WHA merger.

So they should keep it as it is for now.
Or they need to catch up for the 9 teams that they added without increasing the playoff field. After all, the NHL has never added that many teams without increasing the playoff field.

rojac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:38 PM
  #86
NickWIHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Port Washington, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 118
vCash: 500
adding some playoff teams, in a preliminary round would be fine, as long as it doesnt get as bad as the 16 out of 21 that was present after the WHA teams were absorbed. to get that you'd need to expand to 24 teams, and while that could work, for say D1 college football, basically taking in anyone who has a minimum of 60 points is not good business.

NickWIHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:49 PM
  #87
Mightygoose
I Am Groot
 
Mightygoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ajax, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,368
vCash: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickWIHockey View Post
adding some playoff teams, in a preliminary round would be fine, as long as it doesnt get as bad as the 16 out of 21 that was present after the WHA teams were absorbed. to get that you'd need to expand to 24 teams, and while that could work, for say D1 college football, basically taking in anyone who has a minimum of 60 points is not good business.
If 16 out of 21 is bad enough. From the 1938-39 season until the 1941-42 season, 6 out of 7 teams made it in. Now that's a meaningless regular season!

Mightygoose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:52 PM
  #88
McTankel
HFBoards Sponsor
 
McTankel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Hamburg, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,019
vCash: 500
Why player a regular season if nearly everyone makes the playoffs? Seems kind of pointless to me. NFL has the best formula by far, the regular season is nearly as important as the playoffs.

McTankel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:10 PM
  #89
NickWIHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Port Washington, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 118
vCash: 500
NFL also has the fewest games out of the big 4. basketball and hockey play 82 each, and baseball plays nearly twice that. baseball you have teams eliminated by May, and basketball probably needs to shrink the playoffs given the weakness in the eastern conference,.

NickWIHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:15 PM
  #90
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
The Kings just proved that this should never happen.
The Kings are pretty much the most mediocre champion of the past 15 years. Their ability to win precisely demonstrates why they should either just put every team into the playoffs, or reduce the number of playoff spots by half.

  Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:41 PM
  #91
Ringmaster316
Registered User
 
Ringmaster316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
The Kings are pretty much the most mediocre champion of the past 15 years. Their ability to win precisely demonstrates why they should either just put every team into the playoffs, or reduce the number of playoff spots by half.
Mod...

Kings were the most DOMINATING team since the 93 habs


Last edited by Killion: 01-03-2013 at 09:47 PM. Reason: easy there..,
Ringmaster316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:48 PM
  #92
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringmaster316 View Post
Kings were the most DOMINATING team since the 93 habs
If by "dominating" you mean not getting back to the final four over the next 20 years, yes, I do believe the Kings could indeed achieve that level of "dominating".


  Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:48 PM
  #93
NickWIHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Port Washington, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 118
vCash: 500
the kings were the first 8 seed to ever win a championship.
NFL- no 8 seeds -6 is the lowest
NBA- 1999 Knicks are the only 8 seed to ever reach the NBA finals
MLB no 8 seeds- 5 is lowest-
NHL- Kings and 06 Oilers are only 8 seeds to reach the Stanley Cup finals.

NickWIHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 10:09 PM
  #94
Ringmaster316
Registered User
 
Ringmaster316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
If by "dominating" you mean not getting back to the final four over the next 20 years, yes, I do believe the Kings could indeed achieve that level of "dominating".

16-4 playoff record says otherwise

whats your point of 20 years...lol your talking about the HISTORY of the team... i am talking about LAST season

beat the so called ``best`` team in 5 games in the opening round then in the 2nd round they swept the 2nd best team in the west then in conf. finals they won in 5 games the rest is history

Ringmaster316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 06:45 AM
  #95
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyNYR View Post
2- You make the 7th and 8th place teams "earn it" a little more by requiring them to get through a 1 game play-in. This actually increases the "integrity" of playoff teams slightly even though more teams have a shot at getting in. And hey, they aren't facing the 1st place team, they're facing #9 or #10. If they can't get into the 6th or higher ceed or win the one-game play-in, I don't see them as being robbed of something they earned.
This wretched 1-game play-in idea is all MLB's fault. They had that one freak year where the two wildcard spots were decided on the last day of the season in admittedly amazingly dramatic games, then decided "Hey let's do that every year!" to cash in (they had been kicking around the idea for a while, but it took that crazy set of circumstances to make them believe in it & go for it).

If this moronic idea had been in place in 2007, the 81-point St. Louis Blues would have gotten a "play in" game against the 104-point Minnesota Wild. What the hell does the season matter if a 23-point gap doesn't ensure you your spot in the playoffs?! (And the Wild still got smoked by the 110-point Ducks who went on to win the Cup)

Admittedly that is the most extreme example of the past several years, but I want no part of that garbage in the NHL.

optimus2861 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:30 AM
  #96
JeremyNYR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimus2861 View Post
This wretched 1-game play-in idea is all MLB's fault. They had that one freak year where the two wildcard spots were decided on the last day of the season in admittedly amazingly dramatic games, then decided "Hey let's do that every year!" to cash in (they had been kicking around the idea for a while, but it took that crazy set of circumstances to make them believe in it & go for it).

If this moronic idea had been in place in 2007, the 81-point St. Louis Blues would have gotten a "play in" game against the 104-point Minnesota Wild. What the hell does the season matter if a 23-point gap doesn't ensure you your spot in the playoffs?! (And the Wild still got smoked by the 110-point Ducks who went on to win the Cup)

Admittedly that is the most extreme example of the past several years, but I want no part of that garbage in the NHL.
As you admitted, you did pick a very extreme example. That same year, 7th through 10th in the Eastern Conference were separated by 3 points. Even as it was in the West that year, I bet the Wild would've had a more exciting end to the regular season trying to take the 6th spot from Dallas instead of knowing they were comfortably in the playoffs the last week or so of the season. And that's what matters to the league and I think to the fans, that the last couple weeks of the regular season are as exciting as possible for as many teams as possible.

I get that a lot of people don't like the idea. I think a good bit of it is due to just trying to find fault first in any new idea that's presented. I read the title to this thread and thought "hell no!", but after thinking it through, I can see how it would make for a more exciting end to the regular season.

JeremyNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:16 AM
  #97
NickWIHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Port Washington, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 118
vCash: 500
instead of it being a 1- and- done, which imo should be reserved for tiebreakers- hey if you're still tied after 3 tiebreakers, settle it on the ice- have it be a best of 3. why put everything down to one game if theres a 23 point gap between you. we saw what happened with atlanta in baseball this year. was 6 games better than st louis and still lost the coin flip game.

NickWIHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:48 AM
  #98
Ace Rothstein
Aces High
 
Ace Rothstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,093
vCash: 547
It will never be the right time for a 20 team playoff field. I'm sure that won't stop the league from proceeding that way at some point.

Ace Rothstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 09:42 AM
  #99
JeremyNYR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickWIHockey View Post
instead of it being a 1- and- done, which imo should be reserved for tiebreakers- hey if you're still tied after 3 tiebreakers, settle it on the ice- have it be a best of 3. why put everything down to one game if theres a 23 point gap between you. we saw what happened with atlanta in baseball this year. was 6 games better than st louis and still lost the coin flip game.
Why is a 1 game contest that decides the lowest 2 ceeded positions in the playoffs a coin flip, yet the NFL uses 1 game in every playoff round including the championship, and it's generally accepted? It's just a convention that's in place now, and playoff formats (just like divisional/conference alignments) change in sports all the time. I think a team has to succeed within whatever playoff framework is in place at the time to be the champion.

JeremyNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 10:02 AM
  #100
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,665
vCash: 500
Why not just add one team to the playoffs in each conference? That way divisional leaders get a buy in the first round and the highest remaining seed gets a buy in the third round. Here's how I'd do it using laster year's Eastern Conference Standings (Assuming no upsets to make it easy):

Penguins vs. Sabres. - Rangers vs Devils - Boston vs. Panthers - Rangers vs Boston - SCF
Flyers vs. Sens. - Boston vs Flyers
Devils vs. Caps. - Panthers vs Penguins

You add one round while rewarding season play and adding more teams to the playoffs.

DyerMaker66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.