HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Realignment: Did the CBA address this?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2013, 10:23 AM
  #26
a79krgm
Registered User
 
a79krgm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: White Bear Lake
Country: United States
Posts: 675
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to a79krgm
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupChamps2011 View Post
I don't understand why they are having such an issue here. Move Columbus to the south, and Winnipeg to the central.
Please instead move Nashville South, Winnipeg NorthWest and Minnesota Central.

a79krgm is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 10:43 AM
  #27
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
Pacific-------Central-------- Northeast--------Atlantic
Anaheim------Chicago-------Boston----------Carolina
Calgary-------Colorado------Buffalo----------Columbus
Edmonton-----Dallas--------Montreal---------Florida
LA--------------Detroit-------New Jersey------Philadelphia
Phoenix--------Minnesota----NY Islanders----Pittsburgh
San Jose ------Nashville------NY Rangers-----Tampa Bay
Vancouver-----St. Louis------Ottawa----------Washington
-----------------Winnipeg------Toronto


Last edited by silvercanuck: 01-21-2013 at 11:04 AM.
silvercanuck is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:31 AM
  #28
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
Pacific: Vancouver, SJ, LA, ANA, PHX
Northwest: Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota, Winnipeg, and Colorado
South: Nashville, Dallas, Carolina, florida, Tampa Bay
Midwest: St Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh
Northeast: Buffalo, Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, and boston
Atlantic: NYR, NYI, NJD, Philly, and Washington
Ah, but you split up the Penn state twins. Don't think that would fly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
Pacific-------Central-------- Northeast--------Atlantic
Anaheim------Chicago-------Boston----------Carolina
Calgary-------Colorado------Buffalo----------Columbus
Edmonton-----Dallas--------Montreal---------Florida
LA--------------Detroit-------New Jersey------Philadelphia
Phoenix--------Minnesota----NY Islanders----Pittsburgh
San Jose ------Nashville------NY Rangers-----Tampa Bay
Vancouver-----St. Louis------Ottawa----------Washington
-----------------Winnipeg------Toronto
Pacific - two time zones. Central - three time zones.

Don't think the Central teams will be that happy. (Move Colorado to Pacific and you're down to two time zones in Central.)

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:32 AM
  #29
Rocko604
Registered User
 
Rocko604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,003
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
Pacific-------Central-------- Northeast--------Atlantic
Anaheim------Chicago-------Boston----------Carolina
Calgary-------Colorado------Buffalo----------Columbus
Edmonton-----Dallas--------Montreal---------Florida
LA--------------Detroit-------New Jersey------Philadelphia
Phoenix--------Minnesota----NY Islanders----Pittsburgh
San Jose ------Nashville------NY Rangers-----Tampa Bay
Vancouver-----St. Louis------Ottawa----------Washington
-----------------Winnipeg------Toronto
Looks good, I'd put NYR, NYI, NJ in the Atlantic, Pittsburgh, Columbus in Northeast.

Rocko604 is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:36 AM
  #30
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko604 View Post
Looks good, I'd put NYR, NYI, NJ in the Atlantic, Pittsburgh, Columbus in Northeast.
And thus allow room for Quebec City as well, right?

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:44 AM
  #31
Rocko604
Registered User
 
Rocko604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,003
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
And thus allow room for Quebec City as well, right?
Actually I was thinking Seattle in the NW

Honestly I wasn't thinking QC at all, but that works out rather well. The Tri-State teams make more sense in the Atlantic division and PIT, CBS in the Northeast. Boston stays in the NE to keep the Montreal rivalry.

I know multiple time zones per division and the PIT/PHI rivalry have been brought up, but in a 4 division league, I can't see a way around it and make it geographically friendly.

Rocko604 is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:51 AM
  #32
New Jets
Jets fan since '79
 
New Jets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The River City
Posts: 652
vCash: 500
According to Winnipeg Free Press reporter Gary Lawless, this shortened season will most likely be the Jets last in the Southeast Division. He said as much after the lockout ended.

New Jets is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 12:35 PM
  #33
howie789
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 76
vCash: 500
IMO, you have to keep the non-division, intra-conference rivals in tact as well- NYR-MTL, NYR- BOS, PHI-MTL, PHI-BOS, PIT-TOR, PIT-MTL..among others - the bigger Original Expansion- Original Six rivals so to speak. To have them only play twice a year would be at travesty too. I say switch WPG-CLB. Play your div rivals 5-6 x- every other conf team 3x - and the other conf teams twice. You've got to see everyone in your home building once. This is common sense. Baseball and Basketball do this. Travel, schmavel..traveling on a corporate jet is cake.. commercial is different obviously- you don't have to sit by Del Griffith (shower curtain ring salesman) every flight..

howie789 is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 03:37 PM
  #34
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howie789 View Post
IMO, you have to keep the non-division, intra-conference rivals in tact as well- NYR-MTL, NYR- BOS, PHI-MTL, PHI-BOS, PIT-TOR, PIT-MTL..among others - the bigger Original Expansion- Original Six rivals so to speak. To have them only play twice a year would be at travesty too. I say switch WPG-CLB. Play your div rivals 5-6 x- every other conf team 3x - and the other conf teams twice. You've got to see everyone in your home building once. This is common sense. Baseball and Basketball do this. Travel, schmavel..traveling on a corporate jet is cake.. commercial is different obviously- you don't have to sit by Del Griffith (shower curtain ring salesman) every flight..
Totally agree. If you put too much emphasis on the Division, you risk losing a bit more of fan-interest in non-Divisional matchups. Some of those matchups currently draw a lot of attention and, depending on the competitive factor, sometimes or some Seasons those matchups are more sought after by the fans than certain of the Divisional matchups. Just take Boston-Phily, as you mentioned,... so they play a game against each other, things get intense,... currently fans have 3 more of those matchups to look forward to, but imagine reducing it down to only 2 games against in the Season. For one, the intensity level between the teams might not even get so high if they're only playing each other twice.

Packaging it too tightly in a nice little Divisional bow, the League would be limiting itself too much, IMO.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 03:41 PM
  #35
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 18,967
vCash: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
Pacific-------Central-------- Northeast--------Atlantic
Anaheim------Chicago-------Boston----------Carolina
Calgary-------Colorado------Buffalo----------Columbus
Edmonton-----Dallas--------Montreal---------Florida
LA--------------Detroit-------New Jersey------Philadelphia
Phoenix--------Minnesota----NY Islanders----Pittsburgh
San Jose ------Nashville------NY Rangers-----Tampa Bay
Vancouver-----St. Louis------Ottawa----------Washington
-----------------Winnipeg------Toronto
Unless they are planning on adding 2 teams.... No sir, I don't like it


Gentle Ben Kenobi is online now  
Old
01-21-2013, 10:40 PM
  #36
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dingo View Post
Unless they are planning on adding 2 teams.... No sir, I don't like it

Agreed. If they're not actually expanding by 2 teams in the moment, there's no need for the imbalance. Imbalance has existed in the past when it was necessary because of an odd number of teams, but if it's not necessary then don't do it.

If they can make the decision about which team will be put in the East in a 4-Division/Conference alignment (which they ultimately must do if there's only going to be 1 ETZ expansion team), then they can make that same decision and put that team in the East in a 6-Division alignment (until expansion actually happens). If then teams in the West fight over who should get that Central Division vacancy, the League then can have a vote to try to decide that; if they can't, then just leave Winnipeg in the Central (again at least until expansion actually happens).

There's absolutely no reason why the decision on which team gets put in the East to replace Winnipeg should be dependent on or held up by a debate about how teams in the West should be realigned.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 01-21-2013 at 11:02 PM.
MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 01:34 PM
  #37
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
There's absolutely no reason why the decision on which team gets put in the East to replace Winnipeg should be dependent on or held up by a debate about how teams in the West should be realigned.
Of course it's dependent, simply because realignment is a league-wide discussion. If anyone is accepting of the fact that Winnipeg should be moved into a division with teams closer than those in their division now, that invites others with the exact same issue to be brought to bear.

Let's keep in mind that the NHL believed that the realignment proposal they last passed by a 26-4 margin would be passed by the NHLPA. If the NHL provides the NHLPA with the requested information regarding a schedule mock-up and travel concerns, there's no reason to believe that the NHL won't simply attempt the exact same realignment.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 01:53 PM
  #38
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Of course it's dependent, simply because realignment is a league-wide discussion. If anyone is accepting of the fact that Winnipeg should be moved into a division with teams closer than those in their division now, that invites others with the exact same issue to be brought to bear.
I know what you're saying, but I simply don't agree that it should be the case. There's a primary factor here, that Winnipeg was the recipient of a relocated team and thus never aligned in the League as the other teams were (for good or bad). Part of that reality is certainly that Winnipeg will be placed in the West, and, if there isn't a likely potential of 2 expansion teams in the East, then a team from the West will be put in the East. The League makes that simple decision/swap (though with the League it's probably not simple), and at least Winnipeg is playing in the Western Conference, and the team to replace Winnipeg is playing in the Eastern Conference. And there, finished!

And when I say "finished", I don't mean that the League has done with "realignment", I simply mean that that basic swap has been done. Now/Then if the League wishes to confront a "realignment" of the West (or hell even the East for that matter), then so be it; the owners can debate and vote on exactly which team should get the Central Division spot. And if they can't agree, then Winnipeg just stays there by default, until expansion and a potential 4-Division realignment.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:32 PM
  #39
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retail1LO View Post
Was there any discussion of the realignment that was approved by the BOG?
In regards to that proposed realignment:

Winnipeg to Washington = 2003km
Winnipeg to Raleigh = 2165km
Winnipeg to Toronto = 1514km
Winnipeg to Ottawa = 1677km
Winnipeg to Montreal = 1824km

Montreal to Sunrise, FL = 2225km
Montreal to Tampa = 2093km
Ottawa to Sunrise, FL = 2175km
Ottawa to Tampa = 2025km
Buffalo to Sunrise, FL = 1870km
Toronto to Sunrise, FL = 1930km

It would make more sense to put Winnipeg in the Northeast than it would to put the Florida teams there. Hell, without the Florida teams in the SE, Winnipeg could just as easily stay in that Division as have those Florida teams be tacked on to the NE.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:41 PM
  #40
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,902
vCash: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
Pacific-------Central-------- Northeast--------Atlantic
Anaheim------Chicago-------Boston----------Carolina
Calgary-------Colorado------Buffalo----------Columbus
Edmonton-----Dallas--------Montreal---------Florida
LA--------------Detroit-------New Jersey------Philadelphia
Phoenix--------Minnesota----NY Islanders----Pittsburgh
San Jose ------Nashville------NY Rangers-----Tampa Bay
Vancouver-----St. Louis------Ottawa----------Washington
-----------------Winnipeg------Toronto
Not much different than what the NHL voted and approved. Only Colorado was in the Pacific (makes more sense) and Columbus remained in the central.

Also the NHL's proposal put Philly, Pitts with the NY teams because that was a main sticking point to garner enough votes.

cheswick is online now  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:42 PM
  #41
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I know what you're saying, but I simply don't agree that it should be the case. There's a primary factor here, that Winnipeg was the recipient of a relocated team and thus never aligned in the League as the other teams were (for good or bad).
Let's take a look then at other teams that were relocated:

The Carolina Hurricanes were relocated from Harford for the 1997-98 season. They remained in the Northeast Division for that season until the expansion of the late 1990's moved them into the newly-formed Southeast Division.

The Phoenix Coyotes were relocated from Winnipeg for the 1996-97 season. They remained in the Central Division for two seasons until the expansion of the late 1990's moved them into the newly-reformed Pacific Division

The Colorado Avalanche were relocated from Quebec for the 1995-96 season. They were immediately moved into the Pacific Division. Colorado would be moved into the newly-formed Northwest Division as a result of the late 1990's expansion.

The Dallas Stars were relocated from Minnesota for the 1993-94 season. They were left in the Norris/Central Division, but would be moved to the reformed Pacific Division in the late 1990's.

Therefore, realignment appears to take place when there is a genuine need. Just because Winnipeg is closer to all of the teams in the Central Division than the teams in the Southeast Division isn't necessarily a genuine need.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Part of that reality is certainly that Winnipeg will be placed in the West, and, if there isn't a likely potential of 2 expansion teams in the East, then a team from the West will be put in the East. The League makes that simple decision/swap (though with the League it's probably not simple), and at least Winnipeg is playing in the Western Conference, and the team to replace Winnipeg is playing in the Eastern Conference. And there, finished!
But that makes a few assumptions:
1) everyone is happy with the 6-4-18 scheduling format, where every team plays their divisional opponents six times, their in-conference opponents four times and then everyone in the other conference once, with an addition three out-of-conference games for a total of 18 out-of-conference games.
2) that everyone is happy with the division they are currently in.

A simple swap gives the Winnipeg Jets the spot currently held by one of Detroit, Columbus or Nashville. Does Winnipeg want to be in a division with St. Louis, Chicago, and two of Detroit, Columbus or Nashville? Or do either of Minnesota or Dallas want that spot?

And that's where we get to the crux of the problem:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
And when I say "finished", I don't mean that the League has done with "realignment", I simply mean that that basic swap has been done. Now/Then if the League wishes to confront a "realignment" of the West (or hell even the East for that matter), then so be it; the owners can debate and vote on exactly which team should get the Central Division spot. And if they can't agree, then Winnipeg just stays there by default, until expansion and a potential 4-Division realignment.
And that's exactly why a two-step realignment won't be done. The NHL's Board of Governors cannot agree on a simple swap, because the "promise" of another realignment doesn't hold water. It's exactly why a somewhat radical realignment was passed in December 2011, and I'm of the belief the exact same proposal will be passed as the realignment for the 2013-14 season.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:42 PM
  #42
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
Not much different than what the NHL voted and approved. Only Colorado was in the Pacific (makes more sense) and Columbus remained in the central.

Also the NHL's proposal put Philly, Pitts with the NY teams because that was a main sticking point to garner enough votes.
It may not be much different, but it is significantly different!

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:50 PM
  #43
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,902
vCash: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
It may not be much different, but it is significantly different!

But it would never fly. That's the issue. When re-alignment was first being discussed in the media the Pitts seperate from Philly -NYR was being bandied about. This wouldn't have garnered enough votes so it was changed to the final realignment voted on.

Initially reported in late Oct 2011:


Final vote on this in Dec 2011:


Last edited by cheswick: 01-22-2013 at 03:04 PM.
cheswick is online now  
Old
01-22-2013, 03:34 PM
  #44
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
But it would never fly. That's the issue. When re-alignment was first being discussed in the media the Pitts seperate from Philly -NYR was being bandied about. This wouldn't have garnered enough votes so it was changed to the final realignment voted on.

Initially reported in late Oct 2011:


Final vote on this in Dec 2011:
Thanks for demonstrating my point that his alignment idea is in fact significantly different.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 03:37 PM
  #45
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,902
vCash: 574
My solution.

West
SJ, LA, ANA, PHO, COL, VAN, EDM, CAL

South
DAL, TB, FLO, NASH, CARO, ST LOUIS, COLUMBUS

North
Mont, Ott, Tor, Det, Chi, Minn, Winn

East
NYI, NYR, NJ, Philly, Pitts, Wash, Bos, Buff


Pluses:
No teams within a conference more than 1 time zone apart. No conferences with only one CDN or US team. Easy portability of Phoenix if needed to Seattle or Quebec.


Issues:
Split up Bos and Montreal. Conference named south with Columbus in it. East conference great travel advantages over the rest. Plus others i'm sure

cheswick is online now  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:13 PM
  #46
Mike Louis
Registered User
 
Mike Louis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 37
vCash: 500
My realignment suggestion

Adams (Northeast) Conference

Boston
Buffalo
Minnesota
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Winnipeg

Patrick (Atlantic) Conference

Carolina
New Jersey
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington

Norris (Central) Conference

Chicago
Columbus
Dallas
Detroit
Florida
Nashville
St. Louis
Tampa Bay

Smythe (Pacific) Conference

Anaheim
Calgary
Colorado
Edmonton
Los Angeles
Phoenix
San Jose
Vancouver

• Winnipeg gets divisional games against eastern Canadian teams.
• Minnesota gets local CTZ rival.
• Detroit and Columbus gets to play half of their conference games in ETZ.


Last edited by Mike Louis: 01-23-2013 at 02:52 AM. Reason: Left out San Jose
Mike Louis is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:29 PM
  #47
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Louis View Post
My realignment suggestion

Adams (Northeast) Conference

Boston
Buffalo
Minnesota
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Winnipeg

Patrick (Atlantic) Conference

Carolina
New Jersey
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington

Norris (Central) Conference

Chicago
Columbus
Dallas
Detroit
Florida
Nashville
St. Louis
Tampa Bay

Smythe (Pacific) Conference

Anaheim
Calgary
Colorado
Edmonton
Los Angeles
Phoenix
Seattle
Vancouver

Winnipeg gets divisional games against eastern Canadian teams.
Minnesota gets local CTZ rival.
Detroit and Columbus gets to play half of their conference games in ETZ.
That's the alignment that makes much more sense than the proposal last year.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:51 PM
  #48
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Let's take a look then at other teams that were relocated:

The Carolina Hurricanes were relocated from Harford for the 1997-98 season. They remained in the Northeast Division for that season until the expansion of the late 1990's moved them into the newly-formed Southeast Division.

The Phoenix Coyotes were relocated from Winnipeg for the 1996-97 season. They remained in the Central Division for two seasons until the expansion of the late 1990's moved them into the newly-reformed Pacific Division

The Colorado Avalanche were relocated from Quebec for the 1995-96 season. They were immediately moved into the Pacific Division. Colorado would be moved into the newly-formed Northwest Division as a result of the late 1990's expansion.

The Dallas Stars were relocated from Minnesota for the 1993-94 season. They were left in the Norris/Central Division, but would be moved to the reformed Pacific Division in the late 1990's.
Ok, let's take another look at what you posted there....

- Carolina remained in the Northeast until expansion.
- Phoenix remained in the Central until expansion.
- Colorado was immediately moved to the Pacific (*Note: not kept in the Northeast... Could be Winnipeg in the Central, and not kept in the Southeast), before being moved to the Northwest.
- Dallas in the Central,... well that was logical to begin with...

So, what I see is that those teams either stayed in the original team's Division until Expansion, or they were immediately put in a more appropriate Division. Neither of which is the option planned for Winnipeg. No, in Winnipeg's case, the League has proposed new Divisions, without expansion. So, Winnipeg wasn't immediately put in a more appropriate, and isn't going to be resituated due to an expansion.

Quote:
Just because Winnipeg is closer to all of the teams in the Central Division than the teams in the Southeast Division isn't necessarily a genuine need. But that makes a few assumptions:
1) everyone is happy with the 6-4-18 scheduling format, where every team plays their divisional opponents six times, their in-conference opponents four times and then everyone in the other conference once, with an addition three out-of-conference games for a total of 18 out-of-conference games.
2) that everyone is happy with the division they are currently in.

A simple swap gives the Winnipeg Jets the spot currently held by one of Detroit, Columbus or Nashville. Does Winnipeg want to be in a division with St. Louis, Chicago, and two of Detroit, Columbus or Nashville? Or do either of Minnesota or Dallas want that spot?
What does any of that have to do with making the simple swap?

If there are other issues, then tend to those other issues. We've known for a long time that certain teams aren't happy with their Divisions. The schedule itself can be adapted in various ways to fit the alignment. And Winnipeg would probably prefer the Northwest Division over the Central Division. None of those things prohibit Winnipeg from being swapped with a Central Division team taking the SE slot.

Quote:
And that's where we get to the crux of the problem: And that's exactly why a two-step realignment won't be done. The NHL's Board of Governors cannot agree on a simple swap, because the "promise" of another realignment doesn't hold water. It's exactly why a somewhat radical realignment was passed in December 2011, and I'm of the belief the exact same proposal will be passed as the realignment for the 2013-14 season.
And again, the League doesn't have to be made up of children or pranksters. A simple and formal agreement could be made that other alignment issues will be tended to with expansion (if they can't agree on a different alignment arrangement for those teams now within the 6-Division format).

It's almost like you're suggesting that forcing the 4-Division alignment will then result in expansion. Isn't that like putting the cart before the horse? Shouldn't it be expansion which forces the 4-Division alignment?

Oh, and apparently to have that expansion in the Northeast and Atlantic Divisions.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 01-22-2013 at 07:05 PM.
MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 08:31 PM
  #49
leeaf83
Registered User
 
leeaf83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,873
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to leeaf83 Send a message via Yahoo to leeaf83
i dont get why everyone is crying imbalance; every year from 1980-1995 other than 1993 as well as 1998-2000 had an imbalance on divisions and conferences.

leeaf83 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 08:36 PM
  #50
rj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
I just feel sorry for Winnipeg this season.

rj is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:21 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.