We'd be in a division with 8 so our chances are more difficult to make the playoffs but I like this idea. There's also a possibility of a wild card for the 4th spot. It also pretty much means that expansion of 2 more teams is coming in the near future. Here's the breakdown:
Having Columbus in the same conference will be a plus for the 'win' column, and more games against Washington will encourage this rivalry. This looks like a pretty fair realignment.
Conference 2 looks like the most intriguing, with Detroit joining fellow Original 6ers Montreal, Toronto and Boston.
I really don't understand why they can't just move Nashville to the SE, move Winnipeg to the NW, and then move Colorado to the Central.
It keeps things simple and they don't have to redo the whole format and open the door for expansion. The last thing the NHL needs right now is more small market teams.
I personally like the current system, I think they should keep it.
I really don't understand why they can't just move Nashville to the SE, move Winnipeg to the NW, and then move Colorado to the Central.
It keeps things simple and they don't have to redo the whole format and open the door for expansion. The last thing the NHL needs right now is more small market teams.
I personally like the current system, I think they should keep it.
Because a lot of teams don't like the current setup and the time differences (Dallas, Detroit, Columbus, Winnipeg). They're going to change it to this format whether there's an expansion in the future or not.
Having Columbus in the same conference will be a plus for the 'win' column, and more games against Washington will encourage this rivalry. This looks like a pretty fair realignment.
Conference 2 looks like the most intriguing, with Detroit joining fellow Original 6ers Montreal, Toronto and Boston.
It gives the Isles someone to share the basement with.
Because a lot of teams don't like the current setup and the time differences (Dallas, Detroit, Columbus, Winnipeg). They're going to change it to this format whether there's an expansion in the future or not.
Yeah exactly. It's easy for us to like the current arrangement when we currently have the easiest travel set up and big markets for plenty of national coverage.
Possibly but I'd say Seattle and Quebec over KC. You also have to consider that one or both of Phoenix/Florida can move though.
Yeah that's true. An east team would have to be relocated in order to bring a team to Quebec (or another Toronto area team) or else more reallignment would have to take place. I read an interesting article about expansion the other day (I think on Puck Daddy) about how expansion pretty much has to happen in the West because of the logistics of West teams already traveling a lot to play East teams and such and just the fact that there are fewer out there. Adding another East team would complicate things further, unless like you said Florida moves West (or Phoenix moves to one of the aforementioned places). I just think the way the divisions are proposed to be set up make it all the more easier for expansion. All speculation though. Haha.
I think we'll still see a team in Quebec regardless of what happens with the realignment. Makes no sense to keep an NHL team out of Canada when there's a rink and ownership willing to buy a team there.
Putting Columbus with Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, NYR, and Washington is smart, IMO. I might not like it, but for a team that struggles and needs help attendance-wise, those 4 big market/marquee teams are great draws to boost fan interest.
Maybe they'll be one of the teams that moves along with Phoenix? Who knows.
When Columbus entered the league they had several years of 18/19k attendance. A decade of absolute suckage has destroyed that number. That market can succeed, but they need the team to actually win...just like the Islanders.
__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
I agree, it really takes a lot of mental effort to start using the word "conference" instead of "division". Therefore, I think the whole idea proposed should be abandoned, because no one will be able to figure out that the new tag stands for the same thing, i.e. a group.
When Columbus entered the league they had several years of 18/19k attendance. A decade of absolute suckage has destroyed that number. That market can succeed, but they need the team to actually win...just like the Islanders.
Yea but how long until they are able to succeed? How long will the fans put up with it? I agree that they'll succeed if they are winning though. Phoenix, on the other hand, gets lousy attendance even when they are winning. They gotta go.
It going to be a lot harder to get into the playoffs year in year out in the Flyers division. One of the Rangers, Devils, Flyers, Penguins, and Capitals will miss the playoffs every year.
I think both teams will have to be in the West or as DrinkFightFlyers said teams will have to move again, and those teams would probably be either Detroit or Columbus who wanted to be in an Eastern time zone conference. It would make no sense to let those teams finally have their way just to send them packing a few years later. I think Seattle will definitely be one spot, since I think they already have a place set up for an NBA arena that can hold a rink and they might've already started building it. The one thing I don't like about expansion is that it will end the thing they had going for a season or two where every team play each other at least once in their home arena but I guess realignment may have changed that anyways.
I haven't really been following it but, I'm pretty certain all Phoenix's problems in terms of ownership are done with as of a month or more ago so it is a lot less likely they will be moving.
edit- Other than OKC I guess another option based on population is Indianapolis. As of July 2011 it was estimated to be the twelfth biggest city in the U.S.. Either of those locations would work well in conjunction with adding a team in Seattle because Seattle would fall in the Pacific+ conference and OKC or Indianapolis falls in whatever that central+ division would be called. There are also a lot of big cities in Texas but I'm not sure how well the state would support two teams. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_population
Last edited by ilovetheflyers8: 02-25-2013 at 03:00 PM.
But it really is 4 separate conferences. There would be no link between Conference I and II. You play every team 2 times, and then the rest of your games are in the conference only from what I heard.
I think both teams will have to be in the West or as DrinkFightFlyers said teams will have to move again, and those teams would probably be either Detroit or Columbus who wanted to be in an Eastern time zone conference. It would make no sense to let those teams finally have their way just to send them packing a few years later. I think Seattle will definitely be one spot, since I think they already have a place set up for an NBA arena that can hold a rink and they might've already started building it. The one thing I don't like about expansion is that it will end the thing they had going for a season or two where every team play each other at least once in their home arena but I guess realignment may have changed that anyways.
I haven't really been following it but, I'm pretty certain all Phoenix's problems in terms of ownership are done with as of a month or more ago so it is a lot less likely they will be moving.
edit- Other than OKC I guess another option based on population is Indianapolis. As of July 2011 it was estimated to be the twelfth biggest city in the U.S.. Either of those locations would work well in conjunction with adding a team in Seattle because Seattle would fall in the Pacific+ conference and OKC or Indianapolis falls in whatever that central+ division would be called. There are also a lot of big cities in Texas but I'm not sure how well the state would support two teams. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_population
The collapse of Greg Jamison's ownership bid isn't just a familiar failure for the Coyotes. It's a familiar failure in the history of botched NHL ownerships.
It's past the point of a broken record, and it's well beyond farce: Once again, another much-hyped opportunity for the Phoenix Coyotes to find new ownership has fallen through.
Greg Jamison, who reached a lease agreement with the Glendale City Council long enough ago that several members have been ousted by voters because of it, has missed the final deadline to get the financing together to close a deal to buy the club from the NHL. Jamison's request for an extension was denied by new Glendale mayor Jerry Weiers.
People rightly see this as just another chapter in the tragedy that has dragged Coyotes fans, players and staff through hell for three and a half years. But in reality it's just another chapter in a far broader, far longer-running comedy: The NHL's endless and often fumbling quest to find competent, able-funded owners for its many franchises.
Forget Jerry Moyes, who was lured into a situation that put him in over his head and losing millions per year on the Coyotes. In the last 15 years alone, similar situations have played out for the New Jersey Devils, St. Louis Blues, Nashville Predators, Edmonton Oilers, Buffalo Sabres, Ottawa Senators, Florida Panthers, Atlanta Thrashers, Dallas Stars, New York Islanders and Tampa Bay Lightning.
You know, to name a few.
Jamison is of course not the first potential Coyotes owner to fail to follow through. Moyes himself was lured into ownership by developer Steve Ellman, who was chasing a land deal that moved the Coyotes out to suburban Glendale in the first place. Long after their split dragged the Coyotes into bankruptcy, Matthew Hulsizer either didn't have the cash or the patience for Glendale, or both.
The common belief is that Jamison is simply short of cash, though there are some suggestions, such as by Mike Sunnucks of the Phoenix Business Journal, that Jamison's obstacle is not finances but rather issues of team control with his fellow investment partners.
Regardless, that's precisely the point here: The NHL consistently advances with ownership partners who either don't have the money to sustain a franchise or can't conjure it up without complex multi-party ownership groups that ultimately can't form a cohesive, unified ownership group for long.
The Devils reportedly narrowly avoided bankruptcy last month when owner Jeff Vanderbeek finally wrested control of the team from unhappy partners and restructured the team's debt with unhappy bankers.
The Blues were sold last year after a drawn-out process that saw former lead owner Dave Checketts unable to meet the financial demands under which he purchased the team.
The Thrashers moved to Winnipeg a season ago after years of the Atlanta Spirit Group ownership battling each other in court.
The Sabres were bought two years ago by Terry Pegula after years of budget ownership by Tom Golisano, who himself rescued the team from owners headed to prison.
The Lightning were bought in 2010 by Jeff Vinik after a drawn-out search to rescue them from the comically inept partnership of Hollywood producer Oren Koules and former NHLer-turned-land-huckster Len Barrie.
Prior to all that, the Senators were rescued from bankruptcy and the Predators and Oilers were saved only by large multi-party local ownership groups that were strained just to keep these teams afloat. The Panthers have been owned by a rotating cast of fleetingly interested characters, and the Stars were put in limbo when Tom Hicks' sports empire collapsed around him.
The late '90s "ownership" of the Islanders by fraudulent John Spano is the stuff of legend, and itself interrupted years of poor management by a four-man crew, half of whom later ended up in prison.
In several of these cases, most notably the Sabres and Lightning, a single billionaire eventually swooped in -- or was coaxed in -- to save the day and put their franchise on solid footing. In many respects, that is the ideal solution for a league with high expenses but very disparate revenue levels among its 30 teams.
The problem is finding such hockey-loving billionaires. Too often, the NHL has settled for much less. Too often, the league has been either naive or in blatant denial about the weaknesses of the new partners it chooses.
So the latest disappointment is nothing new to Coyotes fans as they near four years of this drama. It's also nothing new to the NHL as a whole.
Nope, it's actually gotten worse. I think Phoenix is gone after this season.
