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.

HNIC shows new potential alignment with 16 teams in "east" groupings

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-26-2013, 01:54 AM
  #576
davebenj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,343
vCash: 500
I can certainly see why a team like Detroit wants to be in the East believe me. I agree their current travel schedule sucks but I just feel like there can be a way to appease them as well as a few other teams while not going too crazy.

davebenj is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 02:20 AM
  #577
Sunking278
Registered User
 
Sunking278's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by davebenj View Post
I can certainly see why a team like Detroit wants to be in the East believe me. I agree their current travel schedule sucks but I just feel like there can be a way to appease them as well as a few other teams while not going too crazy.
The original four-division/conference proposal, while severely flawed overall, was fine as far as the Wings were concerned. Our division rivals would have been the same as now, plus throw in Dallas, Minnesota, and Winnipeg. Now they have this proposal where the Wings will be in the same division as the Florida teams, plus a bunch of Northeastern teams. So, yeah, they're going crazy here. Detroit belongs with other Midwestern teams, not with the Panthers, Lightning, Senators, Sabres, etc. Lord forbid anybody ever has to play a game outside their time zone, though, big babies ...

Sunking278 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 02:42 AM
  #578
Jetsfan79
Registered User
 
Jetsfan79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 324
vCash: 500
Regarding the latest news that it will be top 3 in each conference and 4 wildcards, I only see one scenario that would be the least complicated and IMHO - the best option:
Have the 4 conference winners (reg season) ranked league wide 1-4 based on best overall record of those 4 teams.
The 4 wildcards spots would be the best teams of the remaining 18 teams from all the conferences. The top wild card seed would play the conference winner with the least amount of points and the lowest wild card seed would play the conference winner with the most amount of points ( and president's trouphy winner.)

in other words:

Conference winner ranked 1st would play wild card winner # 4
Conference winner ranked 2nd would play wild card winner # 3
Conference winner ranked 3rd would play wild card winner # 2
Conference winner ranked 4th would play wild card winner # 1


Heres a mock standings board ( just fantasy rankings dont focus where I rate the teams) :

Atlantic Conerence

1. Pittsburgh 105 (2)
2. New Jersey 104
3. New York Rangers 104
4. Carolina 98 Los Angeles (wild card #3)
5. Columbus 95
6. Philadelphia 88
7. New York Islanders 83
8. Washington 77

Eastern Conference

1.Boston 106 (1)
2.Buffalo 101
3.Detroit 97
4.Florida 93 Winnipeg (wildcard #4)
5. Montreal 93
6. Ottawa 88
7. Tampa Bay 84
8. Toronto 79


Central conference

1. Chicago 104 (3)
2. Colorado 101
3. Dallas 97
4. Winnipeg 93 Columbus (wild card #2)
5. Minnesota 92
6. Nashville 88
7. St. Louis 86

Western Conference

1. Anaheim 103 (4)
2. Calgary 101
3. Edmonton 97
4. Los Angeles 94 Carolina (wild card #1)
5. Phoenix 93
6. San Jose 91
7. Vancouver 87

Wildcard:

1. Carolina 98
2. Columbus 95
3. Los Angeles 94
4. Winnipeg 93 (wins tie-breaker)

-----------------
Florida 93
Montreal 93
Phoenix 93
Minnesota 92
San Jose 91
Philadelphia 88
Nashville 88
Ottawa 88
Vancouver 87
St. Louis 86
Tampa Bay 84
New York Islanders 83
Toronto 79
Washington 77


Last edited by Jetsfan79: 02-26-2013 at 03:42 AM.
Jetsfan79 is online now  
Old
02-26-2013, 03:21 AM
  #579
davebenj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,343
vCash: 500
This might be a stupid question but I believe the reason why Toronto wanted to go east other than the Montreal thing was because of the travel correct? Just wondering

davebenj is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 03:26 AM
  #580
davebenj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunking278 View Post
That is an alignment that would make sense. Which means it'll probably never be adopted.
Agreed. That alignment would be perfect or close to it. I am kind of happy to see Dallas get an easier travel schedule with the current proposed format that would start next year too I have to admit. Them and Colorado are kind of distant from the other teams.

davebenj is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 03:41 AM
  #581
guyincognito
Registered User
 
guyincognito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,300
vCash: 500
This gets sillier and sillier. First I thought they wanted to develop playoff rivalries. Now it's being reported that there's going to be a global crossover in the first round?

That can't be right at all. I could see a regional crossover, but if they have a situation where they could cross over Calgary or Los Angeles into the "Atlantic" Division in the first round, it's pretty much selling a line of ****.

guyincognito is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 03:45 AM
  #582
davebenj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
This gets sillier and sillier. First I thought they wanted to develop playoff rivalries. Now it's being reported that there's going to be a global crossover in the first round?

That can't be right at all. I could see a regional crossover, but if they have a situation where they could cross over Calgary or Los Angeles into the "Atlantic" Division in the first round, it's pretty much selling a line of ****.
Yeah, I'm pretty confused with that also

davebenj is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 04:04 AM
  #583
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetsfan79 View Post
Regarding the latest news that it will be top 3 in each conference and 4 wildcards, I only see one scenario that would be the least complicated and IMHO - the best option:
Have the 4 conference winners (reg season) ranked league wide 1-4 based on best overall record of those 4 teams.
The 4 wildcards spots would be the best teams of the remaining 18 teams from all the conferences. The top wild card seed would play the conference winner with the least amount of points and the lowest wild card seed would play the conference winner with the most amount of points ( and president's trouphy winner.)

in other words:

Conference winner ranked 1st would play wild card winner # 4
Conference winner ranked 2nd would play wild card winner # 3
Conference winner ranked 3rd would play wild card winner # 2
Conference winner ranked 4th would play wild card winner # 1


Heres a mock standings board ( just fantasy rankings dont focus where I rate the teams) :

Atlantic Conerence

1. Pittsburgh 105 (2)
2. New Jersey 104
3. New York Rangers 104
4. Carolina 98 Los Angeles (wild card #3)
5. Columbus 95
6. Philadelphia 88
7. New York Islanders 83
8. Washington 77

Eastern Conference

1.Boston 106 (1)
2.Buffalo 101
3.Detroit 97
4.Florida 93 Winnipeg (wildcard #4)
5. Montreal 93
6. Ottawa 88
7. Tampa Bay 84
8. Toronto 79


Central conference

1. Chicago 104 (3)
2. Colorado 101
3. Dallas 97
4. Winnipeg 93 Columbus (wild card #2)
5. Minnesota 92
6. Nashville 88
7. St. Louis 86

Western Conference

1. Anaheim 103 (4)
2. Calgary 101
3. Edmonton 97
4. Los Angeles 94 Carolina (wild card #1)
5. Phoenix 93
6. San Jose 91
7. Vancouver 87

Wildcard:

1. Carolina 98
2. Columbus 95
3. Los Angeles 94
4. Winnipeg 93 (wins tie-breaker)

-----------------
Florida 93
Montreal 93
Phoenix 93
Minnesota 92
San Jose 91
Philadelphia 88
Nashville 88
Ottawa 88
Vancouver 87
St. Louis 86
Tampa Bay 84
New York Islanders 83
Toronto 79
Washington 77
This would be absolutely ridiculous. You are going to have Carolina playing Anaheim in the first round and LA playing Pittsburgh? The idea is to HELP local tv contracts. What kind of ratings is that series going to generate in Pittsburgh when the road games are starting at 10/10:30? Or, in Anaheim when their road games are starting at 4/4:30.

If they are going to do this stupid cross-over, then the only thing to make sense under your standings is Columbus to bump out either Winnipeg or Montreal (whichever team would win a tie-breaker between the two, keeps their spot). Columbus then plays Chicago or Boston and the rest stay within their own conference.


Last edited by patnyrnyg: 02-26-2013 at 04:21 AM.
patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 04:10 AM
  #584
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
This gets sillier and sillier. First I thought they wanted to develop playoff rivalries. Now it's being reported that there's going to be a global crossover in the first round?

That can't be right at all. I could see a regional crossover, but if they have a situation where they could cross over Calgary or Los Angeles into the "Atlantic" Division in the first round, it's pretty much selling a line of ****.
I have to agree. If that is the plan, it just got real stupid. Top-4 in each conference, simple. You finish 5th in your conference, you don't get in. You finish 5th in your conference, but with more points than the 3rd and 4th place team of another conference? TOO BAD. Thems the breaks. It's not fair, it's not fair. Guess what, life is not ******* fair. This whole thing is just getting dumber by the minute.

Either go with the 4-conferences an top-4 make it in. Or, keep the current set-up and tweak it a little. Van to the Pacific, Dallas to the Central, Winnipeg to the Northwest, Minnesota to the Central, Nashville to Southeast. Or however you want to do it.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 04:16 AM
  #585
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL Dude 120 View Post
I wrote something like this in another thread but i thought it would be relevant, if and when the NHL does align they should make it so that all teams will

- Have played in every arena once
- even distribution of teams in every division
- allow for inter-conference playoffs, I may be a new fan but its kinda annoying that eastern conference teams play, well eastern conference teams. this probably wouldn't happen but it kinda annoys me. I'd like to see more rivals develop.
- Have games start at 7:00 ( in the time zones) in order to allow eastern teams to watch western games.


Divisions

- Five divisions of 6 teams. Each team plays each other home and away three times. total of 30 division games played by each team. I've calculated that there would be a total of 90 games per division. for a total of 450 division games.

- Furthermore there would be inter-division games, each team plays each other home and away. 24 home and 24 away games. that totals up to 576 home and 576 away games for a whopping 1152 games.

- that's a total of 1602 games a season.

- I've also accounted for Phoenix relocating as well im assuming they move to Quebec. However this could also work if instead the team relocate to Hamilton

- Due note Dallas, Nashville Winnipeg, St.Louis, Chicago Colorado,Minnesota have different time zones i tried my best to find a compromise on that issue. Some of them will play earlier instead.

-Teams who are playing in a different time Zone will be eased into the changes I.e San Jose wont play say Montreal then Vancouver they would play (in no order at all) Toronto Detroit New York(either ISL or RAN) to ease them into the time Zone. this way travel is not as bad.

Here are the Divisions(I'm making up names)

Norris Division:
Ottawa
Toronto
Detroit
Boston
Montreal
*Quebec

Vezina Division:
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Buffalo
New Jersey
Carolina
Nashville

Art Ross Division:
Vancouver
Edmonton
Calgary
Winnipeg
Chicago
Minnesota

Rocket Richard Division:
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Colorado
Dallas
St.Louis

Hart Division:
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
Tampa
Florida
Columbus

Points
3 for a regulation win
2 for an 1st overtime win
1 for an 2nd overtime point
1 for a shootout win
0 points for a loss

Playoffs

- Winning your division doesn't guarantee a playoff berth, only placing in the top 16 will assure a playoff berth.

- to help with travel, all playoff series will be a best on five.

- I though of after the season finishing there could be a Draw to announce the playoff series, but that was scrapped so, i guess we'll keep the 1 vs 16 2 vs 15 3 vs 14 and etc again higher seed gets to play at home. the winners will then move on so lets say 1 beats 16 and 2 beats 15 , 2 plays 15.

- Heres an example ( I'll assume the higher seed wins too make my point easier)

1 vs 16
2 vs 15
3 vs 14
4 vs 13
5 vs 12
6 vs 11
7 vs 10
8 vs 09

round 2
1 vs 2
3 vs 4
5 vs 6
7 vs 8

round 3
1 vs 3
5 vs 7

round 4 ( SCF)
1 vs 5
sorry, but this is another ridiculous idea. League had the 1-16 set-up and it was so bad they scrapped it after 2 seasons. One year, the Rangers played the Kings in the first round and Philadelphia played Vancouver (78-79) . Yeah, that made a lot of sense.

The rivalries develop over time through multiple play-off series, and competing for the same play-off spots and the multiple play-off series is more likely to happen with division rivals. Are the Rangers and Senators big rivals because they played in the first round last year? Nope.

Secondly, you are going to have the top-2 surviving seeds from the first round play in the 2nd round? Again, that is ridiculous.

SOme games award 3 points, some award 1? Again dumb. So if the Devils and Isles are playing, I should root for the game to go to 2 OTs or a SO so only 1 point is awarded? Bad enough when two teams in the Atlantic are playing my first priority is for the game to end in regulation.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 06:01 AM
  #586
Sunking278
Registered User
 
Sunking278's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 122
vCash: 500
This crossover proposal makes me only more convinced the best thing to do is just stick with the current, six-division structure, making a few tweaks to accommodate Winnipeg, and maybe switch around a Western team or two (Dallas to Central, Vancouver to Pacific, Nashville takes Winnipeg's spot in the Southeast. And if Columbus or my Red Wings don't like it, oh well.) Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with a pure 1 vs. 16 format like the one used in the 1970s, as I believe we should have some variety in the playoff match-ups, but not within the structure the league has proposed. Just too convoluted, too confusing, and completely antithetical to what the league is professing they are trying to do.

Sunking278 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 06:06 AM
  #587
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
This gets sillier and sillier. First I thought they wanted to develop playoff rivalries. Now it's being reported that there's going to be a global crossover in the first round?

That can't be right at all. I could see a regional crossover, but if they have a situation where they could cross over Calgary or Los Angeles into the "Atlantic" Division in the first round, it's pretty much selling a line of ****.
My thoughts as well.

Just scrap the whole thing and keep things the way they are. No reason at all for this silly realignment if they don't do divisional playoffs.

Tough Guy is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 06:20 AM
  #588
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Correct me if I am wrong, but on Saturday night didn't Friedman say a wild card was for the two 8-conference teams only? If that is the case, maybe the cross-over would only apply to the 2 "Eastern" conferences. So, if the Rangers finished 5th in the Atlantic with 90 points and the Bruins finish 4th in the northeast with 89 points, the Rangers can bump out the Bruins and then play the northeast conference champ? Where in the 2 "western" conferences, it would be strictly top 4 pout of 7? Stupid idea, but not as stupid as the possibility of having an LA-NY first round match-up.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 06:25 AM
  #589
Enigma Publius
Registered User
 
Enigma Publius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Empire State
Country: United States
Posts: 86
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
Correct me if I am wrong, but on Saturday night didn't Friedman say a wild card was for the two 8-conference teams only? If that is the case, maybe the cross-over would only apply to the 2 "Eastern" conferences. So, if the Rangers finished 5th in the Atlantic with 90 points and the Bruins finish 4th in the northeast with 89 points, the Rangers can bump out the Bruins and then play the northeast conference champ? Where in the 2 "western" conferences, it would be strictly top 4 pout of 7? Stupid idea, but not as stupid as the possibility of having an LA-NY first round match-up.
Or to put it another way ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma Publius View Post
The only way for a wild card to make sense would be to allow for the top three teams in, say, both Eastern Divisions to automatically qualify (preserving the importance of divisional standings) and then select the final two playoff spots by awarding Wild Cards to the remaining two teams (from either division) with the most points. It's simple, straightforward, and something done by both baseball and football.
Playoff matchups then are: Division winners against the two wild cards. Two seed against three seed within the division.


1A 4B*
2A 3A
1B 5B*
2B 3B

* Wild Card
FWIW, I prefer the straight-up, top-four in each Conference (division, etc.) making the playoffs and playing in two divisional rounds, then reseed the Final Four.

Enigma Publius is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 06:35 AM
  #590
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
I have to agree. If that is the plan, it just got real stupid. Top-4 in each conference, simple. You finish 5th in your conference, you don't get in. You finish 5th in your conference, but with more points than the 3rd and 4th place team of another conference? TOO BAD. Thems the breaks. It's not fair, it's not fair. Guess what, life is not ******* fair. This whole thing is just getting dumber by the minute.

Either go with the 4-conferences an top-4 make it in. Or, keep the current set-up and tweak it a little. Van to the Pacific, Dallas to the Central, Winnipeg to the Northwest, Minnesota to the Central, Nashville to Southeast. Or however you want to do it.
If the wildcard isn't between 4th and 5th of the same conference then the whole idea should be scrapped. If they insist on a wildcard, there has to be an easy, simple way of describing it to the casual fan. If there's some crazy covoluted formula, then 'joe casual', whose team is in 4th, but got wildcarded out of a playoff berth is going to ask wth am I even supposed to care?. Like others have said, teams w more points have missed out before due to divisional playoff rules, why not now? What's so high and mighty about teams in this day and age compared to teams back then? If anyone can truly remember any kind of grievance filed due to team x in conf a having more points than team y in conference b, yet missing out on a playoff berth due to being in a stronger conference, please let us know. I know there was no real internet back then, but surely it would have made the news somewhere.

What if teams in 4th and 5th place in each 8 team division already played each other 6 times? That, imo, would negate any need for the wildcard. If 4th and 5th have only played 5 times, it could be argued that you could use the record vs one another as the 'wildcard'. Don't know why it didn't cross my mind sooner.

I guess I answered myself in the process on typing this post. We all need to remember that the basis of the 'wildcard' garbage was that 7 team and 8 team divisions had different statistical probabilities for making the playoffs. Therefore the 'wildcard' should only be in the two 8 team conferences. If it branches across the league as a whole, then what's the point of the wildcard at all? Wildcard should only be used if it would affect the conference standings, ie if the possibility of 5th overtaking 4th for the last playoff spot.

Rereading my post, it seems I have a couple different solutions here, but I still hate the thought of wildcard in general.

garry1221 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 06:56 AM
  #591
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Happens in the NFL all the time. Team wins their division at 9-7, 8-8 and a team goes 10-6 but misses the wild-card. In 2010, Seahawks were 7-9, won their division. Giants and Tampa were 10-6 and missed the wild-card on tie-breaker. I'm a Giants fan and I said, "Too bad!" Those are the rules. I remember people calling in to WFAN moaning and complaining. Saying how the Seahawks were going to get killed and how it is giving New Orleans, a wild card team, a "bye". Well, Seahawks went out and beat the Saints. In 2008, the year Brady got hurt, Pats went 11-5 and missed the play-offs, while San Diego (I think) won the AFC West at 8-8. Too Bad.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 07:07 AM
  #592
Atomic Punk
Mean Streets
 
Atomic Punk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Panama
Country: United States
Posts: 8,760
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
Happens in the NFL all the time. Team wins their division at 9-7, 8-8 and a team goes 10-6 but misses the wild-card. In 2010, Seahawks were 7-9, won their division. Giants and Tampa were 10-6 and missed the wild-card on tie-breaker. I'm a Giants fan and I said, "Too bad!" Those are the rules. I remember people calling in to WFAN moaning and complaining. Saying how the Seahawks were going to get killed and how it is giving New Orleans, a wild card team, a "bye". Well, Seahawks went out and beat the Saints. In 2008, the year Brady got hurt, Pats went 11-5 and missed the play-offs, while San Diego (I think) won the AFC West at 8-8. Too Bad.
But shouldn't we learn from that rather than emulate it? I am against not having the best teams in the playoffs for the sake of some realignment.

Atomic Punk is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 07:11 AM
  #593
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanny View Post
But shouldn't we learn from that rather than emulate it? I am against not having the best teams in the playoffs for the sake of some realignment.
The BEST teams will be in the play-offs. The BEST teams will win their conference or finish 2nd. And, no. In the NFL it puts value into winning your division.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 07:20 AM
  #594
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 14,844
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
This realignment is stupid if there are no divisional playoffs.

Why play teams in your conference 6 times then face a team you played twice in the 1st or 2nd round?

Morris Wanchuk is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 07:27 AM
  #595
MuckOG
The Brodin Effect
 
MuckOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Right behind you....
Country: United States
Posts: 6,132
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunking278 View Post
This crossover proposal makes me only more convinced the best thing to do is just stick with the current, six-division structure, making a few tweaks to accommodate Winnipeg, and maybe switch around a Western team or two (Dallas to Central, Vancouver to Pacific, Nashville takes Winnipeg's spot in the Southeast. And if Columbus or my Red Wings don't like it, oh well.) Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with a pure 1 vs. 16 format like the one used in the 1970s, as I believe we should have some variety in the playoff match-ups, but not within the structure the league has proposed. Just too convoluted, too confusing, and completely antithetical to what the league is professing they are trying to do.
...and what exactly do you think the League is trying to do?

I've always thought they were about maximizing profit, and creating a system whereby a team can have as many games as possible televised during local prime time viewing hours does just that.

You can call fans "babies" or whatever you want, but it's just a fact that when games start at 9:30 pm local time on a school night there are fewer eyeballs on the television. Luckily for fans of teams in the ETZ, they rarely have to deal with that. Here is Minnesota, we deal with it for more than we should have to.

I'm sure that I'm stating the obvious when I say that more viewers means more advertising dollars means larger television contracts means larger profits for the NHL.


Last edited by MuckOG: 02-26-2013 at 08:42 AM.
MuckOG is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 07:28 AM
  #596
Enigma Publius
Registered User
 
Enigma Publius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Empire State
Country: United States
Posts: 86
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
The BEST teams will be in the play-offs. The BEST teams will win their conference or finish 2nd. And, no. In the NFL it puts value into winning your division.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
This realignment is stupid if there are no divisional playoffs.

Why play teams in your conference 6 times then face a team you played twice in the 1st or 2nd round?
I agree. In addition to TV start times, the whole point of the current realignment proposal is to re-emphasize divisional rivalries (increases those eyeballs on the TV). In order for this to happen, division standings have to matter. In the current six-division format, you care (maybe) about winning the division. But you're more concerned with beating out every other team in the conference. The proposal, especially with a straight-up, top-four qualifier, means that every divisional game will be that much more important. If you want into the Stanley Cup, you've got to slug your way out of your division. And that begins by making sure you're in the top-four to begin with. You don't make it that far? Better luck next year - and next year, make sure you have a better regular season, especially against your divisional foes. I'll be almost as excited to see who the four kings of the divisional (conference) mountains will be than I will be to see who's playing in the Cup finals.

Enigma Publius is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 07:51 AM
  #597
Icedog2735
Registered User
 
Icedog2735's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Haven, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
This gets sillier and sillier. First I thought they wanted to develop playoff rivalries. Now it's being reported that there's going to be a global crossover in the first round?

That can't be right at all. I could see a regional crossover, but if they have a situation where they could cross over Calgary or Los Angeles into the "Atlantic" Division in the first round, it's pretty much selling a line of ****.
The way I interpreted the latest info was that out of the 18 non-automatic qualifying teams, the 4 with the most points would make the playoffs. From there, I would assume that the league would put each team in their own conference's 4-team playoffs where possible. You would end up with an odd match-up every once and a while but I don't think it would be as drastic or as complex as some here are making it seem.

Icedog2735 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 08:13 AM
  #598
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanny View Post
But shouldn't we learn from that rather than emulate it? I am against not having the best teams in the playoffs for the sake of some realignment.
How do you choose 'the best' 16 teams without playing each and every team in the league exactly the same number of times? Thus resulting in a leaguewide 1 - 16 seeding. If you look through this thread, you'll see the league pretty quicky did away with that scenario. A scenario like that would result in an 87 or 100+ regular season schedule.

Yes, some years one conference will be stronger than another, but you shouldn't be in the same playoff hunt as a team you only play twice per year as opposed to those teams you play 2.5 - 3 times that amount.

garry1221 is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 08:37 AM
  #599
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 300
Here's a thought, and this may have been mentioned before so excuse me if it has, but why not take the proposed realignment and just swap the two Florida teams with Carolina and Columbus?

The 2 Florida markets would be happy because they now have 3 NY area teams, and Philly who make up a good deal of their transplants, so they should see increased revenue for all home division games. Not to mention they don't have to "fly over another division" to play their road divisional games. Florida teams are typically in Divisions with teams in the NE corridor in all other major sports.

Carolina goes back to their ancestral home, so to speak, in what's basically the old Adams Division, and while Columbus doesn't get Pitt, they do get geographically close rivals in Buffalo and they keep Detroit in their division and then add the 3 Canadian clubs.

IceAce is offline  
Old
02-26-2013, 08:44 AM
  #600
MNNumbers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,210
vCash: 500
I would like to go back to Enigma Publius' idea here, and play with the numbers some more, because the whole thing is starting to make a little more sense to me.

I believe the idea was a wild card in the 8-team conferences only.

So, PAC and CENT - 4/7 = 57% qualify.

In the EAST, let's call them EAST and ATL. Top 3 in each conference auto-qualify. The wild cards are the next 2 best of the 4th and 5th place finishers. Your playoff bracket would have 1 crossover. It doesn't matter which series it is for this description.

So, in the EAST/ATL we have 8/16 qualifying, but that is tempered out a bit, because high 5 can get in there, so it's maybe like 9/16 = 56%. So, we are close to equal.

Now, however, there are one thing that makes sense about this:

It answers the question: Why are both 8-team conferences in the ETZ? Because this crossover is a terrible idea if it includes anyone from the CTZ, MTZ, or PTZ.

I say this because this realignment is not about PHX, although we want to guess it is. The NHL wouldn't be telling the PA anything about that.

So, this answers a bigger question, too. And, it seems more like something put together with some thought.

MNNumbers 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 09:41 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.