And you think NHL hasn't accounted for the possible sale and most likely location if Phoenix is moved when making this proposal?
we are discussing the proposed divisions and the resulting schedule. It is the only thing that is remotely interesting because it is the only thing we have information about.
If you want to draw up some potential future divisions based on relocation and expansion and what that would mean for Avs schedule, feel free to do so. But let the rest of us discuss the current proposal and what it would mean for Avs.
the 4 division thing makes no sense. just re-align the divisions properly and leave it at 6. does make winning the division more important though, only 2 from each conference.
glad we're not in the pacific one. that would be horrendous start times.
And you think NHL hasn't accounted for the possible sale and most likely location if Phoenix is moved when making this proposal?
we are discussing the proposed divisions and the resulting schedule. It is the only thing that is remotely interesting because it is the only thing we have information about.
If you want to draw up some potential future divisions based on relocation and expansion and what that would mean for Avs schedule, feel free to do so. But let the rest of us discuss the current proposal and what it would mean for Avs.
If the jets sold their franchise, moved it, and played their next game within four months, quit saying we know what the teams are for next year, and that the only way for the math to work is if the Avs play six times in their division. That's fundamentally incorrect.
the 4 division thing makes no sense. just re-align the divisions properly and leave it at 6. does make winning the division more important though, only 2 from each conference.
glad we're not in the pacific one. that would be horrendous start times.
Four divisions work better mathematically with 32 or 28 teams. Switching might indicate that NHL doesn't plan to stay at 30 teams forever.
If the jets sold their franchise, moved it, and played their next game within four months, quit saying we know what the teams are for next year, and that the only way for the math to work is if the Avs play six times in their division. That's fundamentally incorrect.
Ok, you win.
Phoenix could move anywhere and NHL will be taken by surprise and have to re-do everything. Because, we just don't know.
Ideally (never going to happen due $$$), I want to see the playoffs be the top two teams of each division play eachother in the 1st round. Then the winners of that round play the winner from the other division in the region (West vs Midwest, East vs Atlantic). And the SC final between the winners of that round. So, only 8 teams total in the playoffs, period. Screw this BS Kindergarten everyone gets in crap.
I like being in the midwest division better both from a time zone/tv perspective and I think the teams in the midwest set up for better potential and more interesting rivalries.
It this unbalanced intial set up was done with an eye toward future expansion of two more teams (1 in the Pacific division and 1 in the Midwest) I wonder who would be the most likely potential teams (assuming they don't want to just move everyone around again after expanding with teams in the East).
For the Pacific: Seattle? Portland? Las Vegas?
For the Midwest: Milwaukee? Kansas City? Indianapolis?
I think Seattle and Milwaukee would be great additions, seems like there would be alot of support for hockey in those two cities.
I like being in the midwest division better both from a time zone/tv perspective and I think the teams in the midwest set up for better potential and more interesting rivalries.
It this unbalanced intial set up was done with an eye toward future expansion of two more teams (1 in the Pacific division and 1 in the Midwest) I wonder who would be the most likely potential teams (assuming they don't want to just move everyone around again after expanding with teams in the East).
For the Pacific: Seattle? Portland? Las Vegas?
For the Midwest: Milwaukee? Kansas City? Indianapolis?
I think Seattle and Milwaukee would be great additions, seems like there would be alot of support for hockey in those two cities.
I guess Houston is possible, but I think the lease of the arena only allows the guy that owns the Rockets to own a NHL team.
I'd be pretty pumped if the avs came to Nashville a couple times a year. I also wouldn't mind a few less west coast games. It'll take some getting used to but it looks okay by me.
NHL.com posted the proposal.
"The schedule matrix would see each team play teams in the other conference both home and away.
In the seven-team divisions, teams would play intraconference foes three times per season and five of the six intradivision foes five times a season. The sixth opponent within the division would be played four times. In the eight-team divisions, teams would play intraconference opponents three times and intradivision opponents either four or five times per season on a rotating basis."
I guess there might be three-four extra Mountain/Pacific games for Avs compared to if they only had met out of division teams twice.
"Under the proposed system, the top three teams in each of the four divisions would qualify for the postseason. The final four spots would go to the two teams in each conference with the next-best records. So, in theory, five teams from one division and just three from the other division in each respective conference could make the postseason."
It's a bit similar to AHL playoffs. It's not that big a change compared to how it works now though.
Four divisions work better mathematically with 32 or 28 teams. Switching might indicate that NHL doesn't plan to stay at 30 teams forever.
32 teams would be better but if you go 32 then the real question is how much does that grow the pie? i can't remember the revenue sharing portion of the CBA.
32 teams would be better but if you go 32 then the real question is how much does that grow the pie? i can't remember the revenue sharing portion of the CBA.
Got to love the NHL. Cancel half a season because half the league is failing, then plan to expand.
Let's say hypothetically that Phoenix moves to Quebec next season or in the near future.
Will it be Winnipeg or us who will move to the Pacific division.
We are geographically closer, but Winnipeg with all the Canadian teams might be a better fit in that sense, but then again if we move there would be less travel for the Pacific teams.
Let's suppose that Seattle/Portland/whatever city close to the Pacific ocean doesn't get a team.
Got to love the NHL. Cancel half a season because half the league is failing, then plan to expand.
It's rich guy economics. "We can lose half a season, cost a bunch of blue collar guys their jobs, piss off fans, and only pay half our employees salaries. We'll come out on top after the millions we'll get in expansion and relocation fees."
It's rich guy economics. "We can lose half a season, cost a bunch of blue collar guys their jobs, piss off fans, and only pay half our employees salaries. We'll come out on top after the millions we'll get in expansion and relocation fees."
There was some pundit (McKenzie or LeBrun) speculating that NHL would prefer relocating to Seattle and then in a few years expand in Toronto and Quebec because they could get so much in expansion fees ($500M) in those markets.
Puckdaddy on how the new proposal doesn't work out from a math perspective.
I don't know why they went from four separate conferences last week to two conferences with two divisions yesterday, since the previous proposal was more clean.
I guess NHLPA might have balked and wanted slightly fewer in-division games and a few more games against other teams for some reason. From what I can understand everyone involved has to compromise a lot here since there isn't a solution that will make everyone happy.
There was some pundit (McKenzie or LeBrun) speculating that NHL would prefer relocating to Seattle and then in a few years expand in Toronto and Quebec because they could get so much in expansion fees ($500M) in those markets.
It's all about money.
Yea, I heard a similar thing earlier in the year. The expansion fees, and revenue sharing boost from another Toronto based team would be insane.
It's why the owners were so comfortable holding out until the last second playing hardball with the union IMO.
