HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Notices

Realignment is HERE (BOG APPROVED, Post #87)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-24-2013, 03:27 PM
  #51
HyeDray
HFB Partner
 
HyeDray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Hyde Park, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,886
vCash: 500
This is how I would like to see it set up (including bringing back the old names)....

Campbell Conference
Smyth Division
Anaheim (25pts)
Vancouver (24pts)
Phoenix (19pts)
San Jose (19pts)
Los Angeles (18pts)
Edmonton (17pts)
Calgary (15pts)
Seattle (Exp. Team)

Norris Division
Chicago (31pts)
St. Louis (22pts)
Nashville (21pts)
Dallas (19pts)
Minnesota (18pts)
Winnipeg (15pts)
Colorado (15pts)
Columbus (12pts)


Prince of Wales Conference
Adams Division
Montreal (26pts)
Ottawa (24pts)
Pittsburgh (24pts)
Boston (22pts)
Toronto (22pts)
Detroit (19pts)
Buffalo (13pts)
Quebec (Exp. Team)

Patrick Division
New Jersey (24pts)
Philadelphia (19pts)
Tampa Bay (19pts)
New York Rangers (18pts)
Carolina (17pts)
New York Islanders (17pts)
Florida (14pts)
Washington (13pts)


I think this structure makes a far better geographical sense. The old SW teams fit better together. Before it was lumping the so-called Atlantic teams together with North and South together and than makes no sense. This way you have teams from Florida to New York together, and then the Pittsburgh up to Canada together. Pitt is the one move that some may question, but it makes much more sense to me to put Pitt and Detroit in the Adams then adding more travel to the 2 Florida teams up to the North.

A note on Exp Teams:
I am not a fan. I don't think further dilution of talen is a good plan.
Lots of players are staying in Europe and Russia. If they were all coming here in droves and there was no KHL, I may feel differently, but that is not the case.

I could care less if one division has 7 and the other 8 — especially if you play divisional playoffs. I included potential expansion teams in Quebec and Seattle.


Playoff structure...
Top 4 from each DIVISION make playoffs — 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3

Winner of 1 & 4 plays winner of 2 & 3 for Division Title.

Winner of each division title play each other for Conference Championship.

Winner of Conference championships play for the Cup.

This is how it was done for many years with the original names being brought back.
Screw it if some people in middle American "don't get it." There is a history to the game that I think is often lost, and the elegance of what is was is lost — is should be brought back.

I believe the divisional playoffs will go a great deal father to pushing the original rivalries over the 1-8 setup that we now have.


Last edited by HyeDray: 02-24-2013 at 03:43 PM. Reason: I put them in point order as of 2/24/13
HyeDray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2013, 03:51 PM
  #52
DVon Du Nord
Registered User
 
DVon Du Nord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amérique Du Nord
Posts: 153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyiguy21 View Post
Well basically, they have to accommodate Winnipeg playing in the Southeast division. I always thought it was simple enough to move Nashville to the Southeast, Minnesota to the Central, and then place Winnipeg in the Northwest.
This, or Columbus

Tuned in to Devils game, according to that Detroit and Columbus to be moved East

DVon Du Nord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 01:04 PM
  #53
Homeland Security
Mod Supervisor
#beLIeve
 
Homeland Security's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY/FL
Country: United States
Posts: 14,367
vCash: 500
http://www.sbnation.com/2013/2/25/40...-west-east-win

__________________
Homeland Security is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 01:33 PM
  #54
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
You and me both!

And back to home whites!
As much as I'd love that, the advent of third jerseys I think has killed this. Teams don't want to pack 2 uniforms on road trips.

IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 11:18 AM
  #55
Bunk Moreland
Moderator
 
Bunk Moreland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,925
vCash: 234
Bob mckenize with some updates from hit twitter feed:

Quote:
@TSNBobMcKenzie: Top 3 teams in each of two 8-team East conferences make the playoffs. Two wild cards from remaining 10 East teams also make the playoffs.

@TSNBobMcKenzie: Top 3 teams in each of two 7-team West conferences make playoffs. Two wild cards from remaining 8 West teams also make the playoffs.

@TSNBobMcKenzie: Playoff format remains old divisional style, 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3 though it remains to be seen how the wild cards are slotted for first-round.

Next tweets confirms teams in divisions

@TSNBobMcKenzie: I assume schedule matrix stays same as Dec/2011 proposal. Clubs in 7-team conf play 6x 6 in conf (36), and home-and-away with other 23 (46).

@TSNBobMcKenzie: 8-team conferences also play home-and-away with 22 out of conf teams (44) but play either 5 or 6 games vs. conference rivals (38).

@TSNBobMcKenzie: NHL governors were made aware of realignment proposals today by league but cautioned that NHLPA and B of G approval still required.
https://twitter.com/tsnbobmckenzie/s...47684552773632

Bunk Moreland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 11:52 AM
  #56
Bunk Moreland
Moderator
 
Bunk Moreland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,925
vCash: 234
Pierre Lebrun twitter:

Quote:
@Real_ESPNLeBrun: According to NHL memo sent to 30 teams, no longer is the idea to go to 4 conferences, but rather 2 conferences with two divisions each

@Real_ESPNLeBrun: The Eastern Conference would have the Atlantic and Central divisions, the Western Conference would have the Mid-West and Pacific divisions

@Real_ESPNLeBrun: So you could have 5 teams make playoffs from one division and only 3 from one division...
If your going to have two conferences instead of the four they planned on why just switch winnipeg with Detroit/Columbus/Nashville instead of making this so uneven?!

https://twitter.com/real_espnlebrun/...60323953651712

Bunk Moreland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:10 PM
  #57
bluechipbonzo
Registered User
 
bluechipbonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAIslanderFan View Post
For geographic & travel reasons, they should swap the Islanders and Rangers with Tampa Bay and Florida.

Conference C
Boston
Buffalo
New York Islanders
Montreal
Ottawa
Quebec?
New York Rangers
Toronto

Conference D
Carolina
Detroit
New Jersey
Florida
Tampa Bay
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
The old Adams division rivalries are maintained, and don't underestimate the snowbird factor...there are a great many a Canadian who own or rent places in Florida, and their favourite teams are Toronto and Montreal, with Ottawa not far behind. Makes sense to keep these FLA teams here.

bluechipbonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:42 PM
  #58
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 300
I have no real issue with the proposed realignment, I think it gets more right then it gets wrong. It really helps teams like Dallas, Columbus, Detroit, Winnipeg, and Minnesota who were getting killed on travel and having a lot of bad start times for their home fans.

One small tweak I'd make however is swapping Columbus and Carolina with Florida and Tampa bay. This way you have the FLA teams in the same division as the NY/NJ/Philly teams like they are in most every other sport (save the Buccaneers) which also happen to make up the majority of transplants in those areas so they'll still get a bump in gate for divisional home games. I know there are a good amount of Canadians down there, but at least in SoFla they're WAY outnumbered by former Northeasterners.

AND you send Carolina back to their ancestral home with all of the former Adams Division teams. Columbus while not getting in a division with Pittsburgh, still gets in with an ETZ division and stays with Detroit but adds some other close teams like Buffalo.

IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 03:31 PM
  #59
MattMartin
KillerInstinct™
 
MattMartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 5,102
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to MattMartin
Barry Melrose video on this at ESPN.


http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:8992109

MattMartin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 04:51 PM
  #60
zimnyi77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9
vCash: 500
This is what I dont understand and was wondering if someone could shed light on this.

They say that the top 3 in each division will make the playoffs and then the remaining 2 spots will be determined by the 2 remaining best records. Thus, it is possible for one division to have 5 teams in the playoffs and then the other division to have 3.

Then they say the playoffs would be a divisional format, in which 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3. However, that may not be the case if there are only 3 teams from 1 division who makes the playoffs. I suppose it can possibly be not entirely a divisional format if this scenario plays out.

zimnyi77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 05:42 PM
  #61
luki here
Registered User
 
luki here's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vienna
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattMartin View Post
Barry Melrose video on this at ESPN.


http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:8992109
OT: i love the hd quality of that video. damn, european tv stations dont get their **** together like that!

on topic: i guess quebec wont be getting a second team after all. Otherwise wouldnt they arrange for the conferences to be 15/15?

luki here is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 09:50 PM
  #62
Bunk Moreland
Moderator
 
Bunk Moreland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,925
vCash: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by luki here View Post
on topic: i guess quebec wont be getting a second team after all. Otherwise wouldnt they arrange for the conferences to be 15/15?
See that's what I don't get.. There's been strong rumors of expansions and teams moving with Seattle/Quebec City/Second Toronto all in the running. Having two full divisions in the eastern conference might be a hint that these rumors have been nothing but rumors all along.

I always thought the original proposal of two divisions of 7 in the east meant Quebec and Markham/Hamilton would get a team while Seattle could make a bid for the coyotes and nothing would have to change.

Bunk Moreland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 07:59 AM
  #63
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by zimnyi77 View Post
This is what I dont understand and was wondering if someone could shed light on this.

They say that the top 3 in each division will make the playoffs and then the remaining 2 spots will be determined by the 2 remaining best records. Thus, it is possible for one division to have 5 teams in the playoffs and then the other division to have 3.

Then they say the playoffs would be a divisional format, in which 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3. However, that may not be the case if there are only 3 teams from 1 division who makes the playoffs. I suppose it can possibly be not entirely a divisional format if this scenario plays out.
That's exactly the case of what would happen. It would still be a "divisional playoff" except for the one series where the 4th or 5th team in one division was playing the #1 team in the other Division, and then if that lower seed were to advance it would compete against the 2 vs 3 winner of that other division as well. In this scenario, you could actually have two teams from the same division playing in the Conference Finals provided they pull two upsets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk Moreland View Post
See that's what I don't get.. There's been strong rumors of expansions and teams moving with Seattle/Quebec City/Second Toronto all in the running. Having two full divisions in the eastern conference might be a hint that these rumors have been nothing but rumors all along.

I always thought the original proposal of two divisions of 7 in the east meant Quebec and Markham/Hamilton would get a team while Seattle could make a bid for the coyotes and nothing would have to change.
Honestly, the whole QC thing has been a lot of hype generated here and in other parts of the internet. The rumor mill went into hyper-drive once the Thrashers went back to WPG. I've always been somewhat skeptical of just how strong QC's chances are of getting another team. I see a lot of people reading into things and adding 2 and 2 together to come up with 5.

QC would instantly be the NHL's smallest market. I'm not sure the NHL is in any rush to go back to another tiny, Canadian market at this point unless they absolutely have no choice. I've always felt that we'd see Seattle Mets/Totems jerseys flying around the NHL again before we saw the return of that silly Nordiques logo. This realignment sort of cements that notion for me. The Sac Kings getting relocated there and making them build that new arena is pretty much a formality at this point. Once the domino falls, expect to hear a lot more about the NHL in Seattle.

As for Markham, I still say that the Leafs never let this happen. If they balked at Hamilton, I dont see how they allow someone to move in even closer?

If the NHL were to expand, and that's a giant IF, at this point, and the Coyotes don't get there first, I'm guessing the NHL is going to prefer cities like Seattle, Portland, Houston, etc. to ones in the ETZ. More bang for their buck there if they do it right.


Last edited by IceAce: 02-27-2013 at 08:04 AM.
IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:34 AM
  #64
Moosie
Registered User
 
Moosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,006
vCash: 500
I don't know why realignment is taking so long. For the most part the teams that will be moved want to be moved (Winnipeg, Detroit, Columbus).

Moosie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 04:36 PM
  #65
lacunacoil777
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 341
vCash: 500
Islanders staying in the NHL rather then where they belong if they want to be able to compete, the AHL. Unfortunately.

lacunacoil777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:02 PM
  #66
Dutch Frost
Everything is Fine!!
 
Dutch Frost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 1130
Quebec hockey team would be just as terrible as having Winnepeg have another go at it. yes i know Canadians love hockey but Seattle and Milwaukee can be better suited to have an NHL team over those small market cities. I am actually shocked that Wisconsin does not have an NHL team.

Dutch Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:35 PM
  #67
Mr Wentworth
Arch Duke of Raleigh
 
Mr Wentworth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,913
vCash: 500
I HATE uneven!

Two conferences 15 teams in each.
One home and one away against the other conference.
30 games
2 home and 2 away against all other teams in your conference.
56 games
86 game schedule.

And, just to mess with people, a Northern and Southern conference.
Spread the travel misery around fairly.

Teams like Philly and/or the Pens might be in the Southern conference, so it just won't be weak "sun belt" teams.


Its not the best, but it is better than what the NHL is proposing.

Mr Wentworth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:12 PM
  #68
Bunk Moreland
Moderator
 
Bunk Moreland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,925
vCash: 234
Maybe Dreger is just trying to get people tune in but he makes it seem like the NHLPA isn't exactly sold on this deal:

Quote:
Insider live from ACC in 2nd Int. Find out why realignment proposal isn't a slam dunk for the NHLPA. #TSN
https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger/sta...49193229008896

UPDATED:

Quote:
Players don't like playoff imbalance. Believe easiest fix is to leave either CBJ or Det in west. PA hasn't completed full player rep review.
Quote:
Told it's 50-50 at the moment as to whether or not PA approves realignment proposal. NHL will push hard to get it through as is. #TSN
https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger/sta...55499998425088
https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger/sta...55736750116867


Last edited by Bunk Moreland: 02-27-2013 at 08:42 PM.
Bunk Moreland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 09:02 PM
  #69
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 300
I just don't buy that due to the perceived playoff imbalance the PA is going o sacrifice up one of its ETZ teams to play all road games in another time zone with an exorbitant amount of travel.

IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2013, 08:53 AM
  #70
Twine Seeking Missle
Go monkey go!!!
 
Twine Seeking Missle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Suck-town
Country: United States
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch Frost View Post
Quebec hockey team would be just as terrible as having Winnepeg have another go at it. yes i know Canadians love hockey but Seattle and Milwaukee can be better suited to have an NHL team over those small market cities. I am actually shocked that Wisconsin does not have an NHL team.


100% Disagree!

Winnipeg getting back the Jets was great for hockey. I watch as many Jets home games as I can on gamecenter. The atmosphere in that building is second to none. That's the way ALL hockey crowds should be. I know it's a small market but there has not been one empty seat since the first game last year. And the argument about the building being small doesn't work. They would sell out 18,000 easily. The waiting list for season tickets is about 8,000-10,000 deep the last I heard. No American team could ever pull that off.

Twine Seeking Missle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 11:26 AM
  #71
Bunk Moreland
Moderator
 
Bunk Moreland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,925
vCash: 234
Looks like it's all wrapped up:

Quote:
Hearing #NHL #NHLPA will soon announce an agreement in principle on realignment. Players appear comfortable enough moving forward.
Quote:
New #NHL realignment deal could give players window to revisit agreement again after league moves on possible relocation and expansion.
https://twitter.com/RealKyper/status/307533429786951680
https://twitter.com/RealKyper/status/307535334000963584

Bunk Moreland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:51 PM
  #72
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch Frost View Post
Quebec hockey team would be just as terrible as having Winnepeg have another go at it. yes i know Canadians love hockey but Seattle and Milwaukee can be better suited to have an NHL team over those small market cities. I am actually shocked that Wisconsin does not have an NHL team.
You're right. Quebec wouldnt be great for the NHL. It would be great for Quebec City, but wouldnt do all too much for the league especially if it's a relocation of a bigger potential growth market. It would automatically be the smallest market in the league and the area is already hockey saturated, there's little growth potential there. There's more to success than just having people in the seats every night. Not to mention, if (more like when) the economy shifts back to an early 90's paradigm between the US and Canada, the same issues that killed the Nordiques and Jets the first time will likely crop up again.

While I agree Seattle is probably ideal for the NHL at this point (under-served market, hockey history, west coast, natural rival in waiting), I think Milwaukee is an utterly AWFUL idea. No prospects of an arena whatsoever, they may not even be able to keep the Bucks. They barely draw for the Admirals there. I just don't see it as an area clamoring for an NHL franchise.

NHL would get much more bang for their buck if they could find potential owners in Houston or in Portland. Houston is the 4th biggest city in the country now, and you'd have a natural rivalry with the Stars. Teams in Seattle and Portland could set up a cool Northwest "bloc" with Vancouver similar to what they have in the MLS.


Last edited by IceAce: 03-01-2013 at 02:00 PM.
IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 02:34 PM
  #73
Hipster Doofus
Registered User
 
Hipster Doofus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 6,414
vCash: 500
My bet is Seattle (new arena on the way) and a Canadien franchise. NHL has looked at Hartford and considers it a place theyd like to revisit, they have data compiled thats up to date according to an article a few months back about Bettman.

Hipster Doofus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 02:38 PM
  #74
Bunk Moreland
Moderator
 
Bunk Moreland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,925
vCash: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipster Doofus View Post
My bet is Seattle (new arena on the way) and a Canadien franchise. NHL has looked at Hartford and considers it a place theyd like to revisit, they have data compiled thats up to date according to an article a few months back about Bettman.
Personally I'd love a franchise in Hartford again.. This is the first I've heard them being considered though.

Bunk Moreland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 02:57 PM
  #75
Twine Seeking Missle
Go monkey go!!!
 
Twine Seeking Missle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Suck-town
Country: United States
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipster Doofus View Post
My bet is Seattle (new arena on the way) and a Canadien franchise. NHL has looked at Hartford and considers it a place theyd like to revisit, they have data compiled thats up to date according to an article a few months back about Bettman.
I agree on Seattle. If/when the Sacramento Kings finalize their move to Seattle and the arena is constructed it's all but a done deal I would think. The NHL would thrive in Seattle much like MLS has. That Vancouver-Seattle rivalry would be awesome.

And where did you hear this Hartford news? Trust me, I hope it's true but everything I have heard was that Hartford lost it's one and only chance to house an NHL franchise.

Twine Seeking Missle 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 01:13 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.