HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

The new playoff format - specifically, the wildcard/crossover rule

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2013, 03:05 PM
  #76
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
In an ideal world you want to play every team in the league, just so every star theoretically comes to your building. For example if you are a fan in san jose its nice to know you get to see crosby, i've, and stamkos at least once a year.

So if it were me, I would do home and home against everyone, and then fill all remaining schedule with divisional games. None of this play one division 3 times, your own 4, the opposite conference twice. Just make it as simple as possible.
Not every team has a Crosby, Ovechkin, or Stamkos. So a lot of home-and-homes between teams from the other Conference won't offer a lot of interest to many fans, especially also if there's little to no Standings competition between those teams.


This still seems like an appropriate solution for the time being:
http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/ey...hl-should-wait
Just modify the current format (alignment and Playoff seeding format) as best as possible and stay with that until there's expansion and the Coyotes situation has been resolved.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 03:16 PM
  #77
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Not every team has a Crosby, Ovechkin, or Stamkos. So a lot of home-and-homes between teams from the other Conference won't offer a lot of interest to many fans, especially also if there's little to no Standings competition between those teams.
This sort of thing waxes & wanes, I think, and I also think the complaint tends to come from the west more than the east. With Crosby+Ovechkin both emerging in the east during the time when the eastern teams only got 5 games in the west each year, the western teams & fans got really bent out of shape about it and started crying for "every team plays every other team!"

But you don't hear the eastern teams wanting to play the Oilers and their stable of emerging stars more often. Maybe the Red Wings & Blackhawks but it's a mild "maybe". Put MacKinnon & McDavid out in the west in the next few years and I think the Rangers would still rather play the Devils or the Flyers, and vice-versa. The eastern teams have their little fiefdoms to protect.

Anyway, my take is that the out-of-conference games tend to be pretty flat affairs, but I can understand the desire of STH to see all the teams. I don't know how to best square that circle.

optimus2861 is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #78
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,672
vCash: 500
I think if you buy a season ticket yoI should expect to see everyone in the league. Just because the west has no stars that people want to go out of their way to see, doesn't mean that should shape a rule.

The league is a partnership between 30 owners, they should all be looked after as best as possible.

I think home and home with every team is a reasonable expectation and won't cause many issues. Anyone who doesn't like islanders vs sharks can sell their ticket.

The CyNick is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 03:39 PM
  #79
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Not every team has a Crosby, Ovechkin, or Stamkos. So a lot of home-and-homes between teams from the other Conference won't offer a lot of interest to many fans, especially also if there's little to no Standings competition between those teams.


This still seems like an appropriate solution for the time being:
http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/ey...hl-should-wait
Just modify the current format (alignment and Playoff seeding format) as best as possible and stay with that until there's expansion and the Coyotes situation has been resolved.
I do agree its basically illogical to do anything drastic with phoenix up in the air. However its possible the league has a solution, just not ready to share.

The CyNick is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 04:09 PM
  #80
tsanuri
Registered User
 
tsanuri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Grants Pass OR
Country: United States
Posts: 2,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTaterSalad View Post
I think you should just pick the top 16 teams in the league, regardless of conference, seed them 1-16 and let them duke it out until the very end.
Talk about a nightmare. East-west flights from round one and all season. Imbalances in schedules since you can't play each team an equal amount of times. So someone gets the advantage by playing weak teams more.

tsanuri is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 08:32 PM
  #81
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 939
vCash: 500
Detroit needs to stay in the west. It solves the unbalanced conferences issue and keeps a major draw where it belongs. Chicago as the only original 6 team in the west is goofy.

I hope the PA grows a sack and demands Detroit not be moved.

Tough Guy is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 04:52 PM
  #82
Crayton
Registered User
 
Crayton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupertslander View Post
With some form of a four "Conference" alignment now appearing to be inevitable, the main issue to resolve appears to be the new playoff format.

As reported on TSN - http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=416857 - the League appears to be partial to a format that emphasizes in-conference matchups. That makes sense - we all want to keep travel to a reasonable minimum while ensuring the qualification odds are reasonably fair.

It appears the League wants to guarantee three teams per conference a playoff spot. That's reasonable enough. It leaves four "wildcard" places for the teams below third to compete for. So - the question is, how do match up the teams when there are odd numbers of teams from some conferences in the first and second rounds?
Ideas (mostly unrelated to each other) to consider:

1) LOCK the Pacific Conference/Division into a 4-team divisional playoff while allowing the other 3 confs/divs to do the wild-card thing. Presuming a 7-team division, this will give the Pacific an advantage in the long run (even if #5 would have made the playoff as a wild-card every so often). In exchange for this advantage, none of the Central and Eastern teams will ever have to make the long trip until the Stanley Cup Semis, and 3 divisions is a pretty wide base for wild-card competition.

2) If there is a cross-over to be had between two divisions, make matchups as close to 1v8, 2v7, etc... (based on regular season standings) as possible while only having the 1 cross-over series.

3) Forget about postseason "division" champions (put it out of your mind!) unless you are doing a strict divisional playoff. Replace this with "Stanley Cup Semifinalist" if you have to.

3b) This means that bracketing does not need to be done; re-apply pairing heuristics each round.

4) Suck it up and allow for the possibility of an Atlantic and Pacific team meeting in the first round. We calculated a 20% chance of this happening in a given year. And really this is not THAT much more horrendous than the Vancouver-Nashville possibility that exists in most of these other proposals (including the memo released proposal).

5) A league-wide reseeding in the Stanley Cup semifinals would theoretically allow any two teams from the same division to meet for Lord Stanley's Cup (presuming we do not keep a strict divisional playoff).

6) Moving Detroit or Columbus to the "Midwest" relieves the unbalanced conference thingy, and returning to the 2011-proposed schedule (for the West, at least) would save Detroit/Columbus from those many trips to the Pacific. Plus, what if the Coyotes go East... there needs to be a softer landing for Detroit/Columbus/Quebec in that "Midwest" division.

7) if there are 4 league-wide wildcards, always pair teams by division first and by West/East second. So, if there are 6 teams from the Atlantic division then they will play 3 series between them that first round. If there are 5 teams from both the Atlantic and Central/Adams then they will play 5 series between the two of them, while the "West" will play 3.

8) Suck it up and keep Divisional Playoffs. The current solution does not address the unequal number of teams in some divisions. With Divisional Playoffs all teams still have a simple understanding of what they need to accomplish to make the playoffs, and all teams in the same division will have near-identical schedules.


Last edited by Crayton: 03-02-2013 at 05:04 PM.
Crayton is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 04:57 PM
  #83
RandR
Registered User
 
RandR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,192
vCash: 500
I can understand the motivation for 2 wild cards in each conferences; it allows for a 5th-place team from a stronger division to make the playoffs some years.

However, in some other years only 3 teams could make it from the stronger division because the 5th-place team in the weaker division can nip out a slightly better 4th-place team of the stronger division because of an easier schedule. That is especially true with the parity in the league and the number of 3 point games causing so many teams being separated by only a few points in the middle of the conference-wide standings.

Beyond that, I hope they drop this wild-card idea because it means:
1. on average, there will be 6 divisional playoff series in the first round instead of 8 (although still better than the current average of about 4)
2. there won't be 4 true divisional playoff champions every season.

It's still an improvement over the current 6-division format though, and I am glad they appear to be keeping the idea of every team having to show up at every other team's barn at least once each year.

RandR is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 05:56 PM
  #84
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandR View Post
I can understand the motivation for 2 wild cards in each conferences; it allows for a 5th-place team from a stronger division to make the playoffs some years.
You can still do that without incorporating a "wildcard". Just take the top-8 in the Conference (with the top 2 or top-3 per Division guaranteed). I was originally just for a top-2, but then I thought,... with a top-2 only, it could sometimes work out that a Division wouldn't have a representative by Round 3 of the Playoffs; and with these large Divisions I think it would be better for each of the 4 Divisions to have a representative in the Final-4.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 06:06 PM
  #85
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by G Dawg View Post
Detroit needs to stay in the west. It solves the unbalanced conferences issue and keeps a major draw where it belongs. Chicago as the only original 6 team in the west is goofy.

I hope the PA grows a sack and demands Detroit not be moved.
So the other 15 teams in the west will pony up the millions per year that Detroit is losing on TV rights by having almost have their schedule be non-natural start times because they want to keep them there?

MountainHawk is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 07:49 PM
  #86
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 6,256
vCash: 500
The other option for realignment is do away with conferences and go with 5 6 team divisions.

For the playoffs the top 2 in each division (10) earn a spot in the playoffs with a bye.

The next 12 face off have a short play in round of best of 3 or best of 5 series. the winning 6 advance to a final 16.


D1: VAN, CGY, EDM, SJ, LA, ANA
D2: PHX, COL, DAL, STL, CHI, MIN
D3: NAS, CBS, WAS, CAR, FL, TB
D4: WPG, DET, TOR, BUF, OTT, MON
D5: PIT, PHL, NJ, NYR, NYI, BOS
or
D1: VAN, PHX, COL, SJ, LA, ANA
D2: CGY, EDM, CHI, STL, MIN, WPG
D3: NYR, NYI, NJ, BOS, MON, OTT
D4: NAS, FLA, TB, WAS, CAR, DAL
D5: BUF, PIT, CBS, OTT, DET, TOR

Other option....

Go with 10 3 team divisions. Each conference Division winners advance then the next 6 wild card teams have a play in round for final 8.

OR....just set up 8 divisions of 4 or 3 teams designating SEA as an expansion and QC as an expansion with PHX possibly moving to TOR

1: (SEA), VAN, CGY, EDM
2: LA, SJ, ANA, COL
3: PHX(*), DAL, STL, NAS
4: WPG, MIN, CHI, DET
5: TB, FL, WAS, CAR
6: CBS, PIT, PHL, NJ
7: BUF, TOR, OTT, NYI
8: MON, BOS, NYR, (QC)

If PHX moves to TOR2...

1,2,7,8 dont change....

3: DAL, NAS, FL, TB
4: WPG, MIN, CHI, STL
5: WAS, CAR, PHL, NJ
6: CBS, PIT, DET, TOR2

Djp is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 08:37 PM
  #87
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
So the other 15 teams in the west will pony up the millions per year that Detroit is losing on TV rights by having almost have their schedule be non-natural start times because they want to keep them there?
Detroit ain't the only team in the league. You don't realign an entire league to benefit 1 team. Detroit will have to suck it up.

And since when was there a problem with revenue or ratings in Detroit? Don't remember the Leafs losing any viewers when they were in the west either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
The other option for realignment is do away with conferences and go with 5 6 team divisions.

For the playoffs the top 2 in each division (10) earn a spot in the playoffs with a bye.

The next 12 face off have a short play in round of best of 3 or best of 5 series. the winning 6 advance to a final 16.
Terrible concept.

Tough Guy is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 08:39 PM
  #88
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
You do when you just signed an agreement with your players that bases their salary on league revenue, and you are leaving millions of revenue on the table by not moving DET East. Further, this helps more than DET, it cleans up issues for MIN, DAL, CLB as well.

MountainHawk is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 08:50 PM
  #89
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
You do when you just signed an agreement with your players that bases their salary on league revenue, and you are leaving millions of revenue on the table by not moving DET East.
The revenue lost from Toronto or Montreal missing the playoffs will positively DWARF any revenue increase that Detroit may or may not get from moving east. I bet you Detroit's TV deals are locked in and won't be up for renewal for years anyway, so there will be a 0.0% revenue increase in Detroit. And I don't see ratings going any higher anyway.

As hard as people try, they can't come close to justifying uneven conferences. It doesn't benefit the league at all.

Most of the biggest TV markets are in the east, and now you are going to make it harder for those teams to make the playoffs? Talk about stupidity.

Tough Guy is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 09:08 PM
  #90
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by G Dawg View Post
The revenue lost from Toronto or Montreal missing the playoffs will positively DWARF any revenue increase that Detroit may or may not get from moving east. I bet you Detroit's TV deals are locked in and won't be up for renewal for years anyway, so there will be a 0.0% revenue increase in Detroit. And I don't see ratings going any higher anyway.

As hard as people try, they can't come close to justifying uneven conferences. It doesn't benefit the league at all.

Most of the biggest TV markets are in the east, and now you are going to make it harder for those teams to make the playoffs? Talk about stupidity.
Playoff revenues don't change overall. Still 8 eastern teams selling out buildings.

MountainHawk is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 09:10 PM
  #91
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
Playoff revenues don't change overall. Still 8 eastern teams selling out buildings.
Major markets missing the playoffs = less revenue. Most of the major markets are in the east.

Not to mention that this system is simply unfair and makes the league look like a carnival sideshow. I don't care whether its Detroit or Columbus, but one of those teams needs to stay in the west.

Tough Guy is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 09:13 PM
  #92
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by G Dawg View Post
Major markets missing the playoffs = less revenue. Most of the major markets are in the east.

Not to mention that this system is simply unfair and makes the league look like a carnival sideshow. I don't care whether its Detroit or Columbus, but one of those teams needs to stay in the west.
Not really IMO. It's still 8 teams making it, and whichever you lose, you are replacing with DET. Not many revenue teams that will result in a new loss.

MountainHawk is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 09:51 PM
  #93
Goalie_Bob
1992 Vezina (2nd)
 
Goalie_Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,464
vCash: 500
1. Growing up a child of the Patrick division. I never remember any *****ing about how it was unfair that the division had 6 teams and every other division had 5. So I don't understand it now for one conference to have 14 and the other 16. People will get used to it.

2. Or why not just have 9 teams make the playoffs in the East. The 9th team would come from the division with the most points accumulated from all teams in that division. Then the 4th and 5th place teams in that division have a one game playoff. Then just have divisional playoffs from there.

3. Or have the 4th and 5th place teams from each of the East divisions have a one game playoff to decide the teams for the East divisional rounds.

4. Or just suck it up.

Goalie_Bob is offline  
Old
03-03-2013, 10:01 PM
  #94
Buck Aki Berg
My pockets hurt
 
Buck Aki Berg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goalie_Bob View Post
1. Growing up a child of the Patrick division. I never remember any *****ing about how it was unfair that the division had 6 teams and every other division had 5. So I don't understand it now for one conference to have 14 and the other 16. People will get used to it.
Good Lord, this.

Buck Aki Berg is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:11 AM
  #95
Retail1LO
Registered User
 
Retail1LO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 5,233
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
Definite disadvantage travel wise for the Western conference since the east would have a guarantee of being in the same time zone.

Just make it a league wide table so any division can end up playing any otehr diviision. Maybe top two in each division fill spots 1 to 8 then 9 to 16 the next best 8 teams. IIRC there was a season or two where it was a 1 to 16 format.
I don't mind this. The two eastern conferences get a full season's worth of minimal travel. Come playoffs, the western teams shouldn't be the only ones having to bear the burden of all the travel.

Retail1LO is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:15 AM
  #96
Retail1LO
Registered User
 
Retail1LO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 5,233
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO
Quote:
Originally Posted by G Dawg View Post
The revenue lost from Toronto or Montreal missing the playoffs will positively DWARF any revenue increase that Detroit may or may not get from moving east. I bet you Detroit's TV deals are locked in and won't be up for renewal for years anyway, so there will be a 0.0% revenue increase in Detroit. And I don't see ratings going any higher anyway.

As hard as people try, they can't come close to justifying uneven conferences. It doesn't benefit the league at all.

Most of the biggest TV markets are in the east, and now you are going to make it harder for those teams to make the playoffs? Talk about stupidity.
Harder?

Ok... So...would it be any LESS hard, for teams in the east to make the playoffs if there were two more teams in the west? Think about it.

I'll say it again...does anything going on in the western conference...have ANY impact on how difficult it is to make the playoffs in the east?

Retail1LO is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:20 AM
  #97
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by G Dawg View Post
Major markets missing the playoffs = less revenue. Most of the major markets are in the east.

Not to mention that this system is simply unfair and makes the league look like a carnival sideshow. I don't care whether its Detroit or Columbus, but one of those teams needs to stay in the west.
So, maybe instead of records, they should use market-size and revenues to determine which teams make the play-offs. Players would love it, owners would hate it. Why? Because now instead of fudging numbers to show less revenues, team would be doing the opposite. Players salaries as a result would go up.

patnyrnyg is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:40 AM
  #98
Kebekoi
Registered User
 
Kebekoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Matane, QC
Country: Martinique
Posts: 1,468
vCash: 500
I hope that they will find a way to sever the link of Florida + Canada on the final realignment and find a place for Quebec City in Montreal's division.

Kebekoi is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:39 PM
  #99
Mory Schneideur*
Mory's Better!
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Today & The Future
Posts: 5,260
vCash: 500
I personally like the new playoff format. I hope they keep it exactly as proposed with the Wild Card cross overs & I hope they stick with reseeding the final 4 teams.

The whole East/West thing is boring. Divisional playoffs would rock, crossovers would be very exciting & if the league decides to stick with reseeding the final 4, we could see very cool things happen like a Wild Card meeting it's biggest divisional rival in the SCF. Could you imagine the story and the media coverage? It would be amazing to hear about a team like Boston getting in by the skin of its teeth, conquering the Atlantic division & then meeting Montreal in the finals to play for the cup.

Personally, Just to make things fair, I would make the Wild Card teams play a single game elimination, with the winner holding the right to the final seed. This would be perfect because the Wild Card with more points has a chance to cross over, but the 4th seeded team could still defend its position by defeating the Wild Card.

Hope exactly this happens.

Mory Schneideur* is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:17 PM
  #100
CBCnutcase
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,603
vCash: 500
Don't like the divisional playoff format. Instead of the top 3 teams in each div get a playoff spot, how about top 2 teams in each div and then let the other 4 best teams make the playoffs. It can allow 6 teams from one div and 2 from the other but that would be more fair. You know if that were to happen next season where the top 3 make it in and a 6th place team has more points, the change would happen quickly.

CBCnutcase 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 05:52 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.