I'm a bit sad as a Hawks fan. I drove out to your arena from Chicago on January 26th to see the Hawks and had a blast. Was such a fun time. We had planned on doing it a bunch more times over the years...but that will harder with only one game a year now.
We can hang with most of these teams. The Pens have a lot of talent right now, and the Rangers will always have a lot of money, so dominating this division will be difficult, but not impossible.
I know the Devils are always strong, but Brodeur has to retire eventually, right?
I just like the idea of seeing the other Eastern teams more - Montreal, Boston and Ottawa. To me, the east as a whole is a slightly different brand of hockey, and more entertaining.
And yes, of course CBJ management is most concerned about selling tickets and gaining TV viewership. This is the sport entertainment business, and that's what they're *supposed* to be concerned about.
And the best way to do both things, regardless of East or West, division or conference, is to win. THis may make things more challenging for the new leadership team, but I believe it will make it more fun for the fans.
This has been a good year for the CBJ in almost every off-ice concern. Now if they can keep up the on-ice success!
So far no one here besides me has gotten worked up about division names. I've noticed most everyone on twitter shares my view that we should do classic names or hockey legend names, but apparently Gary Bettman says he wants to do something "sensible, geographic, fan friendly and easy to remember." When the NHL says "fan friendly" it usually means "friendly to non-fans" or "instantly understandable to non-fans". I don't trust the competence of the NHL on this. These are the people whose first stab at new division names was to have the old Northeast plus Florida known as the "Central Division".
So far no one here besides me has gotten worked up about division names. I've noticed most everyone on twitter shares my view that we should do classic names or hockey legend names, but apparently Gary Bettman says he wants to do something "sensible, geographic, fan friendly and easy to remember." When the NHL says "fan friendly" it usually means "friendly to non-fans" or "instantly understandable to non-fans". I don't trust the competence of the NHL on this. These are the people whose first stab at new division names was to have the old Northeast plus Florida known as the "Central Division".
There's an old saying, "Never name anything after someone who's still alive". I like the idea too, but I think you'd need to go with legends of the game that are no longer here.
"Gretzky Division" makes a ton of sense for the West Coast conference, what with Wayne winning the cups in Edmonton, and pretty much being a huge cataylst for expansion west and a huge influence on players that started taking up the sport out west when he was in LA but we've seen recently elsewhere in sports that naming after someone thats still alive can backfire if that person shows up in the news for the wrong reasons.
Legends or pioneers of the game is fine with me, as long as they are no longer with us.
That said, I can see the logic behind going with simple, directional-type names if your Bettman. It makes it easier on the casual fan.
Being in the division with NYR, NJD, Flyers and Caps puts us right in the heart of the NE media market. If we play well it will be great exposure for the city of Columbus to a huge population center who have always assumed in the past that Columbus is a small college town somewhere west of Des Moines.
So far no one here besides me has gotten worked up about division names. I've noticed most everyone on twitter shares my view that we should do classic names or hockey legend names, but apparently Gary Bettman says he wants to do something "sensible, geographic, fan friendly and easy to remember." When the NHL says "fan friendly" it usually means "friendly to non-fans" or "instantly understandable to non-fans". I don't trust the competence of the NHL on this. These are the people whose first stab at new division names was to have the old Northeast plus Florida known as the "Central Division".
Yeah if they want sensible, geographic names, they should have grouped the teams geographically. But the NFL's NFC east has included Dallas for years, a decision made to maintain rivalries rather than for geography, so whatevs.
__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
Being in the division with NYR, NJD, Flyers and Caps puts us right in the heart of the NE media market. If we play well it will be great exposure for the city of Columbus to a huge population center who have always assumed in the past that Columbus is a small college town somewhere west of Des Moines.
Clearly, there is value to the city, itself, in having a major league team competing in these important media markets.
Out west, the Seals Division.
The division with most of our current division mates would become the Scouts division.
We would move into the Barons division.
And of course the St. Pats division (or Thrashers division if you want to re-open a recent wound)
That said, I can see the logic behind going with simple, directional-type names if your Bettman. It makes it easier on the casual fan.
Does it really make it easier on the casual fan? I can't imagine it. If I was coming to a new sport and I hear "Northeast Division" I am if anything bored by the concept. I already know where the division is because I know where the cities are. If MLS has a division called the "Pele division" I am excited to look for some history and try and conjure the transference of meaning from the name to the division.
Also as a real fan, I prefer my team to be fighting for a division title that has some history and meaning bound up in it.
Just to let you guys know in advance, the Devils do not trap anymore. Don't believe what you have heard.
That can't possibly be true. After all, everybody says we trap. The conclusion is that "to trap" means that one is playing a style that has a lot of forechecking and defensive play, and that one is a team that random folks have some cause to dislike or otherwise want to dismiss. Therefore of course you guys play the trap, same as we do.
It's just common sense. And SCIENCE.
__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards
Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Just to let you guys know in advance, the Devils do not trap anymore. Don't believe what you have heard.
The original trap as far as know was based on dumping the puck and having four guys in the neutral zone at all times.... in other words, plays died in the neutral zone...
I don't see much of that anymore, the trap was countered when the red line two line pass rule was cancelled. What I do see these days is a focus on puck possession which demands strong play on the boards and relentless checking... (used by some teams)
So far no one here besides me has gotten worked up about division names. I've noticed most everyone on twitter shares my view that we should do classic names or hockey legend names, but apparently Gary Bettman says he wants to do something "sensible, geographic, fan friendly and easy to remember." When the NHL says "fan friendly" it usually means "friendly to non-fans" or "instantly understandable to non-fans". I don't trust the competence of the NHL on this. These are the people whose first stab at new division names was to have the old Northeast plus Florida known as the "Central Division".
It all seems like a bunch of mock outrage from the usual hockey hipsters that we get to deal with on a daily basis. "Return to tradition" by having a nice circlejerk for the criminal element that ran the NHL for most of its history, or else simply make empirical and absolute statements over who was better than who on the ice (off-ice contributions be damned). But most important, don't actually have the discussion over what the criteria are or should be for such an honor, just wing it and everyone can pat themselves on the back about how much more "respectful" it is.
Naming anything after Clarence Campbell, anyone in the Norris family, or frankly any of the "builders" is ridiculous. It's, at best, half a notch better than Wirtz, Eagleson, Stein, Ballard, ASG, and Ziegler. And naming them after anyone living who can still find a way to shoot themselves in the foot...well, look at the way that the HHOF had to deal with Eagleson's downfall.
Naming anything after Clarence Campbell, anyone in the Norris family, or frankly any of the "builders" is ridiculous. It's, at best, half a notch better than Wirtz, Eagleson, Stein, Ballard, ASG, and Ziegler. And naming them after anyone living who can still find a way to shoot themselves in the foot...well, look at the way that the HHOF had to deal with Eagleson's downfall.
