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.

QC/SEA Expansion With Happy DET/CBJ (Alignment Options)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-17-2013, 12:36 AM
  #251
Anisimovs AK
Registered User
 
Anisimovs AK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,563
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by edog37 View Post
have you ever been to Cincinnati? It is basketball dominant....
as opposed to hockey? maybe. Football and baseball far outweigh basketball in terms of popularity in the Natti

Anisimovs AK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 01:17 AM
  #252
richo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 181
vCash: 500
Should just stick with Seattle and Portland (maybe Houston). Most people I know have never heard of Hamilton or Saskatoon never mind find them on a map. For most Quebec is just a province that isn't sure if it wants to be part of Canada or not. The NHL would be hurting itself in terms of overall popularity by continuing to retract to unknown Canadian cities. If it wants to expand popularity it has to get into more BIG markets, not smaller backwoods towns in Canada.

richo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 08:24 AM
  #253
Crayton
Registered User
 
Crayton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
Playoffs: top 8 teams in each conference makes playoffs
Conference winners will emerges to 3-team Semi-finalists

Stanley Cup Semi-finals:
Robin Round games (Memorial Cup style format, no shootout, no ties, continuous OT rules)
Maximum games in the semi-final round is 4 games, 2 home and 2 away.

In case of a tie of win-loss record between 2nd and 3rd place team will go to a sudden death game in a neutral site, half-way distance between teams.

Game 1: Central winner at West winner
Game 2: East winner at West winner
Game 3: East winner at Central winner
Game 4: West winner at Central winner
Game 5: West winner at East winner
Game 6: Central winner at East winner

Game 7: if necessary, neutral site location

Top 2 teams from the semi-final round advances to the Stanley Cup Final with best of 7 format.
Nah, if you want to do a 3-way playoff series, try this:

First 6 games guaranteed (A is highest rank, C is lowest)
Game 1: B @ A
Game 2: C @ A
Game 3: C @ B
Game 4: A @ B
Game 5: A @ C
Game 6: B @ C

Next 4 games ONLY if all 3 teams remain
Game 7: B @ A if necessary
Game 8: C @ A if necessary
Game 9: C @ B if necessary
Game 10: C @ B if necessary

After 1 team reaches 4 losses, remaining teams alternate home games (not listed above; beginning in current city or at highest ranking team) until a 2nd team reaches 4 losses.

Crayton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 09:00 AM
  #254
LouisOlivier
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ville de Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by richo View Post
Should just stick with Seattle and Portland (maybe Houston). Most people I know have never heard of Hamilton or Saskatoon never mind find them on a map. For most Quebec is just a province that isn't sure if it wants to be part of Canada or not. The NHL would be hurting itself in terms of overall popularity by continuing to retract to unknown Canadian cities. If it wants to expand popularity it has to get into more BIG markets, not smaller backwoods towns in Canada.
Like Atlanta?

LouisOlivier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 09:17 AM
  #255
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anisimovs AK View Post
as opposed to hockey? maybe. Football and baseball far outweigh basketball in terms of popularity in the Natti
I wouldn't be so sure. From living in Cincinnati, I would put basketball at roughly the same level as baseball and football.

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 11:44 AM
  #256
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
Adding a few teams, Houston, Salt Lake City and Saskatoon for 36 teams, 3 conference, balanced divisions. I'll tell you why I think Saskatoon is a good NHL city below.
I'm all for there eventually being 36 teams, 12, 15 years down the road, but for now let's just try to keep the perspective related to cities that are being mentioned in the news.

Quote:
Western ConferenceCentral ConferenceEastern Conference
NORTHWESTGREAT LAKESATLANTIC
EdmontonWinnipegNY Islanders
CalgaryMinnesotaNY Rangers
VancouverChicagoNew Jersey
SeattleDetroitPhiladelphia
PortlandColumbusCarolina
SaskatoonPittsburghWashington
   
SOUTHWESTNORTHEASTSOUTHEAST
San JoseTorontoSt. Louis
Los AngelesBuffaloFlorida
AnaheimOttawaTampa Bay
PhoenixMontrealNashville
ColoradoQuebec CityHouston
Salt Lake CityBostonDallas

As you can see, I separated Pittsburgh from the Atlantic because it does not fit geographically and Pittsburgh is closest to the Great Lake, Lake Erie.
Again, I don't have a different perspective personally, but really... If you're going to Try to force an alignment based principally in geographic reasoning, then Pittsburgh isn't the first team I'd think of changing with the Divisions I proposed. Boston is the most logical choice to be in the Atlantic. Not only is Boston not in the same state or province as Montreal, they're in different countries; and though they're not so far apart, they're also not so near to each other either. At least Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are cities in the same state and country. And distance-wise, it's about equal between Bos-Mon and Pit-Phi.

So, before you try to separate Pittsburgh from Philadelphia, separate Boston from Montreal. Though, Unfortunately, neither is likely to fly.

* But then again, it really could depend, as KevFu would say, on the scheduling matrix that is used. Use a particular kind of scheduling matrix and then certain alignment scenarios become somewhat more acceptable.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 02:46 PM
  #257
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,955
vCash: 13357
Could go with this, if the NHL is set on the four conference thing.

Conference AConference BConference CConference D
AnaheimChicagoBostonBrooklyn
CalgaryColoradoBuffaloCarolina
EdmontonDallasColumbusNew Jersey
Los AngelesHoustonDetroitNew York
PortlandMinnesotaMontrealPhiladelphia
San JoseNashvilleOttawaPittsburgh
SeattleSt. LouisQuebecTampa/Florida
VancouverWinnipegTorontoWashington

Alternatively, scrap Houston, Columbus stays in Conference D and you add Toronto2


Last edited by Bourne Endeavor: 07-19-2013 at 01:04 PM. Reason: I forgo the Flyers because I suck/
Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 02:54 PM
  #258
Brodie
watcher on the walls
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 12,157
vCash: 500
you have Columbus in two divisions

Brodie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 03:09 PM
  #259
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Could go with this, if the NHL is set on the four conference thing.

Conference AConference BConference CConference D
AnaheimChicagoBostonBrooklyn
CalgaryColoradoBuffaloCarolina
EdmontonDallasColumbusColumbus
Los AngelesHoustonDetroitNew Jersey
PortlandMinnesotaMontrealNew York
San JoseNashvilleOttawaPittsburgh
SeattleSt. LouisQuebecTampa/Florida
VancouverWinnipegTorontoWashington

Alternatively, scrap Houston, Columbus stays in Conference D and you add Toronto2
And where the hell is Philadelphia?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie View Post
you have Columbus in two divisions
Like yea, I was wondering, How did he get that alignment to work out so nicely while adding Quebec City as well as Seattle, Portland, and Houston?
And then I saw, not only does he eliminate Phoenix but also one of the Florida teams and, as you point out, he doubles up on Columbus.

To Bourne.... You know, anyone can fix the alignment issue if they play around with subtracting enough teams in certain areas and adding ones in other areas. And yes, the addition of both Seattle and Portland in the far west does help with the idea I suggested, but at least both of those cities are being talked about in the hockey media. No one is talking about one of the Florida teams being relocated, and Houston hasn't been a hot potential NHL expansion/relocation option in quite a few years. And Phoenix is still alive, though it may only have another 5 years of shelf-life.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 03:49 PM
  #260
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
If you're going to Try to force an alignment based principally in geographic reasoning, then Pittsburgh isn't the first team I'd think of changing with the Divisions I proposed. Boston is the most logical choice to be in the Atlantic. Not only is Boston not in the same state or province as Montreal, they're in different countries; and though they're not so far apart, they're also not so near to each other either. At least Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are cities in the same state and country. And distance-wise, it's about equal between Bos-Mon and Pit-Phi.
To me, "Geographic reasoning" means we try and make sure regional rivals keep playing each other the same amount of times if at all possible.

Separating teams who've been together in the same conference/division (with 5+ meetings a season or more) for 88 consecutive years is "geographic lack of reason."

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 04:02 PM
  #261
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
To me, "Geographic reasoning" means we try and make sure regional rivals keep playing each other the same amount of times if at all possible.

Separating teams who've been together in the same conference/division (with 5+ meetings a season or more) for 88 consecutive years is "geographic lack of reason."
That reasoning could pretty much be used for Detroit - Chicago, Detroit - Toronto, Toronto - Montreal, Montreal - Boston, Montreal - Chicago, Toronto - Boston.
Take your pick. Or to be fair, choose them all.

And just because some haven't been Divisionally together recently just means that the League saw fit to separate them. What was done to some, could be done to all.

But again, I was telling coolboarder not to expect such things. However, in a way you've pushed me to argue his case, by presenting that such separations have in fact happened and another is just about to for next Season.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 07-18-2013 at 04:10 PM.
MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 04:20 PM
  #262
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
That reasoning could pretty much be used for Detroit - Chicago, Detroit - Toronto, Toronto - Montreal, Montreal - Boston, Montreal - Chicago, Toronto - Boston.
Take your pick. Or to be fair, choose them all.

And just because some haven't been Divisionally together recently just means that the League saw fit to separate them. What was done to some, could be done to all.

But again, I was telling coolboarder not to expect such things. However, in a way you've pushed me to argue his case, by presenting that such separations have in fact happened and another is just about to for next Season.
Oh, I understand. I'm not saying "You absolutely cannot..." because ("hey watch out for those pieces of KevFu's BROKEN RECORD all over this thread") with the right schedule, you can do whatever.

I'm merely saying that in an effort to make the max number of teams happy, and the fewest number of teams unhappy with a re-alignment plan to bring in Quebec, BOS leaving MON & OTT is waaaaay down near the last option on the list.

Going from six divisions of five, to eight divisions of four, and adding QUE, separating out TOR, BUF -- who have nearby non-division teams like PIT, CBJ, DET as options -- to form a new division and leaving MON, OTT, BOS with QUE makes way more sense if we're on a geographic plan.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 04:47 PM
  #263
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
Oh, I understand. I'm not saying "You absolutely cannot..." because ("hey watch out for those pieces of KevFu's BROKEN RECORD all over this thread") with the right schedule, you can do whatever.

I'm merely saying that in an effort to make the max number of teams happy, and the fewest number of teams unhappy with a re-alignment plan to bring in Quebec, BOS leaving MON & OTT is waaaaay down near the last option on the list.

Going from six divisions of five, to eight divisions of four, and adding QUE, separating out TOR, BUF -- who have nearby non-division teams like PIT, CBJ, DET as options -- to form a new division and leaving MON, OTT, BOS with QUE makes way more sense if we're on a geographic plan.
Ok, let's continue this little debate just a bit, KevFu...
I bet that there are those who'll argue that Tor-Mon is still just a significantly relevant as Mon-Bos. Furthermore, some will argue that with the addition of Que, both Mon-Bos and Mon-Tor become secondary. Some others have ocassionally argued that the NHL should take the route of the other major Leagues and perhaps do more to foster a Bos-NY rivalry.

And with respect to separating out Tor-Buf, first Toronto fans will likely say that Buffalo isn't important to them; and secondly, if there is any reference there to Toronto-Buffalo proximity to Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Columbus, or between Buffalo and Detroit and Columbus,... well Boston is closer to NY than any of those teams are to Toronto or Buffalo.

...Just for arguments sake...


Now, on the opposite side of the argument... It's primarily when discussing the idea of two W-E-E-E Conferences that I see a real "geographic" sense of keeping Mon-Bos together. In that scenario, I see Montreal - Boston - (Quebec) as a far northeast corner that in no way should be in a Conference with the California corner. But when splitting the League up more regionally (east-west or the like) then I see Boston as more of an Atlantic/NY associated team which unfortunately must be included into what I otherwise see as a "border" group.


Another argument could be made that it's pretty much splitting hairs to decide which of these teams we're discussing should be kept together and which could be separated. On a related note,... like those here who suggest that a Quebec City team should take Detroit's old place in the West,... And I can hear Montreal now,... Wait a minute, Quebec City is returning to the League and its not only not going to be in our Division but not even in our Conference; Are you ****ing crazy?


Last edited by MoreOrr: 07-18-2013 at 05:00 PM.
MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 08:38 PM
  #264
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,815
vCash: 500
There's LOGICALLY sound arguments for all these scenarios. Geography to put teams together in new ways, tradition to keep teams together in same ways as before.

But it all cycles back to the "Square Peg Round Hole" aspect of realignment. We just don't have symmetrical groups of teams that should be in divisions together.

BOS/MON have been conference and or division mates playing 5, 6 or 8 games against each other for 88 consecutive seasons (that's all of them).

As stated (ad nauseam I'm sure), the alignment needs to be a "quasi-geographical, quasi-historical, quasi-time zone/schedule efficiency" hybrid. There's going to be plenty of compromise. Because the NHL already made the decision to separate TOR/MON into separate conferences before, and I don't think the geographical proximity of BOS to NY, or the historical significance of TOR/MON makes separating BOS/MON a "better compromise."

Geography is the easiest thing to compromise, because fans like seeing their team play their rivals, and seeing their team on TV at a convenient hour way more than they care about the NHL alignment matching a map.

That's why DET/CBJ with TB/FLA makes little "geographic sense," but is a really easy and acceptable compromise: DET/CBJ gets the games in their time zone, so their fans and sponsors get DET vs TB at 7 pm instead of DET/VAN at 10 pm.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 09:19 PM
  #265
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
There's LOGICALLY sound arguments for all these scenarios. Geography to put teams together in new ways, tradition to keep teams together in same ways as before.

But it all cycles back to the "Square Peg Round Hole" aspect of realignment. We just don't have symmetrical groups of teams that should be in divisions together.

BOS/MON have been conference and or division mates playing 5, 6 or 8 games against each other for 88 consecutive seasons (that's all of them).

As stated (ad nauseam I'm sure), the alignment needs to be a "quasi-geographical, quasi-historical, quasi-time zone/schedule efficiency" hybrid. There's going to be plenty of compromise. Because the NHL already made the decision to separate TOR/MON into separate conferences before, and I don't think the geographical proximity of BOS to NY, or the historical significance of TOR/MON makes separating BOS/MON a "better compromise."

Geography is the easiest thing to compromise, because fans like seeing their team play their rivals, and seeing their team on TV at a convenient hour way more than they care about the NHL alignment matching a map.

That's why DET/CBJ with TB/FLA makes little "geographic sense," but is a really easy and acceptable compromise: DET/CBJ gets the games in their time zone, so their fans and sponsors get DET vs TB at 7 pm instead of DET/VAN at 10 pm.
Fine,... I think you know that I'm essentially not in disagreement with most of what you think on this. I was just pushing the issue to reaffirm that different people could take the same ideas and reasons that you're putting forth, but use them to justify different alignment groupings. Ultimately, as you've been promoting, if a scheduling matrix can relax some of the alignment issues then that can help quite a bit. But even that isn't easy to do and still satisfy what so many different people want from a schedule.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 10:06 PM
  #266
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
Yeah, it's good theory: The teams want stars like Crosby/Ovechkin to visit every year. But the number simply don't back up the idea that there's a THIRD needle-moving player in the league/conference.

If we're going to make the broad generalization that more people would go when a big star is in town, we can counter with the similar generalization that the fan bases who'd recognize someone like John Tavares/Steven Stamkos as an elite talent worth going to see in person, are the same same cities selling out most the time anyway!

9 of the 14 teams out west were at 100% capacity last season. NASH was at 99.2%. (and Crosby/Ovechkin didn't visit a single time).

Isn't using 32 out of 82 games on each WC team's schedule (448 games total, 39% of the season) just so Crosby/Ovechkin visit ANA, PHX, COL, DAL in a combined EIGHT games a colossal waste? There's better ways to allocate those games (time zones, rivalries).

The NHL would be much better served if they stopped arguing about which flawed formula "works the best."

They should say "screw it, we've heard your concerns, we know what you guys want. And we know what's going to make us all the most money. We're just ASSIGNING GAMES."

Crosby or Ovechkin will visit ANA**, PHX, COL, DAL every year, and two of the other 10. So every five years, you'll all get to see them. Because we make schedules every year, if an at capacity team falls off we can slot them an Sid/Ovi game. If PHX starts selling out night after night, they'll lose a Sid/Ovi game.

(**And Crosby is visiting Anaheim on Super Bowl Sunday 2015, in an NBC game that starts right after NBC's Super Bowl. NBC can promote the hell out of it and we're FINALLY going to promote the NHL as a hard-hitting sports product to football fans).

It also gives them the freedom to say "You know what, the playoff series between those two non-rivals was intense. Let's give 'em some extra games this season and see what develops."

We need to stop thinking of the schedule as a formula and start thinking of it as "inventory" to sell our product/sport to more fans.
Im sorry, I thought most people who posted in here understood how the business of the NHL works and would therefore understand that the "capacity" numbers are completely fudged. If you dont believe that, welp, dont know how to help you.

Gary Bettman has said in interviews that THE LEAGUE WANTED EVERY TEAM TO VISIT EVERY BUILDING. So its tough to sit here and suggest a new alignment that has a matrix that doesn't accomplish that goal. You can create all kinds of 'fantasy alignments', but really, whats the point? Its not relevant to the reality of the situation.

Assigning games sounds amazing. But its totally illogical. If I'm a team like the Leafs, the Habs or the Rangers, why on earth would I want to play a team like Columbus or Phoenix? The teams that account for the top 10 revenue generators in the league should just get together and say we only want games "assigned" between the 10 of us. That will maximize our own revenues, the games will generate the highest revenues, so we're all happy. As for the other 20 teams, f them, nobody cares about them.

Every 5 years? Wow, what a great schedule. So hopefully on the one visit per five years the guys like Crosby or Ovechkin are not injured, or haven't moved on to one of the other teams I only get to see every five years.

So yeah, you kinda need a formula.

The CyNick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 10:10 PM
  #267
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
Oh, I understand. I'm not saying "You absolutely cannot..." because ("hey watch out for those pieces of KevFu's BROKEN RECORD all over this thread") with the right schedule, you can do whatever.

I'm merely saying that in an effort to make the max number of teams happy, and the fewest number of teams unhappy with a re-alignment plan to bring in Quebec, BOS leaving MON & OTT is waaaaay down near the last option on the list.

Going from six divisions of five, to eight divisions of four, and adding QUE, separating out TOR, BUF -- who have nearby non-division teams like PIT, CBJ, DET as options -- to form a new division and leaving MON, OTT, BOS with QUE makes way more sense if we're on a geographic plan.
I wish some of you guys had to present these bright ideas to the NHL and the owners.

Good luck going into MLSE and saying dont worry guys, you dont need to be in a division with Montreal and Ottawa. You get Pittsburgh and Columbus instead!! Then take the same presentation to CBC, TSN, and Sportsnet and see how well it goes over.

Oh and by the way, dont forget there's a national TV contract to negotiate in Canada pretty soon.

Honestly guys, get it together.

The CyNick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 11:36 PM
  #268
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
I wish some of you guys had to present these bright ideas to the NHL and the owners.

Good luck going into MLSE and saying dont worry guys, you dont need to be in a division with Montreal and Ottawa. You get Pittsburgh and Columbus instead!! Then take the same presentation to CBC, TSN, and Sportsnet and see how well it goes over.

Oh and by the way, dont forget there's a national TV contract to negotiate in Canada pretty soon.

Honestly guys, get it together.
I'm sure CBC, TSN, and Sportsnet would be upset that they had to air more games featuring Crosby and Malkin.

DyerMaker66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 01:59 AM
  #269
SgtToody
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 656
vCash: 500
PACIFIC
Vancouver
Seattle
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose
Edmonton
Calgary
Colorado

GREAT PLAINS
Arizona
Minnesota
Dallas
Houston
St. Louis
Chicago
Winnipeg
Indianapolis

CENTRAL
Toronto
Hamilton
Buffalo
Detroit
Nashville
Montreal
Quebec
Columbus

SEABOARD
Boston
New York
Brooklyn
New Jersey
Washington
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Tampa Bay

...yes, I took lots of liberties in moving/removing clubs. But a number of owners are in tougher straights than the NHL wants us to know -- New Jersey, Phoenix, Columbus... Change is good, and some markets have changed a lot in the past 30 years, like Indy...

SgtToody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 02:16 AM
  #270
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,479
vCash: 500
A couple things I'd change:

- Move Phoenix and keep Florida (Nashville stays west)
- Change Indy to KC or Milwaukee.
- There are numerous places I'd move before Carolina.

DyerMaker66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 07:41 AM
  #271
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
I'm sure CBC, TSN, and Sportsnet would be upset that they had to air more games featuring Crosby and Malkin.
They won't be around forever. Leafs/Habs, Leafs/Sens, Sens/Habs are guaranteed draws for Canadian audiences, it doesn't matter who the players are. Hence there's strong incentive on the part of the Canadian networks to maximize the number of matchups between them and keep it that way.

Habs/Pens may be a hot draw today, but say Crosby gets another concussion next year and has to hang up his skates. Now that draw becomes a dud.

You don't (re)align your league based on the current locations of superstar players. They can change in a flash.

optimus2861 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 10:43 AM
  #272
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 500
playoffs is an even bigger deal.

few people on here seem to be able to comprehend that the divisions were set up to appeal to their tv partners for playoffs.

the leafs division HELPS increase the number of playoff series that are friendly to cbc and tsn.

the rangers division does the same for NBC.

The CyNick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 10:56 AM
  #273
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,535
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtToody View Post

...yes, I took lots of liberties in moving/removing clubs. But a number of owners are in tougher straights than the NHL wants us to know -- New Jersey, Phoenix, Columbus... Change is good, and some markets have changed a lot in the past 30 years, like Indy...
Indy is a terrible pro sports market.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 10:59 AM
  #274
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
I wish some of you guys had to present these bright ideas to the NHL and the owners.

Good luck going into MLSE and saying dont worry guys, you dont need to be in a division with Montreal and Ottawa. You get Pittsburgh and Columbus instead!! Then take the same presentation to CBC, TSN, and Sportsnet and see how well it goes over.

Oh and by the way, dont forget there's a national TV contract to negotiate in Canada pretty soon.

Honestly guys, get it together.
Posts like these now remind me of a thread on the Politics forum, in which a study fairly clearly showed that the "havs" generally always feel a greater "need", a greater right to having even more; while those that "don't have" generally feel less need and demand less.

Toronto, for example, won't have the arena any less fill if Tampa Bay is visiting than if Montreal is visiting. And though Canadian fans may prefer all-Canadian matchups, if Canadian fans know that a Canadian team is playing important games against whatever team in the League, those fans will be watching. Put Toronto in a Division with Dallas, Florida, and Columbus, and if the fans know the games are important to Toronto's Playoff hopes then they'll be watching those games. Add to that some extra physical intensity, fights and huges hits, and hell even a rivalry atmosphere could soon develop. There's lots of evidence of such all through NHL history.

But anyway, I'm not simply trying to argue against the tide. I know what's likely and what's not very likely. But we can still discuss scenarios that could really fit the League dynamic, if enough of those who control the situation were willing to consider them. Because so many options are pretty much closed in reality, well that's just unfortunate.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 11:18 AM
  #275
cbjgirl
Just thinking
 
cbjgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: about last summer.
Country: United States
Posts: 3,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I wouldn't be so sure. From living in Cincinnati, I would put basketball at roughly the same level as baseball and football.
And just to clarify further - college basketball... UC, Xavier, UK, etc.

cbjgirl 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 07:01 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.