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.

56-game season to start circa 12/20?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-05-2012, 03:50 PM
  #51
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,742
vCash: 500
Who cares.. They are still playing the same amount of games. No one has any advantage whatsoever. 55+ games is a good enough sample size to gauge the good and bad teams, and you know what? if the Islanders or florida make the playoffs over the Rangers or Penguins, so be it. thats actually good for the game going forward.

Lundsanity30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:51 PM
  #52
NYRKindms
Registered User
 
NYRKindms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 617
vCash: 500
As someone else said.

The Stanley Cup is not a regular season award.

That is what the presidents trophy is for.

So get in to the playoff however you have to and then the real season starts.

Who cares if it is 82 or 61 etc.

Less games = playoff intensity in the reg season. 82 is a grind anyway

NYRKindms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:51 PM
  #53
Curt in WPG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 91
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
You people don't get the point. You're too biased with wanting hockey back.

Anything less than an 82 schedule which has been normal for several seasons now would make an unfair competitive advantage to those lower tier'd teams.

When you play a full schedule you get injuries, fatigue. etc. You get to see the skill and depth of the team trying to push their way into the playoffs. With a short season you don't really get that. A team can have a lucky month and coast into the playoffs.

Coasting into the playoffs is somehting I do not like at all. This past season was very exciting when you have the last 10 games decides over many teams who would make it into the playoffs.

How would you feel if the following teams made the playoffs in a short season:
1. Florida
2. Winnipeg
3. Buffalo
4. Ny Islanders
5. Toronto
6. Carolina
7. Pittsburgh
8. New Jersey

1. Phoenix
2. Edmonton
3. Calgary
4. Columbus
5. Colorado
6. Nashville
7. St Louis
8. Detroit

Well, personally I'd be pretty freaking excited if the Jets made the playoffs. But by looking at your rankings we'd be playing Pittsburgh so my excitment would probably be short lived.

Having some different teams involved would sure generate interest in some markets.

Besides, I don't think many people look back at the Devils first cup and go "Yuck, it's tainted."

Curt in WPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:51 PM
  #54
flyguy
Sean Cubeturier
 
flyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Country: United States
Posts: 6,515
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to flyguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Aki Berg View Post
So you think that small market teams should only exist as fodder for large-market opponents to pummel the crap out of?
I didn't say that.

I think that if certain large markets where hockey isn't the #1 sport, miss the playoffs, it would hurt the TV ratings in the US a lot, which does not help to grow the sport, and could be detrimental in retaining more casual fans in these markets going forward.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...atched/137284/

Look at the US TV ratings of the Stanley Cup Finals this past year, which featured non-traditional hockey market teams.

Then look at the three years prior, which featured larger hockey market teams. There's a bit of a difference

THEN look at the Stanley Cup Finals the 2 years following the last lockout, which also featured non-traditional hockey markets (at least for the American teams that played in them). These two years had god-awful TV ratings in the US.

Whether Canadians like it or not, they need Big Market American teams to do well and continue to get viewers to watch for the NHL to have any chance of growing.

flyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:52 PM
  #55
Hivemind
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 14,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
I am a hockey fan. But a short season is no good for the NHL. All you need is one lucky month and then play 500 hockey and you've made the playoffs.
And that's different from an 82 game season?

Hivemind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:52 PM
  #56
Stewie Griffin
Moderator
Driving a Bandwagon
 
Stewie Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,349
vCash: 106
A quick look at the Calgary Flames schedule (those originally planned, including a break for an all-star game that won't happen) gives us 53 games from December 22 to April 13.

Add in another 3 games during the all-star break, and go another two weeks in April for another 6 games and hitting a 62 game schedule (and full sponsor $$s) isn't outside the realm of possibility.

Stewie Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:53 PM
  #57
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 9,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
I don't want to the season to start. I'd say start next year. Too much time has been lost and I would hate to see a team like the Islanders make the playoofs or even Edmonton when in a full season they wouldn't. Heck how would you feel if a team like Columbus won the CUP?
If Columbus won the Cup, that would mean that there had been an NHL season - which I am 100% in favor of.

What's the downside here?

You would actually rather see no hockey, instead of less hockey?

And what do you have against Edm or NYI? If they make the playoffs, good for them.

Butch 19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:54 PM
  #58
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,742
vCash: 500
Also, they get 100% of their sponsorship money if they were to play at least a 61 game season. You think they are going to miss 25% of their sponsorship money by only falling 5 games short? They will get those in if this news is as good as being reported.

Lundsanity30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 03:55 PM
  #59
Isles72
Registered User
 
Isles72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
all depends how far into april they are willing to go .

if they are willing to go to april 20th , then 60 gp is doable if they start by dec 2o .

Isles72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:05 PM
  #60
sharks fan 209
Registered User
 
sharks fan 209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 297
vCash: 500
Is there a deal in place already? As much as I want hockey back I am not getting my hopes up to high. Been let down many times already during this mess.

sharks fan 209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:05 PM
  #61
FakeKidPoker*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Balls McGinty View Post
Are coached even allowed to contact players during the lockout? I would assume not.
Neither are owners and players but Crosby flew in with Burkle yesterday

FakeKidPoker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:06 PM
  #62
Hank Chinaski
Mod Supervisor
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
While I agree in principle, they still played 80 regular season games in 1995. Hardly a big difference from the 84 they were originally scheduled to play.
1995 was a 48 game schedule.

Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:07 PM
  #63
IkeaMonkey*
HF Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: derderderderderderde
Country: Sao Tome e Principe
Posts: 12,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharks fan 209 View Post
Is there a deal in place already? As much as I want hockey back I am not getting my hopes up to high. Been let down many times already during this mess.
Gary Bettman put out a completely neutral quote, that had a slight lean towards progress today.

So there's that.

IkeaMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:09 PM
  #64
MISC*
Negged.
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,691
vCash: 500
Isn't the world supposed to end on the 20th?

MISC* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:11 PM
  #65
Hivemind
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 14,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MISC View Post
Isn't the world supposed to end on the 20th?
21st. We get one day of hockey.

Hivemind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:11 PM
  #66
MISC*
Negged.
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
21st. We get one day of hockey.


Sounds about right.

MISC* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:13 PM
  #67
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
You people don't get the point. You're too biased with wanting hockey back.

Anything less than an 82 schedule which has been normal for several seasons now would make an unfair competitive advantage to those lower tier'd teams.

When you play a full schedule you get injuries, fatigue. etc. You get to see the skill and depth of the team trying to push their way into the playoffs. With a short season you don't really get that. A team can have a lucky month and coast into the playoffs.

Coasting into the playoffs is somehting I do not like at all. This past season was very exciting when you have the last 10 games decides over many teams who would make it into the playoffs.

How would you feel if the following teams made the playoffs in a short season:
1. Florida
2. Winnipeg
3. Buffalo
4. Ny Islanders
5. Toronto
6. Carolina
7. Pittsburgh
8. New Jersey

1. Phoenix
2. Edmonton
3. Calgary
4. Columbus
5. Colorado
6. Nashville
7. St Louis
8. Detroit
Sure, over a shorter sample size the averages don't even out as much as they would otherwise. What's your point? Cancel the season and start fresh next year to fit in 82 games? If you're suggesting start in the new year, 10 days makes a difference in your theory? I don't get it.

Ginu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:21 PM
  #68
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 28,852
vCash: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
21st. We get one day of hockey.
So you're saying that the Leafs could theoretically finish out on top?

No Fun Shogun is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:22 PM
  #69
Blue And Orange
Kevin Lowe Must GO!!
 
Blue And Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
You people don't get the point. You're too biased with wanting hockey back.

Anything less than an 82 schedule which has been normal for several seasons now would make an unfair competitive advantage to those lower tier'd teams.

When you play a full schedule you get injuries, fatigue. etc. You get to see the skill and depth of the team trying to push their way into the playoffs. With a short season you don't really get that. A team can have a lucky month and coast into the playoffs.

Coasting into the playoffs is somehting I do not like at all. This past season was very exciting when you have the last 10 games decides over many teams who would make it into the playoffs.

How would you feel if the following teams made the playoffs in a short season:
1. Florida
2. Winnipeg
3. Buffalo
4. Ny Islanders
5. Toronto
6. Carolina
7. Pittsburgh
8. New Jersey

1. Phoenix
2. Edmonton
3. Calgary
4. Columbus
5. Colorado
6. Nashville
7. St Louis
8. Detroit
Oilers a 2nd seed?? SIGN ME UP BRO!!

Blue And Orange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:22 PM
  #70
MatthewT
Registered User
 
MatthewT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,588
vCash: 500
56 or 60 game season is fine. It will still take 16 wins to win the cup and a shortened season will have no effect on those 16 wins.

MatthewT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:23 PM
  #71
Finlandia WOAT
Do U Like Quebec?
 
Finlandia WOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyguy View Post

Look at the US TV ratings of the Stanley Cup Finals this past year, which featured non-traditional hockey market teams.

Then look at the three years prior, which featured larger hockey market teams. There's a bit of a difference

THEN look at the Stanley Cup Finals the 2 years following the last lockout, which also featured non-traditional hockey markets (at least for the American teams that played in them). These two years had god-awful TV ratings in the US.
The reason for the poor ratings had much more to do than just "traditional markets vs. non traditional markets".

First, each of the first 4 games of the Finals went head to head against NBA conference finals. This was due to the NBA lockout, as this does normally not happen.

Second, (this is my opinion), but the hockey was extremely boring. You had the defensive minded Kings against the defensive minded New Jersey Devils. There was too much shot blocking, and both teams got away with ridiculous amounts of standing the puck carrier up at the blueline, which lead to dump and chase. It was god damn tennis out there.

Thirdly, the reason the ratings jumped in from 2008 to 2009 was the prescence of story lines. People love story lines (can Magic beat the Celtics? Will Jordan get his 6th? Can Ray get his Ring?). In 2008, you had Sid the Kid trying to cement his place in NHL history against a veritable dynasty.

Finally, the second highest rated Final since 1995 was the Devils against the Stars with a 3.7. Obviously, people will watch the Final if it is interesting, whether its great hockey or a compelling story. These last Finals featured a 6th seed vs. an 8th seed playing boring ass hockey with no real connection to each other.

Finlandia WOAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:24 PM
  #72
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 25,309
vCash: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by M A K A V E L I View Post
Having the same # of games against divisional and conference opponents would make the divisions useless.
They're heading that way anyway with the proposed realignment last year.

NJDevs26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:32 PM
  #73
Hammerheart
Now how about a hug?
 
Hammerheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
You people don't get the point. You're too biased with wanting hockey back.

Anything less than an 82 schedule which has been normal for several seasons now would make an unfair competitive advantage to those lower tier'd teams.

When you play a full schedule you get injuries, fatigue. etc. You get to see the skill and depth of the team trying to push their way into the playoffs. With a short season you don't really get that. A team can have a lucky month and coast into the playoffs.

Coasting into the playoffs is somehting I do not like at all. This past season was very exciting when you have the last 10 games decides over many teams who would make it into the playoffs.

How would you feel if the following teams made the playoffs in a short season:
1. Florida
2. Winnipeg
3. Buffalo
4. Ny Islanders
5. Toronto
6. Carolina
7. Pittsburgh
8. New Jersey

1. Phoenix
2. Edmonton
3. Calgary
4. Columbus
5. Colorado
6. Nashville
7. St Louis
8. Detroit
Holy ****, who cares? Your concern for who makes the playoffs is stupid.

Hammerheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:33 PM
  #74
Kegsey
#joeMONEY
 
Kegsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgJetsfan View Post
I don't want to the season to start. I'd say start next year. Too much time has been lost and I would hate to see a team like the Islanders make the playoofs or even Edmonton when in a full season they wouldn't. Heck how would you feel if a team like Columbus won the CUP?

It's been said here many times but as long as the same playoff format is used a shortened season does not mean anything in regards to who wins the cup.

Kegsey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2012, 04:36 PM
  #75
3rdlineglory
Korsi Kevin
 
3rdlineglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Mahopac, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 421
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan The Parade View Post
The reason for the poor ratings had much more to do than just "traditional markets vs. non traditional markets".

First, each of the first 4 games of the Finals went head to head against NBA conference finals. This was due to the NBA lockout, as this does normally not happen.

Second, (this is my opinion), but the hockey was extremely boring. You had the defensive minded Kings against the defensive minded New Jersey Devils. There was too much shot blocking, and both teams got away with ridiculous amounts of standing the puck carrier up at the blueline, which lead to dump and chase. It was god damn tennis out there.

Thirdly, the reason the ratings jumped in from 2008 to 2009 was the prescence of story lines. People love story lines (can Magic beat the Celtics? Will Jordan get his 6th? Can Ray get his Ring?). In 2008, you had Sid the Kid trying to cement his place in NHL history against a veritable dynasty.

Finally, the second highest rated Final since 1995 was the Devils against the Stars with a 3.7. Obviously, people will watch the Final if it is interesting, whether its great hockey or a compelling story. These last Finals featured a 6th seed vs. an 8th seed playing boring ass hockey with no real connection to each other.
It was boring because the referees weren't as strict with calling obstruction as they were in the past. It wasn't the playing style of the teams involved. And you couldn't be any more wrong with how the Kings and Devils played: aggressive forecheck =/= defensive minded.

3rdlineglory 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 10:06 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.