HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Realignment: Did the CBA address this?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2013, 03:27 PM
  #401
coolboarder
Registered User
 
coolboarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I'm still going back to my preferred structure, and that's keeping the six Divisions, even whenever expansion happens, and allowing the rivalries to grow within them. If 7 and 8-team Divisions can be okay, then so can 5 and 6-team Divisions. Continuing with that allows for Divisional rivalries (more condensed than 8-team Divisions) and also still allows for secondary Conference rivalries (which sometimes get more intense than the Divisional ones). Of course, the six Divisions need to be fixed, in a more equitable way; and that can be done! I also think it's possible for an approximated 1st Round Divisional Playoff with six Divisions (not a Playoff to see which team(s) come out of the Division, but matchups that are mostly Divisional). And by doing that, you at least reduce the potential of out-of-Time Zone 1st Round matchups.

Let's be honest here, 8-team Divisions are large; whether you think they're too large or not, that's an opinion maybe. But they're large enough that ultimately they could become problematic for the League (as we know, all other major Leagues have shyed away from large 8-team Divisions). So, I believe that ultimately the League would shift from 8 to 4-team Divisions. Now if we think trying to shuffle around teams in a 6-Division format is problematic, imagine separating 8-team Divisions into 4-team Divisions... And then 4-Divisions also suck big time (look at what happens frequently in the NFL for an example).

No, stick with 5 and then 5 and 6-team Divisions. Stick with 5 and or 6-team Divisional rivalries. Stick with secondary Conference rivalries. Incorporate approximated 1st Round Divisional matchups. Stick with a 2-Conference structure, the winners from the two semi-leagues/Conferences meeting in the Final. That's all still my preference.
How would you put the 5 and 6-team division when expansion happens and still retain the 6 divisions options with current east/west conference set-up? If the league decides to expand two more teams to the fold and still retain the two conference setup with 6 divisions and how the schedule would look like with 6 divisions set-up?

Let's say, if Quebec City and Seattle are expansion teams and Phoenix stays in the town or maybe Phoenix is relocated to Seattle and a Second Toronto team and Quebec City are expansion teams. How would you set up with 6 divisions format?

32 teams league when Phoenix stays in town
Western Conference

NorthWest Division Pacific DivisionCentral Division
EdmontonLADallas
CalgarySan JoseChicago
WinnipegAnaheimSt. Louis
ColoradoPhoenixDetroit
MinnesotaVancouverColumbus
 Seattle 


Eastern Conference
Northeast Division Atlantic DivisionSoutheast Division
TorontoNY RangersTampa Bay
OttawaNY IslandersFlorida
MontrealNew JerseyCarolina
Quebec CityPhiladelphiaNashville
BostonPittsburghWashington
Buffalo  

32 Teams league, with Phoenix relocation to Seattle and two expansion teams

Western Conference
NorthWest Division Pacific DivisionCentral Division
EdmontonLADallas
CalgarySan JoseChicago
WinnipegAnaheimSt. Louis
ColoradoSeattleDetroit
MinnesotaVancouverColumbus
  Toronto 2


Eastern Conference
Northeast Division Atlantic DivisionSoutheast Division
TorontoNY RangersTampa Bay
OttawaNY IslandersFlorida
MontrealNew JerseyCarolina
Quebec CityPhiladelphiaNashville
BostonPittsburghWashington
Buffalo  

Schedule Breakdown
 5-team division6-team Division
Divisional games6 games x 4 teams = 24 games5 games x 5 teams = 25 games
Conference games4 games x 11 teams = 44 games4 games x 10 teams = 40 games
Interconference1 game x 16 teams = 16 games1 game x 16 teams = 16 games
Total84 games81 games
For the 6 teams, 81 games but 3 extra games against divisional opponents, some will be 5 games and some will be 6 games against each other.

coolboarder is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 03:45 PM
  #402
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,828
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
The Stars franchise may have existed for 40+ years, but Dallas as a hockey city is a relative virgin in that 40+year timespan. And as for Washington, a decently established franchise it may be, but to hang the burden of appeal at the gate on Washington alone within a Conf/Div isn't anything near to the case of doing the same in the Central with the likes of Detroit. Hell, the whole Western Conference has tried to hold onto to Detroit (and that's in addition to Chicago); imagine Washington filling even a fraction of such a role in a Conf/Div all by itself.

It's bad enough to have 4 or 5 teams in a Division with little or no gate attraction; creating a 7 or 8-team Division with a similar hockey resume would just spread such a curse to a bigger group of teams.
While true to an extent, you're also pairing them up in the Conference with the teams in the Northeast (NY, NJ, Philly, Boston, Mtl) that make up the majority of the transplants in those areas, so you're getting a good draw for those games as well.

In all honesty, that Division isnt much different than the SE Division now. You're just correcting the Winnipeg mistake, adding in 2 strong teams in Nashville and Dallas, and one weak sister like Columbus. Is it perfect? No, but it's going to help those geographically closer outlying SE cities start to establish some better rivalries.

IceAce is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 03:47 PM
  #403
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
How would you put the 5 and 6-team division when expansion happens and still retain the 6 divisions options with current east/west conference set-up? If the league decides to expand two more teams to the fold and still retain the two conference setup with 6 divisions and how the schedule would look like with 6 divisions set-up?

Let's say, if Quebec City and Seattle are expansion teams and Phoenix stays in the town or maybe Phoenix is relocated to Seattle and a Second Toronto team and Quebec City are expansion teams. How would you set up with 6 divisions format?

32 teams league when Phoenix stays in town
Western Conference

NorthWest Division Pacific DivisionCentral Division
EdmontonLADallas
CalgarySan JoseChicago
WinnipegAnaheimSt. Louis
ColoradoPhoenixDetroit
MinnesotaVancouverColumbus
 Seattle 


Eastern Conference
Northeast Division Atlantic DivisionSoutheast Division
TorontoNY RangersTampa Bay
OttawaNY IslandersFlorida
MontrealNew JerseyCarolina
Quebec CityPhiladelphiaNashville
BostonPittsburghWashington
Buffalo  

32 Teams league, with Phoenix relocation to Seattle and two expansion teams

Western Conference
NorthWest Division Pacific DivisionCentral Division
EdmontonLADallas
CalgarySan JoseChicago
WinnipegAnaheimSt. Louis
ColoradoSeattleDetroit
MinnesotaVancouverColumbus
  Toronto 2


Eastern Conference
Northeast Division Atlantic DivisionSoutheast Division
TorontoNY RangersTampa Bay
OttawaNY IslandersFlorida
MontrealNew JerseyCarolina
Quebec CityPhiladelphiaNashville
BostonPittsburghWashington
Buffalo  

Schedule Breakdown
 5-team division6-team Division
Divisional games6 games x 4 teams = 24 games5 games x 5 teams = 25 games
Conference games4 games x 11 teams = 44 games4 games x 10 teams = 40 games
Interconference1 game x 16 teams = 16 games1 game x 16 teams = 16 games
Total84 games81 games
For the 6 teams, 81 games but 3 extra games against divisional opponents, some will be 5 games and some will be 6 games against each other.
For the 6-team Divisions:
6x3 =18
5x2 =10
4x10 =40
1x16 =16
84 games

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 04:03 PM
  #404
HugoSimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 169
vCash: 500
Why are we assuming the nhl will expand by exactly two teams at the same time.

There`s no reason to assume this other than it would be convenient for supposed symmetry.

If for example the yotes went to portland, you`d have 3 strong markets for expansion right around the corner.

HugoSimon is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 04:24 PM
  #405
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
How would you put the 5 and 6-team division when expansion happens and still retain the 6 divisions options with current east/west conference set-up? If the league decides to expand two more teams to the fold and still retain the two conference setup with 6 divisions and how the schedule would look like with 6 divisions set-up?
Let me present the nightmare:

Expand by two teams (required BoG approval, of course). Now there's 32 teams in the League.

Of course, the League must then realign by slotting the new teams. It still only takes 11 teams to deny a realignment. (edit: was 10)

I can almost guarantee any semblance of the Western Conference presented by coolboarder wouldn't generate enough votes for approval, as the four-conference cat is already out of the bag.


Last edited by Grudy0: 02-07-2013 at 04:36 PM.
Grudy0 is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 05:14 PM
  #406
The CyNick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retail1LO View Post
To me, this is the biggest, and most important change I want to see. With a re-seeding of the teams after each of the 4 conferences is decided, it would mean any 2 teams, except those within the same conference, could meet in the Stanley Cup Final. That NEEDS to happen. Personally, I think there needs to be a way that any two teams PERIOD could meet for the final. There's no reason the Hawks and Wings, or Leafs and Bruins, shouldn't be able to meet one another in a Cup final.
I would love for any two teams to be able to meet in the Cup final, but to do that, you would have to re-seed at the round of 8, and then you have the same problem as before with multiple rounds where teams have to travel across the country. Could end up with LA vs Boston in the 2nd round.

The CyNick is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 05:18 PM
  #407
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoSimon View Post
Why are we assuming the nhl will expand by exactly two teams at the same time.

There`s no reason to assume this other than it would be convenient for supposed symmetry.

If for example the yotes went to portland, you`d have 3 strong markets for expansion right around the corner.
That's how they've always done it. They added 6 in 67. Then 2 more in the early 70's. Then 2 more a couple years later. Then 2 more a couple years later. Lost 1 team. Added 4 WHA teams. Added 1 team. Then added 2 more. Then 2 more. Then 2 more. Then added another 4 teams, all pretty much in the same expansion group, over a few years.

If we go by history, if it's not 2 expansion teams at the same time, it won't be 1 for very long.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 05:26 PM
  #408
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
I would love for any two teams to be able to meet in the Cup final, but to do that, you would have to re-seed at the round of 8, and then you have the same problem as before with multiple rounds where teams have to travel across the country. Could end up with LA vs Boston in the 2nd round.
Just looking it up here, and back in the day it used to happen. Kings and Bruins did play in the 2nd round in 76.

Toronto and LA met in the first round a few times in the 70's. Atlanta/LA. Philly/Colorado. Vancouver/NYI. Vancouver/Philly. LA/NYR. LA/NYI. Edmonton/Philly. Buffalo/Vancouver. All best-of-3's though.

What a silly decade that was.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 06:08 PM
  #409
atticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 16
vCash: 500
The 4 "conference" setup is the only way that you can ensure Central or Eastern time zone teams dont have to play a Mountain or Pacific time zone team in the first two rounds of the playoffs.

No team in the ETZ or CTZ wants to play out west in the first two rounds, nor does a Pacific team want to go east either. So unless you want to volunteer your team for potential multiple series against teams 2 or 3 time zones away, don't volunteer others with a 6 division setup, because that's what would happen, and no one wants it.

atticus is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 06:17 PM
  #410
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 3,179
vCash: 50
If we get a 32 team league, the league is no doubt going to go to the 8 divisions with 4 teams.

S E P H is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 06:23 PM
  #411
HugoSimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
If we get a 32 team league, the league is no doubt going to go to the 8 divisions with 4 teams.
If were talking about what is actually gonna happen we`ve already seen it.

HugoSimon is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 06:30 PM
  #412
HugoSimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
That's how they've always done it. They added 6 in 67. Then 2 more in the early 70's. Then 2 more a couple years later. Then 2 more a couple years later. Lost 1 team. Added 4 WHA teams. Added 1 team. Then added 2 more. Then 2 more. Then 2 more. Then added another 4 teams, all pretty much in the same expansion group, over a few years.

If we go by history, if it's not 2 expansion teams at the same time, it won't be 1 for very long.
Well my big assumption is that expansions whether or not they being announced in the same year will not have opening in the same year. And when you factor in that it`s likely multiple cities being ready for expansion over the next 15 years or so.

Also it`s important to note that these expansions in the past were rarely symmetrical for the league. As typically you`d still have unbalance conferences.

HugoSimon is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 08:25 PM
  #413
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoSimon View Post
If were talking about what is actually gonna happen we`ve already seen it.
And 8 Divisions of 4 is what will happen shortly after the League finally actually does go to 32 teams. After 32 teams, I say they'll give it 4 years, max, and it'll be an 8-Division League. It could even happen immediately once there's 32 teams, if they go to the 4-Division format before there's 32. But they'll probably keep the 4-Div/Conf structure around for a year or two after that.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 08:45 AM
  #414
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
And 8 Divisions of 4 is what will happen shortly after the League finally actually does go to 32 teams. After 32 teams, I say they'll give it 4 years, max, and it'll be an 8-Division League. It could even happen immediately once there's 32 teams, if they go to the 4-Division format before there's 32. But they'll probably keep the 4-Div/Conf structure around for a year or two after that.
Here's my issue with a two conference, eight division structure:

Northeast: Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec
North Atlantic: Boston, New Jersey, Islanders, Rangers
Mid Atlantic: Buffalo, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia
South Atlantic: Washington, Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay

Schedule Matrix:
5 games agains two divisonal opponents (10)
4 games against one divisional opponent (4)
3 games against twelve interconference (36)
2 games against each Western Opponent (32)

Playoff Matrix
Division Winners seeded 1-4 on points, next best four conference teams seeded 5-8
1 v 4, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5.

Someone please tell me how much of an improvement this would be.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 09:01 AM
  #415
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoSimon View Post
Well my big assumption is that expansions whether or not they being announced in the same year will not have opening in the same year. And when you factor in that it`s likely multiple cities being ready for expansion over the next 15 years or so.

Also it`s important to note that these expansions in the past were rarely symmetrical for the league. As typically you`d still have unbalance conferences.
The league went from 6 to 12 teams, then 14, then 16, then 18.

Then Cleveland, who used to be in Oakland, merged with Minnesota, which took the number of teams down to 17. Then the league added 4 WHA teams. Stayed that way for a decade+, until the owners in Minnesota sold the team, and got another team back in San Jose, bringing the total up to 22.

Then the league went to 24, then 26. Then added Nashville and Atlanta over two years, and then added Columbus and Minnesota in the same year.

Had Cleveland stuck around(or relocated), the NHL would've been a 22 team league in the 80's, if they still added the teams from the WHA, which may or may not have happened. I don't know how long the NHL may have been thinking of getting teams from the WHA the way they did, but for it to happen right after having a franchise of their own fold, maybe it got the ball rolling in some way.

Going by history, if the league expands, it's probably going to be by 2 teams at the same time. If it's 1 team, it'll only be a year before they add a 2nd. The league won't expand by 1 team, then wait 5 years, and add another team. They'll wait until whatever 2nd city is close to being ready, then expand.

For decades, the league had 6 teams. Then the league doubled in size in one year. Then the 70's were a chaotic time, with a lot of expansion, a few teams relocating, and a bunch of realignments. The 80's were then pretty quiet, with one or two teams relocating, and one major realignment. Then the crazy 90's came, with expansion early, relocation in the middle, and expansion late, with a couple realignments thrown in, with one big one. The 00's were very quiet, with no expansion, no relocation, and no realignment.

The decade we're in now, the league is sort of due for a major shakeup. We've seen one relocation already, and the potential can of worms that it opened up. Could be an interesting time.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 10:33 AM
  #416
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,759
vCash: 500
OK, coming at this from a different direction... We've always looked at alignment by which teams should be grouped together. Now, if it's generally accepted that the NHL should use some degree of geographic proximity to form its Divisions, we could start by looking at what teams definitely should NOT be grouped together in the same Division.

Here I've used a formula that considers Time Zones and distance. Choosing teams that shouldn't be grouped together if there is more than 1 Time Zone difference, and using 1/2 the distance of that between the two most distant teams in the League (Vancouver and Florida = 4470km) as a rough cut off figure between which teams are too distant to be grouped together and which teams aren't too distant. I extended that distance figure to include at least 10 teams in the League, for each team, that would be too distant to be grouped with in a Division. Because of their relative geographic location, 3 teams have their minimum exclusion list at less than the 10-team minimum: Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Carolina, with 8, 8, and 9 team exclusions respectively.

Here is the list, for each of the teams in the League, of which teams should Not be in their Division (teams in Blue are listed because those teams have that respective team one their list):

Teams that shouldn’t be in a Division with…
Anaheim:
The whole ETZ and the Whole CTZ
Los Angeles:
The Whole ETZ and the Whole CTZ
San Jose:
The Whole ETZ and the Whole CTZ
Vancouver:
The Whole ETZ and the Whole CTZ
Phoenix:
The Whole ETZ, plus Nashville, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, St Louis
Colorado:
The Whole ETZ
Calgary:
The Whole ETZ, plus Nashville, Dallas, St Louis, Chicago
Edmonton:
The Whole ETZ, plus Nashville, Dallas, St Louis, Chicago
Dallas:
The Whole PTZ, plus Edmonton, Calgary, Boston, Montreal, Ottawa, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Toronto, Buffalo, Washington
St Louis:
The Whole PTZ, plus Edmonton, Calgary, Phoenix
Chicago:
The Whole PTZ, plus Phoenix, Edmonton, Calgary, Florida, Tampa Bay
Minnesota:
The Whole PTZ, plus Florida, Tampa Bay, Phoenix, Boston
Winnipeg:
The Whole PTZ, plus Florida, Tampa Bay, Phoenix, Boston, Carolina, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington
Nashville:
The Whole PTZ, plus Edmonton, Calgary, Phoenix
Columbus:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ
Detroit:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Florida, Tampa Bay
Florida:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Winnipeg, Minnesota, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo, Detroit, Chicago
Tampa Bay:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Winnipeg, Minnesota, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit
Carolina:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Winnipeg
Washington:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, Winnipeg, Dallas
Pittsburgh:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ
Philadelphia:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Winnipeg
Buffalo:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Florida, Tampa Bay
Toronto:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Florida, Tampa Bay
Ottawa:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Florida, Tampa Bay
Montreal:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Florida, Tampa Bay
Boston:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Winnipeg, Minnesota
NY Rangers:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Winnipeg
NY Islanders:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Winnipeg
New Jersey:
The Whole PTZ and the Whole MTZ, plus Dallas, Winnipeg


Now, a couple of points here:
1) There are exclusions there which include teams that I've sometimes put together in the same Division. So the list isn't biased other than by the three criteria that I used: Time Zones, distance (maximum of exclusion > 1765km distance; minimum of exclusion > 2235km distance = 1/2 the maximum in the League), and an attempt to exclude at least 10 teams for each team in the League.

2) Using this exclusion formula, for grouping teams in Divisions, should mean less reliance on "inclusion" reasoning; though a minimum inclusion method could be incorporated. This means, absolute minimum groupings, such as the following:
Group 1
The NYC area trio
Group 2
The LA area duo
Group 3
The Alberta duo
Group 4
The Florida duo
In all 4 cases, they are either part of the same metro area, or each other's closest and also from the same province or state.

3) Quebec City and Seattle could easily be included; it would be relatively easy to determine where they would fit in or Not.

4) Looking at the results, these exclusions could still allow for a 6-Division alignment, as well as a 4-Division alignment.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 02-08-2013 at 10:38 AM.
MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 10:37 AM
  #417
wildthing202
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Douglas, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 576
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wildthing202 Send a message via Yahoo to wildthing202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Here's my issue with a two conference, eight division structure:

Northeast: Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec
North Atlantic: Boston, New Jersey, Islanders, Rangers
Mid Atlantic: Buffalo, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia
South Atlantic: Washington, Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay

Schedule Matrix:
5 games agains two divisonal opponents (10)
4 games against one divisional opponent (4)
3 games against twelve interconference (36)
2 games against each Western Opponent (32)

Playoff Matrix
Division Winners seeded 1-4 on points, next best four conference teams seeded 5-8
1 v 4, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5.

Someone please tell me how much of an improvement this would be.
Again why are people fixated on keeping Philly-Pitt even over Boston-Montreal? If you're going to do it based on geography then get it right.

Northeast: Boston, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec
North Atlantic: Philly, New Jersey, Islanders, Rangers
Mid Atlantic: Buffalo, Columbus(or Toronto 2), Pittsburgh, Toronto
South Atlantic: Washington, Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay

Problem solved.

wildthing202 is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 10:54 AM
  #418
HugoSimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 169
vCash: 500
Alright I`ve goning back to a 3 conference deal.

Why not quite frankly, it`s hockey, a unique sport.

It`ll still be 6 divisions, just two for each conference.

HugoSimon is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 10:57 AM
  #419
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoSimon View Post
Alright I`ve goning back to a 3 conference deal.

Why not quite frankly, it`s hockey, a unique sport.

It`ll still be 6 divisions, just two for each conference.
And by doing that, you're still able to remove Detroit and Columbus from PTZ and MTZ Conference opponents. Go for it! I've done it before, and I also like it.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 11:34 AM
  #420
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoSimon View Post
Alright I`ve goning back to a 3 conference deal.

Why not quite frankly, it`s hockey, a unique sport.

It`ll still be 6 divisions, just two for each conference.
I couldn't resist, HugoSimon, I had to post:

3 Conference Format revisited:

Western ConferenceCentral ConferenceEastern Conference
PACIFICMIDWESTATLANTIC
VancouverDetroitMontreal
San JoseColumbusBoston
Los AngelesChicagoNY Rangers
AnaheimSt LouisNY Islanders
PhoenixDallasNew Jersey
NORTHWESTSOUTHEASTNORTHEAST
EdmontonWashingtonOttawa
CalgaryCarolinaToronto
ColoradoNashvilleBuffalo
WinnipegTampa BayPittsburgh
MinnesotaFloridaPhiladelphia

(Of course that Eastern Conference alignment will be chewed up and spit out; but you can align them as you wish.)

Regular Season Schedule:
24 games = 6 x 4
20 games = 4 x 5
40 games = 2 x 20
84 game total

Playoff Teams:
6 teams = Top team in each Division makes the Playoffs.
9 teams = The 3 teams with the next best records in each Conference make the Playoffs.
1 team = Final wildcard spot is awarded to the team with the next best record League-wide.
16-team Playoff

Playoff Seeding:
There would be 5 teams representing each Conference, with one Conference having 6 teams.
- For the 1st Round, within each Conference, the Top seeded team would be matched up against the Lowest seeded team within that Conference. The 2nd seed would match against the 2nd lowest...., and the two Conferences with 5 teams entering the Playoffs would have their 3rd place teams play each other.
- For the 2nd Round, two Conferences would still have 3 teams remaining and the other Conference would still have 2 teams remaining. Again, the middle seeded teams in the two Conferences with 3 remaining teams would play each other.
- For the 3rd, Conference Elimination, Round the four remaining teams from the 3 Conferences would play each other (one Conference still having two representatives that would play each other, assuring that Conference a Finals representative), while the result of the other matchup would effectively eliminate one Conference from competition,... thus producing the two Conference Champions.

- For the Final, as usual, the 2 Conference Champions meet.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 12:23 PM
  #421
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I couldn't resist, HugoSimon, I had to post:

3 Conference Format revisited:

Western ConferenceCentral ConferenceEastern Conference
PACIFICMIDWESTATLANTIC
VancouverDetroitMontreal
San JoseColumbusBoston
Los AngelesChicagoNY Rangers
AnaheimSt LouisNY Islanders
PhoenixDallasNew Jersey
NORTHWESTSOUTHEASTNORTHEAST
EdmontonWashingtonOttawa
CalgaryCarolinaToronto
ColoradoNashvilleBuffalo
WinnipegTampa BayPittsburgh
MinnesotaFloridaPhiladelphia

(Of course that Eastern Conference alignment will be chewed up and spit out; but you can align them as you wish.)

Regular Season Schedule:
24 games = 6 x 4
20 games = 4 x 5
40 games = 2 x 20
84 game total

Playoff Teams:
6 teams = Top team in each Division makes the Playoffs.
9 teams = The 3 teams with the next best records in each Conference make the Playoffs.
1 team = Final wildcard spot is awarded to the team with the next best record League-wide.
16-team Playoff

Playoff Seeding:
There would be 5 teams representing each Conference, with one Conference having 6 teams.
- For the 1st Round, within each Conference, the Top seeded team would be matched up against the Lowest seeded team within that Conference. The 2nd seed would match against the 2nd lowest...., and the two Conferences with 5 teams entering the Playoffs would have their 3rd place teams play each other.
- For the 2nd Round, two Conferences would still have 3 teams remaining and the other Conference would still have 2 teams remaining. Again, the middle seeded teams in the two Conferences with 3 remaining teams would play each other.
- For the 3rd, Conference Elimination, Round the four remaining teams from the 3 Conferences would play each other (one Conference still having two representatives that would play each other, assuring that Conference a Finals representative), while the result of the other matchup would effectively eliminate one Conference from competition,... thus producing the two Conference Champions.

- For the Final, as usual, the 2 Conference Champions meet.
Obviously the Eastern Conference would need changing. This is the NHL.

So using last year to give an idea, and higher seeds win:

1st round
NY Rangers/New Jersey
Pittsburgh/Boston

St.Louis/Washington
Nashville/Florida
Detroit/Chicago

Vancouver/Calgary
Phoenix/LA

Philadelphia/San Jose

2nd round
NY Rangers/Philadelphia
St.Louis/Detroit
Vancouver/Phoenix
Pittsburgh/Nashville

3rd round
NY Rangers/Pittsburgh
Vancouver/St.Louis

Final
Vancouver/NY Rangers

Like I said, the league seems to be due for a major change. Sounds crazy enough to work.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 01:04 PM
  #422
HugoSimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 169
vCash: 500
Western ConferenceCentral ConferenceEastern Conference
PACIFICMIDWESTATLANTIC
VancouverDetroitMontreal
San JoseColumbusBoston
Los AngelesChicagoNY Rangers
AnaheimSt LouisNY Islanders
PhoenixDallasNew Jersey
NORTHWESTSOUTHEASTNORTHEAST
EdmontonWashingtonflorida
CalgaryTorontoCarolina
ColoradoNashvilleTampa Bay
WinnipegBuffaloPittsburgh
MinnesotaottawaPhiladelphia

HugoSimon is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 01:53 PM
  #423
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,828
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I couldn't resist, HugoSimon, I had to post:

3 Conference Format revisited:

Western ConferenceCentral ConferenceEastern Conference
PACIFICMIDWESTATLANTIC
VancouverDetroitMontreal
San JoseColumbusBoston
Los AngelesChicagoNY Rangers
AnaheimSt LouisNY Islanders
PhoenixDallasNew Jersey
NORTHWESTSOUTHEASTNORTHEAST
EdmontonWashingtonOttawa
CalgaryCarolinaToronto
ColoradoNashvilleBuffalo
WinnipegTampa BayPittsburgh
MinnesotaFloridaPhiladelphia

.
Switch the Wild into the Midwest, the Stars into the Pacific, and the Canucks into the Northwest and you might be on to something.

Although I could see Philly and MTL lobbying for a swap as well in this scenario.

IceAce is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 01:59 PM
  #424
Jnr78
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 22
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
How would you put the 5 and 6-team division when expansion happens and still retain the 6 divisions options with current east/west conference set-up? If the league decides to expand two more teams to the fold and still retain the two conference setup with 6 divisions and how the schedule would look like with 6 divisions set-up?

Let's say, if Quebec City and Seattle are expansion teams and Phoenix stays in the town or maybe Phoenix is relocated to Seattle and a Second Toronto team and Quebec City are expansion teams. How would you set up with 6 divisions format?

32 teams league when Phoenix stays in town
Western Conference

NorthWest Division Pacific DivisionCentral Division
EdmontonLADallas
CalgarySan JoseChicago
WinnipegAnaheimSt. Louis
ColoradoPhoenixDetroit
MinnesotaVancouverColumbus
 Seattle 


Eastern Conference
Northeast Division Atlantic DivisionSoutheast Division
TorontoNY RangersTampa Bay
OttawaNY IslandersFlorida
MontrealNew JerseyCarolina
Quebec CityPhiladelphiaNashville
BostonPittsburghWashington
Buffalo  

32 Teams league, with Phoenix relocation to Seattle and two expansion teams

Western Conference
NorthWest Division Pacific DivisionCentral Division
EdmontonLADallas
CalgarySan JoseChicago
WinnipegAnaheimSt. Louis
ColoradoSeattleDetroit
MinnesotaVancouverColumbus
  Toronto 2


Eastern Conference
Northeast Division Atlantic DivisionSoutheast Division
TorontoNY RangersTampa Bay
OttawaNY IslandersFlorida
MontrealNew JerseyCarolina
Quebec CityPhiladelphiaNashville
BostonPittsburghWashington
Buffalo  

Schedule Breakdown
 5-team division6-team Division
Divisional games6 games x 4 teams = 24 games5 games x 5 teams = 25 games
Conference games4 games x 11 teams = 44 games4 games x 10 teams = 40 games
Interconference1 game x 16 teams = 16 games1 game x 16 teams = 16 games
Total84 games81 games
For the 6 teams, 81 games but 3 extra games against divisional opponents, some will be 5 games and some will be 6 games against each other.
I really like putting a potential "Toronto 2" (if the league expands to 32) in another conference than the Leafs, be it an 8-team conference or a 16-team conference. It might lower the "value" of a 2nd Toronto team by not having it in the East but it makes the team something different than the Leafs. It would make great match-ups with Chicago and Detroit (the Hawks and Wings would make a couple of more trips to Toronto each season) and, in an 8-team conference, it would give Winnipeg a Canadian conference rival.

Jnr78 is offline  
Old
02-08-2013, 02:01 PM
  #425
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceAce View Post
Switch the Wild into the Midwest, the Stars into the Pacific, and the Canucks into the Northwest and you might be on to something.

Although I could see Philly and MTL lobbying for a swap as well in this scenario.
I expected the Phily / Montreal commentary from someone,... but the other change you're suggesting doesn't make sense. Any new structure should do away with 3-Time Zone Divisions (not maintain them).

MoreOrr 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 03:38 AM.

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.