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
01-27-2013, 08:15 PM
  #176
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNNumbers View Post
I am really surprise that it has only come up in this page that the PHX to QUE plays a huge role in the realignment. I thought that most people had that in mind already.

Truthfully, I see merits in it without the Coyotes moving. I really do. The west is a mess anyway, and with Winnipeg in the SE, well - that's not good.

But, anyway, yes. The truth is that there is no way to fit QUE into a 6-division format.
I think it was something that just sort of got lost in all the excitement, outrage, or just pure discussion of a potential 4-Division/Conference alignment.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 08:23 PM
  #177
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucky_Hoyt View Post
With fewer games in conference and each of those in conference being heavily weighted, I would think the competition level would be that much higher during those critical games.

Perhaps this works from a marketing standpoint?
Hell, all games could be critical, if you're playing 46 games outside of your Div/Conf. But most fans want rivalry intense critical. As it stands, fans get up for those Divisional matchups but also for certain Conference matchups when the games get heated and there are two or three more meetings between those two teams in the Season. With two games, and only 2 games against all teams outside the Div/Conf, those out-of-Div/Conf matchups get less chance to become heated, or the 2 games won't allow for "revenge-type" matchs if it does get heated. I'm imagining now, only 2 games between the Bruins and Flyers all Season long.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 08:26 PM
  #178
Grimmas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 85
vCash: 500
I love the idea that people will get sick of seeing the same teams in the playoffs every year. That's just insane. My favourite games to watch each year are Leafs-Habs. Then Leafs-Sens, then Leafs-Red Wings. I never get sick of them.

Divisional playoffs are really the way to go.

Grimmas is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 09:21 PM
  #179
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmas View Post
I love the idea that people will get sick of seeing the same teams in the playoffs every year. That's just insane. My favourite games to watch each year are Leafs-Habs. Then Leafs-Sens, then Leafs-Red Wings. I never get sick of them.

Divisional playoffs are really the way to go.
I understand why you love those matchups, they're so rare to see these days; Leafs-Red Wings almost impossible.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 09:24 PM
  #180
Grimmas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 85
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I understand why you love those matchups, they're so rare to see these days; Leafs-Red Wings almost impossible.
My point is that these rivalries were built in the playoffs. You can only build rivalries in the playoffs. Having divisional playoffs builds rivalries.

Grimmas is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 09:35 PM
  #181
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmas View Post
My point is that these rivalries were built in the playoffs. You can only build rivalries in the playoffs. Having divisional playoffs builds rivalries.
Let's see, Toronto, Montreal, and Detroit have all been in the League together since 1926, so they've had plenty of time to develop rivalries with each other, Playoffs or not.

And the Maple Leafs and Senators, that's a provincial thing; regardless of Playoffs there would be a rivalry. And Montreal - Toronto, that too has rivalry written all over it, Playoffs or not.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 09:58 PM
  #182
Caeldan
Registered User
 
Caeldan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,205
vCash: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmas View Post
I love the idea that people will get sick of seeing the same teams in the playoffs every year. That's just insane. My favourite games to watch each year are Leafs-Habs. Then Leafs-Sens, then Leafs-Red Wings. I never get sick of them.

Divisional playoffs are really the way to go.
When they did 8 divisional games a piece a season... that was one of the most boring regular seasons.

Really though to swap to 4 divisions again, I think they need to expand to 32 teams. Otherwise there's 2 divisions where 4/7 teams start in the playoffs. Which makes the regular season look more meaningless.

Caeldan is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:02 PM
  #183
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caeldan View Post
When they did 8 divisional games a piece a season... that was one of the most boring regular seasons.

Really though to swap to 4 divisions again, I think they need to expand to 32 teams. Otherwise there's 2 divisions where 4/7 teams start in the playoffs. Which makes the regular season look more meaningless.
You see, that's the thing. Scheduling formats change with the prevailing winds. Less than a decade ago fans were calling for more Divisional games, less games againsts teams in the other Conference. Then fans quickly got tired of so many Divisional matchups and called for a reduction. Now the pendulum has swung the other direction and fans are calling for a Home-and-home against every team in the League. Whatever is ultimately decided, fans will tire of it soon and want there to be a change again.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:03 PM
  #184
Shockmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmas View Post
My point is that these rivalries were built in the playoffs. You can only build rivalries in the playoffs. Having divisional playoffs builds rivalries.
This is something the pro-divisional playoff people say all the time. "You can only build rivalries in the playoffs!"

So answer this: if you're playing the same teams over and over again, how are you building new rivalries?

You aren't. You're just playing the same teams you already have rivalries with over and over again. The current format actually allows you to build rivalries with teams that you don't have much of a history with.

Shockmaster is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:22 PM
  #185
Jets4Life
Registered User
 
Jets4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 548
vCash: 500
If I were the NHL, I would wait until the last possible minute to do realignment, before the start of the 2013-14 season. I expect the Coyotes to move soon, hopefully to Quebec City. Then Winnipeg could move to the West, and the Conferences will balance out.

Jets4Life is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:27 PM
  #186
Jets4Life
Registered User
 
Jets4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
This is something the pro-divisional playoff people say all the time. "You can only build rivalries in the playoffs!"

So answer this: if you're playing the same teams over and over again, how are you building new rivalries?

You aren't. You're just playing the same teams you already have rivalries with over and over again. The current format actually allows you to build rivalries with teams that you don't have much of a history with.

I agree.

There may be additional problems with divisional playoffs, like one division being much weaker than the other division. In the 80's, the Smythe Division was always stronger than the Norris. The proved to be a big disadvantage for teams like Winnipeg and Calgary, who could have won their division most years, but had to play the mighty Edmonton Oilers every single year to make it to the Conference Finals.

Jets4Life is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:31 PM
  #187
Grimmas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 85
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
This is something the pro-divisional playoff people say all the time. "You can only build rivalries in the playoffs!"

So answer this: if you're playing the same teams over and over again, how are you building new rivalries?

You aren't. You're just playing the same teams you already have rivalries with over and over again. The current format actually allows you to build rivalries with teams that you don't have much of a history with.
Except when you just play the teams as ranked in the playoffs, the chances you meet them again in the playoffs is VERY slim. You can't develop new rivalries if teams don't face each other in the playoffs.

Grimmas is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:33 PM
  #188
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmas View Post
Except when you just play the teams as ranked in the playoffs, the chances you meet them again in the playoffs is VERY slim. You can't develop new rivalries if teams don't face each other in the playoffs.
It might be a rude awakening to the new reality of an 8-team Division, in the League of parity. It won't be like the 80s.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:37 PM
  #189
Shockmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmas View Post
Except when you just play the teams as ranked in the playoffs, the chances you meet them again in the playoffs is VERY slim. You can't develop new rivalries if teams don't face each other in the playoffs.
That's still a better chance of developing a new rivalry than just playing the same teams over and over again.

Shockmaster is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:40 PM
  #190
kvladimir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 40
vCash: 500
Here's my total fantasy proposal:

Exactly the same alignment as proposed by the league last year (4-conference, but call them divisions), except take CBJ to the East, slot them and CAR in the NE, and move the FLA teams to the ATL. Either that, or the reverse, but the FLA teams don't make much sense in the NE, plus they used to be in the ATL. CAR would be fine with that, I think, getting BOS and BUF as division rivals. Not getting CBJ-PIT in a division sucks, but it won't work unless the FLA teams go to the NE, and it's still better for CBJ that being in the west (I think?)

For the playoffs, use the inter-division format, but introduce a crossover rule that allows any 5th-or-lower team who finishes with a better record than one who is 4th-or-better in another division to take that team's spot. Each of the former (>=5th) teams, in order of record, takes the spot of the team with the next best record outside the division (>=4th), until all teams get their spot.

If this is done, 1)Top 16 teams make the playoffs every year, no matter what, eliminating complaints about stronger/weaker divisions and more/less teams in each division, 2)Creates a majority of playoff series that are inter-divisional, helping develop rivalries, but there is much less stagnation, as crossovers can occur. Any team can play any other team, in any round, it just isn't as common, and 3)Doing it this way makes the inter-conference (division!) games meaningful, as there is direct competition between teams outside their divisions, even though there is a rough divisional bracket going on.

Yes, this means that a totally random matchup like SJ-NYR could occur in the first round, but 1)I suggest any series with 2 or more time zone differences do the 2-3-2 format to potentially reduce trips, and 2)The alternative for any team slotting into an unfavourable division is missing the playoffs, so I don't think they would mind too much.

After the Division Semi-Finals, the two winning teams in each division playoff play a Division Final. Each of the 4 Division Final winners get re-seeded based on record, and play 1vs4 and 2vs3, then winners play in the SCF. Yes, it is possible that a team from a different division could win that division's final, but they would have to get the crossover AND presumably pull off 2 upsets. If it happens, it happens.

Obviously a fantasy proposal with no hope of coming true. As I am a Western fan, my proposal is all about evening out the playing field between the two conferences (ie the East has to do the same tough things the West does). East teams would never vote this format in, so it's a moot point, but I like the fantasy...

kvladimir is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:45 PM
  #191
Shockmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvladimir View Post
Here's my total fantasy proposal:

Exactly the same alignment as proposed by the league last year (4-conference, but call them divisions), except take CBJ to the East, slot them and CAR in the NE, and move the FLA teams to the ATL. Either that, or the reverse, but the FLA teams don't make much sense in the NE, plus they used to be in the ATL. CAR would be fine with that, I think, getting BOS and BUF as division rivals. Not getting CBJ-PIT in a division sucks, but it won't work unless the FLA teams go to the NE, and it's still better for CBJ that being in the west (I think?)

For the playoffs, use the inter-division format, but introduce a crossover rule that allows any 5th-or-lower team who finishes with a better record than one who is 4th-or-better in another division to take that team's spot. Each of the former (>=5th) teams, in order of record, takes the spot of the team with the next best record outside the division (>=4th), until all teams get their spot.

If this is done, 1)Top 16 teams make the playoffs every year, no matter what, eliminating complaints about stronger/weaker divisions and more/less teams in each division, 2)Creates a majority of playoff series that are inter-divisional, helping develop rivalries, but there is much less stagnation, as crossovers can occur. Any team can play any other team, in any round, it just isn't as common, and 3)Doing it this way makes the inter-conference (division!) games meaningful, as there is direct competition between teams outside their divisions, even though there is a rough divisional bracket going on.

Yes, this means that a totally random matchup like SJ-NYR could occur in the first round, but 1)I suggest any series with 2 or more time zone differences do the 2-3-2 format to potentially reduce trips, and 2)The alternative for any team slotting into an unfavourable division is missing the playoffs, so I don't think they would mind too much.

After the Division Semi-Finals, the two winning teams in each division playoff play a Division Final. Each of the 4 Division Final winners get re-seeded based on record, and play 1vs4 and 2vs3, then winners play in the SCF. Yes, it is possible that a team from a different division could win that division's final, but they would have to get the crossover AND presumably pull off 2 upsets. If it happens, it happens.

Obviously a fantasy proposal with no hope of coming true. As I am a Western fan, my proposal is all about evening out the playing field between the two conferences (ie the East has to do the same tough things the West does). East teams would never vote this format in, so it's a moot point, but I like the fantasy...
If they go with the four division idea, then I think the playoff format should just be seeds 1 and 2 as the division winners, then seeds 3-8 go by whoever has the most points. Then you don't have to worry about the 5th placed team in one division missing out when they are better than the 3rd placed team in another division.

That gives you the best chance to create new rivalries as you'll already be playing your division rivals a ton in the regular season.

Shockmaster is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 10:59 PM
  #192
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,458
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvladimir View Post
Here's my total fantasy proposal:

Exactly the same alignment as proposed by the league last year (4-conference, but call them divisions), except take CBJ to the East, slot them and CAR in the NE, and move the FLA teams to the ATL. Either that, or the reverse, but the FLA teams don't make much sense in the NE, plus they used to be in the ATL. CAR would be fine with that, I think, getting BOS and BUF as division rivals. Not getting CBJ-PIT in a division sucks, but it won't work unless the FLA teams go to the NE, and it's still better for CBJ that being in the west (I think?)

For the playoffs, use the inter-division format, but introduce a crossover rule that allows any 5th-or-lower team who finishes with a better record than one who is 4th-or-better in another division to take that team's spot. Each of the former (>=5th) teams, in order of record, takes the spot of the team with the next best record outside the division (>=4th), until all teams get their spot.

If this is done, 1)Top 16 teams make the playoffs every year, no matter what, eliminating complaints about stronger/weaker divisions and more/less teams in each division, 2)Creates a majority of playoff series that are inter-divisional, helping develop rivalries, but there is much less stagnation, as crossovers can occur. Any team can play any other team, in any round, it just isn't as common, and 3)Doing it this way makes the inter-conference (division!) games meaningful, as there is direct competition between teams outside their divisions, even though there is a rough divisional bracket going on.

Yes, this means that a totally random matchup like SJ-NYR could occur in the first round, but 1)I suggest any series with 2 or more time zone differences do the 2-3-2 format to potentially reduce trips, and 2)The alternative for any team slotting into an unfavourable division is missing the playoffs, so I don't think they would mind too much.

After the Division Semi-Finals, the two winning teams in each division playoff play a Division Final. Each of the 4 Division Final winners get re-seeded based on record, and play 1vs4 and 2vs3, then winners play in the SCF. Yes, it is possible that a team from a different division could win that division's final, but they would have to get the crossover AND presumably pull off 2 upsets. If it happens, it happens.

Obviously a fantasy proposal with no hope of coming true. As I am a Western fan, my proposal is all about evening out the playing field between the two conferences (ie the East has to do the same tough things the West does). East teams would never vote this format in, so it's a moot point, but I like the fantasy...
what other sports league uses a cross-over to an opposite division to the one you're assigned to? it's already happened (BINGHAMTON, 2011 Calder Cup Champion, assigned to the East Division, won the Atlantic Division by cross-over).

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 11:15 PM
  #193
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,627
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
You see, that's the thing, Retail1LO, Vancouver is a much larger and strong market in the NHL, and I'm sure they it could withstand a time in the Pacific Division. Whereas, with that proposed 4-Division alignment, Winnipeg would have to be the lone Canadian team in that one Division. I'd rather have Vancouver being a lone Canadian team (or even Montreal, until Quebec City enters) than to have Winnipeg be the lone Canadian team.
Winnipeg sells out at home, and is guaranteed to do so for the next few years. They can't increase their gate for home games. What they have to look at is revenue from the road games. Playing in Vancouver would be approximately a 9:30 PM start for the game on TV in Winnipeg. Late games == less viewers, which means less money for the TV contract when it comes up for renewal. The "December aligment" is ideal for Winnipeg... their division opponents would be 5 Central Time teams and 2 Eastern Time teams.

knorthern knight is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:15 AM
  #194
coolboarder
Registered User
 
coolboarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
If they go with the four division idea, then I think the playoff format should just be seeds 1 and 2 as the division winners, then seeds 3-8 go by whoever has the most points. Then you don't have to worry about the 5th placed team in one division missing out when they are better than the 3rd placed team in another division.

That gives you the best chance to create new rivalries as you'll already be playing your division rivals a ton in the regular season.
I agree that the odd of having 4 conference making the playoffs with 50% and 57% is unfair. So I have been thinking of ways create fairness for all teams' chance for the cup with better year than other teams. Since the idea is a bit complication, please bear it with me.

So here is my thought and a new idea for the playoff format, this is what I call it, a Flex-Playoff formats that can go in effect. Keep in mind, if all divisions are equal with balanced schedule and some division is not balanced for instance, 8-8-7-7. There are 5 formats that can be in effect at any time in any year, when season ends, we can figure where this can go and it will create for exciting playoffs goes along with exciting regular season. It is hard to grasp my concept but if you find my post get muckier, I could draw an example of what it would look like in future post if anyone request for it.

First qualification:

-Top 3 in each conference makes the playoffs regardless of records. the 4th place teams may not make the playoffs due to sub-par records.

To determine the criteria of the qualification to the playoffs should be:

Second qualification for 4th place team.

-If the 4th place team has better overall points than other conference's 5th place, then their playoff spot is safe. That team will remains in the conference playoffs format and will play against top seed in the conference for the first round. The format will be division/conference playoff format, 1v4, 2v3 for all 4 conferences/divisions.

-If 4th place has lower points than other conference 5th place team, but 4th place team has tied or better non-conference record than the 5th place team, then its own conference 4th place team retains their playoff spot. Format: divisional/conference playoff format

-If 4th place team has lower points than other conference 5th place team and 4th place team has worst non-conference record than the 5th place team, then its own conference 4th place team will miss the playoffs. There are 4 formats below if there are 5-7 place teams that are better than other 3 conferences' 4th place in term of total overall points and better non-conference record.

The reasoning I used non-conference record a part of criteria is that the conference could be the strongest than the other conference so it is not fair for the 5th place to make the playoff based on their vultures in their own weakest conference. The 4th place team will play the top seed in its own conference playoffs if it has better non-conference record than the other conference 5th place.

That will leaves us, Conference A with 3 teams while Conference B with 5 teams. This new wrinkles is that this will becomes one half of the bracket, Conference A will join with Conference B for the rest of the playoffs and shall be reseed from 1st to 8th seed. While the other conference C and D will play its own conference playoffs with 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 and the conference C winner and Conference winner D will meet in the Stanley Cup semi-finals.

-Now, if two conferences 4th place team has lower overall points and has worst non-conference records than two other conferences 5th place team then both 5th place team will make the playoffs. The conference A and conference B have 3 teams while conference C and conference D have 5 teams. The conference A shall be paired with either conference C or D and the conference B shall be paired with either conference C or D for the duration of the playoffs and shall be reseeded 1st to 8th with top conference team guaranteed top 2 and can pick their opponent.

-If two conferences 4th place team has lower overall points and has worst non-conference records than 6th place team in the conference then the 5th place and 6th place will take their both conference 4th place.

Conference A has 3 teams, Conference B has 3 teams, and Conference C has 6 teams, and Conference D has 4 teams.

Conference A, B, and C shall be paired together and reseeded 1-12 while Conference D will play its own conference playoffs 1-4.
Top seed in conference A, B, and C shall be seeded 1-3 and can pick its first round opponents. For round two, reseed 1-6 the winner of first round series and is highest seeded team can pick their opponent from teams who is seeded 4-6.
Conference D will join remainder of the three series winner from round 2 and match-up shall be from the regular season points.

- Finally,If three conferences' 4th place team has lower overall points and has worst non-conference records than 7th place team in the conference with better non-conference record then the 5th, 6th, and 7th place team shall take other three conferences' 4th place team.

Conference A has 7 teams, Conference B, Conference C, and Conference D have 3 teams. Total teams, 16 teams. The playoffs shall be 1-16 with top seed from each 4 conference shall be 1-4 for the reminder of the playoffs and only top 4 teams can pick their opponents and reminders shall be paired together according to the regular season records. the Round 2, the top three teams team can
pick their opponent while 4th place will face that team. Round 3, the total points from regular season will apply the match-up.

This 1-16 might be rarest if there is strongest conference that has more points earned than other 4th place conference teams. It could happen, once in a 100-year thing.

coolboarder is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 09:27 AM
  #195
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,397
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I think you missed his point, KingsFan,.... the Coyotes relocated to Quebec City within a 6-Division alignment...
Which is why I think the Coyotes have been propped up for so long. The league knew it was going to have an issue in Atlanta because of the ownership. So there was going to be a team that was going to have nowhere to play, and another with no owner, with only one city that was ready for a team. At least with the Coyotes, they have a building to play in. We see the can of worms that opened up with with the Thrashers moving to Winnipeg. I think everyone sort of wants to see the aftermath of trying to fit Quebec in with 6 divisions though.

I don't think the league really works with the 6 divisions they've had since 98. It's a nice number and size of divisions in theory(so are 4 conferences...what isn't good in theory?), but one of the divisions in the East barely registers, and the entire Western Conference is a bit of a train wreck. It's great for the NE and Atlantic divisions though(travel, start times, rivals), and since they have the big ticket teams, everything revolves around them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
It might be a rude awakening to the new reality of an 8-team Division, in the League of parity. It won't be like the 80s.
Exactly. It wouldn't be the same as the 80's. There would be more teams in each group, so you might not see the same teams every year in the playoffs. There are 9 new teams since the 80's, with a couple teams having relocated, and not having participated in those playoffs which went a long way toward cementing so many of the rivalries that exist today.

Although Toronto did finally escape, and left their Norris division rivals in the dust. Oddly enough, I can think of a scenario where the NHL has had so much expansion in order to get Toronto into the East. Adding a provincial rival in Ottawa, and having Quebec and Hartford leave the northeast area, didn't hurt either.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 11:14 AM
  #196
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
If they go with the four division idea, then I think the playoff format should just be seeds 1 and 2 as the division winners, then seeds 3-8 go by whoever has the most points. Then you don't have to worry about the 5th placed team in one division missing out when they are better than the 3rd placed team in another division.
Exactly, totally agree. Award Playoff spots to the teams with the best records, only 1st and 2nd place teams in the Division are guaranteed Playoff spots.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 11:15 AM
  #197
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
what other sports league uses a cross-over to an opposite division to the one you're assigned to? it's already happened (BINGHAMTON, 2011 Calder Cup Champion, assigned to the East Division, won the Atlantic Division by cross-over).
Doesn't matter who wins the Division, it's who wins the Conference that matters. Division winners are only for the Regular Season.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 11:16 AM
  #198
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
Winnipeg sells out at home, and is guaranteed to do so for the next few years. They can't increase their gate for home games. What they have to look at is revenue from the road games. Playing in Vancouver would be approximately a 9:30 PM start for the game on TV in Winnipeg. Late games == less viewers, which means less money for the TV contract when it comes up for renewal. The "December aligment" is ideal for Winnipeg... their division opponents would be 5 Central Time teams and 2 Eastern Time teams.
Exactly, that's why Vancouver should be in the Pacific.


Would be nice if I had the patience to wait and put all these above 3 short posts into one.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 11:43 AM
  #199
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
Which is why I think the Coyotes have been propped up for so long. The league knew it was going to have an issue in Atlanta because of the ownership. So there was going to be a team that was going to have nowhere to play, and another with no owner, with only one city that was ready for a team. At least with the Coyotes, they have a building to play in. We see the can of worms that opened up with with the Thrashers moving to Winnipeg. I think everyone sort of wants to see the aftermath of trying to fit Quebec in with 6 divisions though.
Without taking this discussion completely off track, the NHL worked with the City of Glendale to keep the team in the Phoenix area simply because the City built an arena for an NHL team. If the NHL or any of its franchises ever came hat in hand to other cities asking for an arena in order to make the economics work, you can bet the City of Glendale would be the model in which citizen protesters would point at for the reason why not to build an arena.

The NHL has an image to protect, so that owners can receive perks from local communities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
I don't think the league really works with the 6 divisions they've had since 98. It's a nice number and size of divisions in theory(so are 4 conferences...what isn't good in theory?), but one of the divisions in the East barely registers, and the entire Western Conference is a bit of a train wreck. It's great for the NE and Atlantic divisions though(travel, start times, rivals), and since they have the big ticket teams, everything revolves around them.
Precisely. There are many teams in the West dissatisifed with the current structure, which is why a simple swap of one franchise in order to fix the Winnipeg "problem" will not happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
Exactly. It wouldn't be the same as the 80's. There would be more teams in each group, so you might not see the same teams every year in the playoffs. There are 9 new teams since the 80's, with a couple teams having relocated, and not having participated in those playoffs which went a long way toward cementing so many of the rivalries that exist today.
Yes, I agree. However, the one issue I have is not as much the playoff matchups, but the race to qualify during the last two weeks of the season. That will pretty much be gone during the last two weeks of the season with strict conference-based top-four qualification.

I realize one reason that top-four, four-conference qualification may have been proposed was for television. It guarantees two first-round and one second-round playoff series to be played in Mountain or Pacific Time Zones. I'm just not sure if that is an answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
Although Toronto did finally escape, and left their Norris division rivals in the dust. Oddly enough, I can think of a scenario where the NHL has had so much expansion in order to get Toronto into the East. Adding a provincial rival in Ottawa, and having Quebec and Hartford leave the northeast area, didn't hurt either.
Correct. And one has to remember how the Leafs ended up in the Eastern Conference back in 1998:

With the four franchise expansion in 1997 came the need to realign. The proposed realignment looked almost exactly as it currently is, except that Columbus was to be in the Northeast and Toronto in the Central, until either the 2003-04 season or until Columbus first made the playoffs. At that point, the two franchises would swap places.

Somehow, Ken Dryden (President of MLSE at the time) managed to convince the Board of Governors when it came time to approval a new alignment that Toronto should be switched to the Northeast immediately upon implementation of the six-division system, leaving Columbus in the Central.

So there were definitely a few franchises, specifically Columbus and probably Detroit, that may have been "promised" spots in the Eastern Conference if the possibility arose. There were defintely franchises that weren't happy with the six-division alignment in 1997.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 11:57 AM
  #200
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
So there were definitely a few franchises, specifically Columbus and probably Detroit, that may have been "promised" spots in the Eastern Conference if the possibility arose. There were defintely franchises that weren't happy with the six-division alignment in 1997.
Of course there are teams that weren't happy with that alignment then nor now; that has to be logical. Does anyone know what the vote was at that time to approve the 6-Division alignment?

Now it makes me wonder how the NFL, NBA, and MLB got their 8 and 6 Division alignments approved, and if all those teams are happy with their alignment. Compromise would seem to be a key element, I'd expect. The NHL didn't really make fair compromises for some of its teams when it formed the 6 Divisions, that's certainly part of the issue.

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 06:46 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.