well, at least the scheduling thing is getting looked at. I really want to be able to see each team versus playing Phoenix for 1/3 of the season.

The new alignment also enables the NHL to create a balanced schedule in which all teams will play each other at least twice every season, once at home and once on the road, giving fans a chance to see every team and superstar in the League. The remaining games will be played within the conferences.

I am totally ok with this.


The top four teams in each Conference qualify for the Stanley Cup Playoffs. The first-place team would play the fourth-place team; the second-place team would play the third-place team. The four respective Conference champions would meet in the third round of the Playoffs, with the survivors playing for the Stanley Cup.

Im confused at round three.

So lets say Sharks 1st, 'Nucks 2nd, Kings 3rd, 'yotes 4th.
Rd 1: Sharks/Yotes, 'Nucks/kings.
Rd 2: Sharks/'nucks
Rd 3: Sharks/conference B, C or D winners?

Who would they play? Does the team with the most regular season wins play the conference winner with the least?

Rev.K: Also, 16 teams in the west and 14 in the east does nothing to address the inequity of making the playoffs in the west. In face, it only makes it worse. Is there a crossover rule?

This may actually pose a problem for the east coast.

Since it's now statistically harder for a team to make the playoffs in the west and statistically easier to make the playoffs in the east, the diversity in the west is greater. The west could dominate as cup champions because the diversity of the equally cup-deserving east coast teams is lower since they are forced to play among a smaller pool.

How many 7th and 8th spots in the east were decided by the last game of the year in the past few years? Now apply this concept to the smaller conferences with less diversity.

Crossovers based on the season W/L record would be the only way to prevent this from happening.

I liked the idea of moving the Preds to the southeast, Dallas to the central, Avs or Nucks to the pacific, Jets to the north west


I could see the reason why they didn't want to put the jets in the north west because that's too many Canadian teams in the same conference. But this move would have been negated if they moved the Nucks to the pacific.

why are the 2 florida teams in the same division as the old NE?

seems like keeping pitt and wash together is only because of the 2 stars in the respective teams

plus ive always hated divisional playoffs.

overall, i say this plan sucks.

I love the realignment from both a Wild fan's perspective as well as an NHL fan.

First, as a Wild fan I'm tired of playing Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver all the time. We were a bad fit for the NW division. in the New Norris we're in a conference that includes geographic rivals, as well as some of our best opponents. Some of the best Wild games I've seen have been against St Louis and I'm happy to see them more times a year.

As far as the imbalance goes it's due to a couple things.
1) I believe expansion/contraction is in the works. More likely expansion, but I could also see the NHL pruning off 2 southern teams... say Phoenix and Florida.
2) I believe PHoenix if not contracted, is moving to Quebec, which would make it a little less slanted against hte west.

Also, for those complaining about potential playoff formats. This hasn't been decided yet. All that's truly set is which team plays in which division.

Also, I believe the Eastern conferences getting the "easier" playoff path has a lot to do with their influence. The former Western conference teams get a lot of benefits by creating better geographic alignment, The former eastern conference teams, in exchange for their compliance get smaller divisions (which I believe is temporary).

This is the best case scenario for realignment IMO.

/Also, first greenlit thread for me :)

Playoff structure will be the first thing to get fixed next time around.

I like how every team has a home and home.

Really I'm Black: why are the 2 florida teams in the same division as the old NE?

seems like keeping pitt and wash together is only because of the 2 stars in the respective teams

plus ive always hated divisional playoffs.

overall, i say this plan sucks.

The reasoning behind the Florida teams is that these teams benefit from better more recognizable competition coming into their reasoning. They're willing to accept increased travel times to sell more tickets. Snowbirds don't give a shiat about geographic rivals of Florida (in fact geographic rivals should be ignored for the south minus Cali). Snowbirds will show up when teams like Buffalo, Boston, Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal show up.

Fark Crosby

Geographic rivals in California don't matter for shiat either.

In terms of draws involving the southwestern US teams (excluding Dallas), it goes as follows

LA @ SJ
ANA @ SJ
SJ @ LA
PHX @ SJ
ANA @ LA
SJ @ ANA
LA @ ANA
PHX @ LA
LA @ PHX
SJ @ PHX
PHX @ ANA
ANA @ PHX

Ducks fans and Coyotes fans don't exist. LA Kings fans barely exist. Sharks fans exist, but they'll concede to Canucks fans if the price is right.

You would think every game between Anaheim and LA would be a sellout, but the Ducks aren't a draw, at the Pond or at Staples. 8 million people and neither SoCal team can regularly sell out their geographical rivalry game.

Fark Crosby: /Also, first greenlit thread for me :)

With a login like that and this being your first green, I say Kudos!

This is the worst possible scenario. The divisional playoffs format suck. They get boring and repetitive. We may be tempted to romanticize the days of the Smythe, Norris, Adams, and Patrick, but keep in mind two things:

1. The chief argument that you can make for divisional playoffs is that it builds hatred and violence. You know, the stuff that Bettman and company have been trying to curtail (not banish, but curtail) since the damned instigator rule was implemented.

2. The most memorable playoff rivalry of the past 20 years happened between non-divisional opponents (Red Wings vs. Avalanche).

But hey, at least they gave the Western Conference the shaft. As a Kings fan, I'm beyond overjoyed about this.

I can only pray that this crap lasts only a couple of years. Only the NHL can take something as simple as "move Winnipeg to the West, and move Nashville/Columbus/Detroit to the East and ruin it so royally like they've done.

WSUCanuck: Ducks fans and Coyotes fans don't exist. LA Kings fans barely exist. Sharks fans exist, but they'll concede to Canucks fans if the price is right.

You would think every game between Anaheim and LA would be a sellout, but the Ducks aren't a draw, at the Pond or at Staples. 8 million people and neither SoCal team can regularly sell out their geographical rivalry game.

This is a fact. I used to go to Sharks @ Ducks games. It got pretty loud with cheers when San Jose scored.

WSUCanuck: Fark Crosby

Geographic rivals in California don't matter for shiat either.

In terms of draws involving the southwestern US teams (excluding Dallas), it goes as follows

LA @ SJ
ANA @ SJ
SJ @ LA
PHX @ SJ
ANA @ LA
SJ @ ANA
LA @ ANA
PHX @ LA
LA @ PHX
SJ @ PHX
PHX @ ANA
ANA @ PHX

Ducks fans and Coyotes fans don't exist. LA Kings fans barely exist. Sharks fans exist, but they'll concede to Canucks fans if the price is right.

You would think every game between Anaheim and LA would be a sellout, but the Ducks aren't a draw, at the Pond or at Staples. 8 million people and neither SoCal team can regularly sell out their geographical rivalry game.

I guess i'm fairly ignorant about the sharks/ducks/kings fan bases. I just assumed since they're actually close they'd have a factor. Perhaps potential playoff rivalries would help stimulate that process. Having these teams going at each other every season in the playoffs could make a huge difference.

The only teams that regularly sell out Honda Center are as follows (in no particular order)

Buffalo
Chicago
Detroit
NY Rangers
Montreal
Toronto
Vancouver.


Sharks fans aren't going to drive 7+ hours for a game in Orange County unless its on a saturday.

LA Fans won't even spend the 45 minutes it takes on a bad night to get to the Pond. So Cal sucks.

As a Blue Jackets fan I am really happy with this. They dont have to play all those games 3 hours behind the home market and they keep the games with Detroit and Chicago. All I really wanted was for them to move to the Eastern Conference so they can play more games in my timezone, and this will do well enough, even though a fair bit of games will be in the Central Timezone. -1 hour is better than -3 hours.

WSUCanuck: The only teams that regularly sell out Honda Center are as follows (in no particular order)

Buffalo
Chicago
Detroit
NY Rangers
Montreal
Toronto
Vancouver.


Sharks fans aren't going to drive 7+ hours for a game in Orange County unless its on a saturday.

LA Fans won't even spend the 45 minutes it takes on a bad night to get to the Pond. So Cal sucks.

well at least this would ensure that all of those teams come into San Jose at least once a year.

As a resident of Wisconsin, we'll give the Bucks to any city that wants them if you let us call up the Admirals.

You can pick whoever you want to have the other team.

It sucks to see the Stars/Sharks rivalry get hurt by all this but it helps the Stars to actually play in the central time zone and I already dislike St Louis and Chicago and hate the Wings. It also helps Nashville is close and we jacked Minnesota's team so I bet they hate Dallas.

TheJoe03: It sucks to see the Stars/Sharks rivalry get hurt by all this but it helps the Stars to actually play in the central time zone and I already dislike St Louis and Chicago and hate the Wings. It also helps Nashville is close and we jacked Minnesota's team so I bet they hate Dallas.

Meh... we hate Norm Green. Dalllas/MN could become a rivalry... but when it comes down with it... you're a southern team... Dallas being in our division was the only "meh" out of my excitement for this new division.

Gosling: As a resident of Wisconsin, we'll give the Bucks to any city that wants them if you let us call up the Admirals.

You can pick whoever you want to have the other team.

It really doesn't make a lot of sense for the NHL to not put teams in places like Wisconsin but have them in Miami and Nashville. By the way, the Bucks should go to Seattle, they should definitely get their Sonics back.

sadfasdf

Burnside decided he didn't like Colorado in his alignment plan so he contracted them and cloned Washington

Not a huge fan of this.

The league had an easy answer, but they also had a promise to move Detroit East. So they came up with this thing. The most glaring issue is of course the imbalanced conferences. The two "eastern" conferences have 7 teams apiece, while the two "western" ones get 8. That isn't right. And the gerrymandering to get the Florida teams to fit is ridiculous, though the distance isn't really an issue as the important thing was getting teams into similar timezones.

Also, as a Colorado fan living abroad, I am screwed. It was bad enough that so many of their games had a 3 AM start time for me. Now almost all of their games will be at least that late, with many starting at 4. Ouch. That's the price you pay for being so isolated, I suppose (myself in Northern Sweden as well as the Avalanche with no other team within about 1000 miles).

Finally, the divisional playoff format is a step backwards. While it will generate fierce playoff rivalries, it will also ensure that you see the same damn teams playing each other year in and year out. Thus the rivalries, but also the repeats. Not to mention, it has the probability of screwing a lot of teams out of the playoffs. We talk about "If so-and-so in the West with 94 points were in the East, they'd be the 6th seed. As it is they're playing golf this spring." Now those instances are doubled. The format allows too many good teams to miss the post-season simply based on which conference they're in. And when some of those conferences have 7 teams and others 8, that gets all the more grating.

I do like the balanced schedule, and even if I'm not big on the idea, I look forward to seeing the format in action. But it all seems like some sort of Frankenstein creation to me. Obviously the owners like it, so bully for them.

As far as the names of the conferences, one would assume the league goes back to Norris, Adams, Patrick and Smythe, but you never know. They could go with Pacific, Central, East and Northeast. Or Lemieux, Gretzky, Howe and Orr. That last one is intriguing, but I think it may be a little too soon to have those names adorning anything official.

this whole thing is terrible.

the re-alignment is fine, but there are a number of problems.

1) Conference names suck if they are left as A B C D
2) If teams play home/away against every other team, that means (for 8 team conference) 22 games * 2 = 44 games. Subtract from 82, that's 38 games in their own division to play against 7 opponents. They'll play some 5 times and some 6 times.
3) Less teams in Conference C & D means easier road to the playoffs. (yes, I know, the East typically makes the playoffs with fewer points than the West).
4) They don't even know how the 3rd round of the playoffs is going to work, and yet they are going ahead with the plan? (obviously best solution is to seed the teams, and do 1v4 and 2v3).
5) How the hell are Florida and Tampa in Conference C?
6) You'll see way more cases of teams that would make the playoffs in another Conference not be good enough to make the playoffs in their own Conference

I hear the NHLPA can still reject this plan. No idea if that's true or not, but for god's sake, I hope they do.

Why doesn't Bettman solve a real problem in that some games are worth 3 points and others are worth 2 (just because it goes into Overtime)... and solve the problem where a format that has no bearing in the playoffs helps teams make the playoffs (I'm talking 4-on-4 Overtime and then Shootout). I don't mind a shoot-out to break a tie, but either make all games 3 points (3 for a Regulation W, 2 for a OTW/SOW, 1 for a OTL/SOL, 0 for a Regulation Loss) or 2 points (W = 2 pts, L = 0 pts). I'd really like to see some standings that show only Regulation results.

/14-8-6 is still a .500 record.
//Most playoff upsets in the last few years haven't really been upsets - once you break it down and look at a team's regulation time record, the upsets aren't surprising at all.

Do they still do the All-Star game? How's that gonna work?

wattimus: Why doesn't Bettman solve a real problem in that some games are worth 3 points and others are worth 2 (just because it goes into Overtime)... and solve the problem where a format that has no bearing in the playoffs helps teams make the playoffs (I'm talking 4-on-4 Overtime and then Shootout). I don't mind a shoot-out to break a tie, but either make all games 3 points (3 for a Regulation W, 2 for a OTW/SOW, 1 for a OTL/SOL, 0 for a Regulation Loss) or 2 points (W = 2 pts, L = 0 pts). I'd really like to see some standings that show only Regulation results.

This is one of my biggest peeves with the league, but I doubt they work to fix it any time soon. It adds a false veneer of parity, as well as drama in the playoff race. I find it insulting, but you figure they like the idea of things at least having the appearance of being tight (like your mom!).

Rev.K: Also, 16 teams in the west and 14 in the east does nothing to address the inequity of making the playoffs in the west. In face, it only makes it worse. Is there a crossover rule?

There is no more "west" and "east."

It's an interesting concept, but the obvious and most practical answer was NSH->SW, MIN->CEN, and WPG->NW.

Personally, I would have preferred they fixed the point system, which seems a more important problem to me, rather than muck around with alignment.

I'd like to see:
3 pts for OT or Reg wins
2 pts for SO wins
1 pt for SO losses
0 pts for OT or Reg losses.

Mr_Ectomy: Maybe the NHL needs two more teams?

Bring back the Whalers?

Krustofsky: Mr_Ectomy: Maybe the NHL needs two more teams?

Bring back the Whalers?

Bring back the Thrashers?

craigzy: [i39.tinypic.com image 640x477]sadfasdf

The blue division there makes sense. Lots of transplants from that part of the world here.