If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sports Illustrated)   The NHL actually comes up with a sensible realignment plan   (nhl.si.com) divider line 159
    More: Unlikely, NHL, hot stove, Hockey Night in Canada, Jimmy Howard, Atlanta Thrashers, eastern time zone, playoff format, Atlantic Division  
•       •       •

4427 clicks; posted to Sports » on 25 Feb 2013 at 12:35 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



159 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-24 10:24:17 PM  
That does make sense. I have never supported moving Bruins into the same division with the Rangers, Islanders, and Devils as some plans suggested, because the truth is Hockey is the one sport where New York and Boston really don't have a rivalry.
 
2013-02-24 11:03:54 PM  
What a surprise, the loser is pretty clearly Nashville.  Our rivals are the Red Wings.  Any Predators fan will tell you our first and biggest rivals are the Red Wings.  It's something they cultivated from the start, and several playoff series solidified.  But hey, fark over Tennessee, the fanbase is central to the state, so the NHL can pretend we don't exist.
 
2013-02-25 12:00:40 AM  
Horrible article. Show us the alignment in Conference Standings fashion.

I didn't want to waste a lot of time reading the paragraphs and trying to figure out who was moving where.
 
2013-02-25 12:27:54 AM  

jaylectricity: Horrible article. Show us the alignment in Conference Standings fashion.

I didn't want to waste a lot of time reading the paragraphs and trying to figure out who was moving where.


Or a farking map. Map of US/Canada. One color for current alignment, another color for new alignment. Duh. Do I have to think of everything?

/i liek maps
 
2013-02-25 12:34:19 AM  
As a Wings fan, I like it.
 
2013-02-25 12:42:58 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: As a Wings fan, I like it.


I second that.
 
2013-02-25 12:47:53 AM  
As a wings fan, I like it.  The faux rivalry with Nashville never really interested me.
 
2013-02-25 12:53:16 AM  
As a Pens fan, I say no.  I'm tired of being sold this idea that the Caps are our rivals.  Quite frankly, I couldn't give a shiat about that team and I don't want to hear more talk about them.  Throw them to the other Eastern group, send Detroit back west and we'll take the Preds.
 
2013-02-25 12:53:34 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: As a Wings fan, I like it.


Fourthed. I'll be sad to be losing the rivalry with Chicago, just like I was when we lost the games with Toronto, but the chance to play against Montreal, Toronto and Boston on a regular basis is just too cool for words. I feel for Nashville (as much as you can feel for an expansion team), but this is a good move.
 
2013-02-25 12:55:39 AM  
So ultimately there are more teams we see six times and fewer teams we see more than twice.

I vastly prefer it how it is now but I guess they want to reduce travel.
 
2013-02-25 12:56:22 AM  

Di Atribe: jaylectricity: Horrible article. Show us the alignment in Conference Standings fashion.

I didn't want to waste a lot of time reading the paragraphs and trying to figure out who was moving where.

Or a farking map. Map of US/Canada. One color for current alignment, another color for new alignment. Duh. Do I have to think of everything?

/i liek maps


Conference 1: Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Florida, Montreal, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Toronto (Call this an Eastern Conference?)

Conference 2: Carolina, Columbus, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington (Mid-Atlantic Conference?)

Conference 3: Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnipeg (Central Conf.?)

Conference 4: Anaheim, Calgary, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Vancouver (Western Conf.?)

The big change I'd make is put Colorado in #4 because that makes geographic sense and time zone sense (Denver is Mountain time, like Alberta and Phoenix during the winter). Downside is you'd probably have to put Detroit back into Conference #3, but that would maintain the Wings-Hawks rivalry.

Also, if they go with this proposal; that makes it kind of hard to move a team/expand into places like Quebec or southern Ontario. But it does leave open expansion into Seattle or Kansas City or Houston.
 
2013-02-25 01:00:10 AM  
As a 'hawks Fan, how the hell are we losing Detroit?
 
2013-02-25 01:07:09 AM  
Any re-alignment that puts the Blue Jackets in the east I will support. All that travel is killer, plus they actually a winning record against East teams

The NHLPA will still raise a fit about 8/16 teams in the playoffs from the east and 8/14 in the west. I say do away with conferences all together and seed 1-16 based on total points.
 
2013-02-25 01:21:53 AM  
This plan is just as stupid as before. Hey NHL: 30 isn't divisible by 4. Knock it off with the 4 unbalanced divisions crap. Because your inevitable solution to that morass will be "hey! two more teams! BRILLIANT!"

Piss on divisional playoffs too, that also creates unfair imbalances

Just switch Winnipeg and Nashville and keep everything else the damn same.
 
2013-02-25 01:37:52 AM  
it is usually substantially tougher to make the playoffs in the western conference, so i don't have a problem with the western conference having fewer teams
 
2013-02-25 01:46:35 AM  
one star for a team in portland or seattle and one more team in canada.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-25 02:01:07 AM  
Only thing I'd like to see differently is one of the teams from Florida in with the Pens.  We typically have good luck against them.  However, I'm sure the smart folks in charge of the NHL will deal with a realignment plan in a smart way.
 
2013-02-25 02:09:54 AM  

GAT_00: What a surprise, the loser is pretty clearly Nashville.  Our rivals are the Red Wings.  Any Predators fan will tell you our first and biggest rivals are the Red Wings.  It's something they cultivated from the start, and several playoff series solidified.  But hey, fark over Tennessee, the fanbase is central to the state, so the NHL can pretend we don't exist.


I live in Tennessee and as far as I'm concerned, the Preds don't exist. They pretty much copied the Wings style of play. If ya can't beat 'em, clone 'em.

/Go Wings
 
2013-02-25 02:21:57 AM  

animesucks: one star for a team in portland or seattle and one more team in canada.

[i.imgur.com image 761x568]


no way n hell toronto doesnt join a canadian team loaded division.

i guess the NHL is not expecting the yotes to move to quebec.  youd think theyd anticipate any relocations.

then again, everyone predicts a second ontario team and a quebec team, so this plan goes nowhere.

cripes, and is anyone else hating the return of divisional playoffs?  having to see the same gd team every year?  thats boring as fark.
 
2013-02-25 03:05:55 AM  
So... you're happy with a 16/14 conference split? Because MLB just went to a lot of effort to get rid of theirs.
 
2013-02-25 03:48:01 AM  

Gosling: So... you're happy with a 16/14 conference split? Because MLB just went to a lot of effort to get rid of theirs.


It's an 8-8-7-7 conference split.  A New York team would wind up playing a Florida team the exact same number of times as it would an L.A. team.
 
2013-02-25 04:22:57 AM  

animesucks: one star for a team in portland or seattle and one more team in canada.


What happened to Phoenix? ...they move to Portland?

You have 31 teams there including the stars.
 
2013-02-25 04:27:55 AM  
This is what I had awhile ago:

www.ishkur.com

You cannot realign to four divisions until you get two more expansion franchises (or lose two). Otherwise it's the Patrick Division all over again.

Either get Seattle and Quebec City, or lose Phoenix and Florida.

But either way, some teams are always going to be pissed that they aren't in the east. Nashville, Columbus and Detroit will have to draw straws.
 
2013-02-25 04:35:10 AM  

Ishkur: This is what I had awhile ago:

[www.ishkur.com image 761x568]

You cannot realign to four divisions until you get two more expansion franchises (or lose two). Otherwise it's the Patrick Division all over again.

Either get Seattle and Quebec City, or lose Phoenix and Florida.

But either way, some teams are always going to be pissed that they aren't in the east. Nashville, Columbus and Detroit will have to draw straws.


your map is logical
therefore it could never happen

esp since six divisons would make their heads explode
yes I am sure that a playoff schedule, with wildards could trivially be created
 
2013-02-25 04:40:30 AM  
desertgeek:
Conference 1: 8 7 teams : Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Florida, Montreal, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Toronto (Call this an Eastern Conference?)

Conference 2: 8 teams: Carolina, Columbus, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington (Mid-Atlantic Conference?)

Conference 3: 7 teams:  Detroit,
 Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnipeg (Central Conf.?)

Conference 4: 8 teams:  Colorado,Anaheim, Calgary, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Vancouver (Western Conf.?)


so yah ....
this one makes infinitely more sense.
plus you now have two 15 team halves, which could be used to create a simpler playoff schedule

LOL
idiots

I would love to know what kind of backroom games went into the other arrangement.
 
2013-02-25 04:48:01 AM  
It's marginally better than the previous version, mostly for my preference that Colorado not be stuck with the Pacific coast teams as that means even later start times than what they've got now. But you're still dealing with the fact that some conferences have 7 teams and others have 8. At least in the earlier plan it seemed built on the assumption of expansion in the east. Is that assumption now in the west? It's all but a given that Quebec City will get a team. Are they going to realign again in 2-3 years?

I guess I just don't see the need for a massive overhaul. I know Detroit has been moaning about being in the west, and teams have travel complaints, but when you're way out west you're going to be flying a lot more than an Atlantic team. I say flip Nashville and Winnipeg for now, and save any big changes for when expansion actually happens.
 
2013-02-25 05:19:48 AM  
It kind of sucks that Dallas will lost their west coast rivals, but Chicago, Nashville, and St Louis will probably be great rivalries.
 
2013-02-25 05:51:08 AM  
I still think they should scrap the Divisions and go to East-West conferences with home at home games for everyone. Playoffs go East-West pairings eliminating the travel bias. Ridiculous that fans get to see teams from the other conference once a year, maybe.
 
2013-02-25 05:55:00 AM  
i29.photobucket.com

This is what the proposed map is, for reference. I dig it. I like the point made in the article about having Toronto, Boston, Montreal and Detroit be "draws" for the Florida teams. You could extend that argument to the New York teams, I suppose. But most alignment suggestions wouldn't put them together anyway. A four-team division with Florida, Tampa, Carolina and Nashville makes sense at some point. But you need expansion for that. Seattle/Portland and Hamilton/Quebec City are both good bets. Which could eventually lead to this:

i29.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-25 06:12:56 AM  
I don't have a lot of faith in the league or Bettman to do this correctly. I believe that as soon as Detroit gets moved to the east they will get moved back fairly quickly. I also think Detroit needs to know asap so we can make smart trades coming up as we are too small and not physical enough to play in the east.
 
2013-02-25 06:24:29 AM  
As a sabres and redwings fan this excites me being able to see Detroit more often

As a sabres fan this makes me cry because we are bad enough without a powerhouse team like Detroit
 
2013-02-25 06:29:26 AM  

frozenhotchocolate: Popcorn Johnny: As a Wings fan, I like it.

I second that.


I love it.  I miss the Leafs...and not because they suck now...it was always a bitter rivalry.  I'd love to watch the Wings play the Leafs 6-8 times a year again.  Ever since our heated rivalry with the Avalanche cooled off we really don't have anyone to hate.
 
2013-02-25 07:06:13 AM  
I think the realignment makes a lot of sense.  I'd get to go see my Avs play in Nashville and then there's an open slot in that conference for another expansion team here in Atlanta.

/It's still real to me, damn it!
 
2013-02-25 07:11:33 AM  

animesucks: one star for a team in portland or seattle and one more team in canada. Maine

[i.imgur.com image 761x568]

 
2013-02-25 07:52:56 AM  
As a Wings fan, I will enjoy our Triple Overtime playoff games better when I don't have to stay up until 3am to watch them on a work night - at least until the Cup Finals, at which point I don't mind staying up late.

There is something to be said for not having to constantly play evening games 3 time zones off. It's easier to head east than it is heading west for a team's stamina. Also, now that the Avs are no longer a credible rivalry, we will have far fewer games at altitude.

I can see the Red Wings thriving in the East.
 
2013-02-25 08:02:29 AM  
FTFA:

And while it would mean extra travel for Florida and Tampa Bay, the plan would bring marquee opponents to these attendance trouble spots on a regular basis.

The Lightning are 7th in attendance. This is an attendance trouble spot?  Or is SI thinking the team is still owned by the "Saw" movie franchise producer?  Move Nashville to the SE division and Winnipeg to the Central.
 
2013-02-25 08:23:54 AM  
Back when the conferences and divisions were named after people, not regions, it did not matter that the league flunked geography.
 
2013-02-25 08:32:52 AM  
I don't want to hear Columbus fans (do they have any?) or Nashville fans biatching about wanting to move East. As a Wings fan, I have been dealing with this western conference nonsense a heck of a lot longer than you have.

Oh Chicago fans, cry more about losing your rivalry with Detroit. Or as it really is, your benchmark for success.

Oh teams out west who have crappy teams who can't pull in solid attendance numbers, cry about how Detroit not coming out more will lead to poor attendance. Hey, get a better team that will make people come to games.

I am sick to death of 10 or 10:30 pm start times for half of the games of my home team. It doesn't make any damn sense. Move Detroit to where a large majority of their games are played in the Eastern Time Zone, as that is the time zone Detroit is actually in.

You whiners out west will still get Detroit coming to your arena once a season, so stop complaining.
 
2013-02-25 08:33:03 AM  
Problem solved:

i48.tinypic.com
 
2013-02-25 08:34:29 AM  
It's certainly the best that I've seen proposed on a realistic level (from the NHL rather than just us on a board kicking things around).  I really like that the two Florida teams are going to be in the Northern/Canadian conference.  Much of their local fan base is retirees who moved down from up there.  More important than that though is that it breaks up the generally really weak SE division.

That said, namatad's moving of Detroit & Colorado around makes even more sense & I'd rather see that be the way things end up.
 
2013-02-25 08:34:49 AM  
I'm going to miss the Red Wings rivalry, but that's been cooling off lately and St. Louis has been heating up. Still, it means the Hawks will rarely get to play other Original Six teams outside of the playoffs.
 
2013-02-25 08:35:05 AM  

GAT_00: What a surprise, the loser is pretty clearly Nashville.  Our rivals are the Red Wings.  Any Predators fan will tell you our first and biggest rivals are the Red Wings.  It's something they cultivated from the start, and several playoff series solidified.  But hey, fark over Tennessee, the fanbase is central to the state, so the NHL can pretend we don't exist.


Poor Preds and their whopping 14 years of history :'(
 
2013-02-25 08:51:50 AM  
Separating Detroit and Chicago is a terrible idea.  The three conferences not on the Pacific Coast need to have two of the Original Six paired up.  Wings/Hawks, Leafs/Habs, Rangers/Bruins.
 
2013-02-25 08:52:06 AM  
No Hawks - Redwings? Try again.
 
2013-02-25 09:03:55 AM  
If the NHL wants this set up so bad, the only major issue I have is with the Florida teams having no close rivals. I would set up the east to look like this:

Div 1 - Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Flyers, Caps, 'Canes, Lightning, Panthers
DIV 2 - Bruins, Habs, Sens, Leafs, Sabres, Red Wings, Jackets, Penguins

I realize I put the Pens in the "great lakes" division. Pittsburgh's closest geographic rival is actually Columbus and Buffalo and Detroit are each closer than Philly.

Of course, under these plans there's the inherent unfairness of Eastern Conference teams having longer playoff odds every year.
 
2013-02-25 09:13:01 AM  

soopey: Problem solved:

[i48.tinypic.com image 761x374]


No way Flyers and Pens get moved to different divisions. They have the best rivalry in hockey right now.
 
2013-02-25 09:14:13 AM  
I'm still seeing hockey teams south of Virginia, so it's still not right.
 
2013-02-25 09:24:08 AM  
One 30-team league.

2 games against each other team (29 home, 29 away)
3rd game against 24 of 29 other teams on a rotating basis (12 home, 12 away)

Top 16 make the playoffs regardless of geography.
Everyone has an almost identical schedule. At most you will have 5 games different than any other team.

Screw the people that want to sell "divisional champions" hats.  Anyone who buys a divisional championship hat deserves to be cockpunched anyway.

So the conference championship trophies go away - so what, none of the players want to touch them anyway.
 
2013-02-25 09:27:20 AM  

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: soopey: Problem solved:

[i48.tinypic.com image 761x374]

No way Flyers and Pens get moved to different divisions. They have the best rivalry in hockey right now.


I like the fact that that's your biggest gripe.

WTF Indeed: I'm still seeing hockey teams south of Virginia, so it's still not right.


Not on my map!
 
2013-02-25 09:37:56 AM  
Here's another Red Wings fan who likes the new alignment.  Any plan that reduces the number of times Detroit has to travel out west and increasing the games we have against members of the original six is fine by me.

And I never looked upon Nashville as a rivalry.
 
2013-02-25 09:41:23 AM  

jaylectricity: Horrible article. Show us the alignment in Conference Standings fashion.

I didn't want to waste a lot of time reading the paragraphs and trying to figure out who was moving where.


Moar PIcs less wurds
 
2013-02-25 09:42:02 AM  
Don't add two more teams to even things out..eliminate two teams.
 
2013-02-25 09:45:26 AM  

lacydog: [i29.photobucket.com image 850x700]

This is what the proposed map is, for reference. I dig it. I like the point made in the article about having Toronto, Boston, Montreal and Detroit be "draws" for the Florida teams. You could extend that argument to the New York teams, I suppose. But most alignment suggestions wouldn't put them together anyway. A four-team division with Florida, Tampa, Carolina and Nashville makes sense at some point. But you need expansion for that. Seattle/Portland and Hamilton/Quebec City are both good bets. Which could eventually lead to this:

[i29.photobucket.com image 850x700]


Except from a financial standpoint. Florida is already a struggling franchise, giving them less attractive opponents (and I say that with love, Smashville) is the next best thing to pulling the plug on them. That's assuming the proposed restructure happened first and your plan followed. The "four team division" proposal just sounds like geographical nitpicking. The proposal works well with foresight that the Panthers could find a new home in Ontario or Quebec at some point.
 
2013-02-25 09:52:25 AM  

desertgeek: Conference 1: Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Florida, Montreal, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Toronto (Call this an Eastern Conference?)

Thats Gonna Leave a Mark Conference

Conference 2: Carolina, Columbus, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington (Mid-Atlantic Conference?)
Crosby Conference

Conference 3: Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnipeg (Central Conf.?)
Great Pains Conference

Conference 4: Anaheim, Calgary, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Vancouver (Western Conf.?)
Never on TV Conference
 
2013-02-25 10:00:54 AM  

soopey: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: soopey: Problem solved:

[i48.tinypic.com image 761x374]

No way Flyers and Pens get moved to different divisions. They have the best rivalry in hockey right now.

I like the fact that that's your biggest gripe.

WTF Indeed: I'm still seeing hockey teams south of Virginia, so it's still not right.

Not on my map!


Flyers-Pens last week on NBC Sports Network drew one of the highest ratings ever for regular season game. The league will want there to be as many meetings between the two teams as possible.
 
2013-02-25 10:06:36 AM  

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: soopey: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: soopey: Problem solved:

[i48.tinypic.com image 761x374]

No way Flyers and Pens get moved to different divisions. They have the best rivalry in hockey right now.

I like the fact that that's your biggest gripe.

WTF Indeed: I'm still seeing hockey teams south of Virginia, so it's still not right.

Not on my map!

Flyers-Pens last week on NBC Sports Network drew one of the highest ratings ever for regular season game. The league will want there to be as many meetings between the two teams as possible.


Pittsburgh and Detroit can start a new "Rust Belt Unemployment, Foreclosed Homes, and Decrepit Infrastructure Rivalry." No one will be able to afford to go to the games so the TV ratings will be very high.
 
2013-02-25 10:07:51 AM  
All of the realignment proposals that the NHL has been working on start with the premise of moving Detroit to the Eastern conference. The problem is that it doesn't address the problem they have now that was caused by the Thrashers move to Winnipeg and forces absurd compromises (Florida and Canadian franchises in the same division?) in order to make the situation work. The easiest solution, simply move Nashville to the southeast and call it a day. Yes, there are other teams more East or more South that could be moved, but this keeps all of the Detroit, Chicago, St Louis historical rivalries in place. Leaving Chicago alone in the west as the only original six team is a very bad idea.

This looks like essentially the same plan the players association rejected last time, maybe they cleaned up the language regarding the playoffs and hope it will pass this time. It's still a turd, unless you're a Wings fan.
 
2013-02-25 10:19:32 AM  
Please stop putting Minnesota in the Northwest.

/Wild fan
 
2013-02-25 10:19:39 AM  

TheJoe03: It kind of sucks that Dallas will lost their west coast rivals, but Chicago, Nashville, and St Louis will probably be great rivalries.


I'd much rather see Chicago multiple times a year than the Ducks.

soopey: Problem solved:

[i48.tinypic.com image 761x374]


02varvara.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-25 10:36:38 AM  
Here are the three options I posted on the hockey forum I run:


Easy solution:

Nashville to the southeast, Winnipeg to the central. Still a number of less than ideal situations, but the fewest number of moving parts.

Medium solution:

Nashville to the southeast, Minnesota to the central, Winnipeg to the Northwest

More involved:

Nashville to the southeast, Dallas to the central, Colorado to the Pacific and Winnipeg to the northwest.

I think they all make far more sense than what Detroit and the NHL are pushing.
 
2013-02-25 10:37:05 AM  

animesucks: one star for a team in portland or seattle and one more team in canada.

[i.imgur.com image 761x568]


montreal and ottawa have to be in te same conf as toronto dummy
 
2013-02-25 10:47:11 AM  

Ishkur: This is what I had awhile ago:

[www.ishkur.com image 761x568]

You cannot realign to four divisions until you get two more expansion franchises (or lose two). Otherwise it's the Patrick Division all over again.

Either get Seattle and Quebec City, or lose Phoenix and Florida.

But either way, some teams are always going to be pissed that they aren't in the east. Nashville, Columbus and Detroit will have to draw straws.


Perfect. Swap Nashville and Columbus if that's how the politics shake out. Time zone wise, it might make more sense too.

I don't want these unbalanced divisions (I refuse to call them conferences), I don't want a divisional playoff. Expand to 32 and you can do the 4 division thing, until then, fark off and leave it as is, and just shuffle a few teams around.
 
2013-02-25 10:48:01 AM  
A sensible realignment plan would be to eliminate two teams and resolve the situations currently in flux before doing anything.  I look forward to the next realignment plan, sometime in the year 2015.
 
2013-02-25 11:11:50 AM  

WTF Indeed: I'm still seeing hockey teams south of Virginia Chicago, so it's still not right.


Fixed.
 
2013-02-25 11:14:23 AM  

Jimmy Howard told the Detroit Free Press "The travel takes years off of all our lives."


Boo-farking-hoo.  fark you Jimmy Howard.

 
2013-02-25 11:17:19 AM  

Tradition

flak attack: As a Pens fan, I say no.  I'm tired of being sold this idea that the Caps are our rivals.  Quite frankly, I couldn't give a shiat about that team and I don't want to hear more talk about them.  Throw them to the other Eastern group, send Detroit back west and we'll take the Preds.




Right, because they didn't spend 11 seasons in together in the Patrick division, or meet 8 times in the playoffs since 1991 (7 times between 91 and 01). And those were between some of the best teams either club has ever had. 8 times a season, plus first round of the playoffs, almost like clockwork. They most certainly were the Pens biggest rival. As much as I dislike the Flyers, it was always the Caps. Man, knocking the Washington out of the playoffs used to be tradition.

As a Pens fan, I miss that.

/Caps fans maybe not so much.
 
2013-02-25 11:24:04 AM  
Why would Nashville make it into the East before Columbus? At least Columbus is in the eastern time zone. That east West travel is brutal. For the Florida teams to play against the Northeast teams wouldn't be so bad. North south travel is way way easier than crossing 3 time lines.
 
2013-02-25 11:24:28 AM  
8/16 playoffs in the east, but 8/14 in the west? no thanks.
 
2013-02-25 11:28:24 AM  

notsosilentbob: All of the realignment proposals that the NHL has been working on start with the premise of moving Detroit to the Eastern conference. The problem is that it doesn't address the problem they have now that was caused by the Thrashers move to Winnipeg and forces absurd compromises (Florida and Canadian franchises in the same division?) in order to make the situation work. The easiest solution, simply move Nashville to the southeast and call it a day. Yes, there are other teams more East or more South that could be moved, but this keeps all of the Detroit, Chicago, St Louis historical rivalries in place. Leaving Chicago alone in the west as the only original six team is a very bad idea.

This looks like essentially the same plan the players association rejected last time, maybe they cleaned up the language regarding the playoffs and hope it will pass this time. It's still a turd, unless you're a Wings fan.


This is an intended feature not a problem.  The amount of Habs and leafs fans that go down to Florida to watch their team play is absurd.  The NHL wouldn't probably refuse any realignment that does not have Florida/Tampa in the same division as the Canadian teams.
 
2013-02-25 11:28:45 AM  

flak attack: As a Pens fan, I say no.  I'm tired of being sold this idea that the Caps are our rivals.  Quite frankly, I couldn't give a shiat about that team and I don't want to hear more talk about them.  Throw them to the other Eastern group, send Detroit back west and we'll take the Preds.


Are you new to hockey or something? You think the Pens/Caps rivalry is just about Sid vs. Ovie?

The Penguins have never won the Stanley Cup if they did not beat Washington in the playoffs that year.

April 24, 1996 was more of a rivalry defining game than the entire 7 game series in 2009.
 
2013-02-25 11:33:40 AM  
As a St. Louis Blues fan I'd hate to see the Redwings go east since we also have a good rivalry: but it really does make sense travel and time zone wise.

Don't some of the west coast teams have 7:30pm local puck drops which means Redwings fans have to start watching the game at 10:30pm Eastern time?
 
2013-02-25 11:39:06 AM  

mjohnson71: Don't some of the west coast teams have 7:30pm local puck drops which means Redwings fans have to start watching the game at 10:30pm Eastern time?


You could say the same thing about Nashville and Columbus fans but everyone knows that no one watches Preds or Jackets games.
 
2013-02-25 11:43:35 AM  
3 Conf consisting of 10 (2x5) teams.

East1 - Mon, Tor, Ott, Buff, Bos
East2 - Pitt, Phi, NYR, NYI, NJD

Central1 - Det, Chi, StL, Nash, Clb
Central2 - Wash, Car, TB, Flo, Dal

West1 - Van, Edm, Cal, Win, Min
West 2 - Sj, LA, Anh, Phx, Col

6 divs x 5 teams.
Sked -
within div, 6 games x 4 teams = 24
within conf, not div, 4 games x 5 teams = 20
outside conf, 2 games x 20 teams = 40
84 game sked

Each of the 6 div winners get seeded 1-6...other 10 playoff teams based on points.
1st seed v 16th seed
2nd v 15th
etc.

This could mean Boston plays LA, Van, Anh and SJ in a playoff year but it also means that the Bruins could play the Habs for the cup...or Cal - Edm...etc.
 
2013-02-25 11:44:06 AM  

Donnchadha: flak attack: As a Pens fan, I say no.  I'm tired of being sold this idea that the Caps are our rivals.  Quite frankly, I couldn't give a shiat about that team and I don't want to hear more talk about them.  Throw them to the other Eastern group, send Detroit back west and we'll take the Preds.

Are you new to hockey or something? You think the Pens/Caps rivalry is just about Sid vs. Ovie?

The Penguins have never won the Stanley Cup if they did not beat Washington in the playoffs that year.

April 24, 1996 was more of a rivalry defining game than the entire 7 game series in 2009.


God, that game was epic. Still should have gone the other way though...
 
2013-02-25 11:46:17 AM  

meanmutton: mjohnson71: Don't some of the west coast teams have 7:30pm local puck drops which means Redwings fans have to start watching the game at 10:30pm Eastern time?

You could say the same thing about Nashville and Columbus fans but everyone knows that no one watches Preds or Jackets games.


Nashville is still central time zone.

As much as I hate the Redwings (and their fans) the team can go where it wants; that's their right as an original 6 team.
 
2013-02-25 11:51:58 AM  
The regular season is a waste of time, so why not just play everybody home and away, take the top 24 teams into the playoffs.  Top 8 get a first round bye, first round is best of 3 for teams 9-24.
 
2013-02-25 11:54:23 AM  

MugzyBrown: The regular season is a waste of time, so why not just play everybody home and away, take the top 24 teams into the playoffs.  Top 8 get a first round bye, first round is best of 3 for teams 9-24.


Why play hockey at all? Playoff seeding should be done through facebook likes.
 
2013-02-25 11:57:12 AM  

Donnchadha: Why play hockey at all? Playoff seeding should be done through facebook likes.


This would be a 58 game schedule... so less random than what's being played this year.  You don't think you can figure out the top 24 teams in 58 games?
 
2013-02-25 11:58:28 AM  
I can't stand uneven conference/division alignments.  It drove me mad for years with MLB but I at least could understand it because of the AL/NL thing.  But creating that situation when you have any number of alternatives on the table?  Fark that noise.

Besides, what's the point of any alignment plan when probably two of the teams on it have no chance of remaining where they are presently.  And there's still this insane talk of the NHL expanding again which I simply cannot farking believe.
 
2013-02-25 11:59:01 AM  

MugzyBrown: Donnchadha: Why play hockey at all? Playoff seeding should be done through facebook likes.

This would be a 58 game schedule... so less random than what's being played this year.  You don't think you can figure out the top 24 teams in 58 games?


Why is that better than an 81 game season? This year is weird because of the lockout. I find it odd to say "I like hockey, but I would like to see less of it every year"
 
2013-02-25 12:00:15 PM  

Donnchadha: MugzyBrown: Donnchadha: Why play hockey at all? Playoff seeding should be done through facebook likes.

This would be a 58 game schedule... so less random than what's being played this year.  You don't think you can figure out the top 24 teams in 58 games?

Why is that better than an 81 game season? This year is weird because of the lockout. I find it odd to say "I like hockey, but I would like to see less of it every year"


Ok, then why not a 120 game schedule?
 
2013-02-25 12:00:26 PM  
As a Pacific Div team fan can I just say that I'm sick of hearing Detroit fans and players complain about travel?  Cry me a river, try playing on the West Coast.  And, the NHL COULD make a schedule that evens out team travel amongst all teams but it would never happen.  If one Eastern team had to make, heaven forbid, TWO trips out west, there'd be hell to pay
 
2013-02-25 12:03:52 PM  
Just let the Original Dicks reunite in their little circlejerk and abolish the rest of the franchises.
 
2013-02-25 12:03:58 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: I can't stand uneven conference/division alignments.  It drove me mad for years with MLB but I at least could understand it because of the AL/NL thing.  But creating that situation when you have any number of alternatives on the table?  Fark that noise.

Besides, what's the point of any alignment plan when probably two of the teams on it have no chance of remaining where they are presently.  And there's still this insane talk of the NHL expanding again which I simply cannot farking believe.


Why not? They have guaranteed markets in Quebec and Toronto (2nd team), plus places like Seattle and KC to try out for any current teams that fail. It would be the last non Europe expansion, would bring in some cash lost during the lockout, and even up the division/conferences.
 
2013-02-25 12:05:09 PM  
Don't get the Florida - New England connection unless they're trying to cash in on Florida immigrants from up north.  The east-west travel is the hardest, so just slice the teams up north-south.
 
2013-02-25 12:06:14 PM  

TheOther: Just let the Original Dicks reunite in their little circlejerk and abolish the rest of the franchises.


After this stupid lockout, I'm inclined to agree.  See how much that jerk in Boston likes his NESN contract then.
 
2013-02-25 12:08:42 PM  

MugzyBrown: Donnchadha: MugzyBrown: Donnchadha: Why play hockey at all? Playoff seeding should be done through facebook likes.

This would be a 58 game schedule... so less random than what's being played this year.  You don't think you can figure out the top 24 teams in 58 games?

Why is that better than an 81 game season? This year is weird because of the lockout. I find it odd to say "I like hockey, but I would like to see less of it every year"

Ok, then why not a 120 game schedule?


Why not? I'd like to see it, although you'd probably have a tough sell with the players union -- you'd have more luck expanding the playoffs to 12 teams/conference.

Expanding the season poses challenges related to the logistics of scheduling the games, making the season spread over too much time, player health and stamina, etc. You'd hear the same issues come up when talking about an 18 game NFL season. Contracting the season prevents teams from being able to make adjustments during the year -- you're not going to save player health by playing fewer games, since each game now represents a larger percentage of the total season. You'd find more players, and more "minor" players, pushing themselves harder to try and justify a bigger piece of less total ice time and risking injury to do it.
 
2013-02-25 12:10:29 PM  

Donnchadha: Why not? I'd like to see it, although you'd probably have a tough sell with the players union -- you'd have more luck expanding the playoffs to 12 teams/conference.


Well I'd rather watch the players actually play at a high level rather than watching them sleepwalk through1/4+ of the season.

The more games, the more meaningless each game is.
 
2013-02-25 12:14:49 PM  

MugzyBrown: Donnchadha: Why not? I'd like to see it, although you'd probably have a tough sell with the players union -- you'd have more luck expanding the playoffs to 12 teams/conference.

Well I'd rather watch the players actually play at a high level rather than watching them sleepwalk through1/4+ of the season.

The more games, the more meaningless each game is.


The problem with that, like I mentioned, is that you might push the superstars to give their A game every night, but you also push the journeymen and rookies beyond their limits. No superstar has ever won the Cup by themselves and if their team lacks chemistry because their second and third lines are revolving doors of injured players, that team is going nowhere in the playoffs.
 
2013-02-25 12:15:12 PM  
Add a team in either Seattle or Portland then another team in Hamilton to make the league 32. Then have four 8-team divisions.
 
2013-02-25 12:17:49 PM  

notsosilentbob: All of the realignment proposals that the NHL has been working on start with the premise of moving Detroit to the Eastern conference. The problem is that it doesn't address the problem they have now that was caused by the Thrashers move to Winnipeg and forces absurd compromises (Florida and Canadian franchises in the same division?) in order to make the situation work. The easiest solution, simply move Nashville to the southeast and call it a day. Yes, there are other teams more East or more South that could be moved, but this keeps all of the Detroit, Chicago, St Louis historical rivalries in place. Leaving Chicago alone in the west as the only original six team is a very bad idea.

This looks like essentially the same plan the players association rejected last time, maybe they cleaned up the language regarding the playoffs and hope it will pass this time. It's still a turd, unless you're a Wings fan.


Florida and Canadian teams being in the same division is not an absurd compromise.  It's almost by design.  Have you ever seen how many Quebec license plates exist in Florida in the winter?  It's absolutely stunning.  There is a very good reason that they're in the same conference, because half of Canada is already down there either part-time or permanently!
 
2013-02-25 12:25:25 PM  

Donnchadha: The problem with that, like I mentioned, is that you might push the superstars to give their A game every night, but you also push the journeymen and rookies beyond their limits. No superstar has ever won the Cup by themselves and if their team lacks chemistry because their second and third lines are revolving doors of injured players, that team is going nowhere in the playoffs.


It's been readily apparent, especially in the last 10 years, how the Stanley Cup finalists are typically never the best teams but the healthiest.

That makes the playoffs not a grind of merit and heart but of luck (since most injuries are incidental).
 
2013-02-25 12:28:49 PM  

mjohnson71: Add a team in either Seattle or Portland then another team in Hamilton to make the league 32. Then have four 8-team divisions.


You misspelled Quebec City.
 
2013-02-25 12:33:29 PM  

Decillion: Why not? They have guaranteed markets in Quebec and Toronto (2nd team), plus places like Seattle and KC to try out for any current teams that fail. It would be the last non Europe expansion, would bring in some cash lost during the lockout, and even up the division/conferences.


I'm against expansion currently for several reasons.

First, there are several teams that won't last in their current locations.  I see no point in discussing it until that gets addressed.  What happens to Phoenix being the key question.  And I'm not certain about any of the locations you named.  A second team in Toronto or the surrounding area or in Quebec will only further complicate realignment....particularly if it's the Coyotes.  Seattle is up in the air depending on the NBA.  And KC has been mentioned for years and never gone anywhere and seems the least likely of the four to be a good destination.

Second, what's the long term viability of some of the current franchises?  Are the Panthers really going to be around in 5 years (in Florida anyway).  What about the Blue Jackets or Hurricanes?  Or Nashville?

Finally, to be frank this is the NHL and it will almost certainly fark it up.  We've already see one recent expansion team in Atlanta come and go (for the second time).  And it was moved to Winnipeg to replace a team that moved to Phoenix that's now going to move again!

Personally I'd probably feel better about everything if Gary Bettman was just hit by a bus.  And by everything I'm not just talking about expansion or the NHL.  I'm talking about life in general.
 
2013-02-25 12:39:38 PM  

kenfury: mjohnson71: Add a team in either Seattle or Portland then another team in Hamilton to make the league 32. Then have four 8-team divisions.

You misspelled Quebec City.


Fair enough. So add two teams and move Phoenix.
 
2013-02-25 12:39:59 PM  
So unbalanced is sensible subby? Central division will be the least televised division in sports. Good bye hockey night in Canada Jets fans because we'll be playing the other Canadian teams twice a year at best. Seriously, will any game other than Jets vs Hawks be nationally televised? Doubtful. Fark you Bell, I'm not paying to watch my local team.
 
2013-02-25 12:41:47 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: Personally I'd probably feel better about everything if Gary Bettman was just hit by a bus. And by everything I'm not just talking about expansion or the NHL. I'm talking about life in general.


I'd be content with sending him to someplace in Siberia. Yakutsk, maybe?

Then again, I doubt the KHL would appreciate his presence in Russia.
 
2013-02-25 12:48:28 PM  

ElwoodCuse: This plan is just as stupid as before. Hey NHL: 30 isn't divisible by 4. Knock it off with the 4 unbalanced divisions crap. Because your inevitable solution to that morass will be "hey! two more teams! BRILLIANT!"


Then contract Florida and Columbus. Problem solved (except for the Panther and Blue Jacket fans in this thread who will now be calling for my summary execution....).

Alternatively, add a team in Seattle or Portland and one more in Canada somewhere.
 
2013-02-25 12:54:12 PM  

Watubi: As a Pacific Div team fan can I just say that I'm sick of hearing Detroit fans and players complain about travel?  Cry me a river, try playing on the West Coast.  And, the NHL COULD make a schedule that evens out team travel amongst all teams but it would never happen.  If one Eastern team had to make, heaven forbid, TWO trips out west, there'd be hell to pay


It isn't just about the travel, farkwad. It's also about how us Detroiters live in the Eastern Time Zone, and have to deal with games starting at 10pm or 10:30pm way too frequently. Contrary to what idiots like to say, we do have jobs over here. We do have to wake up early in the morning to go to these jobs. We can't just be up all night watching hockey. And it gets ten times worse in the playoffs if games go into overtime.

Ooh, you like the Pacific. Where you can pretty much watch every game played on TV without messing up your sleep schedule. Your teams rarely travel out East. Most of the teams you play are relatively close. Boo hoo. You're right, you have it so much worse.
 
2013-02-25 12:56:36 PM  

tnpir: Then contract Florida and Columbus. Problem solved (except for the Panther and Blue Jacket fans in this thread who will now be calling for my summary execution....).

Alternatively, add a team in Seattle or Portland and one more in Canada somewhere.


I'd be ok with two less teams...then again a team name like the Portland Hipsters does have a nice ring to it.
 
2013-02-25 01:05:59 PM  

tnpir: ElwoodCuse: This plan is just as stupid as before. Hey NHL: 30 isn't divisible by 4. Knock it off with the 4 unbalanced divisions crap. Because your inevitable solution to that morass will be "hey! two more teams! BRILLIANT!"

Then contract Florida and Columbus. Problem solved (except for the Panther and Blue Jacket fans in this thread who will now be calling for my summary execution....).

Alternatively, add a team in Seattle or Portland and one more in Canada somewhere.


Well, Columbus drew really well until recently, even while sucking, and the crowds came back a couple seasons ago when they had a playoff team. Florida ain't going anywhere- the owners simply wouldn't accept a buyout. Without the team, control over the arena and related revenues goes back to the county. Which makes the Panther's owner a lot of money. So while the team may lose money till kingdom come, they're not going anywhere as long as the other shows there continue to print money.

So, you know, maybe not being an idiot before talking about contraction and what markets are horrible and deserve to die would be good. And that doesn't even go into how stupid contraction would be for the league's profits as a whole.
 
2013-02-25 01:07:24 PM  
One thing the NHL could do is wipe out season-long East v West play, then roll it into a couple 2 week long events like MLB did with Interleague Play.  You could market it, turn it into a thing, and maybe help generate some increased interest.  It also allows the NHL to market individual star players in a better fashion as they can advertise Player X and his team coming into town as part of Interconference Play.

Currently as it is (this season excluded obviously), some random team from the other conference shows up on a Tuesday night and nobody gives a shiat...then you don't see them for two more years.
 
2013-02-25 01:28:28 PM  

JohnnyCanuck: 3 Conf consisting of 10 (2x5) teams....


You have the right idea, but the wrong set up. To me, the only answer that makes sense is eliminating geographic conferences and going to a set up similar to that of MLB and have 2 conferences with East, Central and West divisions. It's a set up in which just about everyone loses, but there's no other option that makes sense.

Start by separating the teams by region. I'd have it as:

West: Winnipeg, Dallas, Colorado, Phoenix, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles
Sorry Jets and Stars, but I'll try to make it up to you later. And yes, I'm assuming things with Phoenix. Don't ask me about that. I'm more sick of that than all of you Farkers combined.

The next 2 regions will be controversial
Central: Minnesota, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Nashville, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Florida
1- Pittsburgh teams are used the being in a Central division. The Steelers were in the AFC Central for years. The Pirates are in the NL Central.
2- Toronto was in the Campbell conference for a long time and that was the western-most conference. Plus, it splits the Original 6 teams evenly across the regions.
3- It was either Tampa and Florida in the Central or Washington and Carolina.

East: Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, New Jersey, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Ottawa

Then, we put divisions together; trying to maintain the rivalries as much as possible.

Conference A:
East:
Boston, Montreal, NY Rangers, Carolina, Buffalo
Central: Detroit, Chicago, Toronto, Florida, Nashville
West: Dallas, Winnipeg, Colorado, Vancouver, Phoenix

Conference B:
East:
Ottawa, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington
Central: Pittsburgh, Columbus, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, St. Louis
West:San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton

In Conference A; you have the Original Six, 4 Canadian teams, Dallas and Winnipeg only have to travel to the Pacific Time Zone for 1 team (unless they go to Phoenix during daylight savings time since Arizona doesn't do that).

In Conference B; there's a ton of geographic rivals that will run into each other.

Schedule:
Division: 5 games per team (20 total)
Conference: 4 games per team (40 total)
Interconference: 1-2 games per team (22 total)- extra games against teams in the same region (so East vs East, etc.) and 2 wild cards.
 
2013-02-25 01:29:37 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: One thing the NHL could do is wipe out season-long East v West play, then roll it into a couple 2 week long events like MLB did with Interleague Play.  You could market it, turn it into a thing, and maybe help generate some increased interest.  It also allows the NHL to market individual star players in a better fashion as they can advertise Player X and his team coming into town as part of Interconference Play.

Currently as it is (this season excluded obviously), some random team from the other conference shows up on a Tuesday night and nobody gives a shiat...then you don't see them for two more years.


As a Blues fan with partial season tickets, there's nothing worse than during a regular season getting force-fed weeknight games in January and February crappy matchups like Ottawa and Carolina.
 
2013-02-25 02:12:18 PM  

Handsome B. Wonderful: Jimmy Howard told the Detroit Free Press "The travel takes years off of all our lives."
Boo-farking-hoo.  fark you Jimmy Howard.


Jimmy is kind of a clown, he was obviously joking. One of the nicest guys I've ever met. Ran into him and Osgood more than once at a little local bar back in Michigan.
 
2013-02-25 02:18:34 PM  

WhiskeySticks: tnpir: Then contract Florida and Columbus. Problem solved (except for the Panther and Blue Jacket fans in this thread who will now be calling for my summary execution....).

Alternatively, add a team in Seattle or Portland and one more in Canada somewhere.

I'd be ok with two less teams...then again a team name like the Portland Hipsters does have a nice ring to it.


i111.photobucket.com

/Shamelessly stolen from the Fark thread about the Islanders' move
 
2013-02-25 02:30:07 PM  
Bring back the old division and conference names!
 
2013-02-25 02:33:31 PM  

desertgeek: JohnnyCanuck: 3 Conf consisting of 10 (2x5) teams....

You have the right idea, but the wrong set up. To me, the only answer that makes sense is eliminating geographic conferences and going to a set up similar to that of MLB and have 2 conferences with East, Central and West divisions. It's a set up in which just about everyone loses, but there's no other option that makes sense.

Start by separating the teams by region. I'd have it as:

West: Winnipeg, Dallas, Colorado, Phoenix, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles
Sorry Jets and Stars, but I'll try to make it up to you later. And yes, I'm assuming things with Phoenix. Don't ask me about that. I'm more sick of that than all of you Farkers combined.

The next 2 regions will be controversial
Central: Minnesota, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Nashville, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Florida
1- Pittsburgh teams are used the being in a Central division. The Steelers were in the AFC Central for years. The Pirates are in the NL Central.
2- Toronto was in the Campbell conference for a long time and that was the western-most conference. Plus, it splits the Original 6 teams evenly across the regions.
3- It was either Tampa and Florida in the Central or Washington and Carolina.

East: Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, New Jersey, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Ottawa

Then, we put divisions together; trying to maintain the rivalries as much as possible.

Conference A:
East: Boston, Montreal, NY Rangers, Carolina, Buffalo
Central: Detroit, Chicago, Toronto, Florida, Nashville
West: Dallas, Winnipeg, Colorado, Vancouver, Phoenix

Conference B:
East: Ottawa, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington
Central: Pittsburgh, Columbus, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, St. Louis
West:San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton

In Conference A; you have the Original Six, 4 Canadian teams, Dallas and Winnipeg only have to travel to the Pacific Time Zone for 1 team (unless they go to Phoenix during daylight savings time since Arizona doesn't do that).

In Conference B; there's a ton of geographic rivals that will run into each other.

Schedule:
Division: 5 games per team (20 total)
Conference: 4 games per team (40 total)
Interconference: 1-2 games per team (22 total)- extra games against teams in the same region (so East vs East, etc.) and 2 wild cards.


On mobile, so can't snip, but switch Ottawa and Pittsburgh in conference B. The Pens rivals are Flyers and Caps, division them up together.
 
2013-02-25 02:36:59 PM  

LucklessWonder: On mobile, so can't snip, but switch Ottawa and Pittsburgh in conference B. The Pens rivals are Flyers and Caps, division them up together.


I was torn about that one, but they'd still face each other 4 times a year in my proposal. Putting them in the same division would just add 1 game each. It's not a major loss, IMO.
 
2013-02-25 02:47:11 PM  

cptjeff: tnpir: ElwoodCuse: This plan is just as stupid as before. Hey NHL: 30 isn't divisible by 4. Knock it off with the 4 unbalanced divisions crap. Because your inevitable solution to that morass will be "hey! two more teams! BRILLIANT!"

Then contract Florida and Columbus. Problem solved (except for the Panther and Blue Jacket fans in this thread who will now be calling for my summary execution....).

Alternatively, add a team in Seattle or Portland and one more in Canada somewhere.

Well, Columbus drew really well until recently, even while sucking, and the crowds came back a couple seasons ago when they had a playoff team. Florida ain't going anywhere- the owners simply wouldn't accept a buyout. Without the team, control over the arena and related revenues goes back to the county. Which makes the Panther's owner a lot of money. So while the team may lose money till kingdom come, they're not going anywhere as long as the other shows there continue to print money.

So, you know, maybe not being an idiot before talking about contraction and what markets are horrible and deserve to die would be good. And that doesn't even go into how stupid contraction would be for the league's profits as a whole.


Okay, so first off, excuse me all to hell.  Second off, Columbus as you pointed out doesn't draw, nor is it a desirable market. Miami is not a hockey town, has never been a hockey town, and barely supported that team even when they made the Finals in 1996.  No one would miss either market if they disappeared.

Now, granted, if the NHL were seriously going to contract (and that would be a better option, IMHO, than adding two more teams), there may be better franchises/markets to consider. But both Columbus and Miami would have to be at the top of the list. The NHL is not strengthened by having teams there, whereas they would be stronger with more Canadian teams and another northern US team.

Hey, I'm just a fan making observations. I could be right, I could be wrong. But it seems pretty obvious to me that the rapid southward expansion of the NHL was overall a bad idea - they grew into markets that aren't good for hockey and diluted the hell out of the talent pool.  There is not enough NHL-caliber talent out there for 32 teams, and probably not for 30 teams.
 
2013-02-25 03:54:46 PM  

robertus: WhiskeySticks: tnpir: Then contract Florida and Columbus. Problem solved (except for the Panther and Blue Jacket fans in this thread who will now be calling for my summary execution....).

Alternatively, add a team in Seattle or Portland and one more in Canada somewhere.

I'd be ok with two less teams...then again a team name like the Portland Hipsters does have a nice ring to it.

[i111.photobucket.com image 399x300]

/Shamelessly stolen from the Fark thread about the Islanders' move


I like this logo because I'm on it.
 
2013-02-25 04:06:28 PM  
Let me start by doing some expanding and realigning to get to a good 32:

EXPANSION: Quebec, Seattle
RELOCATION: Coyotes relocated to Kansas City
Panthers relocated to Milwaukee
Islanders relocated to Hamilton
Ducks relocated to Portland
Hurricanes relocated to Indianapolis

I thought about moving the Blue Jackets to Cleveland, but I think their attendance problems are more due to the Blue Jackets being terrible. So they can stay in Columbus. Nashville, Dallas, Tampa Bay and Los Angeles can stay where they are.

Realignment (new NHL cities in bold)

Boston, Buffalo, Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Tampa Bay, Quebec, Hamilton

Columbus, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, New Jersey, Detroit, Indianapolis

Winnipeg, Chicago, Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis, Nashville, Milwaukee, Kansas City

Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Colorado, Seattle, Portland
 
2013-02-25 04:08:18 PM  
Actually, on second thought, scratch that. Flip Tampa Bay and Detroit.

Boston, Buffalo, Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Detroit, Quebec, Hamilton

Columbus, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, New Jersey, Tampa Bay, Indianapolis

Winnipeg, Chicago, Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis, Nashville, Milwaukee, Kansas City

Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Colorado, Seattle, Portland
 
2013-02-25 04:10:29 PM  

Gosling: Actually, on second thought, scratch that. Flip Tampa Bay and Detroit.

Boston, Buffalo, Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Detroit, Quebec, Hamilton

Columbus, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, New Jersey, Tampa Bay, Indianapolis

Winnipeg, Chicago, Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis, Nashville, Milwaukee, Kansas City

Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Colorado, Seattle, Portland


Good thoughts, but I still am not sold on two more teams versus two less teams. I just don't think there's a wide enough talent pool for two more teams.
 
2013-02-25 04:13:16 PM  

Gosling: RELOCATION: Coyotes relocated to Kansas City


As much as I'd like to see a team in KC (moving there this week), They only have the 29th largest metro area in the US (2 million). I doubt they'd be able to support a team.
 
kab
2013-02-25 04:18:19 PM  
Here's a novel concept.   Split however makes the most sense for travel, but get rid of this retarded notion that div. leaders get automatic top seeds in the playoffs.
 
2013-02-25 04:28:27 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Gosling: RELOCATION: Coyotes relocated to Kansas City

As much as I'd like to see a team in KC (moving there this week), They only have the 29th largest metro area in the US (2 million). I doubt they'd be able to support a team.


They built a stadium just to attract a team and nobody's showed up yet.

Also, Columbus is 31st, Nashville is 37th, Buffalo is 49th. (And Portland is 26th, Indianapolis is 30th, and Milwaukee is 36th. Milwaukee is thinking of replacing the Bradley Center, but they'd rather do it for the NHL than do it for the Bucks.)
 
2013-02-25 04:46:30 PM  

lostcitysaint: Oh Chicago fans, cry more about losing your rivalry with Detroit. Or as it really is, your benchmark for success.


From the look of the thread most of the people lamenting this rivalry being lost are Detroit fans?
 
2013-02-25 04:51:49 PM  

Gosling: They built a stadium just to attract a team and nobody's showed up yet.

Also, Columbus is 31st, Nashville is 37th, Buffalo is 49th. (And Portland is 26th, Indianapolis is 30th, and Milwaukee is 36th. Milwaukee is thinking of replacing the Bradley Center, but they'd rather do it for the NHL than do it for the Bucks.)


Looks like they were going after the Islanders, but that obviously fell through. Phoenix is still on the fence, but I'd guess that they end up in Seattle or Portland.

Columbus has the worst attendance in the league, so they're not a good example to use. Buffalo benefits from a lot of Canadians crossing the border for games, so they're drawing from a much larger base than just the Buffalo metro area. Nashville has done well, so there is proof that a small market can support a team.

Guess there's always the Missouri Mavericks for now.
 
2013-02-25 05:15:56 PM  
How to fix the NHL: drop four teams, and move two.

Teams to drop (due to varying degrees of both piss poor management and poor fan support):
- Yotes
- Islanders
- Blue Jackets
- Panthers

Teams to move (good management, some success, but horrible fanbase)
- Devils (to Hamilton)
- Stars (To Quebec City)
 
2013-02-25 05:31:22 PM  
I think it would be interesting to do 2 Canadian divisions. You'd need an expansion team in Quebec/Hamilton/London/Niagara to do it. But I think it would build on the Canada vs. US mindset that would make for some interesting storylines. It won't ever happen, but it would be quite fun.
 
2013-02-25 05:32:09 PM  
For the 1 billionth time, no professional sports league will just drop teams as long as they continue to bring in money and as long as there are enough ownership groups willing to own a team. You might think it's stupid. You might think it's not in the best interest of competition. But pro sports is a business, first and foremost and every league is making more money with 30 teams than they were with 26 or 28. Deal with it and give up on the contraction crap.
 
2013-02-25 05:34:52 PM  
Name the conferences Adams, Patrick, Norris and Smythe and we've got a deal!

/Toe Blake!
//Eddie Shore!
///Old-time hockey!
 
2013-02-25 07:13:45 PM  

LemSkroob: Teams to move (good management, some success, but horrible fanbase)
- Devils (to Hamilton)
- Stars (To Quebec City)


Yeah, great idea to move from the 5th largest US market to a city the size of Ft. Worth and a metro area smaller than the city of Dallas by itself. Dallas doesn't have a bad fanbase, the problem is the Tom Hicks ran the team into the ground, went bankrupt, and the fanbase stopped showing up. Before the bankruptcy, the Stars always sold out games, and now that they have new ownership and are actually trying to improve you are seeing the fans fill up the arena again.

/dumb to move the Devils too
//seems some NHL fans are actively trying to make the sport irrelevant in large parts of the country
 
2013-02-25 08:45:12 PM  

desertgeek: Central: Minnesota, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Nashville, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Florida


Pittsburgh without Philly? Toronto without Montreal?

Um no.
 
2013-02-25 08:58:30 PM  
To any Eastern based team complaining about more travel, STFU.

/west coast teams have been sucking it up for decades.  It wouldn't kill the Devils/Rangers/Islanders to actually have to go on a long road trip every now and then.
 
2013-02-25 09:04:30 PM  

desertgeek: Then, we put divisions together; trying to maintain the rivalries as much as possible.

Conference A:
East: Boston, Montreal, NY Rangers, Carolina, Buffalo
Central: Detroit, Chicago, Toronto, Florida, Nashville
West: Dallas, Winnipeg, Colorado, Vancouver, Phoenix

Conference B:
East: Ottawa, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington
Central: Pittsburgh, Columbus, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, St. Louis
West:San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton

In Conference A; you have the Original Six, 4 Canadian teams, Dallas and Winnipeg only have to travel to the Pacific Time Zone for 1 team (unless they go to Phoenix during daylight savings time since Arizona doesn't do that).

In Conference B; there's a ton of geographic rivals that will run into each other.

Schedule:
Division: 5 games per team (20 total)
Conference: 4 games per team (40 total)
Interconference: 1-2 games per team (22 total)- extra games against teams in the same region (so East vs East, etc.) and 2 wild cards


There is no way in hell they would split the Isles, Rangers, and Devils up. Not a chance.
 
2013-02-25 09:30:51 PM  
The worst part of this realignment is that it leave no room for Quebec City, the most deserving market, as well as a second Toronto area team, the most obvious market ever in the history of professional sports.
 
2013-02-25 10:11:59 PM  

Brosef13: The worst part of this realignment is that it leave no room for Quebec City, the most deserving market


The most deserving market would be somewhere that didn't piss away a team already.
 
2013-02-25 10:28:48 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: The most deserving market would be somewhere that didn't piss away a team already.


Yeah, I'd rather give a team to Seattle, Portland, Kansas City, Houston, and Milwaukee over Quebec freakin City.
 
2013-02-25 11:20:39 PM  

Martonio: To any Eastern based team complaining about more travel, STFU.

/west coast teams have been sucking it up for decades.  It wouldn't kill the Devils/Rangers/Islanders to actually have to go on a long road trip every now and then.


The teams aren't complaining on behalf of the players (they fly on private or charter jets); it's for the fans.  It sucks for ratings for east coast fans to watch games starting at 10:00 PM, particularly in the playoffs when games can easily last until 2:00 in the morning.  Worst case for the West Coast is what, you listen for an hour in the car on the way to the bar after work or DVR a game to watch your team play on tape delay?

This is entirely about maximizing TV ratings.  Fans in Pittsburgh or Chicago or Detroit tune in to watch their team play; fans in LA or other LA or San Jose don't.  Losing 10% of a Pittsburgh or Detroit audience because of a late game is going to hurt ad revenue much more than losing 10% of a San Jose audience because of an early game.
 
2013-02-26 12:12:18 AM  
This proves desert geek knows shiat about hockey

desertgeek: JohnnyCanuck: 3 Conf consisting of 10 (2x5) teams....

You have the right idea, but the wrong set up. To me, the only answer that makes sense is eliminating geographic conferences and going to a set up similar to that of MLB and have 2 conferences with East, Central and West divisions. It's a set up in which just about everyone loses, but there's no other option that makes sense.

Start by separating the teams by region. I'd have it as:

West: Winnipeg, Dallas, Colorado, Phoenix, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles
Sorry Jets and Stars, but I'll try to make it up to you later. And yes, I'm assuming things with Phoenix. Don't ask me about that. I'm more sick of that than all of you Farkers combined.

The next 2 regions will be controversial
Central: Minnesota, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Nashville, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Florida
1- Pittsburgh teams are used the being in a Central division. The Steelers were in the AFC Central for years. The Pirates are in the NL Central.
2- Toronto was in the Campbell conference for a long time and that was the western-most conference. Plus, it splits the Original 6 teams evenly across the regions.
3- It was either Tampa and Florida in the Central or Washington and Carolina.

East: Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, New Jersey, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Ottawa

Then, we put divisions together; trying to maintain the rivalries as much as possible.

Conference A:
East: Boston, Montreal, NY Rangers, Carolina, Buffalo
Central: Detroit, Chicago, Toronto, Florida, Nashville
West: Dallas, Winnipeg, Colorado, Vancouver, Phoenix

Conference B:
East: Ottawa, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington
Central: Pittsburgh, Columbus, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, St. Louis
West:San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton

In Conference A; you have the Original Six, 4 Canadian teams, Dallas and Winnipeg only have to travel to the Pacific Time Zone for 1 team (unless the ...

 
2013-02-26 12:14:16 AM  
Don't worry, the more sensible the plan, the more likely the NHLPA is to reject it.
 
2013-02-26 12:14:54 AM  
There's always one moron who thinks people in San Jose don't tune in or fill up the barn with home fans. (except when Vancouver comes to town in the playoffs, then its Vancouver South). Congrats <b>meanmutton</b> on being that guy.
 
2013-02-26 12:15:55 AM  
Congrats to myself for not figuring out the new formatting system. way to go,  self.
 
2013-02-26 12:18:10 AM  

Electromax: lostcitysaint: Oh Chicago fans, cry more about losing your rivalry with Detroit. Or as it really is, your benchmark for success.

From the look of the thread most of the people lamenting this rivalry being lost are Detroit fans?


most Detroit fans would rather have three original six opponents in a new division than keep Chicago.
 
2013-02-26 12:29:42 AM  

meanmutton: This is entirely about maximizing TV ratings.  Fans in Pittsburgh or Chicago or Detroit tune in to watch their team play; fans in LA or other LA or San Jose don't.  Losing 10% of a Pittsburgh or Detroit audience because of a late game is going to hurt ad revenue much more than losing 10% of a San Jose audience because of an early game.


I get where you're going, but I think you're underestimating the loyalty of the West Coast fan.  East Coast teams should suck it up every now and again for the greater good of the game.  We want to see Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Tavares, Datsyuk, etc.  And I'm sure some East Coast fans would like to see the Sedins, Thornton, Marleau and the West Coast stars more often than every 3 years.
 
2013-02-26 01:18:11 AM  
Flip Winnipeg and Nashville.  Problem solved.

OR

Remove the team from Arizona and place it in Atlanta as compensation for the city losing two hockey teams and one World Series to Canuckistan.
 
2013-02-26 02:09:16 AM  

SniperJoe: Florida and Canadian teams being in the same division is not an absurd compromise.  It's almost by design.  Have you ever seen how many Quebec license plates exist in Florida in the winter?  It's absolutely stunning.  There is a very good reason that they're in the same conference, because half of Canada is already down there either part-time or permanently!


The guys I know that worked for the team shot that argument down last summer, they say that those games did not have significantly better attendance. Since I'm somewhat lazy, I'll take their word on it. You get a slight bump for Montreal instead of Carolina, but not that much. Plus, we all know that Quebecois are not going to go see the Leafs or Bruins, only their beloved Habs. And if your plan to increase ticket sales involves selling more tickets to the fans of other teams when they come to visit, you've essentially given up on growing your own market.

All I'm saying is that if they stop trying to force Detroit into the east, they won't have to fix so many things that aren't broken.
 
2013-02-26 02:27:35 AM  

mikaloyd:

Pittsburgh without Philly? Toronto without Montreal?

Um no.


Did you know that they were in separate conferences up until the 97-98 season? At least I keep them in the same conference.
 
2013-02-26 02:32:01 AM  

notsosilentbob: All I'm saying is that if they stop trying to force Detroit into the east, they won't have to fix so many things that aren't broken.


I agree. I think they're kind of set to this idea, but as I said upthread; put the Avs in Conference 4 and the Wings in 3. Then it's 15 teams in the "West" and the East. Top 4 in each conference goes to the playoffs and then it's Conf. 1 winner vs Conf. 2 winner and 3 vs 4 in the Stanley Cup Semifinals.
 
2013-02-26 02:53:02 AM  

TheJoe03: Yeah, great idea to move from the 5th largest US market to a city the size of Ft. Worth and a metro area smaller than the city of Dallas by itself. Dallas doesn't have a bad fanbase, the problem is the Tom Hicks ran the team into the ground, went bankrupt, and the fanbase stopped showing up. Before the bankruptcy, the Stars always sold out games, and now that they have new ownership and are actually trying to improve you are seeing the fans fill up the arena again.


I think we've proved definitively with the Thrashers and Coyotes that when it comes to hockey, you can take your market sizes and throw them out the goddamned window. It doesn't matter how many people you have in a city. If they only see snow once every 20 years, they're generally a bad place for a hockey team. That is why they moved a team from Atlanta to a place an hour north of North Dakota. On paper, that's a terrible decision. In hockey, it was an obvious decision.
 
2013-02-26 03:14:10 AM  

Gosling: I think we've proved definitively with the Thrashers and Coyotes that when it comes to hockey, you can take your market sizes and throw them out the goddamned window. It doesn't matter how many people you have in a city. If they only see snow once every 20 years, they're generally a bad place for a hockey team. That is why they moved a team from Atlanta to a place an hour north of North Dakota. On paper, that's a terrible decision. In hockey, it was an obvious decision.


Atlanta and Dallas are two different cities, Atlanta doesn't support any of their pro teams all that much. Dallas (and Texas in general) is also a more important market than either Phoenix (and Arizona) or Atlanta (and Georgia). Plus, it seems pretty asinine to move out of a market like Dallas when they finally have a new owner and they are actually selling out games for the first time in a few years (despite having the same ~.500 record they've had in the last few years). The Stars just don't seem like a smart team to relocate, especially to some small city like Quebec City or Hamilton. Go ahead and move Phoenix, but moving Dallas would be just as stupid as moving LA or San Jose.

/DFW actually snows at least once a year, I think Atlanta might be similar.
 
2013-02-26 09:43:57 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: Gosling: RELOCATION: Coyotes relocated to Kansas City

As much as I'd like to see a team in KC (moving there this week), They only have the 29th largest metro area in the US (2 million). I doubt they'd be able to support a team.


The city is REALLY spread out, though- IIRC, once you throw in CSA data (Overland Park, Lawrence, Lees Summit, etc.) they jump to 15th or so.
 
2013-02-26 09:55:00 AM  

Incorrigible Astronaut: The city is REALLY spread out, though- IIRC, once you throw in CSA data (Overland Park, Lawrence, Lees Summit, etc.) they jump to 15th or so.


The 2 million number includes the burbs.
 
2013-02-26 10:13:35 AM  

notsosilentbob: SniperJoe: Florida and Canadian teams being in the same division is not an absurd compromise.  It's almost by design.  Have you ever seen how many Quebec license plates exist in Florida in the winter?  It's absolutely stunning.  There is a very good reason that they're in the same conference, because half of Canada is already down there either part-time or permanently!

The guys I know that worked for the team shot that argument down last summer, they say that those games did not have significantly better attendance. Since I'm somewhat lazy, I'll take their word on it. You get a slight bump for Montreal instead of Carolina, but not that much. Plus, we all know that Quebecois are not going to go see the Leafs or Bruins, only their beloved Habs. And if your plan to increase ticket sales involves selling more tickets to the fans of other teams when they come to visit, you've essentially given up on growing your own market.

All I'm saying is that if they stop trying to force Detroit into the east, they won't have to fix so many things that aren't broken.


watch ANY Canadian team vs Florida and you'll disagree. Always larger/louder away section, sounds like the Panthers are visiting. How would your friend at the pro shop even have any Ida who the fans were there to see? Ask every person who came in?
 
2013-02-26 10:28:18 AM  

WSUCanuck: There's always one moron who thinks people in San Jose don't tune in or fill up the barn with home fans. (except when Vancouver comes to town in the playoffs, then its Vancouver South). Congrats <b>meanmutton</b> on being that guy.


http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance/_/sort/allAvg

San Jose is 18th in home attendance, 20th in road attendance.  But nearly everyone sells nearly all of their seats so selling out their tiny arena isn't that unusual for the NHL.

TV, though, is where my point was.  The most recent ratings information I've seen for the Sharks local TV ratings is from the Sharks  http://sharks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=614593

Last season, they averaged a 1.33 rating for their locally broadcast cable (33,411 households per game).

Red Wings average 4.5 for their locally broadcast cable.
Penguins are averaging 11.9 local ratings this season  http://fans.penguins.nhl.com/community/topic/18951-pens-tv-ratings-ju g gernauts/
Boston Bruins averaged 3.1 and 4.7 the last two seasons on locally broadcast cable.  http://fangsbites.com/2012/04/boston-bruins-set-another-ratings-recor d -on-nesn-2/
 
2013-02-26 11:14:05 AM  

notsosilentbob: The guys I know that worked for the team shot that argument down last summer, they say that those games did not have significantly better attendance. Since I'm somewhat lazy, I'll take their word on it. You get a slight bump for Montreal instead of Carolina, but not that much. Plus, we all know that Quebecois are not going to go see the Leafs or Bruins, only their beloved Habs. And if your plan to increase ticket sales involves selling more tickets to the fans of other teams when they come to visit, you've essentially given up on growing your own market.


I would disagree.  I attended a Panthers vs. Maple Leafs game in late January and there were MANY, MANY Quebec license plates in the parking lot.  I saw multiple people there in Habs jerseys as well as the requisite masses in Leafs jerseys.  I'd say the split was 60-40 in terms of Panthers / Leafs fans.  Furthermore, the BB&T Center (where the Panthers play) actually has a gear shop dedicated to other teams' gear.  They even had Thrashers jerseys, throwback Canadiens jerseys and the vaunted Hartford Whalers gear.

Malcolm_Sex: watch ANY Canadian team vs Florida and you'll disagree. Always larger/louder away section, sounds like the Panthers are visiting.


As noted above, you're absolutely right.  I'm actually going to see the Habs in Tampa Bay in a few weeks, so it should be interesting.
 
2013-02-26 11:22:45 AM  

TheJoe03: Plus, it seems pretty asinine to move out of a market like Dallas when they finally have a new owner and they are actually selling out games for the first time in a few years (despite having the same ~.500 record they've had in the last few years).


I'm actually really enjoying watching them this year. I don't know if the lockout made me miss hockey more than usual or what, but it's been really fun.

And the argument about putting hockey in cities that only see snow "once every 20 years" is asinine. Unless the other teams are playing their games outside, geography is irrelevant.  We can freeze shiat now. WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY
 
2013-02-26 12:17:47 PM  

Di Atribe: And the argument about putting hockey in cities that only see snow "once every 20 years" is asinine. Unless the other teams are playing their games outside, geography is irrelevant. We can freeze shiat now. WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY


The shiat that needs to freeze is the lake. If the lake isn't freezing, there's no underlying winter-sports culture and you can't force one.
 
2013-02-26 12:59:01 PM  

Gosling: Di Atribe: And the argument about putting hockey in cities that only see snow "once every 20 years" is asinine. Unless the other teams are playing their games outside, geography is irrelevant. We can freeze shiat now. WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY

The shiat that needs to freeze is the lake. If the lake isn't freezing, there's no underlying winter-sports culture and you can't force one.


Except that the Stars presence has caused an explosion in youth hockey in Texas:  http://unitedstatesofhockey.com/2011/05/23/raw-numbers-hockeys-growth - in-the-united-states-1990-2009/

State: Texas
NHL Team: Dallas Stars (Moved to Dallas in 1993)
1990-91: 868
2009-10: 10,909
Growth: 1,156.8%

Hell, I grew up watching a local Original Six team and didn't start playing hockey until I moved to the DFW area.

Oh, and the number 1 draft prospect this year, Seth Jones, is from the Dallas area.
 
2013-02-26 01:33:58 PM  
You all might want to check out the Twitter feeds of Pierre LeBrun and Bob McKenzie. Apparently, it's not a 4 conference plan anymore. It's a 4 division and 2 conference plan now. 16 teams in the East and 14 in the West. They're trying to explain it.
 
2013-02-26 06:27:26 PM  

Di Atribe: I'm actually really enjoying watching them this year. I don't know if the lockout made me miss hockey more than usual or what, but it's been really fun.


I honestly feel the same way. These cold weather states need to stop trying to steal our team away!

/yeah we took the team from a cold weather state, but whatever, don't move the Stars again!
 
2013-02-26 06:34:49 PM  

TheJoe03: /yeah we took the team from a cold weather state, but whatever, don't move the Stars again!


Eeeeeeeeeeeeh did we steal it? Or was it given to us? I know Northstars fans were upset. I'd be upset to lose a team, too. But the rest of the league really needs to pipe down. We love our Stars. And also this:

IamSoSmart_S_M_R_T: State: Texas
NHL Team: Dallas Stars (Moved to Dallas in 1993)
1990-91: 868
2009-10: 10,909
Growth: 1,156.8%


There's your underlying winter sports culture right there. Kids in Dallas today have never not had a hockey team.
 
2013-02-26 06:46:57 PM  

bluorangefyre: Flip Winnipeg and Nashville.  Problem solved.

OR

Remove the team from Arizona and place it in Atlanta as compensation for the city losing two hockey teams and one World Series to Canuckistan.


Why would that make sense though? Atlanta would just lose a third hockey team. The Yotes are finally getting some financial success, I thought.
 
2013-02-26 06:52:45 PM  

Di Atribe: Eeeeeeeeeeeeh did we steal it? Or was it given to us? I know Northstars fans were upset. I'd be upset to lose a team, too.


True, they always seemed way more pissed at their owner than they ever were about Dallas, plus I think the Stars still have a decent fanbase up there.
 
2013-02-26 08:30:55 PM  
NHL has announced their proposal, which preserves the Conference Finals round; I can't quite tell if it's going back to effectively the pre-1994 system (four divisional tournaments, conference finals, Cup) with a potential "crossover" or the 1994-1998 format of two divisions playing all together in the conference playoffs.

One thing I especially like about the proposed regular-season schedule is that it's mathematically impossible.

In the seven-team divisions, teams would play intraconference foes three times per season and five of the six intradivision foes five times a season. The sixth opponent within the division would be played four times. In the eight-team divisions, teams would play intraconference opponents three times and intradivision opponents either four or five times per season on a rotating basis.

If you do the math, teams in the West play 16x2 = 32 games against the East, 7x3 = 21 games against the other West division, leaving 29 games inside the division. That's confirmed with the bolded text. But you can't have 7 teams each play 29 games amongst each other. Since each game must obviously have two teams, either the number of teams or the number of games played per team has to be even.

Another way to look at it: Say we look at the Pacific (Anaheim Ducks, Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, Los Angeles Kings, Phoenix Coyotes, San Jose Sharks, Vancouver Canucks). Anaheim plays Calgary only 4 times and vice versa. Edmonton plays LA 4 times and vice versa. Phoenix plays SJ 4 times and vice versa. Who does Vancouver play 4 times?

/i'll let you get back to your hockey
//oh and whoever said the Devils should move, you can kiss my ass
 
2013-02-27 03:28:49 PM  

Handsome B. Wonderful: Jimmy Howard told the Detroit Free Press "The travel takes years off of all our lives."
Boo-farking-hoo.  fark you Jimmy Howard.


Gordie Howe, Dominik Hasek, Chris Chelios, Niklas Lidstrom all agree.  They all could have played into their sixties if it wasn't for the fact they had played for Detroit.....

Boo-Farking-Hoo indeed
 
2013-02-27 03:57:00 PM  

RminusQ: NHL has announced their proposal, which preserves the Conference Finals round; I can't quite tell if it's going back to effectively the pre-1994 system (four divisional tournaments, conference finals, Cup) with a potential "crossover" or the 1994-1998 format of two divisions playing all together in the conference playoffs.

One thing I especially like about the proposed regular-season schedule is that it's mathematically impossible.

In the seven-team divisions, teams would play intraconference foes three times per season and five of the six intradivision foes five times a season. The sixth opponent within the division would be played four times. In the eight-team divisions, teams would play intraconference opponents three times and intradivision opponents either four or five times per season on a rotating basis.

If you do the math, teams in the West play 16x2 = 32 games against the East, 7x3 = 21 games against the other West division, leaving 29 games inside the division. That's confirmed with the bolded text. But you can't have 7 teams each play 29 games amongst each other. Since each game must obviously have two teams, either the number of teams or the number of games played per team has to be even.

Another way to look at it: Say we look at the Pacific (Anaheim Ducks, Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, Los Angeles Kings, Phoenix Coyotes, San Jose Sharks, Vancouver Canucks). Anaheim plays Calgary only 4 times and vice versa. Edmonton plays LA 4 times and vice versa. Phoenix plays SJ 4 times and vice versa. Who does Vancouver play 4 times?

/i'll let you get back to your hockey
//oh and whoever said the Devils should move, you can kiss my ass


You're right, it is impossible to pull off. I think that if they're going to go back to divisional playoffs (which I think is a great idea), they should just stick to the original plan's setup for the schedule: 5-6 games per divisional opponent, 2 games against everyone else.

In the West, that's 36 division games (6x6) and 46 out of division (23x2)
In the East, it's 38 divisional games (3 teams played 6 times, 4 played 5 times) and 44 out of division.
 
Displayed 159 of 159 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report