Should the NHL have first round byes in the playoffs?

[ProfessorLidstrom5 0]

Just some food for thought and the fact of me being bored with no Wings game on.

Could a first round bye in the playoffs make the playoffs more interesting? Would it make much of a difference??

Now before you go and bash this idea by saying it would kill old time hockey tradition, will hurt a team's momentum, etc. etc. just open up your mind.

I think it would be kind of cool with the fact that the top 2 seeds from each conference get to rest up and/or get a chance to see how their first opponent plays in the playoff atmosphere each year. It would also be more meaningful to get the best record each year and guarantee that the top 4 teams in the league get to the 2nd round in the playoffs.

As the current standings show now, it would look like this:

West Conference

Detroit - Bye

San Jose - Bye

Minnesota vs Vancouver

Dallas vs Colorado

Calgary vs Anaheim

East Conference

Ottawa - Bye

Philly - Bye

Carolina vs NY Islanders

Montreal vs Boston

Pittsburgh vs NJ

So what do you think???

[dgodzina 0]

I see where you're going with the idea, but you could only have 6 teams per conference. Three 1st round winners to play two bye teams in the second round?

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

All this would accomplish is to help the Wings from getting embarassed in the 1st round of the playoffs every other year. Also, no one would want to take potentially 2 weeks off. That would be a disadvantage for any team that goes through it, instead of an advantage to strive for. Thus, winning in the regular season would become counterproductive, contrary to what you suggest in your post.

[akustyk 84]

I like this idea but this would mean much less playoff games in TV and what's more important - this would be those games ppl would be often most interested to watch.

won't happen

[Grittzkey 1]

Nooooo, That long of a lay off, Would kill the top 2 teams.

Not to mention Red Wings Playoff Games are the best.

[ProfessorLidstrom5 0]

I see where you're going with the idea, but you could only have 6 teams per conference. Three 1st round winners to play two bye teams in the second round?

Oops, I guess I should have thought it out a little more.

Edited February 1, 2008 by ProfessorLidstrom5

[Bannedforlife 403]

I think that with all the parity that the salary cap has brought, it is even less meaningful to have the best record during the regular season than it was before the lock-out, and something should be done about that besides another trophy. However, having 2 weeks off could theoretically do more harm than good, especially since the team you eventually will be facing after your mini-vacation will be fired up and have that playoff fire in their bellies. I think you would see the first and second place teams knocked out of the second round more often than not.

[Yzermaniac192005 0]

I think you're on to something - however you can only have 6 playoff teams if you want 2 to have a bye, per conference.

However, I've wanted to cut the size of the amount of playoff teams down for as long as I can remember. I don't think the method Baseball uses would work in the NHL but football, I could see. Even the old Basketball playoff method might work where we have shorter first rounds. I just think the NHL playoffs are too long and dragged out, leaving very little emphasis on the regular season.

[dgodzina 0]

Oops, I guess I should have thought it out a little more. Maybe we could add another team to the playoffs to make it 9 teams and just have the top seed from each conf. get the bye instead of the top 2 seeds. That actually looks better

Or add another team and have the three division winners get byes, and play the winners of the other three series. But, in any event, I think the layoff would hurt the top seeds too much, even if you shortened the first round series. The system, would however, give a little more incentive to winning divisions. But I think that the main incentive to winning your division/conference is to have home advantage in a potential game 7. This is when home advantage seems to make the most difference in the playoffs (just ask Colorado).

[ProfessorLidstrom5 0]

I think you're on to something - however you can only have 6 playoff teams if you want 2 to have a bye, per conference.

However, I've wanted to cut the size of the amount of playoff teams down for as long as I can remember. I don't think the method Baseball uses would work in the NHL but football, I could see. Even the old Basketball playoff method might work where we have shorter first rounds. I just think the NHL playoffs are too long and dragged out, leaving very little emphasis on the regular season.

Yeah, the NHL would have to cut it down to 6 with two byes per conf. or 7 with one bye per conf.

[ProfessorLidstrom5 0]

Or add another team and have the three division winners get byes, and play the winners of the other three series. But, in any event, I think the layoff would hurt the top seeds too much, even if you shortened the first round series. The system, would however, give a little more incentive to winning divisions. But I think that the main incentive to winning your division/conference is to have home advantage in a potential game 7. This is when home advantage seems to make the most difference in the playoffs (just ask Colorado).

Right on. I thought that would be the answer more times than not. It's just a fun idea and nothing more than that.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

How about every year the Wings win the West, they get an automatic bye into the finals? That sounds fair right? The team should be rewarded for their constant regular season success.

[ProfessorLidstrom5 0]

How about every year the Wings win the West, they get an automatic bye into the finals? That sounds fair right? The team should be rewarded for their constant regular season success.

Haha, yeah that would be awesome!! Although I'm sure they would be quite rusty by the time they have to play again...lol

[auxlepli 17]

How about every year the Wings win the West, they get an automatic bye into the finals? That sounds fair right? The team should be rewarded for their constant regular season success.

Agreed. No wait I meant to quote your first post in this thread.

[Booster313 138]

The short answer...no, the long answer............also no.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

This actually crossed my brain today, but I don't think there's enough teams in each conference to justify it, plus a handful of games in a series to decide the match (up to 7).

That is just too much time off between games for a team to not deal with rust/layoffs.

If it was a single-elimination tourney, perhaps I'd entertain the idea, but professional playoff hockey is as good as it gets for us fans. Around 3 months of extra hockey, some games being with extra time/sudden death, I could go on and on.

Nothing about professional playoff hockey should be tweaked, in terms of games, length, etc.

[omnipotent_hudler 0]

No, no and no.

One of the best parts about the playoffs is whichever team wins has to suffer through the dreaded "grind" of 16 wins. Bye's take that away. I really think that if you want to lift that cup you should have to suffer as much as any team, even if you are the best in your conference/division/league at the end of the regular season.

Edited February 1, 2008 by omnipotent_hudler

[Konnan511 1,736]

This idea might work if you gave the two top divisional teams in each conference a first round bye and allowed only 4 more teams from each conference in. If we used the current standings as they are now it's look like this:

The East would look like this: Ottawa and Philly get first round byes because even though Philly has less points than Montreal, Philly is leading their division. Then by virtue of being the other division leader Carolina would be in it, followed by Montreal, Pittsburgh and New Jersey.

For the West it would be Detroit and San Jose getting the first round byes. Then it would be the other division leader, Minnesota followed by Dallas, Calgary and the Quackers.

Seed the division leader who didn't get the bye with the first seed and lesser points with each incremental seed.

[sixer 37]

YES YES YES!!!

I've long said this before, why else does the regular season matter except for entertainment, building team chemistry and some home ice advantage.

We need to be more like baseball and football and reward the teams that have stellar seasons!

Forget the layoff blues, a solid team will perform and will be stronger with the fewer games they have to play.

GET IT DONE BETTMAN!!!

Anyone who disagrees needs to look at all the times we were tops in the league and got put out early.

Props to OP, totally agree!!!

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Agreed. No wait I meant to quote your first post in this thread.

It's O.K. I like this one better anyway.

[timothy1997 0]

As the current standings show now, it would look like this:

West Conference

Detroit - Bye

San Jose - Bye

Minnesota vs Vancouver

Dallas vs Colorado

Calgary vs Anaheim

Ok. after Minnesota, Dallas, Calgary advance, what next?? First round byes only work in the NFL playoff format. Thats it.

[SweWings 45]

Playoff hockey is the best hockey and I don't see any real problems with it as is. No complaints. I think the biggest problem is with the regular season and the f-ed up schedule that has too many problems for me to have the wakefulness to write down (it's late over here dammit!! i'm working a night shift and taking a break but still...not really conscious). Oh and like you guys mention, the biggest flaw in this suggestion is the lack of games for some teams. Hockey players are used to a high tempo, to be able to quickly rebound from a bad loss to a win AND to be able to get a good thing rolling. If that's removed then teams lose rhythm and just disappear. Like Ottawa has now when key players have been in and out of the line-up...

[Pskov Wings Fan 71]

I would be against it. The more playoff hockey - the better. Also I am not sure that having a bye would actually help the top teams. Playoff hockey is quite different for regular season. I think the team, which went throught the playoff series would have an advantage (unless half of their lineup got knocked out).

[Gary Bettman 0]

I think this is a great idea. Thank you for bringing this up. I think more change is just what the NHL needs, since we are on the right path to becoming even more popular than the NFL.

[Yemack 1]

wait a second.. so being first overall team means we are awarded to make no profit in first round, and then get to face a team who just went through fire and have all the momentum? (and we just woke up from bed no less?)

It might work in some sports but not in hockey IMO. I would support giving top seeded teams last call on line change tho. (only in first round)

Edited February 1, 2008 by Yemack