ESPN panel fine-tunes NHL

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Do you guys actually think Bettman will let someone move to Saskatoon?

Also, I feel sorry for the Coyotes players, because their golf game would take a huge hit moving from Phoenix back to Winnipeg.

[Buppy 1,720]

I agree with the minimal expansion/realignment strategies, here's my scenario:

I took all of the southern teams and moved the ones that have never won a cup (Florida, Atlanta, Nashville, Phoenix, and LA) ...

Drop the schedule from 82 games to 80 (who came up with an 82-game schedule anyway), each team plays the teams in their division 6 times, the neighboring division twice (i.e. Western vs. Midwest, Northeast vs. Eastern) and then the remaining 16 teams once per season. Playoffs are seeded 1-16 based on record, the division champs getting the first 4 seeds, then each of the remaining teams by overall record. That way, there could conceivably be a Stanley Cup Finals matchup between division rivals.

...

As far as I'm aware, LA actually generates some nice revenue, mostly due to the arena. Fairly sure Anaheim does worse, despite their recent success. Either way, the Southern California market seems perfectly capable of supporting two teams.

Playoff format has some merit, but rivalries really build in the playoffs. A single 16 team pool would make it less likely that rival teams would play each other. Also, that schedule is only 74 games, not that it matters.

[Guest Shoreline]

I like Melrose's ideas about teams to throw out, just not his conference alignment. I especially like the idea of trying out teams in Portland and Saskatoon.

The idea about 40+ teams though is ******* retarded.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Shoreline

[auxlepli 17]

Leave the NHL alone it's fine as is.

It's the best hockey in the world and the best sport in the world.

Oh and by the way, the four-letter network is as bad as hockey is good.

[Buppy 1,720]

Leave the NHL alone it's fine as is.

It's the best hockey in the world and the best sport in the world.

Oh and by the way, the four-letter network is as bad as hockey is good.

Phoenix, Atlanta, Islanders, Nashville, Columbus, and Florida are hemmoraging money. Tampa Bay, Carolina, St. Louis and Buffalo are struggling. Washington, Pittsburgh, and Chicago are just starting to become profitable again. I believe even San Jose and Edmonton aren't far above the danger zone.

The league has been improving steadily since the lockout, but still a long way from 'fine as is'.

[StevieY9802 6]

I don't mind Melrose's plan other than not moving the Preds to the east, you move the Jackets. why you would have an eastern timezone team stay in the east while a central timezone team goes west I dunno. Bucci's was a little nuts. So two in twin cities, another in Milwaukee and the Hawks? I'm also not a fan of his san diego team. So 3 teams in So Cal? No thanks. I go with my tweaked version of Melrose's.

Phoenix, Atlanta, Islanders, Nashville, Columbus, and Florida are hemmoraging money. Tampa Bay, Carolina, St. Louis and Buffalo are struggling. Washington, Pittsburgh, and Chicago are just starting to become profitable again. I believe even San Jose and Edmonton aren't far above the danger zone.

The league has been improving steadily since the lockout, but still a long way from 'fine as is'.

yeah no kdding. All the teams you mentioned are having issues money wise. The league needs some work still. I move PHX, ATL and FLA to canadian cities and get the Isles a new arena to start and that would help out most of the worst teams financially. Then go from there.

Edited September 24, 2009 by StevieY9802

[VM1138 1,921]

Bucci....you didn't think that out very well. I believe there are already tons of college and minor league hockey teams and leagues out there already...what's the point in making the NHL another one of those?

I don't think the league needs to be shrunk necessarily, but FORTY teams with small arenas? Absurd. Especially when you realize that such a setup would make the league extraordinarily vulnerable to economic fluctuations.

They just need smarter placement of teams (i.e. moving Phoenix).

[auxlepli 17]

Fine as is ... as in to stay the course. Not go changing things willy nilly, just because some lame brain gets a wild hare up his arse. And especially wanting to change things because some talking heads at a Mickey Mouse network, known for hating hockey, say so.

[HadThomasVokounOnFortSt 878]

Haha this made a good laugh, but I think the NHL is fine how it is.

[Guest micah]

I would be one of 19 fans in attendance any given night at the NHL's Milwaukee team's game. Studies have been done, angles have been investigated - by all acounts Milwaukee would not be able to support a team. If Wisconsin were given a team, I'd sooner see them play in Madison (even though it's far enough away that I'd not get to many games and it's a cespool of filthy hippies), at least then they could draw from an area that has a little bit of interest in hockey despite it's smallish population. Staill, throwing a dart at Canada and picking that city/town/forrest to host a new team would have a better chance of selling seats than any team in WI would.

I like the idea of renaming the divisions and conferences after greats of the game.

[StevieY9802 6]

I like the idea of renaming the divisions and conferences after greats of the game.

you mean basically going back to what it was like before Bettman tried to NBA-ize the NHL?

And sorry people the NHL is not fine as is when you have so many teams struggling financially. I admit all but Melrose's plan are crazy stupid but his makes sense. Even he said it dosen't need too much tinkering but it does need some. That and some revenue sharing and a good tv deal and the league might be ok.

[Guest micah]

you mean basically going back to what it was like before Bettman tried to NBA-ize the NHL?

Yes, that's exacyly what I mean. It had a little flair.

There is this push by some to make hockey just like the other big professional sports and I'm not sure that that's a good idea. I suspect hockey would do better if it focussed on selling the things that make it unique instead of changing them.

[StevieY9802 6]

Yes, that's exacyly what I mean. It had a little flair.

There is this push by some to make hockey just like the other big professional sports and I'm not sure that that's a good idea. I suspect hockey would do better if it focussed on selling the things that make it unique instead of changing them.

I'm with you 100%. It shows off the history that this sport has that the others really don't. There is a story behind these things. And I've said it before on the boards that did changing the names to East, West, central and so on really bring in more fans? no one sits around saying I'm not gonna like baseball because they have 2 leagues that have different rules about the DH instead of just and east and west or whatever. And after the lockout Bettman wanted to create more div. rivalries but in 93-4 they went away from divisional playoffs.

[Snazzy 0]

To hell being in the east. Divide it into 3 conferences and have the line drawn at the timezone.

[Majsheppard 203]

No kidding, they are stupid.

I would like to see two expansion teams though.

32 is the number in my mind, 16 per division. Of course if Phoenix moves, I would like to see Phoenix and Seattle get the teams so we can effing move EAST!

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

Toronto doesn't need another team, they can barely handle having one.

[Travis 576]

While I do love ESPN, as it's been said before - it's important to remember that their hockey knowledge is as in-depth as their coverage.

Years ago, I really loved Buccigross and thoroughly enjoyed his columns - but the more time goes on the more of an out-of-touch bandwagon jumper he seems to be. At least Melrose has always been the same helmet-headed mastermind.