mmamolo 287 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 32 Teams Even though it's a crappy Eklund blog it does raise an interesting situation to think about. It'd be interesting to know ppl's thoughts on adding two additional teams (as the blog points out potentially a second team in Toronto and a Quebec team) and what they'd think about conference realignments. How would you envision the the playoffs working? Who would be in which division? Who has preferences? Personally I don't think I'd necessarily want, nor be opposed, to add two teams but for the sake of argument why not. Based on geographical location I broke up the league into what I would imagine the divisions to be. I didn't name them but if any one wants shoot out some suggestions or make your own divisions or whatever. NHL Map Pittsburgh Philadelphia Boston Toronto Montreal Ottawa Buffalo Quebec Washington New Jersey New York Rangers New York Islanders Tampa Bay Carolina Florida Atlanta Dallas Minnesota Toronto2 Chicago Nashville Detroit Columbus St Louis Calgary Vancouver Colorado Edmonton San Jose Phoenix Los Angeles Anaheim As the article indicates I think they'd go back to divisional playoffs. I think you'd have 4 teams from each division make the playoffs (or 5 with a by but I hate the idea of aby in hockey) with the division champs meeting in the conference finals. Thoughts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaman 713 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 Some days I believe he writes purely just to see his name on a current blog, then i read said blog, and know my beliefs are indeed facts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmamolo 287 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 Some days I believe he writes purely just to see his name on a current blog, then i read said blog, and know my beliefs are indeed facts. That's definitely true but that doesnt mean it's not an interesting idea to think about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lidstrom for life 20 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 So in the hypothetical 4 divisions, what is the reasoning behind the two Toronto teams being in seperate divisions? Also, how would the schedule work? Does it do away with "conferences" all together so you play the teams in your division a lot and then you play the teams from the other three divisions equally (once or twice a year?) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InKennyWeTrust 126 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 Welp, Dallas is boned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmamolo 287 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 So in the hypothetical 4 divisions, what is the reasoning behind the two Toronto teams being in seperate divisions? Also, how would the schedule work? Does it do away with "conferences" all together so you play the teams in your division a lot and then you play the teams from the other three divisions equally (once or twice a year?) Looking at the map obviously it seems like there are more teams that should fall in the East than the West. That being said with teams like Detroit, Columbus, Minnesota and Chicago in all relatively close distance the second Toronto team could fit in the West. Plus, it's kind of like the Mets and Yankees. It could be weird having them in the same conference. That being said you could have a great rivalry with them in the same conference. I only thought of putting them in the West to create the 16 and 16 balance. But it could work out however you wanted. Based on the article part of the motivation was to further rivalries so I would imagine the regular season schedule would also reflect this. With 8 teams in each division I would imagine you'd play the other 7 maybe 5 or 6 times. Then splitting the among the league somehow. I think the article implied you'd still have conferences (East and West) so I would imagine the schedule would reflect that to some degree as well. The way I see it the schedule could work one of two ways. I'm sure we've all heard lately the NHL has been considering getting rid of 1 or 2 preseason games and expanding the regular season. Under the new realignment here are the two schedules I could see making sense: 83 Game Season 7 Divisional Opponents x 5 Games Each = 35 Games 8 Conference Opponents x 2 Games Each =16 Games 16 Opposite Conference Opponents x 2 Games Each = 32 Games TOTAL 83 Games 84 Game Season 7 Divisional Opponents x 4 Games Each = 28 Games 8 Conference Opponents x 3 Games Each =24 Games 16 Opposite Conference Opponents x 2 Games Each = 32 Games TOTAL 84 Games Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,804 Report post Posted February 17, 2010 I think the league should realign in a way to have Crosby and Ovechkin meet in the Finals every year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tane 17 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 I'd love for them to go back to Divisional playoffs. With this many teams, 4 teams from each divison would work well. And that's how you create rivalries. Especially within the Division. Having to play the same teams every year in the playoffs. not playing the same teams ALL year in the regular season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hooon 1,089 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 Some of the realignment stuff makes a little sense, but in NO way should they touch the current playoff format. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick Zombos Ghost 82 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 with the KHL slowly starting to poach talent lets not spread it around anymore with 2 new teams. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 The League needs to prop up the weak franchises first, not add more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 (edited) I think my idea was WAY better and more feasible: http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=45813 note half way through the thread after other posters collaborated - I think this was the best scenario: lets just go back to Campbell and Wales (but make it more like an AL/NL in MLB) too... with a throwback to the legends - EVERYONE TRAVELS!!! WALES CONFERENCE Adams Division Vancouver, Buffalo, San Jose, Toronto, NYI Patrick Division Atlanta, NYR, Philadelphia, Anaheim, Tampa Bay Morenz Division New Jersey, Dallas, Calgary, Washington, Boston CAMPBELL CONFERENCE Scmidt Division Pittsburgh, Ottawa, Columbus, Colorado, Florida Norris Division Detroit, Los Angeles, Montreal, Nashville, Edmonton Smyth Division Chicago, Minnesota, St. Louis, Phoenix, Carolina 5 games against division - 20 3 games against rest of conference - 30 2 games (home and away) against other conf - 30 Grand total of 80 Same playoff structure Edited February 18, 2010 by stevkrause Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmamolo 287 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 Travel costs aside I am in favour of this. I don't think rivalries are necessarily built based on geographical location. I love the way MLB and the NFL are set up with the AL/NL and AFC/NFC systems in place. I would much rather see a different alignment. Plus, it would give the NHL more flexibility in setting divisions up and maximizing their marketing opportunities and everything else. As usualy, I'm basically on the same page Stevkrause Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CaliWingsNut Report post Posted February 18, 2010 *waits for eva to claim idea as his* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 That map is funny, Avs are labeled as dickless hahaha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stormboy 47 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 32 Teams Even though it's a crappy Eklund blog it does raise an interesting situation to think about. It'd be interesting to know ppl's thoughts on adding two additional teams (as the blog points out potentially a second team in Toronto and a Quebec team) and what they'd think about conference realignments. How would you envision the the playoffs working? Who would be in which division? Who has preferences? Personally I don't think I'd necessarily want, nor be opposed, to add two teams but for the sake of argument why not. Based on geographical location I broke up the league into what I would imagine the divisions to be. I didn't name them but if any one wants shoot out some suggestions or make your own divisions or whatever. NHL Map Pittsburgh Philadelphia Boston Toronto Montreal Ottawa Buffalo Quebec Washington New Jersey New York Rangers New York Islanders Tampa Bay Carolina Florida Atlanta Dallas Minnesota Toronto2 Chicago Nashville Detroit Columbus St Louis Calgary Vancouver Colorado Edmonton San Jose Phoenix Los Angeles Anaheim As the article indicates I think they'd go back to divisional playoffs. I think you'd have 4 teams from each division make the playoffs (or 5 with a by but I hate the idea of aby in hockey) with the division champs meeting in the conference finals. Thoughts? not being a hockey expert, i sort of like the four divisions - top four teams from each making it in, division, conference, etc. for the playoffs. but, even though i don't like his method, i think the luke skywalker poster said that the NHL does NOT need to be trying to add new teams right now. that just makes sense to me. i don't see it so much as a KHL threat, though that might actually be the case and i just don't realize it, but i see is as the same amount of money being more thinly distributed between players and teams. I think my idea was WAY better and more feasible: http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=45813 note half way through the thread after other posters collaborated - I think this was the best scenario: lets just go back to Campbell and Wales (but make it more like an AL/NL in MLB) too... with a throwback to the legends - EVERYONE TRAVELS!!! WALES CONFERENCE Adams Division Vancouver, Buffalo, San Jose, Toronto, NYI Patrick Division Atlanta, NYR, Philadelphia, Anaheim, Tampa Bay Morenz Division New Jersey, Dallas, Calgary, Washington, Boston CAMPBELL CONFERENCE Scmidt Division Pittsburgh, Ottawa, Columbus, Colorado, Florida Norris Division Detroit, Los Angeles, Montreal, Nashville, Edmonton Smyth Division Chicago, Minnesota, St. Louis, Phoenix, Carolina 5 games against division - 20 3 games against rest of conference - 30 2 games (home and away) against other conf - 30 Grand total of 80 Same playoff structure your introductory statement makes me think that you're a huge dick...and though i still don't agree with your arrogance, i have to say that i don't mind this division alignment, generally. but... right now, and trying not to be a total homer, i think that the wings get boned a bit by the conference alignments in that they are the ONLY western conference team in the eastern time zone (i.e. lots of travel [though not the most], and THE most games played in later time zones), but in your system anaheim gets f***ED. i mean, some other divisions, they might be the only PST team, but there are some MST and CST teams thrown in. patrick has three basically east coast teams and ONE west coast team. i mean, far be it from me to look out for ANA, but they would have a damn good reason to *****. not meaning to diss, just looking at arguments for the sake of, well, argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollymania 162 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 does this site allow eklund links? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmamolo 287 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 right now, and trying not to be a total homer, i think that the wings get boned a bit by the conference alignments in that they are the ONLY western conference team in the eastern time zone (i.e. lots of travel [though not the most], and THE most games played in later time zones), but in your system anaheim gets f***ED. i mean, some other divisions, they might be the only PST team, but there are some MST and CST teams thrown in. patrick has three basically east coast teams and ONE west coast team. i mean, far be it from me to look out for ANA, but they would have a damn good reason to *****. not meaning to diss, just looking at arguments for the sake of, well, argument. Isn't Columbus in the EST zone as well? I'm no geography wiz so I could be wrong. Even if they are they would have a bit less distance to travel when going out west though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 not being a hockey expert, i sort of like the four divisions - top four teams from each making it in, division, conference, etc. for the playoffs. but, even though i don't like his method, i think the luke skywalker poster said that the NHL does NOT need to be trying to add new teams right now. that just makes sense to me. i don't see it so much as a KHL threat, though that might actually be the case and i just don't realize it, but i see is as the same amount of money being more thinly distributed between players and teams. your introductory statement makes me think that you're a huge dick...and though i still don't agree with your arrogance, i have to say that i don't mind this division alignment, generally. but... right now, and trying not to be a total homer, i think that the wings get boned a bit by the conference alignments in that they are the ONLY western conference team in the eastern time zone (i.e. lots of travel [though not the most], and THE most games played in later time zones), but in your system anaheim gets f***ED. i mean, some other divisions, they might be the only PST team, but there are some MST and CST teams thrown in. patrick has three basically east coast teams and ONE west coast team. i mean, far be it from me to look out for ANA, but they would have a damn good reason to *****. not meaning to diss, just looking at arguments for the sake of, well, argument. wow... I don't even know how to reply to this, as there's no inflection to text on an internet forum... so to infer that I'm a dick just from that... I was more pointing out that I thought there were better options than what Ecklund was suggesting than anything... but your mind is already made up about me I guess... back to my system, it's more just the general idea I was backing, not necessarily the EXACT teams in each EXACT conference, just a jumping off point... I'm sure teams could be shifted to accommodate better, but I think it should be broken up to try to make travel as equal as possible between all teams in the NHL and put 3 of the original 6 in each conference - that was my main point... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 Isn't Columbus in the EST zone as well? I'm no geography wiz so I could be wrong. Even if they are they would have a bit less distance to travel when going out west though. yes, they are, so is Nashville... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FireCaptain 563 Report post Posted February 18, 2010 Nashville is 100% NOT in the EST. Sorry, geography fail. yes, they are, so is Nashville... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted February 19, 2010 Nashville is 100% NOT in the EST. Sorry, geography fail. the whole "fail" context is pathetic... and people who use it as well... you can correct someone without sounding like a ******. I thought Nashville was EST, my mistake, they are Central... I stand corrected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 5,150 Report post Posted February 19, 2010 the whole "fail" context is pathetic... and people who use it as well... you can correct someone without sounding like a ******.I thought Nashville was EST, my mistake, they are Central... I stand corrected. careful, next time you might get a "PWNED" with that "FAIL" I hate the internet language too... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king_malice 17 Report post Posted February 19, 2010 Just put a new team in Hamilton, Bettman says it isn't personal that's bulls*** he just doesn't want to be proven wrong. Copps Coliseum holds 17,383 for a hockey game and when the rumors of Hamilton possibly getting a NHL team this past season, they were almost sold out of season ticket buyers people put down payments just incase they got it to show the NHL the intrest in Hamilton. I believe it is personal whether its with Balsille,Canada or Hamilton there is a reason Bettman Won't let it happen because the support is defintly there. There are a ton of Leaf fans in Hamilton and thats one of the reasons because the Leafs would end up losing fans and money but everyone knows the Leafs are a corperate team its 85% business men at there games so i don't see the problem. Hamilton can do no worse then teams like Tampa,Florida,Atlanta Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FireCaptain 563 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 Get over yourself. It's a joke. Sense of humor - aisle 5 @ Kroger. the whole "fail" context is pathetic... and people who use it as well... you can correct someone without sounding like a ******. I thought Nashville was EST, my mistake, they are Central... I stand corrected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
