• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
stevkrause

Re-alignment

Rate this topic

89 posts in this topic

Doesn't address the fact that too many teams are in crappy markets. We need to eliminate worthless, parasitic, "who-gives-a-good-frog-fart" teams that nobody want to see play.

Such as colorado, anaheim, and chicago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montreal is totally screwed. Forget the travel issues, all their divisional opponents are a couple time zones away.

not true, no moreso that almost every other team...

Most of that East to West travel for the Habs is still less time on the plane than for current games that the play against teams of the likes of Atlanta, Florida, Tampa, Carolina... they actually travel about the same or less and face more Canadian teams - good for media.

Also, as explained in my other post, they only play about 14 West Coast games under this format, whereas even teams that aren't in division, still have to play 10 West coast games... pretty even if you ask me... at least this way only 2 teams get a little boned, as opposed to the 6 or so now (also remember that they could give these teams scheduling leeway and send them out there for something like 3, 4-5 game trips - so it'd lessen the travel, then make other teams make at like 3, 3-4 game swings) basically ends up being the same - don't look at it so much like one way travel, as much as the overall travel each team will incur...

Not bad, but yeah, Montreal, Chicago, and Colorado are definitely at a disadvantage.

Otherwise, I agree that in this new league of revenue sharing, and the salary cap, ALL expenses should be equal. This includes travel.

only to an extent... once again, look at it from the broad perspective...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... once again, look at it from the broad perspective...

First of all, I don't really buy the premise that travel during the regular season is that much of a hassle. Playoffs maybe, but re-alignment doesn't solve that anyway. Only moving more teams out West would really help.

Secondly, your proposal makes travel worse for just about everyone. Most of all the SW teams. Basically trading games against the closest teams for games against the furthest.

Alignment isn't the problem. The problem (if it really is a problem) is that the East is so much more densely packed. Not much to be done about that, considering that the majority of good hockey markets are in the NE.

If they were to re-align. A North/South split would make the most sense. Divisions would still be regional, but the travel burden would be more evenly distributed East to West.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just some division ideas I pulled out of my rear end real quick without much thought/logic, based on proximity/geography.

Phoenix

Anaheim

Los Angeles

San Jose

Vancouver

Calgary

Edmonton

Dallas

Colorado

St. Louis

Nashville

Atlanta

Tampa Bay

Florida

Carolina

Chicago

Columbus

Detroit

Minnesota

Pittsburgh

Ottawa

Montreal

Boston

Buffalo

Toronto

New York Islanders

New York Rangers

New Jersey

Philadelphia

Washington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I know most people here are younger and are used to the Campbell/Wales setup. But if you look at history, from 1967 (the beginning of the 'modern era', aka divisions, to 1997, the NHL spent more time in the East/West format. From 1967 until now, it isn't even close.

So here's another proposal that would make travel more equal on teams, in general, while still trying to maintain rivalries as much as possible:

West:

Anaheim, Colorado, Dallas, Los Angeles, San Jose, Phoenix, Vancouver

North:

Boston, Buffalo, Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto

East:

Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh

South:

Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Nashville, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Washington

To further equalize travel, the North and South would be considered one conference, while the East and West would be considered another. Perhaps "Coastal" and "Central" or something might be appropriate, but I'm sure there are better names out there. There are two potential openings for expansion teams, preferably in the West and South, but Columbus could be moved to the South if necessary for an East team which is more suited to that division, or Minnesota could be moved West for a North team more suited to the North.

Top two teams in each division would make the playoffs, with division winners guaranteed a home seed. Playoffs would be seeded 1-16 based on overall league results, meaning one entire division could theoretically make it as far as the second round of the playoffs.

As for scheduling:

4 games vs all conference opponents

2 games vs all non-conference opponents

Total 86 games. Remove 2-3 preseason games, perhaps extend schedule by 2-3 days as well.

Perhaps not perfect, but better than a lot of suggestions that kill rivalries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I know most people here are younger and are used to the Campbell/Wales setup. But if you look at history, from 1967 (the beginning of the 'modern era', aka divisions, to 1997, the NHL spent more time in the East/West format. From 1967 until now, it isn't even close.

So here's another proposal that would make travel more equal on teams, in general, while still trying to maintain rivalries as much as possible:

West:

Anaheim, Colorado, Dallas, Los Angeles, San Jose, Phoenix, Vancouver

North:

Boston, Buffalo, Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto

East:

Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh

South:

Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Nashville, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Washington

To further equalize travel, the North and South would be considered one conference, while the East and West would be considered another. Perhaps "Coastal" and "Central" or something might be appropriate, but I'm sure there are better names out there. There are two potential openings for expansion teams, preferably in the West and South, but Columbus could be moved to the South if necessary for an East team which is more suited to that division, or Minnesota could be moved West for a North team more suited to the North.

Top two teams in each division would make the playoffs, with division winners guaranteed a home seed. Playoffs would be seeded 1-16 based on overall league results, meaning one entire division could theoretically make it as far as the second round of the playoffs.

As for scheduling:

4 games vs all conference opponents

2 games vs all non-conference opponents

Total 86 games. Remove 2-3 preseason games, perhaps extend schedule by 2-3 days as well.

Perhaps not perfect, but better than a lot of suggestions that kill rivalries.

I could definitely get on board with this too... the point is, something needs to drastically change...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not true, no moreso that almost every other team...

Most of that East to West travel for the Habs is still less time on the plane than for current games that the play against teams of the likes of Atlanta, Florida, Tampa, Carolina...

How so? Average one-way distance to Van/Edm/Cgy/SJ = 4,213km, average one-way to Atl, Fla, Tb and Car = 2,110km.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How so? Average one-way distance to Van/Edm/Cgy/SJ = 4,213km, average one-way to Atl, Fla, Tb and Car = 2,110km.

distance is not that drastic via plane and you also don't have to stop over at customs for international air travel regulations...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not true, no moreso that almost every other team...

Most of that East to West travel for the Habs is still less time on the plane than for current games that the play against teams of the likes of Atlanta, Florida, Tampa, Carolina... they actually travel about the same or less and face more Canadian teams - good for media.

Also, as explained in my other post, they only play about 14 West Coast games under this format, whereas even teams that aren't in division, still have to play 10 West coast games... pretty even if you ask me... at least this way only 2 teams get a little boned, as opposed to the 6 or so now (also remember that they could give these teams scheduling leeway and send them out there for something like 3, 4-5 game trips - so it'd lessen the travel, then make other teams make at like 3, 3-4 game swings) basically ends up being the same - don't look at it so much like one way travel, as much as the overall travel each team will incur...

The issue for me in this case isn't how much a team travels, but the fact that Montreal is the only team in its time zone. That means continuously having to adjust to games at different times than what your biological clock is used to and for a team that far East versing teams that far West, that's a big difference that's sure to affect play. At least how its set now, many of the games that a team plays are within their own time zone, so no adjusting schedules and getting used to jet-lag for a good percentage of the season. That concept flies out the window with this set-up, and disproportionally so with some teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue for me in this case isn't how much a team travels, but the fact that Montreal is the only team in its time zone. That means continuously having to adjust to games at different times than what your biological clock is used to and for a team that far East versing teams that far West, that's a big difference that's sure to affect play. At least how its set now, many of the games that a team plays are within their own time zone, so no adjusting schedules and getting used to jet-lag for a good percentage of the season. That concept flies out the window with this set-up, and disproportionally so with some teams.

Fair enough, but I'm sure a whole group of people could come up with something in this same vein, while adjusting where needed... see eva unit zero's suggestion - I could get on board with that one as well... the point is, something has got to give, the current system is horrible and needs to be fixed - BADLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I know most people here are younger and are used to the Campbell/Wales setup. But if you look at history, from 1967 (the beginning of the 'modern era', aka divisions, to 1997, the NHL spent more time in the East/West format. From 1967 until now, it isn't even close.

So here's another proposal that would make travel more equal on teams, in general, while still trying to maintain rivalries as much as possible:

West:

Anaheim, Colorado, Dallas, Los Angeles, San Jose, Phoenix, Vancouver

North:

Boston, Buffalo, Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto

East:

Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh

South:

Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Nashville, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Washington

To further equalize travel, the North and South would be considered one conference, while the East and West would be considered another. Perhaps "Coastal" and "Central" or something might be appropriate, but I'm sure there are better names out there. There are two potential openings for expansion teams, preferably in the West and South, but Columbus could be moved to the South if necessary for an East team which is more suited to that division, or Minnesota could be moved West for a North team more suited to the North.

Top two teams in each division would make the playoffs, with division winners guaranteed a home seed. Playoffs would be seeded 1-16 based on overall league results, meaning one entire division could theoretically make it as far as the second round of the playoffs.

As for scheduling:

4 games vs all conference opponents

2 games vs all non-conference opponents

Total 86 games. Remove 2-3 preseason games, perhaps extend schedule by 2-3 days as well.

Perhaps not perfect, but better than a lot of suggestions that kill rivalries.

I like going to four divisions again. Division titles are meaningless anyway. I don't like Detroit in the East unlike most people.

Northeast

New York Rangers

New York Islanders

New Jersey Devils

Buffalo Sabres

Boston Bruins

Toronto Maple Leafs

Montreal Canadians

Ottawa Senators

Southeast

Philadelphia Flyers

Pittsburgh Penguins

Washington Capitals

Tampa Bay Lightning

Florida Panthers

Atlanta Thrashers

Carolina Hurricanes

Nashville Predators

Central

Detroit Red Wings

Columbus Blue Jackets

St. Louis Blues

Dallas Stars

Minnesota Wild

Chicago Blackhawks

Colorado Avalanche

West

Phoenix Coyotes

San Jose Sharks

Anaheim Ducks

Los Angeles Kings

Vancouver Canucks

Calgary Flames

Edmonton Oilers

35 or 36 in division games (either 5 or 6 games against division teams, depending on size of division)

46 or 47 out of division games (2 games against the rest of the league, 3 against a couple teams)

Top four teams from each division make the playoffs

Crazy plan or sane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially with the Winnipeg deal going down and the league not wanting to move Detroit East due to revenues in the West... this NEEDS to happen, if they want parity, MAKE parity, the travel on the West compared to the East is BS right now and does not make an even playing field...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this option someone on HF suggested, but the league would never have the cojones to do this.

23iysxt.png

All the O6 teams in the same conference with divisions that make sense? Yes please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this option someone on HF suggested, but the league would never have the cojones to do this.

All the O6 teams in the same conference with divisions that make sense? Yes please.

That would absolutely make the most sense. But, let's not get ahead of ourselves and who is ultimately running the show. Even aside from all of this we are regionally the most East team and should be in the East. The O6 thing doesn't come into play for Uncle Gary until some older, wiser hockey mind probably brings that fact up to him.

stevkrause likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would absolutely make the most sense. But, let's not get ahead of ourselves and who is ultimately running the show. Even aside from all of this we are regionally the most East team and should be in the East. The O6 thing doesn't come into play for Uncle Gary until some older, wiser hockey mind probably brings that fact up to him.

Agreed.

The long and the short of it is that the league needs to get away from an East/West format for conferences, however they split up the divisions after that, I'm cool with it, as long as ALL teams have a somewhat equal travel for the season. Otherwise, parity is not there.

Edited by stevkrause

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even thinking into it more, playing Toronto, Chicago, and Buffalo 6 times a year would have me quite excited. I know it's not happening but even the idea itself would be worth suggesting somewhere down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about the possibility of doing something a little more radical with alignment as well, but this is Gary Bettman's NHL we're talking about. We'll be lucky if he doesn't move the Kings to the Southeast division. Seriously, Nashville (even though their in a different timezone) will probably get moved to the Southeast. That's the easiest/laziest way to fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

The long and the short of it is that the league needs to get away from an East/West format for conferences, however they split up the divisions after that, I'm cool with it, as long as ALL teams have a somewhat equal travel for the season. Otherwise, parity is not there.

I posted something like this on HF. Without conferences, a 30 team league with 6 divisions of 5 can have each team play their other division members 8 times a year (4 home and 4 away per), plus every other team 2 times a year (1 home and 1 away) for a total of 82 games. More travel due to more opposite-coast games would be somewhat made up for in playing more in-division games. This lack of conferential play much better balances the travel for all times.

So, for example with the current divisions, Detroit would play:

Chicago

Nashville

St. Louis

Columbus

8 times each and every other team (out of 25 remaining) in the league 2 times each. This totals up to 82 games (32 in division, 50 out of division). Even road/home distribution for all team matchups.

That looks much better than our ridiculous conferential system right now, unless you're a spoiled northeast/atlantic team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about the possibility of doing something a little more radical with alignment as well, but this is Gary Bettman's NHL we're talking about. We'll be lucky if he doesn't move the Kings to the Southeast division. Seriously, Nashville (even though their in a different timezone) will probably get moved to the Southeast. That's the easiest/laziest way to fix it.

Agreed and it sucks... unfortunately, what WILL happen and what should VERY rarely ever line up in the NHL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted this on HF, I think it would bring many benefits to the league and a number of teams. Among them include:

1. Better ratings for Phoenix

2. Marquee players in the West for media attention

3. Crosby, Ovy, and Toews all in the same division

4. Many struggling (be it on-ice or financial struggle) expansion teams given a better chance to compete, most notably in the Southeast

5. All of the NYC area and New York teams together, plus with Philly.

Northwest:

EDM

CGY

VAN

WPG

MIN

Pacific:

SJS

LAK

ANA

COL

DAL

Central:

PIT

WAS

CHI

NSH

STL

EAST

Southeast:

TBL

CAR

CLB

FLA

OTT

Atlantic:

NJD

NYI

NYR

BUF

PHI

Northeast:

DET

MTL

BOS

TOR

PHX

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just align the conferences from East/West to North/South and everyone travels to the opposite coast. You draw the line, lol, I'm at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just align the conferences from East/West to North/South and everyone travels to the opposite coast. You draw the line, lol, I'm at work.

I suggested this before too and it would still be a marked improvement over the current system, the problem, is that you would end up with essentially all the biggest markets in the North and that isn't good for the league... either way, something's got to change...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this option someone on HF suggested, but the league would never have the cojones to do this.

23iysxt.png

All the O6 teams in the same conference with divisions that make sense? Yes please.

Divisions that make sense include the highlighted Northwest, and Southwest, a Central where Dallas replaces Detroit, and an Eastern conference where Detroit moves into the Northeast, Buffalo to the Atlantic, and Pittsburgh to the Southeast. The divisions you have here are neat, but ridiculous. Regular games between Florida and Western Canada? Seriously? That's a nightmare trip. Chicago to Montreal is the longest "Eastern" conference trip, and it's shorter than Dallas to Miami, which is an IN-DIVISION trip in the "Western" conference. Completely ridiculous.

Cutting them up North/South instead, including the bottom two divisions plus Carolina, Chicago, Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Washington would make for much more equal travel. It also preserves most rivalries, although the Pens/Flyers, Wings/Blues, and Wings/Hawks are cut apart by it. It does bring back the Wings/Leafs rivalry, which most Wings fans would be more than happy to trade for. If the Atlanta sale falls through, Pittsburgh or Chicago ends up in the North, and a rivalry is saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this option someone on HF suggested, but the league would never have the cojones to do this.

23iysxt.png

All the O6 teams in the same conference with divisions that make sense? Yes please.

As Eva pointed out, it doesn't make sense to have the "Southeast" or whatever division you call that one with the Florida teams in the conference with Vancouver. What about 3 divisions and no conferences?...combine the two far-west divisions in the West, combine your Southern division with the division you've made with the Caps and Canes, and obviously combine the two northern ones. Maybe even have them in 3 conferences with the same divisions you've made. I don't know why we NEED an East/West. East, West, and South should work fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Divisions that make sense include the highlighted Northwest, and Southwest, a Central where Dallas replaces Detroit, and an Eastern conference where Detroit moves into the Northeast, Buffalo to the Atlantic, and Pittsburgh to the Southeast. The divisions you have here are neat, but ridiculous. Regular games between Florida and Western Canada? Seriously? That's a nightmare trip. Chicago to Montreal is the longest "Eastern" conference trip, and it's shorter than Dallas to Miami, which is an IN-DIVISION trip in the "Western" conference. Completely ridiculous.

Cutting them up North/South instead, including the bottom two divisions plus Carolina, Chicago, Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Washington would make for much more equal travel. It also preserves most rivalries, although the Pens/Flyers, Wings/Blues, and Wings/Hawks are cut apart by it. It does bring back the Wings/Leafs rivalry, which most Wings fans would be more than happy to trade for. If the Atlanta sale falls through, Pittsburgh or Chicago ends up in the North, and a rivalry is saved.

It's not that big a deal. Depending on the number of games you're talking one, maybe two extra trips to Florida a season for the other West teams. Not that much different from one or two extra trips to Columbus or Nashville. It's worse for the Florida teams, but again really not that much worse than it is for Columbus or Nashville. You can't be perfect when half the league is concentrated in one quarter of the continent and the rest are so spread out. MLB doesn't have a problem with coast-coast leagues.

But a North/South alignment does make more sense, though I have no idea why you'd mess up the divisions like that. Just make the divisions like in the map, with the NE in the Northern Conference, and the Pit/Phi/Was/Car/CBJ division in the South. The only psuedo-rivalries that threatens is Boston/Philly, and all the Western teams who think they're our rivals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0