88 replies to this topic

[HankthaTank]

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.

[xtrememachine1]

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.

[Datsyerberger]

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.

[stevkrause]

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

[Datsyerberger]

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, 20 May 2011 - 03:03 PM.

[Ozzie30]

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.

[stevkrause]

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...

[eva unit zero]

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.

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.

[evilmrt]

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.

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.

[Buppy]

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.

[eva unit zero]

But a North/South alignment does make more sense, though I have no idea why you'd mess up the divisions like that.

Philly should be in the same division as the Rangers if possible. That's pretty much why I changed them.

[joshy207]

I also have a 4-division alignment I've been kicking around for a while... here it is, with the teams we have today:

Smythe/West division:
Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Phoenix, Colorado.

Norris/Great Lakes division:
Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Toronto.

Patrick/Southeast division:
Florida, Tampa Bay, Atlanta, Carolina, Nashville, St. Louis, Dallas.

Adams/Northeast division:
Ottawa, Montreal, Boston, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington.

Divisions with 7 teams play each other 6 times for 36 games, and play all other teams twice for 46 games. 82 total.
Divisions with 8 teams play each other 5 times and play 3 of the teams a sixth for 38 games, and play all other teams twice for 44 games. 82 total.

No conferences, just the divisions. Top 4 in each make the playoffs, first 2 rounds are played within the division. Top point-getting divisional playoff champ will play the bottom, middle 2 play each other. Winners of those series play for the Cup.

Realignment would have worked better had Phoenix moved to Winnipeg rather than Atlanta, but it can be done.

[martyrme19]

There HAS to be a mathematical logorithm or something that can be applied to calculate the FAIREST traveling distances among teams. I mean, seriously - can't some Excel wiz bang something out here?

When it comes down to it, the ONLY factor that should be taken into consideration is travel distance. I may be wrong about this, but I'm pretty sure that travel expenses (High plane fuel cost, hotel cost - more nights in a hotel than for teams with shorter plane rides home - misc. costs) come out of the Red Wings expense budget. If I were Illitch, I would demand there to be revenue sharing in favor of teams with more travel expenses.

NOT TO MENTION the wear and tear of traveling, jet lag and all that jazz that a team has to suffer more than other teams.

[Donaldjr2448]

What does everyone think of no conferences?? Rank the league 1-30 and the top 16 make the playoffs. You could play everyone twice (54 games) and then fill the rest in with the teams in your division. The top 4 division winners get seeds 1-4 and the rest fills in after that! Even travel in the regular season and even travel during the playoffs! This obviously needs some work, but I think it could work out in the long run!!!

[martyrme19]

What does everyone think of no conferences?? Rank the league 1-30 and the top 16 make the playoffs. You could play everyone twice (54 games) and then fill the rest in with the teams in your division. The top 4 division winners get seeds 1-4 and the rest fills in after that! Even travel in the regular season and even travel during the playoffs! This obviously needs some work, but I think it could work out in the long run!!!

I know what you're saying is unconventional, and because of that many poeple would probably shoot it down - but I think there is such a difference in travel demand between certain teams, and because the NHL is so sporadically spread apart in the country - the solution probably is something unconventional such as this.

[55fan]

What does everyone think of no conferences?? Rank the league 1-30 and the top 16 make the playoffs. You could play everyone twice (54 games) and then fill the rest in with the teams in your division. The top 4 division winners get seeds 1-4 and the rest fills in after that! Even travel in the regular season and even travel during the playoffs! This obviously needs some work, but I think it could work out in the long run!!!

That got me thinking. What about no divisions or conferences? Rank the teams 1-30 by last season's standings. Group into groups of 6. Play each team in your group twice and all others thrice and it should come out to 82 games. I think. I might be off.

Anyway, top 16 make the playoffs (ranked 1-16) and Thor's your uncle. There's the playoffs.

Downside: Division/conference rivalries would be diluted.
Upside: Would be the best two teams standing for Stanley.

I'm sure there are more pros and cons than these, but those were what came off the top of my head.

[Nhurdi]

Lets just axe a few teams, scratch conferences and divisions and have everyone play each other 3 times. One year one team would get two at home and one away next it would swap.

Take top 16 teams for playoffs. done.



I'm joking but it's just as possible as most the stuff being mentioned here.

[Datsyerberger]

Repost from HF, regarding a 3 conference system:

Since a 3 conference idea has been mentioned, I thought I'd fiddle with that:

Scenario 1: All O6 in one

Northern Conference

Great Lakes Division

Detroit
Chicago
Toronto
St. Louis
Ottawa

Northeast Division

Montreal
Boston
New York R
New York I
New Jersey


Southern Conference

Atlantic Division

Buffalo
Columbus
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington

Southeast Division

Carolina
Dallas
Tampa Bay
Nashville
Florida


Western Conference

Northwest Division

Edmonton
Calgary
Colorado
Minnesota
Winnipeg

Pacific Division

Vancouver
San Jose
Anaheim
Los Angeles
Phoenix


Still some travel issues, but not near as bad as now. At least I managed to work it out so noone travels more than 1 TZ in their own division and no more than 2x in their own conference (and this only happens in the WC because of Minnesota and Winnipeg). Swapping Vancouver and Colorado is arguable based upon your opinion of distance travel (north-south) vs TZ travel (east-west). In a Pacific scenario, Vancouver could actually do division games where they start at home, play in SJ, then LA, then ANA, then PHX, then PHX again, then ANA, then LA, then SJ, then back at home. This would greatly cut down on travel and arguably result in a lesser travel schedule than being in the Northwest.

As a mild alternative for the NC and SC, you could put Buffalo in the GL division, St. Louis in the Southeast division, and Carolina in the Atlantic division. I think that works just as well; it becomes a matter of losing St. Louis vs Chicago/Detroit or Buffalo vs Toronto/Ottawa, but all of those rivalries are small potatoes (or at least, St. Louis and Buffalo are small potatoes, BOG-wise).

I'd imagine this would run on either an 84 game schedule where teams play each div rival 6x, conference rival 4x and extra-conference 2x, or 82 game with each div rival 8x, conference rival 6x and extra-conference 1x

Here's a map, because we like MS paint drawn maps:

[evilmrt]

Repost from HF, regarding a 3 conference system:

Since a 3 conference idea has been mentioned, I thought I'd fiddle with that:

Scenario 1: All O6 in one

Northern Conference

Great Lakes Division

Detroit
Chicago
Toronto
St. Louis
Ottawa

Northeast Division

Montreal
Boston
New York R
New York I
New Jersey


Southern Conference

Atlantic Division

Buffalo
Columbus
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington

Southeast Division

Carolina
Dallas
Tampa Bay
Nashville
Florida


Western Conference

Northwest Division

Edmonton
Calgary
Colorado
Minnesota
Winnipeg

Pacific Division

Vancouver
San Jose
Anaheim
Los Angeles
Phoenix


Still some travel issues, but not near as bad as now. At least I managed to work it out so noone travels more than 1 TZ in their own division and no more than 2x in their own conference (and this only happens in the WC because of Minnesota and Winnipeg). Swapping Vancouver and Colorado is arguable based upon your opinion of distance travel (north-south) vs TZ travel (east-west). In a Pacific scenario, Vancouver could actually do division games where they start at home, play in SJ, then LA, then ANA, then PHX, then PHX again, then ANA, then LA, then SJ, then back at home. This would greatly cut down on travel and arguably result in a lesser travel schedule than being in the Northwest.

As a mild alternative for the NC and SC, you could put Buffalo in the GL division, St. Louis in the Southeast division, and Carolina in the Atlantic division. I think that works just as well; it becomes a matter of losing St. Louis vs Chicago/Detroit or Buffalo vs Toronto/Ottawa, but all of those rivalries are small potatoes (or at least, St. Louis and Buffalo are small potatoes, BOG-wise).

I'd imagine this would run on either an 84 game schedule where teams play each div rival 6x, conference rival 4x and extra-conference 2x, or 82 game with each div rival 8x, conference rival 6x and extra-conference 1x

Here's a map, because we like MS paint drawn maps:

Those are pretty cool, I like the division you put the Wings in...it keeps the Chicago rivalry and brings back Toronto. Awesome!

I might swap Colorado and Vancouver in the Northwest and Pacific, but I see what you're doing...putting Vancouver in the Pacific works as far as time zone issues, etc.

[xtrememachine1]

3 Conferences is a neat idea, but the NHL would never think that far outside the box.