puckbags 863 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) Here is a new update on realignment by Pierre Lebrun http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/22010/rest-easy-winnipeg-realignment-is-coming Conference A Anaheim Calgary Colorado Edmonton Los Angeles Phoenix San Jose Vancouver Conference B Chicago Columbus Dallas Detroit Minnesota Nashville St. Louis Winnipeg Conference C Boston Buffalo Florida Montreal Ottawa Tampa Bay Toronto Conference D Carolina New Jersey New York Islanders New York Rangers Philadelphia Pittsburgh Washington Sorry I didn't include the new conferences in the original..here they are. Edited February 13, 2013 by puckbags Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
St. Michael (the Red Wing) 422 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Interesting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Axe Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Id shift Nashville and Columbus East first. Then Id shift Calgary and Edmonton into Conference B. Then Id add Portland and Seattle to Conference A. 32 teams. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joshy207 156 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 These are the divisions that were proposed in late 2011. Another ESPN article, just tweeted in the last hour, says there will be minor tweaks to that proposal, i.e. a few teams will be moved around. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
puckbags 863 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Id shift Nashville and Columbus East first. Then Id shift Calgary and Edmonton into Conference B. Then Id add Portland and Seattle to Conference A. 32 teams. I'm confused..those teams don't exist Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jedi 1,865 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Here's a map of the proposed alignment. As joshy pointed out, this is the exact same as proposed in 2011. For the record, I think there's some positives about the proposed realignment, and some negatives. Less travel, especially in the playoffs would be a huge plus (would only have to travel as far as Dallas/Winnipeg for the first two rounds). However, by default, this proposal is harder for the "western" teams, since they have 8 teams per "division" as opposed to the east, which only has 7. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DyingAlive 27 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Yeah, this was the proposal that was rejected by the NHLPA. So I would expect changes. I am not really sure how the realignment goes from here. The 4 conference system worked, but I just feel like having uneven conferences screws the teams that are in those conferences. Just like the MLB and their NL Central AL West scenario, it was stupid that the teams in the Central had a lesser chance of making the playoffs just because they were unfortunate in placement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pskov Wings Fan 71 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Yeah, this was the proposal that was rejected by the NHLPA. So I would expect changes. I am not really sure how the realignment goes from here. The 4 conference system worked, but I just feel like having uneven conferences screws the teams that are in those conferences. Just like the MLB and their NL Central AL West scenario, it was stupid that the teams in the Central had a lesser chance of making the playoffs just because they were unfortunate in placement. As far as I know NHLPA did not reject last proposal based on its merits but because they were not consulted. It is unclear if players have any issue with the realignment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dobbles 252 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 As far as I know NHLPA did not reject last proposal based on its merits but because they were not consulted. It is unclear if players have any issue with the realignment. i think thats a valid point. i also feel like the players wanted to reject it just to show their strength going into the labor negotiations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 The NHL has a real talent in overlooking the obvious: PA rejected this proposal for good reasons and now they are comingf back with the exactly same one? Unbelievable. Sent from my BlackBerry Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
evilmrt 636 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Looks good, I think that the two Florida teams will not be in Conference C....That's just stupid, and I can't see any other reason to make tweaks other than that...and am I the only one that thinks Nashville is out of place in that conference? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrimsonFlame 424 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 I don't like any situation at all where there are an unequal number of teams in divisions or conferences. It's not fair and it should not be encouraged. If they want four conferences they need to either add two teams or get rid of two. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Richdg 267 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 I don't like any situation at all where there are an unequal number of teams in divisions or conferences. It's not fair and it should not be encouraged. If they want four conferences they need to either add two teams or get rid of two. Contract the yotes and 1 more. Stay at 28 teams. Expand the rosters to 25 so the union don't *****. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Z Winged Dangler 2,082 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Finally i would get to see another Wings game in Winnipeg. Only been like 17 years... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hooon 1,089 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 The uneven numbers just doesnt work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
evilmrt 636 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 The uneven numbers just doesnt work. What about having a best-of-three Wild Card mini-playoff in the two smaller conferences that would determine the bottom seed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 The NHL has a real talent in overlooking the obvious: PA rejected this proposal for good reasons and now they are comingf back with the exactly same one? Unbelievable. Sent from my BlackBerry They're not making the same proposal. The article just gave the details of the previous one because it's believed the new one will be similar with a few tweaks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Euro_Twins 4,469 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 What about having a best-of-three Wild Card mini-playoff in the two smaller conferences that would determine the bottom seed? well bettman does follow the tweets, and reads the blogs and fan sights... so, SUCK IT BETTMAN Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
evilzyme 769 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 So why don't they do this.... divisions 1 + 2 that form 16 teams equal the "western conference", divisions 3 + 4 that form 14 teams equal the "eastern conference".... then, just equal it out and make the western and eastern sitting at 15 and 15. Trade a team closest, that wouldn't make the traveling outrageous and call it a day. Obviously it isn't that easy (or atleast, they... would've done it, right?!) but each "conference" currently has 15 and 15... sigh this just isn't my forte, i'll shut up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hockey&beer 16 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 If I recall, one reason the NHLPA rejected the proposal was that they were not given ample time to research the travel aspect of the realignment. If that is the case, then there is ZERO chance this will fly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Euro_Twins 4,469 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 If I recall, one reason the NHLPA rejected the proposal was that they were not given ample time to research the travel aspect of the realignment. If that is the case, then there is ZERO chance this will fly. I thought the PA requested more information about the proposal (playoff situations, travel, and other stuff like that) and the NHL took forever to send it over, by the time they did send it it was right before the PA's vote so they voted to reject it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jedi 1,865 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 Why the NHLPA rejected NHL's 2012-2013 realignment plan. - by Greg "Puck Daddy" Wyshynski (from Jan. 6th, 2012) So why did the NHLPA refuse to endorse this plan, besides a clear disregard for the league's rights? Simple: They felt realignment was unfair and inconsiderate to the players; they weren't given a chance, in their eyes, to help create it; and it communicated that the NHLPA isn't going to be shoved around now or during the CBA talks. According to sources with knowledge of the negotiations, the NHL didn't include the NHLPA in the formation of the realignment plan because there was no mandate in the CBA to do so. So the league created the plan, the Board of Governors passed it and the dare was made: Go ahead, kill off something that the majority of hockey teams, fans and media deemed a positive move for the NHL. And the "long and short of it"... Basically, the NHLPA felt that this realignment plan was created by and for the owners, and not in the best interests of the players. And when they reached out to attempt to reshape the plan to better serve their interests, that input was rejected, according to one source. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drumnj 459 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) I don't understand why they can't just make it an easy fix with how the current system is setup. No adding/removing teams, no odd number conference/divisions. Unless they figure out some goofy 3 conference playoff system, stick with what is currently in place. Dallas, Minnesota and Colorado could rotate divisions if need be. Edited February 13, 2013 by drumnj Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crymson Report post Posted February 13, 2013 As far as I know NHLPA did not reject last proposal based on its merits but because they were not consulted. It is unclear if players have any issue with the realignment. It was noted openly by several players, Lidstrom included, that the NHLPA was not OK with the 8/7 disparity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Travis 576 Report post Posted February 13, 2013 I don't understand why they can't just make it an easy fix with how the current system is setup. No adding/removing teams, no odd number conference/divisions. Unless they figure out some goofy 3 conference playoff system, stick with what is currently in place. Dallas, Minnesota and Colorado could rotate divisions if need be. Geographically, this alignment makes sense, but I know there has been a lot of talk about keeping divisional rivalries in tact. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites