• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
puckbags

Update on realignment

Rate this topic

47 posts in this topic

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 by puckbags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

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

Here's a map of the proposed alignment. As joshy pointed out, this is the exact same as proposed in 2011.

photonw.png

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

96f9dh.jpg

Dallas, Minnesota and Colorado could rotate divisions if need be.

Edited by drumnj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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.

96f9dh.jpg

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

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