|
|
Post by jetstar on Jun 24, 2011 0:23:30 GMT -5
Sportsnet saying Bettman wants to go back to 4 divisions with the top 4 in each making the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by labatt50 on Jun 24, 2011 1:06:24 GMT -5
That is EXACTLY what they should do. They should also go back to the old names (Adams, Patrick, Smythe, Norris). And playoff teams should have to play their way out of their division. Basically, go back to the way it was from 1983ish to 1993.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronjeremy on Jun 24, 2011 9:24:09 GMT -5
I think they are also delaying the realignment because they know they'll be moving the Coyotes next year...
|
|
|
|
Post by schlitsz on Jun 24, 2011 9:28:23 GMT -5
That is EXACTLY what they should do. They should also go back to the old names (Adams, Patrick, Smythe, Norris). And playoff teams should have to play their way out of their division. Basically, go back to the way it was from 1983ish to 1993. Yes, they should do all of this. Time to separate hockey from the other sports again, in a good way. I've never heard anyone say they favor the current alignment and division names over the old (Adams, Patrick, Smyth and Norris). Everyone loved those division names. |
|
|
|
Post by whitecaps on Jun 24, 2011 10:22:16 GMT -5
Bettman suggesting they go with 4 divisions, WOW, something interesting coming out of his mouth. Still prefer just two conferences period, but this idea is better than the current format. Maybe Gary has seen the light?  |
|
|
|
Post by mrconfusion87 on Jun 24, 2011 14:42:17 GMT -5
I don't care how it happens so long as Minnesota and Winnipeg ARE TOGETHER in the same division! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by labatt50 on Jun 24, 2011 15:28:22 GMT -5
My proposal:
Smythe - SJ, LA, ANA, VAN, PHX, EDM, CAL
Norris - WPG, MIN, DET, CHI, STL, DAL, CLB, COL
Adams - MTL, BOS, OTT, BUF, TOR, NYR, NYI, NJ
Patrick - FLA, TB, CAR, NSH, WAS, PHI, PIT
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by donmaximo on Jun 24, 2011 21:48:21 GMT -5
I like it labbat50, just switch Colorado over to the Smythe. As a mountain time zone team they would fit better there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hobble on Jun 24, 2011 22:12:24 GMT -5
Wouldn't teams in the divisions with 7 teams have a better shot at making the playoffs?!?
|
|
|
|
Post by shifty2007 on Jun 25, 2011 18:06:11 GMT -5
Good timing for four NHL divisions
By Nicholas J. Cotsonika, Yahoo! Sports 1 hour, 35 minutes ago
ST. PAUL, Minn. – High above the stage at the 2011 NHL draft hung the flags of the league’s 30 franchises – the Western Conference in a row on top, the Eastern Conference in a row below, in alphabetical order, left to right.
The key to change hung in the lower right corner, a black flag with the NHL shield and the text “WINNIPEG 2011-12.” Now that the Atlanta Thrashers have moved and become the new Winnipeg Jets, they will play in the Southeast Division for one more season. After that, the NHL will realign dramatically. One NHL executive said Saturday that he could “guarantee” it.
It’s about time.
“Now it’s not perfect in everybody’s eyes,” Nashville Predators general manager David Poile said. “I would think even in whatever realignment we do it may not be perfect. But I think it’s time for … It’s not maybe time, but it’s certainly an opportunity for a change.”
NHL commissioner Gary Bettman said during the Stanley Cup Final that the league would discuss realignment during the first half of the 2011-12 season, and if he had to guess, it would move toward “a slightly more balanced schedule.”
Then Bettman made a proposal at Tuesday’s board of governors meeting, according to a report in the Ottawa Sun. Sources told the newspaper the league would have four divisions – the Pacific, Midwest, East and South. Two divisions would have eight teams; two would have seven. Teams would play a balanced schedule in the regular season, with the top four teams in each division making the playoffs. The first round would be divisional play. Then teams would reseed for conference play.
One NHL executive said Saturday the plan would have four divisions – two with eight teams, two with seven – as outlined in the Ottawa Sun report, but he was vague about whether there would even be Western and Eastern Conferences. He said the divisions would be based on time zones, a common-sense solution to TV and travel problems that some teams face and have been frankly unfair for years. He said the league’s board of governors would rule on the issue in December, though there remains a lot to talk about.
“I think the league would be happy to hear anybody’s opinion,” Poile said. “There’s nothing that’s been formulated. I haven’t seen any proposal. The league certainly hasn’t sent out anything, saying, ‘Would you like to do this or that?’ This is, I think, the start. So if you’ve got an idea, send it to me. Send it to the league. I think it will be looked at.”
With two conferences, six divisions and an unbalanced schedule, two teams in the Eastern time zone play in the Western Conference: the Detroit Red Wings and Columbus Blue Jackets. They must visit each team in the Pacific time zone twice each season, spending time, energy and money to make the trips, with a good portion of their road games starting at 10:30 p.m. for their local TV audience. They don’t play full home-and-home sets against each team in their own time zone.
The Wings have long wanted to move to the East, and Jackets GM Scott Howson said Saturday: “I’m in favor of anything that puts us in the East.”
The situation isn’t much better for teams in the Central time zone. The Predators would like to move east, too. Then there are the Dallas Stars, who are isolated deep in the heart of Texas and play in the Pacific Division.
“I think it’s a good time to look at it,” Carolina Hurricanes GM Jim Rutherford said. “It really doesn’t affect a lot of teams like ours, but Dallas has been in a little bit of an odd situation for a long time. Now, part of that is geography. You can’t change it. But I’m sure they’d like to get a little bit of a change.”
It simply makes sense to align the teams in terms of time zones and play a more balanced schedule. There would be less distance traveled and less jet lag for Western teams. There would be better TV times for more road games. Regional rivalries would still be able to develop, but every building would be able to host every team every season.
“Six divisions to four divisions, that could be good,” Poile said. “For every team in the Western Conference, if we talked about a more balanced schedule, I think we’d be all in for that. So I think it’s an opportunity to put all of our heads together. … Maybe we can at least help and appease everybody to a certain extent, and maybe it would be good for our fans also.”
Just remember that no matter what happens, not everyone will get what they want, and hockey tradition doesn’t always match up with geography.
“I’d like to play in a division with the weakest teams,” Rutherford said, smiling.
Teased that he played in the Southeast, Rutherford smiled even wider.
“Let me think now, the Stanley Cup champions – Tampa, Carolina …,” he said, referring to the 2004 and 2006 winners. “It’s always the weakest division. Where are you guys from? Where do you live?”
My proposal:
Pacific - SJ, LA, ANA, VAN, PHX, EDM, CGY
Midwest - WPG, MIN, CHI, STL, DAL, COL, NSH
Northeast - CLB, DET, PIT, BUF, MTL, OTT, TOR, BOS
Atlantic - FLA, TB, CAR, WAS, PHI, NYR, NYI, NJ
|
|
|
|
Post by ducky75 on Jun 26, 2011 13:42:09 GMT -5
So South, East, Midwest and Pacific, with two 8 team divisions and two 7 team ones?
Then how about
Pacific - Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, Anaheim, San Jose, LA, and Phoenix
Midwest - Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Toronto, Detroit, St Louis, and Buffalo
South - Dallas, Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Columbus, and Washington
East - Philly, Pittsburgh, Boston, Montreal, NYI, NYR, NJ, and Ottawa
Keeps most of the major rivalries together, with the exception of Toronto and Montreal, but they'll get to play Detroit and Chicago again, and you can't really separate Boston and Montreal .
|
|
|
|
Post by stbvoyageur on Jun 26, 2011 15:36:57 GMT -5
Why keep trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, i.e making a South division?
How about
WEST
Pacific
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
San Jose
L. A.
Anaheim
Colorado
Central
Winnipeg
Minnesota
Chicago
St. Louis
Dallas
Nashville
Houston or Kansas City (relocation of Coyotes)
EAST
Northeast
Detroit
Columbus
Buffalo
Toronto
Ottawa
Montreal
Boston
NY Isles (allows for simple transition of moving them to Quebec should the arena deal fall through)
Atlantic
NY Rangers
New Jersey
Philly
Pittsburgh
Washington
Carolina
Tampa
Florida
This allows for every major rivalry to be maintained, as the NHL is proposing returning to the traditional divisional playoffs which I think is a great idea, as hockey rivalries are what make the game so exciting, fans want to see Philly-Pittsburgh, New York-New Jersey, Boston-Montreal. I think Toronto-Detroit would be a great rivalry too, as a substitution for Detroit-Chicago.
The East could better sustain being a 16 team conference as they have more cities that will support their franchises win or lose. The Sun Belt teams get extra revenue from having more games vs. NY, Philly, and Pitt. The Northwest and Pacific divisions would no longer span 3 time zones, giving them a disadvantaged competitive balance, the Pacific would simply consist of Pacific and Mountain time zone teams.
I'm pretty sure this would be a solution that appeased almost every team. Who knew that the Jets coming home would help the NHL get things right again?
|
|
|
|
Post by roosta604 on Jun 26, 2011 16:54:13 GMT -5
Was kinda bored and was just thinking how teams would react to the difficulty of their new divisions. While I know its last years ranking and things change, this is the average finish from last year based on the groupings above.
Atlantic - 13.8
Pacific - 14.7
Central - 16.5
Northeast - 17.6
|
|
|
|
Post by Hobble on Jun 26, 2011 19:08:33 GMT -5
Don't think Toronto and Montreal being in different divisions would fly...
|
|
|
|
Post by mrconfusion87 on Jun 26, 2011 21:44:12 GMT -5
So South, East, Midwest and Pacific, with two 8 team divisions and two 7 team ones? Then how about Pacific - Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, Anaheim, San Jose, LA, and Phoenix Midwest - Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Toronto, Detroit, St Louis, and BuffaloSouth - Dallas, Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Columbus, and Washington East - Philly, Pittsburgh, Boston, Montreal, NYI, NYR, NJ, and Ottawa Keeps most of the major rivalries together, with the exception of Toronto and Montreal, but they'll get to play Detroit and Chicago again, and you can't really separate Boston and Montreal . I LOVE YOUR DIVISION LINEUP DUDE! The best 4 division proposal I have seen so far! Having the Wild, Jets, Blackhawks, Leafs, Wings, Blues and Sabres will make for a very AWESOME 7-team division! Probably should add that to my sig! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Hobble on Jun 26, 2011 22:13:55 GMT -5
I wish they'd revamp the division names. If not go back to the original names, maybe rename them with more modern players or influential individuals in hockey?!?
|
|
|
|
Post by floatyghosthat on Jun 27, 2011 7:41:48 GMT -5
Seems to work quite well in the AHL.
Personally, I really don't like the idea of going back to the old names, but whatever works I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ric O. on Jun 27, 2011 22:08:03 GMT -5
So South, East, Midwest and Pacific, with two 8 team divisions and two 7 team ones? Then how about Pacific - Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, Anaheim, San Jose, LA, and Phoenix Midwest - Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Toronto, Detroit, St Louis, and Buffalo South - Dallas, Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Columbus, and Washington East - Philly, Pittsburgh, Boston, Montreal, NYI, NYR, NJ, and Ottawa Keeps most of the major rivalries together, with the exception of Toronto and Montreal, but they'll get to play Detroit and Chicago again, and you can't really separate Boston and Montreal . This really works for me too, except I'd change "Midwest" to "Central" ... I don't think the center of the Universe could accept being considered a Midwest city. |
|
|
|
Post by ducky75 on Jun 28, 2011 12:28:28 GMT -5
So South, East, Midwest and Pacific, with two 8 team divisions and two 7 team ones? Then how about Pacific - Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, Anaheim, San Jose, LA, and Phoenix Midwest - Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Toronto, Detroit, St Louis, and Buffalo South - Dallas, Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Columbus, and Washington East - Philly, Pittsburgh, Boston, Montreal, NYI, NYR, NJ, and Ottawa Keeps most of the major rivalries together, with the exception of Toronto and Montreal, but they'll get to play Detroit and Chicago again, and you can't really separate Boston and Montreal . This really works for me too, except I'd change "Midwest" to "Central" ... I don't think the center of the Universe could accept being considered a Midwest city. agreed, and those divisions would still work if Phoenix moves to either Vegas or Seattle. It gets a little screwy if they move to either KC or Quebec. |
|
|
|
Post by mrconfusion87 on Jun 28, 2011 20:58:30 GMT -5
I wish they'd revamp the division names. If not go back to the original names, maybe rename them with more modern players or influential individuals in hockey?!? True dat! A friend of mine and I have been discussing about this before - like naming them the Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Howe, etc, etc then assigning them to a division where the team they had the biggest impact in is a part of...  |
|
