| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| mytor4 |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 15:28:37
i was wondering how everyone feels about how the playoffs are run. do you like the system with two divisions and 1plays 4 and so on till a winner from the east meets the winner from the west.or would you rather see a 1 to 16 format where 1 plays 16 2 plays 15 and so on. i like the 1 to 16 format for a few different reason. first the best team is rewarded for being the best by playing the weakest team to make the playoffs. second i'm getting tired of seeing the same old teams facing off against each other yr in and out. third i would love to see teams from the east meet teams form the west more often than just in the finals and last but not least yet the best reason i can think of is we would have a chance of seeing the best two teams in the league play for the cup or having a chance to see two teams from the same conference compete for the cup would be great. imagine the leafs playing the habs in the finals or the flames playing the oilers in the finals. the combinations are to many to list.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| mytor4 |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 14:47:02
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0956
Yes.
The Stanley Cup is a battle of East v West. The conferences and divisions are divided, and the schedule is created to make that happen. Your system doesn't work in a league with conferences or divisions at all. The style you've suggested(akin the NCAA March Madness) where teams battle each other all season for their conference cup and then advance to a playoff round would take away from our game of hockey. To be a college basketball fan all you really need to watch is one month of their year. I realize a lot of fans watch all year, but let's be honest, March Madness is a huge fan draw. Do we really want to lesson the importance(and thereby the ticket sales) of our hockey regular season even more?
by what your saying why bother to watch the regular season . we all the real season starts in the playoffs. i think your to young to remember the old format when the top team earned the right to face the weakest team during the playoffs. also you can't compare hockey playoffs no matter what format you use to March Madness get real now. you like the playoff format the way it is now .fair enough. i prefer the high low system where who you meet is like a revolving door every yr.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
| Guest0956 |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 11:14:07
Yes.
The Stanley Cup is a battle of East v West. The conferences and divisions are divided, and the schedule is created to make that happen. Your system doesn't work in a league with conferences or divisions at all. The style you've suggested(akin the NCAA March Madness) where teams battle each other all season for their conference cup and then advance to a playoff round would take away from our game of hockey. To be a college basketball fan all you really need to watch is one month of their year. I realize a lot of fans watch all year, but let's be honest, March Madness is a huge fan draw. Do we really want to lesson the importance(and thereby the ticket sales) of our hockey regular season even more? |
| mytor4 |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 08:36:51
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0956
Three things:
It's an arguable point that despite what analysts have to say, the two teams that make the finals ARE the best two teams. That's why they made it that far, regardless of playoff stucture.
Second, nearly ever sport with conferences is set up this way. Very often there is a trend of one strong side one weak side. That doesn't mean that the team surviving the semi's in the east will be any weaker than the team from the west. Six months ago Ottawa was the only team to beat in the league. Many would have said they were a season/playoff favourite at that time. I really don't think the 'unbalanced' conferences are as unbalanced as you describe them. Even if they are, there is a market for underdog bandwagons(NY Giants) and anything can happen in the finals. No matter the teams.
Third, I love watching the first round of the playoffs. I love watching the second round of the playoffs. I love the semi's; I love the finals. Your 1-16, 2-15 format takes the edge away from everything else in the playoffs. Now the teams we've been battling in our conference/division(NHL schedule) for those final playoff spots are going to be flying to the east/ewst right away and we don't get to see them again until probably the next year? Rivalries develop over the year and it's great to see the close playoff matchups. I don't want to see my team play Carolina or Montreal in the first round. Give me the Wild or Detroit any day.
so you saying you would rather see your team play the wild or the wings in the first rd instead of seeing your team face the wild or the wings in the finals for the cup?
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
| Guest0956 |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 07:39:26
Three things:
It's an arguable point that despite what analysts have to say, the two teams that make the finals ARE the best two teams. That's why they made it that far, regardless of playoff stucture.
Second, nearly ever sport with conferences is set up this way. Very often there is a trend of one strong side one weak side. That doesn't mean that the team surviving the semi's in the east will be any weaker than the team from the west. Six months ago Ottawa was the only team to beat in the league. Many would have said they were a season/playoff favourite at that time. I really don't think the 'unbalanced' conferences are as unbalanced as you describe them. Even if they are, there is a market for underdog bandwagons(NY Giants) and anything can happen in the finals. No matter the teams.
Third, I love watching the first round of the playoffs. I love watching the second round of the playoffs. I love the semi's; I love the finals. Your 1-16, 2-15 format takes the edge away from everything else in the playoffs. Now the teams we've been battling in our conference/division(NHL schedule) for those final playoff spots are going to be flying to the east/ewst right away and we don't get to see them again until probably the next year? Rivalries develop over the year and it's great to see the close playoff matchups. I don't want to see my team play Carolina or Montreal in the first round. Give me the Wild or Detroit any day. |
| mytor4 |
Posted - 03/27/2008 : 02:45:29
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0956
Don't forget when talking travelling times that east-west puts much more of a strain on the body than north-south. Its not so much the time spent on airplanes that is tiresome but dealing with time differences and playing a game just after lunch when you're used to playing during dinner.
Its easy to single out a handful of possible matchups that would result in uneven travel times. Vancouver and Detroit have by far the toughest travel schedules out there. NJ rarely even have to leave their own city let alone their own time zone.
I'm quite happy with th rivalries building in the playoffs from division races throughtout the season. The finals are interesting no matter who the teams are. Edmonton Carolina was one of the best playoff races in recent years. Don't fix what isn't broken.
you say Don't fix what isn't broken. problem is it is broken. i get really tired of watching the stanley cup finals during the semi finals. seeing tow teams playing in the semi finals knowing the winner will walk through team they meet in the finals. like this yr comming up .everybody knows the west is stronger than the east so when it comes down to the finals it's already done. now we all know upsets happens but come on what would you rather see in the finals.
team A- known as the best team overall playing team B -what most people relate as maybe the 5th best over team in the league or
team A- the best over all team in the league playing team B- the 2nd best over all team in the league. also if travel is such a big issue than make the series go 2-3-2 with rink revenue being split between both teams. now no more excuses on travel time or revenue.
57 career losses,46 shutouts and 5 vezina trophys.6 Stanley Cup rings in 8 yrs |
| Guest0956 |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 21:31:08
Don't forget when talking travelling times that east-west puts much more of a strain on the body than north-south. Its not so much the time spent on airplanes that is tiresome but dealing with time differences and playing a game just after lunch when you're used to playing during dinner.
Its easy to single out a handful of possible matchups that would result in uneven travel times. Vancouver and Detroit have by far the toughest travel schedules out there. NJ rarely even have to leave their own city let alone their own time zone.
I'm quite happy with th rivalries building in the playoffs from division races throughtout the season. The finals are interesting no matter who the teams are. Edmonton Carolina was one of the best playoff races in recent years. Don't fix what isn't broken. |
| Timay |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 17:06:44
I agree with PainTrain. It will never happen as long as Bettman is around or even another sensible commissioner. But then to further add to your problem of the loss of rivalries in the finals... you'll have no rivalries during the first three rounds. No more Boston-Montreal, Toronto-Ottawa, Dallas-Edmonton, Detroit-Colorado. What are the chances any of these will meet in the finals? Very rare.. to the point it wouldn't even be worth it. The finals are always the best series to watch, but you're right only because its the finals. But with that point in mind, it should show that we don't need to improve it.
I've been very happy with the last 3 finals, although they'res no notable anger or animosity between the sets of teams involved (at least not the first game or two), by the end of the series the two sides have usually developed a new found hate for each other. That and the fact there's been a Canadian team in the finals each year has given me hope we can bring the cup back north, and gives me a team to root for.
The rest of the playoffs however would be dull in comparison... An example: Vancouver travelling to Florida in the first round, to New York or Pennsylvania in the second and then Ontario or Quebec in the third wouldn't be very fun for anyone who loves rivalries (such as yourselves, right?). Also the Canucks would be so tired (as would the other teams) that the games will seem slow as the players would be fatigued.
Yes, on one hand the finals would be better and it is the best series, however, in my opinion it is not always the best round of the playoffs. Usually the best round is the first for me. I get to watch 8! not 1, but 8 different match-ups that usually include good rivalries, underdog upsets, long games, lots of overtime, dominating sweeps, and occasionly I get lucky enough to watch a game seven go into overtime.
That's got to be my favourite moment in hockey -- remember watching Todd Marchant score in '97 for the 7th seeded Oilers in game 7 to knock off 2nd seeded Dallas Stars on the same night that Derek Plante was doing the same thing to help his 2nd seeded Sabres beat the 7th seeded Senators? Wow, looking back, in one night you can almost pinpoint the peak or at least the start of some great match-ups. Those games are so memorable. Remeber LaFontaine, Borschevsky, Bure, Brunette or Gelinas? Matteau, Yzerman, or Kasparaitis' slide? How many actually remember Leswick in '54 or Babando in '50?
My point is by changing, if it's to your described way, you get 15 "somewhat boring" series that are "no fun other than they're playoff games," and only one great match. I don't know about you guys I just don't think it's worth it.
Oh yeah, alex:
Vancouver to anywhere in the east: at least 2088 miles
Furthest matchup within the Atlantic or Northeast divison: 315 miles |
| Alex |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 16:39:33
Distance is a problem? Just ten random examples of how a lot of inter-conference flights are much longer than out of conference ones. I am sure I could find a bunch more but this should do for now. Check this out:
Calgary to Anaheim 1208 miles
Toronto to Detroit: 206 miles
Columbus to Vancouver: 2050 miles
Nasvhille to Florida: 619 miles
Atlanta to Chicago: 585 miles
Washington to Florida: 911 miles
Edmonton to San Jose: 1192 miles
Minnesota to Ottawa: 845 miles
Take two minutes to join the PickUpHockey Cyber Cup!
http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3820#51395
|
| PainTrain |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 15:40:47
The problem with the 1-16 format is if a East team is playing a West team the travel is too much. Imagine the NY Rangers playing Vancouver in a best of 7 series, the travel is just too much, and considering that is only the first round let's say. By the time they get to the Stanley Cup they would be so tired it would be like watching Pre-season hockey. |
| Alex |
Posted - 03/26/2008 : 15:38:35
Well obviously the finals are bound to be somewhat boring. None of the finals are fun other than for the very reason that they are the finals.
No team has a rival in a conference, or really, in a division mostly, other than its own.
The way it is set up, no rival can face each other. This is sucking the fun out of the NHL playoffs really. Ottawa - Anaheim, Edmonto - Carolina, Tampa Bay - Calgary ... how many times do these teams play each other in the regular season for gosh sakes? Like once?
Even a conference thing, never mind division, like Wings Flames or Senators Canes even, would be better. The personalities would be amplified, the intensity would be up, there would be more than a cup on the line, there would be pride I tell you, pride! That's how it should be!
Take two minutes to join the PickUpHockey Cyber Cup!
http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3820#51395
|
|
|
