| Author |
 Topic  |
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
 Posted - 12/05/2011 : 20:44:37
|
Poll Question:
Do you like the NHL's new 4 Conference system for the 2012/13 season?
|
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2011 : 20:47:01
|
Hey Semin-rules, sorry but I wanted to make this into a poll so I locked up your original topic. But full credit to you for starting it. Thanks!
BELOW THIS POSTED BY SEMIN-RULES....
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=604852
what do you guys think about it?! Good..Bad?
Personally it will take getting used to, but I think it will work out!
It is nice because the top 4 from each division make it to the post season, so it allows some weaker teams to have a better chance.
Obviously the con is that two of the four divisions only have 7 teams instead of eight, so it will be a little bit easier for them.
A Pro is that every team plays each other twice! Once and at home the other on the road. So the fans should be happy with that.
Another thing that is confusing is why some teams are in the division that they are, and maybe they could have made the divisions split up a little evener (Conference B seems to be the easiest)
A lot of mixed feelings and opinions are felt here and I am curious as to see what my fellow Pickuphockey'ers feel about it!
Semin-Rules |
 |
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2011 : 20:52:56
|
As a VAN fan, I do like the realignment, mainly because of the travel - I think it will be good for an evening out of the travel schedule, and I think its financially fairer as well - I think I read an article saying that VAN spends 50% more on travel than TOR or MTL, due to flying everywhere.
I also like it because it will mean we see every team, every year. I hate the existing 2-times-in-3-years format. |
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2011 : 21:09:21
|
A 7-8 system doesn't work.The NHL has to have plans to add a wildcard position or to go to 28 or 32 teams in the near future. Good luck in conference A next year. With the pretty safe assumption that san jose and vancouver make the playoffs you have, L.A., Anaheim, Calgary, and Phoenix duking it out for the last 2 spots, as well as up and coming teams like edmonton and colorado, who will surely have playoff expectations.
If you look at conferences C and D and not see the enormity of inequality in them, then i suggest you get your head examined !One of Florida, Montreal, ottawa, and toronto is guaranteed to make the playoffs every year by this system. I'm sure we lost count of how many years florida hasn't been in the playoffs, and only leafs fans know how long it's been since they embarked on the quest for stanley's sacred cup. Ottawa is at the beginning of a rebuild, and honestly montreal is sucking so badly many habs fans are converting. This conference is ridiculously easy for the likes of buffalo, and tampa bay, who would struggle to make it in through conference A, or even B.
This however shows only the fallacy of the short term, but with a 4 conference system without wildcard position, there will always be inequalities,for they will be inevitable with less variation. A wildcard position or something of the like, must be imposed for this system to work.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
|
|
|
semin-rules
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1915 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2011 : 21:38:09
|
Hahah thanks Leigh, I don't want you stealing my thunder 
I agree with Sahis, the 7 and 8 conference just doesn't make, it is not fair and just proves that they were lay and just wanted to end the topic already.
I do think that they are preparing ahead on the assumption that Phoenix will move to the East (Quebec) but that still does not fix the problem of some conferences having less teams and ultimately a greater chance to make the playoffs while working less hard than the teams with 8 in their conference.
Now I do think conference B will be very interesting down the road in a few years, all the teams are young with the exception of Detroit and the top 3 spots will be different teams each year.
It is going to be interesting and I am excited to see how it works! |
|
|
|
Shepsky
Rookie
Canada
211 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 04:32:46
|
| Maybe it is possible that the NHL is considering expanding again. The four conference system that they are imposing leaves room to add 2 more teams to make an even 32 with 8 in each conference. If phoenix were to move to Quebec City, you would then have the most northeastern city (quebec) in with the most southwestern city on the map (L.A.) that could make for some serious travel time. However if they just expand as opposed to move teams then you have room to put Quebec City in with Montreal/Toronto/Ottawa, which could make for some interesting rivalries. |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 04:47:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shepsky
Maybe it is possible that the NHL is considering expanding again. The four conference system that they are imposing leaves room to add 2 more teams to make an even 32 with 8 in each conference. If phoenix were to move to Quebec City, you would then have the most northeastern city (quebec) in with the most southwestern city on the map (L.A.) that could make for some serious travel time. However if they just expand as opposed to move teams then you have room to put Quebec City in with Montreal/Toronto/Ottawa, which could make for some interesting rivalries.
Bingo ,, and as for the playoffs issue yes this year Van and San jose will probably take the top 2 spot in that confernece but it's not like it will be like the American league east in baseball where it's just the Yankees Red soxs over and over again with a mix of the Rays now and again,, each team can get on par with Van and San jose LA isn't that far off,, Anaheim has all the tools in the box they just need to maybe add a few more and use them a little better Phoenix is proving this year they are for real, and well Calgary has got some work to do but even in the current format they are not a playoff team for a few years yet
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
|
|
|
Guest9638
( )
|
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 04:54:02
|
| New things are always scary to fans - but from what I've read the benefits from this plan and support from the teams themselves lead me to believe it is a good decision with a few kinks to work out. We, the fans, don't see the travel or the rivalry income... I voted yes! |
|
|
|
ToXXiK1
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
696 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 05:12:22
|
| If Travel was the main drive, why is Fla & TB in this new conference? |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 05:57:11
|
I think this solution is just about the best they could do, to satisfy so many concerns which often conflicted with each other:
Historical rivalries, geographical proximity (time zones), strength of teams, each conference having an original 6 team / big market draw teams.
All of these points must be ranked, and some are more important than others, and that is just how you have to deal when faced with the reality of tough decisions.
Sahis34 - I disregard your arguments about team strength, frankly, and think that is one of the smallest considerations that should be made frankly. Firstly because it is nearly impossible to predict outside of half a dozen teams, and secondly because it is constantly changing. No matter what, because of the shifting strengthening and weakening of teams throught many seasons . . . there will always be strong confernces, strong divisions, and weak ones. You talk about how weak Toronto and Florida are, and yet seem to not realise the changing fortunes of both of those teams. You seem to have forgotten that NJ and the Islanders are not exactly powerhouses. You seem to have forgotten that NO MATTER WHAT, there will always be divisions/conferences that are one year weaker or more powerful.
Of interest to me, is how they came up with putting the Florida teams together with what is currently the Northeast Division . . . it's a bit of a reach, but I think it's the best solution while keeping together all of the valuable rivalries in the Atlantic, and pumping up 'new' ones (Washington and Carolina playing their natural geographic rivals). To me, this is good for hockey . . . I want Washington playing Pittsburgh more, despite Ovechkin's struggles. I want Carolina to play those other Atlantic teams more, it can only help their attendance and build on what should be natural rivals.
And realistically, those Florida teams don't have natural rivals with anyone other than themselves, so why not put them in a division with a bunch of Canadian teams to play, where they will suddenly get a huge boost in attendance and ratings and following when they play original six teams and the Canadian snowbirds come out to watch.
To me, it looked odd at first, but the more I think about the "Eastern" conferences, the more I like it.
In the west, they also do the best they can, and I think it's just fine and appropriate that Detroit is in the "central" conference.
The only quibble I might have is with the playoff format, but when this is more properly explained to me, I'll comment further.
I like it - as a Leafs fan, as a hockey fan. 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 08:51:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Of interest to me, is how they came up with putting the Florida teams together with what is currently the Northeast Division . . . it's a bit of a reach, but I think it's the best solution while keeping together all of the valuable rivalries in the Atlantic, and pumping up 'new' ones (Washington and Carolina playing their natural geographic rivals). To me, this is good for hockey . . . I want Washington playing Pittsburgh more, despite Ovechkin's struggles. I want Carolina to play those other Atlantic teams more, it can only help their attendance and build on what should be natural rivals.
And realistically, those Florida teams don't have natural rivals with anyone other than themselves, so why not put them in a division with a bunch of Canadian teams to play, where they will suddenly get a huge boost in attendance and ratings and following when they play original six teams and the Canadian snowbirds come out to watch.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I too was puzzled by the Florida teams, but I think you're right - they're hoping that Canadians deep in winter will be happy to travel to Florida to follow their teams, and also boost attendance in those markets. No doubt the players like the break from winter as well.
I also read that had they put them in the Atlantic division, they would have had to break up an obvious rivalry - one of PHI/PIT, or NJ/NYI/NYR - in order to make it work. Those rivalries are deep and the NHL likes them as-is.
AFAIK, if they stuck to the original plan, the playoffs will be:
- first 2 rounds within your own conference, to have a conference winner
- the 4 conference winners then are re-ranked based on overall points, and 1st plays 4th, 2nd plays 3rd.
- finals are last 2 teams standing.
If that is the case, then I like it even more, its good to possibly see an eastern team before the finals. |
|
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 09:25:14
|
I also thought the florida teams being in conference C was weird, but good explanation Nuxfan.
This reminds me of the old format with four divisions before they had only two conferences for playoff rankings. While I will miss 1st vs 8th for the playoffs, the interdivisional battles will mean a lot, especially in the West. Playing each team is a bonus as well. I guess we'll know which teams are getting into the playoffs before the last day of the season now though.
In this day and age, the amount of travel needs to be cut down if possible, so it's good they are doing that as well. |
|
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 09:27:48
|
| Oh, forgot to add - does this set up 2 more expansion teams for the NHL? 7 teams in each of the two eastern divisions seems unfair. |
|
|
|
Oilearl
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
268 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 09:50:50
|
I like the realignment idea. I'm sure there will be some changes and adjustments ahead but overall I like it more than hate it.
As far as the different division sizes I'm sure most teams will have to be ahead of the 5th seed instead of the 9th now. Whether there's 3 or 4 teams behind would be irrelevant.
I love that all teams will play home and home series. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 10:37:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by just1n
Oh, forgot to add - does this set up 2 more expansion teams for the NHL? 7 teams in each of the two eastern divisions seems unfair.
This question has been raised by others - I honestly don't see the NHL going to 32 teams, IMO the talent pool is already pretty diluted. I think the NHL has left room for some relocations and/or contraction. PHX came to mind as an obvious team that might leave the west for the east soon (thus evening out the sides), and the two FLA teams have never been particularly strong. We'll see what happens |
|
|
|
ryan93
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
996 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 10:44:31
|
| I don't mind the set up of the 4 conferences, but not really sure what to think of the playoff format yet. |
|
|
|
Guest3404
( )
|
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 12:23:55
|
| I like it, but if they are rearanging this based on geography, why is Tampa Bay and Florida in with what is currently the Northeastern division. Buffalo is in conference C, so why can't they put the other two New York teams instead of Tampa and Florida. If it's for rivalrie purposes, then why aren't Philly and Winnipeg in the same conference. They may not be official rivals, but I think it's pretty obvious. |
|
|
|
Guest7116
( )
|
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 12:27:10
|
| I hate this proposal. They should have just realigned the conferences and divisions and made they schedule change. And maybe a little tweak to the old system such as the division leaders making the playoffs, not being guarenteed a top 3 spot. I just think it will be unfair how some teams will make the playoffs in this format and how lopsided the new conferences are. |
|
|
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 12:35:25
|
I think I have the perfect names for the new divisions/
Pacific-Gretzky division
Central-Howe division
Northeast-Orr division
Atlantic- Lemieux division
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky |
|
|
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 12:38:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sensfan101
I think I have the perfect names for the new divisions/
Pacific-Gretzky division
Central-Howe division
Northeast-Orr division
Atlantic- Lemieux division
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky
Oops didn't realize this was already a topic. |
|
|
|
Guest4388
( )
|
Posted - 12/06/2011 : 15:35:45
|
quote:Originally posted by Sensfan101
I think I have the perfect names for the new divisions/
Pacific-Gretzky division
Central-Howe division
Northeast-Orr division
Atlantic- Lemieux division
Only thing i would change would be the northeast to (Maurice)Richard division |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2011 : 04:59:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7116
I hate this proposal. They should have just realigned the conferences and divisions and made they schedule change. And maybe a little tweak to the old system such as the division leaders making the playoffs, not being guarenteed a top 3 spot. I just think it will be unfair how some teams will make the playoffs in this format and how lopsided the new conferences are.
And this is exactly the kind of response I have seen a lot for this plan . . . "this sucks, they should have just kept it as is" or "they should have done it differently" . . . without giving any kind of even mildly specific idea otherwise.
We'd love to hear what YOU would have them do instead, guest . . . other than your points mentioned, which mostly don't conflict at all with what the actually proposal is, laughably.
"they should have just realigned the conferences"
they did
". . . and made the schedule change"
they did
"a little tweak to the old system such as the division leaders making the playoffs, not making a top 3 spot"
essentially what has happened, actually - conference leaders play the #4 team in their conference, and because there are only 2 conference winners as opposed to 3 division winners, the teams are more legitimate top seeds.
How can you say the conferences are lopsided? Prove it, please. Also, if they are lopsided . . . how would you fix it? Where would you put the Florida teams while not breaking up the 5 team Atlantic rivalries that certainly must stay together?
Does anyone actually put any thought into these kinds of dismissive comments?!? 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2011 : 10:24:37
|
Slozo has hit the nail on the head with a few of his posts. Firstly, people who talk about problems without solutions are simply complaining.It's easy to sit on the sidelines and yap about all the things that are wrong but a lot harder to figure out how to make things right.
Secondly, this 'poppycock' about the conferences not working because of 8 vs 7 team is dumb. The math works. It's not like there are 4 yr olds in NY working out the schedule. We are talking about a difference of one or two more interconference games a year over an 82 game season. Completely irrelevant.
Thirdly, the crap about which conferences are strong and which are not is also a weak argument. The NHL is cyclical. Think 5-6 years ago when Washington, Pitttsburgh, and Chicago were at the bottom of the table. Where are they now??
That being said, I would suggest the playoffs not be inter-conference. I am fine with each of the 4 conference winners being the top 4 seeds in the playoffs. After that, the remaining 12 teams who make the playoffs should be the next best 12 teams regardless of conference. They should be ranked by standings and no re-seeding during the playoffs should happen. This would create some very interesting match-ups in the playoffs and could potentially produce some non-traditional outcomes. Who wouldn't want to potentially see Montreal play Toronto or Edmonton play Calgary for the Stanley Cup?? How about Philly vs Pittsburgh, LA vs SJ or ANA, DET vs CHI?? The list goes on and on.
I think the NHL missed the boat on what could have been a very interesting and creative playoff system. However, the regular season theory works, makes sense, and I like it. |
|
|
|
Utemin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
451 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2011 : 13:14:38
|
Sorry NHL, I don't care if it helps travel schedual but a lot of NHL tradition will be changed by this and I don't want that doesn't need to be changed. No way am I ok with this.
I am a fat boy, who plays too much X box, But my opinions are my biggest health hazzard |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/15/2011 : 13:24:11
|
Bottom line the new alignment is not completely fair.
Would you rather be in a conference where 8 different teams are competing for only 4 playoff spots OR in a conference where only 7 teams are competing for 4 playoff spots?
Decisions like this are why people don't view the NHL as a major sporting league. This is bush league stuff. |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/15/2011 : 13:25:27
|
| And also the excuse of "they are gonna be adding more teams" doesn't matter. Why not realign when you've added those teams then? What's the point of doing it now? Change it when you have enough teams to make it fair or don't do it at all. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2011 : 17:18:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
Bottom line the new alignment is not completely fair.
Would you rather be in a conference where 8 different teams are competing for only 4 playoff spots OR in a conference where only 7 teams are competing for 4 playoff spots?
Decisions like this are why people don't view the NHL as a major sporting league. This is bush league stuff.
I get your point, but i guess some teams will just have to deal with it! Every year is different, but let's take the current NHL, and this is hypothetical as these would not likely ever be the divisions, but if you were the Rangers, would you rather be in a 4 team div with Pittsburgh, Philly and Vancouver or a 5 team division, with Carolina, Anaheim, Columbus and the Islanders? Like i said, every year is different, so good times come and go. See my point?
Also, do people consider the MLB to be "bush league"? Is it not considered a major sporting league? Does it not have 4 div's with 5 teams, but 1 with 6 and 1 with just 4??? It did the last time i looked! Doesn't each division winner make the playoffs? Is that fair, or is that bush too? |
|
|
|
Utemin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
451 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2011 : 17:49:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
Bottom line the new alignment is not completely fair.
Would you rather be in a conference where 8 different teams are competing for only 4 playoff spots OR in a conference where only 7 teams are competing for 4 playoff spots?
Decisions like this are why people don't view the NHL as a major sporting league. This is bush league stuff.
Until this realignment goes through arbotration it will not be permitted. Though it is likely it will happen next year, it is possible that this playoff scenario will not be accepted.
I am a fat boy, who plays too much X box, But my opinions are my biggest health hazzard |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 05:03:39
|
Utemin and guest:
NO set-up will be fair. Full stop.
Do you think the current set-up is fair? Because if you do, I would like you to talk to Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver about their travel schedules. I would like you to talk to Detroit. I would like you to talk to any team in the ultr-competetive Pacific division. I would like you to talk to Winnipeg and Dallas about time zones. Etc etc etc.
Like I said earlier, when one knows that there is no 'perfect' solution, one must compromise - that is a fact. And the effective way to make compromises is decide first what is the most important aspect to satisfy, what is the second most important aspect to satisfy, and so on, and try to get your top two or three objectives satisfied for nearly 100% of the teams and go from there.
Which is why I think the NHL did very, very well here. They satisfied the teams in each division/conference being in the same time zone (Dallas cheers); they satisfied all of the existing and important rivalries, while re-joining some (see - Washington with the Penn. teams) and putting teams where they should be (keeping Detroit with the midwest, putting Winnipeg there). That all makes a ton of sense, to me, as a lot of that has to do with television deals, game times, and exciting the fanbase, and that means more fans, more money, better product, etc. Better hockey!
I still have not seen even ONE better solution offered up by the naysayers. Hey, I am keeping an open mind here . . . still waiting though!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 07:41:38
|
Here's my solution: Leave it as it. What the heck is really wrong with the current format? Are you kidding me about travel being the reason? You think Van lost in the cup final because they were tired from all that travel in the year? No, they got beat by a team that out played them. Detroit travels a lot...how many cups have they won in the last 10-15 years? Travel is an excuse. These are PRO athletes who hop on a FIRST CLASS chartered plane to go places. It's not like they are lining up for hours in security to fly commercial. 2 hours is the max time zone difference. It's not like these guys are going overseas and changing their schedule by days. Excuses...
Alex116 - You're right, MLB does do that. But they also have wild card spots. If they want to make it 8 and 7 teams, they need to change how teams qualify for the playoffs. Why not make it top 8 teams regardless of what div they are in?
The system and format in place needs to be equal for all teams and this is not. Travel/time zones, etc are just outcomes of where the team is located, but the league should be set up to be fair for all. Bottom line. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 08:20:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
Here's my solution: Leave it as it. What the heck is really wrong with the current format? Are you kidding me about travel being the reason? You think Van lost in the cup final because they were tired from all that travel in the year? No, they got beat by a team that out played them. Detroit travels a lot...how many cups have they won in the last 10-15 years? Travel is an excuse. These are PRO athletes who hop on a FIRST CLASS chartered plane to go places. It's not like they are lining up for hours in security to fly commercial. 2 hours is the max time zone difference. It's not like these guys are going overseas and changing their schedule by days. Excuses...
Alex116 - You're right, MLB does do that. But they also have wild card spots. If they want to make it 8 and 7 teams, they need to change how teams qualify for the playoffs. Why not make it top 8 teams regardless of what div they are in?
The system and format in place needs to be equal for all teams and this is not. Travel/time zones, etc are just outcomes of where the team is located, but the league should be set up to be fair for all. Bottom line.
First of all, i didn't see ANYWHERE where Slozo said the Canucks used their travel schedule as an excuse for losing the Stanley Cup on home ice in game 7. BUT, if you wanna go down that path, how do you know travel wasn't a factor? Yes, they fly in style, have less waiting time, etc, but it's a fact, that travelling is still more wear and tear on you body and mind than sitting at home or sleeping in your own bed. How do we know that Vancouver wouldn't have done even better last year if they didn't have that travel schedule? Really, it's a moot point though, and as i said, i don't think Slozo was blaming the cup loss on it so much as simply stating that some teams have a much more difficult travel schedule.
As for the MLB, sure they have wild card spots, but currently they also only have 8 teams making the playoffs! And, teams still play their divisions more than other div's. When you're in a diffucult division, it sucks! Ask the Blue Jays!
I do, however, agree with your point about the top 8 making it rather than division winners but at the same time, if you're not playing exactly the same schedule as all the other teams, it's not gonna be 100% fair anyways. There's always going to be some sort of edge to one team or another. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 09:42:43
|
Clearly people do not understand the NHL structure. Why does the schedule have to go to arbitration?? Who is challenging it?? The only thing that is relevant is the BoG. They have decided. The leaders of each NHL team agree(or at least more than 2/3rd agree) to this realignment.
Secondly, I am not in disagreement with the Wildcard structure. I think it works well in MLB and NFL. Even the NBA does not have a set number of teams that come out of each division. It is based on the 8 best teams in the conference.
I agree with the conference winners getting in but the next 6 teams in each conference get it. It could mean 2 from the Pacific and 4 from the central or visa versa.
That makes sense. However, the difference between 7 teams and 8 teams is irrelevant over an 82 game season. They still have to win enough to get in. |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 12:26:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
That makes sense. However, the difference between 7 teams and 8 teams is irrelevant over an 82 game season. They still have to win enough to get in.
Not true. If a team in the div with 8 sits in 5th place, they could potentially be in a playoff position if you take one of those teams out. They could be a 4th place team in a 7 team division.
Alex116 - I wasn't arguing what Slozo said by bringing up Vancouver, they were just mentioned as a team who should be "talked to" about travel schedules. My point was, why does that matter? Unless you're saying it contributes to the teams performance, which is why i brought up van in the finals. But that shouldn't matter, because as I said Detroit has won numerous cups with bad travel schedules. Travel is just an excuse some teams use... |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 12:36:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
Alex116 - I wasn't arguing what Slozo said by bringing up Vancouver, they were just mentioned as a team who should be "talked to" about travel schedules. My point was, why does that matter? Unless you're saying it contributes to the teams performance, which is why i brought up van in the finals. But that shouldn't matter, because as I said Detroit has won numerous cups with bad travel schedules. Travel is just an excuse some teams use...
Guest and Alex, you are missing the point. The travel argument is not about how tired teams are, it is about how expensive it is.
For example, Vancouver currently spends about 50% more on travel for its team than Toronto does, which ultimately affects their bottom line. For owners of a business where profits are thin as is, this is a big deal. |
Edited by - nuxfan on 12/16/2011 12:38:55 |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 12:50:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
Guest and Alex, you are missing the point. The travel argument is not about how tired teams are, it is about how expensive it is.
For example, Vancouver currently spends about 50% more on travel for its team than Toronto does, which ultimately affects their bottom line. For owners of a business where profits are thin as is, this is a big deal.
So we should be compromising the competitive fairness of the game in order to satisfy this? Well then we might as well just use bigger nets and smaller pucks in only arenas that don't sell as many tickets so the game is more high scoring and exciting there to sell more tickets and thus improve profits.
I get what you're saying nuxfan, but that's not a good enough reason for me to change it. I'm not really even questioning WHY they are doing it. I know the NHL is a business and rich people just want to make more money. Sad fact of the world. It is just not a completely fair system and I don't see how people think it is. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 12:57:10
|
I get what you're saying nuxfan, but the guest and Slozo i believe were discussing travel as an excuse for performance.
Guest.....i still think you're wrong. Just because Det has a tought travel gig (as have teams like Anaheim, Calgary, Edm, etc when they've won it all), doesn't necessarily mean it's not a disadvantage. These teams were able to overcome it, that is all. Again, don't take this the wrong way, i'm not saying i, nor anyone, is using travel as an excuse for the Canucks loss last year, i'm just defending the original point that it can come into play when playing out the year. Who's to say those Det cup wins wouldn't have come easier if they had the travel sched of an eastern team like the Rangers? That was my point, not that it wouldn't be possible for a team with more travel to win EVER. |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 13:13:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I get what you're saying nuxfan, but the guest and Slozo i believe were discussing travel as an excuse for performance.
Guest.....i still think you're wrong. Just because Det has a tought travel gig (as have teams like Anaheim, Calgary, Edm, etc when they've won it all), doesn't necessarily mean it's not a disadvantage. These teams were able to overcome it, that is all. Again, don't take this the wrong way, i'm not saying i, nor anyone, is using travel as an excuse for the Canucks loss last year, i'm just defending the original point that it can come into play when playing out the year. Who's to say those Det cup wins wouldn't have come easier if they had the travel sched of an eastern team like the Rangers? That was my point, not that it wouldn't be possible for a team with more travel to win EVER.
Alex116 - Ok, I hear ya. Let's say it has some effect (which I still don't agree with...cmon guys, have you seen how these guys travel? They basically take a nap on leather seats for a few hours. They don't even carry their own gear!!!) It shouldn't be an excuse either let alone a reason to restructure the entire league. (
Also, I wasn't picking on the Canucks either by bringing them up, I was just using the most recent example.
The supporters are waiting for "naysayers" to provide a better solution. But I haven't heard any good reasons to even justify a change to the current system by any of the supporters...except travel and time zones. And that is a shaky excuse. Seriously, they sleep in leather recliners the whole trip basically!!!  |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 13:59:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
So we should be compromising the competitive fairness of the game in order to satisfy this? Well then we might as well just use bigger nets and smaller pucks in only arenas that don't sell as many tickets so the game is more high scoring and exciting there to sell more tickets and thus improve profits.
I get what you're saying nuxfan, but that's not a good enough reason for me to change it. I'm not really even questioning WHY they are doing it. I know the NHL is a business and rich people just want to make more money. Sad fact of the world. It is just not a completely fair system and I don't see how people think it is.
It may seem sad to you that people that own businesses want to make money, but frankly, thats why they get into owning businesses. Owning a hockey team should not be a charity, and owners should be in it to make money, or at least break even. If I had a team that was on equal footing with 29 other teams, but had to pay 50% more than some other teams just to be able to complete my ordinary course of business, I'd be pissed too.
As for the un-evenness of the conferences, I truly do believe that the NHL is banking on PHX moving from one of the 8 team conferences to one of the 7 team conferences, thus evening things out. Maybe not in time for next season, but the season afterwards for sure. |
|
|
|
Guest2260
( )
|
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 15:23:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2260
So we should be compromising the competitive fairness of the game in order to satisfy this? Well then we might as well just use bigger nets and smaller pucks in only arenas that don't sell as many tickets so the game is more high scoring and exciting there to sell more tickets and thus improve profits.
I get what you're saying nuxfan, but that's not a good enough reason for me to change it. I'm not really even questioning WHY they are doing it. I know the NHL is a business and rich people just want to make more money. Sad fact of the world. It is just not a completely fair system and I don't see how people think it is.
It may seem sad to you that people that own businesses want to make money, but frankly, thats why they get into owning businesses. Owning a hockey team should not be a charity, and owners should be in it to make money, or at least break even. If I had a team that was on equal footing with 29 other teams, but had to pay 50% more than some other teams just to be able to complete my ordinary course of business, I'd be pissed too.
As for the un-evenness of the conferences, I truly do believe that the NHL is banking on PHX moving from one of the 8 team conferences to one of the 7 team conferences, thus evening things out. Maybe not in time for next season, but the season afterwards for sure.
Yes I get business is about making money. If you don't like that the business you're in happens to also be a competitive sport, than don't get into that business. Or move your business somewhere else. Don't just sit there and b!tch about how sucky it is to be in business where you are and have things changed so that you are more comfy. I happen to own my own business friend, and though it's no NHL franchise, I think I run it in a way that doesn't sacrifice integrity.
Like i said before...if they are planning on teams moving or adding other teams, than why not just change things when that happens so that it is fair? Why does this need to happen right now? No one has given a good reason for that. |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 17:07:13
|
How is the new alignment any less fair than the current? 24 games against division opponents, 40 other games versus conference opponents, and only 18 games versus other conference opponents?
At least there will be a home-and-home against everyone in the league next year!
I would strongly argue that the "I'm in the worse conference" skew currently is worse, though less perceptible. Just last year the East 8th place got 93pts, west 8th had 97pts, and 93 would get you 11th.
In 09-10, 88pts got you in the playoffs in the East, West was 95, and 88 would get you 12th.
In 08-09, the skew went in favor of the west, with only 91pts getting you in while, in the east that would get you 10th, 93pts needed for 8th.
You see a pattern? Always a discrepancy in how much you need to get in the playoffs, but nobody was complaining that "better teams" missed out. They simply attributed to conferences having more or less parity.
Same thing will happen next year, some conferences will have more parity, others less.
If you think its too hard to get into the playoffs, stop crying, and work more! |
Edited by - polishexpress on 12/16/2011 18:36:25 |
|
|
|
Guest5011
( )
|
Posted - 12/16/2011 : 21:49:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sensfan101
quote:
Originally posted by Sensfan101
I think I have the perfect names for the new divisions/
Pacific-Gretzky division
Central-Howe division
Northeast-Orr division
Atlantic- Lemieux division
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky
Oops didn't realize this was already a topic.
YA SMARTY PANTS |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
NHL Realignment Poll 
