Jump to content

NHL owners move closer to changing schedule format


DesertRat
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=ap-b...p&type=lgns

I sure hope this happens at the next owners meeting in November. I think the last time this came to a vote, Nashville was the swing vote that kept the current 3-year cyclical format alive. I may be wrong about that, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=ap-b...p&type=lgns

I sure hope this happens at the next owners meeting in November. I think the last time this came to a vote, Nashville was the swing vote that kept the current 3-year cyclical format alive. I may be wrong about that, however.

Sid the Kid sold out Phx when he went there if I recall. Some of these markets need the "carnival" to come into town and help out so hopefully the schedule will reflect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can't change it soon enough for me. These last few years have just plain sucked in the Northwest Division. The Devils and Martin Brodeur have not played in St. Paul since something like 2003-04. Crosby's never been here yet (as well as Colorado, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary) and Ovechkin wouldn't be due back here until perhaps 2010. Then, each and everyone one of our division opponents are located in a different time zone than us! I think Dallas is in the same time zone situation as well.

The "once every three years" situation is just a terrible value for the money for season ticket holders, and then if you divide a season ticket 5 ways like my group, your chances of seeing Crosby are now 1 in 15 years, not 1 in 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope the current method is abandoned. Even if it is one game against every team in the other conference, the worst is having to wait til next year to see the players you didn't see. I would prefer a home and home with each team in the other conference though.

I don't even live in an NHL city, and I want fans to be able to see every big name. DesertRat as a Season Ticket Holder deserves to be able to see Crosby, Ovechkin, and Kovalchuk every year. Not just see Getzlaf, Thornton, and Kopitar 4 times each year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think I'm the only one that actually likes the schedule the way it is now. Sure, there's not much intra-conference play but I just loved the fact that the division teams play each other 8 times. 8 TIMES! For me, that's the way it should be...play the teams you have to beat to get into the playoffs the most. BUT, I come from a division filled with hated rivals. Unfortunately, not all markets are like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think I'm the only one that actually likes the schedule the way it is now. Sure, there's not much intra-conference play but I just loved the fact that the division teams play each other 8 times. 8 TIMES! For me, that's the way it should be...play the teams you have to beat to get into the playoffs the most. BUT, I come from a division filled with hated rivals. Unfortunately, not all markets are like that.

While I can see this argument as well, there is also a reason that this is not good. Take the Atlantic division and the Southeast as examples. The Atlantic has many good teams, who beating each other up are having an average record. Now take the Southeast where if one team has a good year and the rest are horrible, that one team basically beats up on the others and beefs up its record even though they may not be as good as the teams from the Atlantic division.

I personally like the way the NBA does the schedule. A home and home against the other conference. 4 games against every team in your division. Then 3 or 4 games against the remaining teams in your conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sid the Kid sold out Phx when he went there if I recall. Some of these markets need the "carnival" to come into town and help out so hopefully the schedule will reflect that.

He sure did, and had one of the season's goals of the year. IIRC, I think he scored from his rear end. I've seen Ovechkin and I'd love to see Crosby play here more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think I'm the only one that actually likes the schedule the way it is now. Sure, there's not much intra-conference play but I just loved the fact that the division teams play each other 8 times. 8 TIMES! For me, that's the way it should be...play the teams you have to beat to get into the playoffs the most. BUT, I come from a division filled with hated rivals. Unfortunately, not all markets are like that.

If you want to have to fight your way out of your division, you should like my plan then.

I like the idea of making each conference TWO divisions, of one 7 and the other 8 teams.

Play everyone in the other conference twice, once at home, once away. That's 30 games, leaving 52.

Play everyone else in your conference twice (including teams in your own division) twice. That's 28 games, leaving 24 additional games to be played in your own division, but divided among more teams than currently.

In the 7 team division, play the other six teams 4 more times. That's the 24 games you had left. Perfect!

In the 8 team division, play 5 other teams 4 additional times (20 games) and 2 of them 2 additional times (4 games) on an annual rotation.

**********

In other words, you'd play everyone in the other conference twice, everyone in your conference's other division twice and each team in your division 6 times, spread out among more teams than currently.

In the 8 team conference, you would play 5 teams in your division 6 times and 2 teams 4 times.

**********

Then, for the playoffs, the first two rounds are held in your own division with 1-4 and 2-3 playing. The winners meet to crown the division champion. That way you'd build some great rivalries since you would be playing the same teams a lot more often in the playoffs, and that's where rivalries are built.

Personally, at that point I'd ditch the East vs. West format and re-seed the remaining 4 teams based on points. This would prevent two strong teams from the East knocking each other out in the semi's and preventing two Cinderella's from the West meeting to send a lamb to the slaughter in the finals. It also allows for some possible finals matchups that are otherwise impossible, like Boston vs. New York.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He sure did, and had one of the season's goals of the year. IIRC, I think he scored from his rear end. I've seen Ovechkin and I'd love to see Crosby play here more.

While I don't think Sid should be shoved down the throats of everyone like Vs seemed to do last year, I think the NHL should try and market him, AO and a few others to the hilt. Some markets are not well off and at least with a once a year stop it can help matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh...that's funny actually Jeff because you just fused together possibly the greatest alignments the NHL ever had. The first being the inter-division playoff system and the second being the overall seedings in the playoffs. The divisional playoffs are what made todays rivalries "RIVALRIES" and the league-wide seedings in 1980 and 1981 made for fantastic playoff matchups like having the Islanders and Flyers face each other in the Finals. It would definitely be fun to get the Oilers/Flames and Bruins/Habs and Islanders/Rangers and Buffalo/Toronto and Anaheim/Los Angeles matchups in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I don't think Sid should be shoved down the throats of everyone like Vs seemed to do last year, I think the NHL should try and market him, AO and a few others to the hilt. Some markets are not well off and at least with a once a year stop it can help matters.

I agree, they definitely have marketed him hard. Ovechkin was a joy for me to see play live. I happened to see him the day he scored "the goal" against the Coyotes on Brian Boucher. I wasn't pulling for the Caps, but he got me standing up and applauding. The NHL needs to get guys like Sid and Ovechkin hitting every market at least once a year, if not once every other year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

On the topic of the schedule format, I'm personally a big proponent of keeping it the way it is. Much as I'd like to say I follow every team in the league, I can't. I wish I could but I simply can't. But what I can do is follow the other 4 teams in my division, the southeast. Get to know them well, and it makes the frequent games against division rivals that much more exciting. Personally, I'd much rather see many games against teams I know fairly well, than say, one single game against many west coast teams I know little to nothing about. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I get much more psyched up to head across the bay to Tampa to see us play Atlanta or Florida, than I would to drive across to see say, Phoenix. Not saying all teams aren't fun, but I just don't know enough about 'em to make it meaningful. Am I way off base? Not devoted enough of a fan? I dunno.

From the article, I hope this is just me misunderstanding but it says:

Also discussed Tuesday was possible league expansion and the proposed sales of the Tampa Bay Lightning and Nashville Predators. Bettman said expansion talks were premature.

The team sales are not ready to be voted on, Bettman added, but could be by the time the board meets again.

I assume they mean my Bolts changing hands from one owners group to another, not an outright shuttering of the team. I mean, I know Tampa not sharing parking revenue is a pain, but c'mon...we won the cup not long ago. The "expansion talks" thing makes me nervous if they mean the Bolts might disappear. I hope I'm way wrong on that one, I'm just misunderstanding, right guys? Guys?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expansion? Oh Lord, no! Frankly, this league would be better served with 28 teams, not 30, and certainly not 32.

Where are you going to put two more teams now that Nashville and Columbus have them? Wichita and Oklahoma City? If you passed on Seattle and Milwaukee before, what's changed?

Please don't tell me Las Vegas. Please. That just seems so risky. Sure there's a bazillion dollars in the city to buy a team, but what if no one shows up for the games and the owners lose interest? It seems like high risk, low reward at best.

As far as the schedule goes, you can pretty much draw a line down the division between the Eastern Conference and the Western to see who's in favor of keeping the schedule and changing it. Dallas and Minnesota have it so bad right now it's not funny.

None of the teams in their divisions are even in their freakin' time zone! Sydney Crosby has yet to play a game in Minnesota, Colorado, Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver. Not one, and he's the biggest, most marketable star in the league!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expansion? Oh Lord, no! Frankly, this league would be better served with 28 teams, not 30, and certainly not 32.

Where are you going to put two more teams now that Nashville and Columbus have them? Wichita and Oklahoma City? If you passed on Seattle and Milwaukee before, what's changed?

Please don't tell me Las Vegas. Please. That just seems so risky. Sure there's a bazillion dollars in the city to buy a team, but what if no one shows up for the games and the owners lose interest? It seems like high risk, low reward at best.

As far as the schedule goes, you can pretty much draw a line down the division between the Eastern Conference and the Western to see who's in favor of keeping the schedule and changing it. Dallas and Minnesota have it so bad right now it's not funny.

None of the teams in their divisions are even in their freakin' time zone! Sydney Crosby has yet to play a game in Minnesota, Colorado, Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver. Not one, and he's the biggest, most marketable star in the league!

So true, so true! I was against the expansion boom of the late 90's, the only cities I thought that really needed a team or would really support one was Minnesota (obviously) and Columbus. Of course Minnesota should never have lost their team in the first place IMO. With Bettman running the show, I can see them seriously considering expansion like it would solve all their woes. I miss the days of 22-26 teams that I grew up with to fall in love with the NHL. I really hope he finds new employment someday... I'm gonna stop here or I'm gonna really start ranting...

Vegas would be horrible IMO. As much as I've benefited from the Coyotes and love having them nearby, Vegas would have about as much of a fanbase as the Coyotes do. They both are warm cities which attract many northerners who for the most part never seem to lose their prior loyalties. I've not lost my Colts, White Sox, or Pacers loyalties nor would I for any of the AZ teams, I like the Diamondbacks, Suns, and Cardinals, but they will never top my original home teams. Vegas is alright enough to visit, but I don't think it'd be advisable to have that gambling element as prevalent in one of your team's cities. Not to mention 30 teams is really stretching the NHL these days...32 is just a bad idea...they aren't the NFL or MLB!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This talk about Vegas boggles my mind. Why are the powers that be considering there as the most likely expansion spot? Aren't there markets much more appropriate for a new NHL team, which I'm not sure the league needs anyway, but that's another post entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

It is official, a new scheduling format starting next year.

Teams will play each club in their division six times, a total of 24 games, and the 10 other clubs in their conference four times, a total of 40 games.

The remaining 18 games in the 82-game schedule will involve each club playing all 15 clubs in the other conference at least once, home or away. The three remaining games will be devoted to inter-conference “at-large” scheduling.

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?articleid=34495...mp;service=page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is official, a new scheduling format starting next year.

Teams will play each club in their division six times, a total of 24 games, and the 10 other clubs in their conference four times, a total of 40 games.

The remaining 18 games in the 82-game schedule will involve each club playing all 15 clubs in the other conference at least once, home or away. The three remaining games will be devoted to inter-conference “at-large” scheduling.

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?articleid=34495...mp;service=page

GREAT! I have a vague recollection that the schedule was how it was back in the old days but I am not sure. Either way, this is great news!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...