Options
NHL Realignment
jdip9
Posts: 1,895 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Not sure why, but it sounds like drastic NHL realignment is in store....Link
Other than moving Winnepeg west, and one team east (most likely Nashville, which would slide in easily in the Southeast), why do any more teams have to move? As I look at a map, the NHL is perfectly aligned.
I hate divisions with uneven number of teams. Especially when there is a perfectly fine system in place.
Other than moving Winnepeg west, and one team east (most likely Nashville, which would slide in easily in the Southeast), why do any more teams have to move? As I look at a map, the NHL is perfectly aligned.
I hate divisions with uneven number of teams. Especially when there is a perfectly fine system in place.
0
Comments
A
San Jose Sharks
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
Phoenix Coyotes
Vancouver Canucks
Winnipeg Jets
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
B
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
NJ Devils
Toronto Maple Leafs
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Ottawa Senators
Montreal Canadiens
C
Chicago Black Hawks
St Louis Blues
Dallas Stars
Minnesota Wild
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Columbus Blue Jackets
D
Carolina Hurricanes
Florida Panthers
Tampa Bay Lightning
Nashville Predators
Washington Capitals
Pittsburgh Penguins
Philadelphia Flyers
I don't like it. Why not leave things the way they are, with Winnipeg moving to the west and Nashville moving to the Southeast division?
If I learned anything, it's that Bettman will always find a way to screw up a good thing.
<< <i>I heard they are talking about having four divisions. I just don't see how they can do it. There are certain teams that go together naturally. Here's how I see it:
A
San Jose Sharks
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
Phoenix Coyotes
Vancouver Canucks
Winnipeg Jets
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
B
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
NJ Devils
Toronto Maple Leafs
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Ottawa Senators
Montreal Canadiens
C
Chicago Black Hawks
St Louis Blues
Dallas Stars
Minnesota Wild
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Columbus Blue Jackets
D
Carolina Hurricanes
Florida Panthers
Tampa Bay Lightning
Nashville Predators
Washington Capitals
Pittsburgh Penguins
Philadelphia Flyers
I don't like it. Why not leave things the way they are, with Winnipeg moving to the west and Nashville moving to the Southeast division? >>
I would think Columbus is a more logical choice than Nashville in the above 'D' division, no?
Sam
With the NBA possibly missing a season, the NHL really has a chance to jump back into the mainstream, since it may have the stage all to itself from February through June (sorry, no offense the baseball fanatics on this board, but early regular season baseball pales in comparison to playoff hockey). ESPN will have no choice other than show highlights from all NHL games if it wants to fill 1-hour Sportscenters if there are no NBA games to cover.
<< <i> ESPN will have no choice other than show highlights from all NHL games if it wants to fill 1-hour Sportscenters if there are no NBA games to cover. >>
nothing wrong with that!
<< <i>True, if it plays out like H2O proposes, then there isn't many rivalries lost. But, there is talk of moving Detroit east, and who knows what other hair-brained scheme Bettman will come up with. >>
What's so hair-brained about moving the Wings into the East?
<< <i>I know it makes all the sense in the world for Detroit to be in the East....for Detroit. For an NHL with a 1-year window to rebuild an identity, continuity is their friend. >>
With all due respect, I don't get that. A one year window to rebuild an identity? What identity? And why one year? And why would the 2012-13 campaign be the year in which this identity needs to be rebuilt? There aren't any changes happening this upcoming year (so far as I know), and we can likely expect the NBA to be back in action in 16 months from now, so it's not clear why you see the 2012-13 year as a pivotal one in the league's development.
For years the primary complaint against Bettman is that he's forsaken the core fans that helped this league survive for the past 60+ years. If Bettman's charter is-- or should be-- to serve those core fans then I don't see how you can argue that moving the Wings to the East would not serve that purpose. As a casual Wings fan I'll admit that it gets tiring to wait until 10 pm to watch West coast games, so I (as with most Wings supporters) would love to see them move to the East, but even moving past the selfish interests of Wings fans I don't see how any hockey fan can argue that a team stationed in Detroit, Mi. belongs in a conference with the L.A. Kings and not in a conference with the Pittsburgh Penguins. Nor do I see how moving the Wings into the East will somehow pollute the product that the NHL puts out on the ice.
Just about every hockey fan I know- even those who don't live in Michigan- could give a damn what happens to any US team located west of Colorado and south of the Carolinas. If the viability of those teams concerns you then I can see how you might object to a Wings move. If you're more concerned with keeping the core markets vibrant and sustainable, however, then an argument against a Wings move makes no sense to me.
Look at a map. There are 30 teams in the NHL, and 14 are clearly considered West. That leaves one "east" team that has to play in the west. The choices are Detroit, Columbus, and Nashville. Nobody gives two hoots about the latter two, but Detroit's NHL identity is as a Western Conference team. Over the years, there have been real rivalries developed with a number of teams.
<<<If Bettman's charter is-- or should be-- to serve those core fans then I don't see how you can argue that moving the Wings to the East would not serve that purpose.>>>
Here's the thing. The core fans will be there no matter what. It's the reason why the Red Sox ALWAYS get the 10pm time slot come ALDS time, because the networks know there is no other team that will bring the ratings to that time slot that the Sox will bring. If the NHL wants to satisfy the "core fans", the question then turns from "which teams should be realigned" to "which 6 teams should we eliminate"?
The charter should be to turn casual fans into "core" fans. I have no idea how to do that, but that is the only way for the game to THRIVE. The sport can survive otherwise, but toils in obscurity, and gets the same TV air time/coverage as the X games or billiards. Perhaps it is too late, and the sport is already at that point, but chances to reclaim whatever piece of the pie has been lost do not come around very often, and when they do, you've got to be prepared to execute.
To that end, NEXT year is huge, when the NHL potentially doesn't have to compete with the NBA for the attention of the sports fan. I think that they risk losing some of those casual fans if drastic realignment is thrown upon them the following year. However small that number might be, its a number that the NHL cannot afford to lose. My enjoyment of the game will not change regardless of what happens, but I think there is a reason why the NHL is in the position it is in today, and it is due to short-sightedness of the some of the decisions that have been made along the way.
<< <i><<<I don't see how any hockey fan can argue that a team stationed in Detroit, Mi. belongs in a conference with the L.A. Kings and not in a conference with the Pittsburgh Penguins.>>>
Look at a map. There are 30 teams in the NHL, and 14 are clearly considered West. That leaves one "east" team that has to play in the west. The choices are Detroit, Columbus, and Nashville. Nobody gives two hoots about the latter two, but Detroit's NHL identity is as a Western Conference team. Over the years, there have been real rivalries developed with a number of teams.
<<<If Bettman's charter is-- or should be-- to serve those core fans then I don't see how you can argue that moving the Wings to the East would not serve that purpose.>>>
Here's the thing. The core fans will be there no matter what. It's the reason why the Red Sox ALWAYS get the 10pm time slot come ALDS time, because the networks know there is no other team that will bring the ratings to that time slot that the Sox will bring. If the NHL wants to satisfy the "core fans", the question then turns from "which teams should be realigned" to "which 6 teams should we eliminate"?
The charter should be to turn casual fans into "core" fans. I have no idea how to do that, but that is the only way for the game to THRIVE. The sport can survive otherwise, but toils in obscurity, and gets the same TV air time/coverage as the X games or billiards. Perhaps it is too late, and the sport is already at that point, but chances to reclaim whatever piece of the pie has been lost do not come around very often, and when they do, you've got to be prepared to execute.
To that end, NEXT year is huge, when the NHL potentially doesn't have to compete with the NBA for the attention of the sports fan. I think that they risk losing some of those casual fans if drastic realignment is thrown upon them the following year. However small that number might be, its a number that the NHL cannot afford to lose. My enjoyment of the game will not change regardless of what happens, but I think there is a reason why the NHL is in the position it is in today, and it is due to short-sightedness of the some of the decisions that have been made along the way. >>
I have looked at a map, and I'm aware of the the fact that a disproportionate number of NHL teams are stationed in the Eastern half of the continent. There are three teams that could conceivably move to the East (the three you've identified), and Detroit is the only one in the Eastern Time Zone. By my reckoning there is no legitimate argument for moving a team from the Central time zone to the Eastern Conference as opposed to a team from the Eastern time zone.
There are two different arguments here, and while either is fair to pursue we need to decide which one we're having. One argument is 'What is best for the NHL?', and the other is 'What is best for the fans in core markets?'. The tone and substance of your earlier posts lead me to believe that this thread was about the latter, and that was the argument to which I was responding. If we're talking about what's best for the NHL as a whole, yes- I agree that keeping the Wings in the West is probably the best idea. But your earlier posts suggest that you, as a Boston fan, would not want the Wings in the East, and that strikes me as odd. Why wouldn't you want the Wings in the East? Because you're too concerned with the viability of, say, the Coyotes? If I've misinterpreted you then I apologize, but that's what I've taken out of the discussion thus far.
Personally, wouldn't care in the slightest if the NHL folded every team in the West tomorrow, save the Canadian teams, the Hawks and the Blues. If the rest of them were contracted and their players reassigned to new teams via a dispersal draft I'd think it was a great day for hockey. My feeling is that many fans in traditional markets feel the same way, so it seems strange to see a fan in a traditional market objecting to a move to consolidate the traditional teams into one conference.
Perhaps I veered off-track, but that was my point.
<<<Personally, wouldn't care in the slightest if the NHL folded every team in the West tomorrow, save the Canadian teams, the Hawks and the Blues. If the rest of them were contracted and their players reassigned to new teams via a dispersal draft I'd think it was a great day for hockey. My feeling is that many fans in traditional markets feel the same way, so it seems strange to see a fan in a traditional market objecting to a move to consolidate the traditional teams into one conference.>>>
I'm not sure why it matters what I team I cheer for. Consolidating all the traditional teams in one conference only makes the other conference appear inferior, which does nothing to enhance the viability of the sport. Would I be entertained more by an extra Detroit game or two per season than a Columbus game? Of course I would. I just don't think it's best for the NHL. (No different than my thoughts on a salary cap in baseball - even though my team enjoys the benefits of the current system, I think there should be a cap).
I agree that the league would be infinitely better if your scenario above were to happen. But, unless there was unquestionable proof that could convince the union that this needed to happen to save the league, we are just dreaming.
I suppose that is one approach, but with that system, there is a benefit to being a Western conference team, since they only need to beat out 6 teams for a playoff spot, instead of 8.
Baseball is thinking of realignment for that very reason - the AL West teams only have to beat out 3 teams for a division title, while NL Central teams have to beat out 5.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if your idea is one that is on the table.
Sam
<< <i>
<< <i><<<I don't see how any hockey fan can argue that a team stationed in Detroit, Mi. belongs in a conference with the L.A. Kings and not in a conference with the Pittsburgh Penguins.>>>
Look at a map. There are 30 teams in the NHL, and 14 are clearly considered West. That leaves one "east" team that has to play in the west. The choices are Detroit, Columbus, and Nashville. Nobody gives two hoots about the latter two, but Detroit's NHL identity is as a Western Conference team. Over the years, there have been real rivalries developed with a number of teams.
<<<If Bettman's charter is-- or should be-- to serve those core fans then I don't see how you can argue that moving the Wings to the East would not serve that purpose.>>>
Here's the thing. The core fans will be there no matter what. It's the reason why the Red Sox ALWAYS get the 10pm time slot come ALDS time, because the networks know there is no other team that will bring the ratings to that time slot that the Sox will bring. If the NHL wants to satisfy the "core fans", the question then turns from "which teams should be realigned" to "which 6 teams should we eliminate"?
The charter should be to turn casual fans into "core" fans. I have no idea how to do that, but that is the only way for the game to THRIVE. The sport can survive otherwise, but toils in obscurity, and gets the same TV air time/coverage as the X games or billiards. Perhaps it is too late, and the sport is already at that point, but chances to reclaim whatever piece of the pie has been lost do not come around very often, and when they do, you've got to be prepared to execute.
To that end, NEXT year is huge, when the NHL potentially doesn't have to compete with the NBA for the attention of the sports fan. I think that they risk losing some of those casual fans if drastic realignment is thrown upon them the following year. However small that number might be, its a number that the NHL cannot afford to lose. My enjoyment of the game will not change regardless of what happens, but I think there is a reason why the NHL is in the position it is in today, and it is due to short-sightedness of the some of the decisions that have been made along the way. >>
I have looked at a map, and I'm aware of the the fact that a disproportionate number of NHL teams are stationed in the Eastern half of the continent. There are three teams that could conceivably move to the East (the three you've identified), and Detroit is the only one in the Eastern Time Zone. By my reckoning there is no legitimate argument for moving a team from the Central time zone to the Eastern Conference as opposed to a team from the Eastern time zone.
There are two different arguments here, and while either is fair to pursue we need to decide which one we're having. One argument is 'What is best for the NHL?', and the other is 'What is best for the fans in core markets?'. The tone and substance of your earlier posts lead me to believe that this thread was about the latter, and that was the argument to which I was responding. If we're talking about what's best for the NHL as a whole, yes- I agree that keeping the Wings in the West is probably the best idea. But your earlier posts suggest that you, as a Boston fan, would not want the Wings in the East, and that strikes me as odd. Why wouldn't you want the Wings in the East? Because you're too concerned with the viability of, say, the Coyotes? If I've misinterpreted you then I apologize, but that's what I've taken out of the discussion thus far.
Personally, wouldn't care in the slightest if the NHL folded every team in the West tomorrow, save the Canadian teams, the Hawks and the Blues. If the rest of them were contracted and their players reassigned to new teams via a dispersal draft I'd think it was a great day for hockey. My feeling is that many fans in traditional markets feel the same way, so it seems strange to see a fan in a traditional market objecting to a move to consolidate the traditional teams into one conference. >>
I have looked at a map, and I'm aware of the the fact that a disproportionate number of NHL teams are stationed in the Eastern half of the continent. There are three teams that could conceivably move to the East (the three you've identified), and Detroit is the only one in the Eastern Time Zone. By my reckoning there is no legitimate argument for moving a team from the Central time zone to the Eastern Conference as opposed to a team from the Eastern time zone.
are you talking about Columbus and Nashville? Columbus is in the ETZ and I believe is actually slightly further East than Detroit. Nashville is CST. Personally, I think Columbus makes the most sense to move to the East(they have no rivalries or history/allegiance to a conference) but obviously Detroit also makes sense. I'd just hate to lose the Hawks vs. Wings 6 games per year from a selfish standpoint.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i><<<I don't see how any hockey fan can argue that a team stationed in Detroit, Mi. belongs in a conference with the L.A. Kings and not in a conference with the Pittsburgh Penguins.>>>
Look at a map. There are 30 teams in the NHL, and 14 are clearly considered West. That leaves one "east" team that has to play in the west. The choices are Detroit, Columbus, and Nashville. Nobody gives two hoots about the latter two, but Detroit's NHL identity is as a Western Conference team. Over the years, there have been real rivalries developed with a number of teams.
<<<If Bettman's charter is-- or should be-- to serve those core fans then I don't see how you can argue that moving the Wings to the East would not serve that purpose.>>>
Here's the thing. The core fans will be there no matter what. It's the reason why the Red Sox ALWAYS get the 10pm time slot come ALDS time, because the networks know there is no other team that will bring the ratings to that time slot that the Sox will bring. If the NHL wants to satisfy the "core fans", the question then turns from "which teams should be realigned" to "which 6 teams should we eliminate"?
The charter should be to turn casual fans into "core" fans. I have no idea how to do that, but that is the only way for the game to THRIVE. The sport can survive otherwise, but toils in obscurity, and gets the same TV air time/coverage as the X games or billiards. Perhaps it is too late, and the sport is already at that point, but chances to reclaim whatever piece of the pie has been lost do not come around very often, and when they do, you've got to be prepared to execute.
To that end, NEXT year is huge, when the NHL potentially doesn't have to compete with the NBA for the attention of the sports fan. I think that they risk losing some of those casual fans if drastic realignment is thrown upon them the following year. However small that number might be, its a number that the NHL cannot afford to lose. My enjoyment of the game will not change regardless of what happens, but I think there is a reason why the NHL is in the position it is in today, and it is due to short-sightedness of the some of the decisions that have been made along the way. >>
I have looked at a map, and I'm aware of the the fact that a disproportionate number of NHL teams are stationed in the Eastern half of the continent. There are three teams that could conceivably move to the East (the three you've identified), and Detroit is the only one in the Eastern Time Zone. By my reckoning there is no legitimate argument for moving a team from the Central time zone to the Eastern Conference as opposed to a team from the Eastern time zone.
There are two different arguments here, and while either is fair to pursue we need to decide which one we're having. One argument is 'What is best for the NHL?', and the other is 'What is best for the fans in core markets?'. The tone and substance of your earlier posts lead me to believe that this thread was about the latter, and that was the argument to which I was responding. If we're talking about what's best for the NHL as a whole, yes- I agree that keeping the Wings in the West is probably the best idea. But your earlier posts suggest that you, as a Boston fan, would not want the Wings in the East, and that strikes me as odd. Why wouldn't you want the Wings in the East? Because you're too concerned with the viability of, say, the Coyotes? If I've misinterpreted you then I apologize, but that's what I've taken out of the discussion thus far.
Personally, wouldn't care in the slightest if the NHL folded every team in the West tomorrow, save the Canadian teams, the Hawks and the Blues. If the rest of them were contracted and their players reassigned to new teams via a dispersal draft I'd think it was a great day for hockey. My feeling is that many fans in traditional markets feel the same way, so it seems strange to see a fan in a traditional market objecting to a move to consolidate the traditional teams into one conference. >>
I have looked at a map, and I'm aware of the the fact that a disproportionate number of NHL teams are stationed in the Eastern half of the continent. There are three teams that could conceivably move to the East (the three you've identified), and Detroit is the only one in the Eastern Time Zone. By my reckoning there is no legitimate argument for moving a team from the Central time zone to the Eastern Conference as opposed to a team from the Eastern time zone.
are you talking about Columbus and Nashville? Columbus is in the ETZ and I believe is actually slightly further East than Detroit. Nashville is CST. Personally, I think Columbus makes the most sense to move to the East(they have no rivalries or history/allegiance to a conference) but obviously Detroit also makes sense. I'd just hate to lose the Hawks vs. Wings 6 games per year from a selfish standpoint. >>
Oops. Is Columbus east of Detroit? Well, that's a bit embarrassing. If both Col. and Det. are in the ETZ then I don't suppose there's any legit. reason to favor Wings move over a Jackets move.
Edit to add: I too would miss the Chi-Det games, but my God am I sick of the games out West, as well as these terrible games against Nashville (the most unwatchable team in the league, IMO) and Columbus. This unbalanced schedule is just ridiculous. You don't manufacture rivalries in sports; they just happen, often between unexpected teams and for unexpected reasons. Bettman clearly doesn't get that, although I guess that shouldn't come as a surprise.
One other note on this. There have been rumors (unsubstantiated, or at least so far as I know) that Illich went along with the last realignment under the condition that if the league were ever to realign again the Wings would be the first team in line to move to the East. I have no idea if there's anything in that or not, but it's been tossed around here in Michigan for years so I thought I'd share it.
I think those are the same feelings that a lot of the other Western conference fans will have too.
<<<This unbalanced schedule is just ridiculous.>>>
I agree. Both the NBA and NHL have 82 game schedules, yet the NBA finds a way for each team to play teams from the other conference twice. After one of the more nasty NHL Finals in a while, somehow Boston and Vancouver only play each other once this coming season (for the 2nd year in a row).
Edit to add: I too would miss the Chi-Det games, but my God am I sick of the games out West, as well as these terrible games against Nashville (the most unwatchable team in the league, IMO) and Columbus. This unbalanced schedule is just ridiculous. You don't manufacture rivalries in sports; they just happen, often between unexpected teams and for unexpected reasons. Bettman clearly doesn't get that, although I guess that shouldn't come as a surprise.
One other note on this. There have been rumors (unsubstantiated, or at least so far as I know) that Illich went along with the last realignment under the condition that if the league were ever to realign again the Wings would be the first team in line to move to the East. I have no idea if there's anything in that or not, but it's been tossed around here in Michigan for years so I thought I'd share it.
RE: rivalries, if that was Bettman's aspiration with the unbalanced schedule, then that a was a failure. I think the reason it hasn't worked is the result of two factors. The change to the previous playoff structure. When you had the top 4 teams in each division playing a Division Semifinal series, that team would advance to the Division Final...and the winner of that took on the other division in the Conference Final. Just looking back at the late 80's/early 90's the Hawks were matched up against their Norris Conference opposition every year...Wings, Blues, Leafs, North Stars....all those series were heated, and it seemed like every single year the winner that emerged from the Division Final was a different team...at least until the modified version and before the Wings began their 90's dominance. Then the NHL changed to this <yawn> 8 teams from each conference playoff structure in the 90's...that ruined a lot of rivalries. Secondly, the modest salary cap. With Bettman's sunbelt expansion, the cap is artificially low for major market franchises who have to prop up the Coyotes, Preds, and Panthers who have to scramble just to make it to the floor. Not to mention player movement. Players change teams way too much now (105 different players on 1 way contracts have changed teams via FA or trade in the last 5 days) So with more player movement, fewer new player acquisitions care about those old rivalries....then the meatheads can't believe Marian Hossa won't join in the Detroit Sucks chant at the lemming..er Blackhawks Convention...since the Canucks are the rival team to him. I suppose you can still have a few rivalries stemming from the playoffs....Hawks/Canucks...but there's a shelf-life to that 'rivalry' and unless they continue to match-up in the playoffs, it will circle the drain. More than two-thirds of the Hawks' roster has been turned over since the first series in '08. As a result, this rivalry means less to the pre-Toews/Kane era fans who still consider the Wings & Blues their true rivals with the Leafs and relocated Stars falling off the map. So as far as Hawks fans go, we've lost two rivalries and picked up one which will flame out in the same manner the post-90's Wings/Avs has flamed out over the next year or two. Unless there's some sort of Dan Carcillo/Bieksa major incident looming ahead...sigh. For some strange reason, Jackets/Wings hasn't become Michigan vs OSU.
As for Nashville, they're brutal to watch over a playoff series run, but you have to give Trotz credit. Aside from what might be a fluke 30 goal season from Hornquist, he hasn't had a 1st line quality forward since the 17 games he got out of Forsberg in '06-'07. He barely has one 2nd line quality forward on his roster now, but yet every year they're in the playoff picture. I just feel sorry for their surprisingly loyal season ticket holder fanbase (12k-13k). 41 games a year watching that pseudo-Jeff Jackson (Head Coach of Notre Dame) CCHA defensive system. I don't mind watching it at the college level, but I couldn't imagine paying $46 (average Predator season ticket price) to watch it 41 games a year. I like defensive hockey, but I'd probably prefer it to be accompanied by at least one or two forwards who have the ability to outscore Shea Weber.
The ONLY way I would be receptive to a 4-division, 2-conference realignment would be if they went back to the division playoff format. In an ideal world, Phoenix and Florida would be contracted so that all 4 divisions have 7 teams.
San Jose Sharks
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
Phoenix Coyotes
Vancouver Canucks
Winnipeg Jets
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
B
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
NJ Devils
Toronto Maple Leafs
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Ottawa Senators
Montreal Canadiens
C
Chicago Black Hawks
St Louis Blues
Dallas Stars
Minnesota Wild
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Columbus Blue Jackets
D
Carolina Hurricanes
Florida Panthers
Tampa Bay Lightning
Nashville Predators
Washington Capitals
Pittsburgh Penguins
Philadelphia Flyers
Did I miss something here regarding the Atlanta Thrashers??
Currently collecting 1934 Butterfinger, 1969 Nabisco, 1991 Topps Desert Shield (in PSA 9 or 10), and 1990 Donruss Learning Series (in PSA 10).
Thanks for the update!
Currently collecting 1934 Butterfinger, 1969 Nabisco, 1991 Topps Desert Shield (in PSA 9 or 10), and 1990 Donruss Learning Series (in PSA 10).