(HF)NHL Realignment - a modest proposal

[Ohio Jones]

Okay, so while we grind slowly into gear, I thought I'd get everyone engaged in a happy little discussion of realignment. Purely hypothetical, of course - the HFNHL will do whatever the NHL does. Hopefully everyone's read McKenzie's story on the subject, but if not, it's here: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=377916 . It's a loong read, but worth it.

So if we're the Board of Governors, the considerations we would seem to have to keep in mind are:

- Travel time / travel across time zones (especially for teams like Detroit, Dallas).
- Respect for rivalries
- No fewer than 2 US teams in any division
- Preference for the existing playoff format
- A strong lobby to move Detroit into the Eastern Conference

(For those like me who are a little rusty on the finer points of US geography, check out these maps:
http://www.worldtimezone.com/time-usa12.php
http://lib.utexas.edu/maps/united_states/united_states_wall_2002_us.jpg

The solution?

EXPANSION.

Yep, I said it: Expansion. (The ideal solution is actually contraction, of course, eliminating or relocating outliers in the "sun belt". But while the BOG is seemingly unprepared to consider contraction in the face of struggling franchises, they've shown their willingness to accept expansion dollars, so what the hell.)

STEP 1:
Take the NHL to 32 teams by adding franchises in Kansas City and Portland/Seattle (whichever one you can line up ownership and arena, they're both decent markets).

STEP 2:
Go to two conferences of four divisions for a total of 8 divisions, each with 4 teams (see below).

STEP 3:
Eliminate the uneven travel schedule: everybody plays more games within their division as usual, but you play teams in all of the other divisions about the same amount, so that teams in the East have to shoulder the same travel and time zone burden as teams in the West. It's only fair. The only exception to this is that each team gets to schedule a few "rivalry games" with teams outside their division. (This is the equivalent of the Canadian teams playing each other more often than non-conference US teams.)

***ADDED: This results in the following game schedule breakdown:

3 home, 3 away against division teams (6 * 3) = 18 games
1 home, 1 away against every non-division team (2 * 28) = 56 games
4 home, 4 away games assigned to "rivalries" = 8 games
(There may be pressure to keep more divisional games, in which case they would go up to 24 games (4 home and away), and the extra-divisional rivalry games drop from 8 to just 2 games)***

STEP 4:
Playoff format remains the same, but with the Division winners seeded 1-4 in each conference.

So what does that leave us with? This:

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Boston
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
New Jersey

Ottawa
Toronto
Buffalo
Montreal

Florida
Tampa Bay
Carolina
Washington

Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Columbus
Detroit

Okay, I've already broken one of my guidelines by stranding Buffalo in a division with three Canadian teams. I'm not sure how much of an issue this would be for Buffalo ownership, but at least their travel costs would remain modest. Also, I don't like splitting Montreal and Boston, but they'd use the "rivalry" games in the schedule to keep up the hate, and I think it's important to spread the original six teams around rather than having three in the same division.

WESTERN CONFERENCE

St. Louis
Chicago
Nashville
Minnesota

Phoenix
Colorado
Dallas
(Kansas City)

Edmonton
Calgary
Vancouver
Winnipeg

Anaheim
San Jose
Los Angeles
(Portland)

Another guideline broken, in this case the travel distance and time zones between Winnipeg and Vancouver. Frankly, I'd rather not have an all-Canadian division, but I can't avoid that without leaving another US team orphaned amongst Canadians or breaking up the "Battle of Alberta". And I'm sure Winnipeg and Vancouver won't mind the occasional extra travel to sell out each other those games.

In every other case, however, each division plays in one - or at the most two - timezones; in the divisions with two time zones there's only one hour difference, and the split in teams is 50/50 (so you don't have one team constantly playing an hour early or late).

(Of course nothing like this will ever come to pass, because even if they could find owners for the two new teams, it doesn't allow for a second team in Southern Ontario. That is unless Buffalo was to reloc... never mind. )

Anyway, that's my best Jonathan Swift-style "Modest Proposal" for (HF)NHL Realignment 2012. Play along - what would you do?

Click to read more...

 

[Hossa]

I veto any proposal where I'm still in the same division as the Flamettes. It really hurts our season ticket sales having to devote 4 home games a year to those figure skaters.

 

[Ohio Jones]

I veto any proposal where I'm still in the same division as the Flamettes. It really hurts our season ticket sales having to devote 4 home games a year to those figure skaters.

On the bright side, they're guaranteed wins for your manly team, which help sin the standings, no?

 

[Hossa]

On the bright side, they're guaranteed wins for your manly team, which help sin the standings, no?

Not really. David Backes and Ryan Callahan have a real aversion to hitting girls, which makes the playing field unfair.

In all seriousness, I read the Bob article yesterday and thought it was interesting and thought-provoking. Of course it's more or less a non-issue for us, because it actually concerns two of the few aspects of the NHL world which we don't and couldn't include - travel and television revenue. What I didn't realize, seeing as how Ottawa's never going to be even considered for Western Conference realignment, was actually how different Detroit or Columbus' situation is compared to Eastern Conference teams in their immediate area.

 

[Ohio Jones]

What I didn't realize, seeing as how Ottawa's never going to be even considered for Western Conference realignment, was actually how different Detroit or Columbus' situation is compared to Eastern Conference teams in their immediate area.

Detroit and Columbus are the most screwed compared to their EC neighbours, but travel for Dallas may be the worst, simply because there's nobody close to them geographically. Even in my proposal, the closest team is Kansas City, which doesn't exist. Brutal.

BTW, I've edited the above to include how the games would break down in the schedule.

 

[Fooladelfia]

BTW you better put this city in your "EXPANSION" plans..
Quebec will get a team for sure. Kansa City and Portland....

 

[The old geezer]

The expansion concept is interesting but I too am doubtful. If there's going to be any U.S. expansion, or even relocation of an existing team, Portland/Seattle does intrigue me in many respects and helps the alignment debates a lot being a true West coast team. That said, do they have anything reasonably capable of an NHL team playing in?

K.C. I'm skeptical about. It has had an arena ready since the whole Nashville drama a few years back and still no one there. Had they been ready or had interested ownership I suspect Bettman would have preferred moving the Thrashers to K.C. instead of Winnipeg. It's quite possible I guess K.C. is still an option for the Coyotes if that falls through ... I really can't see a second consecutive U.S. team moved north of the border.

Quebec ... well lots of talk of an arena since 2009 and lots of delays ... they're still not even close to breaking ground on an arena. Even if they actually get something moving by the spring of 2012 it would be the 2015/2016 season before it would be ready. Who knows if the whole construction corruption fight in la belle Province might add further delays to them breaking ground on an arena.

I'll beat others to the whole greater Toronto area/Hamilton option ... I'll bet Toronto has it's own NFL team (i.e. snowball's chance in H-E-double hockey sticks) before there's a second NHL team around.

What do I know though. Any 'logical' discussion of potential expansion/relocation options was proven moot by Winnipeg. I never figured Winnipeg would happen and still don't think it can survive. Heck Mississauga has a slightly larger population than Winnipeg and Brampton + Mississauga (with a higher population density) is equal to the population of the entire province ... add in minimal corporate backing and the numbers just don't add up for financial viability once the original euphoria settles down.

They call me grinch


Moving on past the whole 'expansion' option to just realignment I'm indifferent except for one option McKenzie listed and that's of Detroit moving to the SouthEast.

If the HFNHL REd Wings had to move I would already have mixed feelings about seeing some friendly HFNHL rivalries come to an end between St. Louis and Columbus. I guess the Detroit vs. Columbus (second most probable team to be moved IMO) is going to end anyway.

On the "pro" side of the equation I'd leave with winning lifetime records, and bragging rights, against both those rivals which would take decades to reverse with us in different conferences.

On the "con" side though it's the wussy SE Division. Talk about the historically lamest divison in the HFNHL. After seasons of wars in the highly contested Central where would the challenge be in the SE. Sure each year one team tries to look respectful and turn the perception of the SE division around (FLA most recently) but come on there's just no comparing it.

I vote we send the Jackets there, maybe Douglas can finally win a game or two there.

As you can tell my trash talking is in mid season form ... somebody start the season already

 

[Ohio Jones]

I vote we send the Jackets there, maybe Douglas can finally win a game or two there.

A game or two is not the problem. 16 games is the problem.

As you can tell my trash talking is in mid season form ... somebody start the season already

Seconded.

 

[HFNHL Commish]

A quick note on realignment - if I'm not mistaken, both Portland and Seattle have held public referendums in recent years on bringing NHL teams to their cities (Seattle's referendum would've been in conjunction with keeping the departed NBA Supersonics), and in both cases the people voted the proposals down. Seems a little odd, given that both towns have WHL teams, but public support for taxpayer-financed arenas has been waning over the past decade...

As far as our season start goes, will stoke the embers on that discussion...

 

[Ohio Jones]

A quick note on realignment - if I'm not mistaken, both Portland and Seattle have held public referendums in recent years on bringing NHL teams to their cities (Seattle's referendum would've been in conjunction with keeping the departed NBA Supersonics), and in both cases the people voted the proposals down. Seems a little odd, given that both towns have WHL teams, but public support for taxpayer-financed arenas has been waning over the past decade...

Unfortunate, but I'm certainly not blaming those cities. It's been shown time and time again that pro sports bring little in the way of meaningful new economic boost to their cities - the profits of those enterprises go straight to their private owners' pockets. If someone wanted to tackle a public ownership a la Green Bay, that could potentially be another story...

Generally speaking the incremental tax dollars a team generates are minor compared to the very real capital cost to the public of building an arena, and would be readily replaced by any number of other discretionary spending activities.

As far as our season start goes, will stoke the embers on that discussion...

Stoke away!

 

[MatthewFlames]

I hope that the Sim keeps up to the expansion. But I like the new alignment from a HFNHL perspective.


*New Jersey, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New York Rangers, New York Islanders, Washington and Carolina

Traditional rivalries intact. This will be a tough tough conference to emerge from....

* Boston, Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Buffalo, Florida and Tampa Bay

No more easy rides for the Panthers now they're in it with the Sabres and Bruins....

* Detroit, Columbus, Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Dallas and Winnipeg

Does this actually mean a slightly easier time for the powerhouse St.Louis, the young Hawks, the emerging Preds and the rebuilding Wings?

* Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Colorado

Yikes. Anyone wanna argue now which is the toughest conference? The Avs, Canucks and Flames are at the top of their games, the Kings are emerging, and with great GM's in Anaheim, Edmonton and Phoenix, Pasi - you have your work cut out for you.

 

[Ohio Jones]

The one thing I notice about this alignment that I haven't heard mentioned is that it leaves room to move a franchise or two from the west to the east (hello Quebec City, Southern Ontario!), or (ideally, I'm sure, from the league's perspective) expand to two eastern markets.

But I definitely like the look of the HFNHL divisional rivalries that will all the more heated after a couple of rounds of divisional playoffs (I'm looking at you, Nick - just as Drew still seems to have my number, I still seem to have yours!).