If $ wasn't an issue: The right length for the regular season

[Jumptheshark]

for me

Season starts September 15th with the cup raised not later then May 15th--for me that is 9 months of regular season and playoffs--that would take the season down to about 7 games with the first round being best of 5

 

[Brainiac]

With how tight the playoff races are in the Spring every year, I think 82 must be pretty close to the right number. I like hockey. A lot. I'm happy to watch a game every single day. I haven't suffered any fatigue from an 82 game season yet.

The playoffs races are tight because of the loser's point, not because of the number of games. Remove the loser's point and 70 games is way enough.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Realistically? I think somewhere in the mid 70s would make a significant difference in terms of players health without drastically affecting the season and standings.

 

[FlyTimmo]

82 is perfectly fine.

 

[Passchendaele]

80 games is the way to go. Not sure why the schedule went up to 84 (then down to 82 later) in the first place.

 

[canuckster19]

80 games is the way to go. Not sure why the schedule went up to 84 (then down to 82 later) in the first place.

Had to do with the number of teams in the league. When there was 21 teams they played 80 games, I believe the number of games played has to be divisible by 4 to work in a league with an uneven number of teams. So if the NHL goes to 31, watch for a drop or increase of two games.

 

[Butch 19]

82's fine, I wish they condensed the season more though. No more week long breaks or anything. Just balls to the wall play every other day throw in a few back to backs and a few 2 days off.

this ^^^^. Start the season the first weekend of October, play more back-to-backs, and even have back-to-backs during the first round of the POs.

Stanley Cup awarded no later than end of May.

 

[HOLDITHERE*]

48 games season was excepcionally entertaining for me, watched almost every game and it always looked like there was something in play.

I would be ecstatic if a shorter schedule was announced, less injuries, more packed crowds, more ambience, more intensity, and seasons less likely decided by a team's hot streak in spring maybe?

I think it'd be quite the opposite, with teams starting out hot and burning out near the end still being a playoff team.

I would not like a shortened season.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

82 games. It get's intense enough in the playoffs, I don't need more regular season intensity. Plus I don't want less hockey.

 

[eyetest is useless]

They play a balanced schedule in Russian soccer. And the teams there have to travel far more than teams in America.

And what nonsense was that about rivalries? On the contrary, rivalries are enhanced the less you play against your rivals. Makes those games special and more meaningful.

Ya this, I get the feeling that with the size of the north American continent, fans there don't tend to deal with rival's fans irl all that often. 2 games a year = every game means having the best or the worst of it for several months. How do you get worked up about the result of a match if the next meeting between the teams is only two weeks away.

 

[Bougieman]

I'm perfectly happy with 82 games. What I'd like to do away with is the preseason. It's pointless and an obvious way to make extra money off the fans while basically doing nothing more than practicing.

Wouldn't mind seeing 4 less teams make the playoffs, too. Basically dump the 2 wildcard teams from each conference. Its rediculous to have half the league playing in the first round.

 

[eyetest is useless]

Number of games aren't as important to me as the length of the season and start/end dates:

Start the NHL pre-season games on October 1st.

End the regular season in late March.

End the playoffs by no later than May 1st.

At the moment the playoffs take over two months, about double what you suggest. I take it you want only eight teams to make it in?

For everyone saying the 48 game season was great... It was, but due to no games being played at all for three months, it had both the increased meaning of a single game and little time between games. A 48 game season from October to April wouldn't be the same

 

[Pip]

48 is too short for me. Hot/cold streaks don't even out as much (for players and teams) and 48 games from October-May would be not enough hockey.

I'm fine with 82

 

[DVon Du Nord]

I'm a fan of 82 games, but if the season HAD to be cut shorter. Knock out the h/h with East vs West and do one game = 68 games. Due to the uneven and ridiculous conference set up the West would just play an extra intra conference game.

Wouldn't mind puck drop in September though, this way the Cup will be raised before June.

P.S. I hate the Rangers, but I do love playing them. Every. Single. Time.

 

[Chukcha]

82 is the best. Top players have a chance to hit grandmaster marks: 50 goals and 100 points. 30 goals and 60 points aren't beautiful.

 

[Davebo*]

Around 60 games. It's way too long as is and I find myself not being able to sit through a meaningless December game more and more often. Booooring.

This. 60 games was a good amount. Combined with the playoffs - it's a good number.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

Start the regular season November 1.
Award the Cup by April 30.
Eliminate the first round of the playoffs, so only eight teams get in (so a six-week playoff) - subtract six weeks from April 30 and you get ~ March 15.
November 1 to March 15 is 19 weeks (less one week for a 3-day Christmas break and 4 days for the all-star break), at three games per week, results in 54 games.

Perhaps bump it up to 58 games so that you can even out the schedule - 4 games against each team in your own division, 2 against the opposite division in your conference, and 1 against each team in the opposite conference (based on eight teams in each division)

 

[LOFIN]

Remove conferences and divisions, create a single table. Everyone plays against each other once home, once away, resulting in 58 games. Regular season starts in October, playoffs finished by early May.

- The fairest and most balanced schedule from sporting perspective. Everyone has the same opponents, and teams with the best record are awarded with the playoffs.

- Single games matter more, and encounters against rivals/top teams are more special since you only play against them two times a year. Having bragging rights over you bitter rivals for the next few months? Awesome. And painfull if you lose.

- New encounters for playoffs that were not possible with the conference system.

- The start and the end of season can be roughly the same as now, maybe slightly shorter. Less games in the same timespan = more rested players -> improved quality of play.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Earlier I mentioned a 60 game schedule, following a 4-2-1 format for div/same conf/other conf. That would eliminate back-to-backs and provide a little better quality and hopefully healthier hockey. To shorten the season though, I would only have the top two in each division make the playoffs (or top team plus WCs). That would put a higher emphasis on the regular season so those games would REALLY count. I never liked seeing mediocre teams in the playoffs anyway.

I think that would make for some exciting and urgent hockey while also taking some physical toll off the players. The season would end in mid-May.

 

[Finnish your Czech]

I'd like it to be around 60 games or so. You'd have to remove the loser point, or there would be too much of a cluster of teams in the league table.

It's also ridiculous having the SCF in June.

 

[1989]

Predicated on even teams in each conference/division:
2 games against against every team in the League + 2 more games against divisional rivals
So about 70 games.

 

[Colorado Avalanche]

I feel like there's bit too many. 72 games.

 

[ryan callahan]

103 games. Someone who is a real hockey fan will say stay with 82 or upgrade it to more. Honestly boys, what is wrong with the 82 games/16 playoff teams. IMHO an average team should make the playoff and 82 games is perfect. That's why I prefer hockey to baseball, it's because your team has more chances to go in the playoff with a 53.33% chance instead of 26.67% chance.
103 games would play out like this:
East side
8 games against each division rival (56)
4 games against each conference non division rival (32)
1 game against each team of the other conference (15)
And anyways whats wrong with hockey in June.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

103 games.

Well since we're all hockey fans, why not 180 games. They play every day, and then all teams make the playoffs. The playoffs would then take four months and the season would end in late July. Players get two weeks off before camp, since their job is our entertainment and they shouldn't be resting for too long.

 

[His Beardliness*]

One home and one away against every team is the correct way. Everything else is just gimmicky.

Alternately, 4 games against every team and remove the playoffs.