Is a 3 conference league unavoidable?

HugoSimon

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
959
263
I'm trying to do the math of how they are gonna split up Arizona with its natural rivals(a team performing poorly) or split up Edmonton/Calgary(Edmonton also being a business that is performing poorly).

Should we just accept that 99 percent of the problems in the league could be solved by having a 9 team conference, and having 23 teams in East and Central Conference?
 

HugoSimon

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
959
263
no, its unrealistic and makes no sense.
One of the biggest issues the league faces is travel distances and timezones.

I can't understand what exactly is so far fetched. The cost in an unbalanced playoff and regular season structure. However in terms of fairness reducing travel times seems to both offer better viewership and fairer distribution of travel times.
 

MNNumbers

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 17, 2011
7,627
2,486
If the question is "What will be the alignment when Seattle joins the league?" It's already been announced. Arizona is moving to the Central Division.

I won't comment on that. My opinion as to what it might 'mean' is just speculation.

But the reality is:
There won't be a 3 conference league.
There won't be a 9-7-8-8 arrangement.
It's going to be 8-8-8-8.

They've already announced it.
 

Barclay Donaldson

Registered User
Feb 4, 2018
2,531
2,058
Tatooine
They’re doing a 4 conferences of 8 teams, it’s already been announced like MNNumbers said. They’re trying to get the AHL the same way. Anything you think they lose in travel and viewership is more than made up for in scheduling alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

MayDay

Registered User
Oct 21, 2005
12,661
1,146
Pleasantville, NY
With a 32-team league, 4 conferences of 8 teams makes the most sense. No subdivision of the conferences into Divisions.

Playoffs should be:

Top 4 teams in each Conference qualify. No wildcards.

1st round - Conference semi-final: 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3.
2nd round - Conference final round.
3rd round - Cup semi-final: re-seed four conf. champs, then play 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3.
4th round - Cup Final.

It's simple, it's elegant, and it's fair. Which means the league will probably never do it this way.
 

Brodie

the dream of the 90s is alive in Detroit
Mar 19, 2009
15,399
359
Chicago
The issue is that the NHL doesn't have enough teams in the Central timezone/the Midwest to logically split on east/west lines. Every other league has multiple teams in Texas AND a team in Wisconsin AND a team in Indiana OR a second team in Ohio.

The league should just do an NFL/MLB style split into two conferences of 16 with their own east and west divisions.

Campbell East:

Florida Panthers
Carolina Hurricanes
New York Rangers
New Jersey Devils
Philadelphia Flyers
Columbus Blue Jackets
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs

Campbell West:

Anaheim Ducks
Dallas Stars
Vancouver Canucks
Vegas Golden Knights
Colorado Avalanche
St. Louis Blues
Winnipeg Jets
Nashville Predators


Wales East:

Detroit Red Wings
Pittsburgh Penguins
New York Islanders
Boston Bruins
Montreal Canadiens
Ottawa Senators
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals

Wales West:

Los Angeles Kings
Chicago Blackhawks
Seattle
Minnesota Wild
Arizona Coyotes
San Jose Sharks
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
 
Last edited:

jonathan613

Registered User
Aug 6, 2018
133
53
The only scenario where it may be considered is if the situation in Arizona was fixed and the NHL was willing to expand to Houston in a situation where houston was thought of so highly by the league , that they thought a 1 team expansion only was worth it. A 33 team leave would likely best be divided into 3 11 team conferences where you play in conference teams 4 time and the other teams twice. That would give 84 (10*4 +11*2 +11*2) games. When seattle joins, i believe 84 games in the likely schedule they will agree upon in the new 32 team league as you will have 84 (7*4 +8*3 +16*2) games as well. I would think this will be discussed in the next round of CBA negotiations. Thus in theory, you could expand from 32 to 33 by simply changing the alignment.

Below would be how I would break it down. Playoff format to be determined.

Patrick-Adams: Ottawa/Montreal/Boston/Buffalo/Carolina/Washington/Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/New jersey/NY Islanders/NY Rangers

Norris-Tampa/Florida/Nashville/Dallas/Houston/Columbus/Detroit/Chicago/St. Louis/Toronto/Minnesota

Smythe-Winnipeg/Calgary/Edmonton/Vancouver/Seattle/Colorado/Las Vegas/San Jose/Arizona/Anaheim/Los Angeles

I know this works badly for Winnipeg but i couldn't align in a way where i could please all 33 teams.
 

MNNumbers

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 17, 2011
7,627
2,486
The only scenario where it may be considered is if the situation in Arizona was fixed and the NHL was willing to expand to Houston in a situation where houston was thought of so highly by the league , that they thought a 1 team expansion only was worth it. A 33 team leave would likely best be divided into 3 11 team conferences where you play in conference teams 4 time and the other teams twice. That would give 84 (10*4 +11*2 +11*2) games. When seattle joins, i believe 84 games in the likely schedule they will agree upon in the new 32 team league as you will have 84 (7*4 +8*3 +16*2) games as well. I would think this will be discussed in the next round of CBA negotiations. Thus in theory, you could expand from 32 to 33 by simply changing the alignment.

Below would be how I would break it down. Playoff format to be determined.

Patrick-Adams: Ottawa/Montreal/Boston/Buffalo/Carolina/Washington/Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/New jersey/NY Islanders/NY Rangers

Norris-Tampa/Florida/Nashville/Dallas/Houston/Columbus/Detroit/Chicago/St. Louis/Toronto/Minnesota

Smythe-Winnipeg/Calgary/Edmonton/Vancouver/Seattle/Colorado/Las Vegas/San Jose/Arizona/Anaheim/Los Angeles

I know this works badly for Winnipeg but i couldn't align in a way where i could please all 33 teams.

Playing 84 games will not be accepted very easily by the players.
Current sched martix:
East: it's perfect 4,3,2.....Yes. 28+24+30
But in the west, it's a mess:
Central: 2 vs East = 32. 3 vs Pacific = 24. That leaves 26 games in the division. It's a combination of 4 and 5 games against these teams.
Pacific: 2 vs East = 32. vs Central = 21. That leaves 29 games in division. 4 versus everyone with one extra game.

Thus, there is precedent for such scheduling.
There are 2 possibilities for a 32 team sched:
1- home/away versus everyone and all other games in the division. That would be 34 games in the division, and thus it would be 5 games vs 6 teams, and 4 versus the other one. This possibility would be best if they do 2 rounds of straight divisional playoffs.
2 - 4 versus division, 2 vs other conference. Thus equals 28 + 32 or 60 games. That leaves 22 games, and 8 teams in the other division. So, either you have 3 games vs 6 teams and 2 games vs 2 teams. Or, you make 3 versus all, and take away 2 divisional games. In this setup, the wild card stays.
 

MNNumbers

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 17, 2011
7,627
2,486
The issue is that the NHL doesn't have enough teams in the Central timezone/the Midwest to logically split on east/west lines. Every other league has multiple teams in Texas AND a team in Wisconsin AND a team in Indiana OR a second team in Ohio.

The league should just do an NFL/MLB style split into two conferences of 16 with their own east and west divisions.

Campbell East:

Florida Panthers
Carolina Hurricanes
New York Rangers
New Jersey Devils
Philadelphia Flyers
Columbus Blue Jackets
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs

Campbell West:

Anaheim Ducks
Dallas Stars
Vancouver Canucks
Vegas Golden Knights
Colorado Avalanche
St. Louis Blues
Winnipeg Jets
Nashville Predators


Wales East:

Detroit Red Wings
Pittsburgh Penguins
New York Islanders
Boston Bruins
Montreal Canadiens
Ottawa Senators
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals

Wales West:

Los Angeles Kings
Chicago Blackhawks
Seattle
Minnesota Wild
Arizona Coyotes
San Jose Sharks
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames

In principle, I like something like this. I actually think that in the east, preserving the present divisions would be more acceptable. Your setup breaks apart many rivals - TBL-FLO for example. Also, LAK-ANA. While it makes sense in the NFL, with only 16 games, it doesn't work as well here, where rivalry games are more $$ valuable to teams.

What's worse, of course, is that travel and game start times for the West become more problematic.

The only real difficulty in alignment after Seattle joins is in Arizona. Everyone else will have what they want. This is one more reason for speculation about Arizona's franchise. However, I must also admit that, when the word broke about Arz >> Central, there were positive comments on the Coyotes' board.
 

Brodie

the dream of the 90s is alive in Detroit
Mar 19, 2009
15,399
359
Chicago
I mean it is true (unfortunately) that moving Phoenix to Houston would solve literally every problem. But I don't think that's a real thing.
 

jonathan613

Registered User
Aug 6, 2018
133
53
Playing 84 games will not be accepted very easily by the players.
Current sched martix:
East: it's perfect 4,3,2.....Yes. 28+24+30
But in the west, it's a mess:
Central: 2 vs East = 32. 3 vs Pacific = 24. That leaves 26 games in the division. It's a combination of 4 and 5 games against these teams.
Pacific: 2 vs East = 32. vs Central = 21. That leaves 29 games in division. 4 versus everyone with one extra game.

Thus, there is precedent for such scheduling.
There are 2 possibilities for a 32 team sched:
1- home/away versus everyone and all other games in the division. That would be 34 games in the division, and thus it would be 5 games vs 6 teams, and 4 versus the other one. This possibility would be best if they do 2 rounds of straight divisional playoffs.
2 - 4 versus division, 2 vs other conference. Thus equals 28 + 32 or 60 games. That leaves 22 games, and 8 teams in the other division. So, either you have 3 games vs 6 teams and 2 games vs 2 teams. Or, you make 3 versus all, and take away 2 divisional games. In this setup, the wild card stays.
Noted. I believe 1 year there actually was an 84 game schedule. Like the NFL issues, one solution could be to lower the number of pre-season games as well as maybe giving into some player escrow salary relief in the future CBA. Curiously, what scheduling format is the one you think they will eventually go with?
 

MNNumbers

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 17, 2011
7,627
2,486
Noted. I believe 1 year there actually was an 84 game schedule. Like the NFL issues, one solution could be to lower the number of pre-season games as well as maybe giving into some player escrow salary relief in the future CBA. Curiously, what scheduling format is the one you think they will eventually go with?

The 84 game schedule also had everyone playing two games at neutral sites. So, that just re-inforces that 82 will be the continuing number.

As for what I think will actually happen?
I think that, since the owners had originally floated a 4 independent conferences schedule, that is what will happen here as well.

However, I maintain that, in reality, the maximization of $$ might come from the hybrid whereby, in the east, they play a modified 4-3-2, with a wild card, and playoffs actually a 1-8 seeding, in the west, it's a 5/4-2 and the playoffs are 2 rounds in division.
 

KingsFan7824

Registered User
Dec 4, 2003
19,356
7,445
Visit site
With a 32-team league, 4 conferences of 8 teams makes the most sense. No subdivision of the conferences into Divisions.

Playoffs should be:

Top 4 teams in each Conference qualify. No wildcards.

1st round - Conference semi-final: 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3.
2nd round - Conference final round.
3rd round - Cup semi-final: re-seed four conf. champs, then play 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3.
4th round - Cup Final.

It's simple, it's elegant, and it's fair. Which means the league will probably never do it this way.

That did seem to be where they were going in 2013 though. Until too many cooks got into the kitchen. Something else to keep in mind is that no two formats have ever been exactly the same. Assuming something does change in a few years, they most likely will throw a new wrinkle in there somewhere. The re-seeding of the final four would be different. That happened when they were doing the league wide format 40 years ago, but the lead up with the byes and everything was also different.
 

Ted Hoffman

The other Rick Zombo
Dec 15, 2002
28,859
8,113
Playoffs should be:
I would love for everyone who has an idea what the playoff format should be to go off somewhere, hash it all out and settle on one (1) format everyone agrees to, then bring it back and present it.

The league should just do an NFL/MLB style split into two conferences of 16 with their own east and west divisions.
There's about 16 teams that are going to vote against that. Maybe more.

Playing 84 games will not be accepted very easily by the players.
They'll like it from the standpoint that they'll make more money. They won't like how it makes the schedule more compressed.

I mean it is true (unfortunately) that moving Phoenix to Houston would solve literally every problem.
No, it wouldn't. Just in terms of the cap: some teams would be put in a worse position because such a move would push the cap higher, putting [even?] more financial pressure on them. It also doesn't get rid of revenue sharing; some teams would get even more, a few others would start to get it.

The 84 game schedule also had everyone playing two games at neutral sites. So, that just re-inforces that 82 will be the continuing number.
To underscore that: they players hated neutral site games. I would be shocked if they come back any time soon.

However, I maintain that, in reality, the maximization of $$ might come from the hybrid whereby, in the east, they play a modified 4-3-2, with a wild card, and playoffs actually a 1-8 seeding, in the west, it's a 5/4-2 and the playoffs are 2 rounds in division.
As I point out repeatedly, people assume that teams are interested in $ maximization - especially in terms of profits. They're not. [This is trivial to prove.] The players are more interested in maximizing revenues, because that means more money in their pockets, but maximizing revenues doesn't maximize profits.

Drawing up ideas with $ maximization as a goal of any type is a bad way to go. Draw up the idea you want, let the $ fall out however from there.
 

coolboarder

Registered User
Mar 4, 2010
1,424
296
Maryland
3 conference league is possible if there's 33 teams with a radically playoff system. First of all, there are two phrase in the regular season: phase 1, call it, Playoff Spots Allotment every teams in the league plays home and away that is not in the conference for 44 games. After the 44th game, the playoff allotment has been determined: the conference with two best records will get 6 playoff spots while the conference with least points overall get 4 playoff spots. Phrase 2 of the season will focus in conference play for the playoff spot. After 44th game, the teams will know which conference will have the most playoff spots after the Playoff Spots Allotment has been declared after 44th game.

First round:

Top 2 Conference with 6 playoff spots:

1 v 6
2 v 5
3 v 4

Conference with 4 playoff spots:
1 v 4
2 v 3

The conference with 4 playoff spot with series winner being split up and joins other conference and be reseeded 1 v 4 according to the regular season games. If a conference with 4 playoff spots happens to have a president trophy winner, it will still keep their home ice advantage throughout the playoffs regardless of which conference they get. The weakest team with 4 playoff spots joins the strongest conference overall while the strongest team joins the 2nd best conference. Then the bracket will stay the same from round 2 and forth

Round 2:
1 v 4
2 v 3

Conference Final
Round 2 Series winners

Stanley Cup Final

Conference final winners

Conclusion, it's very possible for the weakest conference to meet in the Stanley Cup Final after splitting up into two different brackets.
 

Captain Bowie

Registered User
Jan 18, 2012
27,139
4,414
There's really no reason for it. With 32 teams soon coming, it splits so nicely into 2 conferences of 16, which divides nicely into two division of 8 in each.

Vancouver
Seattle
Calgary
Edmonton
San Jose
LA
Anaheim
Vegas

Winnipeg
Chicago
Minnesota
St. Louis
Nashville
Dallas
Arizona
Colorado
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,746
The issue is that the NHL doesn't have enough teams in the Central timezone/the Midwest to logically split on east/west lines. Every other league has multiple teams in Texas AND a team in Wisconsin AND a team in Indiana OR a second team in Ohio.

The league should just do an NFL/MLB style split into two conferences of 16 with their own east and west divisions.

Campbell East:

Florida Panthers
Carolina Hurricanes
New York Rangers
New Jersey Devils
Philadelphia Flyers
Columbus Blue Jackets
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs

Campbell West:

Anaheim Ducks
Dallas Stars
Vancouver Canucks
Vegas Golden Knights
Colorado Avalanche
St. Louis Blues
Winnipeg Jets
Nashville Predators


Wales East:

Detroit Red Wings
Pittsburgh Penguins
New York Islanders
Boston Bruins
Montreal Canadiens
Ottawa Senators
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals

Wales West:

Los Angeles Kings
Chicago Blackhawks
Seattle
Minnesota Wild
Arizona Coyotes
San Jose Sharks
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames

That setup will never happen. You don't split up Seattle and Vancover like that. The point of the current setup was to reduence travel distance not increase it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

13 others

Registered User
Apr 18, 2007
9,820
805
They already voted to move Arizona to the central. There's no issue here. Having 3 conferences is a terrible idea, especially for the east.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
25,607
9,435
If the question is "What will be the alignment when Seattle joins the league?" It's already been announced. Arizona is moving to the Central Division.

I won't comment on that. My opinion as to what it might 'mean' is just speculation.

But the reality is:
There won't be a 3 conference league.
There won't be a 9-7-8-8 arrangement.
It's going to be 8-8-8-8.

They've already announced it.
I think if AZ was rock solid stable that the NHL move keep AZ in the Pacific.

They are in PST after daylight savings spring forward. So divisional playoffs with 6 other PST teams. Colorado realistically can go either Pacific or central.

MLB the Rockies are in the west. Nba they are in like Midwest, nfl they are with 2 teams west of them plus kc, old afl rivals.
 

WingsFan95

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
3,492
259
Kanata
The NHL given its dead-last salaries and travel extremities (having teams farther out in an 82 game sched) should consider a 4 Conference structure in a 32 team set.

8 teams per, 42 games in conference (3 away, 3 home each divisional opponent), 24 outside conference teams guaranteed played once in a season, remaining 16 games are matched with 2 of the 3 conference and alternate. Basically this means one conference would play the other only once on the year. This schedule is airtight so it makes the most sense like the NFL does it (albeit with a lot less games).

Playoff structure is then pretty easy. Each Conference has their own 4 team bracket with the #1 team at the regular season of each conference representing the Final Four spot. So if Conference A has the team with the most points of the 4 Conference champions it would be in line to meet the 4th best points record of Conference champions.

This means you don't exactly have a 1-16 format resulting in possible hectic travel in early rounds.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->