NHL to Seattle Volume XVI - It's Official. Seattle to join the league for 21-22 season.

[gstommylee]

You are looking at Impacting 4-5 franchises in place of one franchise. Vancouver, Seattle, Calgary, Edmonton all lose if you move the Alberta teams. What is the impact of Colorado going to the west? If Arizona was completely in the PST, then there would be a stronger argument IMHO to keep them in the west and move the Alberta teams, but be that they spend the majority of the year in Mountain Time zone, I don't the impact on that franchise compared to the other 5 would be equitable.

More than 5 you are also impacting the Nashville, Dallas, st louis etc. Those 3 will have to travel more to get to alberta than arizona and colorado. its just people don't realize thats not how the NHL works, they won't screw half the league just for 1 team.

And you're right. Seattle would be fine with AZ/COL in the division just as much as they would be with CGY/EDM. But let me ask you this question, MN:

From a $$$ standpoint entirely, accounting for all revenue as opposed to just TV, which do you think would make more sense for the league and Seattle - having CGY and EDM travel to Seattle for divisional games twice a season or just once as a non-divisional game, especially when you factor in the long-term? All dates against Western Canadian teams will be sellouts regardless of year regardless of situation, whereas you might have trouble down the road here in Seattle selling out AZ and COL as those aren't "draw" teams. For Seattle, I see the "draw" teams as the following: NYR, PIT, BOS, DET, CHI, WSH, LA, SJ, PHI, and possibly BUF...you know, the "big" teams. Not AZ or COL. So if you're Oak View and the league, which alignment allows Seattle to generate more revenue? Seattle fans really aren't going to care who's in the damn division, but if you're the Leiweke's, who would be better for you for your overall balance sheet five years down the road if this doesn't take off like we all think it will based on the season ticket drive?

The other thing to think about too is this: Every other league - the NFL, NBA and MLB, and this really is an NBA and MLB thing primarily - has divisional travel over two time zones. Seattle is in an MLB division where two of their rivals, Texas and Houston, are located in the Central Time Zone, and if the NBA expands, it's likely Seattle will be placed in a division that might include Minnesota, another CTZ team. It's an issue that impacts every league and why the NHL should be exempted from that I have no clue.

Btw Seattle will also get screwed too if edmonton/calgary are moved just for the sake of Arizona. They'll have to travel further too for divisional games.

Vancouver Edmonton and calgary are the 3 closest NHL teams to Seattle.

 

[canuckfan75]

Very happy that Seattle will be in the league soon. Long Long overdue

 

[MNNumbers]

And you're right. Seattle would be fine with AZ/COL in the division just as much as they would be with CGY/EDM. But let me ask you this question, MN:

From a $$$ standpoint entirely, accounting for all revenue as opposed to just TV, which do you think would make more sense for the league and Seattle - having CGY and EDM travel to Seattle for divisional games twice a season or just once as a non-divisional game, especially when you factor in the long-term? All dates against Western Canadian teams will be sellouts regardless of year regardless of situation, whereas you might have trouble down the road here in Seattle selling out AZ and COL as those aren't "draw" teams. For Seattle, I see the "draw" teams as the following: NYR, PIT, BOS, DET, CHI, WSH, LA, SJ, PHI, and possibly BUF...you know, the "big" teams. Not AZ or COL. So if you're Oak View and the league, which alignment allows Seattle to generate more revenue? Seattle fans really aren't going to care who's in the damn division, but if you're the Leiweke's, who would be better for you for your overall balance sheet five years down the road if this doesn't take off like we all think it will based on the season ticket drive?

The other thing to think about too is this: Every other league - the NFL, NBA and MLB, and this really is an NBA and MLB thing primarily - has divisional travel over two time zones. Seattle is in an MLB division where two of their rivals, Texas and Houston, are located in the Central Time Zone, and if the NBA expands, it's likely Seattle will be placed in a division that might include Minnesota, another CTZ team. It's an issue that impacts every league and why the NHL should be exempted from that I have no clue.

Sno...I'm not predicting anything. I'm just saying that it could go either way. As to your question...If they re-align, Seattle may not even get a VOTE. I think that, given what we have seen previously, it's completely fair to say that, after the franchise is awarded in December, the BOG won't do anything to favor Seattle. They will be just one more of the kids. So, sure....Seattle would do better LONG TERM. (When has the NHL ever done anything long term?) As to why the NHL is exempted from the 2-Time-Zone question? It's because the current alignment is what it is PRECISELY for that reason. You've watched this league long enough to know that. You are worrying about Seattle's balance sheet. I think that Arizona's balance sheet is far more precarious, and am VERY SURE that Arizona doesn't want to move to the Central Division.

And guess what you are telling the central division that you must travel much further for games. It is horrible cause you are basically making all 8 teams travel further for divisional games. Central division isn't close together like it is in the pacific time zone. Thus there will be more travel distance.

The NHL is not going to screw half the league just to keep 1 where its at. And the owners aren't going to do that either. They didn't screw detroit or columbus just to get quebec.

Again, the travel schedule ends up having more to do with arena availability than anything else, Tommy. An extra trip to CGY/EDM for these teams is likely nothing. As it is, they go to all 3 Western Canadian teams on one trip. Now it will just be that trip, plus add both of them when you go to Winnipeg. It's not as big a deal as you are making it to be.

And, again, I'm not predicting anything. I am saying that the Time Zone factor, coupled with the financial weakness of the Coyotes makes moving Arizona to the Central a difficult thing to do. It might happen, but it's surely not a slam-dunk or a foregone conclusion.

 

[gstommylee]

MNNumbers, Darn well Seattle should have the vote cause it impacts them too. Let see here travel more for 2 division matches or travel less for 2 more division matches .... Vancouver will have the same issue too. Then The alberta games will have to travel even further like to Dallas, Nashville St louis for divisional games.

What does nashville dallas and St louis perfer? Colorado and Arizona or the Alberta teams? I say Colorado and Arizona.

Do not create a bigger problem that does not exist. The owners works as a collective bunch, they won't screw themselves just for 1 team.

They wouldn't do that for quebec they won't do it now. There is no solution that doesn't screw any team. So basically comes down to what alignment that screws the league as a whole less. Arizona to central.

 

[MNNumbers]

MNNumbers, Darn well Seattle should have the vote cause it impacts them too. Let see here travel more for 2 division matches or travel less for 2 more division matches .... Vancouver will have the same issue too. Then The alberta games will have to travel even further like to Dallas, Nashville St louis for divisional games.

What does nashville dallas and St louis perfer? Colorado and Arizona or the Alberta teams? I say Colorado and Arizona.

Do not create a bigger problem that does not exist. The owners works as a collective bunch, they won't screw themselves just for 1 team.

They wouldn't do that for quebec they won't do it now. There is no solution that doesn't screw any team. So basically comes down to what alignment that screws the league as a whole less. Arizona to central.

In your humble, as always, opinion.....

Instead of thinking about Seattle, think about how this looks if you are Barroway. Or, the other owners who MAY be underwriting the Arizona losses. You have an already distressed franchise, sitting in the desert southwest. Said franchise has a close geographic rival in Vegas for the first time ever. Said franchise has absolutely NO rivalry or history or connection with the Central except that it came from Winnipeg, which seemingly no one in Arizona cares about. So, how much sense does it makes to force that ONE distressed franchise (which the league MAY be underwriting) into a far worse situation with their fans, just to make Seattle happy as it enters the league.

I'm just saying that there are 2 ways to look at this, and it's not an easy choice. Assume all you want, but wait and see....

 

[Llama19]

Alignment, alignment
A Division intwinement...

Pacific or Central
Both have potential...

And nothing of this matters
When Bettman leaves all in tatters...

 

[gstommylee]

In your humble, as always, opinion.....

Instead of thinking about Seattle, think about how this looks if you are Barroway. Or, the other owners who MAY be underwriting the Arizona losses. You have an already distressed franchise, sitting in the desert southwest. Said franchise has a close geographic rival in Vegas for the first time ever. Said franchise has absolutely NO rivalry or history or connection with the Central except that it came from Winnipeg, which seemingly no one in Arizona cares about. So, how much sense does it makes to force that ONE distressed franchise (which the league MAY be underwriting) into a far worse situation with their fans, just to make Seattle happy as it enters the league.

I'm just saying that there are 2 ways to look at this, and it's not an easy choice. Assume all you want, but wait and see....

And what about the rest of the western conference? Do you think the central division will vote to screw themselves. And the 16 eastern teams you think they'll vote to screw the western conference teams too? They won't.

 

[MNNumbers]

And what about the rest of the western conference? Do you think the central division will vote to screw themselves. And the 16 eastern teams you think they'll vote to screw the western conference teams too? They won't.

If I am Nashville and thinking about travel, I think....Hmmm, if I go to Colorado and Arizona, that might be a stand alone trip. I mean, it could connect with LA, sure, or Vegas, but I already have a long trip with Anaheim, LA, SJ and Vegas on the schedule somewhere. So, maybe that Colorado/Arizona trip comes up three times in a year, and they are all stand alone trips. Now, Edmonton and Calgary....That might well come on the way to Vancouver. Or, at the worst, just after a Winnipeg game. You know what? It's a shorter flight from Winnipeg to Calgary (and then a charter bus to Edmonton) than it is from Nashville to Denver. Yeah...Alberta seems like a good idea.....

See, it's not quite as simple as calculating a roundtrip to every city.

Screw the whole league????
Hmmm 10M more dollars a year that Arizona loses because we put them in the Central. 10M more a year that we have to swallow when we finally sell this thing....Not interested.

There is more than one angle to this...

 

[gstommylee]

If I am Nashville and thinking about travel, I think....Hmmm, if I go to Colorado and Arizona, that might be a stand alone trip. I mean, it could connect with LA, sure, or Vegas, but I already have a long trip with Anaheim, LA, SJ and Vegas on the schedule somewhere. So, maybe that Colorado/Arizona trip comes up three times in a year, and they are all stand alone trips. Now, Edmonton and Calgary....That might well come on the way to Vancouver. Or, at the worst, just after a Winnipeg game. You know what? It's a shorter flight from Winnipeg to Calgary (and then a charter bus to Edmonton) than it is from Nashville to Denver. Yeah...Alberta seems like a good idea.....

See, it's not quite as simple as calculating a roundtrip to every city.

Screw the whole league????
Hmmm 10M more dollars a year that Arizona loses because we put them in the Central. 10M more a year that we have to swallow when we finally sell this thing....Not interested.

There is more than one angle to this...

Arizona is in a mess now it'll be in a mess later.

And what about nashville you think its okay to screw them and make them travel further for 2 divisional matches. What about Dallas and Stl louis. Central isn't setup to where the team are actually fairly close to each other like it is in the pacific. The pacific teams are more closer to each other than it is in Central.

You are not thinking in the eyes of the owners themselves. 1) they'll do whats best interest for themselves 2) they'll do what best for the entire league as a whole. And Screwing half the league isn't putting whats best interest for those teams and league as a whole.

They'll do whats has the least impact on themselves and the league as a whole. Sorry but Arizona in central impacts the league less than it would with Edmonton and Calgary in central, colorado in pacific.

 

[MNNumbers]

Arizona is in a mess now it'll be in a mess later.

And what about nashville you think its okay to screw them and make them travel further for 2 divisional matches. What about Dallas and Stl louis. Central isn't setup to where the team are actually fairly close to each other like it is in the pacific. The pacific teams are more closer to each other than it is in Central.

You are not thinking in the eyes of the owners themselves. 1) they'll do whats best interest for themselves 2) they'll do what best for the entire league as a whole. And Screwing half the league isn't putting whats best interest for those teams and league as a whole.

They'll do whats has the least impact on themselves and the league as a whole. Sorry but Arizona in central impacts the league less than it would with Edmonton and Calgary in central, colorado in pacific.

Since you obviously didn't' read what I wrote about Nashville, which also applies to St Louis...
And, since you obviously don't really WANT to think about anything other than you own way....
This has become an argument, not a discussion.

Just send your memo to the BOG, since you obviously know more about it than they do, and they don't even need to talk about it; they can just do what you say....

Congratulations on having your team....

 

[gstommylee]

Since you obviously didn't' read what I wrote about Nashville, which also applies to St Louis...
And, since you obviously don't really WANT to think about anything other than you own way....
This has become an argument, not a discussion.

Just send your memo to the BOG, since you obviously know more about it than they do, and they don't even need to talk about it; they can just do what you say....

Congratulations on having your team....

All i am saying is the league won't vote on realigning the western conference to create longer travel just for the sake of Coyotes. Why you think the league is in the 4 division 2 alignment all eastern time zone teams in the eastern conference to reduce travel time and costs.

They'll pick what has the least impact on themselves and its not Arizona in pacific. The 31 owners will look at whats best interest in themselves before they'll look at what's best interest in the league.

Seattle is paying 650m for a team and you think the league should say thank for the check the only closest team you'll have is Vancouver and you got to travel more for the rest... What about Edmonton and Calgary. Here's your split of the fee good luck we are going to make you travel more to divisional games....

 

[tony d]

Something I've been looking for since becoming a hockey fan in 1989/1990. Good on Seattle for from the looks of it getting a team.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Winnipeg, Minnesota, and Chicago would all travel less to Edmonton/Calgary than they would Arizona. Of course they would also have to cross a national border more often.

The West has been a tough puzzle from the day the league expanded in 1967. Unfortunately, Vegas and Seattle, replacing Dallas and Minnesota, would've made the previous 5 team Pacific and NW divisions make a lot more sense.

Since I believe Bettman said/hinted at there being no major realignment, moving 1 team instead of 3 is the most simple option. None of Edmonton, Calgary, or Arizona are Central teams, but even if they went to 8 divisions, some division is going to look a little odd. Unless they moved SJ away from LA/Ana, and Van from Edm/Cal. Neither one of which will probably happen.

 

[gstommylee]

Winnipeg, Minnesota, and Chicago would all travel less to Edmonton/Calgary than they would Arizona. Of course they would also have to cross a national border more often.

The West has been a tough puzzle from the day the league expanded in 1967. Unfortunately, Vegas and Seattle, replacing Dallas and Minnesota, would've made the previous 5 team Pacific and NW divisions make a lot more sense.

Since I believe Bettman said/hinted at there being no major realignment, moving 1 team instead of 3 is the most simple option. None of Edmonton, Calgary, or Arizona are Central teams, but even if they went to 8 divisions, some division is going to look a little odd. Unless they moved SJ away from LA/Ana, and Van from Edm/Cal. Neither one of which will probably happen.

8 divisions is still a major realignment since that splits rivalries on the east coast.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Divisions are already uneven...so history is there.
Besides, I don't see the league adding 4 teams at once (so going 18-18), so inevitably we may see in a future 17 conferences, and even on short term uneven conferences (16-17, 17-18).

Which was never meant to be permanent though. So yes they could go with uneven divisions if their intent is to expand to 36 in the future.

 

[gstommylee]

Which was never meant to be permanent though. So yes they could go with uneven divisions if their intent is to expand to 36 in the future.

They aren't going to unbalance the league again just when they finally balanced it.

 

[KingsFan7824]

8 divisions is still a major realignment since that splits rivalries on the east coast.

I'm just saying even if they did 8 divisions, which doesn't seem to be an option, the West would still probably look weird. Arizona would still end up in a division with St.Louis or Winnipeg or something like that. Or, you could do SJ/Sea/Van/Col as a division, which would look odd, since SJ is in California, and the league tends to keep teams in the same state/province in the same division.

 

[powerstuck]

^^^
Fascinating.

I have no idea what's going to happen in 5 years, and you are thinking 20 years down the road. Wow.....

I think the BOG is happy about 32 teams.
I think that Jacobs especially wants Houston, but Fertitta doesn't want to pay enough, so Jacobs might be a little frustrated by that.
I think both of those 2 things because of what Jacobs has said before. Houston and Seattle are the only places that might actually help the league get a bigger TV contract.
I don't think the BOG cares about Quebec, except in an emergency. I don't think they care about Hamilton or Southern Ontario at all.
And, I think the BOG knows that both Calgary and Arizona have challenges. Calgary's is not nearly as severe as Arizona's.
I think the BOG also knows that Florida and Carolina are safe for now, but in the next round of lease negotiations, might be in trouble.
I think the BOG really hopes the Islanders deal at Belmont goes through.

For all of those reasons....32 is great. And, Houston and Quebec are there in case there is an emergency.

MNN I agree with you. My whole point was, last set of expansions was late 90s early 2000's. We're now 17 (Vegas) to 20 (2020 Seattle) years later and have new set of expansions.

I agree BOG is happy with 32, but I would believe in 2000 they said they were happy with 30.

Besides, my original comment was to a poster who said 17-17 was making un-even divisions, but history shown that NHL managed to live a few years with that. I don't see NHL expanding 4 teams at once, but maybe 1, then a year or two later another, or 2 teams at once...yes, that may happen. My 20 years comment again was because I don't think ''MUCH'' will change in the next 5 years (and that includes Seattle joining in 2020 while being approved in 2018). I mean if we look at 5 years window...2023 ? That's just 3 full seasons for Seattle before next move...honestly I don't see it happening that fast.

 

[powerstuck]

They aren't going to unbalance the league again just when they finally balanced it.

They wouldn't do it for fun. But throw a $650M carrot or two at the BOG, and I'm not sure they wont be willing to bite it.

 

[MNNumbers]

I hope they don't go to 8 divisions of 4 teams. NFL has that, and some fan base has a gripe every year because some weak team won their division. With 32 teams, 4 is too small a grouping.

It should be 4 groups of 8. Then the schedule will start with this:
vs the other 3 groups (that's 24 other teams) 1 game at home and 1 away. That's 48 games, leaving 34.
Against all 7 of the other teams in your division: 2 games at home and 2 away. That's 28 games, leaving 6.
Now, there are 2 choices.
A) ONE extra game against 6 of those 7 teams.
B) ONE at Home and ONE away both against 3 of those teams. This would be your pods....(Examples: EDM.CGY.VAN.SEA if those teams are all in the Pacific. Or, WPG, MIN, CHI, STL).
Either way works.

And, no wild cards. 2 rounds in division (or, they could call it 4 conferences if they want - that's just semantics).

 

[snovalleyhockeyfan]

I hope they don't go to 8 divisions of 4 teams. NFL has that, and some fan base has a gripe every year because some weak team won their division. With 32 teams, 4 is too small a grouping.

It should be 4 groups of 8. Then the schedule will start with this:
vs the other 3 groups (that's 24 other teams) 1 game at home and 1 away. That's 48 games, leaving 34.
Against all 7 of the other teams in your division: 2 games at home and 2 away. That's 28 games, leaving 6.
Now, there are 2 choices.
A) ONE extra game against 6 of those 7 teams.
B) ONE at Home and ONE away both against 3 of those teams. This would be your pods....(Examples: EDM.CGY.VAN.SEA if those teams are all in the Pacific. Or, WPG, MIN, CHI, STL).
Either way works.

And, no wild cards. 2 rounds in division (or, they could call it 4 conferences if they want - that's just semantics).

I like this one. Here'd be my groupings:
Pacific A-SEA, VAN, CGY, EDM
Pacific B-SJ, LA, ANA, LV
Central A-WPG, CHI, STL, MIN
Central B-COL, AZ, DAL, NSH
Atlantic A-MTL, TOR, OTT, DET
Atlantic B-BUF, BOS, TB, FLA
Metro A-NY teams and PHI
Metro B-PIT, WSH, CBJ, CAR

 

[LeafalCrusader]

I like this one. Here'd be my groupings:
Pacific A-SEA, VAN, CGY, EDM
Pacific B-SJ, LA, ANA, LV
Central A-WPG, CHI, STL, MIN
Central B-COL, AZ, DAL, NSH
Atlantic A-MTL, TOR, OTT, DET
Atlantic B-BUF, BOS, TB, FLA
Metro A-NY teams and PHI
Metro B-PIT, WSH, CBJ, CAR

Looks good to me though I'd put Philly and Pittsburgh in the same division and move up one of the other teams from Metro B.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

I don't really think that the NHL is interested in going the route of 4-team divisions, I think they have the setup for 8-team divisions and want to stick at that. Barring any relocations, once Seattle joins the NHL will either just move Arizona to the Central or swap Colorado with Edmonton/Calgary, and my money is honestly on the latter.

 

[gstommylee]

I don't really think that the NHL is interested in going the route of 4-team divisions, I think they have the setup for 8-team divisions and want to stick at that. Barring any relocations, once Seattle joins the NHL will either just move Arizona to the Central or swap Colorado with Edmonton/Calgary, and my money is honestly on the latter.

why take away Vancouver and Seattle 2 closest teams for the sake of the coyotes? It makes no sense.

Bettman clearly hinted no major realignments so aka Arizona to Central.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

why take away Vancouver and Seattle 2 closest teams for the sake of the coyotes? It makes no sense.

The Yotes arguably need more help at the gate with relatively nearby rivals and Arizona's time factor would be an issue with a sometimes three-time zone Central (which would notably be during playoff time). I'm not saying I favor it, just that I wouldn't be surprised.

And truth be told, I don't think that Seattle would really view the Alberta teams as geographic rivals compared to the California teams and obviously Vancouver.