News Article: Oilers moving to the Central?

[bone]

Really the only thing that makes sense to me in a 32 team league is to create 4 divisions within each conference. You then play 2 games out of conference, 3 within conference then 4 or 5 within the division. Then you could create two different Canadian divisions.

Another option that I like better is that you could simply go with 4 Conferences with 2 Divisions each. This scenario actually creates a completely even schedule where you could play out of conference teams twice, the intra-conference teams 4 times and intra-division 6 times and have an exact 82 game schedule.

The only issue with that is that you'd essentially kill the Wales/Campbell trophies, but does anyone really care about those?

 

[Paperbagofglory]

I have a real disconnect with Central clubs these days. Don't give a hoot about Chicago, Detroit, STL, Preds, Minny etc. These are often dog day games to me. They offer no particular interest. At times Chicago has engaged me but mostly these clubs bore the **** out of me. Some of my worst games ever attended were STL,

Conversely I love California hockey for the most part, not sure why. maybe the Gretzky connection created the allure.

I can't see this flying. From a travel pov or general interest pov.

We're west man, its what we are. Wer'e pretty far west Geographically. To consider this as Central within the continent is a joke.

The Leafs used to be in the West and it made sense because of how few West coast teams there were at the time. Now we will have 6. Time to adjust accordingly, we may be west, but we are no longer that far west compared to the rest of that division. Its 2,438.0 km to get to San Jose, a northern California team, and only 1,305.3 km to get to Winnipeg. What seems the best logistically to you? Pretty such its a lot quicker to get to Minnesota, Colorado, and only a few hundred km more to get to Chicago. Those teams are clumped together enough that the travel difference will be minimal.

 

[rboomercat90]

I doubt that will ever happen. Every NHL city wants to have Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin etc. Go through their buildings to boost ticket sales and / or boost ticket prices

This was one of the reasons the league gave when they went back to home and home series against non conference teams. It will be a sticking point to moving away from that now. Maybe enough time has passed where it won’t be seen as a big issue anymore. The league doesn’t really promote their stars and they certainly don’t call games like they think their best players are anything special. Seeing players every year may not be as big a deal as it used to be.

 

[Saltcreek]

The Leafs used to be in the West and it made sense because of how few West coast teams there were at the time. Now we will have 6. Time to adjust accordingly, we may be west, but we are no longer that far west compared to the rest of that division. Its 2,438.0 km to get to San Jose, a northern California team, and only 1,305.3 km to get to Winnipeg. What seems the best logistically to you?

What about Chicago, Nashville, and Minnesota? That is a hell of a lot of traveling that I cannot see Edmonton and Calgary agreeing to. They would be at a distinct disadvantage. Arizona should be the team to leave.

 

[Paperbagofglory]

What about Chicago, Nashville, and Minnesota? That is a hell of a lot of traveling that I cannot see Edmonton and Calgary agreeing to. They would be at a distinct disadvantage. Arizona should be the team to leave.

Like i said, the distance from Edmonton to those central teams for the most part is still less then heading to Vegas, we won't count Vancouver or Calgary for obvious reasons, same country, close enough proximity to not be annoying.

Yes i admit Chicago is similar in travel but a negligible difference considering the other central teams in proximity to use. I think it would make the transition from central Matchups to Eastcoast road trips a lot easier. There are times the Oilers play the pacific and then head right to New York, Florida, Boston, etc.

Anyone else think that might make it a little better for travel and making a more balanced schedule?

 

[Frank the Tank]

I think you'll see the NHL attempt to revisit the 4 conferences proposal from 2013 that the NHLPA shelved because of the East-West team imbalance. Adding Vegas and now Seattle resolves the main issue of contention. One could even sub-divide each conference into two divisions of four to create a clean schedule of 82 games.

• 6 games against division foes (18)
• 4 games against conference teams (16)
• 2 games against non-conference teams (48)

The only issue would be dividing certain teams out East and preserving rivalries. You could have:

W1: EDM, CGY, VAN, SEA
W2: LA, SJ, ANA, VGK

C1: CHI, STL, MIN, WPG
C2: ARI, DAL, NSH, COL

A1: TOR, MON, BUF, OTT
A2: BOS, NYR, NYI, NJ

M1: DET, PIT, CBJ, PHI
M2: CAR, WSH, TB, FLA

Like I said, certain fans may gripe about a loss of Eastern rivalries (Philly vs. NY area teams), but you'll never make everyone happy.

 

[Raab]

Should just make two division and call them NW and SW.

NW would be:

Winnipeg
Minnesota
Edmonton
Calgary
Vancouver
Seattle
Chicago
Colorado

SW would be:

Dallas
Nashville
LA
Anaheim
SJ
St. Louis
Arizona
Vegas

 

[Bank Shot]

Where is the "I don't care" option?

The Oilers post lockout were in a division with Colorado and Minnesota so it's not like it would be a radical move.

Teams like Chicago and Minnesota are on their way down, so there would be space in that division for the Oilers to excel.

The California teams are always good somehow so maybe it would be nice to get away from them. haha.

The nice thing about staying in the Pacific is if the Oilers make the playoffs, a trip to LA/Anaheim/San Jose to watch the Oilers on the road is more appealing than anywhere in the central except Nashville.

 

[TheRebuild]

Not really liking the idea of playing the Wild again 800 times every season and losing every single game 2-1.

 

[shoop]

Really the only thing that makes sense to me in a 32 team league is to create 4 divisions within each conference. You then play 2 games out of conference, 3 within conference then 4 or 5 within the division. Then you could create two different Canadian divisions.

Completely agreed on the divisions. Make it like the NFL.

Here's how I would split the Western Conference

Smythe
EDM
CGY
SEA
VAN

Pacific
LA
ANA
SJ
VGS

Norris
WPG
MIN
CHI
NAS

Central
Dallas
St. Louis
Colorado
Arizona

Maybe tweak the Norris and Central, but Pacific and Smythe are rock solid.

As for schedule I think you are on the right track, but I would be a little heavier within the division.

Eastern conference home and home = 32 games
Smythe division 6 games per team = 18 games.

For the rest of the Western conference I would play on a rotating schedule. Two out of every three years you play a third game against teams in two of the three divisions.

Division Year 1/Year 2/Year 3
Pacific 12 games total/12 games total /8 games total
Norris 12/8/12
Central 8/12/12

So the Oilers would play 32 games against non-division opponents within the Western conference every year. Keeps the schedule at 82 games.

The playoffs would be the top two in each division then after the first round rank the division winners within the conference.

I like that you end up with a division champion every year.

 

[Niten Ichi Ryu]

This would suck. I actually enjoy being in the Pacific, with the 3 Canadian western teams and the 3 California teams. Also less competitive than the Central, but in the end, Oilers are winning it all anyway so I guess the path doesn't matter

 

[Todd Parchment]

Arizona or LV can peace out. What kind of nonsense is this.

 

[MikeGrier99]

Two conferences with 1-8 making the playoffs is the best system in my mind. Divisions spoil the fun of a sport like baseball. If the Jays were in the AL central instead of the AL east they would make the playoffs something like 2-3x more often. It's just dumb that they have a much harder hill to climb year in and year out then all the other teams not having to top the two most prestigious teams in the game.. NHL could even try something like 1-16 making the playoffs and 17-32 missing it. It would be a very major change though and might not be viable to do travel and a pretty radical change of tradition.

 

[Mr Positive]

as an oiler fan I prefer the pacific.

But, maybe the Central would be a good fit too, and I voted for it in the poll because I do believe it is what is best for the league, but only in the arrangement where both Calgary and Edmonton go to the Central, and Colorado goes to the Pacific

But perhaps the best option is if Arizona moves to Houston, and that team goes to the Central. I don't see it happening

 

[Soundwave]

That would be bad for us, that division would eat us alive.

 

[the4thlinegrinder]

Should just make two division and call them NW and SW.

NW would be:

Winnipeg
Minnesota
Edmonton
Calgary
Vancouver
Seattle
Chicago
Colorado

SW would be:

Dallas
Nashville
LA
Anaheim
SJ
St. Louis
Arizona
Vegas

This would not work. The time zones make it impractical.