No one is saying the Canadian division was fun and great TV. It's just simple Kantian theory: Greater good for the Greater Number. BEFORE talking exact dollar values, you have something BETTER for 7 or 8, and categorically WORSE for 15 to 17 teams.
I don't see it, but what's your 6 and 4, and schedule matrix for this whole concept?
Seattle plays SanJose, LA, Anaheim 6 times each for a total of 18 times. That's a marketable pacific time zone rivalry. Seattle would play Vegas 4 times, Colorado 4 times, Minnesota and Dallas 4 times. 8 games against 2 central timezones sounds like a lot, until you crunch the numbers. There's 6 CTZ teams. Currently they play them 18 times in my alignment they'd play the central timezone 16 times.
Yes Dallas and Minnesota get a bit screwed. But they are kept together with a key rival.
The number of games in the pacific timezone would go from about 21.86 currently, to 24.
They'd go from have 9.86 games in the mtn timezone to 10. They'd go from having 18.36 against the central now, to having 14.
That's 4.36 central timezone games being lost, however if they let Detroit join the conference they're still losing 3.86 central timezone games.
Again Minnesota-Dallas the biggest losers in all of this.
The long term gain is better playoff hockey for ESPN so "they can grow the game". Every year 8 western American teams face in the playoffs. No Calcouvers, of vanmontons, or Edinnipegs.
Market non hockey fans know and care about. I'd argue the 4 Canadian teams in the west are probably a bigger problem for ESPN than it is for rogers-bell.
So it isn't just about growing Canada's market. It's a long term commitment to the USofA.
The metro can stay exactly as it is now. Only the Rangers would face the islanders blue jackets and devils 18 times in total and the other half for a total of 16 times.
Right, no one is disputing that that the TV deal gets bigger. It's a question of how much bigger is it getting DOING THIS rather than NOT DOING THIS.
I'd argue it's easily 30 million per team per decade, which would probably push the value of each team up by 100 million, if you have another way of doing so I'm all ears.
TV contracts have more affect on team values than anything else.
And again assuming ESPN doesn't prefer American on American early in the playoffs.
I don't see how you can increase the shares to 40 times the negatives when you have more teams in a worse situation than teams getting a better one.
The teams most arguably in a "worst situation" are the remaining Atlantic teams.
The five atlantic teams being paired up with 3 central teams is a problem. But you have to look at it from Detroits perspective.
For the 3 central teams coming east they're getting a better division. Better tvs times etc versus the pacific, less travel and more cultural overlap.
Boston-Chicago-Detroit could be an original six rivalrys all playing eachother 4 or 6 times each. You'd have a historic big markets markets battling it out.
They aren't just 06 by brand they represent 3 massive hockey markets Illinois plus Wisconsin, Michigan and New England.
To top it off you'd have Connor bedard in your arena either 4 or 6 times a year.
That's a recipe for good ticket sales and easy to market tv.
Tampa and Florida would be the ones most upset. But again they keep Detroit in their division, and they get Bedard in their division.
Plus you now have Nashville in the division which could be huge for a league wanting to market the team in Atlanta.
The idea is that every Canada vs Canada game is "double" the viewership compared to CAN vs US, because there's TWO cities (or fan bases) watching instead of one, so TV pays more for that. This is logically sound, no one disputes it.
The two problems are:
1) That principle is IN THEORY true if All Canadian team viewer bases are equal, but they're not. Winnipeg is a lot smaller than Toronto. Replacing Boston on Toronto's schedule with Winnipeg isn't doubling from 10 million Leaf fans to 20 million Leafs/Jets fans. It's probably more like 10 to 12.
The TV execs are going to do all that math and make their offers accordingly.
You've just glided by the bit where it ensures rogers has Canadian hockey to broadcast during the playoffs. It isn't about Winnipeg versus Toronto games, it's about the Leafs not making it to the playoffs because they're stuck beneath Boston and Tampa.
2) Division play is 32% of the schedule.
which means 68% are games aren't even up for discussion. We're talking about changing only 32% of games.
If you keep the schedule matrix, but change to an All Canadian division, you're going from 57 of 574 total team games being All Canada matchups (9.9%) to 104 of 656 (15.6%).
So you're really only "doubling" the viewership of 5.7% of games!
So how do you imagnie the Jersey Rangers games adding up?
LA Anageim? Vegas Dallas? Seattle Sanjose?
This isn't preferable for just Canada.
You mentioned two things: The 2021 All Canadian Division being AWESOME for viewership... Because it was 56 games with NO non-division play, you got 196 All-Canada games, almost twice what an All-Canadian division would be in the current matrix.
It was awesome in spite of an awful format. I don't think we're gonna agree with that.
If they had interdivisional play, passionate fans in the actual arena's, and a schedule that was normal, I think all 4 divisions would have been radically happier.
The actual schedule itself was beyond awful.
It wasn't just the repetitive matchups, it was that they were all in a row, follow all in a row with another team.
Now, the logical response is "but we're changing the Matrix!" And I say "YEAH, I've been on board with changing the Matrix from home/away vs everyone to something smarter for a decade now! You can KEEP the divisions as is, but change the matrix to make NON-CONFERENCE play a lot smarter and get the regular season you want. (Playoffs are gonna take a whole other post).
I'd argue yours is more extreme. I can't stand the every team playing eachother twice I agree with that premise. I support the claim that when you break down the majority of teams would notice little change or change for the better. Every division has a sweetener or two, that make what would otherwise be an issue workable.
