Realignment II: Well, why not, we've got another year to kill

[MoreOrr]

I think the reasoning the BoG doesn't like the idea of four divisions is the way the scheduling matrix was presented with it. I think "the 10", or maybe the entire Eastern Conference is quite happy with the current format, where they play their divisional rivals six times and the rest of the conference four times. Moving to four divisions jeopardizes that format.

Why "fix" what ain't broke? What is broken is the West, and maybe it is time to do something a bit more radical out West.

Grudy0, we already discussed this. If the League doesn't like the damn scheduling matrix that was proposed, then they could just toss that element aside and keep the 4-Divisions. The two things aren't symbiotic. And besides, have we heard that they're not in favor of the proposed scheduling matrix? I'm not sure, though I don't remember hearing anything about that. What we've heard is that there's not a whole lot of support for changing to 4 Divisions. If the scheduling matrix were the central problem, then why not say that?

Still, who knows what they're ultimately going to end up doing, other than swapping with Winnipeg with one team in the West. We can only speculate based on what we've heard, and the rest is us just making our own proposals here in this thread.

 

[Grudy0]

Grudy0, we already discussed this. If the League doesn't like the damn scheduling matrix that was proposed, then they could just toss that element aside and keep the 4-Divisions. The two things aren't symbiotic. And besides, have we heard that they're not in favor of the proposed scheduling matrix? I'm not sure, though I don't remember hearing anything about that. What we've heard is that there's not a whole lot of support for changing to 4 Divisions. If the scheduling matrix were the central problem, then why not say that?

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't.

The only info we truly know is that Bettman and the League proposed the four-division, heavy divisional play and first round divisional playoff back in June without knowing the exact makeup of the teams. We also know that GM Howson of Columbus was going to counter propose that there be a 16-team East and 14-team West, obviously with four divisions. It has only been reported that many teams couldn't stomach a four-division proposal, yet we also know from some rumors that there were between fourteen to twenty different proposal scenarios presented at the recent BoG meeting, and one of those came from Calgary's owner to put all Canadian teams in a division, which appears to look like a four-division proposal to me.

The ultimate problem is that we are not completely sure why the League's four-division proposal was rejected, other than we also heard that Pittsburgh did not want to be in a division without Philadelphia. Yes, I fully suspect that the problem was more with the proposed scheduling matrix because the Eastern Conference instead of playing a minimum of 73 of 82 games in the ETZ would then have to play 68 in the ETZ and 14 out, losing some conference games (and perhaps rivals) in the process.

Still, who knows what they're ultimately going to end up doing, other than swapping with Winnipeg with one team in the West. We can only speculate based on what we've heard, and the rest is us just making our own proposals here in this thread.

Very true. We only get dribs and drabs of information at a time.

 

[MoreOrr]

Somewhat of an interesting discussion started here on the Main Board:
The Eastern Conference Bias
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=1004917

It has some relevance to the alignment and scheduling topic.

 

[MoreOrr]

The ultimate problem is that we are not completely sure why the League's four-division proposal was rejected, other than we also heard that Pittsburgh did not want to be in a division without Philadelphia. Yes, I fully suspect that the problem was more with the proposed scheduling matrix because the Eastern Conference instead of playing a minimum of 73 of 82 games in the ETZ would then have to play 68 in the ETZ and 14 out, losing some conference games (and perhaps rivals) in the process.

And directly connected to the Pittsburgh - Philadelphia comment, I fully suspect that it has a great part to do with the fact that those two northeastern Divisions realize that there isn't any kind of a logical scenario that has 4 Divisions and doesn't in some way split up some of the current groupings in those two Divisions. And until something happens that makes that unavoidable, they plan to try to avoid it.

I also keep arguing the reason why this, and every League, went to smaller Divisions in the first place... Because they realize that it's better for team marketing. And some of them probably reminded the rest of that.

 

[Crayton]

And directly connected to the Pittsburgh - Philadelphia comment, I fully suspect that it has a great part to do with the fact that those two northeastern Divisions realize that there isn't any kind of a logical scenario that has 4 Divisions and doesn't in some way split up some of the current groupings in those two Divisions. And until something happens that makes that unavoidable, they plan to try to avoid it.

I also keep arguing the reason why this, and every League, went to smaller Divisions in the first place... Because they realize that it's better for team marketing. And some of them probably reminded the rest of that.

To the part in bold: Carolina and Detroit/Columbus to the Northeast while the rest of the Southeast to the Atlantic. Is Carolina to the Northeast logical? There is logic in choosing them to go there...

Of course, you could also do what SoTzuMe recommended and send Tampa Bay (back) to the Central division. Hey, they put Seattle back into the NFC.

 

[MoreOrr]

To the part in bold: Carolina and Detroit/Columbus to the Northeast while the rest of the Southeast to the Atlantic. Is Carolina to the Northeast logical? There is logic in choosing them to go there...

Of course, you could also do what SoTzuMe recommended and send Tampa Bay (back) to the Central division. Hey, they put Seattle back into the NFC.

Although perhaps slightly less illogical than Cynicaps idea to put the Florida teams with the Canadian teams, those ideas you mention still aren't that rational.

Tampa Bay may once have been in the Central, but there's no zero logical now in separating the Lightning from the Panthers, even much less than putting Toronto back in the Central within some realignment suggestions.

And as for Carolina, to draw a small comparison with the Wild, we've rread some Wild fans saying the other day that they don't necessarily feel a rivalry with the Blues and Blackhawks that the North Stars formally had... and there we're talking about a team that's in the same city. The Hurricanes may once have been the Whalers, but it's been 13 years with the Carolina in the Southeast Division, and fans there are only remotely linked through a few Playoff matchups with certain Northeast teams. Perhaps Columbus - Carolina in the Northeast could somewhat make sense for a Northeast/North Central Division in a 4-Division League... But, well, I'll leave it at that.

 

[Grudy0]

Not news, but Cotsonika's 13 October article entitled "NHL realignment: There's no simple solution" on Yahoo!:

There are two things everyone needs to understand about NHL realignment: One, the East holds the key. Two, this goes beyond how the league is divided. It also involves how the schedule is structured. Will there be more crossover games, and if so, how many?

There are several scenarios on the table, ranging from radical to simple. But as one general manager put it Thursday, what it comes down to is this: “You’ve got to figure out a formula that attracts votes.” At least two-thirds of the clubs must agree for a proposal to pass at the NHL’s board of governors meeting Dec. 5-6, and so the process has become highly politicized.

It basically parrots my talking points over the past few months.

 

[MoreOrr]

Not news, but Cotsonika's 13 October article entitled "NHL realignment: There's no simple solution" on Yahoo!:It basically parrots my talking points over the past few months.

It "parrots" a lot of people's talking points, Grudy0. Most of us know that the East controls virtually everything.

 

[KevFu]

Why nobody sees this idea as being viable amazes me:

Northeast: BOS, BUF, TOR, OTT, MTL, FLA, TB
Atlantic: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, PIT, CBJ, WSH, CAR
Central: DET, CHI, STL, MIN, NSH, WPG, DAL
Pacific: COL, PHX, CGY, EDM, VAN, SJ, LA, ANA

I think that's close. I think this works better:
Adams: BOS, BUF, TOR, MON, OTT, DET, CAR
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, PIT, WAS, TB, FLA
Norris: CHI, STL, MIN, NSH, WPG, DAL, CBJ
Smythe: COL, PHX, CGY, EDM, VAN, SJ, LA, ANA

If an alignment such as that is reasonable, then almost any alignment is reasonable.

I mean seriously... The Canadian and Florida teams in the same Division. Talk about bending over backwards to "not separate the two Division groupings in the northeast". That alignment is pure nonsense, other than your decision that Columbus should be the team put in the East.

And how about stopping for a moment to think about why the League is apparently shying away from the 4-Division idea. Could at least a tiny part of it be that an alignment such as you're suggesting is also seen as ridiculous by the League? Or could it be that no one other than you thought of it? Which do you think is the case?

I'm with him, though. Breaking up the Southeast is the SMARTEST THING TO DO for a number of reasons:
1. They're the division short a team.
2. They really only have THREE teams (CAR, FLA, TB)
3. Lack of historic rivalries
4. Their isolation might be causing lower attendance
5. Makes Washington happy
6. It's the path of least resistance.

For all the talk of "you can't put ______ and _______ in the same division because they are so far away," to crap on people's ideas, take a look at the schedule.

Road trips:
Montreal: CAR/PHI, OTT/TB/FLA, WAS/FLA/TB, CAR,
Toronto: CAR/TB/DAL/ANA, FLA/CAR/WIN, WAS/FLA/TB/OTT/BOS,
Ottawa: CAR, CAR, TB/FLA/NYI, FLA/TB,
Florida: MON/OTT/BUF, TOR/WIN, OTT/BOS, TOR/WIN, MON/MIN/CBJ
Tampa: CAR/BOS/WAS/NYI, BUF/NASH, OTT/NYI/NYR/PHI, TOR/MON/OTT, MON/TOR/WIN

The vast majority of the "travel concerns" is a completely separate issue than the alignment; the alignment just gets scapegoated. Maybe if they scheduled better, the alignment wouldn't be the concern.

those two northeastern Divisions realize that there isn't any kind of a logical scenario that has 4 Divisions and doesn't in some way split up some of the current groupings in those two Divisions. And until something happens that makes that unavoidable, they plan to try to avoid it.

I also keep arguing the reason why this, and every League, went to smaller Divisions in the first place... Because they realize that it's better for team marketing. And some of them probably reminded the rest of that.

The NE and ATL are against the four-team divisions because they have no problem with the current setup. So you have to sell them on ANY realignment. The Patrick/Adams idea is still the "path of least resistance." Adding two teams to what they have is more palatable than losing teams from their divisions.

As far as it better for marketing, if you need to market games against your division rivals, you're in a world of hurt. Those are going to be the marquee games regardless of division. No one has to sell Cubs/White Sox very hard. It sells itself.

They need to make a schedule matrix completely separate from their alignment (maybe the 3x10 format, with eight flex games), and simply not tell anyone how they got there. Just hand a team their proposed schedule and see if they object.

 

[DougKnowsBest]

its sad to say.

but i think at the end of the day.... or year as the case may be


the simplest solution is the best... swap the preds and jets


let the phoenix situation work itself out and go from there

 

[MoreOrr]

I think that's close. I think this works better:
Adams: BOS, BUF, TOR, MON, OTT, DET, CAR
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, PIT, WAS, TB, FLA
Norris: CHI, STL, MIN, NSH, WPG, DAL, CBJ
Smythe: COL, PHX, CGY, EDM, VAN, SJ, LA, ANA

I'm with him, though. Breaking up the Southeast is the SMARTEST THING TO DO for a number of reasons:
1. They're the division short a team.
2. They really only have THREE teams (CAR, FLA, TB)
3. Lack of historic rivalries
4. Their isolation might be causing lower attendance
5. Makes Washington happy
6. It's the path of least resistance.

Crayton suggested this possibility, which, if I had to choose any, would be the best:
Boston, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo, Columbus, Carolina
Islanders, Rangers, Devils, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Tampa Bay, Florida

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Crayton suggested this possibility, which, if I had to choose any, would be the best:
Boston, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo, Columbus, Carolina
Islanders, Rangers, Devils, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Tampa Bay, Florida

What if both Detroit and Columbus went East and they revert to four divisions but just have 14 in the west and 16 in the east? What are the problems with that setup?

 

[MoreOrr]

What if both Detroit and Columbus went East and they revert to four divisions but just have 14 in the west and 16 in the east? What are the problems with that setup?

Only when Quebec City finally gets a team, through relocation or otherwise.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Only when Quebec City finally gets a team, through relocation or otherwise.

Well, if Columbus gets left out in the cold on the realignment, it could very well be them. lol

 

[MoreOrr]

Well, if Columbus gets left out in the cold on the realignment, it could very well be them. lol

You mean for relocation. That would be very unfortunate, that the League would leave the vulnerable ETZ team in the West and move a Western Conference strong house into the East.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

You mean for relocation. That would be very unfortunate, that the League would leave the vulnerable ETZ team in the West and move a Western Conference strong house into the East.

I mean if the Jackets aren't realigned to the east, it could very well be them that is relocated to Quebec City.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

I hate to say it, but you've got a point about the Blue Jackets probably being a candidate for relocation in the near future if their situation doesn't improve significantly. Which is honestly why I'd rank them as being the far more likely choice to be moved east even if they get put in the SE division. Detroit may moan all they want, but they could play in the freaking KHL and they'd still bring in the bucks. Columbus needs all the help they can get at this point in time.

But to bring up the 14-16 split West-East, that's something I've mentioned in the past as being possible as well. From my perspective, the logical split for that would be....

Northeast
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Montreal Canadiens
New Jersey Devils
New York Islander
New York Rangers
Ottawa Senators
Toronto Maple Leafs

Southeast
Carolina Hurricanes
Columbus Blue Jackets
Detroit Red Wings
Florida Panthers
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals

Central
Chicago Blackhawks
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Minnesota Wild
Nashville Predators
St. Louis Blues
Winnipeg Jets

Pacific
Anaheim Ducks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers
Los Angeles Kings
Phoenix Coyotes
San Jose Sharks
Vancouver Canucks

Not to say that this is a great idea, but if the league did want to go the MLB route and have a 14-16 split, that'd probably be the most logical way to do so.

And again, Phoenix is the wild card in everything....

 

[Cynicaps]

I think that's close. I think this works better:
I'm with him, though. Breaking up the Southeast is the SMARTEST THING TO DO for a number of reasons:
1. They're the division short a team.
2. They really only have THREE teams (CAR, FLA, TB)
3. Lack of historic rivalries
4. Their isolation might be causing lower attendance
5. Makes Washington happy
6. It's the path of least resistance.

Grafting anyone to the Southeast is a recipe for failure so why not just graft them onto The 10? What real downsides does any of that have in the long run? How to graft them is the hard issue given each team's needs.

• WSH's rivals still are the Atlantic teams and for them it's the most logical place to go.
• CAR can argue that it has bigger rivalries with BOS and BUF than the Southeast as-is due to playoff history and the heavy number of transplants from those areas.
• FLA exists as a welfare case (for transplants and Broward County) so they'd do fine anywhere but the area culturally seems closer to the Atlantic markets than the Northeast.
• TB could do fine anywhere. Problem is do you dare split the Florida teams?

I think my Atlantic+WAS with CBJ/CAR or FLA/TB and Northeast + FLA/TB or CAR/DET ideas are a lot better than, say, the Southeast + NSH/STL/DAL. Who would sign on to that ghetto of a division?

 

[GKJ]

I like Adam Proteau's idea. Scrap divisions. Everyone is in a 15-team conference.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Grafting anyone to the Southeast is a recipe for failure so why not just graft them onto The 10? What real downsides does any of that have in the long run? How to graft them is the hard issue given each team's needs.

• WSH's rivals still are the Atlantic teams and for them it's the most logical place to go.
• CAR can argue that it has bigger rivalries with BOS and BUF than the Southeast as-is due to playoff history and the heavy number of transplants from those areas.
• FLA exists as a welfare case (for transplants and Broward County) so they'd do fine anywhere but the area culturally seems closer to the Atlantic markets than the Northeast.
• TB could do fine anywhere. Problem is do you dare split the Florida teams?

I think my Atlantic+WAS with CBJ/CAR or FLA/TB and Northeast + FLA/TB or CAR/DET ideas are a lot better than, say, the Southeast + NSH/STL/DAL. Who would sign on to that ghetto of a division?

CAR isn't HFD, OR QUE, under the old divisional alignment, just bc of the trends the last few yrs, but where would you have started the divide between an Atlantic and a SE Team, THE ONLY LOGICAL choice was WSH.... THE OPTIONS are likely Detroit, more than Columbus and no way would you see St. Louis or Dallas in a SE Division, and NSH is in CTZ, not ETZ.....

 

[MoreOrr]

I mean if the Jackets aren't realigned to the east, it could very well be them that is relocated to Quebec City.

Yes, I know that's what you meant...

 

[mucker*]

It "parrots" a lot of people's talking points, Grudy0. Most of know that the East controls virtually everything.

Is there something wrong with it?
I don't understand why that is such problem.
Kinda like complaining that Canada is cold and snowy in the winter.

I mean, should we simply ignore Geography and population distribution, ignore 400 years off history, just to please isolated, 2nd tier western markets?

 

[mucker*]

its sad to say.

but i think at the end of the day.... or year as the case may be


the simplest solution is the best... swap the preds and jets


let the phoenix situation work itself out and go from there

That's exactly what I was thinking.
KISS. Keep it simple stupid.

There is nothing the NHL can do to make everybody happy, this reminds me of trying to order pizza for a party of 10, nobody can agree on it so just play safe and order cheese and peperroni.

So many people want to use a simple re-alignment as a means of "social engineering" to make it so that history, big eastern markets, traditional rivalries, are split up for special interest of having 8 PM not 9 PM starts.

It is madness.

The less that is done, the less who are upset. I am very sorry western conference teams, but this North America, and the balance of population and power is East of the Mississipi, we are sorry if this inconvenices you, but there is nothing we can do.

Splitting up Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Detroit and Chicago, Philly and NY, so you can have 8 PM not 9 PM starts is not fair, not logical, and bad for the majority.

 

[mucker*]

For some reason, this topic is reminding me of the old adage of a few stubborn geezers all disagreeing on the color of an orange.... everybody thinks they have it right, and everyone else is completely wrong for disagreeing with them.

I've brought it up several times, but honestly think that the simple three team swap of Winnipeg to the NW, Minnesota to the Central, and either Nashville or Columbus to the SE makes by far the most sense as it keeps every major rivalry intact, the divisions still make geographic sense (well.... kinda for Columbus), and the NHL would easily get 20 votes for it, no matter how much Detroit and Dallas would be against it.

Then again, I might just be the old man with a completely different idea about the color of an orange, too....

QFT.
You and me man, we are the few who get it.

I say this is more like having a family bicker over what pizza to order for dinner.
One wants pepperoni. The other won't eat meat.
The other wants anchioves and mushrooms.

KISS. Keep it simple stupid.
Cheese and Pepperoni.

Winnipeg W and Nashville E.

 

[Street Hawk]

That's exactly what I was thinking.
KISS. Keep it simple stupid.

Splitting up Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Detroit and Chicago, Philly and NY, so you can have 8 PM not 9 PM starts is not fair, not logical, and bad for the majority.

West already knows it realignment isn't going to be great for them. 4 Pacific, 4 Mountain, 6 Central time zone teams, 16 EST teams.

Detroit and Columbus are in tough. They both play 8 games in the Pacific, 8 in the Mountain, 11 or 12 in the Central. Central time is fine, but 20% of their games begin at 9 or 10pm.

Look at Vancouver, they play 11 games in the MTZ, 11/12 in the Central, 13 in the EST.

Eastern teams only play what up to 9 games outside their time zone? No reason at all for them to complain about anything regarding realignment.

Just do what you can to make life easier for the West. If that means 14 teams in the West, so be it.