Schedule Change Lost by 1 Vote - was 19-11. but 2/3s Majority Needed

[kdb209]

I know, we need yet another New Schedule gripe-fest thread, but some specfics I haven't seen elsewhere.

At the BoG Meetings last week, there was a vote to change the current 8-games-within-the-division-unbalanced schedule. It lost by 1 vote.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/hockey/nhl/san_jose_sharks/16235761.htm

Tonight the Sharks will face the Los Angeles Kings for the fifth time in five weeks. It's this kind of crammed scheduling that prompted 19 NHL teams to vote for changing the format last week at the Board of Governors meetings.

Unfortunately for them, 11 teams voted the other way, leaving the motion one vote short of the two-thirds majority required for passage. Still, the sentiment for change is strong enough that Commissioner Gary Bettman said he is forming a committee to study the issue.

The sentiment is so strong that Sharks CEO Greg Jamison -- his vote was one of the 19 -- said the matter could go to another vote in late January during the All-Star break.

...


Under the failed proposal, the number of division games would have been reduced to six (from eight), thereby alleviating scenarios such as the one now faced by the Sharks and Kings. Moreover, it would have restored the old format in which each team played all 29 others at least once.

...

Sharks Coach Ron Wilson endorsed an idea advocated by Lou Lamoriello, the New Jersey Devils president and general manager. Lamoriello suggested breaking the schedule into three segments, with the first and third devoted to divisional play and the middle portion to accommodate everything else.

``That way you start your season with important games,'' Wilson said.

But under Lamoriello's proposal, the same teams would also be facing each other repeatedly in a short span just like the Sharks and Kings are now.

Click to read more...

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The problem isn't as much playing a division rival 8 times as it is playing one 5 times in 5 weeks (like San Jose and Los Angeles are doing) - something I've yet to understand the logic of. Yeah, I know, there's the whole "we want to see the other conference" argument, but I guarantee if some divisional games weren't compressed like above, there wouldn't be nearly the outcry against the current format.

 

[Hasbro]

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

[shawnmullin]

No the problem IS that they play 8 times. Schedules are always going to end up with too many of those games close together, because there's no other way to make it happen.

Look at the North West. Every team there has an artificially low point total due to the toughness of those divisional games.

 

[burstgreen]

Look at the North West. Every team there has an artificially low point total due to the toughness of those divisional games.

Same is true for the Atlantic, Northeast, Southeast, and Pacific divisions then, I suppose.

 

[jkrdevil]

The problem isn't as much playing a division rival 8 times as it is playing one 5 times in 5 weeks (like San Jose and Los Angeles are doing) - something I've yet to understand the logic of. Yeah, I know, there's the whole "we want to see the other conference" argument, but I guarantee if some divisional games weren't compressed like above, there wouldn't be nearly the outcry against the current format.

I agree They need to space them out more. The season is 7 and a half months there is no reason why 2 teams should play each other twice within the a week or so nevermind in the same building.

 

[Resolute]

How much you wanna bet all eleven nay's are in the Eastern Conference?

 

[Bobby Orr]

Sharks Coach Ron Wilson endorsed an idea advocated by Lou Lamoriello, the New Jersey Devils president and general manager. Lamoriello suggested breaking the schedule into three segments, with the first and third devoted to divisional play and the middle portion to accommodate everything else.

``That way you start your season with important games,'' Wilson said.

I'd rather see:

1) First couple of weeks divisional play
2) Final 1/3rd all conference/divisional play
3) Rest of the season random cross conference/conference/divisional play

As long as the cross-conference games are out of the way when the playoff races really start heating up, I'm fine.

 

[Hasbro]

How much you wanna bet all eleven nay's are in the Eastern Conference?

I say ten because Brian Burke was vocally against it and since it lost by a vote i can blame him.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I agree They need to space them out more. The season is 7 and a half months there is no reason why 2 teams should play each other twice within the a week or so nevermind in the same building.

Home-and-home? That's an acceptable "twice in a week" situation ... it should be the only "twice in a week" situation. Unfortunately, that's not why two teams are seeing each other 6 times in 40 days and once a month later.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I talked about this exact situation when they were looking to change the schedule the last time. A ton of people here were in favor of an East only plays East teams and West only plays West teams.

As a hockey fan I didn't like the idea, and as a season ticket holder I really didn't like the idea. At the time I pointed out if that was how the schedule had always been a 30 year season ticket holder of the L.A. Kings would never have seen the following players in person:

Lemieux
Jagr
Clarke
Bossy
D. Potvin
Trottier
Brodeur
Stevens
LaFleur
Orr
Espositio
Leetch

I was told it didn't matter and that the extra division games were worth it.

The biggest reason the majority of Western teams want to make the switch now is the young talent in the East, especially Crosby & Ovechkin.

 

[Bubba Thudd]

That might be YOUR reason for a change. MY reason is that I'd like to see EVERY team every other year (one year here, the next year there). Even the lowly Flyers.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

That might be YOUR reason for a change. MY reason is that I'd like to see EVERY team every other year (one year here, the next year there). Even the lowly Flyers.

As a season ticket holer I think they should play every team at least once per year. I thought changing this drastically was a mistake.

 

[Stevedude530]

Yea, but no one other than the diehards does.

 

[Stevedude530]

Just for fun, how bout crowds of 10,000 and 12,000 in Florida (vs. San Jose) and Nashville (vs. Ottawa). How 'bout 16,000 in Atlanta for the Ducks, when the Thrashers had sold out many games this season.

Oh, everyone's just dyin' to see the other conferences.

 

[Jazz]

As a season ticket holer I think they should play every team at least once per year. I thought changing this drastically was a mistake.

Yes, and as a season ticket holder (in a league where gate revenue is the majority of revenue), they should be listening to you....

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - this schedule is a simple joke. You can't market yours stars (and hence the league and sport) if they only play in 50% of it's cities only once every 3 years - simple Marketing 101.

This league is limiting it's potential with this absurd schedule, and is typical of GMs and owners taking the short-term solution rather than working on it long-term (ie, growing and marketing the league and it's stars).

My position: all teams play the other conference twice, once home & once away every year.
Compromise solution I am willing to accept: Use the 2003/04 schedule with home and home vs other conference every other year, with 3 games left over to play whomever.....(ie, 6x Div (24) + 4x Conf (40) + 15x other conf (15) + 3 rivalry games = 82)

I say ten because Brian Burke was vocally against it and since it lost by a vote i can blame him.

As for Burke, something is not right there, he had many times stated (before taking the Ducks job) that all teams should be in all buildings every year.....so this leads me to say that he is perhaps now speaking on behalf of his owner, but I'm guessing.....

 

[Sotnos]

I remember the vast majority here was in favor of this new schedule, now they're all griping about it. Good old HF.

I doubt all 11 nay votes were from the east, because I'd be shocked if even one SE owner likes having to play host to the other bad road draw SE teams an extra time a year while missing out on that juicy Detroit matchup every other year.

I also agree they need to space them out more. A home and home is nice, but don't follow it up with two more games against each other in a two week span.

 

[PecaFan]

Just for fun, how bout crowds of 10,000 and 12,000 in Florida (vs. San Jose) and Nashville (vs. Ottawa). How 'bout 16,000 in Atlanta for the Ducks, when the Thrashers had sold out many games this season.

Oh, everyone's just dyin' to see the other conferences.

Atlanta hosting some eastern teams:

Boston: 12,579
Canes: 13,106 (Cup Champs!)
Caps: 12,719
Canes: 14,277
Boston: 14,084
Leafs: 15,092

Gee Wally, that Ducks game is actually one of their better attendances, not the crappy one you try and portray it as.

Nashville games against some western teams:
Phoenix: 13,770
San Jose: 13,436
Wild: 12,759
Columbus: 13,209
Edmonton: 12,032

Again, 13,000 against Ottawa isn't out of the norm for Nashville.

That Florida/San Jose game was on Halloween night, the most likely explanation for that game being so out of whack. The Florida/Anaheim game is pretty much the same attendance as they get for Atlanta, Washington, Montreal, and Toronto.

You're going to need a hell of a lot more data to try and prove there's some sort of hesitancy to see the other conference, because what you've got doesn't show anything other than normal variance.

 

[Stevedude530]

Again you put only some games. Why not post the sellouts Atlanta's had this season, INCLUDING the game before it.

 

[burstgreen]

The big reason behind the current schedule is ticket sales. As much as people talk on here about how they want to see the other conferences, the ticket sales suggest that the fans on here are in the minority. I've already posted a couple other cities' stats on here, but someone mentioned LA. Last year: Divisional games average attendance 18061 (all sellouts except for two games); games against eastern conference average attendance 17237. The difference is even greater in cities that don't sell out as many games as LA.

 

[Fugu]

The big reason behind the current schedule is ticket sales. As much as people talk on here about how they want to see the other conferences, the ticket sales suggest that the fans on here are in the minority. I've already posted a couple other cities' stats on here, but someone mentioned LA. Last year: Divisional games average attendance 18061 (all sellouts except for two games); games against eastern conference average attendance 17237. The difference is even greater in cities that don't sell out as many games as LA.

Did you consider that intra-divisional ticket sales may be affected by the strength of any given division overall? That's part of the problem with unbalanced scheduling. Of course, others have outlined the problems with this as well in rankings and determining who gets into the playoffs; also with the greater cost and wear & tear due to travel and playing out of one's time zone. The Western conference is clearly at a disadvantage.

If teams are trying to attract casual fans and the "average Joe", then it is unlikely that it's just the schedule. People will decide to go based on how the team is doing, weekend vs. weeknight games probably do better, which does mean the NHL is competing against other entertainment options. As far as corporate season ticket holders, they also may not care who's in town but want routine access to tickets which they pass on to clients and customers. They have to believe that their customer base will consider these perks as something of interest and/or value.

That leaves the non-corporate season ticket holder. This is probably the group that may complain the most, but of course I don't have any evidence to support that statement. I'm a Wings' season ticket holder and I don't like paying for 16 games (x 2 tickets) each year to see the same 4 teams (CBJ, St. Louis, Chicago, Preds). I also see the same teams on the TV for an additional 16 games. Even if these teams were all very strong, I'd feel the same way. At a cost of ~$55- 75 per ticket, that's $880 - 1200 per person. Most season ticket holders buy at least 2 tickets. So I'm looking at $1760 - 2400 annually just for 4 opponents out of possible set of 29. If I consider all my entertainment options, I may decide that I could find more entertaining things to do with at least half of that money because I'm just really not that "entertained" by watching the same teams over and over again. I can only speak for myself, but I would prefer to see every other team at least once per season (at a minimum), and ideally I'd probably say 2x per year is fine.

 

[burstgreen]

I can only speak for myself, but I would prefer to see every other team at least once per season (at a minimum), and ideally I'd probably say 2x per year is fine.

By "see" do you mean in person? That would mean that the Red Wings would play a minimum of 30 games against the eastern conference each year (15 at home). If fans in many cities have little interest in buying tickets to the current five games against the opposing conference (as the statistics suggest), I imagine 15 would drive overall ticket sales even lower.

At some point people need to reconcile their views between this thread and the attendance thread -- are people willing to increase the number of games against the opposing conference if it means even more griping and moaning about attendance?

 

[Fugu]

By "see" do you mean in person? That would mean that the Red Wings would play a minimum of 30 games against the eastern conference each year (15 at home). If fans in many cities have little interest in buying tickets to the current five games against the opposing conference (as the statistics suggest), I imagine 15 would drive overall ticket sales even lower.

At some point people need to reconcile their views between this thread and the attendance thread -- are people willing to increase the number of games against the opposing conference if it means even more griping and moaning about attendance?

Please tell me how your statement is statistically supported across the entire NHL?

Secondly, can you prove that if a new format that got rid of the current basis for playoff qualification wouldn't then result in a different distribution in fan attendance?


By "see" what I really mean is "pay".... It's all great and wonderful to talk about the appeal of one schedule over another, but when you have to put your money where your mouth is, it starts looking a bit different. Are you willing to pay $150 per game for two tickets to see 4 other NHL teams 4 times per season, at the exclusion of another set of teams altogether? That's really the question that a gate-driven supplier of a product has to ask those who consume (PAY) for it.

You also have to factor in that Detroit fans are being asked to give up traditions that pre-date a lot of this and they really don't like it that much. There are several Eastern teams fans here really want to see every year.

 

[burstgreen]

Please tell me how your statement is statistically supported across the entire NHL?

Take the average attendance of divisional games and conference games, compare it to the average attendance of games against the other conference. I'm drawing an inference that lower attendance comes from lower interest.

Secondly, can you prove that if a new format that got rid of the current basis for playoff qualification wouldn't then result in a different distribution in fan attendance?

No? We can speculate, but I'm not sure how we can prove that one way or another.

By "see" what I really mean is "pay".... It's all great and wonderful to talk about the appeal of one schedule over another, but when you have to put your money where your mouth is, it starts looking a bit different. Are you willing to pay $150 per game for two tickets to see 4 other NHL teams 4 times per season, at the exclusion of another set of teams altogether? That's really the question that a gate-driven supplier of a product has to ask those who consume (PAY) for it.

So your point is that the statistics showing lower attendance at games against the other conference are reflective only of non-season-ticket-holders' interests, and the league should care more about season ticket holders. Fair argument. Okay.

You also have to factor in that Detroit fans are being asked to give up traditions that pre-date a lot of this and they really don't like it that much. There are several Eastern teams fans here really want to see every year.

Well that happened a while ago. It used to be, five or so years back, that Detroit/Toronto had some sort of "exception" to the regular rules of scheduling wherein they would play each other 3 times/year while other east/west combos would only play each other once or twice a year (we're talking pre-lockout scheduling here). I'm not sure why the league did away with that. It seems like Detroit would just rather be in the eastern conference, but there are so many times in the eastern time zone, it's just hard to pull off logistically. If Pittsburgh moves to Portland, perhaps Detroit could slide into the east.

 

[PecaFan]

Again you put only some games. Why not post the sellouts Atlanta's had this season, INCLUDING the game before it.

I don't know, how about because the sellouts are irrelevant? to the claim?

You tried to claim the low attendance games were because of inter conference matchups. I showed that games against the same conference had similarly bad attendance.

Take the average attendance of divisional games and conference games, compare it to the average attendance of games against the other conference.

Right. So do it, if you're going to claim it.