Name Nameless
Don't go more than 10 seconds back on challenges
- Apr 12, 2017
- 6,562
- 3,039
Just a little fun in the autumn. Some people talk about a september-cup in jest. Let's give that to the world. But as there needs some planning underways, it would be a little more than just in september.
Why? Well, if you compare the NHL with, say, the big Euro soccer leagues, one of the big differences is the amount of leagues and cup to win. In English soccer, there aren't only the league. It's two important cups. This makes it possible to win something for a larger part of the players. With 31, soon to be 32 teams, the part of the players -and fan-bases- actually winning something, is really small.
I know you have the Presidents Trophy. It could have meant a lot. It don't. Also, when you win it, you are just heading into the Stanley Cup playoffs, and there are not so much celebration of it. You also can't win it as an underdog who don't even make the SC playoffs.
So, just a little cup in the autumn, with single-game rounds. With 32 teams, that would be just five rounds. Just draw the rounds, and who gets the home game in the first round. Or you could match teams based on least travel-distance in the first round, that would be ok. In the second round, you could have the away-winning teams in a pot, and draw them as home-teams until you either run out of slots, or teams. With a similar higher odds for getting the game as a home-game in the third round, with a first pot of teams who won two road-games, so a promise you get the home-game now. And then drawing the home-team from a pot with teams who has had only one home game and so on.
Yeah, it's the availability to the arena-issues, that could also be used an element in the schedule-making, although not for the final two rounds or something if you want to tweak. As some arenas are dedicated hockey-arenas, you could risk having your team play the last home-games at a remote location, but that is also how the cups generally are arranged in Europe. I assume some arena -owner would promise to hold the finale if not the elected team manages to get hold of their own place.
My main point: with a short cup in the autumn, there is something else to win, and your team could go for the Double, or not.
Regarding the number of games: with 32 teams, there will be some tweaking anyways. And for half the teams, this cup would mean only one round. It should be possible for the players to accept it with just a shortening of the preseason with a couple of games in a future CBA, even if the players on the good teams then ends up playing up to three more games or something.
With a single-game cup, you will of course have a competition the players watch as less valuable. The fans could still have fun with it. The media could have something to write about, and the last game -the Autumn Cup finale- might, just might, end up as something people watched on TV, as it would be just one, defined, finale-game, a half-year removed from the Stanley Cup.
Why? Well, if you compare the NHL with, say, the big Euro soccer leagues, one of the big differences is the amount of leagues and cup to win. In English soccer, there aren't only the league. It's two important cups. This makes it possible to win something for a larger part of the players. With 31, soon to be 32 teams, the part of the players -and fan-bases- actually winning something, is really small.
I know you have the Presidents Trophy. It could have meant a lot. It don't. Also, when you win it, you are just heading into the Stanley Cup playoffs, and there are not so much celebration of it. You also can't win it as an underdog who don't even make the SC playoffs.
So, just a little cup in the autumn, with single-game rounds. With 32 teams, that would be just five rounds. Just draw the rounds, and who gets the home game in the first round. Or you could match teams based on least travel-distance in the first round, that would be ok. In the second round, you could have the away-winning teams in a pot, and draw them as home-teams until you either run out of slots, or teams. With a similar higher odds for getting the game as a home-game in the third round, with a first pot of teams who won two road-games, so a promise you get the home-game now. And then drawing the home-team from a pot with teams who has had only one home game and so on.
Yeah, it's the availability to the arena-issues, that could also be used an element in the schedule-making, although not for the final two rounds or something if you want to tweak. As some arenas are dedicated hockey-arenas, you could risk having your team play the last home-games at a remote location, but that is also how the cups generally are arranged in Europe. I assume some arena -owner would promise to hold the finale if not the elected team manages to get hold of their own place.
My main point: with a short cup in the autumn, there is something else to win, and your team could go for the Double, or not.
Regarding the number of games: with 32 teams, there will be some tweaking anyways. And for half the teams, this cup would mean only one round. It should be possible for the players to accept it with just a shortening of the preseason with a couple of games in a future CBA, even if the players on the good teams then ends up playing up to three more games or something.
With a single-game cup, you will of course have a competition the players watch as less valuable. The fans could still have fun with it. The media could have something to write about, and the last game -the Autumn Cup finale- might, just might, end up as something people watched on TV, as it would be just one, defined, finale-game, a half-year removed from the Stanley Cup.