Which Matchups could potentially attract fans more if there were more games?

[MoreOrr]

For whichever NHL city you live in or near or NHL team you prefer to watch on TV, which Regular Season matchups would you and other fans be interested to attend or tune into more often if there could be more games against those specific teams?

Obviously, certain rivalries fans just love, but then perhaps there are certain other teams that you'd like to see your team play more often. And of course, the League once had 8 games against Division opponents, but the decision was made that it wasn't the best scenario for the League and for the majority of fans. So essentially, this question is asking about those teams that your team doesn't currently play many games against (4 or fewer games against). It's not asking about the obvious, i.e. more games between the Bruins and Canadiens.

Of course, predicting the answers to the question, most people will probably choose a very similar short list of teams. And therein lies the problem, as so many teams exist in the League that a significant number of fans have little interest in seeing. Nevertheless, I'm offering up the question of the thread in order to see if there may be something more than expected.

Click to read more...

 

[tarheelhockey]

Carolina's list of rivalry teams is fairly short, so probably just the Sabres and Devils plus whatever teams are the hot ticket.

 

[MoreOrr]

Carolina's list of rivalry teams is fairly short, so probably just the Sabres and Devils plus whatever teams are the hot ticket.

Doesn't necessarily have to be a list of rivalry teams. But just taking that into consideration, then you are suggesting that if the Hurricanes played the Sabres and Devils more often it could likely translate in greater attendance or more people watching.

Take the Thrashers, for instance, if they had played the Predators more often, would that have helped attendance somewhat? They certainly weren't rivals, but I can imagine that there would've been fan interest. The same could go for Columbus and Pittsburgh, at least from Blue Jackets fans perspective, I would imagine. I could make a list of teams that I personally imagine could be attractive to fans in this or that city to see more often.

 

[LadyStanley]

I'd rather know I was going to watch good hockey regardless of the teams involved.

Instead, in past seasons I'm force fed EC "name" teams that someone in control thinks will be "interesting". (So I don't even bother to tune in.)


(There was a NHL fan survey about a month ago, asking what folks would like to see, specifically regarding rivalries. There's usually a comments box that I spend a lot of time filling in with stuff related that they didn't ask specific questions about. My main point was I'd rather see good hockey that a developed rivalry. Yes, the game might be one/same, but the reasons for it might be different.)

 

[MoreOrr]

I'd rather know I was going to watch good hockey regardless of the teams involved.

Instead, in past seasons I'm force fed EC "name" teams that someone in control thinks will be "interesting". (So I don't even bother to tune in.)


(There was a NHL fan survey about a month ago, asking what folks would like to see, specifically regarding rivalries. There's usually a comments box that I spend a lot of time filling in with stuff related that they didn't ask specific questions about. My main point was I'd rather see good hockey that a developed rivalry. Yes, the game might be one/same, but the reasons for it might be different.)

LadyStanley, if all fans had that attitude, which perhaps many do but they just don't express it in that way, then maybe certain teams wouldn't struggle with attendance. Then on the other hand, if the "poor" hockey is primarily played by the home team, I guess that can turn a lot of fans off, regardless of who the opponent is.

 

[pete goegan]

Columbus vs. Pittsburgh is a natural rivalry that doesn't have a chance to grow under the current conference alignment.

 

[Mathradio]

Toronto vs. Detroit?

 

[Frosty415]

Florida vs Phoenix.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Doesn't necessarily have to be a list of rivalry teams. But just taking that into consideration, then you are suggesting that if the Hurricanes played the Sabres and Devils more often it could likely translate in greater attendance or more people watching.

Jersey might even be a bit of a stretch at this point... there was a brief rivalry because of their playoff matchups but I'm not sure if it impacts ticket sales.

Buffalo brings a crowd, for sure. There are a ton of Buffalo transplants in this area and the matchup has been pretty hostile in the past. Those tickets tend to move.

Similarly, transplants will swarm to games involving the Rangers, Bruins, Pens, Flyers, maybe the Hawks, definitely the Wings. In some cases it's hard to separate transplant interest from the bandwagon effect of those teams just being good right now. When those teams are a hot ticket, local Canes fans will show up to see them as well.

 

[hdtrax]

Toronto vs. Detroit?

Goes for any real original six matchups. The current system means every couple of years we don't even play Detroit or Chicago at all

Detroit-Toronto
Detroit-Boston
Detroit-NYR
Detroit-Montreal

Chicago-Toronto
Chicago-Boston
Chicago-NYR
Chicago-Montreal

These matchups need to happen more often.

Columbus vs. Pittsburgh is a natural rivalry that doesn't have a chance to grow under the current conference alignment.

Definitely.

Minnesota-Winnipeg should be a fun one to watch.

 

[MoreOrr]

The general idea being that in an 82-game Season the schedule should be flexible enough to accommodate these matchups more frequently. The problem being though that every team needs to be matched up with certain other teams in this way; can't rightfully create special matchup games only for certain teams.

 

[hdtrax]

The general idea being that in an 82-game Season the schedule should be flexible enough to accommodate these matchups more frequently. The problem being though that team needs to be matched up with certain other teams in this way; can't rightfully create special matchup games only for certain teams.

I realize that, and generally speaking, I've always been in favour of every team playing every other team at least once. I love watching Toronto-Detroit and wish they'd play more often. Maybe if/when they move back East..

 

[MoreOrr]

I realize that, and generally speaking, I've always been in favour of every team playing every other team at least once. I love watching Toronto-Detroit and wish they'd play more often. Maybe if/when they move back East..

But that's the problem, these sought-after matchups should be more than the minimum number of games in a Season. Why can't there be a system in which certain matchups can get 4 or even 6 games against even if the teams are in the same Conference or Division?

 

[Crescent Street]

For the Flyers, their west coast counterpart LA Kings would be cool to see more often. Nashville and Philly have also had a long history of trades.

 

[KingsFan7824]

The general idea being that in an 82-game Season the schedule should be flexible enough to accommodate these matchups more frequently.

It should be? Should is a strong word. Working with a limited number of games doesn't really equate with special accommodations, for 1 or 30 teams. At least not when all these teams are competing for the same limited number of playoff spots.

Unless there was the possibility of not having to make everything exactly equal for the entire league. As in, the same number of teams in each division, or an even number of divisions, or the same number of divisions in each conference, the same number of teams in each conference, etc. If the fairness aspect is no longer a consideration, and it's just about fan attraction, then there are probably a lot of different things you could do with the schedule.

 

[MoreOrr]

It should be? Should is a strong word. Working with a limited number of games doesn't really equate with special accommodations, for 1 or 30 teams. At least not when all these teams are competing for the same limited number of playoff spots.

Unless there was the possibility of not having to make everything exactly equal for the entire league. As in, the same number of teams in each division, or an even number of divisions, or the same number of divisions in each conference, the same number of teams in each conference, etc. If the fairness aspect is no longer a consideration, and it's just about fan attraction, then there are probably a lot of different things you could do with the schedule.

The NFL, now that's a "limited number of games".

 

[Mathradio]

Goes for any real original six matchups. The current system means every couple of years we don't even play Detroit or Chicago at all

Detroit-Toronto
Detroit-Boston
Detroit-NYR
Detroit-Montreal

Chicago-Toronto
Chicago-Boston
Chicago-NYR
Chicago-Montreal

These matchups need to happen more often.

Up until a few years ago, this was true. Now every team is guaranteed to play each other at least once a season. Still, Toronto-Detroit is among the matchups that should have more than one game a season.

Definitely.

Minnesota-Winnipeg should be a fun one to watch.

Once the realignment becomes a reality then you will have 4 games (or 6) in that matchup.

 

[KingsFan7824]

The NFL, now that's a "limited number of games".

82 is still a limited number. NFL teams don't even play every other team within their own conference every year, and won't play other teams in the other conference until every fourth year depending on what division a team is in.

If the NHL could decrease the amount of games between division opponents, or have a given division not play at least one other division at all during the season, then there would be extra games for fan attraction purposes. You could cut out playing the other conference, which would be an extra 15-30 games, depending on what they do with the schedule. You could group certain teams within a division/conference, even if they're uneven, just so you get more games against those certain teams, as long as all involved are alright with having a statistically tougher time making the playoffs. Have to give to get.

 

[MoreOrr]

82 is still a limited number. NFL teams don't even play every other team within their own conference every year, and won't play other teams in the other conference until every fourth year depending on what division a team is in.

If the NHL could decrease the amount of games between division opponents, or have a given division not play at least one other division at all during the season, then there would be extra games for fan attraction purposes. You could cut out playing the other conference, which would be an extra 15-30 games, depending on what they do with the schedule. You could group certain teams within a division/conference, even if they're uneven, just so you get more games against those certain teams, as long as all involved are alright with having a statistically tougher time making the playoffs. Have to give to get.

I suppose that if it's for the betterment of attendance and general fan interest then I don't see the problem with, each Season, each team not playing the teams in one Division in the other Conference, in order to have those extra games to schedule more games against teams outside their own Division but that fans would be interested (or possibly interested) to have their team play against more often in a Season.

Whether it be teams in the same Conference that could have 6 games scheduled against (equivalent to Division matchups), or teams in the other Conference that could let's say have 3 games scheduled against rather than the norm of only 1 game against in a Season.

 

[squidz*]

After realignment there will most likely be 6 versus your division and 4 against everyone else. (obvious exception being the two 7 team divisions which will have to make up their missing 6 games cross division)

This won't help for situations where we feel 4 games aren't enough, but it will fix the 0-2 games a year issue.

 

[kdb209]

After realignment there will most likely be 6 versus your division and 4 against everyone else. (obvious exception being the two 7 team divisions which will have to make up their missing 6 games cross division)

Uhh - you might want to check your math there.

6 (in division) * 7 + 4 (everyone else) * 22 = 130 games.

What you will likely see is:

7 team division: 6 (in division) * 6 + 2 (everyone else) * 23 = 82 games.

8 team division: 5-6 (in division) * 7 (4 teams * 5 + 3 teams * 6) + 2 (everyone else) * 22 = 82 games.

Basically a home and home against every team outside your division and the remainder within your division - the conference becomes meaningless except for playoff structure.

 

[squidz*]

Uhh - you might want to check your math there.

6 (in division) * 7 + 4 (everyone else) * 22 = 130 games.

What you will likely see is:

7 team division: 6 (in division) * 6 + 2 (everyone else) * 23 = 82 games.

8 team division: 5-6 (in division) * 7 (4 teams * 5 + 3 teams * 6) + 2 (everyone else) * 22 = 82 games.

Basically a home and home against every team outside your division and the remainder within your division - the conference becomes meaningless except for playoff structure.

You're right, going off memory is apparently a bad thing tonight...

 

[Fehr Time*]

]I'd rather know I was going to watch good hockey regardless of the teams involved.[/B]Instead, in past seasons I'm force fed EC "name" teams that someone in control thinks will be "interesting". (So I don't even bother to tune in.)


(There was a NHL fan survey about a month ago, asking what folks would like to see, specifically regarding rivalries. There's usually a comments box that I spend a lot of time filling in with stuff related that they didn't ask specific questions about. My main point was I'd rather see good hockey that a developed rivalry. Yes, the game might be one/same, but the reasons for it might be different.)

Agreed on that point. The current watered down parity of the NHL unfortunately prevents this. If players had a chance to play where they wanted to more I think we would see more high end teams no doubt. Everyone would love to see more games between big market teams like Chicago, Toronto, NYR if they had a larger chunk of the elite talent imo.

 

[Butch 19]

I realize that, and generally speaking, I've always been in favour of every team playing every other team at least once. love watching Toronto-Detroit and wish they'd play more often. Maybe if/when they move back East..

I think every team should play every other team at least twice a season (home/road).

But with 30 teams and an 82 game schedule, it will take a bit more figuring out (unbalanced with certain intra-conference teams), but this has also been discussed many times here - there are ways to do this.

2x a year makes sense for both historical and future rivalries.

 

[MGregoir]

Home and away with every non-division team = 50 games.
Home and away with every divisional team four times = 32 games.

This way every team plays in every barn every year, the season ticket holders get the added value of seeing a greater variety of opponents, and the standings would better reflect the relative strengths of divisions.