That would be a different thing, it would be the most awesomely cool failure since CFL USA and Crystal Pepsi
2007-02-15 11:20:16 · 13 answers · asked by Sask Riders Pwn 2 in Sports ➔ Hockey
6 is fine. they have a different things they need to worry about than the division structures.
2007-02-15 11:29:52 · answer #1 · answered by Wham 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
unfortunately my brain has been contaminated from travelling overseas and seeing how other professional leagues work. so, while it will never, ever happen, i would love to see the nhl merge with the ahl. there would be 60 teams which would divide up into 3 leagues. the top 2 would each have 21 teams playing each other 4 times for an 80 game season and then the playoffs (the stanley cup for the top league and the calder cup for the second tier) and the bottom league would have just 18 teams. 16 teams would make the playoffs in the top 2 leagues and the 5 losers would be relegated down to the next lower league.
just like in soccer, bad teams would sell off their star players if they were relegated, so the best players would always be at the top level, there would be fresh faces and new places every year, and places like winnipeg and quebec that many people think should be back in the nhl would have a shot at just that. also, perennial losers like florida and washington would have a shot at success playing for the calder cup instead of being on the outside every year.
2007-02-17 07:07:07 · answer #2 · answered by pucknhead 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a bad idea, but I think the larger issue is the fact that some teams never play each other within a year. I think the number of divisional games should be reduced from 8 to 6, or even 4 and cross-division/conference games increased to at least 1 a year.
2007-02-15 19:57:07 · answer #3 · answered by rulistening521 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the NHL needs to change the amount of divisions they just need to change this stupid schedule, I for one am tired of seeing every other team in the Division 8 times a year and only seeing 10 east teams a year, it's ridiculous the current schedule
2007-02-18 22:30:20 · answer #4 · answered by SetoKaiba 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what they need to do is structure their schedule so that every team plays every other team at least once during the season. as of right now i believe that the play 6 games against division opponents so this totals to about 30 games, then 4 games against the conference opponents (non division) which totals to 40 games, then a home and home with one division from the other conference for 12 games totaling 82 games (if im wrong please correct me).
the way it should be is to cut the number of division games from 6 to 5 and conference games from 4 to 3 and that should free up the schedule for every team to play everybody in at least one home and home
2007-02-15 20:48:18 · answer #5 · answered by nameless face 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they should just do 2... east and west. This allows all teams to play just as hard and not get in the top 3 spots just because they won their division.
2007-02-15 21:17:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
my uncle has an unopened can of crystal pepsi. but no. i think it works out fine with the 6 divisions. it has for a while.
2007-02-15 19:28:30 · answer #7 · answered by iron chef bryan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
that's how it used to be until the mid 90's, when gary bettman decided the best way to market the sport outside of traditional markets was to abandon tradition. if they went back to 4 divisions, and went back to the divisional playoff format they used to have, things would get pretty interesting again. that's what i would like to see.
2007-02-15 21:54:33 · answer #8 · answered by bkemp2001 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and while they are at it reduce the number of teams in the league and have less teams make playoffs.
2007-02-15 19:48:09 · answer #9 · answered by DL 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
6 works, although if the divisions could be more geographically structured ( move dallas and vancouver) it might be better
2007-02-15 19:33:24 · answer #10 · answered by sshueman 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋