Another "Lets see what y'all think about...."?

Question

I was reading something online a while back that made the most sense I've seen in a long time. It's time to redue the NHL scheduling. Instead of the current policy where a team doesnt' play every team in the league, they proposed this idea: No more divisions. Make it 2 conferences, 15 teams a conference. To keep the time frames the same, take away two-four preseason games, add them to the regular season part of the schedule. The schedule would go something like this: Each team will play each team in their conference 4 times (2 away, 2 home), bringing the season total to 56. Plus you would play each team in the other coference twice (1 home, 1 away), bringing th total to 86. If you only take two from the preseason, two games could be added in almost anywhere for most teams. Furthermore, it would be the top 8 teams per conference to make it, none of the division leaders get the top three spots, even if they are not the top three in points. What do y'all think about this one?

Also, please don't say anything about the travel costs or anything about money moving the teams. This is just a question where money spent by the teams is not a factor. Feel free to say something about the money made or not made from the games if you like, just nothing about how much is spent by the teams.

I can almost promise you that they will not use this idea cause once again, it makes way to much sense for the NHL to use.

I said don't bring up money. I know that money is an issue, but I'm not talking about that side of the house. I'm talking about just the games played. not the money spent, as I said before, so your answer will be ignored.

To the 4 answer: I like that idea kinda. I like the playoff idea and the just do the same thing that the NFL has (top two teams on each side get a first round bye). I don't think though, that the original 6 idea is really needed. I understand what you were trying to go for, but i just don't like the idea. that is juts personal differences.

My idea would not involve any teams changing conferences or anything like that.

Habs: again, you miss read what was put infront of you. I never said aything about them playing all 4 games in on month. I said they would play 4 games against eachother, that's it. learn to read, you seem to have a very big problem with that.

Answer 1

I would like to see them eliminate the divisions and just have the two conferences, maybe even go back to the old (pre-bettman) names (Wales Conference and Campbell Conference) and then just have each team play everyone twice giving a 58 game season where no one gets to beat up on the bottom feeders in the division. Or drop 4 teams, up everyones talent level a bit, have a 50 game season and either way have playoffs that don't end in June.


Just as a side note being a sports fan in general I know I'd love to see my football team play every team in league at least once a season and that baseball is so off balance no one cares, the red sox and yankess play each other like 19 times in a season.

Too many games make them unimportant and too few doesn't give fans a chance to get to see the team or judge how good they are against everyone else just a select few.


OK I'm done bitching now....


so yes change the schedule....but make it smaller and screw the money (its a business if you cant make money you should be in a different line of work)

Answer 2

I hate divisions. I would rather see them focus on the two conferences. Divisions are a joke because teams like Nashville and Detroit get to play Columbus, Chicago and St. Louis 8 times a year each. That means up to 48 points can awarded by beating just these three horrible teams . Also Detroit has almost 10 more points than Vancouver but since Vancouver leads their division they are ranked 3rd in the East where Detroit is ranked 4th. I think the 86 game system could work if they cut out the All Star game. The only problem with this is you know Bettman is going to expand the NHL to 32 teams and having 32 teams would make the schedule too bulky.

Answer 3

Would prefer if they get rid of a few games instead, if they were going to do anything. Although that could work well in my let's get rid of a few of the teams idea as well. Also it DOESN'T make too much sense for the league. Sure it works great for the teams that DON'T get to see the teams they want to see, like Western fans that want to see the Penguins, but it is bad for the East. Don't say don't bring up travel costs, and then CLAIM this is good for the league. The travel costs are part of the whether or not it is GOOD for the league. Yeah the playoff thing is better. Yeah it is better for fans that want to SEE every team. Me I'd be happy not having to see teams like Phoenix or L.A. or a few others twice a year, and that is an Eastern Conference fan. I could name a few EASTERN teams I don't want to see 4 times a year. As I said I know it sounds good if you miss out on seeing some teams, but that doesn't mean it is best for EVERYONE. As to the getting rid of Preseason games and making them Regular season, for that part I'm fine. I just think they need to cut down games in general. Think about it. Why do people watch the NFL all season? Simple all 16 games are IMPORTANT. The NHL though has 82 games and people that aren't fans don't get interested until about 60 games in, and then only if their team is still playing. It is like MLB playing 162 games, who the HELL can pay attention to 162 games? The fewer games the more important each is and the more likely people will pay attention to the sport.

Answer 4

Your idea is a good one that the NHL might at some point take a look at, but the question I have for you is does it involve some teams moving conferences? Similar ideas have been presented to the NHL, but they have involved teams moving conferences, so they got shot down because teams don't want to move conferences. If, however, everybody stays in their current conference, then I think that the NHL might take a serious look at this idea at some point. However, they are going to keep with the current schedule and division set-up for at least one more season, so there is currently going to be no change in this area. But, your proposal is not a bad one, and might be adopted at some point if it involves every team keeping within their current conference. This idea is something for the league to look into if they are interested in division re-alignment at some point. Good proposal though. We'll see what happens in the future. But, for now, they are keeping with the current schedule and division alignment.

Answer 5

I sort of like your idea of the 2 conferences but i would like to see the original 6 teams play each other 6 times each=30 games per team plus play all other teams-26, 2 times each=52 games totalling 82 games. One twist though i think we should drop the number of teams qualifying for playoffs to 12 from 16. This would make teams play harder during the season and eliminate 1 playoff round.

Answer 6

I like the idea, but I don't think it is ever going to happen. One of the main reasons teams play so many conference and divisional games is travel time. With that new schedule, teams would be flying for hours each night to get to their next city. The only way around that would be long road trips (5-10 games), and the league/players wouldn't like that either. I would really like to se more East vs. West battles, and the abolishment of the top 3 for division leaders, so I would be happy if they made the change, but with Betteman allows change in the league, its never going to happen.
Good idea though!!!

Answer 7

I think this idea is wonderful. It makes perfect sense to me, and you're right, it's probably why the NHL will never go for it. All NHL teams should play every other team in the league. Without the consideration of money, this idea is perfect.

Taking away divisions will introduce more competition, and it will keep weaker teams from being granted a higher seed.

Good idea.

Answer 8

That was the basic setup from 1967-1974. Then again, there were only 12-16 teams in the entire league back then, and only 4 teams from each conference were in the playoffs. It is a good idea in theory, but will it be adopted?

Answer 9

the league had a meeting a week before the All-Star game and they had a vote to see if the scheduling will be change for next year and the votes came in NO. the schedule they have will be in place for another 2 years then they will change it. its a terrible schedule if your a Sens or Leafs fan then you will agree that it would of been very boring to see them two teams face off 4 tI'mes in the first month of the regular season and im sure there other teams that did the same makes it very boring if you ask me. there 7 months in a regular season they could of made in 1 game per month that would of been a little better then playing 4 games in a month.





GO HABS GOI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Answer 10

I think it's a piss poor idea.The game is changed enough as it is .To take away even more would destroy the aspect of the Stanley Cup being the hardest trophy to win.We already don't have enough games to watch as it is. If you like a shorter scheduel then stick to High School or College Hockey.