Conference and Divisional realignment that would bring equality to the NHL:

[Hindustan Smyl]

1 hour ago, BrockBoester said:

Vancouver looks like it’s located in the cat’s sphincter.    

[IBatch]

CHI and LA won recent cups and are some of the year to year most traveled teams - and it didn’t seem to stop TB last year....the travel is what it is.  For us 4/5 Seattle games will reduce things a little.   Not sure ARI is the right team to leave the conference but it definitely looks that way, and bonus for us they are just getting back out of their bottom cycle (although who knows how well Seattle will do with their expansion draft).   

[BoKnows]

I thought Arizona was set to move to the Central division once Seattle is playing.

 

Didn't the NHL already announce this?  I think I remember this announcement bringing up a lot of speculation that Arizona can relocate to Houston easier cause they'd be apart of the Central division.  

 

I could of dreamt this though.

 

EDIT:  I think I missed the ball on this one.  I don't think what you purposed is gonna happen.  I could see something more along the lines of the AL and NL or AFC and NFC for conferences.  Side note I think the NHL should rename the conferences, make them sound a little cooler.

Edited November 16, 2019 by BoKnows

[CptCanuck16]

14 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

think it would be more fair if all teams had to experience approximately the same travel schedule

In this age of climate hysteria I think they're looking for less travel in general. Your suggestion just leads to more travel for everyone.

 

I'd rather see longer home stands and regional road trips. Like for example, you would have a southeast road trip where the Canucks would fly to the southeast US and play all the regional teams in one go. Florida, Tampa, Carolina, maybe hit Dallas and LVGK on the way back. Then a northeast road trip. Play NYR, NYI, NJD, BUF, BOS, WSH, TO, MTL, OTT, PIT, PHL, etc all in one trip. Basically, when the team leaves for a road trip they'll be gone for 1-3 weeks which will give them a chance to acclimate to the time zone, and better yet, they only have to take a few cross country flights every season.  It would be a win/win for everybody.

[JeremyCuddles]

Our travel sucks enough as is without adding Eastern teams to our list of teams we play more than twice. Not to mention they likely don't want more games starting at 10pm Eastern time.

[lmm]

17 hours ago, coolboarder said:

1. When Seattle comes in the league, I'd rather it to be strictly divisions of 4 teams each, no conference with schedule matrix of 8/2.  8 divisional games (4H, 4A) and 2 games, home and away, against rest of the league.   Playoff would be strictly divisional with 1 v 2.  The divisional winners across the league would be 8 so therefore, you throw out the divisional records for round 2 of the playoffs with 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, and 4 v 5 and reseed again.  This will ensure that every games in the league is meaningful because it affects your round 2 seeding and divisional record don't matter at this point.   Imagine this, Canucks is able to come home 12 times after a short trips by midnight.   Canucks would go LA just once, rather than 2 times with conference format in place, saving themselves 2,4000 miles per round trip.  They can go on southwest road trip in one swing then never go there again for rest of the year.    

 

2. If they decide to keep the conference format with schedule matrix of 4-3-2, and if you truly wants Eastern conference teams to experience what Canucks went through, easily, make them fly to Florida first at the start of the road trip, either back to back games in Florida then fly to the West Coast with stops along the way without any opportunity to come home for a home game, more rest, etc.   2 games plus 3 or 4 games, then they would have went through 5 to 6 games road trip and Canucks would be able to catch them at their 5th or 6th game of the trip.   My ideal for Eastern conference when similar to Canucks by going to Florida then play games in the northeast would be, TB, Florida, LA, Ari, Van, then go home.  No more easier trips that involves with Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver groups or SJ, LA, Anaheim group.   Next trip would be Florida, Anaheim, SJ, Col, Calgary, Edmonton and quick three gamer, Tampa Bay, Vegas, and Seattle   That's how you rack up Eastern conference teams' air miles.  This will bring equality but not quite because geographically, Canucks would still have to go Central divisions so that is why I would be in favor of having 4 conference format with 2 divisions each.   

 

3.

You know, I have done research that the Canucks would be able to go only 39,000 miles, just under 40,000 miles a few years ago, that not including Seattle.  If you want to know destination of each city.  Trip #1, Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Toronto, then go home.  Trip #2. Washington, Philadelphia, NJ, NYR, NYI, Bos, Mon, Ottawa then go home.  Trip #2 is not difficult because cities are so close and is not taxing on the body and you get to stay in one city for one week so imagine this, 2 games then 3 games then 3 games.  Not that difficult of the trip shortest amount of the time on the plane possible but very long, it would take 3 weeks of the trip.  I am willing to have one long trip only if it's in this route.  If Philadelphia to Pittsburgh, forget it, it's out of the way despite in the same state.  Trip #3, Dallas, Nashville, Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay, Dallas (2). If they keep 3 conference games on a rotational basis.  If not, start in Nashville then end at Dallas.  Trip #4, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg.  You would end up with 2 or 3 quick road games trips to the divisional games in the southwest of the U.S and Colorado.   This research did not include Seattle.    If you go out of order, they would go above 40,000 easily.   One extra trip to the east if you cut down 8 games into 4 games each would easily go 45,000 miles.  I would rather them go through 39,000 miles which would better than Boston on the chart on my calculation.  10,000 miles difference would equal to 20 extra hours in the plane than other teams in the eastern conference which is a big difference on term of recovery.  You recover quickly on the ground than in the air.  

 

No more two quick games like Chicago/Winnipeg last week, it easily went up to 47,000 as shown on the chart.  You can see that it affects them this week for home games after a long road trips from late October with short time at home.  

I agree in general, however it is more difficult to schedule with 30-31 other team, and the arenas having other events scheduled before the nhl starts its scheduling process.

I think more important than actual miles travelled is the compressed schedule. 3 games in 4 nights and 4 games in 6, fininshing with afternoon games in Jersey etc. are the real the problem. Funny that article on "Load management" last week. Is "Load Management" not neccesary becuase of the compressed schedule? I agree with CaptCanuck 16 about rules for trip construction, where teams have mandated breaks between games. That is more useful than the manditory week off , ( which followed the allstar break last season), not really helpful.

I think teams should have a maximum number of 3 in 4s, like 2 or 3 per season

and no 4 in 6s.

I also feel the compressed schedule has been used as a mechanism to "create" parity, if I am paying big bucks to see an NHL game, I want all players reasonably fresh.

[Chris12345]

People forget this is a circus act with money trumping all.

 

Owners don't care about equality. They care about money.

 

I will also add Van gets a lot of loser points off teams ending their road trips and specifically playing 3 games in 4 nights coming out of Alberta.

Edited November 17, 2019 by Chris12345

[coolboarder]

30 minutes ago, lmm said:

I agree in general, however it is more difficult to schedule with 30-31 other team, and the arenas having other events scheduled before the nhl starts its scheduling process.

I think more important than actual miles travelled is the compressed schedule. 3 games in 4 nights and 4 games in 6, fininshing with afternoon games in Jersey etc. are the real the problem. Funny that article on "Load management" last week. Is "Load Management" not neccesary becuase of the compressed schedule? I agree with CaptCanuck 16 about rules for trip construction, where teams have mandated breaks between games. That is more useful than the manditory week off , ( which followed the allstar break last season), not really helpful.

I think teams should have a maximum number of 3 in 4s, like 2 or 3 per season

and no 4 in 6s.

I also feel the compressed schedule has been used as a mechanism to "create" parity, if I am paying big bucks to see an NHL game, I want all players reasonably fresh.

It is far better to have season schedule reduced to 72 games but length of season stays the same, first Wednesday of October to first Saturday of April.   Eliminate the 5 days off and all-star weekend.   It's better use of schedule where back to backs will be no longer exist.  If you have to hold some back to back games, I prefer it to be the same team where neither teams gain advantage.  Long road trip will not be needed if its 72 games and gives Canucks a legitimate break when returning home from the trip and giving them practice time they need.  10 games, that's 10 days off, spreading it around throughout the season and you'll see players relatively fresh in the playoff.  

[Provost]

They aren’t going to add costs and reduce TV viewership (with more time zone issues).

it just isn’t in the cards or reasonable at all.

Gillis and Gilman were very proactive to work with the league and minimize travel issues to even things out a lot more 

[Shift-4]

Congrats OP

You just outdumbed all your other topics

[lmm]

1 hour ago, Shift-4 said:

Congrats OP

You just outdumbed all your other topics

congrats Shift-4, you just... oh never mind