Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsawwassen
Bringing back divisional playoffs is a bad idea because it does not create stronger rivalries.
|
Yeah, those Montreal-Quebec, Montreal-Boston, Rangers-Flyers, Oilers-Flames, Detroit-Chicago, etc playoff series all sucked.
Quote:
|
That's why the format changed 20 years ago, those rivalries were stale and repetitive.
|
It changed because of expansion. Not because those rivalries were stale and repetitive.
Quote:
|
More div games in a season would be brutal, that's why it stopped after 3 seasons since the 2nd lockout.
|
It stopped because the fans were whiners and the rivalries across the division which are built up during the playoffs weren't there.
Quote:
|
Variety is important and those rivlaries you like can meet in the 3rd round.
|
Meet in the 3rd round? That's silly. Only four teams get that opportunity each year.
Quote:
|
The old way that you want won't allow that. There are more fans than you think that would like the Canucks in the Pacific, it would allow more games in the same timezone
|
But it would increase the Canucks travel.
Quote:
|
. That would keep the Avs and Wild together and not leave them as the only US team in a division. Expansion may not stop at 2 teams. I wouldn't be in favour of more teams but, in any expansion, there are sore losers. Those become headaches as they look to buy struggling teams and want to move them or force a league to expand again.
|
I highly doubt the NHL would expand by more than 2 teams for the significant future. There is not enough demand from markets to do that. And those sore losers that you talk about are not headaches to the NHL but a bargaining tool for greasy owners like Katz to use to get what he wants.