02-12-2013, 06:41 PM
|
#1
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
NHL Conference Realignment
Rest Easy Winnipeg, Realignment is Coming
Quote:
The NHL’s new realignment plan for next season could become reality within two to three weeks.
The league in conjunction with the NHL Players’ Association has worked diligently over the past two weeks on realignment, including a meeting in Toronto Tuesday morning between the two sides.
"The last two weeks we’ve been in constant communication with the NHLPA on realignment issues," deputy commissioner Bill Daly told ESPN.com Tuesday. "We’ve been exchanging information and we’re trying to get to a resolution as soon as possible." The NHLPA, through a spokesman, confirmed that there has been communication between the sides over the last two weeks, adding that it is committed to continuing to work with the league in an effort to reach an agreement.
|
Quote:
|
Several team executives and governors contacted by ESPN.com Tuesday were in the dark about what the league was determining for realignment. And just what exactly the league and union have been working on the past two weeks, neither NHL nor NHLPA officials would divulge Tuesday. But it’s believed the framework is a slight variation from the December 2011 realignment format. And when I say variation, I believe there are a couple of teams that have been switched around from the original December 2011 format.
|
This was the proposed realignment in December 2011:
Conference A
Anaheim
Calgary
Colorado
Edmonton
Los Angeles
Phoenix
San Jose
Vancouver
Conference B
Chicago
Columbus
Dallas
Detroit
Minnesota
Nashville
St. Louis
Winnipeg
Conference C
Boston
Buffalo
Florida
Montreal
Ottawa
Tampa Bay
Toronto
Conference D
Carolina
New Jersey
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
__________________
Huge thanks to Dion for the signature!
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:43 PM
|
#2
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Conference A looks so boring. San Jose, Phoenix, Anaheim... all boring teams to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:46 PM
|
#3
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Anaheim and SJ are boring to watch?
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to timbit For This Useful Post:
|
BBQorMILDEW,
cgy2london,
FanIn80,
J epworth,
ken0042,
Lanny'sDaMan,
Madrox,
Mustache,
Nehkara,
OffsideSpecialist,
Phanuthier,
Regular_John,
Resolute 14,
Rhettzky,
SeeBass,
vilzeh
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:47 PM
|
#4
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Not hard to see Calgary at the bottom of conference A in a year or 2. Calgary is clinging on to stay in front of Edmonton and Colorado.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:47 PM
|
#5
|
|
Resident Videologist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx
Conference A looks so boring. San Jose, Phoenix, Anaheim... all boring teams to watch.
|
At least Minnesota is out of it.
I wouldn't say San Jose or Anaheim are boring though.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:47 PM
|
#6
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chilliwack, B.C
|
If the Flames are in conference A it will take a decade to make the playoffs
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to calgaryred For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:49 PM
|
#7
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by timbit
Anaheim and SJ are boring to watch?
|
For some reason, yes, very much so.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:49 PM
|
#8
|
|
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Crowsnest Pass
|
Don't like the conferences having different numbers of teams. Not equitable.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
|
Ashasx,
DownInFlames,
Fire,
FlamesAddiction,
FlamesPuck12,
Flash Walken,
handgroen,
HOOT,
I-Hate-Hulse,
icarus,
OffsideSpecialist,
RoadGame,
Rocky Raccoon,
Roof-Daddy,
RT14,
The Yen Man,
the2bears,
trackercowe
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:51 PM
|
#9
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgaryred
If the Flames are in conference A it will take a decade to make the playoffs
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
Don't like the conferences having different numbers of teams. Not equitable.
|
I didn't want to quote too much from the article, but they did mention that the NHLPA was concerned about the differing chances to make the playoffs in different conferences.
The writer of the article says it is likely the NHL has, in some manner, changed the playoff structure to even the playing field.
__________________
Huge thanks to Dion for the signature!
Last edited by Nehkara; 02-12-2013 at 07:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Nehkara For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 06:59 PM
|
#10
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
Don't like the conferences having different numbers of teams. Not equitable.
|
Agreed, while I do agree that the NHL needs some sort of realignment, I am not in favor of the unbalanced conferences.
It would be easy to blame Winnipeg for this... so I will. Screw the Jets; they can keep their crappy schedule if it won't end up in creating an imperfect standings like this will give us.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:02 PM
|
#11
|
|
Not Jim Playfair
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
|
I oppose any proposal where one team has a better chance of making the playoffs than another. That is why the Dec 2011 proposal was brutal in my mind - 7 teams in two of the conferences, 8 in two of the conferences. Very sloppy proposal.
__________________
CORNELL
National Champions: 1967, 1970
CALGARY
Stanley Cup Champions: 1989
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to calgARI For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:07 PM
|
#12
|
|
Crash and Bang Winger
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgARI
I oppose any proposal where one team has a better chance of making the playoffs than another. That is why the Dec 2011 proposal was brutal in my mind - 7 teams in two of the conferences, 8 in two of the conferences. Very sloppy proposal.
|
Yeah - stays harder to be in the West, eh?
Pure team-wise. Right now - Conference D looks the toughest.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:09 PM
|
#13
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
It would be better to save this until two new teams are added. It's just simply unfair to have the Eastern teams have a better advantage at making the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Joborule For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:10 PM
|
#14
|
|
Not Jim Playfair
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Professor
Yeah - stays harder to be in the West, eh?
Pure team-wise. Right now - Conference D looks the toughest.
|
Except four of the seven teams make the playoffs. It's a garbage proposal that very obviously benefits Eastern markets who all have to compete with fewer teams to get to the playoffs than they currently do. Ludicrous that so many teams voted for it.
__________________
CORNELL
National Champions: 1967, 1970
CALGARY
Stanley Cup Champions: 1989
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:12 PM
|
#15
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgARI
Except four of the seven teams make the playoffs. It's a garbage proposal that very obviously benefits Eastern markets who all have to compete with fewer teams to get to the playoffs than they currently do. Ludicrous that so many teams voted for it.
|
compounded by less travel. Conference D is going to be a free agent haven.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji
Johnny eats garbage and isn’t 100% committed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nik- For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:20 PM
|
#16
|
|
Retired Aksarben Correspondent
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Spokane, Washington
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nehkara
Conference A
Anaheim
Calgary
Colorado
Edmonton
Los Angeles
Phoenix
San Jose
Vancouver
Conference B
Chicago
Columbus
Dallas
Detroit
Minnesota
Nashville
St. Louis
Winnipeg
Conference C
Boston
Buffalo
Florida
Montreal
Ottawa
Tampa Bay
Toronto
Conference D
Carolina
New Jersey
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
|
Hard to imagine how the NHL could have one team move from the Western Conference to the Eastern Conference so that an equal number of teams would be in each conference.... maybe moving a Western based team to a French speaking city....or as a second team in the centre of the hockey universe.
Last edited by Tilley; 02-12-2013 at 07:23 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:21 PM
|
#17
|
|
Franchise Player
|
expansion to 32 makes more sense
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:29 PM
|
#18
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
|
As long as they have a crossover spot where if the 5 place team is better than a fourth place team I am okay with it.
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:30 PM
|
#19
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2006
Location: @HOOT250
|
87 games, everyone plays each other 3 times, top 16 make it. Done!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by henriksedin33
Not at all, as I've said, I would rather start with LA over any of the other WC playoff teams. Bunch of underachievers who look good on paper but don't even deserve to be in the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to HOOT For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-12-2013, 07:31 PM
|
#20
|
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
expansion to 32 makes more sense
|
And it will be upon us fast.
I wonder if the new alignment would last longer than 2 years before expansion.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:51 PM.
|
|
