[News] NHL to have bye weeks next season

[Flame19,289]

I'm hoping that this is a precursor to the players push for continued Olympic participation. It would make sense to have bye weeks during non-Olympic years and then when the Olympics roll around, the bye week is put on hold for the season.

[Southside]

Do not like.

I assume the players would still get the 2 or 3 days (whichever) per month as well?

They should just shut down for a Christmas break. Give every team a 7 day break by staggering last games December 22 and 23 and starting up again on the 30th and/or 31st. As someone else suggested in Olympic years, take the break then instead. Taking the break at the same time means everyone gets the same benefit. It would suck to be locked into a good battle for positioning in late February only to go on your bye week and have your opponents win a few while you're off putting heat on you with only 6 weeks to go.

[Jordan!]

Yeah, that's stupid

[Yrebmi]

Put me in the camp that would rather see this week be simultaneous for all the teams. Only way to keep it fair. Christmas break sounds right,

[Poe969]

I agree that a week off in the middle of the season is a good idea and I'd be fine extending the season a week longer. Having it at different times isn't really fair though, some team can come off of a huge road trip and play against a team that just had a bye week. The end of January seems about right though, just let every team get away for a bit.

[mrkajz44]

Extending Christmas break for everyone just makes more sense. There are already a few days off anyway, and mandating 5 days off would allow everyone some time with their family during the holidays. Winter Classic on Jan 1 kicks off the season again.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

Put me in the camp that would rather see this week be simultaneous for all the teams. Only way to keep it fair. Christmas break sounds right,

Why are different 5 day breaks unfair?

[Southside]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Why are different 5 day breaks unfair?

A break to start January might be a good opportunity to heal some wounds and take a breather. A break to end February could be a momentum killer and allow divisional opponents to gain ground or separation in the standings with little time to recover. It's a bad idea.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Southside

A break to start January might be a good opportunity to heal some wounds and take a breather. A break to end February could be a momentum killer and allow divisional opponents to gain ground or separation in the standings with little time to recover. It's a bad idea.

They still play the same 82 games. Right now Tampa has played 21 games to the 17 of Nashville. The 2 games you might have otherwise seen in a 5 day week are inconsequential when the uneven schedules already exist.

The actual break itself could be argued either way. An opportunity to rest and recoup or a way to lose traction. It depends on the situation at the time, which isn't all that different then today's scheduling. I mean the Flames right now are only playing 1 game in nearly a week.

[Southside]

But unless were playing hockey into July, the schedule will be compacted meaning fewer days off in between making a break of 5-7 days more significant.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Southside

A break to start January might be a good opportunity to heal some wounds and take a breather. A break to end February could be a momentum killer and allow divisional opponents to gain ground or separation in the standings with little time to recover. It's a bad idea.

That makes no sense. Those are all essentually random events... you're no more likely to be injured in Jan then you are in Feb, you're no more likely to be on a hot streak in Jan then you are in Feb, and your opponents are no more likely to gain ground or separation in the standings in Jan then in Feb.

[Oling_Roachinen]

The 5 day "bye-week" could be accommodated by an extra day or two in the schedule. Again, there's already times when teams play only once in a week. It's happening right now for the Flames. It just means 1 more back-to-back that a team otherwise wouldn't have had. Or maybe 1 less pre-season game.

Flames play the Panthers on Wednesday, January 13th. Their next game is Saturday the 16th against the Oilers followed by the Devils on the 19th. Remove their game against the Oilers, schedule it some other time and you've got their bye-week.

This is a case of people getting worked up simply because of "change." This 5 day bye week wont be adding another month onto the schedule.

[Parallex]

In terms of games this isn't really a meaningful break. I mean in any two month segment I'm sure you can find a stretch where each team will only play one game... so just tack on an additional back to back and the season is the same length.

The big benefit to the players is that they won't have to go to practice so they can actually go home and visit the famly or take a mini-vacation.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Edit nevermind

I idiot

[Southside]

Originally Posted by Parallex

That makes no sense. Those are all essentually random events... you're no more likely to be injured in Jan then you are in Feb, you're no more likely to be on a hot streak in Jan then you are in Feb, and your opponents are no more likely to gain ground or separation in the standings in Jan then in Feb.

The difference between early January and end February is 7 weeks. Sure it's all random, but the fact remains there is less schedule left in front of you. It will have an impact.

[Armchair Quarterback]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Money. The money they make and how much players are paid.

I don't think the teams want to lose out on potential profits and I don't think the players want to take any kind of pay cut.

Depends, if players had the prospect of a less grueling season and injuries they might take a small pay cut to make that happen.

The amount of money lost on a shorter season could easily be recuperated by the fact that the playoffs wouldn't run into June, and more fans would stay interested. A shorter season means higher-stakes games.

The fact of the matter is, a bye week is stupid because an 82 game season is already way too long. Frick why don't we just do it MLB style and have a 162 game season while we're at it.

[CroFlames]

If they can work it in without extending the season, I'd be inclined to say OK.

As a fan though I don't like having to wait too long between games to watch my favorite team.

[topfiverecords]

Well, for the Oilers it means a week they won't lose a game.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Well, for the Oilers it means a week they won't lose a game.

Nooo!!!!! 2 Nolan Patrick points lost.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Southside

The difference between early January and end February is 7 weeks. Sure it's all random, but the fact remains there is less schedule left in front of you. It will have an impact.

By the end of February there's usually around a 4 or 5 game difference between the teams who played the most and the teams that played the least. Some teams have played significant more home games, others have had to travel far more or had more back-to-back games etc. The schedule is far from balanced on any given night even by the 82nd game given the travel the west has had to do.

If anything, I would argue that this evens it out as now every team gets at least a 5 day break in their schedule in the second half of the season.

Again, we're essentially looking at taking one game in January/February and rescheduling it and letting the players go home for those off-days. It's not really a significant change, which is why the NHL agreed to it in exchange for an All-Star format change.

Unless you're a schedule maker, it's not a big deal.