The Hockey Gods can go #### themselves.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

So all this whining about records and conferences is pointless.

Yes, but we're still going to do it. Leave us be

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

It's kind of amazing that the NHL even tried 1-vs-16 for a couple of seasons, particularly in an age when teams had to fly commercial. The Flames in 1981 had to figure out travel to Chicago, Philadelphia and Minnesota in the first three rounds and then it would have been Islanders in round four. It also threw into chaos who you could face in subsequent rounds because it reseeded each time.

With 21 teams, it was easy to do a balanced schedule. 20 opponents, play them four times each. Divisions were meaningless, which was good for the Flames as they were in a division with the Islanders, Flyers, Rangers and Capitals.

Eric Duhatschek had an interesting article on this just year:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/536...at-duhatschek/

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

It's kind of amazing that the NHL even tried 1-vs-16 for a couple of seasons, particularly in an age when teams had to fly commercial. The Flames in 1981 had to figure out travel to Chicago, Philadelphia and Minnesota in the first three rounds and then it would have been Islanders in round four. It also threw into chaos who you could face in subsequent rounds because it reseeded each time.

Which is why they ditched that format after just two years.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

It's kind of amazing that the NHL even tried 1-vs-16 for a couple of seasons, particularly in an age when teams had to fly commercial. The Flames in 1981 had to figure out travel to Chicago, Philadelphia and Minnesota in the first three rounds and then it would have been Islanders in round four. It also threw into chaos who you could face in subsequent rounds because it reseeded each time.

With 21 teams, it was easy to do a balanced schedule. 20 opponents, play them four times each. Divisions were meaningless, which was good for the Flames as they were in a division with the Islanders, Flyers, Rangers and Capitals.

Eric Duhatschek had an interesting article on this just year:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/536...at-duhatschek/

although the Flames would have also been tough travel wise in a divisional format- given that they were still with the 2 NY teams, Philly and Washington that year

[Locke]

I feel like Pedro Cerrano when Jobu abandoned him.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by looooob

although the Flames would have also been tough travel wise in a divisional format- given that they were still with the 2 NY teams, Philly and Washington that year

This is why they completely realigned the divisions at the same time that they abandoned the 1–16 format.

It sounds crazy, but under the old divisional alignment, Los Angeles and Montreal were in the same division.

[EldrickOnIce]

Use standings from this year, 1v16
Jets vs Devils
Caps vs Flames
Knights vs Blues
Leafs vs Wild
Stars vs Sens
Kings vs Panthers
Lightning vs Hurricanes
Avs vs Oilers

I'm sold

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

This is why they completely realigned the divisions at the same time that they abandoned the 1–16 format.

It sounds crazy, but under the old divisional alignment, Los Angeles and Montreal were in the same division.

I wonder what even was the point of the divisions for those two seasons? Everyone played everyone four times and the playoffs were league wide.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

I wonder what even was the point of the divisions for those two seasons? Everyone played everyone four times and the playoffs were league wide.

I think at that time, the divisions were basically less trouble to keep in name only than to formally abolish. Or as old-time programmers used to say, they were kept for ‘hysterical raisins’.