Globe & Mail writer suggests NHL adopt "Play & Stay" travel model

[lazypucker]

Just cancel the league. No one will die if there is no hockey. The world won't stop turning if there is no NHL.

This whole thing is just a giant waste of the precious earth's resources.

[Always Earned Never Given]

What? This is exactly how it is now. When Flames play, I stay to watch! ��

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

I agree.

The NHL already has a tremendous carbon footprint. Anything reasonable to reduce that should be considered.

I also think teams playing against each other on back-to-back games would bring a bit more intensity to the regular season.

If the NHL went with this type of scheduling, I would stop watching majority of the games.

[Zapruder]

Globe and Mail writers can hold to whatever doomsday cult religions they want, I just don't want it imposing itself all over my favorite sport.

[curves2000]

Smarter travel schedules for the NHL is needed as travel is the worst for it compared to other leagues.

In MLB they play much more games but do stay in cities for a longer period of time to get accustomed.

The NHL is unique in that the league stretches from Vancouver to South Florida. All the teams cross the Canada/US border a ton of times compared to other sports when its only when they play Toronto do they come up. Weather is always a constant issue in Canada and the nature of sport being more physical and all the team players playing, even if banged up. There is no resting random players in the NHL for the sake of rest during the season, perhaps the last game, perhaps.

I was on a Flames road trip during the lockout year that was very unique in a lot of ways and a few players and staff said the same thing. The Flames flew out of YYC on a Thursday afternoon and landed in LA in the afternoon. They slept in downtown LA that night at the same hotel we were all staying at. They did a game day skate at the practice facility of the Kings and than bused it to Anaheim for the game on a Friday.

They played the Kings on Saturday and held a game day skate at Staples Center, followed by a game there that evening. Sunday was on off day for players and staff and it was hilarious how many guys got picked up from friends on the LA King's and went golfing while others were recovering from their Saturday night on the town in LA.

Monday was another game vs the Kings and than the Flames stayed in LA that night and left Tuesday morning. That was 3 games in So Cal but they stayed 5 nights in the same hotel room and didn't have to travel back to Calgary and arrive at 4:30 am in their beds. Normally this would be teams switching hotel rooms, more buses back and forth, late night flights, additional flights etc.

It comes down to seeing how much better can they travel, who's arena schedule might lose a few concerts, which teams will complain about added hotel expenses etc. It's a fine line. But teams with heavy travel schedules like Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton should be able to go into the NY area, play the Rangers, Islanders, Devils and even the Flyers on the same road trip during the same week.

The above teams don't fly all the way out here to play in Alberta, go back home and than come back all way back to play in Vancouver and San Jose and than back again to play in Winnipeg.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Just cancel the league. No one will die if there is no hockey. The world won't stop turning if there is no NHL.

This whole thing is just a giant waste of the precious earth's resources.

I know your being sarcastic but It is true what you just said.

[Itse]

I like it, and have actually been wanting something like this forever.

IMO the current regular season is kind of a boring grind. Like one oversized sausage with very little that stands out.

I also think playing two games against the same team could do nothing but improve the latter game. The team that lost will always be motivated to have it back, and any animosity will be fresh in everyone's mind.

You could also have back to backs that are completely fair to both team, which would ease scheduling.

I would just generally like to have more regularity in the schedule. That you could look at the schedule and clearly see some patterns. "When are they going to do the NY/NJ/Boston trip? Oh this year it's in January", etc.

Also, ecology should play a part in everything. It's just dumb to ignore it.

Plus I think players (and everyone who has to follow the teams) would love the reduced air miles. Anything that keeps the players fresh directly improves the quality of hockey and thus the entertainment value for fans.

I also think it would be cool to do kind of the same in reverse, so that the visiting teams would also come in similar packages, so you'd get Rangers and Islanders close in Calgary close together etc. You could have observations like "we've owned the east coast last couple of years" etc.

Basically I support anything and everything that would split the regular into something more than just an endless stream of seemingly random opponents from all over.

[Northendzone]

the NHL is scheduling around concerts, trade shows and other events in all venues who knows where in the pecking order their venue requests fall - in some rinks likely high, in others not so much. also you now have to do this for all 32 teams. I believe that the schedule is done by hand (I am sure I read they tried software to do it, but it caused lots of issues)

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

It’s probably not that hard.

Start with a few hundred thousand fans a night and cut out all that unneeded commute.

Save on the dogs, beers and sweaters.

Condense the league to a few hundred players and a YouTube channel and voila, carbon problem solved.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

the NHL is scheduling around concerts, trade shows and other events in all venues who knows where in the pecking order their venue requests fall - in some rinks likely high, in others not so much. also you now have to do this for all 32 teams. I believe that the schedule is done by hand (I am sure I read they tried software to do it, but it caused lots of issues)

Scheduling is considerably more difficult than most people including the Globe & Mail realize. Even in the playoffs we get these two day breaks in some series because of conflicting arena schedules. Try doing that in large US cities in December, January, etc that house an NBA team and plenty of concerts and see how easy it is to schedule all these play and stays for all 32 teams at once.

Our supposed green PM flies from Ottawa to Florida back to Ottawa for a meeting (anyone heard of Skype?) then back to Florida to continue his vacation and we want to pick on the NHL with all the obstacles they already face when it comes to scheduling? It's always the people with the biggest carbon footprints like David Suzuki telling everyone else that they need to be better while not walking the walk and now they want to pick on professional sports. I'm all for smarter scheduling but I don't think people can understand how difficult it is to make the schedule and as well we are talking about totally re-writing the NHL schedule in regards to inter and outer conference play.

[bizaro86]

I would be ok with the odd two game stretch if it cut the travel down a bunch. Or better, something like LA-Anaheim-LA or a visiting team going Calgary-Edmonton-Calgary. That would still cut down the miles but allow for a bit less repitition for fans.

My big concern here is we end up getting a week in the middle of January with the Wild on Sunday/Monday and then Phoenix on Wednesday/Friday...

[Resolute 14]

Unless you're going to be creating 6-9 game home stands and road trips the same way MLB does, this is pointless.

Theoretical four-game road trip for Calgary under current format: San Jose-Anaheim-LA-Arizona. Do that twice.

Theoretical four-game road trip under this proposal: San Jose x2, Arizona x2. Separately, Anaheim x2, LA x2. You're not reducing travel, nor are you reducing carbon footprint.

It's pointless within the division. It's obviously unworkable for interconference games.

The only point where it makes nominal sense is against the other division within your conference. And even then, that means only a maximum of four back-to-backs at home, and four on the road.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Zapruder

Globe and Mail writers can hold to whatever doomsday cult religions they want, I just don't want it imposing itself all over my favorite sport.

I agree with the arguments that the travel notion was a dumb thing to tie to carbon footprints and climate change but are you suggesting people who pay attention to those ideas are in a "doomsday cult"?

[Hot_Flatus]

http://prairieclimatecentre.ca/2018/...ons-come-from/

If you point your finger at the energy consumed by teams to keep ice in their buildings 10 months of the year, then maybe you're onto something. Power generation, heating and inefficient ground transportation is and always will be the main culprits of global emissions until a totally renewable and highly implemented power source is adopted globally. This proposal seems like nothing more than uneducated drivel to me which is sad coming from the Globe and Mail. As it stands now, air travel makes up an estimated 1% of C02 emissions as a whole, with the majority of that obviously not coming from the NHL, but general travel and shipping.

I would wager the annual Flames power consumption at the dome far exceeds their air travel carbon footprint each and every year. If this is the stance people want to take, you might as well get rid of ice and ask the players to start playing roller hockey.

[rhino]

I believe he leaves out the fact teams do charters and they would have to pay for that plane to sit for the extra time they are in 1 city. I don’t think that’s a cost cutting move.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

http://prairieclimatecentre.ca/2018/...ons-come-from/

If you point your finger at the energy consumed by teams to keep ice in their buildings 10 months of the year, then maybe you're onto something. Power generation, heating and inefficient ground transportation is and always will be the main culprits of global emissions until a totally renewable and highly implemented power source is adopted globally. This proposal seems like nothing more than uneducated drivel to me which is sad coming from the Globe and Mail. As it stands now, air travel makes up an estimated 1% of C02 emissions as a whole, with the majority of that obviously not coming from the NHL, but general travel and shipping.

I would wager the annual Flames power consumption at the dome far exceeds their air travel carbon footprint each and every year. If this is the stance people want to take, you might as well get rid of ice and ask the players to start playing roller hockey.

I would suspect that domed stadiums cost way more than ice in arenas (though they are occupied less I suppose).

I wonder if AHL teams on their buses make a bigger footprint than NHL teams in planes?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I would suspect that domed stadiums cost way more than ice in arenas (though they are occupied less I suppose).

I wonder if AHL teams on their buses make a bigger footprint than NHL teams in planes?

It would be an interesting study to read for sure. A jet would obviously burn huge amounts of fuel taking off, but after that, it's pretty much null. A fully loaded diesel bus starting and stopping for 6-10 hours, each way, might be closer than you think.

Electric trains, buses would be make things an entirely different story, but again it's all moot in most major Canadian and American cities as we still get 80-90% of our power from fossil fuel generation anyway.

[SofaProfessor]

I don't know if this is the answer but I've always thought there was room for improvement in the schedules. How many times does a team fly across the continent to play 2 or 3 road games and then fly home only to do the same thing the next month? Longer road swings out east would make more sense travel-wise and create longer home stands for the teams.

That said, these guys have families and responsibilities outside hockey and that should also be considered. A long road trip just to save on travel may have other unintended negative effects.

[Always Earned Never Given]

Hey! How about every 4 years, a city bids to host the NHL season. They would require 12 to 16 NHL rinks and a village where all the athletes, plus family, would live.


I could imagine some of the bad blood during a game spill over in the village and players food fighting in the cafeteria!

Then we, the fans, would be the ones travelling and staying to watch either our favorite team or to boo the no goods.

Can't believe we are almost in 2020 and teleportation isn't a thing yet!

[DeluxeMoustache]

Maybe some of you guys need to look at the schedule more closely.

Firstly, give the schedule makers their due for the sheer complexity of the task they are dealing with, and all of the variables and constraints

I am sure there is some consideration for the demands placed on players in the CBA.

Teams have 41 road games, right?

15-16 are other conference so those are ineligible for multi day stays. Lots of road trips are quick 2 gamers here and there, such as Toronto-Buffalo. When they hit TB, they hit Florida

Consider the remaining 25 games
For the Flames, 6 of these are from they do the LA / SJ / ANA circuit. I think these function as well, if not better, as 2 x 3 game sets than they would as 3 x 2 game sets. That would, in fact, be either a stupidly long 6 game road trip, or a 2 gamer and a 4 gamer. No significant travel benefit.

They seem to bundle Arizona and Vegas, also hit multiple mid west teams on fairly logical circuits.

A lot of what they do really makes sense.

Even what was viewed as a brutal February was obviously a lot of travel, however when you look at it
- they start very well rested, off a very long break
- fly to Washington long haul, then to Raleigh (short haul - about 1 h 15 flight)
- 3 days off
- back home vs SJ then to Van (a really short haul)
- 2 days off including long haul flight to Florida
- 2 games in Florida with a day in between, then another day between games with a 2.5 h flight to Pittsburgh (that long trip was 3 games in 8 days - probably a reasonable balance between travel and game demands)
- back home for a full week home stand
- game in Ottawa, short haul flight to NY then back to back in NYI/NJD with 2 days off to recover

Having traveled more than that, I would say that if you were to give me the option of a larger number of 3-4 day trips or trading them for multiple 6-8 day trips, I would take the digestible size trips for sure.

The more I think about it, the less I appreciate this guy’s idea, and the more respect I have for the schedule makers. Not an easy job, and they do pretty well.

No matter. This guy isn’t really a regular Globe writer, he is a freelance writer / stand up comedian based in Abu Dhabi.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

My big concern here is we end up getting a week in the middle of January with the Wild on Sunday/Monday and then Phoenix on Wednesday/Friday...

I don't understand this problem, and I mean that sincerely I don't get why people see this as a problem.

We play those teams anyway. Of we play those games on one week, then we don't play them any other weeks. How is it worse if they're back to back?

It likely adds some extra emotion to the latter game, because the players will care more about not losing to the same team twice in a row.

I think it would also add some novelty value, if every team only comes to visit once a year, the only difference being how many games they stay.

Just imagine how heated games against Edmonton would become, if instead of four individual games you'd just have two two-game matchups, once in Edmonton and once in Calgary. Those trips would really become the highlight of the regular season without the actual number of games dropping. I'm pretty sure players and fans would be a lot more aware of the situation in the season series than they are now.

At least the way I see it, it would be slot more memorable to win two games in a row, than win one game now and one game two months from now.

At least to me that would be simply better.