Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf
Kovy27 wrote:GreenBlood10 wrote:Me likey!!!!
How? TB/FLA in the north & Detroit/Chicago rivalry is dead. They are morons.
DelPen wrote:Biggest thing was to also get Dallas to the Central timezone. Avs too. It's a good compromise and they are definately hedging bets of one of the Florida teams moving north. Phoenix, if they move, will need to go to Seattle, maybe KC but then Colorado gets moved again.
Not sure how you will schedule games though to make the division or conferences even really matter.
Say 6 divisional games, there's 42 games right there in the east, if you do 4 vs the other division there's another 32 and that leaves 8 total games vs the West. If we go to a play one western division on the road each year and then the other at home, which would be fair to the entire divison if the Atlantic went to Pacific and then rotated, that's 14 games leaving 2 wild card games against the other conference if you only do three games a season.
For the West, 48 Division, 28 vs the other division and 16 vs the East which will leave an extra 4 games to work out.
The only thing I'd want to see is keep the top 3 in each division as making it but then take the next 4 regardless of conference and they make the playoffs. If three teams from the East are in the top 4, the top 2 stay in the East bracket and the other is the in the West. Travel might ultimately suck but that's the only fair way to do it.
iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
You know inter-divisional playoffs is not a new concept for the NHL, right? That it was done like this for years?
The Snapshot wrote:slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
You know inter-divisional playoffs is not a new concept for the NHL, right? That it was done like this for years?
Yeah, and it stinks. The Playoffs should be about the best teams, seeded and matched up on the basis of performance. I understand that the bigger number of teams means less "walkovers" to the Playoffs like the Caps have had in the Southeast, but I for one hate the Conference only format that this shortened season brings. Now I have to watch the same teams every year to get to the Conference Final?
slappybrown wrote:The Snapshot wrote:slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
You know inter-divisional playoffs is not a new concept for the NHL, right? That it was done like this for years?
Yeah, and it stinks. The Playoffs should be about the best teams, seeded and matched up on the basis of performance. I understand that the bigger number of teams means less "walkovers" to the Playoffs like the Caps have had in the Southeast, but I for one hate the Conference only format that this shortened season brings. Now I have to watch the same teams every year to get to the Conference Final?
And that's fine if you don't like it. I was responding to the initial poster who gave me the impression that this was an unheard of way to format the playoffs.
Also, its not really the "same teams." With 8 teams to choose from in your conference, there is significantly more variability than there was in the old Patrick Division days; plus, the wild card aspect means some years you'll have a party crasher from the other division in your set of playoffs. So, you could have years where you play 2 of your 3 series against teams from the other division to make the Cup Finals. The balance of repetition and resulting intensity with some degree of crossover gives everyone a bit of what they want IMO.
slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
You know inter-divisional playoffs is not a new concept for the NHL, right? That it was done like this for years?
iWonTheCup87 wrote:slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
You know inter-divisional playoffs is not a new concept for the NHL, right? That it was done like this for years?
Yea well if you are forcing each division to play through their division FIRST its horrible. I dont care if it is not a new concept it is dumb. So you are telling me you want to see the pens play the same pool of teams every single year with no chance of playing a team outside the division first? That is going to get old REAL fast. Also that means a better chance we play someone like the flyers more often, I dont want that at all and i havent talked to one person yet who likes that idea.
Should be division winners and then the next best teams in order of the most points IMO. Also the current setup isnt perfect either beccause the division winners should not be able to lock up the 1st 3 seeds. Its not fair a garbage team like the Panthers get less points than the 4-7 seeds and they get the higher spot. Division winners should be guarantee a playoff berth but after that the seed should go by points
slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:slappybrown wrote:iWonTheCup87 wrote:if you have to play through your division first for the playoffs then this is stupid. I dont care as much about the 4 divisions but if you have to play through the same teams every year before you can play other teams in another division that is ridiculous. That means we will play ranger/flyers/devils every single season first.
You know inter-divisional playoffs is not a new concept for the NHL, right? That it was done like this for years?
Yea well if you are forcing each division to play through their division FIRST its horrible. I dont care if it is not a new concept it is dumb. So you are telling me you want to see the pens play the same pool of teams every single year with no chance of playing a team outside the division first? That is going to get old REAL fast. Also that means a better chance we play someone like the flyers more often, I dont want that at all and i havent talked to one person yet who likes that idea.
Should be division winners and then the next best teams in order of the most points IMO. Also the current setup isnt perfect either beccause the division winners should not be able to lock up the 1st 3 seeds. Its not fair a garbage team like the Panthers get less points than the 4-7 seeds and they get the higher spot. Division winners should be guarantee a playoff berth but after that the seed should go by points
On your first paragraph, I think you should re-read how this will work with the wild cards. Because it doesn't work the way you are describing it. The system is not "the same pool of teams every single year with no chance of playing a team outside the division first." Also, lots of people like the return of the Patrick Division era playoff format. Some do not -- for example, many in this thread -- but I think your sample size is a bit small.
On the second paragraph, I agree division winners under the current format should be guaranteed a berth but not a top 3 seed.
slappybrown wrote:No problem. So the way it works is kind of a hybrid model.
Lets say that the teams finish like this:
PIT - 108
NYR - 106
PHI - 100
NJ - 91
BOS - 107
MTL - 105
TML - 98
FLA - 93
TB - 92
PIT, NYR, and PHI would make it from the Atlantic, and BOS, MTL, TML would make it from the Northeast guaranteed. Then you take the next two highest records. Let's say that the next three teams would be:
FLA - 93
TB - 92
NJ - 91
NJ is out, even though they finished 4th in their division. The Northeast division would have 5 teams qualify.
In this scenario, you shift TB into our division to replace the Devils, and the divisional playoffs would be:
ATLANTIC
PIT v. TB
NYR v. PHI
NORTHEAST
BOS v. FLA
MTL v. TML
The teams then play the other winner within that division once the first round is set, so if we won and PHI won, we'd play them in round 2. The winner of BOS v. FLA is locked into playing the winner of MTL v. TML. So the conference finals would then be whoever came out of "divisional" play.
Like I said, IMO, it provides the benefits of divisional play but also some of the variety of the conference wide setup we currently have once they did away with divisional play in the mid-90s.
no name wrote:slappybrown wrote:No problem. So the way it works is kind of a hybrid model.
Lets say that the teams finish like this:
PIT - 108
NYR - 106
PHI - 100
NJ - 91
BOS - 107
MTL - 105
TML - 98
FLA - 93
TB - 92
PIT, NYR, and PHI would make it from the Atlantic, and BOS, MTL, TML would make it from the Northeast guaranteed. Then you take the next two highest records. Let's say that the next three teams would be:
FLA - 93
TB - 92
NJ - 91
NJ is out, even though they finished 4th in their division. The Northeast division would have 5 teams qualify.
In this scenario, you shift TB into our division to replace the Devils, and the divisional playoffs would be:
ATLANTIC
PIT v. TB
NYR v. PHI
NORTHEAST
BOS v. FLA
MTL v. TML
The teams then play the other winner within that division once the first round is set, so if we won and PHI won, we'd play them in round 2. The winner of BOS v. FLA is locked into playing the winner of MTL v. TML. So the conference finals would then be whoever came out of "divisional" play.
Like I said, IMO, it provides the benefits of divisional play but also some of the variety of the conference wide setup we currently have once they did away with divisional play in the mid-90s.
This is exactly what i suggested and it seems like the best overall solution. The only team you can reseed is a 5th seeded team. It also would open up 2 teams fromt he same divsion playing for the right to goto the cup. If TB came out of our division a winner, they would face someone from their old division. That would be cool. I honestly think even if you get a 32 team league this would be the best way.
Users browsing this forum: Pens4Life, Wooav8tor and 17 guests