GoHabs2002 Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Campbell Conference (Northern) Western Division Central Division Eastern Division Calgary Columbus Buffalo Edmonton New York ® Boston Minnesota New York (I) Montréal San Jose New Jersey Ottawa Vancouver Washington Toronto Wales Conference (Southern) Western Division Central Division Eastern Division Anaheim Carolina Atlanta Dallas Chicago Florida Colorado Detroit Philadelphia Loa Angeles Nashville Pittsburgh Phoenix St. Louis Tampa Bay Modified version (after CBA and possible team re-locations): Campbell Conference (Northern) Western Division Central Division Eastern Division Calgary Buffalo Boston Edmonton Columbus New York ® Portland Montréal New York (I) Seattle Ottawa New Jersey Vancouver Toronto i]Philadelphia[/i] Wales Conference (Southern) Western Division Central Division Eastern Division Anaheim Chicago Atlanta Colorado Detroit Carolina Loa Angeles Minnesota Dallas Phoenix Nashville Tampa Bay San Jose St. Louis Washington Encourage Pittsburgh Owners and Florida Owners to transfer team to Portland and Seattle. Bold: New team Italics: Established teams who changed divisions under the modified post-team transfers divisions. In brackets are the alternate names for the conferences. General scheduling outlines: The scheduling of games would be the same for the new divisions, regardless of whether or not there are new teams. Under the current system teams play 82 games in a regular season, and it is broken down as follows: 24 Divisional Games (29% of the season) 40 Conference Games (49%) 18 Intra Conference Games. (22%) However, some teams (mostly the current “western conference” teams) leave their time zones more often to play games then other teams (like Philadelphia, who only plays 2 games outside the Eastern Time zone). 2) Changes to the Schedule: With any new CBA with a reduced pay scale, players may ask for a reduced schedule to coincide it. It would be in the NHL’s best interest to go with a few less games. Furthermore, for long term benefits, it would also be in the league’s best interest to stabilize the league’s schedules. The league should aim at starting and ending the season at a standardized time. More specifically, the season should start the first weekend (Wednesday-Saturday) of October, striving for as close of a start date to October 1st as possible. Also, the league should make it a point not to expend the regular season past the last weekend of March; allowing the regular season to end around the 31st of March (a range from Sunday to Wednesday would suffice, the closest to the 31st as possible without surpassing that date) These two modifications would allow the league to maintaining its season days of roughly 175 (this season has 176 days of regular season). For example, this season the league would have commenced on Wednesday, October 1st and would have concluded on Thursday, March 31st, 2003 (180 days of regular season). It is merely a coincidence that this season would be the perfectly scaled season, according to the dates. Next season would start Friday, October 1st and end on Wednesday, March 30th.(180 days because of the leap year). Obviously during Olympic years and World cup years, the season schedule would have to be expended accordingly. However, this should be the model NHL season. Furthermore, currently with this season as a model, the average team plays a game every 2.15 days. Under my format that figure would be 2.20. A marginal increase indeed, but combined with the following suggestion, it would dramatically increase the figure. As mentioned earlier, the league may very well reduce its scheduling to a number less than 82 games per team. The idea figure would be 74 games. The owners would lose 4 home dates, however with a more stretched out season, and a bigger emphasis on rivalries, it may very well be addition by subtraction. The game breakdown would be as follows: 32 Divisional Games (8 games vs. each team, representing 43% of the season’s games). 30 Conference Games (3 games vs. each team, representing 41%) 12 “Wild Card” games (subject to team profile described below, representing 16%) This format would allocate more than 62 regular season games to the conference rivalries. The term at least is essential here, referring to the 12 wild card games. Wild card games would be as follows: Firstly, for the Original Six: Each original six team will play against original six teams of the other conference twice. For Detroit and Chicago: 8 games (2 each vs. Toronto, Montreal, Boston, and New York) For Toronto, Montreal, Boston, and New York: 4 games (2 each vs. Detroit and Chicago) Furthermore, each Original Six team will also play the original six teams in the conference an additional time. For Detroit and Chicago: 1 game each (1 game vs. each other) For Toronto, Montreal, Boston, and New York: 3 games each (1 game vs. each of the other 3 teams) Consequently Chicago and Detroit would have 3 wildcard games remaining (12 games – 8 intra-conference Original six games – 1 inter-conference original six game) and Toronto, Montreal, Boston, and New York would have 5 wild card games remaining (12 games – 4 intra-conference original six games – 3 inter-conference original six games). Canadian teams will also play an additional game versus the Canadian teams outside of their division (i.e Western Canadian and Eastern Canadian teams play 4 times against each other instead of the 3 inter-conference games). This would bring Montreal and Toronto’s remaining wildcard games down to 2, Ottawa’s to 11 and Vancouver’s, Calgary’s and Edmonton’s to 11. All of these teams’ remaining wild card games will follow the league wide format. League wide Wild card format: Teams will complete their schedules with 12 wildcard games, according to overall standings form the previous regular season (or draft order, which ever the league deems more appropriate) regardless of division or conference. The league will be “divided” into 4: Teams finishing 30-25, 24-19.18-13, 12-6, 5-1 will be grouped together. Team wildcard games will be based on this grouping. (with possible modifications because of the original six contingency). Lastly, all intra-conference games (obviously wildcard games, if any) shall be played between November 1st and February 15th; allowing the last month and a half of the regular season being against inter-conference teams. Also, the league should attempt to create a unique weekend once a month to create a buzz around the league, somewhat like inter-league play has done in MLB. Once a month, the league should schedule, league wide, back to back, home and home series between teams in the same division (or conference) on a specified weekend (either Friday-Saturday or Saturday-Sunday). This would generate interest that can be carried over throughout the season. This schedule as a whole will provide many benefits for the league.. Firstly, as a 72 game season, it would bring the average game to approximately every 2.5 days; a vast increase compared to today’s standards (108 non-playing days as oppose to 94 this actual season). Secondly, it would provide a balanced schedule in terms of travelling. Every team will travel out of its time zone and into the same time zones. Any discrepancy in the travelling will be minimal. Also, this format will greatly encourage rivalries to form and last, a strategy that should be employed by the league until it is capable to market its stars and the quality of play. Furthermore, the quality of hockey is greatly influenced by the intensity and energy of the teams playing, two variables that can be more consistent and regular with rivalries. The playoff races, theoretically, would become much more closely fought and teams will benefit from the additional non-playing days off. Finally, the playoffs would culminate at the end of May, or at the beginning of June at the latest, benefiting from being away from the NBA playoffs and the beginning of MLB’s summer push. Moreover, on a more Canadian concern, the Canadian teams will not be hurt from this format. Currently the 6 Canadian teams play 50 games within the Canadian market (therefore using the Canadian currency). That is, 41 home games, three road dates vs. the three Canadian teams in the other Conference and 6 road dates vs. the two Canadian teams in the same conference. That is 61% of its games in the Canadian Market. Under my format, they will each play approximately 51 games (depending on wildcard games) in the Canadian market in the 74-game regular season (37 home dates, 8 road dates at two other Canadian teams in division, 6 road dates versus three inter-divisional Canadian teams and 6). That is 69%, a marginal increase. Obviously, there are a lot of politics currently in the NHL head office and some owners may not want to sacrifice star names for divisional and conference concept. However, the league is not in the same position as the other North American leagues, it does not have the player notoriety as the other three and it cannot gain it if it does not attract fans, and consequently more media attention. The only conceivable way to do it is to generate interest from the hardcore fans first, which can gradually rub off on the casual fans once the new schedule format is placed in and the NHL successfully capitalizes on the newly found rivals. Consequently, the NHL will see gain more interests from the media. Also, this format may be too standardized and programmed for the league’s current operations, however the bigger importance, I feel, is the Conference re-alignment and 74-game season. Together, they both will help with travel situations and perhaps lead to a better season long performance from the teams and the players. That is the true goal. 3) Also, one thing I don’t agree with is the current offside rule. Why is it that the rule currently stops faster players from going into the offensive zone and positioning themselves for a pass? I understand executives do not want freeloading players, so the rule could have the same explanations as the two-line offside pass rule. However, I feel that maybe we should eliminate the offside rule for entry into the offensive zone and applying it only for when the puck leaves the zone. Here’s how it could theoretically go down, players are permitted to enter the offensive zone before the puck, assuming there is no two line pass being committed (there would be now two possible two-line offside passes scenarios: the traditional one when passing out of the defensive zone and the new one when passing into the offensive zone). Once the puck leaves the offensive zone the linesmen holds his arm up indicating a delayed offside until all the offensive players clear the zone, at which point the process starts over again. If the puck re-enters the offensive zone before the linesmen waves off the delayed offside, then and only then would an offside infraction be called. With this alteration to the offside rule, defensemen are forced to follow forwards that rush past them, thus opening the neutral zone for the other players; meanwhile offering more creative and fast-paced plays. After all, how many times have we seen potentially exciting rushes come to an abrupt end because of a split-second advancement? 4) I would also take this time to further suggest a reduction to the number of players dressed per team. Currently, 20 players out of 23 are in the line-up every game. The fourth liner’s generally play 5-8 minutes on the average team and possess limited NHL skill. I would suggest the number of players in the game line-up to 18. This would presumably lead to the loss of 2 forwards, leaving a team with 10 players, 6 defensemen and two goaltenders. The virtual loss of the fourth line will immediately increase the skill level of each game, while not affecting dramatically the face of the game. Those two players would only be getting a minimal amount of ice time under normal circumstances, but the fact that teams will now be forced to rely more on of their most talented forwards, it can eventually improve play. Obviously, the player’s association would step in and voice their concerns. However, a reduction in the game line-up should not automatically equate to the same number of jobs being loss. Remaining at a 23-man roster would bring the league back to the days where they had a 25-man roster and 5 players sitting in the stands. Statistically, the league would bring the skill level back to where it was when there were only 26 teams. Teams dress twenty players for a game that, using a simple model, results in 600 game day players (20 times 30 teams. Back in 1996, when there were only 26 teams, there were 520 (20 players times 26 teams) game day players. Under this new rule, there will be 540 game day players (18 players times 30 teams). The result would be that the pluggers and less skilled guys that the teams placed on the fourth line and used sporadically to disturb the star players will not lose their job but only be put into a position to improve their play. Teams will only play the players that can realistically contribute in the game, with only 10 forwards to divide the ice time with. With three forward lines, teams can decide to dress an extra defenseman or an extra forward, depending on the opponent and situation. It might not have a dramatic affect on the goal output, but it could very well improve the product. 5) Another change the league may take a look at is the way penalties are administered. Not the calling of the infractions, but the severity of the calls. In an attempt to increase offense, the league should promote puck handling and puck possession. Accordingly, the league should protect those with the puck more efficiently. Therefore, any penalty that occurs in the defensive zone against an opponent who has the puck will result in a 3-minute penalty; looking at it in another way, a penalty on a puckhandler who is in the offensive zone warrants a three minute penalty. An infraction on any other player and/or anywhere else on the ice results in the usual penalties. The term puck control will need to be clearly defined, but this could open up space for the puckhandler, especially late in the game when teams are scared to incur a penalty. Of course, a general improvement in the calling of penalties will be required. 6) Perhaps the league should implement an illegal coverage infraction. Teams must always have two forwards (forecheckers) in the offensive zone while the puck is in there. The only exception would be for line changes and penalty killing (in which case, there would have to be at least one). Once line changes are complete, teams must have two forwards in the offensive zone if the puck is still there. This would stop teams from sitting back, bring back the forechecking, and create more room in the neutral zone if the puck gets passed the forecheckers. And if it doesn’t get passed the forecheckers, then a scoring chance for the forechecking players isn’t too bad either. Any team failing to have forecheckers will have the play stopped and a face in their zone. Obvious avoidance to comply with the rule will result in an unsportsmanlike penalty. 7) Lastly, Mr. Bobby Smith’s idea of returning to the original zone sized and enlarging the blue and center lines would be a great boost for the product. Whether it creates regular 8-goal games is doubtful, but it will create more options and more “room” with the manipulation of the line sizes. But more importantly, it will create a buzz around the league that is sorely lacking. Other minor changes that could be looked at are removal of the illegal stick provision, no NHL action at the trade deadline and making it a primetime event, implementing no-touch icing, expanding overtime to 10 minutes, eliminating points for ties to encourage wins and a return to the three column records and enforcing icings against penalty killing teams. The league is at a crucial period of its existence. It is more popular than ever, however that popularity is global and does not affect its North American mainstream existence. If something is not done to remove the negative vibes and atmosphere surrounding the NHL brand, then the league will begin to regress. The league must stop attempting to grow into another one of the big 4 team leagues, and begin to capitalize on its advantages, like the intensity, the speed and the general excitement that is generated in a good NHL game. If the NHL aims at producing more of those games, then they will finally take a step forward. :/):can: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoHabs2002 Posted December 10, 2003 Author Share Posted December 10, 2003 sorry about the conference line ups, I hope you guys can read it properly, left teams are in the western divisions. middle one in the central and the right ones in the eastern divisions (just think of geography ) and I know it's long, but it was a bit fun writing it all. Only one I think is way radical and that is the #6, the illegal coverage call, too hard and guys like Brian Burke would never allow it. But, all in all, I hope it gets people talking, should be fun to hear what people think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabumnimhabs Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 I honestly think that what you are saying has some good ideas and aspects. Especially dressing less players, this will allow for a smaller budget expenditure and may help out canadian teams. What I don't particularily care about is that when all put together seems to change the game drastically and players will have a real difficult time getting used to it I personally think the number one problem is the goalies. You are not allowed to touch them when they leave the net or you get penalized. Thats why many rushes are dead and forechecking has gone down the tube. You now have 3 D and 3 forwards on the ice with the goalie leaving all the time. I remember a time when a goalie was considered a moron for leaving his net b/c he'll get creamed by the rushing forwards. I think if they impliment that goalies can leave their net, but are then like every other player, we'll see much more effective rushes and then forechecking can then be revived as part of the game. I want to see some old time crunching of hockey. There has never been anything more fun than watching a goalie get creamed and spend like half a minute to get back to the empty net while the offence is flying around the zone to get the puck and score. Thats my two cents!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs77 Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 New rules: - goalie is free game when he leaves his crease, will allow forecheck and probably lead to more fights - penalties are called as written in the rulebook, instead of letting everything go as it is now... That's it... nothing more is needed. I'm against 3000 rule changes that will completely de-naturalize the game into a game we no longer recognize. As for having less players, sure that's a good idea... but the NHLPA will never allow it so why bother spending more time on it. As for divisions, schedules... that's where I get a lot more creative: - reduce each conference to 10 teams, two 5 team divisions X Conference Div 1 Montreal Toronto Ottawa Boston Detroit Div 2 Philadelphia New York New York (Islanders) Chicago Buffalo Y Conference Div 1 Colorado Vancouver Edmonton Calgary Minnesota Div 2 Florida Dallas St-Louis San Jose Los Angeles - For the missing 10 teams, create a new european conference (Finland, Sweden, Russia, Czech, Swiss, Germany, Slovakia...) The NHL has to follow hockey where it's popular... and that new conference will bring in the TV revenue the NHL is desperately seeking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Originally posted by TheAussiePosseYou are not allowed to touch them when they leave the net or you get penalized. I'm sorry, but you're kidding right? How many times have we seen Garon and Theodore knocked over by crashing forecheckers? What you say was true 2 years ago. BUt now, not even close Did you read what habs77 said? He said when they LEAVE the net... The only time I can remember Theodore or Garon being hit when they left the net was the infamous Varada knee play a couple of years ago... But that was bad because of a KNEE , not because of a hit... I agree with habs77 , goalies are fair game outside the crease... inside it though , dont touch them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAussiePosse Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 BALEETED!!!!1! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabumnimhabs Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 puck7x, you are the reason I feel discouraged for the new generation. No sense of deductive reasoning!!! Don't take my quote out of context and try to make me look like an idiot. Honestly!!! You know try reading EVERYTHING and then write, it may help!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Originally posted by sabumnimhabspuck7x, you are the reason I feel discouraged for the new generation. No sense of deductive reasoning!!! Don't take my quote out of context and try to make me look like an idiot. Honestly!!! You know try reading EVERYTHING and then write, it may help!!!! What are you talking about? I read the thread , and I just re-read it a couple of times and I still cant make sense of what your saying. I wasnt responding to your quote , I was responding to Aussie's comments. I agree with what you were saying , at least if you were saying what I think you were saying... Maybe you were being sarcastic? Calm down , no one is trying to make you look like an idiot... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs77 Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 I think sabumnimhabs was replying to what aussie said, and mistakenly addressed it to puck7x. From what I can tell anyway And let's lay off the personal attacks ok guys? Keep your sticks on the ice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAussiePosse Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 haha, yeah, i deleted my post because it was too much of an embarassment to bear. but yeah, back to the topic... :ghg: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.