Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Z-Man

Latest on realignment

219 posts in this topic

No, they were not. you're wrong :rolleyes:

Read the thread before jumping in.

Tri, didn't you know the NHL didn't exist prior to Ovechkin/Crosby?

devlman needs to do his research. ANY research. Those Caps/Pens series were epic. Pittsburgh fans invaded DC for many of those playoff games, and it became a huge rivalry.

Of course, for some people...if it hasn't happened in the last 8-10 years, it must've never happened. :doh1: Never mind that the Caps and Pens were in the Patrick Division together from 1981-1993, when the playoffs were stritcly divisional matchups.

Edited by Z-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the old names quite well and do miss them. I wish they would have just switched a few teams and kept the 2-conference with 3 divisions each format but reverted back to the old names. In the East you can have the old Patrick and Adams divison back and come up with a new name for the Southeast division and then for the West have the old Smythe and Norris division and have a new name for other division.

I kinda like the new format but it has some flaws. I guess I am still somewhat on the fence about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You better go look up your history:

Patrick Division Stanley Cup Champions: 7

Atlantic Division Stanley Cup Champions: 5

Patrick Division President's Trophy winners: 2

Atlantic Division President's Trophy winners: 1

:lol: I'll play your game, you rogue. You better go look up your math:

1974-1993 = 19 years

1993-2012 = 19 years

The "younger" crowd who only really remembers/knows the Atlantic Division era will always associate the Devils and their success with it. 9 division titles and 3 Cups will do that. The Devils are the most successful team of the "Atlantic" division era, of course we all will have an attachment to it, just like.....

those of us that grew up in the 80's with the Patrick Division and were introduced to hockey (and the Devils when they moved here) at a young age. We remember the Devils 1988 run, the Islanders dynasty, NYR/NYI playoffs, Capitals/NYI Lafontaine OT goal, NYI shocking Pittsburgh and the rivalries born. That's not to mention a Flyers cup and the 70's NYR/NYI playoffs, either.

This is very subjective. Everyone is going to value their own memories and nostalgia above everyone else's. Fans from 1993 til now are going to identify with Atlantic, fans who gained foothold from '74 through '93 are going to identify with Patrick, and fans who predate '74 are probably too busy bemoaning expansion to give half a crap about silly division names. Unless you're a "my nostalgia is better than your nostalgia" elitist, this is a moot point.

Sorry, but i prefer the unique names of the past. They may be "old and dusty", but the men honored with them were builders and influential in the early days of the sport that the Gretzky's and the Lemieux's, et al., can owe gratitute towards for being able to be what they were.

And that's great. Honor the past. That's exactly what these three trophies accomplish. Why double-dip with these guys when the dude who re-wrote the league's record book only gets a couple highways named after him?

Hell, why were at at, let's have the NFL take the Vince Lombardi name off the Super Bowl trophy since he's old and dusty, too!

Please tell me that's a joke and my internet sarcasm detector needs to go back to the shop.

Look, I'm not against the league reverting back to Smythe, Patrick, Adams and Norris. There IS a history there, and it'd be cool to see that history restored rather than sticking with generic geographic naming. One of the cooler aspects of this league is its naming tradition. It isn't the MVP, it's the Hart. It isn't the Goalie Of The Year, it's the Vezina. So on and so forth. But Patrick, Smythe and Norris still have their awards. No one's trying to take those away. So instead of clinging to a past that's already sufficiently honored, I'd prefer to spread the wealth to some people who really, really, REALLY friggin deserve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tri, didn't you know the NHL didn't exist prior to Ovechkin/Crosby?

devlman needs to do his research. ANY research. Those Caps/Pens series were epic. Pittsburgh fans invaded DC for many of those playoff games, and it became a huge rivalry.

Of course, for some people...if it hasn't happened in the last 8-10 years, it must've never happened. :doh1: Never mind that the Caps and Pens were in the Patrick Division together from 1981-1993, when the playoffs were stritcly divisional matchups.

Yeah because i started watching hockey when Ovechkin and Crosby entered the league. Good one..and its funny because Triumph probably didnt even know the NHL existed prior to 1995 anyway.

Playoff series dont mean you are big rivals otherwise our biggest rival would be the Hurricanes. Ask any pens fan if they ever considered the Caps a huge rival, dont just look up that they played each other in the postseason and conclude they must be! Thats my point, but dont bother reading any of the posts, just respond with some childish sarcasm...

Edited by devlman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is that it's going to be biased and based on someone's opinion who gets their name on the conferences and a lot of people are going to agree and a lot will disagree and it will degenerate into fan battles over stupid crap like that rather than the "my team is better than yours" difference of opinion. Who cares what they call the conferences, although geographical references would be more neutral or regional references maybe, some important thing in common between all the cities in that conference, who knows. They just shouldn't have for instance the Gretzky Conference, or god forbid, the Bettman Conference :puke: :puke: :puke:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah because i started watching hockey when Ovechkin and Crosby entered the league. Good one..and its funny because Triumph probably didnt even know the NHL existed prior to 1995 anyway.

Playoff series dont mean you are big rivals otherwise our biggest rival would be the Hurricanes. Ask any pens fan if they ever considered the Caps a huge rival, dont just look up that they played each other in the postseason and conclude they must be! Thats my point, but dont bother reading any of the posts, just respond with some childish sarcasm...

How about talking to Capitals fans and asking them who their biggest rival is? Penguins fans would say the Flyers are #1, but the Capitals would probably be #2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about talking to Capitals fans and asking them who their biggest rival is? Penguins fans would say the Flyers are #1, but the Capitals would probably be #2.

In the 90's? Everyone loved to think the Pens with Jagr and Lemieux were their big rivals. Pens fans had bigger hate for the Flyers, Rangers, Isles, even the Devils throughout the decade.

Edited by devlman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: I'll play your game, you rogue. You better go look up your math:

1974-1993 = 19 years

1993-2012 = 19 years

You originally posted about the 19 year life span of each division. :noclue: I merely went and gave you facts that the Patrick was a more successful era. Even if an Atlantic team wins the Cup this year, the Patrick still wins in total.

You said "the Atlantic Division has exactly as much history/as many memories as the Patrick Division."

Which is wrong. There isn't "exactly" as much history and memories unless you're a Devils fan (and NYR fan to an extent). Hell, if you remove the Devils and Rangers out of Atlantic history, that era is thin. The Patrick, however, was much more entertaining and had more variety as i had posted.

This is very subjective. Everyone is going to value their own memories and nostalgia above everyone else's. Fans from 1993 til now are going to identify with Atlantic, fans who gained foothold from '74 through '93 are going to identify with Patrick, and fans who predate '74 are probably too busy bemoaning expansion to give half a crap about silly division names. Unless you're a "my nostalgia is better than your nostalgia" elitist, this is a moot point.

Facts don't lie. As a pure hockey fan, the Patrick was a better era. Since i was around from the 80's until now, i can say that in my own opinion. As a Devils fan, of course the Atlantic era was good to me but that doesn't mean it was better.

And that's great. Honor the past. That's exactly what these three trophies accomplish. Why double-dip with these guys when the dude who re-wrote the league's record book only gets a couple highways named after him?

Again, maybe if it wasn't for those who came before, there would be no one to come after? Just a thought as to why these men are so honored.

I do see what you're saying and that, yes, history should update it's modern contributors and builders. However, it's a fine line. The NHL is never going to change the trophies, so that's safe. I think the whole "overlooking the past history for updating the present" is an issue that will invoke many debates. That's probably why now, coming up on 2012, it's more practical to stick to generic labels for divisions and why bettman did it in the first place even though my view of him and his "changes" to the sport are always under a microscope.

Please tell me that's a joke and my internet sarcasm detector needs to go back to the shop.

I know leatherheads are much more "protective" of their legends then puckheads are, which means that Bill Belichek will never be on the SB trophy :giggle:

Look, I'm not against the league reverting back to Smythe, Patrick, Adams and Norris. There IS a history there, and it'd be cool to see that history restored rather than sticking with generic geographic naming. One of the cooler aspects of this league is its naming tradition. It isn't the MVP, it's the Hart. It isn't the Goalie Of The Year, it's the Vezina. So on and so forth. But Patrick, Smythe and Norris still have their awards. No one's trying to take those away. So instead of clinging to a past that's already sufficiently honored, I'd prefer to spread the wealth to some people who really, really, REALLY friggin deserve it.

Do you really think in your wildest dreams that this league will ever name an award after Lou? Or Scott Stevens? Or Brodeur?

If the league hasn't named anything major after Bobby Orr (who should be honored with the "Norris" change) or Gordie Howe by now, then everyone else is a distant second including Gretzky and Lemieux and Lou, Stevens and Brodeur are not even in thought.

In the 90's? Everyone loved to think the Pens with Jagr and Lemieux were their big rivals. Pens fans had bigger hate for the Flyers, Rangers, Isles, even the Devils throughout the decade.

This is dead wrong. The Pens and Capitals were rivals back then and the Croby/Ovechkin era has given it a re-brith. I think you either do not know much about the Pens/Caps over the years or you are incredibly stubborn and refuse to listen to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is dead wrong. The Pens and Capitals were rivals back then and the Croby/Ovechkin era has given it a re-brith. I think you either do not know much about the Pens/Caps over the years or you are incredibly stubborn and refuse to listen to others.

I have no idea what you're even talking about. Are you sure you are quoting the right person? lol Did you remember to read the posts clearly today? Forget the meds, gramps? Responding to two different conversations can confuse an old feller.

Edited by devlman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phoenix is currently in one of the eight-team conferences. All that would happen if they did move to Quebec is you take them out of that division and put them in the Montreal-Boston-Buffalo 'conference', which currently has seven teams including Quebec's original rivals.

but it also gives the chance to re-align geographically.

PHO moves east & their old conference reduces to 7 teams.

The Northeast (currently 7) adds an 8th in the new QUE.

Move PIT into the new QUE conference, giving 9.

Take away the 2 FLA teams that leaves 7.

By losing PIT, the Devs conference goes to 6

Add the two FLA teams to make 8 in our conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what you're even talking about. Are you sure you are quoting the right person? lol Did you remember to read the posts clearly today? Forget the meds, gramps? Responding to two different conversations can confuse an old feller.

I'm responding to you, tard.

You obviously know sh!t about the Pens/Caps rivalry, so now you're back to what you normally do when proven you're a simpleton.

BTW...i'm 37, Son.

Edited by SJP20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my beef with the new setup is that we play less games (only 2 per year) against the Northeastern conference. The more contests, the better chance of a rivalry -- is pretty much a given rule of thumb.

I see the point in having all teams visit each other so we can all see the stars etc --- but I was fine with every other year because that is the sacrifice needed to play our other Northeastern rivals 4 times per year. which I think is better.

One has to assume that the league used the historical standings & ran their numbers comparing the different playoff formats and concluded that this new method will be no more controversial than the current method.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but it also gives the chance to re-align geographically.

PHO moves east & their old conference reduces to 7 teams.

The Northeast (currently 7) adds an 8th in the new QUE.

Move PIT into the new QUE conference, giving 9.

Take away the 2 FLA teams that leaves 7.

By losing PIT, the Devs conference goes to 6

Add the two FLA teams to make 8 in our conference.

There's no way they would ever be able to split up the Pens and Flyers, and it wouldn't make much sense to move them away from all their other natural rivals anyway. It sounds more like wishful thinking to make our division 'easier'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm responding to you, tard.

You obviously know sh!t about the Pens/Caps rivalry, so now you're back to what you normally do when proven you're a simpleton.

BTW...i'm 37. Son.

37 huh? People that age use the word 'tard' and talk like a tough guy on the interwebs when they get confused? lol...Maybe the Patrick division talk has got you a little worked up. Take it easy on the ol' ticker now. Anyway, thanks for telling me your opinion on something I never said. Thanks for dropping by!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

37 huh? People that age use the word 'tard' and talk like a tough guy on the interwebs when they get confused? lol...Maybe the Patrick division talk has got you a little worked up. Take it easy on the ol' ticker now. Anyway, thanks for telling me your opinion on something I never said. Thanks for dropping by!

:giggle: Simpleton.

So let's just play the rags 82 games then. The rivalry fanboys are making more out of the rivalry factor here. The caps pens rivalry for example is manufactured by the league and hasn't been a genuine rivalry for decades.

"Maunfactured by the league"? LOL. "Hasn't been genuine in decades" LOL. Did you watch 2009? Did you watch any of their series in the 90's/early 2000's?

As i said, and i'll say it again...you are clueless to their rivalry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Maunfactured by the league"? LOL. "Hasn't been genuine in decades" LOL. Did you watch 2009? Did you watch any of their series in the 90's/early 2000's?

As i said, and i'll say it again...you are clueless to their rivalry.

And I stand by that. The rivalry bw the two this decade has been hyped-up by the media more than it genuinely is. You are clueless to comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I stand by that. The rivalry bw the two this decade has been hyped-up by the media more than it genuinely is. You are clueless to comprehension.

You're cluelees to understand a rivalry is a rivalry, period. Adding Crosby and Ovechkin and the fanboy/media/league banter only adds to it.

The Capitals and Penguins have had a rivalry since the 90's. You seem to keep ignoring the past and blaming the league for artifically making this up in the present

Edited by SJP20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're cluelees to understand a rivalry is a rivalry, period. Adding Crosby and Ovechkin and the fanboy/media/league banter only adds to it.

The Capitals and Penguins have had a rivalry since the 90's. You seem to keep ignoring the past and blaming the league for artifically making this up in the present.

Since you dont want to read the prior posts, I'll quickly sum up what Ive been saying, which is def. off topic from my original opinion on this thread, but anyway...I didnt say they were not rivals in the 90s. I said they were not big rivals and Pens fans certainly didnt consider them much of a rival, at that. Secondly, the rivaly today is certainly a rivalry, but clearly over-hyped by the media. So, instead of letting senility creep in and acting ridiculous for your age, go find some old sweaty jerseys to collect instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like this one bit. I'm sure we're all looking forward to seeing the Pens, Flyer and Caps be the three teams that perpetually make the playoffs for the next 5 or 6 years.

I mean let's say the Devils end their season 3rd in their division with 99 points, but the Lightning finish second in theirs with 97 points then the Lighting get to go into the playoffs and the Devils miss. Whack!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you dont want to read the prior posts, I'll quickly sum up what Ive been saying, which is def. off topic from my original opinion on this thread, but anyway...I didnt say they were not rivals in the 90s. I said they were not big rivals and Pens fans certainly didnt consider them much of a rival, at that.

Wrong, but i'm convinced you're the type that won't listen to what anyone has to say, instead counter with garbage.

Secondly, the rivaly today is certainly a rivalry, but clearly over-hyped by the media. So, instead of letting senility creep in and acting ridiculous for your age, go find some old sweaty jerseys to collect instead.

And i'm right! Another shot at me collecting game worn jerseys from another shining example of maturity and knowledge on this board. How originial and intelligent!

You're another one that should have been out of here awhile ago. But, like another resident adolescent, you're probably on so many ignore lists no one sees you to even bother. :cheers:

Edited by SJP20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you dont want to read the prior posts, I'll quickly sum up what Ive been saying, which is def. off topic from my original opinion on this thread, but anyway...I didnt say they were not rivals in the 90s. I said they were not big rivals and Pens fans certainly didnt consider them much of a rival, at that. Secondly, the rivaly today is certainly a rivalry, but clearly over-hyped by the media. So, instead of letting senility creep in and acting ridiculous for your age, go find some old sweaty jerseys to collect instead.

Except that, again, you're still wrong about this point. If you actually think that the Penguins have a 2nd bigger rival than the Capitals, you're simply wrong.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that, again, you're still wrong about this point. If you actually think that the Penguins have a 2nd bigger rival than the Capitals, you're simply wrong.

No, no...Today their top rivals are the Flyers and Caps, although I maintain the Caps rivalry still gets blown out of proportion by the media. The 90s are a different story.

And i'm right! Another shot at me collecting game worn jerseys from another shining example of maturity and knowledge on this board. How originial and intelligent!

Cmon, its too easy! You cant throw out insults at people and not expect a little in return. :cheers:

Edited by devlman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You originally posted about the 19 year life span of each division. :noclue: I merely went and gave you facts that the Patrick was a more successful era. Even if an Atlantic team wins the Cup this year, the Patrick still wins in total.

You said "the Atlantic Division has exactly as much history/as many memories as the Patrick Division."

Which is wrong. There isn't "exactly" as much history and memories unless you're a Devils fan (and NYR fan to an extent). Hell, if you remove the Devils and Rangers out of Atlantic history, that era is thin. The Patrick, however, was much more entertaining and had more variety as i had posted.

Facts don't lie. As a pure hockey fan, the Patrick was a better era. Since i was around from the 80's until now, i can say that in my own opinion. As a Devils fan, of course the Atlantic era was good to me but that doesn't mean it was better.

OK, I think I was unclear in my intent.

I only brought up history because usually when it's brought up it's to say "X has been around longer than Y, so therefore it's better". That's why I was saying they were around for the same amount of time.

And I only kept referring to Patrick/Atlantic because it was easier than referring back to all divisions. Maybe the Patrick era was better to its teams than the Atlantic era, but the Central era was better to its teams than the Norris era. It's all subjective.

And besides, none of that has anything to do with the names anyway. Those eras were better because of the players, teams, rivalries, dynasties, postseason series, etc. Implying that one division name was better than another because of the success of the teams during those eras is kinda like saying one car is faster than another because of the color of its interior. Driving in that faster car might leave one with a warm and fuzzy impression of its lime green interior, but that doesn't make it a superior interior. It just happens to be the interior linked in one's memory to the faster car.

Again, maybe if it wasn't for those who came before, there would be no one to come after? Just a thought as to why these men are so honored.

I do see what you're saying and that, yes, history should update it's modern contributors and builders. However, it's a fine line. The NHL is never going to change the trophies, so that's safe. I think the whole "overlooking the past history for updating the present" is an issue that will invoke many debates. That's probably why now, coming up on 2012, it's more practical to stick to generic labels for divisions and why bettman did it in the first place even though my view of him and his "changes" to the sport are always under a microscope.

I know leatherheads are much more "protective" of their legends then puckheads are, which means that Bill Belichek will never be on the SB trophy :giggle:

Do you really think in your wildest dreams that this league will ever name an award after Lou? Or Scott Stevens? Or Brodeur?

If the league hasn't named anything major after Bobby Orr (who should be honored with the "Norris" change) or Gordie Howe by now, then everyone else is a distant second including Gretzky and Lemieux and Lou, Stevens and Brodeur are not even in thought.

If I'm not mistaken, Clarence Campbell was still league President when the conference was named after him.

Regardless, I agree about the current trends in naming. I'm definitely not holding my breath waiting for a Lamoriello Award :lol: . Hell, there still isn't even a Michael Jordan Award.

But if there's anything post-lockout Bettman deserves credit for, it's being unafraid to buck the trend. The shootout, the All-Star "fantasy draft", Outdoor Life Network (which is about to become NBC Sports ... a ballsy move that thus far has looked pretty savvy). And now this realignment. When Bettman first got here, he aligned the league just like all the other major sports leagues. This four-conference setup is a pretty vast departure from that norm.

At this point, I don't think naming the conferences after Gretzky, Howe, Orr and Lemieux is actually too far-fetched an idea. But, then again, who really knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll name the divisions after former players, because the names themselves don't signify anything, so they're confusing to anyone who doesn't follow the sport closely. If Fenwick or Corsi had a name that refers to what they are rather than the people credited for 'inventing' them, there might not be so much misunderstanding and mistrust regarding them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll name the divisions after former players, because the names themselves don't signify anything, so they're confusing to anyone who doesn't follow the sport closely. If Fenwick or Corsi had a name that refers to what they are rather than the people credited for 'inventing' them, there might not be so much misunderstanding and mistrust regarding them.

And if the United States of America were just labeled as "Nation between 2nd largest Ocean, largest Ocean, Big Lakes and Curvy Looking River" instead of some obscure Italian cartographer we'd all have a much easier time with people who don't follow geography closely to find it on a map.

Edited by NewarkDevil5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0