Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
redruM

The Importance of Rivalries...

Recommended Posts

redruM    48

I have to be honest, until Devs Philly, I have not ben that excited about the season...but what a great game....if the 76 other games were have as intense as Devs philly the attendance would never be questions again...but in an 82 game season ther are far too many meaningless games..

the NHl want to improve rating and attendance....play more rivalary game.

I suggest NO MOREl interconference games, lets increase divisional games by 2 or 3. those are the games that get the blood flowing, the games the fans want to see...does anyone here really want to see a devs wild game ??? not me, not unless its the Cup finals....

Itas all about intensity thats what sells tickets, the games the get the juices flowing...and rivalries do that everytime...forget about canging the rink o the rules...change the scheduling and the NHL will be cured....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'7'    568

I'd be willing to try that for a year, but there are Western conference teams with stars that would draw a crowd. Playing the Blues/Nucks/Wings/Avs is exciting, we draw decent crowds here and they fill the building when we visit them.

and of course I don't want to see Devs/Wild or Devs/Preds, but you can't have it both ways and only request to play the high profile teams.

You might just get your wish though, if we get another 48 game season next year, there will probably be no interconference games again like in 1995

but if you REALLY want to bring back rivalries then you change the playoff system. Bring back the old Patrick Division with the Devs, Isles, Rangers, Pens, Flyers, and Caps. Top 4 make the playoffs, 1 plays 4, 2 plays 3. That would be intense.

Edited by '7'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek21    49

I agree Red. If they want to increase ratings, more rivalry games would do the trick. It's a step in the right direction going to six games against each divisional opponent. Why not eight? There are five teams per division. So, play each of them eight times. That only totals 32 games. They could make it an even ten for 40 in the division if they decided to go that route. And then leave the other half of the schedule for the rest of the Conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Triumph    641

By having eight games, you lessen the rivalry.. the point of rivalry is that it is distinguished from every other game and stands out.. but you can't make that happen by adding more games to the schedule. Eight is the maximum I would have. You do not want to unbalance the schedule and allow teams with weak divisions to dominate their division, or teams who get crushed because they play in a tough division.

There should not be an elimination of out-of-Conference play. Should the Western fans really have no shot at seeing Ilya Kovalchuk? Let's be reasonable here.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewarkDevil5    19

On the contrary, Triumph. Familiarity breeds contempt in hockey. The more you play against the same players the more the rivalry flourishes.

As for Western Fans seeing Ilya or Eastern Fans seeing Marian, honestly, who cares? We're here to watch hockey, not look for names. If you want to see the other conference's stars then watch them on TV. That'll improve ratings too. Otherwise the regular season just seems like a blur of colors and players. If you get familiar with the players though in your conference then suddenly you start caring more. I'd personally rather see players like Vinny Lecavalier and Joe Thornton that the Devils might see in the playoffs than see David Legwand or even Joe Sakic. Granted there's a possibility the Avs might make it to the Finals to face the Devils, but that chance is very remote.

Edited by NewarkDevil5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Triumph    641

Not necessarily. Who really wants 8 games against the Penguins? It breeds contempt, but it doesn't mean that translates to good hockey. When the two teams are skilled, like the Devils and Flyers, it does, but some non-Devil, non-Ranger fan please try to tell me that the Devils-Rangers "rivalry" has been any good for the last 5 years. Hockey-wise, it sucks. Yeah, I love Devil-Ranger games, but they're becoming less and less special with each year the Devils kick the crap out of the Rangers.

Who cares? My point was, if another Gretzky comes along, you can't deny him to one conference. If Mario Lemieux were still great, you can't deny him to the West. He in himself is a draw. Kovalchuk should be a draw. If this Sidney Crosby lives up to expectations, he will be a draw. It's not good for hockey when you can't see this guy live.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrQuotes    0

the league should look for rivalries

the obvious ones (devils/rangers)

the playoff born ones (devils/ leafs, stars/oilers)

big goalie matchups (devils/sabres hasek era)

just see what draws the most emotion and then put more of em on the schedule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MaddDog    0

I dunno, we don't exactly play the Crapalanche all that often, but many of us don't like that crappy team much for obvious reasons. :lol: I do agree that you tend to have more emotional investment in games against closer rivals, or at least ones within the same conference. But, I don't really like the idea of eliminating a BUNCH of games against teams from the West, since there ARE some players I like from that conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NJD Jester    0
I suggest NO MOREl interconference games, lets increase divisional games by 2 or 3. those are the games that get the blood flowing, the games the fans want to see...does anyone here really want to see a devs wild game ??? not me, not unless its the Cup finals....

I'm of two minds on this:

1. I want to see 10 games against each divisional opponent. The league's problems began when divisional play was diluted by a more balanced schedule. Even in divisions that don't have the historic rivalries, like the Southeast, playing each other 10 times a season will result in the stakes being higher and a greater chance of something happening to spark a rivalry (a cheap-shot injury, for example). Plus, travel expenses go down, gate increases, and fans are happier. But...

2. ...the league does need to have its conferences play each other in order to develop interest in all the teams. If the Devils NEVER play the Wild, for example, then the NHL is no better than ESPN, which shows the same 8 teams over and over and over again, and then cries when the Wild and Sens make the conference finals. As a hockey fan, I want to see some of the western teams come to town. I want my shot at watching Iginla, booing GiggyPuff Marshmallow Goalie, and catching flies with my open mouth as I watch the Canucks' power play work.

All that being said...why not go with an NFL-type schedule, where you play in your division (10 games vs. 4 teams=40), and then focus on one division in the other conference (2 games vs. 5 teams=10) and then fill in the rest with at least one game against each conference foe (1 game vs. 10 teams=10) and other interconference rivals?

This makes too much sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Triumph    641

It unbalances the schedule; the divisions are already cut in economic lines... unless you somehow had a system where the top 2 teams from any division automatically gained entry to the playoffs, it would be very easy to have teams which had a lesser strength of schedule getting into the playoffs as a result..

6 games is enough. You put it up to ten and gate will no longer increase as much.. the games will take on less value. Look at what happened with Yankees-Mets... similar things will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DevilMinder    379

You also have to figure in that every team would like to play the stanley cup champions one or two times. But I do agree with Red, the rivalaries make the games a lot more interesting. Having the Flyers and Avs this week seems to have increased interest everywhere because traffic is up from last week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
#10 Duguay    0

Some interesting stuff here - I hope you don't mind if I add my two cents.

1. Interconference games are pretty unimportant. As a season ticketholder who sells the majority of the games - No one is interested in the Western Conference teams. They don't all come in every year anyway. In fact, how many people like the Interleague games in MLB? Nice for the first year or two, now they're unimportant and the league would be better off without them. You don't hear about people in American League cities crying about not seeing Bonds or Sosa. No big deal.

2. If they brought back the 4 divisions, and top 4 teams in each division makes it, it would absolutely bring the intensity up in the regular season. No doubt about it.

Back in the day, you'd play your rival a ton during the year and the hatred would build, and by the time the playoffs rolled around, these teams were all over each other. That's the way it needs to be again.

But before you go back, you do need to think of this - back then, a team like Hartford or Quebec would always get into the playoff in the Smythe while a better team in the Patrick was left out. Is the league better off with the top 16 teams in the league in the playoffs, or the top 4 in each division, allowing that teams with better records could be shut out?

All interesting stuff. But the idea is still correct - more games between natural divisional rivals is what the NHL needs to get back to.

Edited by #10 Duguay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redruM    48
By having eight games, you lessen the rivalry.. the point of rivalry is that it is distinguished from every other game and stands out.. but you can't make that happen by adding more games to the schedule. Eight is the maximum I would have. You do not want to unbalance the schedule and allow teams with weak divisions to dominate their division, or teams who get crushed because they play in a tough division.

There should not be an elimination of out-of-Conference play. Should the Western fans really have no shot at seeing Ilya Kovalchuk? Let's be reasonable here.

Tri I disagree.... Yanks Red sox played 26 times this year..the 26th was just as intense as #1, #7 or #11....

Devs and flyers played like 4 times in preseason, whay waste those games on preseason? I'd love to 10 games w/ Philly & the rangers....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Tri in that rivalries in this league are also a result of a teams recent success . I dont think ive heard anyone talk about "weighted" schedules. That might be an idea.....best teams last year, have "hardest" schedule, worst place teams have "easiest". Of course there are minimum conference/division criteria ala the nfl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tretyak 20    0
f you REALLY want to bring back rivalries then you change the playoff system. Bring back the old Patrick Division with the Devs, Isles, Rangers, Pens, Flyers, and Caps. Top 4 make the playoffs, 1 plays 4, 2 plays 3. That would be intense.

I've got to agree with ^7^ here. Returning to the old playoff alignments would make for better playoff hockey.

During the regular season I would still want interconference games, though. Otherwise you might as well have two entirely different leagues. That would also take away from the Championship series. I'd like to see more games against divisional opponents, though. I want to see the Devils play Detroit and Colorado once or twice a year, but does anybody really want to see Florida or Carolina more than once or twice?

I say take away some of the in-conference but out-of-division games in favour of more in-division games. And also go back to the old playoff format... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redruM    48

I understand wanting to play Col, Det & Dal, but lets be honest along w/ that comes, Sj, LA, Phx, Chi, Nash, Cal, etc....

thats 30 or so games!!! If we must keep interconf. then make it one game...I know bos is not in our division but I'd take an extra game agaisnt them & mont & tor over the tother option.....

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  

×