Devil Dan 56 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 The only non-offensive option (aside from geographical names) is going back to the Patrick/Adams/Norris/Smythe names. This would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bringbackbrylin Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 we'll if we continue our horrible play we can kiss the playoffs goodbye for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellOnICE Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 (edited) It's not a perfect world. I get that. If I was King, I'd like to go back to the 2006 when we had 8 games versus the division. I don't need to see some teams every year, especially home and home - but I get why some do. I think that's the problem with over expansion but whatever. I understand why they have to go to this alignment to satisfy a number of votes, fine. I don't like divisional playoff matchups, because I'd like a chance for their to be either a Devils/Flyer Semi Final or even better, a final. I'd be OK with these four divisions, but the top 16 point getters get into the playoffs...and we do 1 - 16 travel be damned playoff. Make the 4 division winners top 4 seeds and there you go. Some divisons will just be better than others. Edited December 6, 2011 by HellOnICE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Now, I don't neccesarily mind the format of division playoffs in the first two rounds but only playing every other team twice combined with having division playoffs in the first two rounds essentially kills off all non-division rivalries and for the most part just adds games to rivalries that were already good (and forces the creation of new, goofy ones based on travel). Thats the other thing that concerns me...is playing the same the same teams in the first two rounds of the playoffs. It can get stale, and you dont create new non-div rivalries. I dont want to play the Flyers or Rags in the playoffs every year (if we even make the playoffs) as it can lose its fizzle (sorry for using that word). I'm not a big fan of these changes and I know you hate everything that has to do with Winnipeg, but it's not like Winnipeg came in and told the league what to do here. Yeah I see that Bettman wanted to do this regardless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 mmmm what i dont like is that its taking away rivalries that you have with other teams... if im arguing with a MTL or Boston fan... you can't go like... "HA my team is 6 pts ahead of yours in the standings !!!" it doesnt matter anymore... its all about your division and thats it with Pittsburgh, Flyers and Washington in our division its gonna be a though run... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaglejelly Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roomtemp Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 (edited) This will kill parity that the league loves so much. When you are 6 points behind the 8th spot and have to jump a few teams its easier to sell then being 12 behind in 5th or 6th behind the 4th spot. Edited December 6, 2011 by roomtemp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 (edited) Have to admit, that isn't too bad. Just shows how far away the Florida teams are from everyone else anyway, not to mention NW Canada. Edited December 6, 2011 by NJDevs4978 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 well at least they didnt went out of their way to put Crosby and Ovechkin in the same division... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 (edited) Pittsburgh and Washington have had a rivalry since Crosby and Ovechkin were born, there was no way the league was going to have them play twice a year with almost no playoff matchups. The league didn't have to go out of its way, it's not like they're 1000 miles apart. Edited December 6, 2011 by NJDevs4978 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 I love it. The Patrick Division I grew up with and the Whalers. mmmm what i dont like is that its taking away rivalries that you have with other teams... if im arguing with a MTL or Boston fan... you can't go like... "HA my team is 6 pts ahead of yours in the standings !!!" it doesnt matter anymore... its all about your division and thats it with Pittsburgh, Flyers and Washington in our division its gonna be a though run... Didnt realize the devils had such a huge rivalry with the B's and Habs. Count me among those who like it. And if any of the league's revenue-sharing can go towards travel costs, it won't be so bad for the Florida teams. At least all their games are in the same time zone, as that seemed to be a priority with this realignment. I also like the Proteautype (sp?) suggestions for conference names. It wouldn't seem fair if a team played in a conference named for a guy who wore their uniform, so I'd propose: Conference A = Howe Conference B = Lemieux Conference C = Gretzky Conference D = Orr If by that you mean, Patrick, Adams, Norris, and Smythe, then I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Thats the other thing that concerns me...is playing the same the same teams in the first two rounds of the playoffs. It can get stale, and you dont create new non-div rivalries. I dont want to play the Flyers or Rags in the playoffs every year (if we even make the playoffs) as it can lose its fizzle (sorry for using that word). I take it you weren't watching in the 80's and early 90's? From 82-87 the Rangers played the Flyers 5 times in the first round. Rangers won 3 and the Flyers 2. Was huge for building that rivalry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Poster Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 All this needs now is to re-name the "divisions" back to Patrick, Smythe, et al. This alignment is close enough in look and feel to those old divisions. It was a mistake for Buttman to ever change it following his NBA roots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 I take it you weren't watching in the 80's and early 90's? From 82-87 the Rangers played the Flyers 5 times in the first round. Rangers won 3 and the Flyers 2. Was huge for building that rivalry. This isnt the 80s... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 I don't think the playoffs will get stale if we're playing the same teams.. You seriously want to tell me that even 15 years from now you'll be like "Oh the Devils are playing the Rangers in the playoffs? Yawn, wake me up when something new and exciting happens".. It'll be huge even if it happens every season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Didnt realize the devils had such a huge rivalry with the B's and Habs. They don't. But i do with have one with fans since i don't live in NJ... im mostly dealing with Habs, Pens, Leafs and Bruins fans... to the point that i dont really care much about Rangers fans since i dont deal with them... i know one Rangers fan thats it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 (edited) I take it you weren't watching in the 80's and early 90's? From 82-87 the Rangers played the Flyers 5 times in the first round. Rangers won 3 and the Flyers 2. Was huge for building that rivalry. Agreed. We are going to get some real knock down drag out series out of this. And playing a team every year will just make it better. Look at Montreal-Boston. They seem to play each other almost every year in the playoffs, and those series are almost always great. And as for killing the parity, I think there will still be plenty of parity. You have 7 teams fighting for 4 spots. Sure, one team might be out all season but it's the same now with 15 teams fighting for 8 spots. There's always a couple of teams that will pull away from the pack and there's always teams that will be in close to last all year, but you'll still have the dog fights for the last couple of spots. Edited December 6, 2011 by Devil Dan 56 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaneykoIsGod Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 If by that you mean, Patrick, Adams, Norris, and Smythe, then I agree. Kidding aside, those guys (except for Charles Adams) still have awards named after them. It's time for the next generation of hockey contributors to be immortalized, and if Gretzky, Howe, Orr and Lemieux aren't worthy of that honor, then no player(s) ever will be. And besides ... without cheating, can you honestly tell me anything about James E. Norris? Nostalgia is nice, but it also helped bring Brian Rolston, Bobby Holik, Jason Arnott, etc. etc. back to Jersey. In other words, sometimes it's best to move on ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onddeck Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 well i dont know how to feel about it. i guess I really don't care honestly that much. there wasn't much a reason to change the old system but its obviously different than other sports, something new to look at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Kidding aside, those guys (except for Charles Adams) still have awards named after them. It's time for the next generation of hockey contributors to be immortalized, and if Gretzky, Howe, Orr and Lemieux aren't worthy of that honor, then no player(s) ever will be. And besides ... without cheating, can you honestly tell me anything about James E. Norris? Nostalgia is nice, but it also helped bring Brian Rolston, Bobby Holik, Jason Arnott, etc. etc. back to Jersey. In other words, sometimes it's best to move on ... Or in the Rangers' case, bringing back Esa Tikkanen and Mark Messier. If someone proposed to name the baseball divisions after 1880s players they'd be laughed at. The old names are silly, I wouldn't mind names from the more recent past. I have to imagine, though, they'll stick with the geographical type names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 its gonna be rough for awhile but with the right moves and signing the right players we could be competing in a few years with our youngs Ds all up here and with a more experience Larsson... can only hope the Canes and islanders continue to suck and that Carolina and Rangers can't find a good replacement after Ward and Lundqvist... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaneykoIsGod Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 (edited) As always, great stuff from Stu Hackel: Reportedly, Bettman’s divisions (he preferred they be called conferences) originally were:Group One: Anaheim, Los Angeles, San Jose, Phoenix, Colorado, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary. Group Two: Dallas, Nashville, Chicago, St. Louis, Minnesota, Winnipeg and Columbus or Detroit Group Three: Detroit or Columbus plus Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Boston. Group Four: New York Rangers, New York Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington, Carolina, Tampa Bay and Florida. Well, it sounded good in theory until the conferences were revealed and the howling started again. For one thing, the Penguins and Flyers, two of the NHL’s most fierce rivals, were in separate conferences. The Flyers-Penguins problem was solved by putting them together in the group with the New York area teams. That meant moving the two Florida teams into the group where the Penguins were — among four northeastern teams — and they stick out geographically like the hair under George Parros’ helmet. As you can imagine, the Florida teams may not have been too pleased with the drastic increase this would mean in their travel costs, but more visits from the Canadiens and Maple Leafs, who always fill those Florida arenas, likely eased their mind. The whole thing is a really good read. Edited December 6, 2011 by DaneykoIsGod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 This isnt the 80s... yeah, and hockey was a lot better in the 80's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDPucks Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Geographical Conference names but each winner wins the following trophies: "Atlantic Division" wins the Lemieux-Brodeur Trophy "Northeast Division" wins the Orr-Bowman Trophy "Central Division" wins the Howe-Hull Trophy "Pacific Division" wins the Gretzky-Messier Trophy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall Posted December 6, 2011 Share Posted December 6, 2011 Which part is the Brodeur-part of the trophy? 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.