The Plan: Rivalry Creation in the NHL

originally posted on calling audibles.

I know a lot of people don't care about hockey. I am not trying to convince anyone to watch or like it with this post. I really don't care. This is my personal opinion about how the game and league could be better for the fans that do watch and the fans that would like to watch. Some people (Most people) don't like hockey, nothing is going to change that. Thats fine, I hate the NBA and will never watch that. And I am fine with that, and I am fine with many people hating hockey and the NHL. That is your choice, this post is for fans and people who like hockey but think the NHL is missing something.

I have a plan that would return the game to previous success as far as competition and emotion is concerned. Hockey is not Basketball, you can not focus attention or advertising on single players. They are just not on the ice enough. Some of the best scorers in the game only play 18-20 minutes a game, compared to 35+ for some NBA players. So please NHL stop pushing the individuals. I know some of them are great, Sidney Crosby, Alexander "Ovie Wan Kenovi" Ovechkin, Henrik Zetterberg, and Ilya Kovalchuk are probably the top draws. But I wouldn't go to a game just to see them play, I want more. I want hard hitting, fast paced hockey against teams that really don't like each other. I want to go watch a game that reminds me of Detroit vs Colorado in the mid 90s. Two teams that just want to beat the crap out of each other.

That is my plan here. To realign and reorganize the league. The AHL has the setup I am looking for, 2 conferences and 4 divisions. They also have the rivalries that make the games great. I live near Hershey and when the Wilkes-Barre Penguins or Philly Phantoms come to town, you can't get a ticket to the game. Thats what the NHL needs. Are there any rivalries like that now? I don't think so, other than Canadian teams and there hate for each other. But that is what the NHL needs.

The Plan: Rivalry Creation

'Step 1: Expansion'

First things first, the league wants to expand. For everyone who thinks they are nuts, attendance and revenues are up across the league, so it isn't really a bad idea. Expand to 32, add 2 teams. The talk has been Vegas and Kansas City, so thats what we will use. There have been others mentioned, like Portland, Oregon, but it really doesn't matter. After adding the teams, lets realign.

'Step 2: Realignment'

Eastern Conference

Atlantic Divsion - Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New York Rangers, New York Islanders, New Jersey Devils, Washington Capitals, Carolina Hurricanes, and Boston Bruins.

Other Division(name TBD) - Ottawa Senators, Montreal Canadians, Toronto Maple Leafs, Buffalo Sabres, Atlanta Thrashers, Florida Panthers, Tampa Bay Lightning, and Columbus Blue Jackets.

Western Conference

Central Division - Detroit Red Wings, Chicago Blackhawks, Nashville Predators, St. Louis Blues, Dallas Stars, Minnesota Wild, Colorado Avalanche, and Kansas City.

Pacific Division - Calgary Flames, Vancouver Canucks, Edmonton Oilers, San Jose Sharks, Anaheim Ducks, Phoenix Coyotes, LA Kings, and Las Vegas.

Those divisions keep the old rivalries alive while creating new ones like Kansas City/St Louis, or Philly/Wash. Good teams playing each other for division supremacy. It will make for great physical hockey all season long.

'Step 3: The Schedule'

Each division would play 2 against the other division in the conference, 1 at home, 1 away. They would also play the other conference, the entire conference, 1 division at home, the other away. Then they would play 3 home, 3 away against their division rivals. That would leave 8 more games and I think they should play half of each division in the opposing conference again, opposite location of previous game.

For example:

Detroit would play 6 games against each team in the Central, 2 against each team in the Pacific, 1 at each team in the Atlantic, and 1 at home against each team in the Other Division. Then they would have 4 games at home against Atlantic teams and 4 games on the road against the Other division teams.

Following me so far?

'Step 4: The Playoffs'

Instead of seeding based on conference, it is all division. This is where rivalries start so why not have these teams playing each other every year in the playoffs. The top 4 teams from each division make the playoffs. They play a first round series against division opponents, then a division championship and then the conference championship before the Stanly Cup playoffs. I know that some teams will get upset because they have more points than the 4th team in another division, but so what, too bad. This will create great rivalries.

After all that, I think the rivalries will be better and more meaningful. I would keep most of the division games for the end of the season. Play 2 against each opponent in the division before the All Star break and 4 after. This will keep the rivalries and meaningful games heated going into the playoffs.

For anyone (most of you probably) who does not follow the AHL, you don't know how well this system works. I know the AHL does it more to keep travel costs down, but the rivalries are intense. Even the fans from opposing teams don't like each other. There is some of that in the NHL but not enough. Lets get some more of that. Good Old-Fashioned NHL HATE!!

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

668 days ago

Score 2

As far as expanding the league goes, just because revenues are up doesn't make it a good idea. Expansion dilutes talent. And honestly, KC and Vegas getting hockey teams? There are enough clubs in non-hockey cities as it is. If the NHL were to expand, why not Milwaukee (Wisconsin is a good hockey state), and a Canadian city that lost a franchise (Quebec or Winnipeg).

And as a Bruins fan, your realignment design would piss me off if it were implemented. To be removed from playing with Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo, and most of all Montreal would be devastating. It would reduce rivalries, not increase them.

Using the AHL as a model is interesting, but the AHL is different for one major reason: it's regional. The teams (particularly in the East) are very closely bunched. Hell, there are 3 teams in Massachusetts, and 8 in New England. This area is covered by only 1 NHL team. Even in the West you've got 4 teams in Illinois, 2 in Upstate NY (plus Albany in the East), and 2 in Texas.

It's difficult to generate rivalries, especially with players moving from team to team so often. The best way to create rivalries would be to implement rules making it difficult to move key players around via trades or free agency. But creating new teams and shifting everybody around (especially an Original 6 team like Boston) just wouldn't work.

Permalink | Reply

Gman2797JV Squad

668 days ago

Score 0

You're right. And I understand the Boston argument, so that can be worked on. Maybe Atlanta going to the Atlantic and Boston staying with the Canadian teams. So there is that. You're also right the AHL is regional and that is understood.

But the reason the rivalries work is because the playoff matchups are regularly the same. Rivalries are born in the playoffs, so that would make it so that the same teams are playing each other yearly.

Rivalries are not built on players, they are built on teams. The Steelers vs Browns, Cowboys vs Eagles, Lakers vs Celtics, Cubs vs Cardinals. Rivalries are built when teams fans get tired of playing each other over and over. And those teams are expected to win against those teams.

The NHL will never have great rivalry games in season. But playoff rivalries make for great sport and great tv if its on.

Permalink

Gman2797JV Squad

668 days ago

Score 1

And I know that expanding the league doesn't make sense, but the NHL is looking into it. I would definitely be all for more canadian teams but that probably isn't going to happen. Although Hamilton has been mentioned (I think it is too close to Buffalo and Toronto to get the fans but who knows) so they could be one. Which would change the divisions. Does expansion make sense to me? Probably not but they think it will work. I would rather see them get rid of two teams, say Florida and Nashville, but I think adding teams is more likely.

Permalink

FrankDDiv-I Stud

667 days ago

Score 1

I think Vegas and K.C. are just the first ones thrown out there as a part-joke, part-conversation starter. K.C. already had a team - they turned out to be the Devils.

As for Vegas, and I feel this is eternally debated to no end, but managing a team in the desert is much harder than anywhere else. Sure, people live in Vegas, but it's mostly tourists that visit and spend money on things like this. However, should it be financially affordable, I think a tourist would rather drop $25-$45 on a hockey ticket for a night of entertainment rather than posting up $100+ for any kind of Vegas form of entertainment.

Celine Dion was the closest Canada's national sport will get to Vegas for quite some time.

Permalink

LASportsblogAAA-er

668 days ago

Score 2

I think you have the right idea, but your heading in the wrong direction. Insted, contract American based teams that are not holding their own weight and relocate them in Canada, where the game has real appeal. Then Realign and continue on your plan as you have it laid out.

Permalink | Reply

Gman2797JV Squad

668 days ago

Score 1

thats a fine idea. now with a hard salary cap the smaller market teams could compete. Put teams back in Winnipeg and Quebec or another city that wants a team. If they want teams I say they get them first.

Permalink

FrankDDiv-I Stud

667 days ago

Score 0

I never understood why Toronto didn't have another team. I mean, the Yankees and Mets play in the same town and, although they aren't necessarily all that 'close' in proximity, the idea is they both play for the same big market. If the NHL would expand another team in Toronto, they'd have to schedule it on games in between the Leafs.

Permalink

Equipment ManLittle Leaguer

667 days ago

Score 1

Thanks for the post, very interesting read. I'd treat expansion very carefully. Things are at the point where they're already so dilluted.. I'm not sure how much more they'd want to risk it. I do like the idea of inter-divisional first round playoff series. There are other leagues that have done this in the past and it really serves to get the fans into things from the first round. The downside is when you have a really weak division and a team ends up getting into the playoffs that doesn't belong there... meaning a worthy team misses out.

Permalink | Reply

Anonymous Fanatic #1

660 days ago

Score 0

you need to bring back the teams that we lost, winnipeg, quebec, and possibly hartford. nhl expansion teams the coyotes, thrashers, and panthers should be moved to those locations and the names changed to the originals. expand hockey to where its known and appreciated and you will make money guaranteed. if you want to expand the league further, expand it to wisconsin or halifax

Permalink | Reply

Taytay 24All-American

660 days ago

Score 0

If Winnipeg, Quebec and Hartford were guaranteed money makers, they wouldn't have lost their teams in the first place. As others have said, the NHL needs to contract, not expand.

Permalink

Taytay 24All-American

660 days ago

Score 0

Before the lockout and canceled season, the NHL was ridiculed for not marketing its stars. Here, they are ripped for doing it. I guess the point is that the NHL has bigger problems than marketing.

Of course, the answer is that you have to do a little of both. People used to go to a game just to see Gretzky or Lemieux. I remember there was a stretch where Gretzky and the Rangers came to Dallas over New Years weekend, when I was always out of town. I was thrilled when I was finally able to see him in person. The NHL has young stars that they should be building around, but they also need to give some attention to the marketing of the teams. But again, marketing is not their biggest problem.

Realignment? Eh. New playoff format? A gimmick that lacks integrity. Maybe its time that we just accept that the NHL is a second rate pro league. Kudos for the effort, but the fact that you felt the need to apologize for writing a hockey article says it all.

Permalink | Reply