What if the NHL Went to a Six Division Set Up in a 36 Team League?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 апр 2024
- Okay, since I saw comments of this nature in my recent expansion video, I might as well discuss how a 6 division NHL might look.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @thehockeyguy
Join us on our discord to chat hockey, talk with others during the game, share pet pictures, and more.
/ discord
Order jerseys from Ben H Sports while saving 10% off the listed eBay prices by sending him an email regarding jerseys you spot in his listings. ben.hoogenband@yahoo.ca Just tell him Shannon sent you.
Support The Hockey Guy via Patreon / thehockeyguy
/ youtubehockeyguy
Instagram: thgshannon and thg_cats
Spoutible: spoutible.com/TheHockeyGuy
TheHockeyGuy.yt@gmail.com
Contact me via snail mail at:
The Hockey Guy
PO Box 15038 Seven Oaks PO
Abbotsford, BC
V2S 8P1
In the USA:
Shannon Skanes
1125 Fir Avenue
Suite 119
Blaine, WA 98230 
Спорт
I am the only one to notice the Conference magnets are the wrong way round? It is like an Easter Egg THG leaves for us every now and then.
@@KrisCreiderDon’t be dickish
@ACatNamedLupus notice the like disparity between the original post and the reply.
@@KrisCreiderWhy are you here then?
lol...I wondered how many comments it would be before someone pointed it out haha...
I was beginning to think it was part of an extreme league structure remodelling so that East became West 😂
The nhl adopts a "battle royale" system. 100 teams enter. 1 team leaves.
And watch each division have a sponsor, just because they can.
The Tim Horton's Division?
And then that sponsor will have a sub sponsor
The colgate division. Recommended by 9/10 LTIR doctors.
They did that when they changed the divisions for the 2021 season when teams only played in their division. So you’re probably right
The In-n-Out Southeast Division Championship, sponsored by Raytheon!
I assume you sent this to Gary so he can use it in the future.
It’s true! Even now, they could give the divisions players names, it would be much more endearing.
Other way around. Gary sent this to Shannon so he can hear feedback on his plan
@@legndery1909 Bet-man has ideas? More likely he watches THG under his covers every night.
@@jeffreyrainey1015 I'm sure they'd name them after sponsors knowing the NHL
I think you're right on the money with the expansion clubs, but I just don't see why AZ and COL wouldn't be swapped here.
I agree.
He mentions at the very beginning that Utah and Colorado need to be in the same division. I think all 3 should be in same division + Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg
@@verytasty1532 "need" does a lot of work here. There is a while damn mountain range between them. (not at you)
@@trapjohnson I think it's more so that Utah will be by far the closest team to Colorado. Would seem a bit silly to not have them play each other most often from a Colorado perspective, especially when there are no other teams very close to Colorado at all
@@verytasty1532then van, Seattle, cali teams and az for a pacific division?
I think it'll be 9 per the four divisions. ATL goes to the Metro, Quebec City in the Atlantic, Houston into the Central and the revived Coyotes Pacific.
9 teams in 4 divisions how can scheduling work?
6 teams in 6 divisions are easier to schedule
@@ddddirge With 4 divs of 9 teams each, at minimum,
3 divisional games, so 3 x 8 = 24
2 with everyone else, so 2 x 27 = 54
and four extra games for: more arch-rival games, and encounters with other clubs that rotate every year; western Canadian cities would want to see more Habs and Leafs
In this case, get rid of Conferences, so the semifinals would be 1st vs 4th, and 2 vs 3.
Playoff Quals: top 4 per div.
Or, top 3 per div, with a play-in between next 8 teams league-wide. Best record meets lowest record.
A playoff qualification should be no longer than a 2-game home and home, with tie-break criteria similar to the reg season.
@@joetoh6675we experienced it this year and I don’t want to ever have to again there is no world where Philly and Pittsburgh should be playing each other less than 4 times a year I don’t love the 6 division format either because that is an absolute mess to seed curious if there is an in between way to do it.
Quebec City is not getting a team stop it
With 4 divisions with 9 teams the NHL can get more games in the regular season.
4 games against teams in the same division 4*8=32
2 games against the rest of the teams in the league 2*27=54
That´s 86 games, which I think is realistic.
Dude, what an in-depth vid, well done sir!
I thought about this and came up with something similar, but prioritizing time zones in the west
Pacific: VAN, SEA, SJS, LAK, ANA, VGK (splits up Vancouver and Alberta unfortunately)
Mountain: CLG, EDM, WPG, SLC, COL, ARI (Winnipeg is the odd one out)
Central: MIN, CHI, STL, NAS, DAL, HOU
Southeast: FLA, TBL, ATL, CAR, WSH, CBJ (east is the same)
Northeast: QUE, MTL, OTT, TOR, BUF, BOS
Metro: NYR, NYI, NJD, PHI, PIT, DET
4x games against divisional opponents, 2x games against everyone else
I also think the best playoff format is top two from each division, plus two wildcards in each conference, as divisional play is more important with this regular season format.
Ultimately, I really hope they don't expand this much (though it's hard to argue with $$$). It sucks to expand the playoffs, and it sucks to make it harder to make the playoffs, either way ruining the good balance we have now. It also would ruin the balance between playing in every arena, and maintaining rivalries that there's no good way to solve without increasing the number of games (which can't happen).
I don't want to see the NHL become the NFL where you only play certain teams every 4 years, and I don't want to see it become the MLB where it's impossible to watch every game.
The NBA has now adopted the play-in round, though it's a single game knockout involving the 7-10 seeds in each conference. Which was what many fans wanted the NHL 2020 bubble playoffs to be, maybe a best-of-3 instead of a single game. But the league elected to make it a best-of-5 involving seeds 5-12 in each conference.
Also, for many years there was no interleague play in the MLB. I think that only became a thing at the turn of the millennium, but I could be wrong. I also don't think interleague play is necessary for the regular season. Make more divisional games instead.
Sam, I wrote down my divisional alignment before I read yours, and it’s exactly the same.
Shannon,
Winnipeg and Minnesota should not be put in a Northwest Division where there is a 2 time zone difference. I’m OK with a 1 time zone difference within a division.
The only negative of Sam’s and my alignment is that Vancouver is split from Calgary & Edmonton.
BTW for everyone: Arizona is on Mountain Standard time year round. So they’re the same as Mountain in the winter and the same as Pacific after early March when daylight savings starts. So it’s not optimum to have Arizona in the Central.
Geographically, you could almost flip Detroit and Nashville, but the way the time zone line is laid out, Detroit is on Eastern time and Nashville is on Central time.
They will never separate Vancouver from Alberta. Those are the games everyone loves
The division names are cool. Takes me back to when I first started watching hockey with the Campbell and Norris....
I like more rivalry games leading to a rivalry playoffs. It’s easier to just get aware of a few teams and how you stack up against them than half the league.
The southwest should be the Dionne Division. At a time when west coast hockey was the LA Kings, Dionne was a scoring machine. He was our first superstar.
As a pre-Gretzky Kings fan, I wholeheartedly agree!
West needs to be organized by time zones full stop
Only issue is the states that don’t switch time zones, but 100% agree with them being aligned that way
I think it’s stupid teams like FLA and TB fly over Carolina, Washington, Pennsylvania, New Jersey/East New York to play teams in Canada, Massachusetts, West New York, and vice-versa.
Like, isn’t saving fuel and miles traveled more important than an hour saved? 😒
That would work for the Pacific (6 teams) but the Central has 8 teams and the Mountain only has 4. Two from the Central would have to go to the Mountain, probably Winnipeg and Arizona, but then you're taking Vancouver away from Calgary and Edmonton. That wouldn't work.
I agree, for the same reason Detroit wants to be in the East, as a Dallas Stars and Houston Astros fan I’m tired of a large portion my teams away games being in the pacific or mountain time zone (for Dallas it’s not as bad as to used to be).
Don't you mean Saskatoon and Winnipeg?
Shouldn't the east and west magnets be flipped?
LMAO shannon moments
100%
Shh don't tell him
l noticed once he mentioned the Jazz magnet. Other than that l like the divisions
Who cares? Why be anal about it? Im sure you aren't that stupid and do understand.
I can't imagine my Jets not playing St. louis, Chicago and Dallas. All in the same time zone.
Detroit has to come back to our division as well
The quality content put out by this man is unrivaled. The sports networks are put to shame each day
I admire you Shannon for pursuing your passion!
why not group by timezone? seems like thats what creates more competitive advantage. 1.)CA teams + VAN, SEA, VGK 2.) Alberta teams + Utah, Colorado, AZ, and one of dallas or Houston 3.) existing central division as it is now but without colorado, AZ, and possibly Houston instead of Dallas
I'm gonna try for fun
Western Conference
Pacific : LA, San Jose, Anaheim, Seattle, Vancouver, Vegas
Center West : Calgary, Edmonton, Utah, Colorado, Winnipeg, Arizona
Center East : Houston, Minnesota, Chicago, Nashville, St Louis, Dallas
Eastern Conference
Northeast : Quebec City, Toronto, Buffalo, Ottawa, Montreal, Boston
Metropolitan : NYR, NYI, NJD, Pittsburgh, Washington, Philly
Atlantic : Columbus, Detroit, Atlanta, TBL, Panthers, Canes
I like your western divisions better than Shannon’s tbh… I feel like Minnesota would not be happy with a division of almost all Canadian teams that are very far west of them. Splitting Vancouver up from the Alberta teams is unfortunate, but putting them with Seattle + California does make sense, and then Arizona fits nicely with the Canadian/American prairie teams, and Minnesota slots into the Central.
@@Lafv Yea, The only two teams I wasn't sure of is winnipeg is pretty far from the other teams in the division I put them in, and detroit is kind of far as well, but my goal was to keep iconic rivalries together like pitt washington and Boston leaf's and habs etc etc.
@@jakobfinney Winnipeg is a bit far but it works cause they’re with CGY & EDM. Detroit doesn’t really have any rivals in their division though, I’d switch them with Washington personally
@@Lafv Maybe because I grew up watching Crosby and Ovi that rivalry seemed bigger than it is but I wanted washington to stay with pittsburgh but I can see that change. I also dont think the red wings have massive rivalries except the original 6, but when I looked it up their fans seemed to hate tampa, but maybe thats every fanbase lol
"Center East" is called the Mid-West.
"Center West" could be Mountain maybe..Other than that, I like your WC divisions.
This screws Minnesota really hard.
and winnipeg, and arizona.
...I agree!... I'd have Arizona in the southwest, Utah in the northwest, & Minnesota in the central!...
@@dominickpanoz That screws Utah harder than you'd be screwing Minnesota.
Minnesota in the NW sort of makes sense, but Arizona in the Central doesn't. They'd be closer to all the teams in the SW than half of the teams in the central division.
@@idiotandco.1750 ...How?... if Utah's in the NW, they'd still have two teams in their time zone & none that are two time zones away!... if MIN is in the NW, they'd only have one team in their time zone & two teams that are two time zones away!...
I think you nailed it especially given the subtle changes/options that you mention later on in the vieeo.
AZ is located in the southwest US; not certain why they are in the central division. Ergo AZ to the southwest, CO to the northwest moving WInnipeg or MN to the central. This works if you take time zones under consideration, other than either Wpg or MN two hours ahead of the Pacific time zone.
they have the divisions mostly divided up by time zone for a reason, Shannon. This would absolutely kill the jets and the other teams in the "northwest" because of all the crazy time changes they'd have to experience during the season. it would directly disadvantage the teams there Over the teams in the other divisions. veto
Why would that kill them? Who cares bout the time Zone change?
@@wesleythorne6657 Kids in WPG or MN that want to watch their team play. 9pm local starts on school nights from Oct-April doesn't scream fan friendly/grow the game but if you are West Coast then you don't think or care about those things.
@@seanpollock8221 not west coast, honestly couldn’t care less if a few kids can’t watch the game before school.
@@wesleythorne6657 teams like new york rangers play nyi, nj devils, philly and still get to sleep in their own beds afterwards. this is huge for recovery for an athlete. jetlag and daily routine are also factors. I doubt nyr would play as well over the course of a full season if they were flying to the west coast every other day
@@wesleythorne6657bro time zone is a huge thing wtf are you talking about 😂
If the NHL were to expand to 36 teams in 6 divisons, a division of the Original 6 teams would be awesome. Maybe not the easiest in terms of geography but the inter-divisional play and rivalries would be worth it.
Love this! Nice job
Put the conference magnets in the wrong spots haha
Personally, I think that fans would like divisions better than a 2 conference setup. Being 6 or 8 points behind in your division feels better than being 18 points behind in your conference. Plus playing division rivals creates more rivalries for fans. More likely the NHL keeps things the way that they are and doesn't change anything.
I agree with you. As long as we can get one home and home with every team once a year. Back when your team played some outta conference teams every 3rd year… that was not great for attendance. some cities never got the chance to see star players
Best team in the west plays worst team in the west in round 1
The other 3 match ups can be divisional.
This way...winning "the conference" gets you something of real value.
Then in the second round...The team with the worst record must play the team with the highest record remaining.
This way regular season placement still means something of value.
I don't like conferences because you can never face your close rivals in a final. It's always some team on the other side of the nation.
But isn't it really the other way around: if you're 18 points behind in your division you're likely going to be like 8 (or more likely ~12) behind in conference as the other division(s) have teams to fit between teams from a division that unbalanced.
If the top 2 teams in the conference must play each other ever before the 3rd round. It's garbage. You earned that seed with hard work.
1 and 2 in the east should never ever meet anywhere but the east final.
THG has a Neapolitan complex
I see what you did there 🤭
Is that when you have rage when someone brings that shitty ice cream flavor to your house?
@@islandmankactually, it's 3 flavors 😏 and I like it 😅
Brilliant thought process
This would be a nightmare as a Jets fan. So many late games!
Now I’m expecting you to climb deeper in this rabbit hole
For playoffs, just make the top 2 from each division qualify. Division winners get seeds 1-3 and runners up get seeds 4-6, depending on points. And then next 2 most points as 7 and 8 seeds, they can be from same division.
for the playoffs it should be the team finished first in there division seed 1st and 2nd then the 3rd-8th go by points and do a cross over for example if the 9th place team in the east has more points then the 8th place team in the west then the 9th place team plays in the west if they do that you could have 2 teams in the same division play for the cup
36 teams. 4 divisions 9 teams each. Arizona to Pacific. Houston to Central. Atlanta to Metropolitan. Quebec to Atlantic. The 32 teams remain in their respective division.
Playoffs - Division based.
1-3 automatically qualify for playoffs.
4-6 must play in a qualifying best-of-one tournament.
7-9 eliminated from playoffs and season end at the conclusion of the regular season.
Qualifying tournament:
6th seed at 5th seed. Winner of that game plays at 4th seed. Winner of that game faces the 1st seed in the first round of playoffs.
I like the idea of 4 Divisions with 9 teams each. Not sure how you would run the schedule to make it fair unless you go to 86 games. I would also understand that the owners are going to want more opportunity at revenue since the % chance of making the playoffs would go down I would not want to extend the playoffs any further than maybe a wild card game per division. IE. Seeds 6-9 eliminated at the end of the season while the 4th seed hosts the 5th seed in a do or die situation to get into the playoffs.
I hope the NHL is taking notes. ✍️
We're talking about the NHL here. ;)
every other year teams in other conferences host each other. 2025 New Jersey hosts the Canucks, 2026 Vancouver hosts the devils.
Put Red Wings in Central, Predators in Southeast and Washington in Metro. Feels cleaner
I too felt disturbed seeing the Wings in a division like that. I'd give it to them if they actually named it the Howe division, but let's be real.
I love videos like this. I find them calming while also being interesting. Thanks, Shannon, for always putting out videos on topics that other hockey youtubers don’t typically talk about-and when they do, it’s not in your signature style (not putting down other hockey youtubers, many are fun and engaging and entertaining, but THG scratches the itch in my brain while also being those things, yknow?)
Fun video! It’s hard not to think of how diluted the talent could be. Thanks for the content.
While more teams def means more dilution of talent, at the same time, more people are playing hockey with better training, plus throw in the assumption it's growing internationally. I'd like to see an analysis and projection somewhere of the "dilution of talent" argument.
I think I figured out a really good formula that makes everybody happy :
4x 5 division opponents = 20 games
3x 12 conference opponents = 36 games
Okay now for the out of conference scheduling formula.
Each division is paired with a division from the other conference to play 2x. The division pairings rotate every year (similar to NFL’s scheduling formula). You play the remaining out of conference teams 1x season, alternating home and away on the non pairing years, giving us:
2x 6 non conference, paired division teams = 12 games
1x 12 non conference, non paired division teams = 12 games
Which gives us….. an 80 game season!!!
I really think this formula makes everyone happy. Division and conference rivalries play just as often as they do now, every team plays each other at least once.
And if you want to keep the 82 game format, throw in 2x additional conference, non division matchups that are legacy rivalries from the previous divisional make ups. E.g. Tampa plays Toronto and Boston an additional game.
Minnesota to Central
Sharks to Northwest
Arizona to Southwest
arizona and colorado flipped?
4 New NHL Teams Are Atlanta, Houston, Quebec City, And Utah With Arizona Being An NHL Team Again In 5 Years.
I like what you've got, but I'd move Minnesota to the Central, Arizona to the Southwest, and Utah to the Northwest, just to keep the time zone changes down. But I like it!
Torts just gifted the Capitals a postseason birth!!
Pulled the goalie in tie game despite being eliminated by the Red Wings
4 expansion teams at once would sure make for an interesting expansion draft.
The league needs to contract to 28 teams. Will never happen though.
Very interesting concept
Tbh i find rivalry's are more formed in the playoffs rather than the regular season. Like the canucks and blackhawks playoff history or toronto boston
32 is enough
The magnets being backwards is hilarious to me
Thanks!
Awesome interesting video!
I'd be pissed if the Wild were in a West Coast division.
Only two teams would be on the actual coast. All others are east of the mountains.
Bring back the Whalers and the Nordiques!!
As someone who is from Georgia, the general feel from most around here is that the team should be called the Thrashers, and I honestly think that's what they'll go with. The Phoenix, Firebirds or Knights are the only other options I see, BUT the Knights already exist in the NHL, the Phoenix sounds weird especially if the Coyotes come back and the Firebirds doesn't sound as good as Thrashers to me.
Agree with your thoughts on 6 divisions in a 36-team league and I was thinking the same to get to an expanded playoffs. I was against the idea at first, but Elliotte Friedman was very insistent that because the NHL is more gate-driven than other pro sports, expanded playoffs are a necessity. I think that in a 36-team league, 24 teams make the playoffs. The top team in each conference get a bye in a first round with one wild card, and the remaining of the top 4 in each division enter a first round best of 5 series. The winning teams in the first round face the bye teams in the second round. A team would have to win either 16 or 19 games to win the Stanley Cup, but the regular season would be shortened by 2 games to 80. Thanks for all you do here and cheers
A play-in should be no longer than a 2-game home and home, with tie-break criteria similar to the reg season. Having to start with a b.o. 5- or even 3-game series would guarantee those teams never advancing past the final 16.
I guess I hate the idea of Minnesota in the Northwest. Two opponents in the Mountain Time Zone, and two in the Pacific just doesn’t get it. Should Arizona get another team, put them out west - where they are geographically. Chicago, St.Louis, and even (yuck) Dallas should be our division rivals.
That is an issue for the Jets as well.
@@jacobdill4499That’s very true. It’s all speculation at this ooint, but I’m not happy about the prospect of either team stuck in a division like this, to be honest.
Here's my ideas
West -
Mostly based on timezone
Pacific - Anaheim, Los Angeles, San Jose, Vegas, Seattle, Vancouver
Sierra/Rocky - Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Kansas City, Calgary, Edmonton
Central - Houston, Dallas, Nashville, St. Louis, Minnesota, Winnipeg
Could swap Winnipeg/Kansas City
Eastern Conference V1
You can divy up the north east two ways and travel time can take a back seat to rivalries. Here I did OG6 division
Oldtown/Metropolitan - Boston, Montreal, Toronto, New York Rangers, Detroit, Chicago
Atlantic - Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New Jersey, New York Islanders, Ottawa, Buffalo
Southern - Florida, Tampa, Atlanta, Carolina, Washington, Columbus
Could swap Washington/New Jersey if you want Penguins vs Capitals in the same division.
Eastern Conference V2
Heres a 3-3 split
Atlantic - Boston, New York Rangers, Montreal, New York Islanders, Buffalo, Ottawa
Foundry - Toronto, Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Columbus
Southern - Florida, Tampa, Atlanta, Carolina, Capitals, New Jersey.
When the line for the eastern conference runs through Nashville and Chicago theres its hard to put a team there. Atlanta is the easy one, after that you got Indianapolis, and then it falls of a cliff to Quebec City. It's just easier to expand west as adding 2 teams in Texas makes sense, Kansas City makes sense, Portland makes sense, Arizona/Utah make sense, New Orleans makes sense, so I think if we are going to 40 it will be 5-3 or 6-2(west-east) with how the league expands. if holding to 36 it makes sense to go 3-1 west-east.
Foundry kicks ass
Original Six Division would be glorious, fuck timezones resurrect that bloodbath all season long baby. That foundry division would also be killer. Any way you slice it, Chicago should be battling in the east.
Nice effort. I mostly agree
2:28 Also can't forget Brett Hull finished his career with Arizona
Original 6 division: Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Montreal, NY Rangers, Toronto
Canadian/North division: Quebec City, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver
Pacific division: Anaheim, Arizona, Los Angeles, San Jose, Seattle, Vegas
Central division: Utah, Colorado, Dallas, Houston, St. Louis, Minnesota
South division: Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Washington
Atlantic division: NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Columbus
I like this.
You cannot not put Montreal and Quebec City together. One of the Biggest rivalries ever
@@brandoncote5406 So you don't want a rivalry?
@@tristanpotts3300 I want the rivalry, these divisions split Québec and Montréal
@@brandoncote5406 I agree, now why would they do a OG 6 division? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The divisions should be teams that are within a certain distance from each other.
No no no Shannon, Vancouver should be in the southeast division! 🤭
Great job .
Top 2 from each division and two wildcards from among the 3 divisions allows for 8 teams per side for a clean playoff setup.
The idea of the NHL expanding beyond 32 teams is just ludicrous. They are definitely interested in quantity, not quality.
Nashville to southeast
, Detroit to central and Washington to metro and it's perfect
I honestly wish they would put Detroit back in the West and just bring Nashville to the East. Detroit has felt out of place for years. All their classic rivals are in the West. They've been irrelevant in the East.
@@jbellflower83 Detroit is nowhere close to any of the teams out West sans Chicago in terms of geography. The Avs rivalry is dead and gone. I love that my Wings are in the East, primarily for the reason that I won't be up until midnight watching games.
Love it!!!
This can definitely work I like this format of 6 divisions (3 divisions in both conferences) & 2 conferences
Detroit should be with Buff, Tor, Mtl, Ott, and Que and rename it Howe. Boston should be in the Orr division with Isles, NYR, Pitt, Philly, and NJ.
Expansion, especially in the places the NHL is talking about, will just further water down the league.
and the officiating
That's the same argument every time that any sport expands... and the competition gets better not worse. Way back when, the NHL went from 16 to 21 teams? Edmonton, Quebec, Winnipeg and Hartford were all expansion teams and the talent pool was just fine.
Have you looked at the teams in the playoffs this year? Tell me how the league is “watered down?”
There is more average talent per team on the ice now than I'd wager any era ever before, with the amount of young kids playing hockey and going pro. Thanks to the cap, that talent is spread out more, so less dynasties for sure.
The one issue I have is that the average fan will see less Stanley Cups in their lifetime. I'm envious of my dad who grew up an Islanders fan and saw them win 19 playoff series in a row. That just won't ever happen again. (Or really really probably won't happen again). I wish every tier 2 market could get the St Louis experience, but there just aren't enough years in the average fan's lifetime.
@quinten3427 That's a valid thought. One thing that bothers me is how the small market teams are already hurting themselves, in my opinion. They take on bad contracts to get to the salary floor. It's a lot of money that isn't helping them on the ice. I know that the argument is that they're getting draft picks, but draft picks can be a gamble that doesn't always work out. I think if they spent money on salaries instead of gambling on draft picks, they might be better off? Or not?
This is GREAT!
You do a great job
Love THG rabbit holes
Loved the video! Very interesting - yeah NHL with 36 teams seems like the way the world is going.
I am soooo excited about this...more expansion...fantastic idea especially for Georgia which is just screaming for a hockey team, who wouldn't want to see hockey when the temperature is 97 and the humidity 99, can't wait for the first outdoor game there. Hopefully the league will expand to Idaho and New Mexico, I will personally fly to Boise to witness the historic first game between the Idaho Potatoheads and the New Mexico Roadrunners....epic 😂.
I think you’re spot on
While I agree with the East, I am pretty sure the Arizona team will not want to be in with the Central Time zone because they are effectively in the Pacific Time zone from March until November.
Here is my suggestion for three 6 team divisions in the Western Conference. Time zones in parenthesis. Arizona is (M/P) because of the uniqueness of their situation. (Note: Division Names are placeholders, suggestions welcome)
PACIFIC DIVISION
Vegas (P)
Los Angeles (P)
San Jose (P)
Anaheim (P)
Vancouver (P)
Seattle (P)
MOUNTAIN DIVISION
Utah (M)
Colorado (M)
Arizona (M/P)
Calgary (M)
Edmonton (M)
Winnipeg (C) (Note: Some team from the Central Time zone had to be added here)
CENTRAL DIVISION
Dallas (C)
Houston (C)
Nashville (C)
Chicago (C)
St Louis (C)
Minnesota (C)
Northwest:
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
San Jose
Seattle
Winnipeg
Southwest:
Los Angeles
Anaheim
Arizona
Colorado
Utah
Las Vegas
Midwest:
Minnesota
Detroit
Chicago
St Louis
Milwaukee
Columbus
--
Southeast:
Dallas
Houston
Nashville
Atlanta
Florida
Tampa Bay
Northeast:
Montreal
Toronto
Boston
Ottawa
Buffalo
New Jersey
Metropolitan:
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington DC
Carolina
Play every division team four times. (5 x 4= 20)
Play other same-conference teams twice, plus one team from each division a third time (12 + 12 + 2 = 26)
Play every opposite-conference team twice (18 x 2 = 36)
Winnipeg obviously gets screwed the worst (but at least they don’t have to cross the border for three of their rivals.)
In the second scueduling option, I think you could also take a page out of the NFL's book to get the number of games up to 82. You could have 2 additional games, each against a team in the same conference who had the same division standing as you. So for example: if the division standings were just as shown on the board, then Calgary would play Dallas and Utah 3 times in the following season, as opposed to just twice.
Hear me out: 4 x 5 div teams = 20.
3 x 12 conference teams = 36
1 x 18 opposite conference teams = 18 games. 74 games so far.
8 “floater” games in the opposite conference. Decided by last years’s standings, best rivalries, or rotating schedule.
Playoffs: 2 division winners each, 2-3 wild card teams per conference.
This is fun Shannon. But i agree with your idea of going to just two conferences.
Even with Chicago being in the central time zone, the idea of having an Origins division with the original 6 I think is a banger that could be worth it. Just make their home divisional games start at 7:00 local time. Even with Detroit not being geographically close to Montreal, when teams are flying for their travel, there isn’t a big difference between a 1:35 flight to Philly or a 1:05 flight to Pittsburg and a 1:50 flight to Montreal.
I actually love this, it probably won't happen but if it does I'm all in for it.
I drew up something similar when I've found out elsewhere that LA Rams owner Stan Kroenke is exploring a San Diego franchise. I've factored out Atlanta because of no potential owner identified at the moment.
Gretzky: VAN, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, SD*
Hart: VGK, AZ*, SLC, COL, CAL, EDM
Norris: WPG, MN, CHI, STL, DET, CLB
Bettman: NSH, CAR, TB, FL, DAL, HOU*
Adams: BUF, TOR, OTT, MTL, QUE*, BOS
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHL, PIT, WSH
I have kept your scheduling mechanism for a relatively clean 80 game schedule. For the playoffs, teams will be seeded by division champions obtaining the first six seeds, then the remaining ten by season record.
i would want pittsburgh and washington together. that rivalry still holds up
"Seattle has to be in the same division as Vancouver from a travel perspective." Adds Minnesota seconds later.
Flight distances:
Seattle to Canucks: ~120 miles
Seattle to Flames: ~440 miles
Seattle to Oilers: ~560 miles
Seattle to Utah: ~700 miles
Seattle to Sharks: ~700 miles
Seattle to Golden Knights: ~880 miles
Seattle to Kings: ~960 miles
Seattle to Ducks: ~980 miles
Seattle to Avalanche: ~1000 miles
Seattle to Phoenix: ~1100 miles
Seattle to Jets: ~1150 miles
Seattle to North Stars (I mean, Wild): ~1400 miles
Denver to Minneapolis: ~700 miles
Salt Lake City to Minneapolis: ~1000 miles
Limiting travel, are we? Putting Minnesota in a division with Seattle and Vancouver increases travel for all three.
West Division:
Seattle
Vancouver
San Jose
Los Angeles
Anaheim
Vegas
Midwest Division:
Colorado
Utah
Arizona
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Central Division:
Minnesota
Dallas
Houston
Nashville
Chicago
St. Louis
For the west, they should keep it (mostly) in line with time zones:
Pacific = Vancouver, Seattle, SJ, LA, Anaheim, and Vegas
Mountain = Edmonton, Calgary, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and Winnipeg (Winnipeg would be the only one outside of their time zone; but would get to be in a division with 2 Canadian teams)
Central = Minnesota, Chicago, Nashville, St. Louis, Dallas, & Houston
For the east, I think they'd need to give every team at least one 'assigned local rival' (Ideally historic, but basically a short drive that the networks would make into a thing and air every year; this is basically because a team like Columbus needs someone close by; and in your set up, I don't think Washington would fit that role).
North = Toronto-Buffalo, Montreal-Boston, & Ottawa-Quebec
Metro = NYR-NYI, NJ-Philly, & Washington-Pittsburgh
South = Tampa-Florida, Atlanta-Carolina, & Detroit-Columbus
Splitting it this way would be ideal for time zones, and I hope would also give natural internal rivals
Cool idea
Good video. What about the conference magnets?
Pacific: Vegas, San Jose, Anaheim, LA, Seattle, Vancouver
Mountain: Calgary, Edmonton, Colorado, Utah, Winnipeg, Minnesota
Central: Dallas, Houston, Nashville, Chicago, St. Louis and Arizona (new team gets shafted)
One division with three time zones because it’s unavoidable with 7 pacific, 4 mountain and 7 central time zone teams
great idea
Honestly, I think you could shift SJ to the northwest, Minn to the central, and AZ to the southwest for the western conference.
I’d love to see more ephasis on rivarlies. Sadly with expansion I think we move further from that rather than closer.
Now personally I would have six divisions and still two conferences when the league expands to 36 teams with two Canadian teams in a division and four each conference, with the top two from each division qualifying for the playoffs plus four Wild cards per conference would involve in play in three game series for the last two playoff spots (7v10, 8v9).
All playoff rankings would based on points total.
The regular season format I would use looks like the following
90 game season:
6 games against division teams (5x6=30)
2 games against conference rivals (12x2=24)
2 games against opposite conference teams (18x2=36), but to reduce travel this would be played as two game series, so for example, you would play in every non-conference venue every two years instead of the currently which is yearly.
I was a big fan of the old playoff format, particularly because it fostered playoff meetings by happenstance-which I think is the way it should be…let rivalries be born and happen naturally!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
East demands ONE timezone.
West: Laughs while cursing in THREE
I like how we all silently agree that the old playoff system was better than the current system
While I understand the time zone reasoning, I'd prefer to see Nashville in the Southeast, Detroit in the Central, and Washington in the Metropolitan. Keep the Caps/Pens rivalry, Bring back the Hawks/Wings rivalry, and implement the natural Nashville/Atlanta rivalry.
Detroit fans also travelled well to St Louis.
Go to four divisions of nine teams each. Play four games against each intradivisional rival (32 games) and two games against everybody else (48 games) for a 90 game season. Don't expand the playoffs unless one-game play-ins are instituted, similar to the NBA. Retain the divisional structure for playoffs.
I tried doing this yesterday, with the same 4 expansion teams. My 3 eastern divisions were the same as yours, except I had Nashville instead of Columbus in the Southeast (Columbus replaced Nashville as the eastern team stuck in the Western Conference; I didn't think about time zones). I had the 3 California teams, Vegas, Seattle, and Vancouver in a "Pacific" division, which worked, but the other 2 western divisions were a bit of a mess. I like your western divisions better, although I probably would swap Arizona and Colorado.
Rivalries are where it’s at. It’s going to be hard to come up with demeaning chants for every team if the league goes in this direction.
I love the 80 game schedule idea.
I heavily prioritize every team playing every other team twice each year instead of having strong rivalries. As someone that lived out of market (Virginia), I’ve always cared very about the Minnesota Wild coming to teams nearby every year for me to see them. I also think that it makes for a more competitive league overall, and that it helps us determine who the best team is league wise before getting to the playoffs, unlike the NFL, for example, where so many teams never see certain teams unless they get to the Super Bowl.
I also think that an 85 game schedule would work, if we wanted to add additional divisional games. But, I think we would need to simplify the playoffs some.
As to 6 divisions, I wouldnt hate having 4 divisions of 9 teams.
As a Blue Jackets fan, this puts us in a division without either team we consider a rival (Red Wings, Penguins).
Bettman doesn't want rivalries, creates too much animosity. He's trying to eliminate fighting in the league.