A few tweaks

My last post proposed some pretty drastic changes to the way the NHL operates. Today, I'd like to suggest some less drastic measures.

The NHL has usually created divisions based on geographical proximity. Most of the time it has tended to have equal number of teams in each division. Subsequently, each conference has usually had an equal number of divisions. I think its time to reconsider some of these traditions. My first suggestion is only moderately drastic. My second suggestion is more practical--particularly is a team were to relocate to Hamilton.

Suggestion #1
An interesting alternative would be to do away with conferences and have 5 divisions of 6 teams each. They would be:

Great Lakes: Pit, Clb, Det, Buf, Tor, Chi
Northwest: Van, Edm, Cal, Col, Min, Stl
Southwest: LA, Ana, SJ, Pho, Dal, Nas
Southeast: Atl, Car, TB, Fla, Phi, Was
Northeast: Bos, NYR, NYI, NJ, Mon, Ott

Teams would play teams within their own division 4 times, teams in adjacent divisions 3 times (Great Lakes being adjacent to Northwest and Northeast), and teams in non-adjacent divisions twice. This would result in an 80 game schedule. If the NHL were concerned about maintaining an 82 game schedule, two extra games could be added. Perhaps an extra home and home series between seeded teams in each division.

Sure, getting rid of conferences would be a big deal, particularly with respect to the playoffs. But the NHL has been toying with the idea of changing the playoff format anyway. The top 20 teams could qualify for the playoffs. They would be divided into 4 pools of 5 (East A, East B, Central C, and West D) with a preliminary round robin of home and away games. The top two teams from each pool would advance to the Stanley Cup quarter finals with best of 7 elimination until the champion is crowned.

Suggestion #2
If that first suggestion seems a bit too far out there for some, this realignment might be a bit more palable:

Eastern Conference

Northern: Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal,
Altantic: Boston, New Jersey, NYRangers, NYIslanders,
Central: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington, Columbus,
Southern: Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Florida,

Western Confernce

Northern: Vancouver, Minnesota, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, Detroit, Chicago,
Pacific: Anahiem, San Jose, Los Angeles, Dallas, Phoenix, Nashville, St.Louis,

I spent the better part of a very long day playing with numbers and looking at various combinations (Yes, I had nothing better to do). I think that this might actually be something that could work. In the end, I constructed a schedule based on the above realignment. For simplicity, a schedule of 80 games works much more nicely than 82 with this configuration. Teams would play one game against teams from the other conference, half being at home and half being away. This would alternate from year to year between home and away for each division. Teams would play non-division teams 4 times and division rivals 6 times. If the NHL insisted on an 82 game schedule, I'm sure that 2 extra wild card games could be included. One possibility would be one extra game based on conference seeding and one based on non-conference seeding (first vs last, second vs second last, etc with 8th and 9th in the east playing twice) Top seeds could have home ice thereby rewarding good teams with two extra home games. Don't worry, thanks to revenue sharing no one would be left empty handed.

Under this format, the Stanley Cup playoffs wouldn't need to change. However, to compensate for the extra teams in the East, a format change might be worthwhile. It could be argued that the Western teams would have a slight advantage from fewer teams. However, at present they argue a slight disadvantage because of travel. So, in reality, the changes wouldn't neccessitate any alteration for the playoff format in the west. In the east, the top ten or twelve teams could qualify for the playoffs. There are a number of ways that an Eastern Champion could be crowned. Starting with 10 or 12 teams would likely require some form of round robin play. If 12 teams qualified, the four division winners could get a bye into the second round. The other 8 teams that qualify would be divided into two pools. The first round would be a round robin, home and away playoff. The second round would consist of two new pools made up of the top two teams from the first round pools and two division winners. This round would also be a home and away round robin playoff. The top two teams in each pool would then move on by cross-over to best of five elimination conference semi-final and final series. If 10 teams qualified, they could be divided into two pools for round robin play. The top two from each pool could then cross-over to play best-of-seven series. Either way, it would add a bit more creativity to the playoffs.