WordsOfWisdom Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Think of how much more interesting it would be right now if the NHL allowed 8/30 teams in instead of 16/30. When you look at the standings, there are TWO races going on: Minnesota vs Colorado for 8th Philly vs Detroit for 8th That's it. The bottom teams are out. The top teams are in. There is nothing intriguing happening in the middle. Teams are just waiting for the playoffs to start. Should we really be putting all of our focus on the 8th place teams in each conference this time of year? Why? If it were the top 8/30 (top 4 per conf), you would have Boston, Philly, Detroit, New York x 2, Florida, Tampa, etc. all battling for 3 of the 4 spots and all within a few points of one another. I'm sorry but that's just better in my opinion. Is it less revenue to lose a playoff round? Yes. Does it add meaning to the regular season? Yes. Does it put the focus on the best teams instead of the middle teams? Yes. Does it give a reason for the top teams to play well down the stretch instead of coast? Yes. Is it better for the integrity of the game? Yes. As a fan, I don't care about revenue. I care about the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted March 25, 2016 Author Share Posted March 25, 2016 Of course, I realize Philly/Detroit/Minny/Colorado fans are happy right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 17 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: Think of how much more interesting it would be right now if the NHL allowed 8/30 teams in instead of 16/30. When you look at the standings, there are TWO races going on: Minnesota vs Colorado for 8th Philly vs Detroit for 8th That's it. The bottom teams are out. The top teams are in. There is nothing intriguing happening in the middle. Teams are just waiting for the playoffs to start. Should we really be putting all of our focus on the 8th place teams in each conference this time of year? Why? If it were the top 8/30 (top 4 per conf), you would have Boston, Philly, Detroit, New York x 2, Florida, Tampa, etc. all battling for 3 of the 4 spots and all within a few points of one another. I'm sorry but that's just better in my opinion. Is it less revenue to lose a playoff round? Yes. Does it add meaning to the regular season? Yes. Does it put the focus on the best teams instead of the middle teams? Yes. Does it give a reason for the top teams to play well down the stretch instead of coast? Yes. Is it better for the integrity of the game? Yes. As a fan, I don't care about revenue. I care about the game. I completely disagree. You are measuring this based on the top 8 teams of each conference making it, then yeah there are more teams in the mix. If going into the season you know only the top 4 from each division make it. -- two from each division. then more teams will call it quits earlier in the season. Kind of like baseball. And the owners will never go for this as the playoffs are the profit makers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share Posted March 26, 2016 Oh, I just meant chopping a play-off round. So 8/30 instead of 16/30, same selection format. Thus, top team in each division makes it plus 2 wildcards. If it went this way now, here is what the play-off race in the East would look like: Washington* - 109 (clinched) Florida* - 91 NY Rangers - 92 Tampa - 89 --------------------------------------------------- Pittsburgh - 88 NY Islanders - 87 Boston - 86 Philly - 85 Detroit - 85 Number of play-off races: 6-way battle for the 4th seed. Panthers and Rangers also in play. Both Philly and Detroit would still be in the race and have lots to play for. It actually creates more excitement when you have fewer teams getting in because you create scarcity. Scarcity creates play-off races and adds value to the regular season games. It's like a delicate balancing act. A PIT vs TB game means more if PIT is below the cut line trying to get in. It means almost nothing when TB is 4th and PIT is 5th of 8 teams that get in. You can't sell a "must-win" game to fans when it's just jockeying for play-off seed position. Under the current system, any game that takes place right now involving any of the above teams except Detroit and Philly, is a nearly meaningless game. The NHL could actually bring in 2x the revenue right now if it were structured as shown above because you could charge double for those regular season games 70-82. That's more than you make back in one play-off round. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDevil Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I think 16 teams, with 4 rounds is perfectly fine. I do think they could reseed them by points in the playoffs though. I know they want to build up rivalries with the divisional round (side note, I've always found it funny how much the league wants to play up hatred, yet are supposedly concerned about player safety) but I think that just leads to good teams going out early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPuk Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 I agree with @WordsOfWisdom. Anything that shortens the season is a good thing. Having play-off games in July is just ridiculous IMHO. Has the 16th place team ever won the cup? The 15th or 14th? How about the 8th place team? I don't know the answer, but I'll bet I can guess. The NHL play-offs are set up to fool people into thinking that their team has a chance but I doubt it would ever happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 Poor Leaf fans....you've forgotten the magic that is the playoffs. The Kings won the cup as an 8th seed. There are a lot of times when the first round is the best round of the playoffs...or close to it. It's also part and parcel of what makes hockey the most gruelling sport there is to win a championship in....I know the Flyers played 27 playoff games one season, and still lost. Meanwhile there are NFL champions who won 2 playoff games. Of course it's now become a gruelling 3 game series. Or even 4 if a wild card team made it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share Posted March 26, 2016 4 hours ago, BluPuk said: I agree with @WordsOfWisdom. Anything that shortens the season is a good thing. Having play-off games in July is just ridiculous IMHO. Has the 16th place team ever won the cup? The 15th or 14th? How about the 8th place team? I don't know the answer, but I'll bet I can guess. The NHL play-offs are set up to fool people into thinking that their team has a chance but I doubt it would ever happen. Or an even better question might be: Has the league (as a whole) FAILED when a 16th place team wins the Stanley Cup? (I say yes.) What is the value of the regular season when a 16th place team can win the Stanley Cup? (I say zero.) What is the benefit to finishing 1st when you have no greater chance to win than the 16th best team? (Home ice is not enough.) Don't get me wrong, I understand the allure of having a large tournament bracket. But in other sports (like tennis), you have THOUSANDS of players to choose from. The NHL has 30 teams. Imagine if I could play at Wimbleton just by being a weekend warrior tennis player with a beer gut. Imagine Wimbleton having a tennis tournament bracket large enough to include more than 50% of all tennis players in the world in their first round. Who would watch that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share Posted March 26, 2016 4 hours ago, flyercanuck said: Poor Leaf fans....you've forgotten the magic that is the playoffs. The Kings won the cup as an 8th seed. Completely. I know that teams can win from the 8th seed, but I look at that as a bad thing. The problem is simply that the NHL devalues its regular season by rewarding mediocrity. They're saying that being a "C-" team is good enough to play for hockey's biggest prize, however being a "C-" quality player doesn't get you into the NHL. Why then does the league accept .500 teams into the play-offs? It would be like the #16 ranked boxer in the world getting a title shot... and then knocking out the champion. Everyone loses in that situation because: a) People will think the previous champion wasn't a good champion. b) People will think the new champ got lucky and is just a joke. To use a wrestling term, nobody "gets over". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share Posted March 26, 2016 Anyway, that's my two cents. I know I get passionate about this stuff sometimes! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 I have to completely disagree with this. Personally, I don't believe that it's a bad thing that an eight-seed can win the Cup, To me, it shows that there are a lot of competitive teams, and that there's a good product being put on the ice. I can't really go along with the boxing analogy either. I really haven't heard anyone suggesting that either of the Kings' Cup-winning teams were weak or illegitimate. The fact that they fought through the grueling playoff race proved just the opposite. The first one was an eight-seed, and the second one finished sixth in the West. Contract the playoffs to eight teams, and neither of those happen. Those aren't the only runs we would have missed out on, either. There would have been no Philly Finals run in 2010, no Oilers run in 2006, and no Flames run in 2004, and no Anaheim run in 2003. In my opinion, that would be a shame, because that stuff was fun to watch. All of that said, it's not true that the #16 team has as good of a chance as the #1 team. Usually, they're #1 and #16 for a reason. Since 2001, a top seed has won the Cup five times. An eighth place team from a conference has won it a grand total of once in league history. Basically, I don't think it's broken, so I'd say don't try to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted March 27, 2016 Author Share Posted March 27, 2016 On 26/03/2016 at 11:51 AM, ScottM said: Basically, I don't think it's broken, so I'd say don't try to fix it. I wouldn't say that it's broken either. If the current system were a giant hay target for archers, the current play-off system would be like an arrow sitting in one of the outer rings. The archer gets the satisfaction of knowing that they hit something, and they probably leave feeling good about themselves, but there's plenty of room for improvement. Forum: "Stop with the @$&^#$@ analogies WoW!!!" Sorry! My bad! :-) The downside to the current system is as follows: Hurts the value of the regular season. Games 70-82 mean nothing. (Top 16 teams with nothing to play for -- more than half the league -- just wasting time until April. Intrigue centers around only 4 teams from March 1 onward every year with everything else having been decided.) Play-off ADHD sets in after one or two rounds. Audience = gone. Making the play-offs becomes a diminished accomplishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.