From The Ground Up: Divisions
61 CommentsCheck the pollbar. You can now vote on your preferred divisional boundary alignment for the Icethetics fantasy league.
Since I can't offer higher resolution images within the poll, I'm offering them here with a list of cities available to each division. All divisions here are named by geography.
Here are some things to think about with regard to the divisional boundaries. The larger the division area, the fewer teams you get out of that area in a way. Remember, every division gets 5 teams. Smaller divisional areas have a better chance of getting a city you want, for example.
So, if you think there should be more Canadian teams and fewer southern teams, you'll probably want to pick D. If you want more eastern cities than western, go with C. A has the best geographical spread. B and E rely heavily on northern cities. Just a few observations. There are plenty of other ways to look at each setup.
Happy voting!
Reader Comments (61)
I really love the way E is set up. I hope it wins.
For me, D is the one that emphasizes the best potential rivalries.
i like b the best even though it is really similar to the nhl right now, and this is trying to promote differences, but i just like it the best
i dont really see how the northeast division would work for D or really any divisions for D, the southeast is huge
and i think the midwest for E would suck kinda
b or a are the best
i think it will be cool if there is a team in ankourage
wtf @ sudbury... I spent one night there on my way moving from Thunder Bay to Ottawa... it is the worst city, aesthetically, that I've ever seen, lol. Hope it doesn't get a team. It's not even a big city, by any means.
:)
Setup D is the most pleasing, hopefully the beautiful Sault Ste. Marie gets a team.
Maybe I'll start a campaign for the Underdog, like vote Rory for All-Star!
Setup D wins in my book!!
Rochester needs a team to rival Buffalo! :]
Gotta go with D! And I dunno how you decided on my city, but thanks for including Sault Ste. Marie as a choice for a possible team!
i like D because it gives the chance of having teams higher north
Gotta go with D! And I dunno how you decided on my city, but thanks for including Sault Ste. Marie as a choice for a possible team!
That's what I'm talking about! Lets start a Vote for the Soo blog!
I gotta go with D, my town of Kelowna and my hometown of Vancouver are on it and i think i want to be apart of this finally now that i have some time to screw around on illustrator and photoshop.
what..no love for hawaii? im not hawaiian..but could you imagine the awesome road trip that would be for players and fans alike? lol
Same here, I gotta go with D!
I'm with the consensus, gotta go with D.
Here's to a team in Yellowknife or Whitehorse!!!
D and E are the most interesting to me. went with D only because i like all of CA in one division
I think option D is the way to go, I think it divides the areas up nicely; not too big, not too small, and keeps travelling costs realistic for most of the divisions except for northwest, southwest, and south east divisions
I think you should put cities that don't have NHL teams like - Roswell, Georgia - gwinnett, Georgia - columbus, Georgia
This site has totally lost it's direction. I'm so disappointed. Will make a note to visit less often.
E, I like that east coast metro areas are in the same division, i.e. Boston, Philly, NY, NJ, etc. Also puts TN in the Southeast, where they belong.
This site has totally lost it's direction. I'm so disappointed. Will make a note to visit less often.
And I'll make a note to remind myself of your disappointment. It's not a lost direction, it's a new one.
I like D and the 2 all Canadian Divisions(exception for anchorage, which should be part of Canada)!!!!!! It would be awesome!!!!!!!
lets go sault ste marie!!
Did San Jose kick your grandmother?
As an Edmontonian (and Canadian), it's between A and D.
I chose A for these four reasons though:
1.) It still has the Canada/US rivalry thing happening for what would be my team's division.
2.) For maintaining a solid Canadian rivalry as well (I'd kill to see an Edmonton/Winnipeg match again... even if it's in a made up league)
The last two are biggest reasons I didn't chose D:
3.) Vancouver's natural rival, and someone they should play regularly is Seattle... hell, let's include Spokane as well (this includes at the NHL level... you hear that Bettman? Forget about friggin Vegas!). Having these teams in the same division is one of the best things you could do for any of them.
4.) I firmly believe in mixing the two countries. Hey, if it was possible to break divisions into time zones, I'd be happier than hell (but the East would be overloaded with teams).
I didn't like D for a few reasons. Detroit is not a Western Conference city. The NHL has Detroit in this conference because there are barely any teams on the west.
Another reason was that the Pacific shouldn't branch out all the way to Colorado. They're like, 1000 miles from the coast?
Finally, the Southeast was way too large. There would need to be at least 7 teams for this division.
I went with A, I think all of the regions are fairly balanced, and there will be some great rivalries in each division. I'm looking forward to this project :)
I went with D. I think it allows for more Canadian cities which a hockey league should have. In A the NorthEast has too many "hockey" cities, and thus we would end up with many cities that are in the NHL now. For example, look at it and pick 5 cities and we'll probably have Toronto, Montreal, New York, Philly, and Pittsburgh. Or Buffalo or Ottawa would get in. To me that would result in too many cities that have NHL teams (currently) and stunt our level of creativity.
I chose 'D' because its the closest to the real sub-cultural divisions that exist in North America: where people travel by car, where relatives live, where people have the same accents, etc.
I'll vote for C because it's different, and if we had a league playoff setup like what the NHL has, there'd be a better chance of getting more Canadian teams in instead of having them all beat each other up during the regular season. It also is the only one to have Madison, WI, where there is a bunch of tradition on the college hockey level, but sadly lacks the population for an NHL team.
On a different note - I mentioned on the Hockey News Logo Tournament blog that they needed to give credit to Icethetics / NHL TOL and they removed my comment. Sad, taking credit for someone elses idea...
Gotta go with D
I can just envision that huge Anchorage vs Whitehorse Rivalry!
I would have liked to see an option for Victoria to have a team, but that's nitpicking.
I really like how this is starting to shape up, and it'll be really cool to see what has been created in a few months. Awesome stuff.
I do like A, but how do you pick only 5 from all the teams in the Northeast? There are 8 existing NHL cities in the list.
D gets my vote.
I do like A, but how do you pick only 5 from all the teams in the Northeast? There are 8 existing NHL cities in the list.
You just said it. EXISTING cities. The NHL already exists. I don't know how to get you guys to stop thinking of this project in terms of the NHL. Why are we bothering with all these steps if you just want to recreate the NHL?
i like d because tthen the will be one canadian team omnly division in each conference
Although a lot of fans have chosen Map D, I feel the need to take it a step further by predicting the cities per division and conferences that I hope will be represented. Please note that this is just a fun speculation on my part. My aim is to avoid using current NHL cities. So enjoy:
Northeast: Halifax, NS; Quebec City, QC; Sault St. Marie, ON; St. Johns, NL; Thunder Bay, ON.
Atlantic: Hartford, CT; Portland, ME; Providence, RI; Rochester, NY; Scranton, PA.
Southeast: Baltimore, MD; Greenville, SC; Houston, TX; New Orleans, LA; Orlando, FL
Midwest: Cleveland, OH; Indianapolis, IN; Kansas City, MO; Milwaukee, WI; Wichita, KS.
Pacific: Albuquerque, NM; Las Vegas, NV; Portland, OR; San Diego, CA; Seattle, WA.
Northwest: Anchorage, AK; Kelowna, BC; Saskatoon, SK; Whitehorse, YT; Yellowknife, NT.
…and for Map A:
Central: Cincinnati, OH; Grand Rapids, MI; Indianapolis, IN; Kansas City, MO; Sudbury, ON.
Northeast: Halifax, NS; Hartford, CT; Providence, RI, Quebec City, QC.
Southeast: Baltimore, MD; Birmingham, AL; Greenville, SC; Hampton Roads, VA; Orlando, FL.
Pacific: Anchorage, AK; Kelowna, BC; Las Vegas, NV; Portland, OR; Seattle, WA.
North: Bismarck, ND; Omaha, NE; Regina, SK; Winnipeg, MB; Yellowknife, NT.
South: Albuquerque, NM; Houston, TX; Oklahoma City, OK; Salt Lake City, UT; Wichita, KS.
Note: only four chosen for the Northeast.
I agree with most of your choices for both map sets. I would just change a few things like giving London On. and Winnipeg MB. teams over Sault ST. Marie ON. and Anchorage AK. respectively in map D. And maybe switch up one of the Portland's.
On another note, I fear for the Atlantic division (D) and the Northeast Divisions (A) for there are many current NHL cities in them and we may end up with 4 of 5 teams being from the NHL in those divisions because people will want their city represented in this Fantasy league. I for one will vote for Kalowna over Vancouver in my divisional area so I hope others will do the same and not make this the NHL with new boundaries.
i honestly dont know how the sault could every have a nhl franshise, let alone sudbury (but i hate sudbury)
that would be sick if we got one for this league
GO SOO!!
i think the problem is that too many people want to see new ideas for their hometown. Personally, i'd love to see Pittsburgh chosen, for many reasons including simple hometown pride. however, that does stray from the notion that we want a completely new league, devoid of NHL ideas.
i think from here on out, you should try to avoid having the "NHL current situation" not be an option. if you tweak what we can choose, then you'll have a lot of new things with only minor complaining when the choices are posted.
I also agree with a lot of the guys, after this is finished (but i'd announce it far ahead of time to appease the masses), set up a "minor league" for this venture. The minor league would be nothing more than this: anyone who wants to submit a team for a city that wasn't included, or even a second team for a city that was included, they can, and it will be posted and recorded. If you have multiples for a city, you can even have a poll to pick just one (keeping in line with what the site is all about). For instance, if Pittsburgh doesn't make the cut for this league, after this league is finalized, i could send you a Pittsburgh team concept. you post it, if someone else has another Pittsburgh team concept, put the two against each other in a poll, the winner gets put on the big board, or whatever becomes of this, as a "minor league team"
everybody wins!
i meant to say "not have the 'NHL current situation' be an option," for example, not include 30 teams as an option next time. you get the idea.
voted for option D because:
1) It has a very balanced spread.
2) Includes the most options for a very weak SE (in terms of "hockey cities").
and I would like to make the suggestion that D include cities like Tulsa OK, and Richmond VA instead of Tampa and Orlando FL in the SE.
ummm. i dont think sudbury is the greatest choice as a second ontario team. cities like london and hamilton are way better choices. id personally go with london because they have sold out every single game for the knights for the past like 5 years
i would really like to see colorado springs get a team. it is one of the most overlooked cities in the country and imo, with evidence of colorado college, they could field an nhl team. Denver vs the Springs, Battle of Colorado
Im from denver by the way
a or d is fine with me
I believe in geographical rivalries.
With that said I wanna see DC and Baltimore both with teams.
Actually label the DC team DMV (DC, MD, VA)
Ok, maybe it's just me, but it's annoying when the province you live in is completely cut off the map. Especially considering it's the most easterly point in north america and also contains north america's oldest city.
This would be a whole lot better if we could all just forget about the NHL and it's current cities. I'm totally on board to create this league completely from current non-NHL cities, even to no include original 6. Heck, this league should have its own original 6!
@ Darrell Sharpe
I could see how that could get irritating...
I REALLY like the idea of having our own "Original Six" (or Original Four, if you want to be different). I think Chris should be the one that gets to choose and create those. And then we're allowed to 'expand' into his league.
GReat idea Vic we should chose wen they got extended!!!!
if u didnt make it up the other person who said it good job :)
I didn't vote D because I am a Southeastern fan and would like to see as many teams from hicktowns as possible.
Also, after adamently arguing for a "no NHL cities" plan for the league, I think Chris has come up with a good idea. I can still be disappointed if it's a Canada heavey league; but, if most of the participants are Canadian, well, that's democracy. I'll vote my opinion and live with whatever results.