NHL Realigned for 2012-13 Season
I went on vacation for a few days only to return to find an NHL nothing like the state in which I left it. Apparently, the NHL's Board of Governors decided yesterday to radically realign the league from six divisions into four conferences.
And based on the emails I'm getting, a lot of you want to see Icethetics host a contest to name new conferences and create its trophies. Sadly, I have too much going on here already to conduct another contest, but I'm more than happy to at least offer this blog post so we can all share our opinions.
Here are how the new conferences break down:
Conference A
Conference B
Conference C
Conference D
If you're curious about my take on the new setup, here it is. It's annoying because I'm a Tampa Bay Lightning fan. If I weren't a Lightning fan, I'd have to call it perfect. Dallas, Columbus and Detroit should be beside themselves over not having to play so many games in the Pacific Time Zone. Most of the great rivalries are intact. It's fantastic.
But why do Tampa and Sunrise have to get lumped into the "Northeast Division" basically? And even as I ask the question, I know the answer. You can't break up Philly and Pittsburgh nor any of the New York area teams. You can't separate the eastern Canadian teams nor break up rivalries like Sabres/Leafs, Habs/Bruins or Penguins/Capitals (especially now that HBO just released the first 24/7 Winter Classic on DVD!).
I know everyone has there two cents on how to improve things for their own teams. And that nobody cares what anybody else things. But here's mine anyway. Move the Pennsylvania teams to Conference C and put Tampa Bay and Florida in Conference D. I know, it simply can't be done that way.
The way it is now is just sort of a geographical necessity. So like Boucher says, let's start building the new practice rink in Vermont. We'll be spending a lot of time up there next year. And we'll only play the Hurricanes as many times as we play the Canucks.
Though I suppose the good news out of all this for me personally is that now I'm guaranteed that the Lightning will visit my neck of the woods (Vancouver) at least once a season. This year, they're not making that trip at all thanks to the current setup. (Interestingly, however, I will still be seeing a Bolts-Canucks game this season.)
That's all. Your turn, now. How do you fix the new alignment? Or do you? And what do you name the new conferences? What about the trophies? And how should the third round of playoffs work?
Chris
Nevermind. The realignment plan is off, at least for 2012-13. The NHL didn't get consent from the NHLPA. The idea was kind of nice while it lasted though, wasn't it?
Reader Comments (75)
Swapping the Pennsylvania teams into Conference C for the Florida teams will break up the Penguins-Capitals games the NHL and the NBC love so damn much. That's a no-no for sure.
The Florida teams are thrown in the mix with the Northeast teams because of Montreal, Toronto, and Ottawa... Lots of Canadians winter in Florida, and Canadians go to hockey games. A lot of hockey games. What better place to watch the Habs or Leafs 3 or 4 times a year than in Sunrise Florida.
FLA will be like the Leafs and Habs second homes.
The two Florida teams were aligned with the Norheast teams because according to the NHL and CBC, they're taking advantage of the Canadian snowbirds flying south. Does it make sense? I don't know, I don't think so.
As far as I understand, FLA & TB are in with MTL-TOR-OTT because a lot of Canadians are down in Florida during the winter anyways. So, I like the way the conferences are set up.
Names of the conferences: Gretzky Conf., Orr Conf., Howe Conf., Lemieux Conf.
Campbell trophy given to winner of semi final 1 seed vs 4 seed
Wales trophy given to winner of semi final 2 seed vs 3 seed
Also as I understand it, the 3rd round of the playoffs will feature the 4 conference playoff winners. They will be re-seeded (1-4) based on regular season points. The winners then meet for the Stanley Cup. I love it!!!!!!
I think you bring up a great point, and as a Devils fan, it's a bit worrying to see us in such a stacked conference. But with that said, when you look at this setup with the mindset of "what's best for the NHL?" they got it spot on. It's as geographically sound as you can get without destroying some major rivalries, and those rivalries will still be intact come playoff time.
For conference names, I think they should stick with geographical names: Pacific, Central, Northeast, Atlantic. Something to that effect. I don't see the harm in bringing in two more trophies so each respective conference can have their own, and I think the best way to set up the 3rd round would be a 1-4 seeding based on total points in the season. I'm a fan of the 1st and 2nd round set-ups for rivalry purposes, but I think it'd be interesting to combine all the teams into a 16-team bracket or 2 8-team brackets based on season points. You wouldn't get guaranteed rivalry match-ups but it would be interesting to see how that worked out.
Totally agree with you about the Tampa Bay Lightning and the Florida Panthers why are they in the northeast division it makes no sense to me it would make more sense to put the two New York teams in that division and the two Florida teams in the souteast division.
Smythe, Patrick, Adams, Norris.
Love it!!! and hera are my suggested names. A-Gretzky B-Hull C-Dryden D-Clarke.
Conference A: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix, and Colorado
Conference B: Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, and Winnipeg
Conference C: Tampa Bay, Florida, Nashville, Columbus, Carolina, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Washington
Conference D: Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo, New York Rangers, New York Islanders, New Jersey
I honestly like the setup. I think it is little weird that the western conference champions and eastern conference champions aren't going to meet up every year before the final, but I think it is the best situation. I think this set up also makes the schedules more fair. What I like most is that the first two rounds are like the way it used to be. I think the conference alignment has work out the best too. I'm always a big fan of keeping rivalries together and splitting NJ, NYI, NYR, PHI, PIT, and WSH wouldn't ruin a lot of that. Also WSH and CR have put together a good rivalry in the past, at least from a 3rd party perspective. I love how travel won't be as big of a factor either. I know that some people are upset with the Eastern conferences having fewer teams than the Western ones, but what else are you going to do? The NHL definitely left room for teams to move (Phoenix to Hamilton?), and they left room for expansion teams in the East too (Hamilton, Hartford, and Quebec City?). I love the new setup. I really think the NHL got it right.
I like Dylan's layout except I don't think colorado should have two NHL teams and I dont want to see Montreal and Boston split up....wait where's boston at all?
Conference A: Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Buffalo, Boston, Washington, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia
Conference B: Tampa Bay, Florida, New York I, New York R, New Jersey, Carolina, Columbus
Conference C: Nashville, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas
Conference D: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Colorado
This balances to 15 east and 15 west, but I strongly feel that the NHL is looking to expand to 32 teams, or at the very least move phoenix to Quebec. Should this happen my divisions don't work well for that at all.
I guess the alignment of the teams shows the CBC lobby isn't as big as some people suspect, because they would've loved an all-Canadian conference with 4 guaranteed teams, 2 successive guaranteed rounds, and a Canadian team in the semifinals every year.
As for the Florida teams, I'm just going to reiterate the snowbird angle. But at least this also fosters a nascent Florida/Tampa Bay rivalry.
Finally, on the subject of the conference names, I'm sure many will agree with the following:
Adams Conference
Buffalo, Boston, Florida, Montréal, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Toronto
Patrick Conference
Carolina, Devils, Islanders, Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
Smythe Conference
Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, LA, Phoenix, SJ, Vancouver
Norris Conference
Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Detroit, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnepeg.
AND I FORGOT!!! I feel that the Prince of Wales Trophy and the Clarence Campbell Trophy should be awarded to the Final Four Round Champions, rotating years between the 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3. You don't want people feeling that one trophy is more important than the other. I feel like the Conferences should bare the names of the old divisions.
"A" being "Smythe," "B" being "Norris," "C" being "Adams," and "D" being "Patrick." Also a thought, one that I'm not completely sold on myself.
The Smythe Conference winner should receive the Wayne Douglas Gretzky Trophy.
The Norris Conference winner should receive the Gordon Howe Trophy.
The Adams Conference winner should receive the Robert Gordon Orr Trophy.
The Patrick Conference winner should receive the Mario Lemieux Trophy.
Just an idea. I feel like if you did trophies like that, you would have to make it so that the team that that player predominately played for should be able to win that trophy. The problems when you do that though are that 1) what if that team has to move to a different conference later on down the road? and 2) It singles out some legends and teams. The best way to do it is to probably name them after previous executives in the league.
I like the creativity with the old school division names, but I think it would be just as good to have the trophies names after them and keep the division names based on geography.
A: Pacific
B: Midwest
C: East
D: Atlantic
Anybody that didn't say, "Smythe, Norris, Adams, and Patrick" should be shot!
But seriously, with "vintage" being in, I don't see how they could not go with these conference names. Oh, and Tim Thomas deserves his own trophy.
I forgot to mention also, I think this is the best you could really get. Any way you do it, the Florida teams are going to be somewhat displaced, and putting them in a "Southeast" division would overload Conf. C and D. The NHL wanted to keep Conf. C with 7 teams in case PHX does relocate to Quebec (most likely of any other place), so they would not have to realign and could just simply move them into Conf. C. The other thing is, how in the world can people stand to split up the Flyers-Rangers and Flyers-Devils rivalries in some of their scenarios. The Flyers-Rangers playing only twice a year is a crime. Lastly, to balance to playoff seeding because of the off number of teams, the NHL COULD have it where if the 5th place team in an 8 team conference has more points than the 4th place team in a 7 team conference then the 5th place team would take over that Conf. 4th seed like the AHL did last season. In order to do that one team from Conf. B would have to move to C or D in order to avoid the possibility of a Conf. A team playing in the Conf. C or D playoffs. To do this, simply move Columbus to Conf. D or Nashville to C. The Columbus move makes more sense geographically.
A- Western Conference
B- MidWest Conference
C- Eastern Conference
D- Middle East Conference
I love the idea at going back to Smythe, Norris, Adams and Patrick for the names (or that Gretzky, Howe, Orr, and Lemieux idea was pretty sharp as well!). Unfortunately not everybody can be pleased with the outcome of realignment...as an Oilers fan I'm thrilled at the idea of seeing LESS Minnesota and more of teams like Pittsburgh and Washington. I'm content with the realignment, but for the sake of changing it up and an argument...:
CAMPBELL CONFERENCE
Smythe Division: ANA, CGY, COL, EDM, LA, PHX, SJ, VAN
Norris Division: CHI, DAL, DET, MIN, NSH, STL, WPG
WHALES CONFERENCE
Adams Division: BOS, BUF, MTL, NJ, NYI, NYR, OTT, TOR
Patrick Division: CAR, CBJ, FLA, PHI, PIT, TB, WAS
Pros: 15 teams in each conference again, with the southeast rivalries being retained and better geographically for Eastern teams.
Cons: With subtraction of Columbus to the East, Detroit becomes the only team out "west" in eastern time zone. Break up of Rangers/Flyers rivalry.
Playoffs change too top 2 teams in each division make up the top 4 seeds per conference, with the remaining 4 seeds filling out from the next 4 best clubs in the conferences. Back to "old" 1v8, 2v7, etc format.
Again, I'm usually not this radical, but for the sake of argument, what the heck.
Conference A
LA, Anaheim, San Jose, Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton, Colorado
Conference B
Dallas, Phoenix, Winnipeg, Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit, St. Louis, Nashville
Conference C
Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Toronto, Rangers, Islanders, Ottawa
Conference D
Carolina, Columbus, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New Jersey, Washington, Tampa Bay, Florida
A = West, B = West central, C = East Central, D = East. By the way I hope they keep the third round of the playoffs simple and logical and make it A vs. B and C vs. D.
Seems a little odd how there are less Western based franchises, yet the conferences based out of the west are both the ones with 8 teams... Just seems odd. Id say move Detroit and Columbus over to the Eastern conferences like so...
Conference A: ANA, CGY, EDM, LA, PHO, SJ, VAN
Conference B: CHI, COL, DAL, MIN, NAS, STL, WPG
Conference C: BUF, CLB, DET, PIT, MTL, OTT, TOR
Conference D: BOS, CAR, FLA NJ, NYR, NYI, PHI, TB
Columbus could even move over to Conference B, and balance out a sort of "East" and "West" thing. Either way, based on a strictly geographical outlook, this seems to make a little sence. This would never happen... Too many rivalies broken up.
Names of the conferences you say? Why that's easy...
Conference A: Western
Conference B: Central
Conference C: Frozen Orange Juice
Conference D: Eastern
As for the 3rd round of playoffs, the winners of A&B play for Campbell trophy, C&D play for Wales trophy. Keep it simple.
But as a Sens fan I'm fine with this setup, I don't mind having Tampa thrown in our conference, we seem to have their number of late...
Looking at this, how is it that both western-most conferences are the ones with 8 teams? One of the teams from Conference B should move to Conference C.
From my perspective, it just looks like this alignment was done to make it easy for Phoenix to relocate to Quebec City if push comes to shove, and leaves the door open for expansion sometime down the road if the NHL decides they want to test those waters.
Also, obviously stinks to be in a 8-team conferences versus a 7-team conference for simple odds of making it into the playoffs, but then again if you argue that it's unfair that you didn't get in because you weren't in the top half of your conference, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on.
I have a good hunch that they will name two of the four conferences the Campbell and the Wales Conference while giving the remaining two conferences two completely new names and creating two brand new trophies for each of the two.
Conference A --> Campbell Conference --> Clerance S Campbell Trophy
Conference B --> brand new name ? --> brand new trophy ?
Conference C --> brand new name ? --> brand new trophy ?
Conference D --> Wales Conference --> Prince of Wales Trophy
Or at least I hope they do it this way, and also hope to god they don't do as was speculated on Tuesday that they might have sponsor named conferences. My god can you imagine a conference named after toilet paper brand Charmin or how about the Viagra Conference? > insert face palm emoticon here < We already have sponsor named NHL arenas with sponsor advertisement inundated rinks, I think that's quite enough, so let's just leave it at that please NHL.
Aside from Tampa Bay and Florida playing in the "Northeast" Division I think this is pretty good. They kept the Atlantic Division rivalries together and as a Flyers fan that's what I care about most. Overall everything is pretty good.
As for names...
There is no way I would support the Flyers playing in a conference named after a Penguin even if it's Mario Lemieux.
The names should revert to Adams, Norris, Patrick and Smythe plan and simple. However... Knowing the NHL they'll probably ignore that and the history and try to fit it into a geographical naming system.
I guess we'll have the Pacific, Central, Atlantic and East Divisions/Conferences.
just need to switch NYR and NYI for Tampa and Florida to 'fix' it properly. unless the NHL think Tampa and Florida are both going to be sold and then moved to Hamilton and Halifax!!
Honestly, I like it... As a Sabres fan, I think a TB-BUF, and/or FLA-BUF rivalry could develop outta this nicely - Gary & the BOG maybe could have been a little more subtle about the 'Yotes situation by at least balancing the East & West at 15 teams - pretending they are going to leave it unbalanced for 5-10 years with plans of expansion to QC/SO is kinda far-fetched IMO. I hate to be "that guy", but it just seems like the writing is on the wall for poor Phoenix.
A) Ducks, Flames, Avs, Oilers, Kings, sharks, Canucks
B) Hawks, jackets, Stars, Wings, Wild, Preds, Blues, Jets
C) Bruins, Sabres, Panthers, Habs, Sens, Nordiques, Bolts, Leafs
D) Canes, Devils, Isles, Rangers, Flyers, Pens, Caps
They should have left the divisions the same. They could have just moved Winnipeg to the NORTHWEST, Dallas to the CENTRAL, Colorado to the PACIFIC and that would leave Nashville moving to the East in the SOUTHEAST and all the divisions would have been fine geographically.
I really think the options for conference names boil down to a) Smythe, Norris, Adams, Patrick, b) Gretzky, Howe, Orr, Lemieux, or c) something bland and georgaphical. Unfortunately, I think c) is most likely to actually happen, but I'm pulling for one of the others. Not sure which, though.
There are benefits to this alignment to many teams - nobody has to travel more than one time zone for games within their division (so TV viewership should theoretically be up), most of the rivalries are intact, etc. But the Florida teams got a pretty raw deal; the "snowbirds come to FL in the winter" has a bit of merit but it's really just throwing them a bone. Now, if they relocate the Bolts and Panthers to, say, Quebec and Hamilton...
I kid, but knowing the NHL, I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of logic were involved.
As a Pens fan, I love the part where we maintain the PHI, NYR, NJ, NYI rivalries, and potentially enhance the one with WSH. The Canes and Pens always play exciting games too, and who wouldn't love more Staal-on-Staal action?? And it's great that every arena will see every team once per season. But it does stink that it also waters down the other exciting matchups: Pens - Sabres, Pens - Habs, Pens - Bruins each have history, and recent bad blood in the case of Montreal and Boston.
These setups are fine. As much as it is about travel and time zones, this setup is still about finding balance as well. You can't put Philly and Pittsburgh in "Conference C" because that will severely weaken and effect the overall efficiency of "Conference D". Also, if something like that were done, the majority of those teams in Conference C are big money makers and VERY competitive as things stand right now... And since only 4 teams go through to the playoffs in each group, why risk setting up so many big markets for an annual failure like that? It would be like the dreaded "Group of Death" (like in soccer tournaments) but EVERY SINGLE YEAR! I wouldn't think it would be super smart to put all your eggs in one basket like that.
Then there is also the strong chance that the Coyotes could make a move in the near future to Conference C as well, IF a move to Quebec or the Greater Toronto Area were to happen.
You could move the Rangers and Islanders to Conference C, but then the Rangers lose out on two of their biggest rivals in Philly and New Jersey.
In the long run, having Tampa Bay and Florida seeing teams like: Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, and Boston will only be beneficial. It allows for decent conference balance (for multiple reasons), and only helps TB and FLA THAT much more, on a financial standpoint. And I don't think that tiny extra bit of travel would add very much wear and tear since these places are only a two hr plane ride away, with no time difference, or added jetlag.
You can never get these things perfect, the FLA teams would not fit naturally in any 4 division system so you have to do what satisifies the most people and I think the league succeeded at that. Besides, there are other examples of teams placed arbitrarily in divisions that make no geographic sense. Dallas Cowboys in the NFC East?!? Sounds nonsensical but has sure worked for the NFL.
Perhaps the NHL should just contract Tampa and Florida, move Detroit and CBJ into the conference C*, and move let's say the Avs into Conference B. 7 teams in every conference, and no awkward Tampa/Florida Northeast division mess.
*or Phoenix when they move to Québec City.
If PHX moved to QC next season, you could swap the two Florida teams with Carolina.
7 Teams: Buffalo, Boston, Québec, Montréal, Ottawa, Carolina, Toronto
8 Teams: Florida, Tampa Bay, Devils, Islanders, Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
FLA and TB to Norris, DET to Adams, CBJ to Patrick. It's that simple.
The current format is likely just a temporary solution as there are still a few teams in jeopardy of relocation. Once all 30 NHL teams are relatively stable the NHL could then complete a minor reshuffle and add two expansion teams to make four eight-team conferences.
Phoenix will be coming East, in the form of Quebec City. Fixed.
Basically a good job by the NHL overall. here are the pros and cons as I see them.
Pros:
building rivalries. rivalries are made in the playoffs. It has been 20 years since the oilers and flames (two of the biggest rivals in the NHL) met in the playoffs. with this format teams are more likely to meet in the playoffs. traditional rivalries like oilers and flames, habs and leafs will be rekindled. new rivalries will be built.
less cross-timezone travel, and the fact that every team will play a home and home with every other team makes for a much more balanced travel schedule.
seeing every team in your building every year.
cons:
loss of rivalries. with the new alignment one of the current NHL's fiercest rivalries (canucks and hawks) will be lost. As will other rivalries.
random other thought.
it seems convenient that the coyotes are in an 8 team conference. if they are indeed relocated (perhaps to quebec city) they could easily switch conferences.
Everyone is pointing out that they the conferences up to allow for future expansion or team movement. Sure, I see that.
What people fail to notice is that the conferences are also set up to allow for future "contraction".
If both western conferences would loose a team (Phoenix and Columbus for example), it would leave 4 equally sized conferences. Using the proposed scheme, home and home out of conference (42 games) and 3 home - 3 away in conference (36 games) would yield a 78 game schedule.
I doubt they would want to loose the revenue from the lost games so that would leave 4 "special" games for historical rivalries not met by the proposed alignment (ex: Montreal - NYR, Toronto - Detroit) or rivalries that develop from the semi-finals and finals (presently: Chicago - Vancouver, a few years ago: Detroit - Colorado). These games could be adjusted year by year as things evolve.
A- Gretzky
B- Howe
C- Richard
D- Messier
Sucks to be the Islanders and Devils in that conference
Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I say you swap the Islanders and the Devils with the Lightning and Panthers.
regular season, not perfect..but fair..I hope the playoffs get some tinkering. I grew bored of Sabres-Bruins every year for 6 years...Instead keep a tally of the combined non-divison records for each of the 4 divisions. Then rank them 1-4 as best to worst overall confrences...then Conf 1 plays conf 4 Conf 2 matches up with Conf 3...you rank the playoff qualifiers from each confrence 1-8 and they go at it for the first 2 rounds of playoffs..
Thus you are about guaranteed some different matchups from year to year..AND you get rewarded for being a tougher
/better overall conference but getting the weakest matchup possible.
Thus, as a Sabres fan..let's say we clinch early..I can still pull for the lowly Senators to beat Vancouver in March...because it may aid in which conference we match up with in the first rounds of the playoffs.
Im really hoping they dont name the confrences after people again. I would go with:
Western
Central
Eastern
Atlantic
Chris, Take your fan goggles off for a second. The competition if Pitt and Philly went to conference C would be unreal. It's just as much about fair competition as it is travel accommodations.
I think this format is foreshadowing Phoenix moving to Quebec or Hartford (much more likely Quebec) and playing in Conference C, coinciding with dropping the four "conference" idea for four "divisions" and bringing back all of the old names.
It makes too much sense since (A) They haven't named the division/conferences yet, (B) they haven't announced the semi-finals format yet, and © I doubt Detroit would have backed down from playing in an Eastern Conference without knowledge that there will be a new more-eastern team soon.
Guys, you can't start naming conferences and trophies after guys that are still involved in the NHL. The Lemieux conference? He owns the Penguins. Gretzky is still rumored to be an owner in the future. Orr is still deeply involved with the B's.
This is the problem with naming after players. It'll be either Smythe, Norris, Adams, Patrick, or they'll go with the lame geographic locations.
Here's what I made back in the summer:
Atlantic: Bruins, Rangers, Isles, Devils, Caps, Canes, Bolts, Panthers
Northeast: Leafs, Habs, Sens, Sabres, Jackets, Pens, Flyers
Central: Jets, Wild, Wings, Hawks, Blues, Preds, Stars (same minus Columbus)
West: Canucks, Oilers, Flames, Kings, Sharks, Ducks, Preds, Avs (exact same)
Gavin: Pretty sure I took off my "fan goggles" when I wrote "I know, it simply can't be done that way," right? And I think the "fair competition" argument is the worst one to be made over a decision that will change the landscape of the league for years to come. Just because certain teams are good now doesn't mean they will be in ten years... or even five.
A Pacific
B Central
C East
D Atlantic
I think the NHL did this because when phx moves next year it will probably be in conference c or d they can just plop them in.