Chevalier du Clavier
Écrivain de ferrage
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,639
- 3,616
Making divisions is hard because there's always a geographical outlier (Colorado is usually the hardest to fairly place). The best I could come up with for 34 teams - two divisions of 8, two of 9. The west would've been more geographically appropriate with 10, but someone had to be moved and Colorado is the odd man out.Why new arena is complex, critical component to Atlanta's NHL return
If the NHL, as expected, expands further into the United States, prospective ownership groups are under pressure to present an attractive package to the league. In Atlanta, that includes a new arena, but what comes first: the team or the construction?www.sportsnet.ca
32 clubs is already too many.
But at least it’s symmetrical.
Four divisions of eight clubs each.
Sixteen clubs per conference.
Half the teams make the playoffs, half miss.
But they’ll continue to water it down so long as the expansion fee check clears.
It’s always about the money, and I get it.
The only question on my end is whether I stop watching cold turkey one day or slowly ween myself off the product.
The day is fast approaching, and I know that the powers that be don’t care. Plenty will keep watching, buying tickets and shirts even when the Rapid 7 Bruins meet the RBC Bank Canadiens twice per season.
It’ll probably be 36 eventually.Making divisions is hard because there's always a geographical outlier (Colorado is usually the hardest to fairly place). The best I could come up with for 34 teams - two divisions of 8, two of 9. The west would've been more geographically appropriate with 10, but someone had to be moved and Colorado is the odd man out.
Adams:
MTL
BOS
OTT
BUF
NYR
NYI
NJD
PHI
Norris:
TOR
DET
CBJ
PIT
STL
CHI
MIN
WPG
COL
Patrick:
WSH
CAR
NSH
ATL
FLA
TB
DAL
HOU
Smythe:
UTA
CGY
EDM
VAN
SEA
SJ
LA
ANA
VGK
It's also free money that doesn't go into the split to the players, of course they're going to keep expanding until there are no more buyers
They're going to over expand, dilute the product by having too many roster spots without enough NHL players to fill them, then the TV money is going to go down a lot (which is going to happen anyway), and in 15 years teams will contract and the league will settle at 30 or 32.
Possibly. I think the impending death of RSNs will hurt in some fashion regardless. I still think there is quite a bit of talent out there. Won't get 4 more elite teams, but I could see 4 more that float in the 10-20 range
Making divisions is hard because there's always a geographical outlier (Colorado is usually the hardest to fairly place). The best I could come up with for 34 teams - two divisions of 8, two of 9. The west would've been more geographically appropriate with 10, but someone had to be moved and Colorado is the odd man out.
Adams:
MTL
BOS
OTT
BUF
NYR
NYI
NJD
PHI
Norris:
TOR
DET
CBJ
PIT
STL
CHI
MIN
WPG
COL
Patrick:
WSH
CAR
NSH
ATL
FLA
TB
DAL
HOU
Smythe:
UTA
CGY
EDM
VAN
SEA
SJ
LA
ANA
VGK
They're going to over expand, dilute the product by having too many roster spots without enough NHL players to fill them, then the TV money is going to go down a lot (which is going to happen anyway), and in 15 years teams will contract and the league will settle at 30 or 32.
Not exactly Nietzsche, Aristotle, or Plato but give me a more solid philosophy for how to pick people to associate with in life and I’ll be impressed.
There are 7 Canadian teams. Does the NHL split HNIC revenue with all teams or just Canadian?It’ll probably be 36 eventually.
The TV people want every major American market to have a club.
The six Canadian clubs do nothing to boost the TV numbers in the States.
36 teams probably also means a plan tournament for the last two playoff spots in each conference.
At some point, it only resembles the product it once was. But again, it’s a business at the end of the day.
Torts' remarks retweeted by Meredith Gaudreau.