Playoff Format | Page 2 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Playoff Format

Honestly i say f*** it and do either 1-16 league, or just randomly assign teams opponents in the first round


The whole “create rivalries” thing doesn’t work, as a fan of a team that mostly played the same 3 opponents for like 10 years it got old and somewhat boring. What if the Caps had played Dallas one year ?


The divisions aren’t balanced, really the conferences haven’t been balanced and I’d like to see different teams match up just to see.

Maybe this could go with a baseball-series style regular season, make teams see different opponents more


Or whatever, f*** it idk
 
I prefer this format, with 8 divisions realignment in playoff format..

First round, 8 divisional series. 1 v 2.

2nd round format goes like this: 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5 based on seeding from regular season records outside the division record. Divisional record do not count in case of a strong team being a victim of a stronger division so it deserves a chance of having a better non-division record a home ice advantage rather than overall points if you include divisional record. Since first round is divisional so the divisional records is moot as you have knocked out all divisional opponent from first round.

3rd round: reseeded 1 v 4, 2 v 3.

Stanley Cup Finals: Stanley Cup Semi-final winners.
 
Let's get rid of playoffs altogether and make it one big division. Every team plays each other twice and the top team is the Stanley Cup champion.
 
NHL has been obsessed by creating divisional rivalries by force for 20 years now. It doesn't work. It has to come organically, either through history or an inciting incident.

At least they don't force us to watch 6-7 games against divisional teams anymore. That was unbearable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howboutthempanthers and 94 Oil Drops
IMO its a foregone conclusion we are going to the NBA 1-6/7-10 playin format in a few years. Its just a question of does Bettman cave or does the new commissioner end up being the one who does it
 
They'll never go back to 1v8. Gary invented the divisions himself and loves the format. The owners obviously like the divisional format. Unless there's a sizeable dissent in the BoG looming that we don't know about.
 
These Are The Days said:
In order to win a Cup Tampa's going to have to beat

1. The best record in the NHL (FLA)
2. The 2nd best record in the NHL (COL)
3. The 4th best record in the NHL (TOR)
4. 8th best record in the NHL (NYR)

Literally the only way this could have been harder would be had CAR (3rd best record the NHL) beaten the NYR and it would've just been 1-2-3-4 in no particular order

Forget the threepeat for 2 seconds and realize just how f***ing nonsense that level of strength of schedule is. Now think about how it is literally because of divisional formatting that we gotta do the "LA Kings 8th seed in the West" route.


The divisional format needs to be abolished immediately along with complete and total divisional realignment
Click to expand...
Even in the 1vs8 format, Tampa still likely ends up playing the same teams, but in a different order. If you want an easier schedule in the playoffs, be better in the regular season.

With that being said, I still would probably prefer the 1vs8 format, but I'm ok with how it is because 1. potential for more rivalry matchups, and 2. you gotta beat the best to be the best anyway.
 
Yep I guess I am in the minority but I love this playoff format.

To be the best you got to beat the best. No rounds are 'wasted' in the first round. The first round is when the best and most intense hockey is played.

Beat your division, beat the other division, win the finals.

Wah wah wah :popcorn:
 
  • Like
Reactions: SUX2BU and Lt Dan
AssaultPK said:
Yep I guess I am in the minority but I love this playoff format.

To be the best you got to beat the best. No rounds are 'wasted' in the first round. The first round is when the best and most intense hockey is played.

Beat your division, beat the other division, win the finals.

Wah wah wah :popcorn:
Click to expand...
Exactly. Focus on your own division first before declaring yourself one of the best in the league. You cannot be the best if you can't beat your own division.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny__K, GirardSpinorama, AssaultPK and 1 other person
You have to play and beat good teams in the playoffs. You aren't entitled to make it out of your division unless you slay your divisional demons.

The worst thing that can happen here is the best two teams in the league are in a divison together and have to play in the second round. Is that what we're complaining about here? No. We want to change the rules because our team got eliminated and want something to blame other than our own incompetence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GirardSpinorama, Summer Rose, AssaultPK and 1 other person
These Are The Days said:
The divisional format needs to be abolished immediately along with complete and total divisional realignment
Click to expand...

Preach.

East

1 - Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Buffalo

2 - Boston, NYR, NYI, NJ

3 - Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Philly

4 - Washington, Carolina, TB, Florida

West

1 - Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, Seattle (or Winnipeg instead of Seattle)

2 - LA, Anaheim, SJ, Vegas (or Seattle instead of Vegas)

3 - Colorado, Arizona, Dallas, Nashville (or Vegas instead of Nashville)

4 - Winnipeg, Minnesota, St Louis, Chicago (or Nashville instead of Winnipeg)
 
I like the playoffs the way they are now

Let's look at the 2014 Playoffs for my LA Kings

Round 1:
Current system:The first round the Kings played The Sharks in one of the all time great playoff series.
Old way: The Kings would have played St Louis for the third year in a row and likley would have smoked them again


Round 2:
Current system: The Kings played in the Ducks, This is THE only time the teams have ever met in the playoffs and I think even Ducks fan will agree that it was one heck of a series
Old Way: Kings would have played Chicago in the second round. The Kings did play Chicago in the CF and it was one of THE best CFs ever.

Round 3:
The Hawks or Kings would have destroyed who(m)ever made it to the CF and it would have been boring AF


I love that the current playoff format really promotes and promotes the division rivalries and saves the "champs" of the two divisions for the conference finals
 
  • Like
Reactions: AssaultPK
Conference style but the division winners get 1 and 2 followed by points in the Conference. For example the east this year would have the same standings as regular 1v8 conference format and the west would only have 1 team move down. But it makes the divisions mean something still and yields and almost indeticsl result.
 
I'd prefer the 1-8, etc, but the change I really want to see is a cross-conference semi-final, so we have a better chance of seeing the top two teams in the final.
 
Division playoffs make sense to get battle of Alberta more frequently in the playoffs. Sucks for anyone in a tough division but it does create rivalries.
 
What if we let the team vote for the match ups. Never been done, crazy idea. If you are number 1 seed, you get to pick any team from your conference that was in the top 8.
 
Captain Subban said:
Bring back the 1981 format.
Click to expand...
That only worked because it was a balanced schedule at the time.
stealth1 said:
I love the division format. The only I would change is ditch the wildcards. Top 4 in each division get in. Similar to how it was in the 80s.
It's funny how many here say hint at not wanting to see the same teams play each other year and year. During the regular season the division games sell more then every other game.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem how many times would you have sub .500 teams finishing 4th in their division while teams in other divisions finished with much better records only to go home early.
 
I picked other.

I'd go back to pre-Bettman days and have actual divisional rounds. Seeded 1-4 in each division, 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3. Winner of those series play for division title. Division winners play for conference, etc.

One of the reasons Bettman moved away from the format was his group felt that there were too many matches that repeated every year. They wanted new rivalries. I think it's fair to say after 25 plus years there are some match-ups that would be nice to see again. Match-ups that could come from strict intra-divisional play.

I think it would appease markets and broadcasters alike. Markets are more likely to get close regional match-ups. Broadcasters on both sides of the border have easier sells. Going back to divisional play, under the current alignment, gets you more battles of Alberta and a greater chance of Toronto and Montreal playing one another. It gets you more match-ups among eastern seaboard rivals.

Some will argue that a weak sister division gets teams in the playoffs that are less deserving. Maybe a deep run. We're seeing conversations here that dynasties are boring, the playoffs are boring, etc. Cinderella runs are exciting - FYI the Rangers were NOT a Cinderella run. Weak division or not, some of the best playoff series I've seen were from the Norris Division in the 80s.
 
BLNY said:
I picked other.

I'd go back to pre-Bettman days and have actual divisional rounds. Seeded 1-4 in each division, 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3. Winner of those series play for division title. Division winners play for conference, etc.

One of the reasons Bettman moved away from the format was his group felt that there were too many matches that repeated every year. They wanted new rivalries. I think it's fair to say after 25 plus years there are some match-ups that would be nice to see again. Match-ups that could come from strict intra-divisional play.

I think it would appease markets and broadcasters alike. Markets are more likely to get close regional match-ups. Broadcasters on both sides of the border have easier sells. Going back to divisional play, under the current alignment, gets you more battles of Alberta and a greater chance of Toronto and Montreal playing one another. It gets you more match-ups among eastern seaboard rivals.

Some will argue that a weak sister division gets teams in the playoffs that are less deserving. Maybe a deep run. We're seeing conversations here that dynasties are boring, the playoffs are boring, etc. Cinderella runs are exciting - FYI the Rangers were NOT a Cinderella run. Weak division or not, some of the best playoff series I've seen were from the Norris Division in the 80S
Click to expand...


Same problem I mentioned above last year. How many teams finished ahead of Montreal but didnt make it.
 
stealth1 said:
While true they also didn't play the same schedule.
Click to expand...
What's your point? The north division was garbage.

Stars played in a harder division (car, fla, tb), and finished with 1 more point. Same with the rangers in the east.

You could even make a case for the Hawks who finished with the same number of wins, but 4 less points, but playing in a division with the hurricanes, Florida and tampa.

I realize this will always happen with the divisional playoff seeding, and last year was a 1off with the covid divisions, but last year highlights what can happen with a weak division. You end up with a horrible cup finals.
 
LaCarriere said:
What's your point? The north division was garbage.

Stars played in a harder division (car, fla, tb), and finished with 1 more point. Same with the rangers in the east.

You could even make a case for the Hawks who finished with the same number of wins, but 4 less points, but playing in a division with the hurricanes, Florida and tampa.

I realize this will always happen with the divisional playoff seeding, and last year was a 1off with the covid divisions, but last year highlights what can happen with a weak division. You end up with a horrible cup finals.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. If you are one of the best teams it shouldn't matter who you play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom