Knightrider Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 I think that blows. I hate interconference games in general. They don't mean as much. There isn't usually much of a rivalry. It takes away from the rivalries inside the conference. It reduces the discussion about who is a better team... :thumbdown:
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 6 games is more than enough in the division. I would much rather see the Sabres play Anaheim and San Jose than have 2 more games vs. the Bruins. Less division games also equals less NESN.
SDS Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 The article I read said they would wait and see after this 3 year plan is up. There is movement in that direction, but they are uncertain they can get the 2/3's vote to change.
Two or less Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 If that means no more of these stupid "home and home" 2 game series during the season, then i'm all for it. I hate when teams play each other 2 games in a row, but i really hate it when their both in one city. Esspicially since we're the ones always on the road. wtf. lol
Knightrider Posted December 5, 2006 Author Report Posted December 5, 2006 The article I read said they would wait and see after this 3 year plan is up. There is movement in that direction, but they are uncertain they can get the 2/3's vote to change. GR said there were only 3 teams against... 6 games is more than enough in the division. I would much rather see the Sabres play Anaheim and San Jose than have 2 more games vs. the Bruins. Less division games also equals less NESN. Personally, the Bruins are a good example of a good rivalry gone cold because of the lack of games against them. As for NESN, I'd rather see CI provide both feeds.
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 GR said there were only 3 teams against... Personally, the Bruins are a good example of a good rivalry gone cold because of the lack of games against them. As for NESN, I'd rather see CI provide both feeds. I just don't think more regular season games creates a rivalry like a playoff series. In March last year it seemed like we were playing the Bruins every other day. I would honestly rather see some of the good teams from the other Conference.
Orange Seats Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 I think it's better to play each team in the league at least once.
topshelfcookies Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 Originally I was opposed to cutting back on the division games, simply because I really like the fact that in order for a team to make the playoffs, they have to play well within their division. Playing 24 division games goes a long way in determining where each team finishes in the conference, and personally, I think that's a good thing. However, would 6 games vs division opponents accomplish basically the same thing? It might, only because it would force strong teams in week divisions (see: Red Wings, Detroit) to play more games against stiffer competion. With the league trying to rebrand itself, it doesn't seem to make sense to limit the amount of inter-conference games. I'd love to see the Sabres play the Ducks this year, or San Jose. With attendence down in numerous US cities, why not give fans in each city the chance to see Ovechkin or Crosby, or the Sabres at least every other year? Simply copying the NFL (which has a ludicrous scheduling system) isn't the answer. I knew last year when the Falcons came to the Ralph that if I ever wanted to see Mike Vick in person, I had to be there simply because the next time the Falcons come to Buffalo NASA will have a completely sefl-sufficient habitat on the Moon.
Two or less Posted December 5, 2006 Report Posted December 5, 2006 So WGR was wrong? NHL officials: No changes to regular-season schedule, playoffs December 5, 2006 PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) -- NHL officials decided Tuesday that there will be no immediate changes in regular-season scheduling or in the way playoffs matches are determined. League and team officials met for two days, discussing having teams play fewer in-conference games in order to face more opponents from other conferences. The playoff talks focused on going to a bracket format instead of the current method in which teams are re-seeded after the opening round based on regular-season performance. "The view was that the competitive issue by reseeding predominates over everything else," Bettman said, adding that the current system will remain. He also said the regular-season scheduling part of the discussions is not a dead issue. "I think there was sentiment in the room that change should be and could be considered, but I think on balance, people believe that what we have now is better than any of the alternatives," Bettman said. "I'll probably appoint a committee and we'll take a look at it on an ongoing basis." The potential schedule change arose for two reasons: fans wanting to see star players from other conferences in their arena more often and because western teams travel more than teams from the east. Link- http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylt=ApUg...ov=ap&type=lgns
Knightrider Posted December 5, 2006 Author Report Posted December 5, 2006 So WGR was wrong? Link- http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylt=ApUg...ov=ap&type=lgns Not possible. WGR'd never report something with doing due diligence. :ph34r:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.