Your ideal NHL

[gunnar hendershow]

Sorry I'm late to the party, but my ideal NHL would have 20 teams in the top tier and then another 20 in the lower tier (with a promotion/relegation system). This way, we don't have the top talent so spread out (why would the best players want to play in the lower tier?). We also have something which I'm a huge fan of in the promotion/relegation format. We still keep the two conferences however, due solely to travel problems. 10 in each of course, no divisions since a bad division would help some teams avoid relegation. The lower tier is a 2 conference format as well. The top team in each conference gains automatic promotion, the 2nd through 5th place teams play a best-of-7 knockout series to determine which one of them gets promoted. I'm not a massive fan of the playoff format, especially if there's like a 15-point difference between 2nd and 3rd. The bottom 2 in each conference get relegated. But from a business standpoint it is a good thing to have.

Anyway, here's a layout of how it would look.

NHL Division One

Prince of Wales (East)

Toronto

Montreal

Buffalo

Ottawa

New Jersey

Pittsburgh

Atlanta

Tampa Bay

New York Rangers

New York Islanders

Clarence Campbell (West)

Detroit

Anaheim

Vancouver

Nashville

San Jose

Dallas

Minnesota

Calgary

Colorado

St. Louis

NHL Division Two

Adams (East)

Carolina

Florida

Boston

Washington

Philadelphia

Quebec (Expansion)

So. Ontario (Expansion)

Hartford (Expansion)

Baltimore (Expansion... and I'd love nothing more than for a hockey team to play 20 minutes from me)

Columbus (Conference Switch)

Smythe (West)

Edmonton

Chicago

Los Angeles

Phoenix

Las Vegas (Expansion)

Milwaukee (Expansion)

Winnipeg (Expansion)

Saskatchewan (Expansion)

Seattle (Expansion)

Kansas City (Expansion)

This doesn't even fill out all the cities I think could, with proper funding, support an NHL franchise. Salt Lake City, Indianapolis, Houston, New Orleans, and Halifax come to mind. But there it is.

In my ideal world a much greater emphasis is placed on the regular season, with each team playing teams in their own conference 6 times (totalling 54 games) and playing teams in the other conference 2 times (totalling 20 games). This makes for a 74 game regular season, which given that there are 20 teams in the league is more than enough. How do we make up for these lost regular season games? Have a tournament take place throughout the season (Similar to, for example, the FA Cup in England). This way, teams who have their season looking lost still have something to care for in the massive NHL Trophy (best name I can come up with). Based on the previous season's results, a draw takes place, selecting who gets placed in each 5-team group. Each team plays the other team in the group twice (Thus making 82 games so the businessmen can be happy) and the top 2 advance to the knockout round. We now have a 16-team knockout tournament. Another benefit of this tournament is that, if say Edmonton and Calgary are in different tiers, they can still play each other at some point if luck is on their side. The knockout round is a best-of-3 determined by group placement. The 1st place team in group A gets home-field advantage against the 2nd place team in group D. This goes all the way until a Championship game on a chosen neutral site.

That concluces along with the regular season. Naturally, the teams going after the Stanley Cup probably wouldn't want to pursue it as much as the teams who look destined for midtable mediocrity. So the real good teams get their trophy tournament too. The top 4 from each conference advance to the Stanley Cup. They start off in a group stage, with each team playing one another twice. The top in Wales then faces the second in Campbell and vice versa in a best-of-7 series. Then after those two series are done we see a best-of-7 Cup final. This way, the best two teams throughout the season, regardless of conference, in theory get to play each other.

That's how I'd do it, here's hoping the Baltimore Murderers (As I shall call them) become the dominant force in my ideal NHL. I'm ready to defend/elaborate with anyone who wants me to.

[Gabriel]

While I don't think I could ever see the above suggestion actually happening, I would love for it to happen. Separating the teams by placing them in two separate leagues almost, would keep the lower teams against the lower teams, making more competitive games and hopefully increasing fan interest, as even if say the Boston Bruins are in the B Level, they're more likely to be competitive and have something to strive for.

I'm a huge fan of the relegation system. Personally, with so many teams in the league, it's hard sometimes to make a case as to why certain teams managed to make the playoffs. Weak divisions or conferences even have led to some teams making the playoffs that really had no business being there based on regular season performance. Cutting it down to 20 teams vying for the Cup in any single season, and perhaps an 8 team Playoffs instead of 16, and it's already much more competitive.

Plus, it's always fun to cheer on that one shitty team you just can't help but like. Having a relegation system would also make it easier for teams to rebuild. You've just been relegated to the B Pool? Well drop some of that heavy salary you've got and try to rebuild a bit. You're playing other teams in the same situation you're in for the next year (at least) anyways, so there's no pressure to find that quick fix.