Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 6, 2012 Share #76 Posted January 6, 2012 Um... they just won the President's Trophy last year and got to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. I would hardly call that "choking". So far this season, it looks like they're having a repeat performance of win after win after win. LOL... Game 7 means nothing unless you win it. They're so cocky and haven't won the big prize. They win during the regular season, then get to the playoffs and get scared or something. Got blown out on the road by the Bruins and then got beat at HOME for Game 7. Major choke if you ask me. Oh and let's not forget about the early exits in the previous years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 6, 2012 Share #77 Posted January 6, 2012 A most fitting cartoon depicts the ever-frustrating plight of being a Canucks Fan: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted January 6, 2012 Share #78 Posted January 6, 2012 Via Garibaldi 8... In response to your post: www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/512433-post60.html Hockey fans having a lack of access to its games on TV does not equal to being more technologically advanced than a watcher of any other sport.... It's an unjust conclusion, regardless of whatever numerical findings he made (or obtained), in comparison to those that watch other sports online, less... It's basing someone's level of knowledge (and/or savvyness) of technology solely based on - Sports.... I don't care if it was Stern, Selig, or Goodell that came out & said something like that on the air either..... That would be like sayin, chris (mad dog) russo's listeners are more technologically advanced over mike francesa's listeners b/c mad dog's show is on sirius satellite radio..... it's a foolish comment for bettman to have made on the air; regardless if it was an attempt to pump up NHL fans.... I'm glad fat boy (Francesa) called him out on that; IIRC, he basically told him there's no way he can actually prove that.... he also asked bettman where he got his numbers from..... Anyway, the rest of what you say about how much more skill hockey takes over the other sports, I'm not fin to get into.... Not gonna turn this into a "which sport is better" pissing contest... What B35 and I were saying is that the 'rivalries' between the players in the NHL does not have the hatred or passion as it did say in the 1970's and 80's. That along with the WWE-type fighting brawls you saw 25-30 years ago. Here the proof. The players, forget it... the days of the mano-y-mano hatred of one person over another is done..... The teams though.... the bench clearing fights you do see nowadays look more forced (IMO) than anything.... Giving the fans the illusion that the level of hatred b/w whatever teams still exist.... If you're keen enough, you can often tell if the foundation of something if really real, or really fake/watered down... There's no good rivalries anymore?! Are you guys serious? Just taking hockey alone, I can name these: Canucks - Blackhawks Rangers - Islanders Maple Leafs - Canadiens Oilers - Flames Canucks - Flames Wild - Red Wings Canucks - Red Wings Devils - Flyers Penguins - Flyers Bruins - Canadiens Etc. etc. etc. ...and every last one of them are stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 6, 2012 Share #79 Posted January 6, 2012 Via Garibaldi 8... In response to your post: www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/512433-post60.html Hockey fans having a lack of access to its games on TV does not equal to being more technologically advanced than a watcher of any other sport.... It's an unjust conclusion, regardless of whatever numerical findings he made (or obtained), in comparison to those that watch other sports online, less... It's basing someone's level of knowledge (and/or savvyness) of technology solely based on - Sports.... I don't care if it was Stern, Selig, or Goodell that came out & said something like that on the air either..... That would be like sayin, chris (mad dog) russo's listeners are more technologically advanced over mike francesa's listeners b/c mad dog's show is on sirius satellite radio..... it's a foolish comment for bettman to have made on the air; regardless if it was an attempt to pump up NHL fans.... I'm glad fat boy (Francesa) called him out on that; IIRC, he basically told him there's no way he can actually prove that.... he also asked bettman where he got his numbers from..... Anyway, the rest of what you say about how much more skill hockey takes over the other sports, I'm not fin to get into.... Not gonna turn this into a "which sport is better" pissing contest... LOL I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion because I didn't say anything about that. Not even close. :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted January 6, 2012 Share #80 Posted January 6, 2012 LOL I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion because I didn't say anything about that. Not even close. :eek: Who do you think you are trying to fool; you don't know how I came to that conclusion.... lmao Goin off on a tangent about skill & playability, and your reminiscence of playing hockey on the streets.... At that point, you don't have to exactly say hockey is the better sport - after what you said in those last two paragraphs in that post; it's grossly implicated..... seriously, wtf is this: "It's easy to pick up a soccer ball, a basketball or a football, or even a baseball and a stick and a glove" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 6, 2012 Share #81 Posted January 6, 2012 Who do you think you are trying to fool; you don't know how I came to that conclusion.... lmao Goin off on a tangent about skill & playability, and your reminiscence of playing hockey on the streets.... At that point, you don't have to exactly say hockey is the better sport - after what you said in those last two paragraphs in that post; it's grossly implicated..... seriously, wtf is this: Dude, seriously, did you really read my post??? I was talking about how expensive hockey is to play and how the cost of playing makes the sport less accessible than other sports. When I said it's easy to pick up a soccer ball, basketball, etc. I was referring to the fact that those sports cost very little to play. In other words if I want to play basketball, I can go buy a basketball and all I need to do is find a place to shoot around. I wasn't speaking about skill level of any of those sports in NO shape or form. You clearly did not read my post and then went on the deep end accusing me of something that I was not talking about at all, nor did I imply. :mad: :tdown: For your information, I played all sorts of sports growing up besides hockey... Baseball, soccer and a bit of football and tennis on a few occasions as well... Not exactly easy at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted January 6, 2012 Share #82 Posted January 6, 2012 Dude, seriously, did you really read my post??? I was talking about how expensive hockey is to play and how the cost of playing makes the sport less accessible than other sports. When I said it's easy to pick up a soccer ball, basketball, etc. I was referring to the fact that those sports cost very little to play. In other words if I want to play basketball, I can go buy a basketball and all I need to do is find a place to shoot around. I wasn't speaking about skill level of any of those sports in NO shape or form. You clearly did not read my post and then went on the deep end accusing me of something that I was not talking about at all, nor did I imply. :mad: :tdown: For your information, I played all sorts of sports growing up besides hockey... Baseball, soccer and a bit of football and tennis on a few occasions as well... Not exactly easy at all... The part in bold is all you had to originally say, if that connotation of your post wasn't the case..... You made hockey out to be a sport that's so damn difficult to play, and you knew that's what you meant by that snippet.... Now you wanna mention what other sports you played & how not easy they are after the fact.... Why even bring that up, if what you're now conveying to me is true..... Regardless, everything after that first paragraph in that post in question of yours, aint have a damn thing to do with bettman's quote about NHL fans being so technologically advanced anyway..... which was the subject matter of what you bothered to address in that post of mine..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 6, 2012 Share #83 Posted January 6, 2012 The part in bold is all you had to say originally, if that connotation of your post wasn't the case..... You made hockey out to be a sport that's so damn difficult to play, and you knew that's what you meant by that snippet.... Now you wanna mention what other sports you played & how not easy they are after the fact.... Why even bring that up, if what you're now conveying to me is true..... Regardless, everything after that first paragraph in that post in question aint have a damn thing to do with bettman's quote about NHL fans being so technologically advanced anyway..... which was the subject matter of what you bothered to address in that post of mine..... Actually it does. And yes, hockey IS difficult to play from an economic and accessibility point of view. That was the main point of the post that you clearly didn't get and why I made those examples. The point of me bringing up the places I played hockey was to show how few places there were back then and even less so today, as just about all of those places are now used for other things and hockey isn't one of them. The fact that the sport is less accessible than its counterparts does indeed force fans to be more technologically savvy simply because sports like the NBA, NFL, etc. are more easily accessible on TV (be it cable or regular TV). Whether or not NBA, NFL fans, etc. are less technologically savvy is another issue. I also pointed out how for example, unless you have NHL Center Ice (TV subscription) you have to watch the games on the internet, many of which would be considered "big matches" in the NBA or NFL. You can watch them on select smart phones, but they must be either iPhones or Androids, which many folks would consider to more "sophisticated" than your average cell phone and require very fast internet speeds (4G), so in a way he is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted January 6, 2012 Share #84 Posted January 6, 2012 Actually it does. And yes, hockey IS difficult to play from an economic and accessibility point of view. That was the main point of the post that you clearly didn't get and why I made those examples. The point of me bringing up the places I played hockey was to show how few places there were back then and even less so today, as just about all of those places are now used for other things and hockey isn't one of them. The fact that the sport is less accessible than its counterparts does indeed force fans to be more technologically savvy simply because sports like the NBA, NFL, etc. are more easily accessible on TV (be it cable or regular TV). Whether or not NBA, NFL fans, etc. are less technologically savvy is another issue. I also pointed out how for example, unless you have NHL Center Ice (TV subscription) you have to watch the games on the internet, many of which would be considered "big matches" in the NBA or NFL. You can watch them on select smart phones, but they must be either iPhones or Androids, which many folks would consider to more "sophisticated" than your average cell phone and require very fast internet speeds (4G), so in a way he is right. You can try to intertwine & justify there being a connection to the two all you want.... Hockey being difficult to play from a skill standpoint OR an economic standpoint still doesn't make it any more relevant to Bettman's comment regarding viewer's/fans choice of mediums to watch NHL games.... and nah, don't try to now minimize what Bettman was gettin at w/ that quip.... it had everything to do with what fans of other sports aren't doing as well... He made that remark in a direct response to a question that Francesa asked him, about NHL games no longer being shown in any regularity on ESPN... and losing overall ratings/viewership by making the move to versus.... That's why he brought up that BS about NHL fans being technologically advanced over the other 3 major sports... Bettman was the one that kept talking about how great a move moving to versus was for the NHL.... If it was so great, then there would have been ZERO need for him to bring up the fact that NHL fans watch games online.... IIRC, francesa even said "fans of baseball, football, and basketball watch games over the internet also, whaddaya talkin about....." Fat boy had Bettman backed into a corner he couldn't get himself out of... You don't talk smack about other sports if your sport (at that timeframe) isn't exactly on the up & up.... It was a tit-for-tat throughout that whole radio interview... Bettman came in right off the bat on a high horse about how great the NHL is (which by itself is nothin wrong with)... Later on in the interview though, he started goin on about what the NHL has (regarding its fanbase) and what the NBA & NFL doesn't (he didn't say as much about MLB fans, probably b/c he knew that's francesa's expertise, so to speak... they've had interviews before)..... Furthermore, you keep mentioning the different mediums that hockey fans use to watch games... I never disputed (nor do I disagree w/ Bettman) that NHL fans actually watch games online & what not... But I call BS when a commissioner of a sport tells me, the listener, how much better they're doing at whatever, over other sport(s)..... It comes off as nothin more than complete and utter bias... You don't have to attempt to downplay the ongoing's of other sports to pump up your own sport... ....and that's where Bettman was in the wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 7, 2012 Share #85 Posted January 7, 2012 You can try to intertwine & justify there being a connection to the two all you want.... Hockey being difficult to play from a skill standpoint OR an economic standpoint still doesn't make it any more relevant to Bettman's comment regarding viewer's/fans choice of mediums to watch NHL games.... and nah, don't try to now minimize what Bettman was gettin at w/ that quip.... it had everything to do with what fans of other sports aren't doing as well... He made that remark in a direct response to a question that Francesa asked him, about NHL games no longer being shown in any regularity on ESPN... and losing overall ratings/viewership by making the move to versus.... That's why he brought up that BS about NHL fans being technologically advanced over the other 3 major sports... Bettman was the one that kept talking about how great a move moving to versus was for the NHL.... If it was so great, then there would have been ZERO need for him to bring up the fact that NHL fans watch games online.... IIRC, francesa even said "fans of baseball, football, and basketball watch games over the internet also, whaddaya talkin about....." Fat boy had Bettman backed into a corner he couldn't get himself out of... You don't talk smack about other sports if your sport (at that timeframe) isn't exactly on the up & up.... It was a tit-for-tat throughout that whole radio interview... Bettman came in right off the bat on a high horse about how great the NHL is (which by itself is nothin wrong with)... Later on in the interview though, he started goin on about what the NHL has (regarding its fanbase) and what the NBA & NFL doesn't (he didn't say as much about MLB fans, probably b/c he knew that's francesa's expertise, so to speak... they've had interviews before)..... Furthermore, you keep mentioning the different mediums that hockey fans use to watch games... I never disputed (nor do I disagree w/ Bettman) that NHL fans actually watch games online & what not... But I call BS when a commissioner of a sport tells me, the listener, how much better they're doing at whatever, over other sport(s)..... It comes off as nothin more than complete and utter bias... You don't have to attempt to downplay the ongoing's of other sports to pump up your own sport... ....and that's where Bettman was in the wrong. Well you have to understand what Bettman and the NHL wants to become. His job is to sell the sport and the goal of Bettman and the NHL is to not just be "that" sport that "some" folks watch, which is exactly what it has been for many years, mainly because it just wasn't accessible and the NHL seemed to accept that role of being behind the NBA, NFL and MLB. He wants the sport to grow into one of the major sports, if not "the" major sport and I have to admit that the deal w/VERSUS has helped to grow the game a bit. Unfortunately, I think the sport has a ways to go to make it to the next level. There are still only a handful of games shown on regular TV and the NHL still tries to schedule games around other sports since it knows that many of its fans watch other sports. Growing up, in addition to hockey, I watched the NFL, the MLB, soccer, lacrosse, tennis, golf, bowling, skiing, Formula 1 and rugby and the NBA on occasion. Now and days hockey is the main thing I watch, along with soccer and the occasional NFL game. The others have rather outgrown me. The reason I watch hockey more is because it's far more accessible than it was just a few years ago. I don't see the sport growing much here in the States if it continues to be shown mainly just on cable. However, the sport is becoming accessible in Europe, mainly because of technological advances. Does Bettman sound arrogant? Yes, he can be arrogant, but I don't think he means to do it in a way to put down other sports. He has a zeal for the game and he likes to pump up the sport, probably moreso than other sports because for years, it's been the sport that's been sort of on the back burner that folks didn't really talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted January 7, 2012 Share #86 Posted January 7, 2012 Well you have to understand what Bettman and the NHL wants to become. His job is to sell the sport and the goal of Bettman and the NHL is to not just be "that" sport that "some" folks watch, which is exactly what it has been for many years, mainly because it just wasn't accessible and the NHL seemed to accept that role of being behind the NBA, NFL and MLB. He wants the sport to grow into one of the major sports, if not "the" major sport and I have to admit that the deal w/VERSUS has helped to grow the game a bit. Unfortunately, I think the sport has a ways to go to make it to the next level. There are still only a handful of games shown on regular TV and the NHL still tries to schedule games around other sports since it knows that many of its fans watch other sports. Growing up, in addition to hockey, I watched the NFL, the MLB, soccer, lacrosse, tennis, golf, bowling, skiing, Formula 1 and rugby and the NBA on occasion. Now and days hockey is the main thing I watch, along with soccer and the occasional NFL game. The others have rather outgrown me. The reason I watch hockey more is because it's far more accessible than it was just a few years ago. I don't see the sport growing much here in the States if it continues to be shown mainly just on cable. However, the sport is becoming accessible in Europe, mainly because of technological advances. Does Bettman sound arrogant? Yes, he can be arrogant, but I don't think he means to do it in a way to put down other sports. He has a zeal for the game and he likes to pump up the sport, probably moreso than other sports because for years, it's been the sport that's been sort of on the back burner that folks didn't really talk about. Yeah, I know what the job of a commissioner is, thanks... Some facts are just going to have to be faced here... As much as I'm a casual fan of the sport, the NHL will never breakout of (as you put it) that sport some folks watch here in America (soccer is even worse in that category).... Any one of us can sit here & name however many reasons as to why that is, under the sun.... but in the end, none of it matters..... As far as versus, ehh, I seriously wonder if people actually know that channel exists.... I can't sit there & attribute the airing of games onto that channel as aiding in the league progressively digging itself out of the hole it created for itself..... I have to say, the NHL did more for versus than versus did for it..... Apparently, foolish pride's got Bettman believing the contrary.... Anyway, like I said earlier, rule changes, right players/youthful players, right time.... Pulling out of ESPN was one of the dumbest moves he could have made for the sport.... As far as Bettman's arrogance, I'm not as quick to excuse it... shut up about the NBA, shut up about the NFL.... shut up about other sports..... Fix the problems in your own backyard before you start goin in on someone else's..... In the meantime, I'll continue to watch the games..... That's all I, the fan, can do..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 7, 2012 Share #87 Posted January 7, 2012 There's also something that needs to be addressed here. In Canada, there is no other major sports league to compete for fan's attention except for the CFL. And since, well, Canada invented ice hockey, it is the sport to watch. The NHL teams have so much respect in Canada you would think the Canadiens were the Yankees or something (the parallels are a little stunning actually). This whole thing about it needing to become a "major sport" (which is a load of bollocks, it already *is* a major sport in both Canada and the US) is non-applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share #88 Posted January 7, 2012 There's also something that needs to be addressed here. In Canada, there is no other major sports league to compete for fan's attention except for the CFL. And since, well, Canada invented ice hockey, it is the sport to watch. The NHL teams have so much respect in Canada you would think the Canadiens were the Yankees or something (the parallels are a little stunning actually). This whole thing about it needing to become a "major sport" (which is a load of bollocks, it already *is* a major sport in both Canada and the US) is non-applicable. Very true except 1 thing. Also to a small degree the Blue Jays (if they doing well) can also draw the sports fans attention in Canada as well. However most of the Jays fanbase is in Ontario and also parts of Quebec as well because of the old Expos before they became the Washington Nationals. Tokemon I only been to Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa so far in visiting your native Canada but i say this. During the early 1990's when the Jays won 2 straight world series, all of their games were either on CBC, CTV and on cable TSN(ESPN's sister station north of the border)Blue Jay world series matches were getting close to Stanley Cup Finals ratings in '92 and '93. So don't forget about the Jays as well. Worse thing their current Owners Rogers Communications(Canada version of Time Warner)took off all the 20-25 weekend games from 'free tv' on either CBC or CTV couple of years back. Tokemon I also know you were born in the early '90's and don't remember how popular the Jays were in Canada during their World Series years. Not sure about your neck of the woods in British Columbia, but the Jays got fans from all over Eastern Canada and even upstate NY, Vermont and Maine as well. I leave the Jays dicussion there. On the NHL point though you right, the hockey as a whole will always be king north of the border.:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 7, 2012 Share #89 Posted January 7, 2012 Put it this way, outside of Summertime in Toronto (when nothing else is going on), the Blue Jays don't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share #90 Posted January 7, 2012 Put it this way, outside of Summertime in Toronto (when nothing else is going on), the Blue Jays don't exist. Ok. Not meant as a rude remark but i say this. Tokkemon (I could be wrong) seems to dislikes baseball which is fine. However he refuses to hear the facts I mentioned as he was only born in the early '90's when Blue Jays World Series were getting TV ratings as high as Stanley Cup Finals games across all of Canada. All I am saying is when the Blue Jays return to the playoffs or make a return to the World Series they can be a strong #3 in terms of popularity behind the CFL and NHL. PS The CFL is not popular as he thinks as watching on TV, I see plenty of empty seats in Toronto, Montreal and until they made the playoffs Hamilton Tigercats. And he from British Columbia so his sports world is only the Cancuks and when they doing well the CFL's BC Lions. As with (B35) I am a casual NHL fan (Go NY Rangers having the #1 record in NHL as of this writing)but my favorite sports is MLB and NFL. NBA a close #2. So lets move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share #91 Posted January 7, 2012 Looks like fairly new NHL Players Association head Donald Fehr(yes the same guy who played a huge role in cancelling the 1994 world series)is being diffcult again. The planned and controversial league wide realignment starting next season is now on hold. NHL: Realignment plan put on hold Again here the proposed new 'division' set-up(offical names has yet to be announced yet) East Conference 1 NY Rangers NY Islanders New Jersey Philadelphia Pittsburgh Washington Carolina East Conference 2 Toronto Montreal Ottawa Buffalo Boston Florida(Miami area) Tampa West Central Conference Detroit Chicago Columbus Dallas St Louis Minnesota Winnipeg Nashville Pacific Conference Van. San Jose LA Anaheim Colo. Edmonton Calargy Phoenix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 7, 2012 Share #92 Posted January 7, 2012 Looks like fairly new NHL Players Association head Donald Fehr(yes the same guy who played a huge role in cancelling the 1994 world series)is being diffcult again. The plannned and controversial league wide realignment starting next season is now on hold. NHL: Realignment plan put on hold Again here the proposed new 'division' set-up(offical names has yet to be announced yet) East Conference 1 NY Rangers NY Islanders New Jersey Philadelphia Pittsburgh Washington Carolina East Conference 2 Toronto Montreal Ottawa Buffalo Boston Florida(Miami area) Tampa West Central Conference Detroit Chicago Columbus Dallas St Louis Minnesota Winnipeg Nashville Pacific Conference Van. San Jose LA Anaheim Colo. Edmonton Calargy Phoenix It's not on hold. It's not happening next year. Watched NHL Network last night and the NHLPA voted it down because they have concerns that they don't feel have been addressed by the NHL (i.e. traveling issues, etc.) I don't care for the new set up quite frankly. Why they can't just re-align the teams with the same set up is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share #93 Posted January 7, 2012 It's not on hold. It's not happening next year. Watched NHL Network last night and the NHLPA voted it down because they have concerns that they don't feel have been addressed by the NHL (i.e. traveling issues, etc.) I don't care for the new set up quite frankly. Why they can't just re-align the teams with the same set up is beyond me. Agreed:tup:. They should just ship Winnipeg to the Northwest Division and shift either Columbus, Ohio or Nashville to the Southeast and call it a day. Not perfect but the existing 6-division 2-conference format works well for the NHL and NBA who started it. The current division format works in which for instance 1 division in 1 season is crappy and sends only 1-2 teams to the playoffs. While in same Conference a much better Division can send as many as 4 teams. In end I won't be shocked if the above option of shifting the Jets to the Northwest and trade back East, either Detroit, Nashville or the Blue Jackets is what ends up happening by the start of the 2013-'14 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 7, 2012 Share #94 Posted January 7, 2012 In the Stanley Cup Rematch between the Canucks and Bruins, the Canucks win 4-3 with a heaping smelly mound of penalty minutes across the board. Vancouver Canucks at Boston Bruins Game Recap - 01/07/2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share #95 Posted January 7, 2012 In the Stanley Cup Rematch between the Canucks and Bruins, the Canucks win 4-3 with a heaping smelly mound of penalty minutes across the board. Vancouver Canucks at Boston Bruins Game Recap - 01/07/2012 That game should had been shown on NBC Sports Net(old versus) here in US. Hey Tokkemon what your reactions to the realignment plan? Or if not the Canucks you not intrestred lol?:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 7, 2012 Share #96 Posted January 7, 2012 Agreed:tup:. They should just ship Winnipeg to the Northwest Division and shift either Columbus, Ohio or Nashville to the Southeast and call it a day. Not perfect but the existing 6-division 2-conference format works well for the NHL and NBA who started it. The current division format works in which for instance 1 division in 1 season is crappy and sends only 1-2 teams to the playoffs. While in same Conference a much better Division can send as many as 4 teams. In end I won't be shocked if the above option of shifting the Jets to the Northwest and trade back East, either Detroit, Nashville or the Blue Jackets is what ends up happening by the start of the 2013-'14 season. Well Nashville wouldn't mind moving. Detroit and Columbus would be fine moving to the East since it would make traveling easier for them. That game should had been shown on NBC Sports Net(old versus) here in US. Yeah well clearly the NHL has some sort of agreement with NHL Network. Last year I didn't have NHL Network and only had Versus and NHL Game Center (Internet). They block all NHL Network games from being shown if you have NHL Game Center and want to use it. :mad: Now I have NHL Network and have yet to actually watch a game, except for the Jets vs Flyers game. I do watch it for the highlights and analysis though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 7, 2012 Share #97 Posted January 7, 2012 As for the realignment, I'm not really a fan of it. I think a good chunk of shuffling of the teams should be done, esp. when it comes to which teams are in each division, but to change it to four divisions only? That's a little weird. Then again, I didn't grow up in the Smythe/Norris/Adams/Patrick Divisions era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 7, 2012 Share #98 Posted January 7, 2012 As for the realignment, I'm not really a fan of it. I think a good chunk of shuffling of the teams should be done, esp. when it comes to which teams are in each division, but to change it to four divisions only? That's a little weird. Then again, I didn't grow up in the Smythe/Norris/Adams/Patrick Divisions era. Same here... I remember the Norris and all of that, but still. I think the new set up would suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted January 7, 2012 Share #99 Posted January 7, 2012 Looks like fairly new NHL Players Association head Donald Fehr (yes the same guy who played a huge role in cancelling the 1994 world series) is being diffcult again. The plannned and controversial league wide realignment starting next season is now on hold. What is with this sudden fixation with these sports realigning divisions... The NCAA is really gettin ridiculous with the moving of schools from conference to conference (Houston & SMU to the big east come next year? both of them are in freakin Texas)... MLB talkin about realigning they division (as well as their playoff format)... NBA talkin bout shifting some teams around.... good grief.... Anyway, it aint goin bring anymore revenue in for the league; they're still playin the same 82 game regular season, so what's the point..... and I hate when the suits use the excuse of possibly creating new rivalries..... oh, and smh @ "east conference" 1 & 2..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 8, 2012 Share #100 Posted January 8, 2012 The point is simple practical reasons. Since teams always play within their divisions more than everywhere else, you would like it if they're within the same geographical area. That's why Winnipeg being in the Southeast Division is taxing on the players. They should be elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.