Clearly realignment will have to happen as they can't keep Winnipeg in the East for long. Do you think we're looking at just a straight swap of Winnipeg for Nashville or Columbus for now? Do you think something a little bigger is in the offing?

I forget what the final realignment picture looks like, but if I'm not mistaken we're going to see like 4 conferences of 6 or 7 teams. I may be wrong.

Unfortunately, the players association vetoed the plan. It did have its flaws such as Buffalo and Boston only playing the Pens, Devs, stRangers, Icelanders, Caps, Philthy twice a season. Kinda weird for the northeastern teams to see each other less than 4 times a season. Ultimately I think we see a modified version of that plan. In the interim they really need to swap Nashville out for Winnipeg.

Yikes I didn't hear about that. Honestly I thought that plan was stupid to begin with.

Would this work?

A - Boston, Montreal, Rangers, Islanders, New Jersey, Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto
B - Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Detroit
C - Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas, Colorado
D - Phoenix, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton

Each team in A and B gets at least 5 games against its conference mates, and 2 against everyone else. Teams in C and D play their conference mates 6 times

Or. If the NHL really wanted to shake things up, go with three conferences-the playoffs would be league-wide in all four rounds. Conference "D" above adds Dallas, Colorado, and Winnipeg; Conference "A" adds Philadelphia and Pittsburgh; and the remainder of "B" and "C" form the third conference..

Did any of it get put into the new CBA? Cause it seemed like the NHLPA and the NHl/ Owners had different ideas on the subject.

didn't hear anything about that- but hopefully they got it put in there....

A - Boston, Montreal, Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Quebec
B - Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, New Jersey
C - Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas, Detroit, Columbus
D - Colorado, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton

Leaves room for top two expansion spots Seattle and Hamilton without resorting to further realignment.
(Calling Phoenix to Quebec once Jamison fails to buy them in the next 9 days)

(01-22-2013 10:52 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  A - Boston, Montreal, Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Quebec
B - Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, New Jersey
C - Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas, Detroit, Columbus
D - Colorado, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton

Leaves room for top two expansion spots Seattle and Hamilton without resorting to further realignment.
(Calling Phoenix to Quebec once Jamison fails to buy them in the next 9 days)

They are even considering adding two teams?

*****

I know the Coyotes ownership has been in flux but are they financially not making it? They have had a decent team the last few seasons. Not sure why they would move back to the city where the Nordiques vacated and became the ____.

(01-22-2013 09:07 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:52 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  A - Boston, Montreal, Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Quebec
B - Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, New Jersey
C - Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas, Detroit, Columbus
D - Colorado, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton

Leaves room for top two expansion spots Seattle and Hamilton without resorting to further realignment.
(Calling Phoenix to Quebec once Jamison fails to buy them in the next 9 days)

They are even considering adding two teams?

*****

I know the Coyotes ownership has been in flux but are they financially not making it? They have had a decent team the last few seasons. Not sure why they would move back to the city where the Nordiques vacated and became the ____.

Well after 16 years of never making a profit and recent losses of up to $45 million without a city subsidy they aren't going to last that long.

Quebec is back thanks to PKP who is building a new arena and owns a sports network in Canada which the new Nords would be the lead team on it.

(01-23-2013 01:26 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 09:07 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:52 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  A - Boston, Montreal, Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Quebec
B - Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, New Jersey
C - Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas, Detroit, Columbus
D - Colorado, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton

Leaves room for top two expansion spots Seattle and Hamilton without resorting to further realignment.
(Calling Phoenix to Quebec once Jamison fails to buy them in the next 9 days)

They are even considering adding two teams?

*****

I know the Coyotes ownership has been in flux but are they financially not making it? They have had a decent team the last few seasons. Not sure why they would move back to the city where the Nordiques vacated and became the ____.

Well after 16 years of never making a profit and recent losses of up to $45 million without a city subsidy they aren't going to last that long.

Quebec is back thanks to PKP who is building a new arena and owns a sports network in Canada which the new Nords would be the lead team on it.

Never truly trust any professional team's accounting procedures. A lot of small market teams are money pits regardless of sport though. While the coals might be hot back in Quebec they did lose a team. Although I guess with the Thrashers heading to Winnipeg who knows.

(01-23-2013 02:08 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(01-23-2013 01:26 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 09:07 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:52 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  A - Boston, Montreal, Buffalo, Ottawa, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Quebec
B - Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington, Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, New Jersey
C - Nashville, St. Louis, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, Dallas, Detroit, Columbus
D - Colorado, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton

Leaves room for top two expansion spots Seattle and Hamilton without resorting to further realignment.
(Calling Phoenix to Quebec once Jamison fails to buy them in the next 9 days)

They are even considering adding two teams?

*****

I know the Coyotes ownership has been in flux but are they financially not making it? They have had a decent team the last few seasons. Not sure why they would move back to the city where the Nordiques vacated and became the ____.

Well after 16 years of never making a profit and recent losses of up to $45 million without a city subsidy they aren't going to last that long.

Quebec is back thanks to PKP who is building a new arena and owns a sports network in Canada which the new Nords would be the lead team on it.

Never truly trust any professional team's accounting procedures. A lot of small market teams are money pits regardless of sport though. While the coals might be hot back in Quebec they did lose a team. Although I guess with the Thrashers heading to Winnipeg who knows.

When the 1st owner goes bankrupt and you spend 3 years looking for an new owner to keep the team in the market while blackmailing the city for $50 million, it's safe to say the team is a money sinkhole.

They just drew 8,355 for a home game that you could buy tickets off of stubhub for $3. Heck look at their entire season on stubhub hardly any home game where the cheapest ticket is over $6.