by Jesse Liebman
Editorial. Photos by AP News.
Before I begin let me preface by saying, "Yes, this is another hockey article." But take note: it has been football and baseball that is responsible for its existence. While sitting in a laundromat in the North End, I picked up a book from the table: Bob Costas' "Fair Ball," and began to read. And recently, I watched the AFC and NFC crown their respective champions. Both got me thinking.
The game of hockey -- in my mind, at least -- is unquestionably the most exciting sport to watch. The powers that be have made changes to the game that have altered the face of modern hockey in the post-lockout world. And to be fair, many of these changes reinvigorated and improved what was once a dying on-ice product for the fans.
But there is one glaring defect that stands out in particular and was not corrected after 2005: how teams are aligned in the standings, and its ramifications on the postseason. Since 1993-94, the NHL decided to copy the NBA's playoff format and removed the divisional structure. This was a natural progression at the time to save money on travel costs and because of the increasing number of teams.
The NHL experimented with restoring a focus on rivalries for the first three years following the work stoppage by having divisional teams play each other eight times during the regular season, but this came at a costly expense: it reduced inter-conference play to the point where Sidney Crosby had to wait until his third season in the league to play against teams such as Vancouver, Edmonton and Colorado. You do not create rivalries by artificially forcing it.
What needs to happen -- what fans have been crying for for years -- is to re-install the old division standings. Throw away the tepid names such as Atlantic, Northeast and Central. Bring back names such as the Adams, Smythe and Norris. But what's in a name? Not much if you don't commit to fixing what it represents.
Prior to 1993-94, teams would claw their way to secure a first place finish in the division, because once the Stanley Cup Playoffs rolled around, the top four teams in each division -- there were four in total -- would face off, followed by the remaining two. Whoever won that contest would be crowned the division champion; the division champions would then compete for the conference title before advancing to compete for hockey's holy grail.
It's not only the regular season where rivalries are made; it's in the postseason, when the next game might be your last. We all know in today's NHL only one team out of 30 will win it all. So players and fans will look to raising a division banner to the rafters on opening day as a symbol of pride and excellence. The heightened sense of emotion made for a tremendous display for the fans; this manifested itself into legendary overtime games, pride-swallowing handshake lines, and yes, the occasional bench-clearing brawl.
That's how teams such as Boston and Montreal's rivalry continued to grow in the 80s and early 90s. The Adams Division was filled with legendary rivalries besides that: Montreal-Quebec; Boston-Hartford; Buffalo-Quebec.
The Norris Division prominently featured Toronto, Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit and St. Louis. These match-ups alone wrote the headlines for yesterday's sports pages.
Heck, in the Patrick Division, the battles featuring Rangers, Islanders, Capitals and Flyers produced some of the most thrilling series ever in the 80s: Pat Lafontaine's Easter Sunday goal, Ron Hextall slashing at anyone coming within ten feet of his crease, John Vanbiesbrouck pushing the Rangers to unexpected heights. Ask any fan and they'll tell you these matches were not games, but all-out war.
My final point is this: when you have the post-season division champions face off -- regardless of how they fared in the regular season -- it lends respect to the series and builds momentum for the eventual Stanley Cup Final.
If the NHL wants to make headway on reclaiming the No. 3 position in the Big Four -- amongst fans and the media -- it needs to give them something to focus their attentions on. Realigning the divisions back to the old format of two divisions in each conference is so obvious, it's baffling that Gary Bettman and Co. have not fixed it yet.
Oh wait, it took how many years to eliminate the two-line pass rule again? Never mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment