U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Hockey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-01-2013, 09:29 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
4,850 posts, read 6,368,152 times
Reputation: 5800

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tekkie View Post
For the sake of debate, why? I've been to a few Detroit/Chicago games and watched several of them on tv and there's nothing particularly riveting about these "rivalries". When I think of rivalry, I think of a rough and tumble brawl on ice. When Detroit plays Chicago, it's just like when Detroit plays Tampa Bay. What sets this "rivalry" apart from any other matchup?
Have you ever attended a Wings v Hawks game?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-02-2013, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Mequon, WI
7,836 posts, read 19,582,534 times
Reputation: 4435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondurant View Post
Have you ever attended a Wings v Hawks game?
Yeah no kidding! my first hawks game was vs Detroit, it was crazy! Plus gotta love the "Detroit Sucks" chant coming from 22,000 fans! or 110% capacity of the united center.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2013, 06:05 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
4,850 posts, read 6,368,152 times
Reputation: 5800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milwaukee City View Post
Yeah no kidding! my first hawks game was vs Detroit, it was crazy! Plus gotta love the "Detroit Sucks" chant coming from 22,000 fans! or 110% capacity of the united center.
When I went to games at the United Center there was more Detroit fans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2013, 06:52 AM
 
Location: Metro Washington DC
13,110 posts, read 19,956,520 times
Reputation: 7729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tekkie View Post
For the sake of debate, why? I've been to a few Detroit/Chicago games and watched several of them on tv and there's nothing particularly riveting about these "rivalries". When I think of rivalry, I think of a rough and tumble brawl on ice. When Detroit plays Chicago, it's just like when Detroit plays Tampa Bay. What sets this "rivalry" apart from any other matchup?
History. Tradition. But, yeah, the rivalries aren't what they used to be. The on with Colorado, now that was a rivalry! I miss that. I think Detroit is more midwestern than eastern, as well. The midwestern teams are just one timezone apart so it's no big deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2013, 04:33 PM
 
3,083 posts, read 4,660,225 times
Reputation: 3524
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkf747 View Post
History. Tradition. But, yeah, the rivalries aren't what they used to be. The on with Colorado, now that was a rivalry! I miss that. I think Detroit is more midwestern than eastern, as well. The midwestern teams are just one timezone apart so it's no big deal.
Well, maybe I was spoiled with that rivalry, because that's the one that set the benchmark for me. It's not so much the fighting as it was the intensity. The hits were bigger, the goals were more bitter (or sweet), and the intensity was through the roof.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2013, 04:36 PM
 
3,083 posts, read 4,660,225 times
Reputation: 3524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondurant View Post
Have you ever attended a Wings v Hawks game?
Indeed, and that's actually what I was thinking about when I posted that. The game was last season on March 4th. It was a Sunday afternoon game, so not sure if that had anything to do with it. But the Joe was relatively quiet throughout the entire game. I don't think there was a single fight or scuffle. The Blackhawks ended up winning that game. I was somewhat disappointed, not only because the Hawks beat my Wings, but because it was such a low-key game. I've been to indoor lacrosse games that were more exciting and more intense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2013, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
4,850 posts, read 6,368,152 times
Reputation: 5800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tekkie View Post
Indeed, and that's actually what I was thinking about when I posted that. The game was last season on March 4th. It was a Sunday afternoon game, so not sure if that had anything to do with it. But the Joe was relatively quiet throughout the entire game. I don't think there was a single fight or scuffle. The Blackhawks ended up winning that game. I was somewhat disappointed, not only because the Hawks beat my Wings, but because it was such a low-key game. I've been to indoor lacrosse games that were more exciting and more intense.
The games I went to at the United Center in Chicago were always quite lively. Some of the in-game attitude could be attributed to Detroit being a less aggressive & fighting team over the past few years. I think Tootoo was brought in to bring some of the old time hockey back to Motown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2013, 03:07 PM
 
127 posts, read 161,721 times
Reputation: 107
Count me in the crowd that is very happy they're abandoning four distinct conferences. I'm glad that the East and West Conferences will live on.

With that said, this new "wild card" format seems completely unwarranted. Yes, it's possible that the 5-seed in the Midwest could accumulate more points than the 4-seed in the Pacific, but boo-hoo. How bad should we feel about a fifth place team not qualifying for the playoffs? I hate the idea of the 4-seeds switching divisions for the playoffs just to ensure the inferior wildcard/4-seed plays the top 1-seed. That really kills what they're trying to accomplish with the first two rounds of divisional playoffs. If they're going to do this, they might as well just keep the 1 thru 8 seedings by conference just as they have it now.

As a fan of a western team, I'm glad to see the East saddled with the 8 team divisions. Maybe you can make the case that this levels the playing field given the easier travel schedule, but I still don't think it's right. I almost think that they should table this alignment until 32 teams are a reality. There really isn't anything fundamentally wrong with 5 x 6. Just swap Winnipeg with Detroit or Columbus.

This is nitpicking, but I'm not crazy about the 'Midwest' name. I would go 'Pacific' and 'Central' (or even 'Norris') in the West. The East should be 'Northeast' and 'Atlantic'. The division with the Florida teams should probably be the 'Atlantic'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Midwest
4,628 posts, read 3,975,776 times
Reputation: 6623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubblejumper View Post
The NHL put forth a realignment proposal to the NHLPA and owners today.

Link

The proposal would have two divisions in each conference, with the top three teams in each division being guaranteed a playoff spot and the two remaining spots being given to the two next best teams, regardless of division.

Proposed divisions are:

WEST

Pacific
Anahiem
Calgary
Edmonton
LA
Phoenix
San Jose
Vancouver

Midwest
Chicago
Colorado
Dallas
Minnesota
Nashville
St. Louis
Winnipeg

EAST

Central
Boston
Buffalo
Detroit
Florida
Montreal
Ottawa
Tampa
Toronto

Atlantic
Carolina
Columbus
New Jersey
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington


Thoughts?
I am against this type of realignment. They need to retract to 28 teams, expand to 32 teams so it is balanced, or relocate one of the eastern teams to the west so both conferences are balanced.

The only team that is getting screwed right now is Winnipeg. Move WPG to the Northwest, Minnesota to the Central, and Nashville to the Southeast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondurant View Post
Good for television, bad for Red Wings fans. Bye bye traditional rivals. The prospect for Detroit v Chicago Cup final is pretty cool, though.
Red Wings would renew rivalries with other Original Six teams. The Hawks would develop new rivalries...anyways the Hawks two biggest rivals are Vancouver and STL right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Lethbridge, AB
1,132 posts, read 1,654,543 times
Reputation: 974
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude1984 View Post
I am against this type of realignment. They need to retract to 28 teams, expand to 32 teams so it is balanced, or relocate one of the eastern teams to the west so both conferences are balanced.

The only team that is getting screwed right now is Winnipeg. Move WPG to the Northwest, Minnesota to the Central, and Nashville to the Southeast.


Red Wings would renew rivalries with other Original Six teams. The Hawks would develop new rivalries...anyways the Hawks two biggest rivals are Vancouver and STL right now.
Moving Winnipeg to the Northwest would require them to play two time zones over on a regular basis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Hockey
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top