YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

    Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

    To get started, first
    Puck Daddy

    Why the NHLPA rejected NHL’s 2012-13 realignment plan

    Getty ImagesWhat we didn't know about the NHL's radical realignment plan, approved by the NHL Board of Governors last month and affecting everything from conference sizes to playoff format: That the National Hockey League Players' Association would refuse to provide its consent, and kill the plan for 2012-13.

    Which, in fact, the NHLPA did on Friday. No four unbalanced conferences. No divisional playoffs. The Winnipeg Jets remain in the Southeast. The Dallas Stars remain in the Pacific, and so on.

    What we really didn't know about the NHL's radical realignment plan, until the NHLPA and executive director Donald Fehr's rejection of it: That it was a grandiose power play against the players, as Gary Bettman pushed Fehr for the first time and Fehr responded with a left hook that made the fight fans gasp.

    From the NHL:

    The National Hockey League announced today that it will not move forward with implementation of the realignment plan and modified playoff format recently approved by the NHL Board of Governors for the 2012-13 NHL season because the NHLPA has refused to provide its consent.

    "It is unfortunate that the NHLPA has unreasonably refused to approve a plan that an overwhelming majority of our clubs voted to support, and that has received such widespread support from our fans and other members of the hockey community, including players," said NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly.  "We have now spent the better part of four weeks attempting to satisfy the NHLPA's purported concerns with the plan with no success.  Because we have already been forced to delay, and as a result are already late in beginning the process of preparing next season's schedule, we have no choice but to abandon our intention to implement the realignment plan and modified playoff format for next season."

    "We believe the union acted unreasonably in violation of the league's rights.  We intend to evaluate all of our available legal options and to pursue adequate remedies, as appropriate."

    As a result of the league's decision today, the NHL will maintain its current alignment and playoff format for the 2012-13 season.

    So why did the NHLPA refuse to endorse this plan, besides a clear disregard for the league's rights (OK then)? Simple: They felt realignment was unfair and inconsiderate to the players; they weren't given a chance, in their eyes, to help create it; and it communicated that the NHLPA isn't going to be shoved around now or during the CBA talks.

    On Monday, Dec. 5, 2011, the NHL's Board of Governors approved a new four-conference format for the league beginning in 2012-13, with two conferences of seven teams and two conferences of eight teams.

    Every team in the NHL would have played home-and-home; the Stanley Cup Playoffs would have started inside each conference, with the top four teams squaring off in divisional playoffs.

    Smythe! Norris! Adams! Patrick!

    According to sources with knowledge of the negotiations, the NHL didn't include the NHLPA in the formation of the realignment plan because there was no mandate in the CBA to do so. So the league created the plan, the Board of Governors passed it and the dare was made: Go ahead, kill off something that the majority of hockey teams, fans and media deemed a positive move for the NHL.

    But the league eventually needed the NHLPA's consent. It was never a given despite reports to the contrary. So they sent a letter asking for it, and the NHLPA responded by communicating several concerns they had with the now-passed plan:

    • The unbalanced conference format, with two divisions of eight teams and two divisions of seven teams. Combined with the return to a four-team "divisional" playoff format, the players felt there was an unfair advantage to teams in the smaller conferences.

    • The NHL trumpeted reduced travel for teams; for example, the Detroit Red Wings would only have to make one long swing to California and to Western Canada each season instead of multiple trips.

    What the NHLPA wanted: Specific data on what the schedule would look like under this plan, to better understand duration of road trips, for example. What the NHL provided, according to a source with knowledge of the talks: Mileage charts per teams and other formulas. The NHLPA was not pleased.

    • Basically, the NHLPA felt that this realignment plan was created by and for the owners, and not in the best interests of the players. And when they reached out to attempt to reshape the plan to better serve their interests, that input was rejected, according to one source.

    The NHLPA and NHL VP Bill Daly had traded letters for the last month, with the PA telling Larry Brooks of the New York Post as early as Dec. 4 that they had problems with the realignment plan. As late as Jan. 6, the NHLPA offered to meet with the NHL to hash out the realignment plan. The meeting never occurred.

    Now, the death of realignment for next season — which will anger several fan bases that celebrated easier schedules and more rivalry-friendly conferences under the new plan — has been pinned on the NHLPA. The NHL fires the first cannon in the public-relations war that'll be waged well into next season, as the two sides battle over the CBA.

    Perhaps that's why we went from the simple flip/flop of a Central Division team with the Winnipeg Jets to a large-scale reshaping of the NHL. At best, the league would have satisfied a dozen disgruntled owners and excited fans with a new rivalry-based playoff format.

    At worst, realignment is delayed for a season and Donald Fehr looks like the Grinch Who Stole The Patrick Division.

    The NHL successfully demonized the players back in 2005 during that negotiation, as public pressure increased until the PA crumbled under the weight. (Jeremy Roenick, of course, helped along the cause by telling fans that criticized the players' avarice that "we don't want you to watch hockey.") As the next labor war approaches, this realignment tango has a familiar stench.

    Sigh ... realignment was taken from even before we learned the conference names. Then again, it wasn't as if realignment didn't have its drawbacks.

    • • •

    UPDATE: Donald Fehr and the NHLPA released the following statement:

    "On the evening of December 5, 2011, the NHL informed the NHLPA that they proposed to put in place a four-conference format beginning with the 2012-13 season. As realignment affects Players' terms and conditions of employment, the CBA requires the League to obtain the NHLPA's consent before implementation. Over the last month, we have had several discussions with the League and extensive dialogue with Players, most recently on an Executive Board conference call on January 1. Two substantial Player concerns emerged: (1) whether the new structure would result in increased and more onerous travel; and (2) the disparity in chances of making the playoffs between the smaller and larger divisions.

    "In order to evaluate the effect on travel of the proposed new structure, we requested a draft or sample 2012-13 schedule, showing travel per team.  We were advised it was not possible for the League to do that. We also suggested reaching an agreement on scheduling conditions to somewhat alleviate Player travel concerns (e.g., the scheduling of more back-to-back games, more difficult and lengthier road trips, number of border crossings, etc.), but the League did not want to enter into such a dialogue.  The travel estimation data we received from the League indicates that many of the current Pacific and Central teams, that have demanding travel schedules under the current format, could see their travel become even more difficult. On the playoff qualification matter, we suggested discussing ways to eliminate the inherent differences in the proposed realignment, but the League was not willing to do so.

    "The League set a deadline of January 6, 2012 for the NHLPA to provide its consent to the NHL's proposal.  Players' questions about travel and concerns about the playoff format have not been sufficiently addressed; as such, we are not able to provide our consent to the proposal at this time.  We continue to be ready and willing to have further discussions should the League be willing to do so."

    UPDATE 2: Bill Daly speaks with Sportsnet about the NHLPA's decision, including why the NHL just doesn't go ahead with the plan since they don't need formal NHLPA approval. (The reason? The don't want to start a labor way before the CBA negotiations.)

    Other popular content on Yahoo! Sports:
    Judge delays Floyd Mayweather's jail time so he can fight
    Everyone back to chasing Wildcats in SEC hoops
    Strikeforce women's champ Cristiane Santos suspended for steroids

     
    • Mike  •  Tustin, California  •  4 months ago
      So the fans are going to get screwed over another #$%$ match? Cool! Thanks guys!
    • Aaron  •  4 months ago
      This just makes me think the NHL is facing yet another lockout in its future. What a shame.
    • North Shore  •  New York, New York  •  4 months ago
      They should just go to the balanced schedule and the top 16 teams get into the playoffs, with reseeding after every round. This way the best teams teams will make the finals.
      • shiitake 4 months ago
        The only way you'd get a fair ranking of the top 16 teams would be to have each team play each of the other 29 teams an equal number of times (either 1 or 2 home and away) and with both teams having an equal amount of days rest before each game,

        It's not possible to have a fair yet non-retarded schedule and alignment.
    • JASONH  •  New Braunfels, Texas  •  4 months ago
      TThis better not be a prelude to a lockout... the fans have suffered because of these idiots before.
    • Tom  •  4 months ago
      Great news. The best teams PERIOD should get into the playoffs.
      • DavidM 4 months ago
        And how do you determine the best teams with the heavy divisional play in the current format?? If you are in a weak division you currently make the playoffs over stronger teams in tough divisions.
      • Alex 4 months ago
        Which, under the current system, doesn't happen.
      • Tom 4 months ago
        Okay, but the new playoff format was to be applied in conjunction with the whole 'home-and-home for everyone' scheduling thing (which i wholeheartedly agree with). I'd argue that with the majority of your schedule eaten up 'at random' like that, points are actually a pretty fair indicator of how good your team was.
    • toe blake  •  San Francisco, California  •  4 months ago
      So what power does this Board of Governors really have? It sounds like a cool title to have.
      yep, another lockout on the way.
      • Scott S 4 months ago
        Thank god there is an AHL team not too far from where I live (Hershey Bears)
    • Ryan  •  Tampa, Florida  •  4 months ago
      The new playoff format stunk in my opinion. You'd see the same teams every year in the first two rounds, which would get old pretty quickly. It makes a lot more sense to just keep the current divisions and just swap Nashville and Winnipeg. The NHL currently has the best format and most exciting playoffs out of the four major sports, and I don't think there's a need to tweak it.
      • Aaron 4 months ago
        The current system sucks for teams like MN though Ryan. We regularly have to stay up very late on weeknight just to watch games in our own division, example Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton. While I wasn't a fan of the two different conference sizes, 2 with 8 teams and 2 with 7, I did like that we were being put together with teams in our own time zone. If your worried that teams would dominate there conference now then that should put more ambition into the lesser teams to get better. The bruins hadn't won a stanley cup in how many years? I don't think we are going to see any more dominance in a particular team than we already do.
      • DavidM 4 months ago
        Yeah, we know why Philly and NY teams don't like it, they would have to take more than a 1 hour bus ride to games. But lots of teams have horrendous travel under the current plan and even worse get killed on TV ratings on those games. As a fan in Dallas I want to be able to see every team in the NHL every year. We don't see some teams in our building for three years now.

        The eastern owners finally bit the bullet and did what was best for hockey overall. And the NHLPA sinks it. At the very least it is horrendous PR for the players.
      • John 4 months ago
        You don't have a bad point but the solution is to introduce some mandatory shuffling of the division every five years or so.
    • Mashman  •  4 months ago
      Simple just get rid of the Yotes and a team from Florida. No four unbalanced conferences everybody is happy and it would serve the Fehr right i thought we rid rid of him back in WW2
    • Bud F  •  Vancouver, Canada  •  4 months ago
      Please go on strike, as a season ticket holder I would love to save some money. I also suggest a 60 game schedule, but that would never happen.
    • K-SHE95 Fan  •  Houston, Texas  •  4 months ago
      Unions are the reason jobs are shipped overseas.
      • BOB 4 months ago
        UNIONS ARE A NATIONAL PLAGUE - - -THEY WERE USEFUL AT ONE TIME
        NOW JUST A MONEY MAKER FOR THE UNION HEADS - -
    • Lehnerd  •  Buchanan, Georgia  •  4 months ago
      If Bettman Just switch Put winnipeg in spot where dallas was move them to southeast divison and problem done right!
    • Rob  •  Cleburne, Texas  •  4 months ago
      Actually, thye still screwed it up because Buffalo, Boston, Montreal, NYI, NYR, Toronto and Ottawa mkes more sense to limit travel expenses as they claim to want to accomplish.
    • Kristian  •  French Camp, California  •  4 months ago
      I accept the likely power play as a rationale for rejecting this format. Close scrutiny reveals an imbalance based upon this first half of this season as a reference point out west: 6 of 8 teams from Conf. B (Norris) would be playoff teams today (all except Winnipeg, Columbus) while the (Smythe,) Conf. A gets three Canadian and 5 US teams. This goes to separate issues, 1. Competitive imbalance versus 2. Travel imbalance.

      No plan can redress all concerns and create overall parity of specific concerns. The West will always have a) more travel as we are more spread out as we move west of the Mississippi River and b) more of the recent expansion teams less of the traditional/historical power teams.

      Another difficulty faced by the committee is what to do with the two Florida franchises. In the East it seems they should be able to include one Canadian team in each conference. It appears to me, that this would make a decent compromise Conf. C (Mid-Atlantic if you will) = TOR, OTT, BUF, PIT, CAR, TB & FL while Conf. D (Coastal) = MON, BOS, NYR, NYI, PHL, NJ, & WAS.

      Pluses=as stated each conference has now at least one Canadian franchise. Strikes a good balance of current powers. Each conference has four playoff teams as of 1/7/12.

      Minuses=splits PIT/PHL, 3/1 split of the original six franchises (also present in the league committee approved plan).

      No matter how you try to divide the teams you have the following weaknesses obstacles:
      1. greater distance between teams in the West
      2. only six original franchises no further west than Chicago
      3. two teams in Florida difficult to manage into a 'fair' plan
      4. more teams in a much tighter geographical area on the eastern seabord (my proposed Conf. D as an example).
    • emily h  •  Santa Clara, California  •  4 months ago
      I say keep the divisions & playoff format the way it is but make the following changes:
      move VAN to Pacific; MIN & WIN to Northwest; DAL to Central; CLB to Southwest.
    • dani  •  Seoul, South Korea  •  4 months ago
      If it's true that the new alignment would decrease travel, then all the NHL needs to do is prove it via the 2011-2012 calendar with the available dates given by the GMs last year. They could even go so far as using previous calendars and available dates to increase the sample-size and amount of proof.
    • BigE  •  Dallas, Texas  •  4 months ago
      Donald Fehr is the Great Satan of sports fans.
    • Josh  •  Springfield, Massachusetts  •  4 months ago
      @ Bill Daily, Im pritty sure its the 95th NHL season, I did my research on it an I got 95th, In the 1991-1992 season it was the 75th NHL season, Twenty years from the 1991-1992 season would be 95. I could be wrong...
    • Fakename70  •  4 months ago
      Well, NHLPA, you got what you wanted when you hired Donald Fehr. Hope you're happy now. Did you REALLY know what you were signing-up for when you went after him, I wonder? Explain to me how Donald Fehr throwing a hissy fit because the NHL- NHLPA CBA didn't require the players consent to go ahead with a sensible realignment plan is somehow good for the league?
    • Rae Lew  •  Conesville, Ohio  •  4 months ago
      Really, how hard is it to just put Columbus in the Eastern Conference and Winterpeg in the Western Conference. Problem solved. It's that simple.
    • SharkFan  •  4 months ago
      I like how instead of really addressing the issues with the new plan, Daly just talked about the problems of this one. No one has complained about the playoff format and it has been just fine. Switch Jets with either Detroit or Columbus and be done with it. There is no "rights being violated". You asked for something to be approved and the NHLPA did not like you waiving your big stick around. You can't always get what you want.

    Yahoo! Sports Authors