Proposed 24-team NHL postseason has more questions than answers

The proposed solution to the NHL’s hiatus still leaves a lot to be desired.

Like many sports leagues, the NHL has been put on hold thanks to the novel coronavirus pandemic since mid-March. Fans have been begging to see the puck drop again. According to Pierre LeBrun, fans could be getting what they want shortly, as the popular proposed 24-team format is being voted on by the NHLPA.

Now, the league probably isn’t going to get started until July. Recently, Canada and the United States mutually agreed to extend the closing of their border for non-essential travel until June 21. While the NHL could argue that they are essential, since it’s the players’ job to play hockey, that could get complicated.

The 24-team format, like everything created by man, is flawed. However, it leaves more questions than answers.

More from Puck Prose

But let’s be honest. No solution was going to please everyone. And, as someone once said, you can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.

No matter what format the league went with, it was going to make some people upset. The conventional 16 team format didn’t give the bubble teams a chance. Meanwhile, the 20 team format would have probably been the lesser of the evils, but it didn’t give the league as great of a chance to regain revenue as the 24-team format does.

Before I break down the weaknesses of the format, let’s talk about why it should help the NHL gain back some revenue. The 20-team format (assuming top 10 teams per conference get in) would lave the New York Rangers, Chicago Blackhawks, and the Montreal Canadiens out of the picture. Those are three significant television markets.

However, the 24-team format includes all three. And since it doesn’t appear fans are going to be at games, the league must rely on television ratings to regain revenue. In that regard, including the Blackhawks, Canadiens, and Rangers absolutely makes sense.

But that’s where the “good things” about the format end. Let’s break down the questions remaining about the 24-team format.

Fairness

Above all, NHL teams, players, and fans want something that’s fair. Given the rough circumstances, nothing was going to be fair. But the 24-team format is the least fair of the options.

Sure, the bubble teams would have a lot to say about the 16 team format, but that’s what it is all the time. Nobody shed a tear for the Montreal Canadiens when they missed the Stanley Cup Playoffs by a point last year, even though they had more points than several Western Conference teams who made the postseason.

The 24-team format, though it’s fair to the bubble teams, isn’t fair to the top teams. Imagine how the Pittsburgh Penguins must feel. They have the third-best record in an extremely competitive Metropolitan Division. What’s their reward? Having to fight for their playoff lives against the Canadiens, who have lost more games than they’ve won.

Or how about the Edmonton Oilers? They’re the second-best team in the Pacific Division. But because the Central Division has three teams with a better record, the Oilers still have to play in the initial play-in round against the Blackhawks, who, much like the Canadiens, have lost more games than they’ve won.

Here’s a change I’d recommend. Currently, the top four teams in each conference, regardless of division, are getting byes from the play-in round. They’ll have a tournament of sorts between each other, which might determine seeding or might just be exhibitions.

Expand that to the top three teams from each division. Let the wild card teams and play-in teams worry about fighting for their postseason lives. The top six teams shouldn’t have to.

Now, speaking of which, how fair is it to give teams a bye? This means the top teams have to get back on the ice for their first truly meaningful game in over three months and it will be against a team who has already been fighting for their playoff lives. The tournament should help, but there’s no substitute for game experience.

Money

It’s unquestionable the 24-team format should help the NHL get some of their revenue back. But how much revenue it will get them back is up for debate. Let’s say the Rangers, Canadiens, and Blackhawks all get eliminated in the play-in round. There goes the entire reason the league wanted the 24-team format in the first place.

Let’s be honest. If the 23rd and 24th ranked teams were the Ottawa Senators and the Anaheim Ducks, nobody would be pushing that hard for a 24-team postseason. But because the 23rd and 24th ranked teams are the Canadiens and Blackhawks, the league wants the 24-team format.

Also, let’s consider this. The NHL was always going to get viewers for the playoffs. Fans of all sports are bored as heck. Many sports fans (myself included) have resorted to Korean baseball. I don’t even like NASCAR and I watched a recent race because I’m that bored. The league will get viewers no matter what. They could determine seeding by drawing names out of a hat and people would still tune in.

Next. Top 5 Rivalries Of All-Time. dark

Personally, I’ll be excited to have hockey back on my television. But at the same time, I can’t help but think the 24-team format isn’t fair to anyone and fans could lose interest early because the play-in rounds feature merely one compelling series (Hurricanes versus Rangers).

Home / Editorials