The word out of some media outlets is that Gary Bettman has put forward a plan with the League’s Board of Governors, to return to a 4 division format, with divisional playoff play, for the 2012/2013 season.
This is something I would support, along with White Uniforms at home and a return to "Named" Divisions.
If the plan is implemented, there would be two conferences, each with 1 seven, and 1 eight team division. Each team would play home and away against every other team in the league for the first time in over a decade. The new divisions would be the Pacific, Midwest, East, and South.
Detroit and Columbus are both being promised moves East. That would mean another team besides Winnipeg would have to head West. My guess is Toronto, which will reunite with some of its old Norris Division Rivals in the "Midwest."
Here is my breakdown as to how that would shake out geographically:
East
Montreal
Ottawa
Buffalo
Boston
New York
New York
New Jersey
Philadelphia
South
Washington
Columbus
Detroit
Carolina
Tampa Bay
Florida
Pittsburgh
Midwest
St. Louis
Winnipeg
Minnesota
Chicago
Edmonton
Calgary
Toronto
Nashville
Pacific
Vancouver
Colorado
Phoenix
Los Angeles
San Jose
Anaheim
Dallas
Showing posts with label Systems of Government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Systems of Government. Show all posts
Friday, June 24, 2011
Defiance Yielding No Results
Make no mistake that the economy of the US has been broken, in some sense, for a considerable amount of time. The unprecedented down turn that has transpired over the past few years seems as if it is never going away. I am just wondering if the GOP wants to keep it that way, at least through the 2012 elections, if not permanently.
John Boehner spoke about reducing debt by cutting spending and pleaded for tax cuts. Now, when given a chance to approve a tax cut that could help create jobs, Boehner wags his finger "No". I often wonder if that is the only word some on the far right know, "No". I don't recall Boehner ever mentioning any desire to pass bills to create jobs, just asking where they were. Over and over and over again. So in that respect, you can't say he hasn't kept up his word. He never promised to create jobs, just inquire as to their wherabouts. However, to see a republican refuse tax cuts is something on a parallel with Haley' Comet. Every hundred years or so.
Boehner doesn't want to support a bill that will give tax cuts to businesses for creating jobs because he only sees it as a short term solution. With the unemployment rate being what it is and the economy making no strides currently, any solution, short or long term, should be considered progress. But that isn't what Boehner and the GOP want to see. They don't want progress. They don't want jobs created. They don't the economy to recover. They want it to fail and pin it all on Obama.
Since taking over control of the House, there have been no jobs bills passed. There has been a bill delaying regulation on food and gas prices, but nothing to create jobs. Why would we expect Boehner and his constituents to create jobs? They already have them, funded by the tax payers with nice expense accounts and transportation and 5 star accommodations covered on our dime. I have yet to see any member of the GOP decry such spending as wasteful. That's because they don't really care about government spending as a whole( see Bush Adminsistration 2001-2009 for proof), they care about government spending when it doesn't benefit them and their backers. It's okay for John Q. Public to pay these folks salaries and benefits, but let's see to it they get nothing in return.
And that is where we stand: more elected officials talking a big game, getting a big tax payer subsidized salary and doing nothing in return. Now, if you consider blocking bills that could help stimulate the economy and job growth through obstructionism and child-like defiance a return, then you are getting your money's worth.
John Boehner spoke about reducing debt by cutting spending and pleaded for tax cuts. Now, when given a chance to approve a tax cut that could help create jobs, Boehner wags his finger "No". I often wonder if that is the only word some on the far right know, "No". I don't recall Boehner ever mentioning any desire to pass bills to create jobs, just asking where they were. Over and over and over again. So in that respect, you can't say he hasn't kept up his word. He never promised to create jobs, just inquire as to their wherabouts. However, to see a republican refuse tax cuts is something on a parallel with Haley' Comet. Every hundred years or so.
Boehner doesn't want to support a bill that will give tax cuts to businesses for creating jobs because he only sees it as a short term solution. With the unemployment rate being what it is and the economy making no strides currently, any solution, short or long term, should be considered progress. But that isn't what Boehner and the GOP want to see. They don't want progress. They don't want jobs created. They don't the economy to recover. They want it to fail and pin it all on Obama.
Since taking over control of the House, there have been no jobs bills passed. There has been a bill delaying regulation on food and gas prices, but nothing to create jobs. Why would we expect Boehner and his constituents to create jobs? They already have them, funded by the tax payers with nice expense accounts and transportation and 5 star accommodations covered on our dime. I have yet to see any member of the GOP decry such spending as wasteful. That's because they don't really care about government spending as a whole( see Bush Adminsistration 2001-2009 for proof), they care about government spending when it doesn't benefit them and their backers. It's okay for John Q. Public to pay these folks salaries and benefits, but let's see to it they get nothing in return.
And that is where we stand: more elected officials talking a big game, getting a big tax payer subsidized salary and doing nothing in return. Now, if you consider blocking bills that could help stimulate the economy and job growth through obstructionism and child-like defiance a return, then you are getting your money's worth.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Realigned NHL Divisions with Winnipeg?
Realigned NHL Divisions with Winnipeg?
As I said here, don’t throw assume Atlanta is done yet.
But let’s just say for a moment that the deal between Atlanta Spirit and True North Entertainment does whisk away hockey back to the Manitoban Plains, how would the NHL adjust its divisions to accommodate such a move? Chances are we will either get a lame duck team in Atlanta this year, or have the absurdity of City on the same longitude of Lincoln, Nebraska being in the Southeast.
But starting in the 2012-13 season you have to imagine the NHL would alter its divisions for reduced travel cost and more natural geographic rivalries. What will such a league look like? Let’s take a stab at a few options here, just for fun.
The “Easy” Path
The most simple way to handle realignment would be to move Winnipeg into the Central Division of the Western Conference and switch Nashville into the empty spot from the Southeast. That would be geographical, logical and create the least amount of waves.
The “Traditionalist” Path
There was a time in hockey where each division sent 4 teams into the playoffs and the first two rounds were heated inter-divisional play. How could that work with 30 teams? Here is how I would see it happening with one 7 and one 8 team division in each conference. Playoff teams based on last years point totals are in bold. This setup would leave room for two more expansion teams (Quebec and Seattle anyone?)to eventually round the league off at four 8-team division, with exactly half making the playoffs. While going back to the traditional Conference titles, the league should also return to the home teams wearing white.
Wales Conference
Patrick Division
Washington Capitals
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Nashville Predators
New York Rangers
Carolina Hurricanes
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
Adams Division
Boston Bruins
Tampa Bay Lightning
Montreal Canadians
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs
Ottawa Senators
Florida Panthers
Campbell Conference
Norris Division
Detroit Redwings
Chicago Blackhawks
Dallas Stars
St. Louis Blues
Minnesota Wild
Columbus Blue Jackets
Winnipeg Jets
Smythe Division
Vancouver Canucks
San Jose Sharks
Anaheim Ducks
Phoenix Coyotes
Los Angeles Kings
Calgary Flames
Colorado Avalanche
Edmonton Oilers
A Truly Radical Approach
This would really shake things up quite a bit. It would make no sense in terms of the history of the game and a lot of traditional rivalries and Conference affiliations would be broken up, but it would certainly be something new and exciting.
Eastern Conference
Northeast
Boston Bruins
Montreal Canadians
New York Rangers
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
Great Lakes
Detroit Redwings
Chicago Blackhawks
Ottawa Senators
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs
Mid-Atlantic
Washington Capitals
Philadelphia Flyers
Tampa Bay Lightning
Carolina Hurricanes
Florida Panthers
Western Conference
Central Division
Pittsburgh Penguins
Nashville Predators
Dallas Stars
St. Louis Blues
Columbus Blue Jackets
Northwest
Phoenix Coyotes
Calgary Flames
Minnesota Wild
Winnipeg Jets
Edmonton Oilers
Pacific Division
Vancouver Canucks
San Jose Sharks
Anaheim Ducks
Los Angeles Kings
Colorado Avalanche
As I said here, don’t throw assume Atlanta is done yet.
But let’s just say for a moment that the deal between Atlanta Spirit and True North Entertainment does whisk away hockey back to the Manitoban Plains, how would the NHL adjust its divisions to accommodate such a move? Chances are we will either get a lame duck team in Atlanta this year, or have the absurdity of City on the same longitude of Lincoln, Nebraska being in the Southeast.
But starting in the 2012-13 season you have to imagine the NHL would alter its divisions for reduced travel cost and more natural geographic rivalries. What will such a league look like? Let’s take a stab at a few options here, just for fun.
The “Easy” Path
The most simple way to handle realignment would be to move Winnipeg into the Central Division of the Western Conference and switch Nashville into the empty spot from the Southeast. That would be geographical, logical and create the least amount of waves.
The “Traditionalist” Path
There was a time in hockey where each division sent 4 teams into the playoffs and the first two rounds were heated inter-divisional play. How could that work with 30 teams? Here is how I would see it happening with one 7 and one 8 team division in each conference. Playoff teams based on last years point totals are in bold. This setup would leave room for two more expansion teams (Quebec and Seattle anyone?)to eventually round the league off at four 8-team division, with exactly half making the playoffs. While going back to the traditional Conference titles, the league should also return to the home teams wearing white.
Wales Conference
Patrick Division
Washington Capitals
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Nashville Predators
New York Rangers
Carolina Hurricanes
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
Adams Division
Boston Bruins
Tampa Bay Lightning
Montreal Canadians
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs
Ottawa Senators
Florida Panthers
Campbell Conference
Norris Division
Detroit Redwings
Chicago Blackhawks
Dallas Stars
St. Louis Blues
Minnesota Wild
Columbus Blue Jackets
Winnipeg Jets
Smythe Division
Vancouver Canucks
San Jose Sharks
Anaheim Ducks
Phoenix Coyotes
Los Angeles Kings
Calgary Flames
Colorado Avalanche
Edmonton Oilers
A Truly Radical Approach
This would really shake things up quite a bit. It would make no sense in terms of the history of the game and a lot of traditional rivalries and Conference affiliations would be broken up, but it would certainly be something new and exciting.
Eastern Conference
Northeast
Boston Bruins
Montreal Canadians
New York Rangers
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
Great Lakes
Detroit Redwings
Chicago Blackhawks
Ottawa Senators
Buffalo Sabres
Toronto Maple Leafs
Mid-Atlantic
Washington Capitals
Philadelphia Flyers
Tampa Bay Lightning
Carolina Hurricanes
Florida Panthers
Western Conference
Central Division
Pittsburgh Penguins
Nashville Predators
Dallas Stars
St. Louis Blues
Columbus Blue Jackets
Northwest
Phoenix Coyotes
Calgary Flames
Minnesota Wild
Winnipeg Jets
Edmonton Oilers
Pacific Division
Vancouver Canucks
San Jose Sharks
Anaheim Ducks
Los Angeles Kings
Colorado Avalanche
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Canadian Election Results
While U.S. news coverage has been overwhelmed by wall to wall Osama Bin Laden coverage, the people of Canada had a Federal Parlimentary Election yesterday.
The clear overall winner was Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who had been governing the Parliment for years with a plurality of seats, depending on votes from other parties to pass his legislation. This election his party won a clear majority for the first time under his watch. This will give him legislative carte blanche in the new government.
This is far from the result the main opposition parties, The Liberal Party and the seperatist Bloc Quebecois wanted. Both of those parties pretty much got routed actually, with the surprise rise of the formerly minor New Democratic Party, led by quirky and charismatic Jack Layton. "Good Jack" had the most success of any NDP leader in history, and bouyed by his strong performance in the national leaders debate, his party moved into 2nd place as the Official Opposition in Parliment.
It is the first time in Canadian history that the Liberal Party is not in the Government lead or in Opposition. While these are dark days for the Liberals, they will certainly lick their wounds and regroup. The Bloc Quebecois may not get such a chance. In the 1990s the group came close to its goal of a making the French speaking Province of Quebec a seperate nation from the rest of Canada. Since then, Canada has further integrated and unified all its peoples and the movement lost its steam. The 2011 election may be the seismec shift that eliminates the Bloc as a major player on the national stage. It would seem that the people in the Province rejected the seperatists as an ineffective path moving forward and shifted in a major way to the NDP.
The clear overall winner was Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who had been governing the Parliment for years with a plurality of seats, depending on votes from other parties to pass his legislation. This election his party won a clear majority for the first time under his watch. This will give him legislative carte blanche in the new government.
This is far from the result the main opposition parties, The Liberal Party and the seperatist Bloc Quebecois wanted. Both of those parties pretty much got routed actually, with the surprise rise of the formerly minor New Democratic Party, led by quirky and charismatic Jack Layton. "Good Jack" had the most success of any NDP leader in history, and bouyed by his strong performance in the national leaders debate, his party moved into 2nd place as the Official Opposition in Parliment.
It is the first time in Canadian history that the Liberal Party is not in the Government lead or in Opposition. While these are dark days for the Liberals, they will certainly lick their wounds and regroup. The Bloc Quebecois may not get such a chance. In the 1990s the group came close to its goal of a making the French speaking Province of Quebec a seperate nation from the rest of Canada. Since then, Canada has further integrated and unified all its peoples and the movement lost its steam. The 2011 election may be the seismec shift that eliminates the Bloc as a major player on the national stage. It would seem that the people in the Province rejected the seperatists as an ineffective path moving forward and shifted in a major way to the NDP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)