The NHL playoff landscape has seen its share of transformations over the years. Before 2013, things were straightforward: first seed faced eighth, second seed took on seventh, and so on. It was a no-nonsense setup that rewarded regular-season success.
But starting with the 2013-14 season, the NHL shook things up by adopting a divisional playoff format similar to the NFL. Sixteen teams make it to the postseason, with the top three from each division securing their spots, and two wild cards per conference rounding out the field.
This setup locks in matchups early, creating divisional showdowns right from the start. The goal?
Ignite rivalries. And while it’s succeeded in that regard, it’s also sparked ongoing debate.
Recently, Pierre LeBrun posed a question that’s been on many minds: when the next Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations roll around, could the league reconsider this format?
Gary Bettman’s response was clear-cut. No room for ambiguity.
The commissioner is sticking with the current system. It’s his vision, and he’s not budging.
So, the debate rages on.
Many within the sport aren’t fans of the current setup. Players have voiced their desire to return to the 1 vs. 8 conference seeding.
Their reasoning is straightforward: finishing first in the conference should come with the perk of facing the eighth seed. It’s about rewarding regular-season performance.
Cale Makar didn’t mince words last fall, telling ESPN’s Greg Wyshynski, “I feel like all the players want back to 1 to 8.” He’s not alone.
Sidney Crosby and others have echoed similar sentiments. The consensus?
The regular season’s grind should count for more.
Currently, a team can battle through 82 games, finish near the top, and still face a tough opponent in the first round due to divisional alignments. Meanwhile, a team from a weaker division might have an easier path. It’s not just about drama; it’s about fairness.
There’s also the issue of repetitive matchups. Fans have seen the same teams clash repeatedly, like the Oilers and Kings in the first round.
While these rivalries can be thrilling, they can also become predictable. The old 1-8 format naturally mixed things up, offering fresh matchups and more unpredictability-key ingredients for playoff hockey.
Bettman argues that the divisional format fosters instant tension and geographic rivalries. From his perspective, if it’s not broken, don’t fix it.
But the pressure for change persists. General managers, fans, and players continue to discuss the possibility of returning to conference seeding.
Ultimately, the next CBA negotiations may hold the key to any potential changes. Until then, Bettman’s stance remains firm. The system stays as is, but the conversation about its future is far from over.