LeBrun: Should the NHL change its playoff format? What governors and players say — '1 should play 8' (2024)

One season with a low point total for the third seed in the Metropolitan Division isn’t reason enough to blow up the NHL’s playoff format on its own.

But the fact that it’s been more than a decade since the current format was adopted and it still hasn’t won over hockey fans — who never really liked it to begin with — is a pretty good indicator that it’s worth at least considering a change.

You can actually look up the league’s history of playoff format changes on the NHL’s website, but for the purposes of this article, here’s what you need to remember: The NHL had divisional playoffs (Adams, Patrick, Smythe and Norris!) from 1981-82 through 1992-93, then switched to conference playoffs — 1 versus 8, 2 versus 7, etc. — starting in 1993-94 (division winners got top seeds), which ran through 2012-13.

Then with realignment in 2013-14, the league went from three divisions to two in each conference and switched to the current playoff format.

However — a quick pause here — people forget the NHL Players’ Association first rejected the league’s initial playoff format and realignment plan. The NHLPA in early January 2012 vetoed the playoff format change because it felt divisional playoffs would set up an unfair advantage because there were two seven-team divisions and two eight-team divisions and the top four in each division made the playoffs, so obviously teams in the seven-team divisions had an unfair advantage.

Hence, one year later, the wild cards were part of the format that we have today.

The NHLPA rejecting the original proposal also resulted in this fun statement from NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly on Jan. 6, 2012:

”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. 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.”

Fun times!

All of which led to the expiry of the collective bargaining agreement in September 2012, then a lockout and an abbreviated season.

And now we have this hybrid, half-pregnant divisional/wild-card playoff format. It was aimed at creating better divisional rivalries, but the wild cards sometimes mess with that (obviously the pandemic years brought us some temporary changes, as well).

The question is whether teams, players and fans are tired of this format, and whether they would prefer going back to the conference playoff format the league had before: 1 versus 8, 2 versus 7, etc.

I posed that to team presidents around the league over the past few days. I asked them because this is a Board of Governors matter, not a GMs matter.

“I understand the thought behind the current format to create rivalries between divisional opponents; there just isn’t as many regular-season divisional games like there used to be,” Boston Bruins president Cam Neely said via text message. “I’d like to see how a conference format would be received by hockey fans.”

Another Hockey Hall of Fame player turned team president, the Los Angeles Kings’ Luc Robitaille, said he doesn’t have a problem with the current playoff format but does wish there would be more divisional games in the regular season. Still, like Neely he would be open to having the discussion.

“Honestly, this is the first year where I feel like people are talking about that,” Robitaille said over the phone. “It seems to be more vocal. I have not looked into it, in terms of what it would do with everything around it, the big picture of it all. But like Cam, I would listen at least and study it, yes.”

A dozen or so other team presidents and governors requested anonymity in their responses, as the commissioner prefers this subject not be hashed out in public by teams.

Of those, the majority were in favor of going back to the 1-8 conference format or at least having a serious conversation about it.

One team president argued that it gives greater value and incentive to regular-season performance and negates early-round, strong-team matchups.

Another agreed that going back to 1-8 properly rewards a good season.

Still another team president said it seems easier for fans to understand.

One team president, his team from a non-traditional market, said it’s not a burning issue for him and that he respects how difficult it is for the commissioner to please everyone on this subject but that he’s routinely asked by fans how the current playoff format works. He says going back to 1-8 just for simplicity’s sake probably makes sense.

Another governor, who also said he liked the 1-8 system because it’s less confusing for fans, added that it’s hard to avoid really good teams being paired off in either format. The parity is real.

Of the anonymous responses, there was only one team president who voted to keep the system the same, saying it works fine as-is.

That falls in line with the comments from Jim Rutherford, Don Waddell and Keith Jones, who shared their responses on the record.

“No easy solution,” Rutherford, the president of hockey ops for the Vancouver Canucks, said via text message. “I would keep it the same. Even with this format, the lowest team has beaten the top team.”

Added Waddell, the Carolina Hurricanes president and GM, via text message: “I like the current format. Not having a balanced schedule, I think this is the fairest way.”

Ditto from Jones, the president of hockey ops for the Philadelphia Flyers.

“I’m still good with the current format,” Jones said via text message. “I think the reward for finishing first in the division is significant enough, and the second- and third-place division battles make for some great hockey in round one.”

Kyle Dubas, the president of hockey ops and GM for the Pittsburgh Penguins, had a unique reason for not minding the current format, in terms of the divisional matchups you most often end up with.

“I liked it in Toronto because I thought it was good for our development going against Boston twice and Tampa twice,” the former Leafs GM said via text message. “Beyond that, I haven’t done much thinking on it and don’t know the years in which it would have made a massive difference or changed the matchups.”

So it’s certainly not everyone who wants a playoff format change, but while this survey wasn’t scientific by any means, I would say more than not want change — or least a discussion on it.

It’s always hard to know what 750 players think, but of the three veterans I checked in with Monday, it was also clear where they were on it.

“Both formats have good and bad,” said Penguins defenseman Erik Karlsson, who played under the old format for four years at the beginning of his career. “But if you think about it logically or realistically, 1 should play 8. That concept probably makes the most sense.

“If you look at Champions League in soccer, you know, they’re all ranked for a reason and that’s the way it is. It’s one versus 16 and 2 versus 15 and it goes down. And they re-seed the next round. So, I would probably be more of an advocate that way. It also brings the variety usually in who you get to play.

“I mean, 1 versus 8 seems the most logical. I haven’t looked at everything in depth, but it’s just the most logical way. It makes the most sense, I think. It’s the most fair.”

Leafs veteran Mark Giordano, 40, played seven seasons in the previous set-up from 2005-06 through 2012-13, although his Calgary Flames played in just one playoff series during that stretch.

“What they wanted was rivalries in the division, which I think it has done,” Giordano said. “But a lot of the time you see two of the top Stanley Cup contenders going at each other first round. That’s one way to look at it. The other is hey, you’re going to play those guys anyway down the road, so if you play them fresh, it might be better.

“But I just like the older way. I don’t know why, but I just do.”

It is a subject that’s come up in the Leafs dressing room.

“Yeah, we’ve talked about it,” said Leafs blueliner Morgan Rielly. “My stance on the playoffs, in general, is that you’ve got to beat the best teams either way. So the format is going to be whatever it’s going to be. Now, I grew up with the 1 versus 8 and 2 versus 7, so that’s what I know and what I think most of us are used to. At least when you’re checking standings, that’s how you do it typically.

“With in-the-division stuff, it is what it is. I’m OK with it. As players, I don’t think it’s worth spending too much time worrying about it.”

Again, though, players do have a say via the CBA, which expires in September of 2026.

Of course, the other alternative now that the league has 32 teams is to go full divisional playoffs like the 1980s and get rid of the wild cards.

I prefer the conference playoffs myself, but either one is better than the hybrid.

What say you, readers?

(Photo: John E. Sokolowski / USA Today)