New Schedule

[Tinner]

Should the WHL, as part of adding at least 1 new team, look at revamping the current schedule. There is a big outcry from the fans in the NHL that they are seeing too many games involving some teams and not enough of some others. I see the same thing in the WHL. Playing divisional teams 8-10 times a year is to much and others not enough. I would like to see a more balanced schedule. I know the owners say cost and school issues is why they don't do it, but the fans will ultimately decide if they get vocal enough. Whats wrong with playing every team at least once on the road and once at home, playing outside the conference at least twice per team and inside games make up the remainder. Any other opinions?

[Beaner]

I would love to see each team once a year, but I think the owners have a good arguement against it.

Sorry I have to agree with the owners on this, for all of their reasons.

[RunTheGoalie]

A more balanced schedule would be nice, but with cost being the overriding factor, it just isn't going to happen.

[The_Vulk]

Travel costs (bus, hotels, travel time/distance, rink time) is a big factor in them not having a more 'balanced schedule'. If everything was equal, then yes, a balanced schedule would be best for ALL Fans. I would love to see all the teams, every year.

One must also remember that these are kids, most of whom are still in high school. Not the pros whom we expect to perform at the highest level at all times. They are not only developing their hockey skills, but their academic ones as well. As such, I'd have to side with the owners/players versus the fans on this issue.

[Tipped Off]

Everett plays Seattle 11 or 12 times this year. Understanding it is a natural rivalry and both teams see a boost in ticket sales, I think too much of your season devoted to one team is not good. From Jan 20 - end of season they see each other 8 times. That's 8 times in 28 games.

[Tinner]

I'll agree with the cost thing, but only for some teams. We have teams in this league that are making their owners a lot of money, and I mean a lot. Most all teams have education fund raisers. It might be a case of the rich helping the poor, but a balanced schedule CAN happen. The schooling end of things may hinder or make it a little more tougher to do, but it can be done. Even if its not a balanced schedule, but one where you play every team at least once home and away, then conference and divisional games would lessen how many times you see or play any one team.

[LifelongChiefsFan]

I really don't see the point in having the US division play each team from the eastern conference once a year. It really doesn't make any sense. The Chiefs go play up in Kootenay 4 times a year. Why can't they go to Lethbridge or Red Deer etc several times as well. They aren't that much farther away. Plus it would mean Spokane could play Everett less times a year!!!

[RunTheGoalie]

I'll agree with the cost thing, but only for some teams. We have teams in this league that are making their owners a lot of money, and I mean a lot. Most all teams have education fund raisers. It might be a case of the rich helping the poor, but a balanced schedule CAN happen. The schooling end of things may hinder or make it a little more tougher to do, but it can be done. Even if its not a balanced schedule, but one where you play every team at least once home and away, then conference and divisional games would lessen how many times you see or play any one team.

Not in a bus league. Even putting aside the cost factor, why would Portland, Brandon, Kootenay and Prince George be interested in a balanced schedule? Travel would be even more of a nightmare than it is already for these teams.

As far as cost goes, some subsidization might be viable, but how long do you think the majority of the league will be interested in keeping the smallest teams (ie: Swift Current) alive via their own dollars?

[Sput]

As far as cost goes, some subsidization might be viable, but how long do you think the majority of the league will be interested in keeping the smallest teams (ie: Swift Current) alive via their own dollars?

How well recieved do you think 'profit sharing' would be to those owners that are making money? These guys are in it for the bucks, and have the 'to bad if you can't make it' attitude (at least from what I've seen and heard). From the PG perspective the travel is already brutal enough. The local paper (PG Citizen) did an average through the league and most teams average 22 nights in hotels. The Cougars average 52-55 nights in hotels each year. Adding more travel wouldn't be feasible.