If The NHL Expands, So Should The Playoffs – Here's How
American billionaire Dan Friedkin of The Friedkin Group, which owns soccer clubs AS Roma and a majority share of Everton, reportedly met with the NHL multiple times about a potential Houston franchise, according to ESPN's Emily Kaplan. This comes after past news about the interest in bringing a team back to the Atlanta area as well. That could bring the NHL up to 34 teams, with 17 in each conference, if interested owners in each city get their wish.
An offshoot of potential NHL expansion should be the Stanley Cup playoff format.
As it stands, half the NHL's 32 teams make the playoffs. But if the NHL kept its 16-team structure after bringing on another expansion squad or two, that number would drop below the 50-percent mark.
So, how could the league address its post-season in a 34-team setup?
From our perspective, there are a couple of options. The first would be along the lines of what the NBA does, which is assuring the top six teams in each conference of a playoff spot, with the top four teams in the wild-card race squaring off in a play-in tournament to decide the final two spots in the Eastern and Western Conferences. Another option could be a best-of-three series between the second- and third-place teams in the wild-card race for the second wild-card berth.
With the best-of-three-series option, 18 teams advance to the post-season – just over half – but only two teams in the East and West battle for the final spot in each conference's quarterfinals. You'd have four teams fighting for two playoff spots in each conference with the NBA system. From this writer's preference, an expanded NHL playoffs using the NBA format would be the right way to go, as there's the potential for more upsets while keeping a thrilling end to the regular season.
The first and second teams in the wild-card race get two chances to advance anyway. They would face off, with the winner clinching the first wild-card spot. The loser takes on whoever wins in the No. 3 vs. No. 4 game for the second wild-card place.
If this wild-card play-in format happened this season, the potential matchups could have been full of drama. Ahead of Monday night's games, the standings would have had the Ottawa Senators and Montreal Canadiens facing off in the East's No. 1 vs. No. 2 game and the New York Rangers taking on the New York Islanders in the No. 3 vs. No. 4 match. In the West, the Minnesota Wild would battle the St. Louis Blues for the first wild-card spot, while the loser would take on the winner of a Calgary Flames and Vancouver Canucks contest for the second wild-card spot.
The NHL only introduced wild-card berths in 2013-14 as the league continued to evolve. If the league grows, it makes sense to continue to grow the playoff pool like what happened 45 years ago.
The NHL expanded to a 16-team playoff format in the 1979-80 season, when there were only 21 teams in the league. So this notion that there can't be a majority of the league's teams involved in the post-season flies in the face of the NHL's history.
It's Clear NHL Expansion Isn't Ending Anytime Soon: 'I Don't Think We're Necessarily At That Ceiling' Unexplored markets — not a return to Canada — remain a focus when considering NHL expansion after Vegas and Seattle's successes spurred interest in other cities.
Ultimately, an expanded NHL playoffs is all about increasing the value of regular-season games, which would be true if the NHL adopted an NBA-style play-in system. In fact, all the teams that were in the wild-card race for most of the season but are running out of time would still have everything to fight for.
As of March 24, four teams trail the 10th-place Islanders by fewer than five points. In the West, the Utah Hockey Club is only one point behind the 10th-place Canucks, and the Minnesota Wild are only four points behind the Colorado Avalanche for the third spot in the Central Division – which would hypothetically make them safe from a play-in round. That means more teams are playing important games deeper into the regular season, and that's what it's all about.
If more NHL expansion ever happens, which would come with sky-high expansion fees, a revamped playoff system should come with it. Teams with the most regular-season success wouldn't be affected by an increased playoff field, but games would matter more for more teams, and any way you look at it, that would be a success.
Get the latest news and trending stories by following The Hockey News on Google News and by subscribing to The Hockey News newsletter here. And share your thoughts by commenting below the article on THN.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Airlines say AI won't set fares by passenger. Experts aren't so sure.
Cruising Altitude is a weekly column about air travel. Have a suggestion for a future topic? Fill out the form or email me at the address at the bottom of this page. It's no secret that airline pricing can be opaque and confusing to many travelers – even to experts. When I spoke to William J. McGee, senior fellow for aviation and travel at the American Economic Liberties Project, we joked that one of the worst questions an aviation expert can get asked at a party is, 'how do I find a good deal on airfare?' The answer is usually best represented by the shrugging emoji: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ However, flight pricing is getting a renewed round of attention after Glen Hauenstein, president of Delta Air Lines, acknowledged on the company's earnings call last month that the airline is testing a new AI tool to help set its fares. Panic from consumers, advocates and even lawmakers naturally ensued as the specter of a new way for corporations to squeeze every penny out of us appeared on the horizon. For now, Delta (and other airlines) insist that they're not using AI to make prices truly individualized, but as technology gets more sophisticated, the already-dynamic pricing model used in the aviation industry is likely to get more granular. How do airlines price tickets today? Again, I say: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 'This is such an opaque process, there is so much that we don't know about what they know about us,' McGee said. Airlines acknowledge using some of our personal data in setting prices even now but say that such information is used only in the aggregate, not to tailor fares to individual travelers. In a letter to senators after last month's earnings call, Delta Air Lines' Executive Vice President of External Affairs, Peter Carter, explained how the carrier does and doesn't use passenger data for setting prices. 'There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data. ... Our AI-powered pricing functionality is designed to enhance our existing fare pricing processes using aggregated data,' the letter said. 'Given the tens of millions of fares and hundreds of thousands of routes for sale at any given time, the use of new technology like AI promises to streamline the process by which we analyze existing data and the speed and scale at which we can respond to changing market dynamics.' Still, McGee said airlines have a history of testing the limits of price differentiation. 'It's really a much longer story going back 20 or 25 years at least. The technology has improved for them, and that has increased the airline industry's ability to tailor surveillance pricing, individualized pricing,' he said. For now, Delta says it's just using AI technology to streamline the work of its human analysts, who ultimately set and file its fares. Kyle Potter, editor of Thrifty Traveler, a travel and flight deal website, said it makes sense that airlines don't have the technical capability right now to target prices at specific passengers, because the system airlines use to file their fares relies on outdated technology. 'The technology in how airlines set fares and distribute them to their own website and other third-party sites, is really a roadblock to offering truly individualized airfare,' he said. 'There's no way to weave in the massive amount of data that airlines have or could have into offering a truly dynamic set of prices that varies from person to person. That's just not possible today at any kind of scale that I'm aware of.' How could AI be used for airline pricing in the future? For a third time I say: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ There are just too many variables to be sure about how all this will develop. 'Where we're at right now is that we're going to come to look at Delta's comments last month to investors as a trial balloon for just how far Americans would be willing to go to accept some level of personalized pricing,' Potter said. 'The answer, at least for the last month, has pretty clearly been not at all.' Delta, which is the poster child for pricing developments in the airline world right now, insists it has no intention to ever set truly individualized prices. 'There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data,' Carter's letter said. But McGee, who works as a consumer advocate, said it's important for both passengers and regulators to not get complacent as predictive pricing technology gets more powerful. 'It's going to be very hard, but it's necessary, for regulators and legislators to get their hands around this and understand it,' he said. 'It's not unimaginable that if this goes unchecked and there's not action by Congress or (the Department of Transportation), we may all be paying a different fare for the same flight within a few years. That's going to be a tough thing to undo.' Potter agreed with McGee's assessment. 'I think what we saw this year, what we've seen again and again and again over the last several decades is that airlines will do whatever it takes to charge people the highest fares possible within the constraints of the technology that they currently have,' he said. 'The global airline industry has been trying to push towards a future of personalized airfare. Just because there's a backlash now doesn't mean this isn't going to happen eventually.' Last week's Cruising Altitude: Travel tips every senior should know for stress-free flights How do I find the best airfares? For one final time, I say: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Airfares are subject to change at any time, and the prices are set by people working in a black box behind a curtain. In general, the advice experts have always given me is to trust your gut. If you feel like you're getting a good deal on airfare when you look for flights, you probably are. Also: it's a good idea to leverage consumer-facing price prediction tools, like those available on Google Flights, Expedia and other airfare aggregators. Zach Wichter is a travel reporter and writes the Cruising Altitude column for USA TODAY. He is based in New York and you can reach him at zwichter@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Could AI make your plane ticket more expensive than your neighbor's?
NBC News
13 minutes ago
- NBC News
How the NBA got rid of microbets — and why it could be a blueprint for MLB
Sixteen months after a landmark decision opened the door for legal sports gambling in the United States, a high-ranking NFL executive sat before a House committee in the fall of 2019 to ask for help banishing a particular type of bet that has drawn the ire of sports leagues across the country. Proposition bets, better known as 'prop bets,' allow wagers not on the outcomes of games but on occurrences during them. A wager could be on the result the first play of a game, the first pitch of an inning or whether a player will compile over or under a certain number of rebounds, strikeouts or rushing yards. Leagues, as the NFL indicated that day in front of lawmakers, consider such props troublesome and more easily manipulated because many hinge on the actions of just one player. 'These types of bets are significantly more susceptible to match-fixing efforts and are therefore a source of concern to sports leagues, individual teams and the athletes who compete,' NFL Executive Vice President Jocelyn Moore testified in 2019. (Moore, who has served on the board of directors of DraftKings since 2020, declined to comment.) Had you placed a bet then that prop bets would go away, you would have ended up a loser. When the NFL staged the Super Bowl between the Los Angeles Rams and the New England Patriots five months after the NFL's testimony, bettors could still choose among hundreds of prop bets. And six years later, they are still a source of headlines, concern for leagues and income for sportsbooks. In 2024, the NBA banned the Toronto Raptors' Jontay Porter for life for sports betting after an investigation found he had, among other findings, 'limited his own participation to influence the outcome of one or more bets on his performance in at least one Raptors game.' In June, reports surfaced that a federal investigation into longtime NBA guard Malik Beasley was related to activity around prop bets. 'I do think some of the bets are problematic," NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said in July, the month Major League Baseball placed a Cleveland Guardians pitcher on paid leave while it investigated unusually high wagers on the first pitches of innings on June 15 and June 27, ESPN reported. Weeks later, after MLB placed a second Guardians pitcher on leave as part of a sports gambling investigation, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred told a group of baseball writers that there were 'certain types of bets that strike me as unnecessary and particularly vulnerable, things where it's one single act [and] doesn't affect the outcome, necessarily.' Whether MLB considers prop bets 'unnecessary' enough to try to have its gambling partners restrict the kinds that are offered is unclear. But if MLB does, it might look to the NBA for a possible blueprint. During the 2024-25 NBA season, the league's gambling partners including FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM and several others who make up upward of 95% of the legal U.S. sportsbooks agreed to no longer offer 'under' prop bets on players either on 10-day or two-way contracts. (Porter had been on a two-way contract.) Fans could still bet on the sport's big names, like Stephen Curry's 3-pointers or LeBron James' rebounds — but legal sports betting operators in the United States were no longer offering action on the NBA's lowest-paid players. The decision wasn't a mandate handed down solely by the NBA. 'We do not have control over the specific bets that are made on our game,' Silver said in July. Years earlier, the league had sought just that type of power, but it was unsuccessful in persuading state lawmakers to pass legislation that would have given the NBA the right to approve what types of bets could be offered on the league. It also doesn't hold veto rights over what its gambling partners can and cannot offer, according to sources with knowledge of the situation. Instead, much like the NFL's attempt in its congressional testimony six years earlier, the NBA had to ask for help. Representatives for DraftKings and FanDuel didn't respond to requests for comment on their back-and-forth with the league that led to the decisions to restrict certain prop bets. Multiple people with knowledge of the situation not authorized to speak publicly on sensitive discussions said the league had to rely on making the case to its partners that prop bets on 10-day and two-way players weren't worth the relatively small amount of business they brought in. 'It's a small part of the marketplace,' a person involved in the process said, 'but had outsized integrity risks.' Such dialogue between a league and a sportsbook would have been unthinkable before the Supreme Court's 2018 decision to overturn a federal prohibition on sports gambling freed states to decide whether to permit legal sports betting. (Thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia allow sports gambling, and Missouri is set to launch its own operation in December.) Almost overnight, leagues and sportsbooks that once steered clear of one another were now in business together. Sometimes, the back-and-forth between a league and its sportsbook partners has stopped bets from appearing before they are even listed. In 2020, with leagues still months away from making a pandemic comeback, ESPN scrambled to fill programming that included NBA players' competing against one another in video games and even HORSE. As those competitions were announced, the NBA was contacted by betting operators and regulators who wanted to know whether betting odds should be offered on the unusual action, according to the sources with knowledge of the situation. The NBA strongly advised against it because the tournaments had been tape-delayed, meaning a handful of people already knew the outcomes and could benefit from that information if bets were offered. Sportsbooks agreed. The NFL recently has also found success restricting certain types of prop bets, this time through legislation. The Illinois Gaming Board in February approved the NFL's request to prohibit 10 types of what it classified as 'objectionable wagers,' including whether a kicker would miss a field goal or an extra point and whether quarterback's first pass of a game would be incomplete — the same type of 'single-actor' bets that leagues have come out against and that have reportedly sparked investigations into multiple athletes. By seeking to influence which bets are offered, leagues and their gambling partners are attempting a delicate balance of limiting bets they consider risks to the integrity of their games while still ensuring that enough betting options are offered to keep fans wagering their dollars in legal markets, rather than through offshore sportsbooks where tracking suspicious activity is much more opaque. Proponents of sports betting suggest that although the headlines about players or league staffers being investigated, or caught, for betting manipulation isn't good public relations for the sports, they're a sign that a 'complex system that detects aberrational behavior,' as Silver said in July, is working as intended. As part of their partnership agreements, leagues, betting operators and so-called integrity firms have data-sharing agreements that allow them to communicate with one another to monitor suspicious activity. "The transparency inherent with legalized sports betting has become a significant asset in protecting the integrity of athletic competition," DraftKings said in a statement. "Unlike the pre-legalization era, when threats were far more difficult to detect, the regulated industry now provides increased oversight and accountability that helps to identify potentially suspicious activity.' In the case of the pair of Cleveland Guardian pitchers, the Ohio Casino Control Commission was notified June 30 by a licensed Ohio sportsbook about suspicious wagering on Guardians games and 'was also promptly contacted by Major League Baseball regarding the events,' a commission spokesperson said in a statement. 'Under the Commission's statutory responsibilities, an independent investigation commenced.' It's why leagues and sportsbook operators consider restricting bets a fine line. 'If you have sweeping prohibitions on that type of a bet, you're taking away the ability for your league to ensure the integrity of that activity,' said Joe Maloney, a senior vice president for strategic communications at the American Gaming Association. 'You will not have the ability to work with an integrity monitor to identify any irregular betting activity on such a legal market. You will not have the collaboration of a legal operator who will share that information. You will not have the collaboration of a legal operator to say to them, 'Here's the do-not-fly list for betting activity for our league: employees, club employees, trainers, athletic officials, referees,' etc. ... 'Betting engagement on prop bets is largely a reflection of fandom. And so, by pushing that away, I think you absolutely lose the ability to properly oversee it and to root out the bad actors that would seem to exploit it. Because it will still take place.' In 2022, legal sports betting accounted for $6.8 billion in legal revenue, while illegal sports betting accounted for about $3.8 billion, according to research from the American Gaming Association, a trade association. Last year, it estimated that revenue from legal sports betting rose to $16 billion, while the illegal market grew to about $5 billion. A 2024 analysis by the International Betting Integrity Association, a nonprofit integrity firm made up of licensed gambling operators, questioned the efficacy of restricting prop bets. The IBIA reported that 59 out of 360,000 basketball games that had been offered for betting from 2017 to 2023 were 'the subject of suspicious betting.' 'There was no suspicious betting activity linked to match manipulation identified on player prop markets,' the IBIA report said. 'There is no meaningful integrity benefit from excluding such markets, which are widely available globally. Prohibiting those products will make offshore operators more attractive.' By persuading its partners to keep some prop bets off the books, the NBA nonetheless provided a precedent for how to remove bets leagues have considered, to use Manfred's term, 'unnecessary.' Would MLB, amid an ongoing investigation into two pitchers, follow? Unlike the NBA, MLB doesn't have easily defined classifications of contracts such as 10-day and two-way players. One method could instead be to target so-called first-pitch microbets. MLB is having 'ongoing conversations' related to gambling, according to a person with knowledge of the league's thinking. If baseball were to make such a push against microbets, its reasoning might mirror the NBA's last year, said Gill Alexander, a longtime sports betting commentator for VSiN. 'I think basically baseball's point would be, you know, this is the type of prop that is just begging for trouble, right?' Alexander said. Ohio, for one, would most likely agree. Last month, Gov. Mike DeWine asked the Ohio Casino Control Commission to ban prop bets on 'highly specific events within games that are completely controlled by one player," he said in a news release, while asking the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, WNBA and MLS commissioners to support his stance. 'The prop betting experiment in this country has failed badly,' DeWine said. Alexander said: 'I do think that we're in the era now where these leagues can exert some influence on these sports books, as long as it is of no financial pain to the sports books. This is one of these instances where, really, I don't agree with Rob Manfred every day, but I actually think he's probably going to get what he wants here.'
Newsweek
15 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Nikki Haley: Trump Needs To Rebuild U.S.-India Relationship
In July 1982, President Ronald Reagan welcomed Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to a state dinner at the White House. Toasting the friendship between our "two proud, free peoples," he said: "although our countries may travel separate paths from time to time, our destination remains the same." Four decades later, the U.S.-India relationship is at a troubling inflection point. To achieve the Trump administration's foreign policy goals—outcompeting China and achieving peace through strength—few objectives are more critical than getting U.S.-India relations back on track. The last few weeks have seen an explosive series of events. The Trump administration has threatened India with 25 percent tariffs for purchasing Russian oil, on top of the 25 percent President Donald Trump already slapped on Indian goods. These developments followed months of rising tension, including over the U.S. role in India-Pakistan ceasefire negotiations. Trump is right to target India's massive Russian oil purchases, which are helping to fund Vladimir Putin's brutal war against Ukraine. India has also traditionally been among the most protectionist economies in the world, with an average tariff rate more than five times the U.S. average in 2023. But India must be treated like the prized free and democratic partner that it is—not an adversary like China, which has thus far avoided sanctions for its Russian oil purchases, despite being one of Moscow's largest customers. If that disparity does not demand a closer look at U.S.-India relations, the realities of hard power should. Scuttling 25 years of momentum with the only country that can serve as a counterweight to Chinese dominance in Asia would be a strategic disaster. WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 22: Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley announced that she would vote for former President Donald Trump during an event at the Hudson Institute on May 22, 2024 in Washington, DC. WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 22: Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley announced that she would vote for former President Donald Trump during an event at the Hudson Institute on May 22, 2024 in Washington, the short term, India is essential in helping the United States move its critical supply chains away from China. While the Trump administration works to bring manufacturing back to our shores, India stands alone in its potential to manufacture at China-like scale for products that can't be quickly or efficiently produced here, like textiles, inexpensive phones, and solar panels. When it comes to defense, India's expanding military ties with the United States, Israel, and other American allies make it a crucial asset to the free world's security, and a rapidly growing market for U.S. defense equipment and cooperation. India's growing clout and security involvement in the Middle East could prove essential in helping to stabilize the region as America seeks to send fewer troops and dollars there. And India's location at the center of China's vital trade and energy flows could complicate Beijing's options in the case of a major conflict. In the longer term, India's significance is even more profound. Home to more than a sixth of humanity, India surpassed China as the world's most populous country in 2023, with a young workforce that contrasts with China's aging one. It is the world's fastest-growing major economy—soon to eclipse Japan as the world's fourth largest. India's rise represents the most significant geopolitical event since China's, and is among the greatest obstacles to China's goal of reshaping the global order. Simply put, China's ambitions will have to shrink as India's power grows. Yet, unlike Communist-controlled China, the rise of a democratic India does not threaten the free world. Partnership between the U.S. and India to counter China should be a no-brainer. India and China are unfriendly neighbors that have conflicting economic interests and ongoing territorial disputes, including a lethal skirmish over contested borders as recently as 2020. It would serve America's interests to help India stand up to its increasingly aggressive northern neighbor, both economically and militarily. And it would be a massive—and preventable—mistake to balloon a trade spat between the United States and India into an enduring rupture. If that were to happen, the Chinese Communist Party would be quick to play India and the United States against one another. For its part, India must take Trump's point over Russian oil seriously, and work with the White House to find a solution. As for the United States, the most urgent priority should be to reverse the downward spiral, which will require direct talks between President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The sooner the better. The administration should focus on mending the rift with India and giving the relationship more high-level attention and resources—approaching what the U.S. devotes to China or Israel. Decades of friendship and good will between the world's two largest democracies provide a solid basis to move past the current turbulence. Navigating challenging issues like trade disagreements and Russian oil imports demand hard dialogue, but difficult conversations are often the sign of a deepening partnership. The United States should not lose sight of what matters most: our shared goals. To face China, the United States must have a friend in India. Nikki Haley, the Walter P. Stern Chair at the Hudson Institute, was US ambassador to the United Nations and governor of South Carolina. Bill Drexel is a fellow at the Hudson Institute. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
