Changes to hockey
- Thread starter Lanny'sDaMan
- Start date
- Status
Lanny'sDaMan
Registered User
gc2005 said:
That being the case I am still against it. Granted ties are not very exciting but to have any game decided by shootout, well I am against it. Always have been from Olympics and junior hockey to the NHL. IMO the shootout is the worst idea ever.
People are always against change initially. If they make the change you'll get used to it and might even like it since it would be a more exciting finish.
So let's look at logic...
The overtime games were great, and THEN they added a point for OTL.
Players started riding out the ties and the game suffered.
NOW, for EXCITEMENT, rather than fixing a mistake (and allowing to call their gaffe a mistake), they institute a shootout, as if this was a peewee league and parents get to see shootouts which are soon to be buzzkills.
They never stop killing everything that was great about the game prior to the "fixing" Bettman started, killing the sport. Kill fighting, now there's more heinous injuries. Kill OT....now there will be more unsatisfactory games. Anything the rule guys (headed by a basketball guy) institute turns into an achilles heel for the game.
Fix it once and for all and bring back the rulebook from 1992-94, when the game WORKED.
The overtime games were great, and THEN they added a point for OTL.
Players started riding out the ties and the game suffered.
NOW, for EXCITEMENT, rather than fixing a mistake (and allowing to call their gaffe a mistake), they institute a shootout, as if this was a peewee league and parents get to see shootouts which are soon to be buzzkills.
They never stop killing everything that was great about the game prior to the "fixing" Bettman started, killing the sport. Kill fighting, now there's more heinous injuries. Kill OT....now there will be more unsatisfactory games. Anything the rule guys (headed by a basketball guy) institute turns into an achilles heel for the game.
Fix it once and for all and bring back the rulebook from 1992-94, when the game WORKED.
Lanny'sDaMan
Registered User
AJ1982 said:
Unlikely. It's not change that I am against. I am against Shootouts. I hate them in every form. Never have I enjoyed watching one, and I honestly can't see me changing 30+years of dislike for them.
Baradin said:
I don't really like the idea either, but so long as they don't touch the playoffs (which they won't) then I can live with it. Stupid idea or not, it might actually add excitement, which in the eyes of many borderline fans, the game needs in a big way. If it brings in more fans, then fine.
Baradin said:
The one good thing about shootouts is that they will reduce the number of goons in the NHL. Teams, especially defense oriented teams without much offense, will start to carry a "shootout specialist", a players whose main, and perhaps only skill is offensive moves. This means that a lot of guys who are skilled but too small or too slow or too soft in the NHL will have joibs. It's an almost like an employment program for soft Sergei Berezin and the like. Since roster space is limited, the goons will have to go.
I'm not a particular fan of the shootout concept, but regardless of what solution they try in the effort to reduce ties - I'm not sure it's going to make much difference in terms of attracting new fans.
How many fringe or non hockey fans are going to be enticed to sit thru an entire nhl game in the hopes that they might get to see a shootout? Not many I'm thinking. If you want to get more fans into the buildings and turning on the tvs - the most important thing is making the regulation periods exciting - not the o/t.
The 4 on 4 5 minute o/t is great. Unfortunately, it is all too often preceeded by 60 minutes of boring hockey.
Take care of the gameplay in regulation, and o/t will be nothing more than a minor problem.
I can't tell you how many tie games I attended in the 60s, 70s and 80s, where I walked out after the game, feeling I definately got my moneys worth.
Give the fans 60 minutes of fast paced, hard hitting hockey, and they could care less about ties.
How many fringe or non hockey fans are going to be enticed to sit thru an entire nhl game in the hopes that they might get to see a shootout? Not many I'm thinking. If you want to get more fans into the buildings and turning on the tvs - the most important thing is making the regulation periods exciting - not the o/t.
The 4 on 4 5 minute o/t is great. Unfortunately, it is all too often preceeded by 60 minutes of boring hockey.
Take care of the gameplay in regulation, and o/t will be nothing more than a minor problem.
I can't tell you how many tie games I attended in the 60s, 70s and 80s, where I walked out after the game, feeling I definately got my moneys worth.
Give the fans 60 minutes of fast paced, hard hitting hockey, and they could care less about ties.
MLS went to shootouts to decide ties. Guess what? Americans didn't start flocking to soccer games.mr gib said:
The league once again decides to alienate its core fans in an attempt to woo future fans -- future fans who won't be wooed.
They do this time and time again. That's why I won't shed a tear if the league does fold. Perhaps it's time for a different organization to run the top league in professional hockey.
Jester
Registered User
i'm against removal of the red-line because i'm concerned it is going to cause dmen to be even more cautious in the offensive zone and not play as much of a role there. thus not really adding too much to the scoring because teams won't have the option of using cutting dmen to create good chances in the slot as much...
i really think all they needed to get scoring up was to have the refs actually call the rule book and free the game up through the neutral zone... speed equals scoring chances.
i really think all they needed to get scoring up was to have the refs actually call the rule book and free the game up through the neutral zone... speed equals scoring chances.
e-e
Registered User
i don't know why you guys are against shootout. my team begun a champion (czechoslovakia) after shootout in 1986 for the first time and i'll never forget how exciting it was. people were in heart attack mode. i could't breath...more excitement CAN"T hurt the boring game we've been watching in last few years...
e-e said:
The problem is - an exciting o/t solution doesn't fix the problem of 60 minutes of boring regulation play.
Give the fans 60 minutes of fast, intense and exciting regulation play, and they will be happy - win, lose or tie.
missK
Registered User
barnburner said:
Exactly!!
Focus on making the 60 minute game exciting and a tie won't matter.P.S. And don't tell me people won't leave the arena before a shootout because I have seen it happen in the ECHL!
NHLFanSince2020
What'd He Say?
Are they really contemplating eliminating regular season OT all together and going straight to the shootout or OT then shootout?
Who knows? Keeping customers informed isn't a top priority with the league. You'll find out one day. And you'll take it however it's served.getnziggywidit said:
Lanny'sDaMan
Registered User
getnziggywidit said:
As I understand it completely removing OT from regular season play and going to a Shootout.
Boo-urns!!!
Steve L*
Registered User
Thats the problem with hockey, these people arent true fans. Even the people who go to the game dont care about the resultmissK said:Exactly!!
P.S. And don't tell me people won't leave the arena before a shootout because I have seen it happen in the ECHL!
missK said:Exactly!!
P.S. And don't tell me people won't leave the arena before a shootout because I have seen it happen in the ECHL!
they need to make stick on body contact an automatic penalty, something similar to the strictness of the NFL with facemasks or pass interference, and getting rid of ties will force teams not to sit back
Baradin said:
no, it will probably a 5 minute OT, but if they are smart, they should move it to a 10 min OT or two 5 min OT periods before a shootout
txpd
Registered User
Baradin said:
Maybe someone else has corrected you, but if they are going to do what the AHL is doing, they would not eliminate the 5 minute 4 on 4 OT. They will only add the shootout to the end of OT games that remain tied.
Also the Stanley Cup playoffs will remain as they are...sudden death til there is a winner. that is if there is ever another stanley cup playoff game.
the american soccer fan will come out to see the best - that of course is not the mls - the summer tours of the big european clubs sell out - man u - juventus -celtic - i agree with you concerning hockey - can't somebody do it right?Weary said:
txpd
Registered User
bcrt2000 said:
one of my problems over my 30 years as a hockey fan is the arbitrary nature of how the league calls penalties. Hooking is actually not a penalty. Its only a penalty when in certain degrees and in certain situations. Same with slashing.
Holding is a penalty in open ice but is legal along the boards. Crosschecking in front of the net by a defenseman is illegal at even strenth but is generally overlooked when killing a penalty.
its brutal trying to explain the rules of hockey to a new fan. the game should be called as the rulebook says. if a player takes his hand off his stick and grabs opposing player, that should be a minor penalty. if a player uses his stick to make contact with an opposing player, then its either hooking, slashing, high sticking, crosschecking or spearing. it can only be legal if its stick to stick contact.
of course i can't imagine that the league would actually do that. but that would open the game up a long way.
and the bettmans two ref thing totally screwed it up - and they still don't call it - european's brought the stickwork and the defensive zone interference - the coach's refined the trap and body positioning - i agree - call the rool book - watch one of the classic games - the difference is staggering -txpd said:
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
GAME 3 - Drummondville Voltigeurs @ Victoriaville Tigres - Drummondville Voltigeurs leads series 2-0Wagers: 1Staked: $35.00Event closes- Updated:
-
