Espnhl

Status
Not open for further replies.

John Flyers Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
22,416
16
Visit site
Some details on their plan:

Re-start with 20 teams, and then as financial stability is gained, start to slowly add more teams.

16 make the playoffs.

60 game schedule beginning in early November ending in late march/early April.

Rosters are 20 players, only 17 can dress (9-6-2)
Tag-up off sides
No-touch icing
No fighting
4-on-4 OT, followed bya shootout
Nets made bigger
Goalie rule similar to AHL
Mandatory helmets and visors
Restrictions on goalie equipment

Enhanced marketing
Olympics will be a staple
3 players and a coach will wear mics for every game
TV will have access to lockerrooms

Tieried luxury tax system, with the money going into league marketing initiatives


The 20 teams

Montreal
Boston
Toronto
Detroit
Hartford

Philly
New York
New Jersey
Atlanta
Miami

Dallas
St. Louis
Chicago
Minnesota
Denver

Los Angeles
Las Vegas
Vancouver
Edmonton
Calgary

Plans to expand to the following cities: Phoenix, Seattle, Kansas City, Portland, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, Baltimore/Washington and Columbus.


More details at espn.com
 

joechip

Registered User
May 29, 2003
3,229
0
Gainesville, Fl
www.sabrerattling.com
Typical leftist ESPN nonsense. Helmets, visors, no-fighting. No Buffalo. There was no effort put into this. It's nothing more than their wish-list in the hockey they want to televise, not the hockey we want to watch.

Welcome to the No Hitting League.

Hartford? *snort*

Ta,
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
Las Vegas gets a team and Ottawa doesn't?...riiiight.

They lost me with adding shootouts as well.
 

Sinurgy

Approaching infinity
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2004
12,425
3,877
AZ
Ok, now that I'm past the intial anger of the stupid 20 teams idea, I do agree that it was cool of ESPN to atleast put something out there and even gave it the front page (which lets face it, not a spot the NHL occupies often).
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
John Flyers Fan said:
I'm not a fan of the shootout, but when the NHL returns it sounds as if we'll be seeing shootouts. :banghead:

Yeah, I know. And I'll be counting the days until they realize it's a mistake and remove them.
 

Go Flames Go*

Guest
Hockey is not a circus, this just a disrespectful idea right here.
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
I'd like the NHL to fix the game, not the outcome.

As I've said before, the only way a shootout works for me is to hold it before the game. That way teams would have 60 (or 65) minutes to make it's result moot. The drama would be in the game and not a shootout, which is where it belongs in my opinion.
 

s7ark

RIP
Jul 3, 2003
27,579
174
Sinurgy said:
Why shouldn't games be decided by penalty shots?


Because hockey is a team game. It is about which team can win , not which team has the 5 better players
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
Sinurgy said:
Why shouldn't games be decided by penalty shots?

Why shouldn't they be decided by a fastest skater race? Why not by shooting targets? Why not a fight at center ice?

Because it isn't part of the game.

Here was a recent poll on these boards.
 

Sinurgy

Approaching infinity
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2004
12,425
3,877
AZ
Chili said:
Why shouldn't they be decided by a fastest skater race? Why not by shooting targets? Why not a fight at center ice?

Because it isn't part of the game.

Here was a recent poll on these boards.
You certainly don't have to but you didn't answer my question. Unless your answer as to why it shouldn't be there is simply because it's not part of the game.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Here are the facts of life on shootouts gentlemen. They are a necessary evil. The thing holding hockey back from getting a major TV contract is the unpredictability in the length of the games (a killer for baseball on the networks was extra innings). There are games that can drag out for ever, and to a casual fan they want to see a definite winner. Nothing is worse than investing three hours of your time to see a sister kisser. As much as we like skate till you puke OT, or games where a tie is a fair result (there are not many of these, I have seen two or three in my life), the majority of the audience out there wants to know who WON the game. There has to be a quick and entertaining way for this to happen in hockey. Hence the shootout. It defines a winner in short order and is a great vehicle for TV. The excitement of the break away is poetic. This is a great seller for TV. Games will be sold on a easily packaged time block (four hours including pre and post game shows). It makes all the sense in the world from a TV point of view.

Personally I like a lot of the changes suggested by ESPN. There are some great ideas there. I think they could be shaped a little differently, but the fact of the matter is that if you want to grow the game in new and exciting ways you have to make changes for all the right reasons. I think they made some good proposals that could make the NHL a better and more sellable product.
 

mackdogs*

Guest
A truly Americanized version of a new hockey league. I was shocked that they kept a team in Edmonton. They lost me shortly after no fighting though, this is a ridiculous idea. Fighting is as much a part of hockey as the puck and the nets.
 

Beauty eh?

Not sure if serious.
Dec 20, 2004
5,367
1
Southern California
This ESPNHL business sounds like the equivalent of the "XFL" on ice. They can keep their stupid ass gimicks. We don't need 'em!

No fighting in hockey? LOL.....suuure.
 

joechip

Registered User
May 29, 2003
3,229
0
Gainesville, Fl
www.sabrerattling.com
The Iconoclast said:
Here are the facts of life on shootouts gentlemen. They are a necessary evil. The thing holding hockey back from getting a major TV contract is the unpredictability in the length of the games (a killer for baseball on the networks was extra innings). [snip] Games will be sold on a easily packaged time block (four hours including pre and post game shows). It makes all the sense in the world from a TV point of view.

Personally I like a lot of the changes suggested by ESPN. There are some great ideas there. [snip] I think they made some good proposals that could make the NHL a better and more sellable product.

I agree with a lot of their suggestions (including the use of shootouts in the regular season) but I cannot abide a ban on fighting or mandatory visors AND helmets. If anything, hard plastic forearm/shoulder pads should be outlawed, as they cause a tremendous number of serious injuries. Enforcing stick violations, more 3 on 3 potential along with their suggestions on goal size/ goalie rules should create more scoring from the power play, thereby eliminating (through the pressure of *gasp* losing) the viscious two-handers we have to endure today.

Ta,
 

Sinurgy

Approaching infinity
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2004
12,425
3,877
AZ
mackdogs said:
A truly Americanized version of a new hockey league. I was shocked that they kept a team in Edmonton. They lost me shortly after no fighting though, this is a ridiculous idea. Fighting is as much a part of hockey as the puck and the nets.
C'mon now, that's not fair. They even mentioned that the majority of people voted for fighting but they removed it anyway. I agree that it's a "casual fan" view but not an American view. For the record, this American does NOT want fighting removed at all.
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
Sinurgy said:
You certainly don't have to but you didn't answer my question. Unless your answer as to why it shouldn't be there is simply because it's not part of the game.

Your forcing an outcome of a team game with a skills event. The 60-65 minutes are rendered pretty much meaningless.

In the regular season what is the necessity of having a W or L in every game?

I have no problem with a tie game in the regular season. This is not the problem with hockey, it's the defensive minded schemes that have taken over.

Instead of trying to encourage opening up the play a bit, we're focusing on fixing the outcomes of games?

I believe they were removed in at least one of the Euro leagues. The novelty will wear off.

But again the NHL seems focused on catering to 'casual fans'. For once, it would be nice if the league listened to the longtime fans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->