Bounces R Way
Registered User
For several years now there has been some people involved in hockey lobbying for the NHL to widen it's rink. To make some subtle changes to the size of the ice surface to allow for more space for the players playing. McKenzie talks about how Brian Burke lobbies teams that are building a new rink to design them in mind for a change in his article from 2016 https://www.tsn.ca/burke-on-a-mission-to-increase-size-of-nhl-ice-surfaces-1.425938
Most teams refuse but I did find it interesting Detroit considered it in their construction of Little Caesars Arena.
I believe the idea has merit for several reasons:
1) The game is so much quicker than it has been in the past.
To watch the hockey played today in the NHL and not see that the average player athlete is bigger, faster, and stronger than they were in the past cannot be described as anything other than willful ignorance. Logically if the players are bigger, faster, and stronger then it follows that the game has gotten more competitive. I believe the central problem is this: that the NHL has gotten so incredibly tightly checked, over coached, and ultimately stifled of the kind of flow that makes it such a beautiful sport to begin with. It would be fair to say the fascination with Corsi is a symptom of what I believe should be viewed as a problem with the game. The amount of shots that get blocked, deflected, or are no where near the net due to the immediate pressure is outrageous. The average amount of Corsi events created by an NHL team this season was around 4000, the average amount of shots on goal registered by an NHL team was less than 3000(around 2600 more precisely), and the average chance one of those shots had of being a goal was just 9.3%. So that's roughly 30 000 shots this year that never made it to the goal, and that's just at even strength. Widening the rinks by 5 feet on either side would give players more of an area to make plays from, more room to get a clean release without a defender's stick in their lane.
2) Would lessen the amount of offsides and icings.
Nobody has ever left a hockey rink after the big game and said to their fellow fan, "Wow, remember that time Player X was offside. What a play! Can't wait to see the highlights of that tomorrow." Only to have his friend respond "My god when he iced it, I nearly spilled my beer, absolutely captivating." These are whistles there need to be less of. The fact the NHL even had to make a review system because there were so many close calls where inches or in some cases mm I would chalk up as another symptom of a greater problem. You accept margin for error in so many of your other rules, but one of these ones are somehow worth a penalty and a timeout if you challenge them and lose. Making the rinks wider would allow for more surface to be exploited by the attacking team, more space open for a pass, more room to build speed through the neutral zone, and lessen the need for a player to have his whole body other than his toe across an arbitrary line.
If it were really up to me I'd soften the language for both rules(wider blue lines, breaking the plane concept for Offside, eliminate the red line entirely and reserve icing for pucks that cross the opposing team's goal line that were cleared from the defending team's zone). But that's a topic for another time and definitely not why a girlfriend or two advised me to "seek help".
3) The NHL already changes it's rules basically annually.
To all the NA hardliners who wouldn't dare be caught trying to emulate the European game, the sanctity of your altar is an illusion. Icing is a completely different rule than it was 10 years ago. There's a trapezoid that the goalie can't play the puck from. Challenging another player to a fight is an extra penalty... sometimes, as is removing your helmet for the said fight. There's no such thing as a tie game. You can actually get a point from a losing result. Plus this change might actually make the game better, unlike some of these other reactionary and superficial amendments.
4) Less dangerous collisions.
The physicality displayed in the contemporary game is another thing that has drastically changed over this league's history. There are still some great hits, fantastic puck protection, and in the right games there exists a competitive intensity.However when I see many of the hits leading to injury I can't help but think that they are preventable. With the pace of today's hockey players barely have time to get their head up after receiving a pass. A lot of these perceived "blindside" or "interference" collisions could be avoided if the players had an extra second or two to react to their surroundings. When a hockey player goes to hit another player the objective should be to separate them from the puck. When that player recognizes he's going to be hit he can then make his choices on how to prevent that from happening.
Widening the rinks would also help to alleviate many of the scary collisions along the boards. When a player has more room to work with and more time to prepare, he's less likely to be caught off guard and fall hard into the boards. It would however encourage the return of the clean open ice hit, an art that seems to be failing the test of time. That play can still be rewarding, especially if it creates a turnover and a temporarily outnumbered opposing team. Far too often I see players angle to force a dump in when a player's breaking in 1 on 2, simply because that player has no other option, his time and space is gone.
5) Would help officiating.
Almost every game I watch there are at least 4 or 5 collisions of varying degrees of severity with the referees. Widening the rinks would give them more space to operate, and logically more of an opportunity to call the game rather than constantly getting out of the game's way.
6) Would reset coaching strategies.
Don't get me wrong, there are some fantastic coaches in the league today. Their teams play a structured and disciplined system designed to maximize success. But it's all so similar, protect the red line and the blue lines, force a change in possession, and then depending on whether you have a good coach or a bad one, make several quick headman passes and attack the net. They've mastered the prevent defense, which is more or less just be in the way and force mistakes. Hockey too often comes off as stale and stifled when there's so much commitment to these systems. They've sucked out the creativity and spontaneity that makes the game exciting. I understand why they would do that, after all they're paid big salaries to figure out how to win rather than make the game exciting. You can't have an entire league running a similar PP setup. This is again what I would view to be a symptom of a greater problem. Widening the rinks would force these guys to innovate and adapt.
7) Would better showcase the tremendous young talent the NHL boasts in it's ranks.
My final point is that the league has never been brimming with the type of players it is today. For what was long considered a veteran's league, the young talent entering every year or other year is astounding. This year saw a fantastic amount of point per game players. Some of the things they are able to do despite the lack of time and space available to them are incredible. So foster that, give these players a little more runway to dazzle and believe in your stars. They are the ones after all people come to see.
I don't really expect the Owners to give up a row or two of what I'm sure is their most profitable real estate, I imagine the annual Board of Governors meeting to be nothing more than a drunken shouting match. Just for once would like to see the NHL act proactively, rather than the usual reactionary throw shit at the wall and see if it sticks standard operating procedure. The game has undeniably evolved, I don't see why the playing area can't as well.
Most teams refuse but I did find it interesting Detroit considered it in their construction of Little Caesars Arena.
I believe the idea has merit for several reasons:
1) The game is so much quicker than it has been in the past.
To watch the hockey played today in the NHL and not see that the average player athlete is bigger, faster, and stronger than they were in the past cannot be described as anything other than willful ignorance. Logically if the players are bigger, faster, and stronger then it follows that the game has gotten more competitive. I believe the central problem is this: that the NHL has gotten so incredibly tightly checked, over coached, and ultimately stifled of the kind of flow that makes it such a beautiful sport to begin with. It would be fair to say the fascination with Corsi is a symptom of what I believe should be viewed as a problem with the game. The amount of shots that get blocked, deflected, or are no where near the net due to the immediate pressure is outrageous. The average amount of Corsi events created by an NHL team this season was around 4000, the average amount of shots on goal registered by an NHL team was less than 3000(around 2600 more precisely), and the average chance one of those shots had of being a goal was just 9.3%. So that's roughly 30 000 shots this year that never made it to the goal, and that's just at even strength. Widening the rinks by 5 feet on either side would give players more of an area to make plays from, more room to get a clean release without a defender's stick in their lane.
2) Would lessen the amount of offsides and icings.
Nobody has ever left a hockey rink after the big game and said to their fellow fan, "Wow, remember that time Player X was offside. What a play! Can't wait to see the highlights of that tomorrow." Only to have his friend respond "My god when he iced it, I nearly spilled my beer, absolutely captivating." These are whistles there need to be less of. The fact the NHL even had to make a review system because there were so many close calls where inches or in some cases mm I would chalk up as another symptom of a greater problem. You accept margin for error in so many of your other rules, but one of these ones are somehow worth a penalty and a timeout if you challenge them and lose. Making the rinks wider would allow for more surface to be exploited by the attacking team, more space open for a pass, more room to build speed through the neutral zone, and lessen the need for a player to have his whole body other than his toe across an arbitrary line.
If it were really up to me I'd soften the language for both rules(wider blue lines, breaking the plane concept for Offside, eliminate the red line entirely and reserve icing for pucks that cross the opposing team's goal line that were cleared from the defending team's zone). But that's a topic for another time and definitely not why a girlfriend or two advised me to "seek help".
3) The NHL already changes it's rules basically annually.
To all the NA hardliners who wouldn't dare be caught trying to emulate the European game, the sanctity of your altar is an illusion. Icing is a completely different rule than it was 10 years ago. There's a trapezoid that the goalie can't play the puck from. Challenging another player to a fight is an extra penalty... sometimes, as is removing your helmet for the said fight. There's no such thing as a tie game. You can actually get a point from a losing result. Plus this change might actually make the game better, unlike some of these other reactionary and superficial amendments.
4) Less dangerous collisions.
The physicality displayed in the contemporary game is another thing that has drastically changed over this league's history. There are still some great hits, fantastic puck protection, and in the right games there exists a competitive intensity.However when I see many of the hits leading to injury I can't help but think that they are preventable. With the pace of today's hockey players barely have time to get their head up after receiving a pass. A lot of these perceived "blindside" or "interference" collisions could be avoided if the players had an extra second or two to react to their surroundings. When a hockey player goes to hit another player the objective should be to separate them from the puck. When that player recognizes he's going to be hit he can then make his choices on how to prevent that from happening.
Widening the rinks would also help to alleviate many of the scary collisions along the boards. When a player has more room to work with and more time to prepare, he's less likely to be caught off guard and fall hard into the boards. It would however encourage the return of the clean open ice hit, an art that seems to be failing the test of time. That play can still be rewarding, especially if it creates a turnover and a temporarily outnumbered opposing team. Far too often I see players angle to force a dump in when a player's breaking in 1 on 2, simply because that player has no other option, his time and space is gone.
5) Would help officiating.
Almost every game I watch there are at least 4 or 5 collisions of varying degrees of severity with the referees. Widening the rinks would give them more space to operate, and logically more of an opportunity to call the game rather than constantly getting out of the game's way.
6) Would reset coaching strategies.
Don't get me wrong, there are some fantastic coaches in the league today. Their teams play a structured and disciplined system designed to maximize success. But it's all so similar, protect the red line and the blue lines, force a change in possession, and then depending on whether you have a good coach or a bad one, make several quick headman passes and attack the net. They've mastered the prevent defense, which is more or less just be in the way and force mistakes. Hockey too often comes off as stale and stifled when there's so much commitment to these systems. They've sucked out the creativity and spontaneity that makes the game exciting. I understand why they would do that, after all they're paid big salaries to figure out how to win rather than make the game exciting. You can't have an entire league running a similar PP setup. This is again what I would view to be a symptom of a greater problem. Widening the rinks would force these guys to innovate and adapt.
7) Would better showcase the tremendous young talent the NHL boasts in it's ranks.
My final point is that the league has never been brimming with the type of players it is today. For what was long considered a veteran's league, the young talent entering every year or other year is astounding. This year saw a fantastic amount of point per game players. Some of the things they are able to do despite the lack of time and space available to them are incredible. So foster that, give these players a little more runway to dazzle and believe in your stars. They are the ones after all people come to see.
I don't really expect the Owners to give up a row or two of what I'm sure is their most profitable real estate, I imagine the annual Board of Governors meeting to be nothing more than a drunken shouting match. Just for once would like to see the NHL act proactively, rather than the usual reactionary throw shit at the wall and see if it sticks standard operating procedure. The game has undeniably evolved, I don't see why the playing area can't as well.
Last edited:
