The merits of widening the NHL rink.

[Cursed Lemon]

As long as the game is 5v5 and the players have to score into one net, the game will ALWAYS be slow.

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

I say make something like a 3 second rule. If you're in the offensive zone 3 seconds before the puck crosses the blue line, it's offside. This will get rid of a ton of offsides and prevents cherry picking.

 

[nystromshairstylist]

widening the rink is guaranteed to make the game slower and much more boring.

-all widening the rink does is force the action further away from the high price areas (slot, dots and crease)
-pushes the offense out wide.
-encourages the defense to pack the middle even more to block shots.
-and removes nearly all physical play from the game. There are no checks because of the above strategies. Its simply a snooze fest of 2 teams taking turns playing keep away before firing a shot into a crowd.

aka how basically every international game on big ice goes.

As a regular viewer of the Swiss league, I disagree with this entirely.

I have proposed time and time again that the NHL, which has become a grinding bore, to switch to the Olympic size rink, but as said above all the owners care about is money, no matter how badly the game suffers. They could ameliorate the loss of two seat rows with a slight increase in all seat prices, but that would require complex thinking beyond the brainpower of most owners.

It is ridiculous watching the game at this point; just take a look at a game from say 1980 and the size/speed of the players - its a joke, its like watching women's hockey, the players are like 2/3 the size.

Am impressed the OP mentioned icings and off-sides, which are endemic and stifle the flow of the game significantly; if there was a way to eliminate them outright I'd do so.

 

[nystromshairstylist]

If you think the ice is too crowded, the solution is to remove a winger from each team. That opens up space in the scoring areas and kills the neutral zone trap/zone defense. Adding more room to the outside is like making a football field longer.

Hah, this is exactly why the league and so many posters are not correct on arguing against widening the rink; they claim the extra space will have "no effect" on the game flow but the overtime is 3-on-3, so the league is tacitly admitting more open ice = more scoring chances/better/faster game flow. Otherwise, why not go 10-on-10 in OT if space wasn't directly related to game flow/scoring chances?

 

[nystromshairstylist]

I wish they allowed variations in the rink size within certain constraints. It would bring back home ice advantages, allowing variation that teams could take advantage of. Slight differences in end boards allowing for different bounces, larger ice surfaces for fast skilled teams, smaller rinks for grinding physical teams, maybe even allow differences in blue line placement or glass height like baseball has different wall distances/heights.

Fundamentally against this; its like the 1984 Cardinals with their toy astro turf field allowing them to hit lots of ground balls that bounce a mile high off the turf, giving them doubles from routine singles. I recall the days of the smaller Boston/Detroit arenas, and it was ridiculous, like having left-handed Yankee power hitters aim for the short right-field porch, or righty Red Sox players aim for the Green monster.

Rant over, the league should have a standard platform for all teams.

 

[Blue and Green]

85 feet has become too narrow with the mobility of the contemporary NHL player. A little more space would make for more interesting play. But I don't care for the 100-foot width of Olympic-sized rinks. If I was the hockey dictator I would go with 90 feet.

 

[KingJoffrey]

NA posters who wish wider rinks should watch some FEL and SEL playoff games. If you want to watch games where 90% of teams play 1-4 trap (some teams even use 0-5 trap) and force opponents to outside while have they have 5 men middle field defense then be my guest.

It’s simply nightmare to watch. There is a zero skill at display.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Make it like the NBA.

No blue lines. Just a centre Ice line. So offensive and defensive zones are half the ice.

 

[Saekk]

Widening a bit, sure, going full airport mode? No thanks.

 

[BoltSTH]

Go back to 1 ref and 1 lineman
move to to 4 on 4 but increase the game roster size to 25 so can play shorter shifts.

 

[TheOtherOne]

Here's a stupid suggestion that might be secretly awesome:
Add 2 feet to each side down the length. BUT that extra 2 feet does not count as the offensive zone for offsides purposes.

Hm? Hm?

 

[Wingsfan 4 life]

Players/coaches will addapt regardless of the merits.

 

[Stud Muffin]

I’d be ok with 2.5 feet on each side, but it would be stupidly hard to do, so many rinks across North America to change. Not really do able.

 

[ElGuapo]

Trust me, it slows the game down eventually. Even though widening the rinks to lets say, Kuopio Kalpa's, 30 meters by 60 meters rink, adds 120 m^2 of space, it really slows down the play. Or it has considerably had that effect on European ice.

Has no effect on offsides and icings in my opinion. That space players will get will only be clogged up with more of playing the trap defense. Not a good idea. I want the FEL to move onto NHL sized rinks rather than getting incentive from NHL itself to stay with the current rink sizes.

All I know is I always find hockey played on a wider rink to be more entertaining. Just seems faster and more wide open and exciting to me despite people always saying it's slower and more territorial when brought up.

 

[Lacaar]

The strategy remains the same. It's the same reason Olympic hockey on Olympic Ice with NHL players was even less exciting.

The strategy for hockey defensively is 90% formed around the goal and interior box of the ice. Collapse low and have 1 person pursue the puck carrier. The other four defenders stay in the defensive box. Force or wait for turnover and transition.

The goalies are too good and frankly have the support of some wonderful equipment tech that affords teams to give up low quality outside shots. Let alone that every player plays goal via shot blockig now days also. The evolution of the postition and block goalie from the reactionary style of long years past. In the Olympics you see players sucked into the strange security of extra space. There's more room on the outside and it's instinct to use it. But It winds up with the same game being played of trying to crack the inner parts as it's near impossible to score from distance in today's NHL (Not without some fortunate bounces that is). It's why shot attempts can be a misleading stat. Sometimes the other team is just dominant. But sometimes it means they aren't able or willing to get the puck to the dangerous inner scoring area and are taking the freebie.

 

[snag]

So Olympic size rinks would mean Winnipeg would have just over 14,000 seats...

 

[Bounces R Way]

widening the rink is guaranteed to make the game slower and much more boring.

-all widening the rink does is force the action further away from the high price areas (slot, dots and crease)
-pushes the offense out wide.
-encourages the defense to pack the middle even more to block shots.
-and removes nearly all physical play from the game. There are no checks because of the above strategies. Its simply a snooze fest of 2 teams taking turns playing keep away before firing a shot into a crowd.

aka how basically every international game on big ice goes.

Slower and boring or more controlled and fluent. I don't really see how it does any of these things. The defense already packs the middle and collapses to their net. By widening the rinks you're giving more room for the players to shoot from, more space to make a move on a defender, more of an opportunity to use their skating to get open. You know how a d man most often gets beat resulting in a break in on net? Wide. The defense will also have more ground to cover, they'll have to skate more too. More of an emphasis of actually being on your man instead of just between him and the net, and if a puck is turned over they're more likely to be involved in the play going the other way.

5v5 systems have caused the game to stagnate, barely ever see odd man rushes anymore. By the time possession changes and the possessing team makes two or three passes between the blue liners and has changed their forwards, the other team has already assumed their structure again. That structure is called the trap, and it's dreadful hockey to watch. Basically it's purpose is trying to force you offside at the blue line or make an ill advised pass right before it. Either that or they trap you at your blue line, and cycle skaters into a forecheck looking to disrupt an outlet pass. We all agree breakaways, 2 on 1's, open shots from the slot are great, but you need to be asking yourself where these plays started. That's why the NHL should be aiming to allow it's teams to generate more speed through the neutral zone.

For those using international ice as reasons why it wouldn't work, that's not the increase the OP and article are talking about.



So Burke is suggesting adding 5 feet of width. No one really knows what impact that could have on NHL hockey but I'd love to see it tested.

Yes thank you, not sure how I didn't make that clear in all of my exposition .

Testing something might be a touch too innovative for Gary and co. Why not play a few preseason games at BU's Agganis Arena? It has 200 x 90 ft dimensions. Ask the players and refs what they thought of it after? Why be so afraid of different.

 

[Bounces R Way]

It won't happen, ever. More seats and income is more important than to stop playing hockey in the same bathtub as 100 years ago. Improved game quality has nothing to do with it, fans still keep going as lemmings, so why improve the game?

Fair enough. I mean I still watch it bathtub and all.

Biting the financial bullet and improving the game might do something the NHL has been trying to do for years. Attract new fans. I don't really mean to say the game is some awful boor, I really do believe it's as competitive as ever. Fans that have a good understanding of the game(which I'm assuming applies to at least some of the users here) can appreciate all these nuances and the parity they've created. For the more casual sports fan looking for excitement, particularly one that hasn't actually played, it looks like a meatgrinder with an occasional glove save or goal.

 

[maacoshark]

The ice surface is pretty small for the size and speed of players now. If they did increase the size of the rink I wouldn't get too carried away. We don't need an international size rink.

 

[authentic]

NA posters who wish wider rinks should watch some FEL and SEL playoff games. If you want to watch games where 90% of teams play 1-4 trap (some teams even use 0-5 trap) and force opponents to outside while have they have 5 men middle field defense then be my guest.

It’s simply nightmare to watch. There is a zero skill at display.

I think you have to keep in mind the NHL is full of a lot more skilled and faster players. It just doesn't make much sense to me that there wouldn't be more offense on display with a bit more space.

 

[LeafFever]

The rink needs to be bigger. There is no doubt in my mind.
People always come back with the "Euro Size=Boring" argument, but who says it needs to be the same size? An Inbetween NHL regulation and euro would be perfect.

 

[Bounces R Way]

NA posters who wish wider rinks should watch some FEL and SEL playoff games. If you want to watch games where 90% of teams play 1-4 trap (some teams even use 0-5 trap) and force opponents to outside while have they have 5 men middle field defense then be my guest.

It’s simply nightmare to watch. There is a zero skill at display.

Hate to break it to you, but this has already happened to the NHL. Where do you think the FEL and SEL teams picked it up? This is the defensive structure almost all NHL teams employ. It's designed to force an icing call (1-4) or an offside/dump in (0-5) and clog the neutral zone. It's way too easy to do that when the rink is 85ft across, defenders don't even have to be moving, their mere presence at their blue line neutralizes the ice around them.

 

[canuck2010]

Count me as a no. It slows the game down. Both for the team and the individual. The ice isn't used anyway. It creates a perimeter game with the puck as the defence close down to defend a smaller and more compact area of the ice.

Except for what was at stake there was nothing more boring than watching Team Canada play the game they played in Sochi.

 

[JianYang]

So Olympic size rinks would mean Winnipeg would have just over 14,000 seats...

Olympic size has the opposite problem. If the NHL were ever to entertain this thought, it would be more a hybrid size like Finland has.

The players have outgrown this ice size though. They have just become too big and fast, and since hitting, and physicality in general has been declining in favor of speed and finesse, the league would be better for it from an entertainment standpoint.

Anyways, I dont see it happening anytime soon from a business perspective, so moot point.

 

[boredmale]

I think the NHL should go the way of MLB. Give teams a set of limits they can be in and allow them to design the rink anyway they want. That way you feel like a team has an actual home ice advantage