I think the fact that former players in many sports have sued the leagues over lifelong physical and mental damage from playing has driven the changes away from violent collisions and fighting. Throwing Christians to the lions used to draw big crowds to the Roman Coliseum back in the day too, but eventually someone decided that wan't OK. I loved old time hockey too, and I'm still up out of my seat cheering for a big hit or fight, but there is also a part of my more rational brain that wonders if I should be paying for people to injure each other for my entertainment. I was just saying to my wife last night as we were listening to the Royal/Growlers game that ended 7-5, that I think I'm ready to accept more radical changes to the game to increase scoring. If we can't go back to the old days of thunderous hits and line brawls (and I don't think we can), then 2-1 games with little physicality are really pretty boring, and the solution is probably bigger nets, or larger ice surfaces, or a real consistent crackdown on hooking, crosschecking, interference, etc. Sort of what the NFL did in changing the defensive rules to increase scoring and eliminate the big hits and head shots. Hockey is removing the physical plays that made the game exciting between goals, but they haven't replaced it with anything, so the game is not as interesting - especially for the casual fan. I was opposed to those kind of changes like most everyone else, but I am coming around to thinking that's what they are going to have to do.