Espnhl

Status
Not open for further replies.

SuperNintendoChalmrs

Registered User
Jun 28, 2002
3,682
6
Buffalo
joechip said:
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,


But wait! The players can take their helmets off during the shootout!!!!!! :lol

This was mentioned at least 3 different times, it must be important!!!!

:lol :teach: :dunce:
 

SuperNintendoChalmrs

Registered User
Jun 28, 2002
3,682
6
Buffalo
no13matssundin said:
I just replied to the ESPN Sportsnation about the "ESPNHL"... this is my post:

----

To Whom It May Concern.

This ESPNHL is, by far, the utmost stupidest thing I have ever read. I am, infact, dumber for reading and have wasted valuable time reading it that could have been used in more noble pursuits, such as picking my nose or taking a large dump on an ESPN THE MAGAZINE Subscription card. And it is just another reason why ESPN has absolutely and unequicably no business discussing anything to do with hockey ever anywhere at all period. You people would not good hockey if it tackled you and sat on your face. Wider nets? No fighting? Teams in Las Vegas and Atlanta, but not in Buffalo or Ottawa? Why dont you re-name it the XFL while youre at it, Vince McMahon. You people have once again proven that no one in your organization has any clue whatsoever about Hockey, nor should you be allowed to comment on it. ESPN telling the world how hockey should be run is like Gandhi telling me how to slow cook a good slab of beef. You people have no clue. You never will. Stick to College basketball, the NBA and Poker because (thankfully) youre uber-idiotic ideas will never ever be implemented. The ESPNHL? Thanks, but no thanks Jimmy McNoClue.


LOL :handclap: :lol:


I wrote to them, but forget the complete specifics.....something along the lines of:

"What you have created is akin to what bored 8th graders do in last period study hall on a Friday afternoon. Their slightly misfiring synapses cause them to create little pretend sports leagues or draw pictures, thinking they should be sent to the local patent office or the Smithsonian."

:dunce:
 

PecaFan

Registered User
Nov 16, 2002
9,243
520
Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Mountaineers said:
Larger nets is a stupid idea.

I don't think it's stupid at all, actually. Obviously, the preferable solution is to reduce the goalie equipment size back to what it was in the late 80's. But, with the union filing lawsuits every time this is attempted, the only way to achieve a reasonable goalie size to net size ratio is to add a few inches to the net.

Most people wouldn't even be able to tell the difference. It's not like you'd be adding several feet to the net. An extra inch or two means that puck that now hits the post goes in.

Scotty Bowman also had a great idea, in that you could reduce the size of the posts. The outside dimensions of the nets would be identical, but the inner dimensions would be larger, and there'd be more goals.
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
NJD Jester said:
So basically, you think a shootout win isn't worth as much as a regulation or overtime win.

They why have them? If they're just a circus act pretending to be part of hockey, why have them decide anything?

And if you want to decide a winner in the regular season, let me say it again: Four-on-four for 12 minutes is something I'd like to see tested before a shootout is.

<JESTER>
if a normal win is worth more than a shoot out win, teams have more incentive to win in normal time and this will make the games more exciting.

If the sport needs to be made more exciting and there has to be a result, shoot outs are the only way of doing it.
 

Street Hawk

Registered User
Feb 18, 2003
5,348
19
Visit site
ok..

bleedgreen said:
point 1. the whalers played in the hartford civic center. its still there... its where the wolf pack plays, holds about 16,000. CT has built a football stadium for uconn, and a convention center downtown, and they kicked outthe govenor who let the whale leave. they would build a new one.
as for vegas, do you really think a casino wouldnt step up to build one, or someone else? they would have it done in six months.

point 2. they are trying to market these guys. you know, to people who dont already know who they are. most people couldnt tell an iginla from an iguana. put a face to the name for the average joe. not too hard a concept to grasp.

For point 1, Neither city has an arena in place right now that the NHL would allow a team to go to. The Civic center in Hartford is what, at least 25 years old, so they would need a new arena to get a NHL team back. Vegas, no arena right now. So, my point is that ESPN is dealing with ifs. My point is that it would be more realistic for them to list a team like Portland, who play out of the Rose Garden, cause it's a new building, about 8 or 9 years old than it is to list a team without an arena or a team with too old an arena to play in.

For point 2, I watch a lot of the NFL and when I recognize a player, it's about half and half between seeing that guy's PHOTO plastered on the TV after he makes a play and the other half when they zoom in on the guy when he's on the bench without his helmut. I don't have an issue with taking the helmut off during a shootout, no issue there, just the excuse of not recognizing a player with a helmut. A helmut covers up just as much as a cap in baseball doesn't it? Only thing more you can see on a baseball player is about an extra inch on the back of his head. Wow, big deal. It's just that you get more up close shots of the players in that sport.

So, what can the NHL do to follow the NFL. Well, start to plaster the player's PHOTO on the screen whenever they make a save, big hit, nice pass, or get a scoring chance. As for the bench, it's too dangerous to sit there without a helmut.
 

jacketracket*

Guest
ESPN?

Are they still trying to do sports?

I thought they went to an all-comedy schtick 5 or 6 years ago. And that proposal proves it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->