Ideas to make the game better.

[BruinLVGA]

At this point I think we have found there is nothing that can be done. There needs to be a huge change, and no matter what it is, people will hate it. Keeping on will do nothing.

[MOD]

Your original idea is beyond horrible.

But if one wants a little more offense, just introduce the 3 points system and all of a sudden, all incentives to reach OT in order to gain at least a point are gone.

As an example, look no further than... your own team this year. Toronto is 2 points behind Boston for 3rd spot in the Division, with 1 game in hand. Yet, the Bruins have 5 MORE WINS than Toronto. But Toronto is the classic example of a system that doesn't work, because thanks to 14 (!!!) OT losses, they are essentially tied with Boston.

Using an extreme abstract example, now a team that would go 41-41-0 would have the same points as a team that would go 0-0-82. A team winning 0 games shouldn't be rewarded the same as one winning 41 games. It doesn't make sense.
Hence, if one wants more offense, let's award the SAME points in regulation as are given in OT (with the 3 points system: 3 points in regulation - 3 for a win, 0 for a loss - and 3 in OT - 2 for a win + 1 for a loss. As things are now: 2 in regulation and 3 in OT - 2+1) otherwise it's understandable that teams would rather play more cautious and try to reach OT. The current system rewards defensive, prudent hockey. That's where it can be improved.

 

[CrashBartley]

How about every time you score, you have to take a player off the ice? That way the trailing team has a better chance of scoring.

But on a serious note, why not just go to wins/losses? Since every game ends with a result, there is no need for awarding loser points. Other leagues use that system and it works just fine.
Then use regulation, O/T and S/O wins to determine tiebreaks. That way, winning in regulation can become very important.

 

[Eowin]

The bottom of the boards should be made of hard rubber.

 

[Machinehead]

Stop reviewing offside.

If it's close enough to be onside with the naked eye, it's ****ing onside.

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

1. If they want more scoring, one little rule change can be made without changing goalies equipment or increasing net size. Once the puck breaks the plane, its a goal. Just like in the NFL. The puck do not have to be 100% across the line.

2. Get rid of that awful automatic delay of game penalty for shooting the puck over the glass. It should be the refs discretion if the player tried to delay the game or not, just like any other penalty. Hate to see games and playoff games especially in OT to be won by this rule.

3. Get rid of the stupid shootout. Its a team sport, so lets leave it at that. By the time the shootout is done we could of had another 5 minutes of entertaining 3 on 3. If still tied after 10 minutes, both team get a single point and leave it at that.

4. Tweak the playoff format so that when it gets down to 4 teams, Top seed plays 4th seed. This way it is possible that the Islanders can play the Rangers in the cup final, Flames and Oilers, Leafs and Canadiens etc. After all the top 2 teams should vie for the cup, even if they are in the same conference. Leave the first 2 rounds the same. If they want to crown conference champs, do it at end of regular season standings.

5. Refs should not call a penalty unless it is 100% a sure thing. Too many iffy penalties takes the flow out of the game. The refs dictate the game way too much, let the teams decide the game, unless like I said its a sure penalty. One call I would like to see the refs do though, is once the whistle is blown, everyone must stop the shoving, crosschecking, punching etc, or get a penalty.

What are your thoughts hockey fans? Good or bad ideas? Have any of your own?

Love it... great idea

 

[Prairie Habs]

1. If they want more scoring, one little rule change can be made without changing goalies equipment or increasing net size. Once the puck breaks the plane, its a goal. Just like in the NFL. The puck do not have to be 100% across the line.

2. Get rid of that awful automatic delay of game penalty for shooting the puck over the glass. It should be the refs discretion if the player tried to delay the game or not, just like any other penalty. Hate to see games and playoff games especially in OT to be won by this rule.

3. Get rid of the stupid shootout. Its a team sport, so lets leave it at that. By the time the shootout is done we could of had another 5 minutes of entertaining 3 on 3. If still tied after 10 minutes, both team get a single point and leave it at that.

4. Tweak the playoff format so that when it gets down to 4 teams, Top seed plays 4th seed. This way it is possible that the Islanders can play the Rangers in the cup final, Flames and Oilers, Leafs and Canadiens etc. After all the top 2 teams should vie for the cup, even if they are in the same conference. Leave the first 2 rounds the same. If they want to crown conference champs, do it at end of regular season standings.

5. Refs should not call a penalty unless it is 100% a sure thing. Too many iffy penalties takes the flow out of the game. The refs dictate the game way too much, let the teams decide the game, unless like I said its a sure penalty. One call I would like to see the refs do though, is once the whistle is blown, everyone must stop the shoving, crosschecking, punching etc, or get a penalty.

What are your thoughts hockey fans? Good or bad ideas? Have any of your own?

1) The idea behind increasing scoring is improving the actual play, not redefining non-goals as goals.

2) This goes completely against increasing scoring as it will allow players to "accidentally" shoot it over again. Also, I don't know why people think the refs should have discretion on every call. If you high stick a guy its a high stick, you need to be in control of your stick at all times. If you put your free hand on an opponent its a holding. Refs don't get to decide if something is a penalty so much as they decide whether or not something actually happened or not.

3) Agree completely, hate the shoot-out.

4) Indifferent here, I see the pros and cons either way.

5) The refs already swallow their whistles too much as is. A horrible non-call that takes away a scoring chance ruins the flow more than if it actually gets called. I hate how people say that a ref is "making the game all about them" when they actually call penalties. Non-calls influence the game just as much as soft calls if not more.

 

[123TripleDoge]

Shootout > 3 on 3

 

[Uberdachen]

Increase the quality of calls by decreasing the size of referee pads.

Next!

 

[Thirty Seven]

Haha why would anyone care to score in the first period then? This really doesnt fix anything and I feel if they even tried this at the all-star game it would be hated.

 

[starling]

Shootout > 3 on 3

Your hockey fan privileges have been revoked.

 

[NHL Dude 120]

My idea for points
3-regulation win
2-points for an overtime win
1- shootout
0-loss

Something cool that Rugby does btw is that if there is a huge goal difference they get an extra point.

I.e. if you win by 5 you get an extra point, if you win by +10 you get an extra 2 points

 

[SladeWilson23]

Shootout > 3 on 3

False.

 

[Demandedace]

This may be the worst idea in the history of terrible ideas in the NHL

 

[ShootIt]

Tough choice between

and

so I just posted both.

 

[Cowumbus]

This is dumb. Just have the benches be switched so there are two periods of long changes, and start calling penalties. Easy fix.

 

[QnebO]

Not the worst idea I have seen. At least it wouldn't make the game a diving contest or PP festival. Risk taking in the 3rd period could be beautiful.

As long as goal scoring tables would count 1 goal as 1 goal, also same for assists.

Adding extra penalties, banning players for playing the game are "artificial" changes that probably suck. This is a real change. I wouldn't hurry doing this, but I see way worse ideas in every "how to change the game" topic.

Teams don't play "enough" offense because it's not worth it. Instead of some artificial changes, this would simply correct the risk-reward relation and there would be alot of offense.

This idea is way better than:
Starting to call every little hook ect
90% of the other proposals in these topics

Edit:
Thinking it more, it could make players fear mistakes even more, and end up game not being any more offensive after all. Taking into account all other complaints that I just read, yeah probably this is a bad idea. But so are most ideas to change the game. I'd still like to see this piloted in some league, some games.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

One of the worst ideas ever.

 

[Ducks in a row]

So please bear with me here, this would take a change to the rules, but I think it's worth it.

Scoring is down now because teams are taking the lead, and shutting it down. Another issue brought up are teams playing for OT if the game is close in the 3rd.

I think the NHL should adopt a weighted score, where goals count for more points during each period. This would not reflect on an individual stat line, only on the game score sheet.

My proposal is goals are worth 1 point in the 1st, 2 in the 2nd, and 3 in the third. This means that rather than take their foot of the gas and try to hold onto their one goal lead, teams would be on constant offense in the third and the pace would pick up more and more as the game goes on.

This should open up the game as teams who deploy a run and gun style of game would technically be better than teams who are built to take a 2 goal lead and then deploy the trap. Sitting on a lead is no longer an option, unless the game is a blow out, because even 2 goals in the third can totally shift the game.

I get this will be un-liked by a lot of fans who want to keep the game traditional, but I think the sport needs to be updated to fit the modern demand. of NHL audiences.

This would return the NHL to 80's level of offense, and allow players to show case their skills.

Score 2 goals in the opening period give up a goal with less then a min in the 3rd when the other team pulls their goalie and lose 3-2

 

[kudymen]

I thought the result of a solution would be a better state compared to the previous?

 

[Maukkis]

I just had this image of players riding around the ice on hockey sticks...

The Bauer Blizzard is the stick of choice for players in the know.

What do the beaters actually use to knock down their opponents? Some kind of hardened shoulder pads?

 

[philip]

More goals/points doesn't equal a more fun game to watch.

 

[Kamiccolo]

Score 2 goals in the opening period give up a goal with less then a min in the 3rd when the other team pulls their goalie and lose 3-2

Exactly.. Which is why they need to try and keep scoring.

 

[kudymen]

Score 2 goals in the opening period give up a goal with less then a min in the 3rd when the other team pulls their goalie and lose 3-2

"It's your fault you only scored more goals than the opponent!!!"

 

[Maukkis]

Exactly.. Which is why they need to try and keep scoring.

The difficulty of scoring a goal remains the same throughout the game, no matter when you score it. There is no logical argument for rewarding teams differently for scoring the same goal at different times.

And isn't that literally what the teams are doing anyway? If you are trailing in a game, your prime objective is to score a goal. It does no good for the game, as players would be more likely to take the first period off due to avoiding running out of gas in the late game.

Your idea does not change anything for the better.

 

[Yung Rotini]

Why even try to score in the first period? Just stand in place for 20 minutes. Gives you the same odds at winning with these idiotic rules than actually trying.