NHL forming Competition Committee - players and owners

[dolfanar]

Some NHL GMs unhappy with new committee

TSN.ca Staff

7/2/2005 12:34:01 PM

It hasn't taken long for reaction to the NHL's newly-formed competition committee. And that reaction, from some NHL general managers, has been of the adverse variety.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=129421


Also, some more details on the new rules came out, in that same article:

* Smaller goalie equipment, including 11 inch pads.

Baby Steps

* The reinstitution of the tag-up offside rule.

Yay!

* Moving the goal lines back two feet towards the end board to create more room in front of the net instead of behind it.

Ok

* The calling of more penalties more consistently, specifically for obstruction on players with and without the puck and not just in the netural zone.

Duh! I've heard this on before though...

* The institution of a shootout to eliminate tie games in the NHL. Before going to the shootout, though, overtime would be modified to include one five-minute period of four-on-four overtime and, if still tied, a three-minute period of three-on-three. * If, after eight minutes of overtime, the game is still tied, then it would go to a shootout.
* The winner of the game - in regulation time, overtime or the shootout - would receive two points for the victory. The loser, regardless of when the loss occurred, would receive no points.

8 minutes of OT? Snuh? Jesus H... how aout 10 minutes of 4 on 4, 3 points for regulation win, 2 points for OT win and 1 point for a tie (NO POINTS for loss). No shootout. IT's a step forward without pissing on the fans who hate the idea of a skills competition deciding a hockey game.

* The blue lines would be made fatter, as per the American Hockey League experiment this season, to slightly increase the size of the offensive zones.
* The centre red line will be removed for the purposes of allowing two-line passes.
Goaltenders will only be permitted to handle the puck in a designated area directly behind the goal net, as per the AHL experiment this season.

Okay... This should be interesting when applied to NHL Goalies who are effectively 3rd defensemen. But still, if you are allowing them to play the puck behind the net, the effect will be minimal.

* A modified form of no-touch icing, where the first player to cross the goal line - not to touch the puck - will dictate whether icing is called. In other words, if the defensive player gets to the goal line first, icing will be called. If the offensive player gets to the goal line first, no icing will be called. Also, when icing is called, the team that iced the puck will not be permitted to change lines.

Oh brother. Just ****ing swallow the pill and go to no touch icing. And how about not allowing teams on the PK to not ice the puck while you're at it!

* Any player in the defensive zone that shoots the puck directly out of play will receive a two-minute minor for delay of game. In the past, only the goalie was penalized for shooting the puck out of play.

VERY NICE!

* Automatic fines to the coach and suspensions to the player for any fight with an instigator in the last five minutes of the game.

Yes... LESS fighting and LESS policing in the league. Smooth...

 

[Montrealer]

IT's a step forward without pissing on the fans who hate the idea of a skills competition deciding a hockey game.

Boy, is this getting old fast.

It doesn't piss on anyone except the dinosaurs that are absolutely incapable of accepting any idea that originated in the past decade and are not going to change their mind no matter what - even fifty years from now when shootouts are as much a part of a hockey game (in the event of a tie game) as icing, offsides, or not having a sixth skater (rover).

I swear I'm going to punch the first guy who complains about it in the mouth when I'm at a game. It's getting that frustrating hearing all the whining.

DO US A FAVOUR AND AT LEAST GIVE IT A CHANCE BEFORE PISSING ALL OVER IT.

Jeez.

 

[Mess]

First commitee members:

Players: Trevor Linden, Brendan Shanahan, Jarome Iginla and Rob Blake

GM's: Nashville's David Poile, Montreal's Bob Gainey, Edmonton's Kevin Lowe and Atlanta's Don Waddell

Philadelphia chairman Ed Snider will be the lone owner.

and we need add NHL GM's pissed at this event ..

Read the TSN story on that after the announcement of the committee..

Some GMs unhappy with NHL committee
TSN.ca Staff
7/2/2005 12:38:07 PM

It hasn't taken long for reaction to the NHL's newly-formed competition committee. And that reaction, from some NHL general managers, has been of the adverse variety.

A number of GMs told TSN said they're "frustrated" and even "angry" at effectively being replaced as the body that recommends rule changes to the NHL board of governors.

"A lot of guys (GMs) aren't happy at all," one GM told TSN. "In fact, they're furious. This competition committee could have been integrated with the GMs, but it looks like it's a replacement type of thing. It's going to be very interesting to see how this dynamic is going to work."

Others, however, are taking a wait and see approach.

"Let's give it a chance," said one GM not too perturbed at the changes. "But a lot (of GMs) aren't happy, that is for sure."

Some of the angry GMs have apparently let their feelings be known to the league, which as part of the new collective bargaining committee has established this competition committee, where there are as many players (four) as GMs on the nine member panel.

Full Story : http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=129421&hubName=nhl

 

[FLYLine27*]

I love the OT setup,

5 Minutes of 4 on 4
3 Minutes of 3 on 3
Shootout

I would think in 75% of the games a goal will be scored before reaching the shootout. Which is good news. That 3 on 3 is going to be great, 2 Forwards and a defensman on the ice. Forsberg,Jagr,Iginla players are completely going to dominate this, should provide some great highlights.

 

[Dave is a killer]

The p***yfication of the NHL has hit an all time high - not getting rid of the Instigator is the worst idea ever

 

[WC Handy*]

The p***yfication of the NHL has hit an all time high - not getting rid of the Instigator is the worst idea ever

Not only have the GM's who have set the rules for the last decade not agreed, but the newly formed rules committee with players doesn't agree. The instigator rule is nothing but a scape goat and the people who are in charge the rules realize this and have actually through this through. Why else would they be strengthening the instigator?

 

[Donny_Brook]

re:

When is someone going to mention the instigator rule.It has to go.Let's see some fights and some true heavy weights in the game.

 

[GSC2k2*]

When is someone going to mention the instigator rule.It has to go.Let's see some fights and some true heavy weights in the game.

Boring staged fights. Yippee.

 

[X0ssbar]

I have been mostly pro-owner through this mess but honestly what in the hell are the GM's crying about? I love this new competition committee and I love the fact that the NHL red tape has been significantly reduced and streamlined - now changes can actually occur more than once a decade.

The NHL wanted a partnership (a.k.a linkage/salary cap/new system) well a partnership goes much deeper than just dollar and cents. This committee is a first example of this and the GMs better get on board b/c this won't be the last aspect of the game that the players will and should have a say in -- i.e. marketing, merchandise, etc, etc.

 

[dolfanar]

Boy, is this getting old fast.

It doesn't piss on anyone except the dinosaurs that are absolutely incapable of accepting any idea that originated in the past decade and are not going to change their mind no matter what - even fifty years from now when shootouts are as much a part of a hockey game (in the event of a tie game) as icing, offsides, or not having a sixth skater (rover).

I swear I'm going to punch the first guy who complains about it in the mouth when I'm at a game. It's getting that frustrating hearing all the whining.

DO US A FAVOUR AND AT LEAST GIVE IT A CHANCE BEFORE PISSING ALL OVER IT.

Jeez.

I did. I have seen enough Shoot out hockey in the AHL. It's a dumb idea. It is the equivalent of a home run hitting contest deciding a baseball game, a dunking contest deciding a Basketball game or a field goal contest deciding a football game.

It's a dumb concept, always has been, and mainly appeals fair weather "fans" with 10 second attention spans unable to conceive the notion that hey! sometimes there doesn't HAVE TO BE A WINNER!

Shoot-outs will be gone in less than 5 years (when the novelty of the dime store gimmick wears off), but in the mean time we get another dumb era in hockey (like the OT loss era) to muck up the game.

"I swear I'm going to punch the first guy who complains about it in the mouth when I'm at a game. It's getting that frustrating hearing all the whining."

Like I said. Social geniuses like this are in support of the Shoot out... need I say more?

 

[Kritter471]

I was thinking about this last night (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong with the assumptions I'm making in here with regards to nationalities and playing styles).

So, six of the 9 members are Canadian born while the other three (I'd guess) are American (Snider, Poile and Waddell. I couldn't find their birthplace information online, but Poile and Waddell are involved in USA hockey and I just guessed on Snider). And of the guys I know of as players (Iginla, Linden, Shanahan, Blake, Lowe, Gainey), none strikes me as a real, wide-open type of game guy. The four current players are all known as power-forwards or defensemen, Gainey was the premier defensive specialist of his time and Lowe, for playing in the high-flying 80s, is more of the grinder types (from what I've seen, this is where I'm guessing).

So where are the guys who are really interested in the wide-open games? Some of the well-spoken, skilled Europeans or French Canadians, or guys in the vein of Sakic and Modano who's game revolves around speed and skill rather than excelling in the physical aspect of the sport (not saying players like Iginla don't have speed and skill, but his modus operendum is a power-forward rather than a so-called "skill forward")? If the real problems with the game stem from lack of scoring chances, wouldn't you want guys on the committee who play a real high-flying game? Where are the guys in the vein of the mid-1990s Jagr and Bure who can say what is good for their type of game?

 

[X0ssbar]

I did. I have seen enough Shoot out hockey in the AHL. It's a dumb idea. It is the equivalent of a home run hitting contest deciding a baseball game, a dunking contest deciding a Basketball game or a field goal contest deciding a football game.

It's a dumb concept, always has been, and mainly appeals fair weather "fans" with 10 second attention spans unable to conceive the notion that hey! sometimes there doesn't HAVE TO BE A WINNER!

Shoot-outs will be gone in less than 5 years (when the novelty of the dime store gimmick wears off), but in the mean time we get another dumb era in hockey (like the OT loss era) to muck up the game.

"I swear I'm going to punch the first guy who complains about it in the mouth when I'm at a game. It's getting that frustrating hearing all the whining."

Like I said. Social geniuses like this are in support of the Shoot out... need I say more?

Let me ask you this - what were the fans doing around you when the game went into a shootout - leaving?

Everytime I've seen a shootout the fans are not only staying but they are on their feet cheering and showing emotion. If shootouts are so terrible why such a positive reaction from the majority of the crowd - or are they all just "social geniuses"?

Montrealer is right - rule changes need to be given a chance to succeed. Rules can always be changed back if they don't produce the desired result.

 

[Hunter74]

I am all for getting rid of a abunch of GM's who are more interested in there job survival as opposed to making the overall game better. I dont want to bash Lou but i will use his situation as an example. You think a he is gonna be in favoure of a rule that limites his goaltender from handling the puck possible making teh team less usccefull and possibly ultimatly costing him his job? Or Riesborough you think he is gonna vote in a rule that makes the trap illigal which will hurt his teams on ice usccess and most likely lead to him being fired and possibly never getting a GM job again?

Point is the GM's have to much of a conflict of interest to make rule changes that could affect the way the game is played the effectiveness of there respective teams. Besides these GMs have had a over a decade to clean up the game but all they did was jerk around and let things get as bad as they have with only this year as the only year were they actually have made some media waves about making changes for the betterment of the game. Most likly b/c the Shanahan summit made some of those GM's realise they might lose some of there control over the game so they made a last ditch effort to try and show they know what there doing.

I am sure the 4 players on the panel are going to giving ideas that they get from teh entire PA and not just there own personal views. The same will be said about teh GM's now and this can only be a good thing for teh game. I think this competition committee is gonna be a really good thing for the NHL as long as Bettman and Goodenow can keep the overwhelming number of ignorant, arrogant dinasours who think they know everything about anything at bay.

Either way I am very very happy that some of the control over the game has been wrestled away form the GM's.

 

[Donny_Brook]

Boring staged fights. Yippee.

The hitting is fake too.So is the lockout.Like that new coke thing.

 

[GSC2k2*]

The hitting is fake too.So is the lockout.Like that new coke thing.

I repeat: BOOOORRRINNG!!!

Bring something new to the table, or else please go watch your NHL fight tapes and leave this thread alone.

 

[DW3]

So do all 30 GM's still vote on the recommendations put forth, or does the committee have total say on the new rules?

 

[FLYLine27*]

Boy, is this getting old fast.

It doesn't piss on anyone except the dinosaurs that are absolutely incapable of accepting any idea that originated in the past decade and are not going to change their mind no matter what - even fifty years from now when shootouts are as much a part of a hockey game (in the event of a tie game) as icing, offsides, or not having a sixth skater (rover).

I swear I'm going to punch the first guy who complains about it in the mouth when I'm at a game. It's getting that frustrating hearing all the whining.

DO US A FAVOUR AND AT LEAST GIVE IT A CHANCE BEFORE PISSING ALL OVER IT.

Jeez.

Most hockey fans DONT want the shootout, there was a poll on the boards and it was 60/40 in favor of not having a shootout. Ill put a lot of money that this will be a one year thing just like it was in SEL...when everyone realizes what a JOKE it is.

 

[Bill McNeal]

Most hockey fans DONT want the shootout, there was a poll on the boards and it was 60/40 in favor of not having a shootout. Ill put a lot of money that this will be a one year thing just like it was in SEL...when everyone realizes what a JOKE it is.

I wouldn't confuse this board with the general hockey fan. Most fans (of any sport) do not spend their time posting on a message board dedicated to it.

 

[PecaFan]

I love the OT setup,

5 Minutes of 4 on 4
3 Minutes of 3 on 3
Shootout

I would think in 75% of the games a goal will be scored before reaching the shootout. Which is good news. That 3 on 3 is going to be great, 2 Forwards and a defensman on the ice. Forsberg,Jagr,Iginla players are completely going to dominate this, should provide some great highlights.

I hate it. I think you're dead wrong on the amount of games that will be decided, as well. Remember, they've scrapped the guaranteed point. So teams will be playing very defensively in those first five minutes of 4 on 4, much more so than in the past. So automatically, you've got less games being decided.

Going to 3 on 3 is going to mean a full set of defensemen on the ice, with one forward. Essentially teams will throw their best 1 on 1 guy on the ice, and hope he can manage to dance his way through the 3 defenders. He'll be stripped of the puck, then the other lone forward will try his luck the other way.

Remember, give up a goal at any time, you lose, *ZERO* points. No way do teams (smart teams) go with two forwards, one D. Nope, we're guaranteed a *ton* of shootouts with this system. I'll bet we'll see teams routinely in the 20+ shootouts a year range.

 

[Strangelove]

If all of these changes are implemented, we should see the top 10 scorers approaching 2 points-per-game IMESHO (ever so).

I do like where they're talking about no point for the loser. I mean c'mon.... "We lost the game, but we got the point".

Pulease.

And the return of the tag-up offside was a long time coming.

Also, something had to be done about the ballooning goalies. Speaking of goalies, one of my pet peaves was always how they could play the puck but you couldn't hit them. So I like that change as well....

The rest of the proposed changes, well you can stick them in your sock mister!

You heard me.....

 

[blitzkriegs]

I was thinking about this last night (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong with the assumptions I'm making in here with regards to nationalities and playing styles).

So, six of the 9 members are Canadian born while the other three (I'd guess) are American (Snider, Poile and Waddell. I couldn't find their birthplace information online, but Poile and Waddell are involved in USA hockey and I just guessed on Snider). And of the guys I know of as players (Iginla, Linden, Shanahan, Blake, Lowe, Gainey), none strikes me as a real, wide-open type of game guy. The four current players are all known as power-forwards or defensemen, Gainey was the premier defensive specialist of his time and Lowe, for playing in the high-flying 80s, is more of the grinder types (from what I've seen, this is where I'm guessing).

So where are the guys who are really interested in the wide-open games? Some of the well-spoken, skilled Europeans or French Canadians, or guys in the vein of Sakic and Modano who's game revolves around speed and skill rather than excelling in the physical aspect of the sport (not saying players like Iginla don't have speed and skill, but his modus operendum is a power-forward rather than a so-called "skill forward")? If the real problems with the game stem from lack of scoring chances, wouldn't you want guys on the committee who play a real high-flying game? Where are the guys in the vein of the mid-1990s Jagr and Bure who can say what is good for their type of game?

Too good of question you ask. why? b/c no one is responding to it.

However, i think you have gone a little to far out of the box on this. The players you mentioned on the committee all played during the mid 90's (except Iginla) and the NHL was a wide open league at that point. If mario can remember, so can these guys.

 

[cecilnyr]

I to was looking at the list of the players on the committee and where are the European players? They represent 1/3 of the league and none of them have representation on this competition committee? What gives?

 

[X8oD]

Too good of question you ask. why? b/c no one is responding to it.

However, i think you have gone a little to far out of the box on this. The players you mentioned on the committee all played during the mid 90's (except Iginla) and the NHL was a wide open league at that point. If mario can remember, so can these guys.

Ask Shanahan what he thought of playing the Calgary Flames this past season. Hew as VERY vocal to "sources" here in Detroit about the clutching and grabbing. The guy goes into a shell if the clutching isnt called. Its why many here in Detroit wanted to see him traded or what not, becasue we mostly believe they will NEVER fix the clutching and grabbing effectively. So get players who can play thru it.

the ironic thing is, If they ever clamp down on that, Iginla may end up having a say in his own teams demise. As with out clutch and grab, Calgary doesnt make it out of the first round.

it will be interesting though. I dig the concept.

 

[Kritter471]

Too good of question you ask. why? b/c no one is responding to it.

However, i think you have gone a little to far out of the box on this. The players you mentioned on the committee all played during the mid 90's (except Iginla) and the NHL was a wide open league at that point. If mario can remember, so can these guys.

I don't doubt they remember, I'm just questioning the specific make-up of the competition committee, especially if they're looking to "open up the game."

If I was making it up, I'd want a "skill" forward, a power forward, a defenseman (ideally an offensive d-man in the vein of Zubov or Leetch) and a goalie. Each can speak to the unique effect each rule will have on his position (like, why are forwards deciding where goalie's can and can't handle the puck?). The GMs and owner slot are a little harder, but again, I'd look for variety of styles teams employ/how they played and want a conglomerate rather than the very similiar styles represented currently.

I'd also love to see representatives from Europe or who have experience with the European leagues. These leagues often employ rules variations (witness - two-line passes allowed in some leagues) that the NHL is considering, and having a first-hand account on the rules committee would be helpful.

 

[Cawz]

Boring staged fights. Yippee.

I dunno man. The last Flames game I went to, Oliwa fought someone in the opening minute (thats about as staged as you can get) and the crowd was as loud during that fight as they were for the rest of the game (the fight was an exceptionally long one).

So there was about 15000 fans that would loudly disagree with you.