Highlander23
Registered User
I feel that this formula could add some drama/fatigue and would be great to maintain rivalries on and off the ice.
what do you think ?
what do you think ?
Not to mention a lower quality of play for the paying patrons.Why do you want to add fatigue? That's a negative.
The NHLPA would (rightfully) throw a fit about a schedule like that.
Why do you want to add fatigue? That's a negative.
The NHLPA would (rightfully) throw a fit about a schedule like that.
I feel that this formula could add some drama/fatigue and would be great to maintain rivalries on and off the ice.
what do you think ?
Because we have it in the KHL and it is just complete BS. Watching fatigued teams playing worse hockey is not the show you want to sign up for, especially in the playoffs.I feel that this formula could add some drama/fatigue and would be great to maintain rivalries on and off the ice.
what do you think ?
Because we have it in the KHL and it is just complete BS. Watching fatigued teams playing worse hockey is not the show you want to sign up for, especially in the playoffs.
They've never had B2B home & road games.Why? they used to play btb in the POs. Were players just in better shape several years ago?
You don't really need them in the first rd, sine you start with 16 teams, but the second round could use some b2b games
They've never had B2B home & road games.
Read the thread title.I didn't say anything about B2B home & road games. It would have to be 2 home or 2 road games B2B
and injuries and ugly hockey?i guess i'm the only one who love some hustle/tired legs hockey