Agreed on the no logo changes. Except maybe the original Mighty Ducks....no?No uniform or logo changes. Get it right the first time. You can’t manufacture iconic.
There will ALWAYS be a team in Quebec City.
Another team in the GTA.
Only wooden sticks.
No ads on the ice surface.
Schedule starts no later than Sept 15th of every year.
No licensing fees for equipment. Players and goalies wear whatever makes them feel safest and most comfortable.
Expose and prosecute Alan Eagleson.
Absolutely! The current Ducks logo is second worst to only the Blue Jackets.Agreed on the no logo changes. Except maybe the original Mighty Ducks....no?
I think gretzky to LA and Messier to NY still happens in that scenario. Cause really, even with revenue sharing, do you really think Pocklington's gonna help himself? Plus, the NHL would always see Gretzky to LA as the ideal scenariolooking back, being proactive about collective bargaining and revenue sharing before the scale of professional sports skyrocketed would probably solve everything
you don't destroy your momentum following the one-two punch of a gretzky/LA finals +messier/NY cup with a lockout
with cost certainty, kariya doesn't hold out and hockey makes sizeable leaps globally in nagano
you are never without a national TV deal, you never have to be on the outdoor life network, and nobody ever has to worry about revenue
you probably would preempt the mass exodus of star players from small markets, and maybe the panthers effect that turned into the DPE doesn't happen
on the other hand, without that mass exodus, maybe gretzky to LA and messier to new york never happen. maybe hartford doesn't swap out francis and samuelsson for the less established and i assume cheaper cullen and zalapski and there are no mario cups. as a fan, i'm happy with those outcomes, but they wouldn't be great for growth. on the other other hand, maybe no arizona, so yay?
The only problem with this is the winner gets to live...For a fantasy one: Alan Eagleson vs Don King to the death cage match with the "winner" thrown into a pit of starving wild dogs.
Some real vetting of potential owners, and not handing them out like candy to anyone with a facade of wealth, some connections, and a good line of bullshit.
For a fantasy one: Alan Eagleson vs Don King to the death cage match with the "winner" thrown into a pit of starving wild dogs.
I just sat on the glass for a game, if you think the NHL is soft you need to go watch. They are big and incredibly fast and strong.So basically turn hockey into a soft game, like today?
Making a Concussion protocol.And you have the gift of foresight (I should I say hindsight) knowing what will transpire the next 40+ years. List 3-5 changes that you would make to the game, whether it be a rule that affects game play, franchise/team play, international play or anything of that nature or a change in free agency/roster rules that you think would be needed, would have been better for the league or a rule that was changed that didn't deserve to be.
(FYI, I picked '79 because of the merger of the WHA and that 3 out of the 4 teams joining the league that year would eventually relocate).
This is where youre out of your mind. Pretty much the entire job description for Gary (and Ziegler before him) is to attract investors and people interested in ownership to the league. Anything less than a criminal record or not having the capital you claim to have is pretty much irrelevant when you need another minority ownership stake in the coyotes filled for the fifth timeOne of the keys for me would be getting rid of (the otherwise entertaining) Bruce McNall. That would mean (a) no Gretzky trade to Los Angeles and (b) no Gary Bettman.
But seriously, I think most of the things---good and bad---that have happened in the modern era are mostly unavoidable.
But I would like the NHL expansion to have stopped at max. 24 teams. Would be so much better hockey today if so, and no silly Arizona