Experimenting with Rules Changes

[wjag]

Haven't seen this discussed lately.

 

From NHL.com Research Development Camps.

 

I like the no touch icing, wider blue lines, 2 on 2 OT, yellow line, red net, shaded ice near boxes, center face off dot, and REQUIRING team to clear the zone on delayed penalty. That last one would significantly alter the game.

 

Not a fan of any of the faceoff proposals.

[Calvin]

Haven't seen this discussed lately.

 

From NHL.com Research Development Camps.

 

I like the no touch icing, wider blue lines, 2 on 2 OT, yellow line, red net, shaded ice near boxes, center face off dot, and REQUIRING team to clear the zone on delayed penalty. That last one would significantly alter the game.

 

Not a fan of any of the faceoff proposals.

Thanks for the link.. there's lots of interesting ones there

 

I like the OT ones with reducing the numbers of players, with the added one of changing ends to create the long change.

 

You're right, the faceoff ideas suck.

[SwampD]

As a fan of the Sabres, there is now way I want to see wider blue lines. We have enough trouble getting the puck out of our zone as it is.

[Stoner]

I'll admit to not reading all of that, but what I read had me laughing. Yellow snow, refs on platforms, placing the puck on the ice for a faceoff and everyone looking at it like it's a turd. Some of the ideas are just dumb. Allowing a linesman to determine who's "going to" win a race for a puck on an icing? Great.

 

I hear Roby. Leave this game alone, he's roaring. There's just too much tinkering.

 

What this games needs is to ban defensive monstrosities like Lindy Ruff. Bring this game back to offense and excitement and greatness. "More goals" is the idea. Why don't the owners get together and agree to hire offensive minded coaches? The league should fine every team that doesn't reach a minimum number of goals and give that money to the teams that score above a certain level.

[carpandean]

I've advocated for a winder blue line for a while, but with one other change: a player would be deemed offsides if he is completely across the blue line before the puck enters the blue line, rather than crosses it. Basically, it would give the rushing players a 24" buffer to be slightly ahead or if the player carrying the puck has to make a quick move around a defenseman. The intent would be to reduce the number of offsides and increase the speed of rushes. I should point out that I was suggesting extending it into, rather than away from, the defensive zone, so clearing the zone would not change.

 

The league should fine every team that doesn't reach a minimum number of goals and give that money to the teams that score above a certain level.

Well, then Lindy Ruff's team would likely have received a check last year, as they were in the top-third of the league. The teams paying last year would have been Boston, Calgary, Florida, Edmonton, Montreal, Toronto, ...

[wjag]

I'll admit to not reading all of that, but what I read had me laughing. Yellow snow, refs on platforms, placing the puck on the ice for a faceoff and everyone looking at it like it's a turd. Some of the ideas are just dumb. Allowing a linesman to determine who's "going to" win a race for a puck on an icing? Great.

 

I hear Roby. Leave this game alone, he's roaring. There's just too much tinkering.

 

What this games needs is to ban defensive monstrosities like Lindy Ruff.

 

I'll admit to not reading all of that as soon as I saw this was another Lindy Ruff rant..

[shrader]

-The OT thing is too gimmicky. Just extend the 4-on-4 play and call it a day (after scrapping the shootout of course).

 

-I'd like placing the puck on the faceoff dot, but only in the league I play in. Monday night the ref "dropped" a faceoff that went directly towards the other team's pointman. It didn't just bounce that way either. He actually threw it diagonally behind their center, then it bounced. NHL refs know how to drop a puck, beer league refs don't.

 

-I've been saying it for a while, but I'd take the no line changes thing a bit further. Don't allow a line change after any rules violation. Icing, offside, hand pass, penalties... anything. Imagine the scenario where a defenseman takes a penalty and then his team would be forced to deal with a faceoff in their own zone with 3 forwards and 1 defenseman on the ice. That would make things interesting.

 

-That verification line for determining goals on review is interesting, but it still ignores the problem with the angle of overhead cameras. The only ultimate fix that that problem will be figuring out a way to mount cameras within the cross bar (and then probably on inside each of the posts as well). The technology has to be out there, but I'm sure they'll always be worried about that messing with the integrity of the posts themselves.

 

-The three central faceoff dots is dumb. That basically eliminates the effectiveness of the onetimer after a quick win on the draw. That shot would now have to go through a ton of traffic to get to the net and wouldn't make it through most of the time.

[nobody]

placing the puck on the ice for a faceoff

 

 

Then you make the players taking the faceoff tap their sticks 3 times right?

[mercury]

I'll admit to not reading all of that as soon as I saw this was another Lindy Ruff rant..

 

Indeed.

 

Then you make the players taking the faceoff tap their sticks 3 times right?

 

Indeed!

[Stoner]

I've advocated for a winder blue line for a while, but with one other change: a player would be deemed offsides if he is completely across the blue line before the puck enters the blue line, rather than crosses it. Basically, it would give the rushing players a 24" buffer to be slightly ahead or if the player carrying the puck has to make a quick move around a defenseman. The intent would be to reduce the number of offsides and increase the speed of rushes. I should point out that I was suggesting extending it into, rather than away from, the defensive zone, so clearing the zone would not change.

 

 

Well, then Lindy Ruff's team would likely have received a check last year, as they were in the top-third of the league. The teams paying last year would have been Boston, Calgary, Florida, Edmonton, Montreal, Toronto, ...

 

Did I say anything about top third? Anyway, let's look at Lindy's overall record on the offensive side, especially power plays, before anointing him the next Herman R. Mureau.

[Stoner]

I'll admit to not reading all of that as soon as I saw this was another Lindy Ruff rant..

 

But I made you read most of it -- and I am sure you read all of it, and wanted more.

[bob_sauve28]

 

-I'd like placing the puck on the faceoff dot, but only in the league I play in. Monday night the ref "dropped" a faceoff that went directly towards the other team's pointman. It didn't just bounce that way either. He actually threw it diagonally behind their center, then it bounced. NHL refs know how to drop a puck, beer league refs don't.

 

-

I played a turnament where the refs just got right to the circle and with no pause dropped the puck. I was use to having about two seconds to set my feet and stick and had no idea that I prepared so much for the draw.

[gregkash]

I hate most of these changes. 2 on 2 ot? screw that. What is this street hockey?

[Sabre Dance]

Some of these are really dumb. Red nets? So instead of blending in with the boards, they blend in with the goal posts/crossbar? Why not chartreuse nets? What's wrong with the blue lines the way they are? And it should be no-touch icing or nothing... The rule about blowing a whistle and having a faceoff if the goalie is interfered with? There is a goalie interference penalty already on the books - just enforce it! (Full disclosure - I'm biased 'cause I used to play goal). Yeesh! :blink:

[wjag]

But I made you read most of it -- and I am sure you read all of it, and wanted more.

 

yep.. like a moth to a bug zapper..

[shrader]

What's wrong with the blue lines the way they are?

 

It's an old idea and they tested it in the AHL a little while back. By expanding the blueline into the neutral zone, the offensive zone becomes bigger, giving a team more room to work with. It would probably mean the most on a powerplay. It's worth looking into. They screwed up when they did it in the AHL though because they expanded the lines the wrong way, into the defensive zone instead. That made the neutral zone bigger. I'm not sure what the idea was there.

[wjag]

I hate most of these changes. 2 on 2 ot? screw that. What is this street hockey?

 

I'd rather see games end in OT by any means that avoids the SO. Heck, I'd rather watch goalie shooting on goalie than watch TV or anyone else in the SO. It's bad in soccer and it's bad in hockey.

[Stoner]

Less regulation. More creativity. Unleash the offensive talent. It's there.

 

Fire Lindy.

[carpandean]

Did I say anything about top third? Anyway, let's look at Lindy's overall record on the offensive side, especially power plays, before anointing him the next Herman R. Mureau.

My point was that your suggestion would not adversely affect Lindy Ruff unless you are having the bottom 70% pay the top 30%.

 

For the record, though, I would be very happy if they hired an assistant coach to run the PP.

[Eleven]

Less regulation. More creativity. Unleash the offensive talent. It's there.

 

Fire Lindy.

 

Yet another thread, intended for intelligent discussion (this time, about NHL rule changes) that you turned into a Lindy rant. Why the f*ck did I even bother to come back after vacation and look? This board is becoming useless with threadjacks.

 

TSN's article on what the NHL is considering, and what it is not, is here

 

The icing idea is interesting.

 

The OT idea would be a return to the past; IIRC, the reason they STOPPED switching ends is because goalies would hack up the ice in front of their nets, knowing that a five-minute OT (with no resurfacing) was coming--thereby trying to thwart the opposing goalie who would soon occupy the same crease.

[SwampD]

Yet another thread, intended for intelligent discussion (this time, about NHL rule changes) that you turned into a Lindy rant. Why the f*ck did I even bother to come back after vacation and look? This board is becoming useless with threadjacks.

 

TSN's article on what the NHL is considering, and what it is not, is here

 

The icing idea is interesting.

 

The OT idea would be a return to the past; IIRC, the reason they STOPPED switching ends is because goalies would hack up the ice in front of their nets, knowing that a five-minute OT (with no resurfacing) was coming--thereby trying to thwart the opposing goalie who would soon occupy the same crease.

Hi Eleven,...

 

 

 

 

 

 

How's your summer going?...

 

 

 

 

 

Good to hear from you...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But you gotta admit, Lindy sucks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

:D

[Stoner]

Yet another thread, intended for intelligent discussion (this time, about NHL rule changes) that you turned into a Lindy rant. Why the f*ck did I even bother to come back after vacation and look? This board is becoming useless with threadjacks.

 

TSN's article on what the NHL is considering, and what it is not, is here

 

The icing idea is interesting.

 

The OT idea would be a return to the past; IIRC, the reason they STOPPED switching ends is because goalies would hack up the ice in front of their nets, knowing that a five-minute OT (with no resurfacing) was coming--thereby trying to thwart the opposing goalie who would soon occupy the same crease.

 

How the game is coached has everything to do with proposed rule changes. The rule changes, most of them, have something to do with game's desperate need for more goals, more excitement. Coaches like Lindy, defensive-minded coaches who would just as soon trap and clog and block and score UGLY goals (his words) and win 2-1 behind The Dominator or MillerTime, work directly against what the league appears to want. I say appears to want because it's the league, the owners, who hires these dinosaurs.

 

Listen, you're not going to shut me up. Maybe it bothers you that some guy with Internet access in a double wide in Bradford, Pee Ay, dares to challenge the thoughts of a lawyer in some big old fancy bildin' in downtown Buffalo, prolly a-wearin' shoes an with most of his teeth, goldarnit. I don't know. My rants may be getting old to those who cannot fathom the idea of replacing the coach after 13 mostly unproductive, unentertaining years. Your whining is getting even older.

 

Hope you had a nice vacation.

[SDS]

This board is becoming useless with threadjacks.

 

then report the post, so that we may consider your complaint.

[Stoner]

Sometimes life is good. I turned on the NHL Network propaganda show on the rule development camp, and league big wig Brendan Shanahan (when did this happen?) said overriding theme behind the idea of considering these rules is to take control away from the coaches, tie their hands behind their backs and prevent them from setting the pace of the games.

 

A league of owners has to save themselves from... themselves?! Just fire all the bastards, including Lindy, and put coaches (and GMs) in place who share your vision of the game.

 

IT CAN BE A GREAT GAME AGAIN.

 

Ken Hitchcock coached one side in the scrimmage, BTW.

[SwampD]

How the game is coached has everything to do with proposed rule changes. The rule changes, most of them, have something to do with game's desperate need for more goals, more excitement. Coaches like Lindy, defensive-minded coaches who would just as soon trap and clog and block and score UGLY goals (his words) and win 2-1 behind The Dominator or MillerTime, work directly against what the league appears to want. I say appears to want because it's the league, the owners, who hires these dinosaurs.

 

The only problem with this is that this is not what the league wants. They had this very thing in '05-'07 and chose to change it. In fact, they changed back during the playoffs those very years. They don't need more rules to make the game better, just call the rules they already have. If they did, I'm betting that Kennedy would still be on the team and Recchi would have been called for interference.

 

Sometimes life is good. I turned on the NHL Network propaganda show on the rule development camp, and league big wig Brendan Shanahan (when did this happen?) said overriding theme behind the idea of considering these rules is to take control away from the coaches, tie their hands behind their backs and prevent them from setting the pace of the games.

 

A league of owners has to save themselves from... themselves?! Just fire all the bastards, including Lindy, and put coaches (and GMs) in place who share your vision of the game.

 

IT CAN BE A GREAT GAME AGAIN.

 

Ken Hitchcock coached one side in the scrimmage, BTW.

Did you mention Ken Hitchcock because he was one of the coaches that coached the very style you are complaining about and was responsible for one of the most God awful SCFs to watch in 2000.