Eleven Posted August 19, 2010 Report Posted August 19, 2010 Hi Eleven,... How's your summer going?... Good to hear from you... But you gotta admit, Lindy sucks. :D Hey bud, summer's fine; good to hear from you too; happy to discuss your last remark but not in this thread. then report the post, so that we may consider your complaint. Not going to bother. Someone could start a Coke vs. Pepsi thread, and Lindy or Darcy would be in there. (Plus, I'm not the Sabrespace police, Scott; your board is yours.) 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. This at least partially addressed the topic. So, which proposed rules are good? Bad? That's the topic of this thread, after all...
Stoner Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 Re: "whistle faceoffs": what about when the crowd is roaring and it's so hard to hear? Think Chicago, Montreal -- shouldn't be a problem in Buffalo. And what about the jerks who are going to start showing up with whistles? I'll leave this thread with one thought. Imagine that the best hockey players in the world show up on a frozen pond somewhere in northern Ontario. There are no coaches, no fans, no media, no refs. OK, a couple of guys volunteer to call the lines and ref. How goddamned good would that hockey game be to watch? Now, how does the NHL bring that game to all of us? That's the question.
SDS Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 Not going to bother. Someone could start a Coke vs. Pepsi thread, and Lindy or Darcy would be in there. (Plus, I'm not the Sabrespace police, Scott; your board is yours.) Not sure why you would adopt this attitude. There is entire reporting system built in to the software to handle issues in an efficient manner. You would rather me read every single post, every day and make a determination on each one? No thanks. I would rather posters take some level of ownership and help create the place that they want to interact in.
darksabre Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 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. Hockey is the greatest game. It doesn't need fixing.
Stoner Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 Hockey is the greatest game. It doesn't need fixing. I noticed that you didn't say NHL hockey is the greatest game.
Calvin Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 Re: "whistle faceoffs": what about when the crowd is roaring and it's so hard to hear? Think Chicago, Montreal -- shouldn't be a problem in Buffalo. And what about the jerks who are going to start showing up with whistles? I'll leave this thread with one thought. Imagine that the best hockey players in the world show up on a frozen pond somewhere in northern Ontario. There are no coaches, no fans, no media, no refs. OK, a couple of guys volunteer to call the lines and ref. How goddamned good would that hockey game be to watch? Now, how does the NHL bring that game to all of us? That's the question. I like that.. that's a good way to look at how the game needs to be played and what changes if any are required to get there. Of course, while Bettman's involved there is going to be another agenda as well.. what gives you the most advertising time, how to best use the boards for advertising, how to sell hockey to the 'don't know don't care' segment of the population etc etc..
MattPie Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 I'll leave this thread with one thought. Imagine that the best hockey players in the world show up on a frozen pond somewhere in northern Ontario. There are no coaches, no fans, no media, no refs. OK, a couple of guys volunteer to call the lines and ref. How goddamned good would that hockey game be to watch? I suspect it would look a lot like an All-star game. Half the posters here would just whine that no one is playing hard-nosed defence and no one was clearing out in front of the net.
SDS Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 I suspect it would look a lot like an All-star game. Half the posters here would just whine that no one is playing hard-nosed defence and no one was clearing out in front of the net. That's exactly what I said to myself... It's called "pickup" and the scores would be 12-9.
nobody Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 I like the all-star game. It's fun. It is fun. It is not real NHL hockey.
nobody Posted August 20, 2010 Report Posted August 20, 2010 Re: "whistle faceoffs": what about when the crowd is roaring and it's so hard to hear? Think Chicago, Montreal -- shouldn't be a problem in Buffalo. And what about the jerks who are going to start showing up with whistles? I'll leave this thread with one thought. Imagine that the best hockey players in the world show up on a frozen pond somewhere in northern Ontario. There are no coaches, no fans, no media, no refs. OK, a couple of guys volunteer to call the lines and ref. How goddamned good would that hockey game be to watch? Now, how does the NHL bring that game to all of us? That's the question. The NHL will have to bring us to that game since it is in Northern Ontario. ;) Would the NHL make more money if they went into the travel agency business?
beerme1 Posted August 21, 2010 Report Posted August 21, 2010 No touch icing should have been done ten years ago.
henysgol Posted August 23, 2010 Report Posted August 23, 2010 No touch icing is great. The OT stuff could be interesting. But do we really want to confuse the refs even more? It seems like every other year they have to learn something new.
johnnychemo Posted August 25, 2010 Report Posted August 25, 2010 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. Yes, I remember that too. If they really believe the long change is what boosted scoring in the 2nd period, then they should have the long changes in the 1st and 3rd periods, setting up the OT for the long change without the worry of the goalies hacking the ice as well as boost scoring in the 1st and 3rd periods. Or don't change at all and keep all 3 periods (+ OT) with the long change. It would screw up my season ticket seats, though! Much rather be in the shoot twice end! Some other thoughts - no change after offsides - interesting, I'd be open to it - 4v4 -- 3v3 -- 2v2 OT - really? that sounds like a bad joke to me - shallow nets - I like the idea of opening up the back of the net, but why not just move the net up 4", & move the blueline back 4". Now you've got the larger space behind the net, and a slightly larger offensive zone. -verification line - no effect on gameplay, but if it can increase the reliability of replay then go for it -shaded ice in front of player benches - seems like it should have been the rule years ago in retrospect -no icing while shorthanded - no way - tired players get injured more easily, and this change will create more tired players. Are a few more PP goals worth the potential injuries? -red mesh - seems reasonable in concept, but I don't think players at the NHL level have much trouble seeing the netting even if it is white. Besides, with the adverstisements on the boards, there isn't much white to blend into anymore delayed penalty rule change - (must clear zone before whistle) - I don't hate this one.... -thin top mesh - again no change to gameplay, but it has the potential to improve the reliability of replay, so I have no problem with it I find it interesting that the rationale for the faceoff changes are to "restore the fairness and integrity of the faceoff." However, I don't think they've accomplished it with these changes.
shrader Posted August 25, 2010 Report Posted August 25, 2010 -no icing while shorthanded - no way - tired players get injured more easily, and this change will create more tired players. Are a few more PP goals worth the potential injuries? The NCAA's putting it in play this year, so we'll see how that goes. The biggest worry I keep hearing is that it will lead to more whistles because teams will put the puck out of play instead of icing it, specifically, into the benches. We'll see how that one goes too.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.