What would you do to increase offense?

[nfreeman]

This. It would be step closer to soccer on ice. You're making it more difficult to get in scoring position.

You guys enjoyed the games at the worlds because there were good players flying around out there and you're used to watching the Sabres.

Soccer on ice is a good description of the most recent Olympics. No thank you.

Your first sentence makes an excellent point. So much of the net is covered today. Look at the sick stats Buffalo goaltenders put up this season by allowing long shots and taking away the in close chances. Making changes that result in fewer long shot stops will change how defenses play.

And this is why I want to see form fitting Kevlar for the goalies with much smaller gloves as well. I just can't believe that we can't have adequate protection with much

less bulk.

[JJFIVEOH]

How about increasing rink size? 

[thewookie1]

How about increasing rink size? 

 

Way too expensive to be feasible, few to no stadiums are capable of making the switch.

[MattPie]

Soccer on ice is a good description of the most recent Olympics. No thank you.

And this is why I want to see form fitting Kevlar for the goalies with much smaller gloves as well. I just can't believe that we can't have adequate protection with much

less bulk.

 

You keep saying "kevlar" but I don't think that word means what you think it means. :) Kevlar, as I understand it, is a fabric that is extremely resistant to tearing, abrasion, or puncture. You see it mostly used in bullet-proof (or rather, resistant) garments, gloves for handling sharp things, and a lot of motorcycle applications (gloves, jackets, pants, etc.). IT doesn't protect against impact at all. I have some kevlar stuff in my bike gear, and it feels like somewhat-heavy cotton. Now if you want to talk carbon fiber, that might be more to what you're thinking (light and stiff). The problem there is CF tends to crack or shatter when it's repeatedly hit. CF is fiberglass, but using carbon-weave fabric instead of glass-weave so it's a lot lighter.

[nfreeman]

You keep saying "kevlar" but I don't think that word means what you think it means. :) Kevlar, as I understand it, is a fabric that is extremely resistant to tearing, abrasion, or puncture. You see it mostly used in bullet-proof (or rather, resistant) garments, gloves for handling sharp things, and a lot of motorcycle applications (gloves, jackets, pants, etc.). IT doesn't protect against impact at all. I have some kevlar stuff in my bike gear, and it feels like somewhat-heavy cotton. Now if you want to talk carbon fiber, that might be more to what you're thinking (light and stiff). The problem there is CF tends to crack or shatter when it's repeatedly hit. CF is fiberglass, but using carbon-weave fabric instead of glass-weave so it's a lot lighter.

 

Well, you might have me there.  I suppose I mean "body armor" and not "kevlar" and that I am assuming there is a product that would work.

[MattPie]

Well, you might have me there.  I suppose I mean "body armor" and not "kevlar" and that I am assuming there is a product that would work.

 :)

 

Kevlar vests are essentially, "in the event you get shot, it won't kill you; but we don't recommend it". This would imply that getting hit with a hockey puck (at a very improbabe 120MPH) is the same energy as being shot with a .380 pistol. That's a bit high, but .22LR is probably a more sensible number.

http://wredlich.com/ny/2013/01/projectiles-muzzle-energy-stopping-power/

[North Buffalo]

Rink size is an interesting idea but probably a long term solution say 20 plus years as arenas are upgraded. Not sure net size is bad but it doesnt meet the eye test of tradition, pad size and better enforcing of obstruction type penalties are critical.

Edited May 18, 2015 by North Buffalo

[carpandean]

I am and always have been for changing the rules for offsides.  Crossing the blue line is the biggest interruption to flow, whether it's an actual offsides or just slowing up to avoid going offsides.  It's depressing how many good rushes get negated.

 

My long-time suggestion has been 3 or 4 foot wide blue lines (qwksndmonster also mentioned this ... well, 10 ft wide) and changing the rule to "no player make cross the offensive-zone edge of the blue line until the puck crosses the neutral-zone edge."  However, I could imagine many others.  You could get silly and try a soccer-like "a player may be in the zone, but cannot be behind the last defender when the puck crosses the blue line on a entry."  Others have mentioned some:

 

Offsides is nullified if the opposing team possessed the puck in the neutral zone.

Offsides is nullified if there is a defender in position in their defensive zone.

How about a rule that says one offensive player can be offside when the puck crosses the blue line? Lots of rushes are stifled because of this. Maybe say they can be no deeper than the top of the circle.

Or maybe they are allowed to enter the zone once the puck crosses the red line.

Eliminate offside completely

Get rid of icing and offsides and goto an indoor soccer 3 line rule (can't pass across 3 lines). It would open up the ice more. Players could get behind the defense for a "long ball" strategy.

[Drunkard]

After thinking about it more they should just eliminate offsides altogether. Who really cares if a player/team wants to cherry pick other than whatever purists who are out there who will likely piss and moan about any changes anyway? Let them go ahead and do it and if their team isn't able to gain possession of the puck it will be like they are playing short handed. It would lead to all sorts of breakaways and scoring changes and a good chunk of the play stoppages would go the way of the dodo. Faster paced game, increased tempo, and way more scoring chances.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Drunkard

[shrader]

Goaltenders are larger than ever, though. The nets were made at a time when smaller men played goalie. I think it's a natural evolution to increase the nets now.

 

The rinks themselves have gotten bigger over those years.  Prior to the modern arena boom in the 90s they were practically like ball parks, with each building having its own dimensions.  That's a big counter to anyone who says they shouldn't change something because that's the way it has always been.  That and so many other things have changed over the years.

 

Net size really is the most obvious thing to discuss in this topic.  It is a change that is not going to have any effect on the visuals of watching a hockey game.  Most won't be able to identify any difference in the net when watching a game.  The game will still be played the same exact way, as opposed to any modified rules being suggested.  I do think there are some good rules floating around out there, but ultimately coaches will figure them out, they always do.

[qwksndmonster]

The rinks themselves have gotten bigger over those years.  Prior to the modern arena boom in the 90s they were practically like ball parks, with each building having its own dimensions.  That's a big counter to anyone who says they shouldn't change something because that's the way it has always been.  That and so many other things have changed over the years.

 

Net size really is the most obvious thing to discuss in this topic.  It is a change that is not going to have any effect on the visuals of watching a hockey game.  Most won't be able to identify any difference in the net when watching a game.  The game will still be played the same exact way, as opposed to any modified rules being suggested.  I do think there are some good rules floating around out there, but ultimately coaches will figure them out, they always do.

Not true.  If they make the net bigger, Enroth's head will be even with the crossbar instead of his chest.

[MattPie]

Not true.  If they make the net bigger, Enroth's head will be even with the crossbar instead of his chest.

 

Enroth participated in a test game:

[Hoss]

Allow headbutting the puck in the net

[qwksndmonster]

Allow headbutting the puck in the net

So many goals disallowed because of this stupid rule.  When will the NHL learn?

[Stoner]

Wouldn't make a huge difference but... more penalty shots!

 

You could tweak the criteria. Also put the hammer down on the refs to consistently call them.

[TrueBlueGED]

Enroth participated in a test game:

Awesome :clapping:

[Claude_Verret]

https://www.google.com/patents/US7235025

[Hoss]

So many goals disallowed because of this stupid rule. When will the NHL learn?

There would've been 20% more goals at a certain point in last night's game if they allowed it.

[qwksndmonster]

There would've been 20% more goals at a certain point in last night's game if they allowed it.

I loved Shaw's compete during the celebration.  He wasn't going to let the fact that the goal might not have counted get in the way of flipping out and hugging his bros.

[nfreeman]

So -- Tampa led the NHL in scoring this year.  In their 4 finals losses, they scored 1, 1, 1 and 0 goals.  Shots on goal by TB in 3 of those losses:  22, 23 and 25.

 

There is a real problem here.

[LGR4GM]

So -- Tampa led the NHL in scoring this year.  In their 4 finals losses, they scored 1, 1, 1 and 0 goals.  Shots on goal by TB in 3 of those losses:  22, 23 and 25.

 

There is a real problem here.

There was so much interference occurring in the finals it made Tampa's game largely ineffective. 

[BetweenThePipes00]

 I do think there are some good rules floating around out there, but ultimately coaches will figure them out, they always do.

 

 

Sorry to grab a random line from weeks ago as a jumping off point, but I think this is the more interesting part of the discussion ... I totally agree goalies have gotten too big and too good for the size of the nets ... if goalies shrink or the nets grow scoring may rise a little but if it's just more random goals going in off guys' elbows and rear ends, the game is really no better. 

 

Are there any changes that can actually make the game less congested? I saw Scotty Bowman quoted last week and he pointed this out, the coaches always adjust. Here is the link - http://www.theprovince.com/sports/Gallagher+Scotty+Bowman+knows+teams+score+today/11122774/story.html... I found it interesting that moving the blue lines out and making the o-zone bigger has ended up clogging prime scoring areas more, which was the opposite of the intent. Question is, now that coaches have seen how effective packing 5 guys in and blocking shots can be, would things evolve back the other way if the moved the blue lines back? Or is the toothpaste out of the tube forever? If it does loosen up the zone and defending forwards are out by the points more, will we see the return of the breakaway pass? Even with the two-line pass we used to see lots of those ... Also made me think, has the no-change icing rule also backfired ... by that I mean, have the high-risk breakaway passes been coached out of the game out of fear of an icing call if it misses? 

Would love hear from people on here who have coached or played ... I know just enough to be dangerous, I am really curious ...

Edited June 16, 2015 by BetweenThePipes00

[rickshaw]

I wonder how many goalies would realize a net had been widened by an inch or two, if the league just did it when they were all in bed sleeping?

Seriously. Over the summer, the nets were widened by an inch on each side (2 inches for math challenged lol) and repaint the ice and then see how many knew? 

[darksabre]

There was so much interference occurring in the finals it made Tampa's game largely ineffective.

I disagree. Losing Tyler Johnson is what killed them.

[nfreeman]

I disagree. Losing Tyler Johnson is what killed them.

 

But the highest-scoring team in the NHL shouldn't be completely silenced by losing one guy.