Question for this upcoming season...

[Goodfella25]

I like goals and fancy passes and all that, but I remember when I first started watching hockey it was because of the physical aspect of the game. It was the early 90s and there was still a great deal of toughness in the game. Players had to pay the price for a dirty hit and take a beating to stand in front of the net. The open ice body check, which is now almost an extinct art, was common back then, as were a couple good scraps each and every game. Well folks, although I am glad this new NHL favors teams like Buffalo who are built for finesse and speed, I am angry that we are subject to such a watered-down version of hockey.

 

There are hardly any good hits anymore, the role of the enforcer (which is always a hot topic of debate among fans) has virtually been eliminated, and lets be honest...the overall intensity just isn't there some nights...at least it wasn't last season. Plus it seems like every little thing is a penalty, and there is no accountability for cheap shots (third man in and instigator rule are partially to blame). I'm not looking to have fight night on ice each game, but a couple scraps a game and more hits would suit me just fine.

 

So my question to you is do you think this second post-lockout year will spawn more intensity/rivaries/physical play than we saw in the first post-lockout year? Do most of you miss this aspect of the game or are you content with the just the increased scoring?

[Bmwolf21]

You've been spending some time on the FlyersFans.com message boards, haven't you?

 

Seriously, I think the enforcer needs to be a part of the game somewhat, as the tightening of penalties hasn't stopped the cheap shots, and there is no accountability for your actions, except maybe a 2-game vacation. When there is no accountability, you get a lot of visor-wearing wannabe tough guys hitting guys from behind with no fear of retribution.

 

Personally, I'd start by repealing the fighting insitgator penalty, but the other problem is enforcers who can also take a regular shift in today's NHL are few and far between, so coaches need to decide whether to sit someone who might be critical to their team's success (maybe a Paille or Vanek this year) in favor of a Peters, who might see the ice for 2 minutes tops.

[jerryg]

I like goals and fancy passes and all that, but I remember when I first started watching hockey it was because of the physical aspect of the game. It was the early 90s and there was still a great deal of toughness in the game. Players had to pay the price for a dirty hit and take a beating to stand in front of the net. The open ice body check, which is now almost an extinct art, was common back then, as were a couple good scraps each and every game. Well folks, although I am glad this new NHL favors teams like Buffalo who are built for finesse and speed, I am angry that we are subject to such a watered-down version of hockey.

 

There are hardly any good hits anymore, the role of the enforcer (which is always a hot topic of debate among fans) has virtually been eliminated, and lets be honest...the overall intensity just isn't there some nights...at least it wasn't last season. Plus it seems like every little thing is a penalty, and there is no accountability for cheap shots (third man in and instigator rule are partially to blame). I'm not looking to have fight night on ice each game, but a couple scraps a game and more hits would suit me just fine.

 

So my question to you is do you think this second post-lockout year will spawn more intensity/rivaries/physical play than we saw in the first post-lockout year? Do most of you miss this aspect of the game or are you content with the just the increased scoring?

 

 

Huh??? The overall intensity isn't there? Like it was in the good old days watching two teams play the trap all night? No Hitting? Ask Umberger and Tim Connolly about open ice hits. If you said the checking wasn't as good as in the 70's...or the 50's I'd agree, but the style of hockey played in the 90's was not very good. I don't recall " a couple good scraps" in every game in that era either. Are you sure you'e talking about the 90's or the 70's???

[PTS]

I seen more clean hits this year than in the last decade. If by physical play you mean clutching and grabbing, then NO, you won't see it again.

[Goodfella25]

Huh??? The overall intensity isn't there? Like it was in the good old days watching two teams play the trap all night? No Hitting? Ask Umberger and Tim Connolly about open ice hits. If you said the checking wasn't as good as in the 70's...or the 50's I'd agree, but the style of hockey played in the 90's was not very good. I don't recall " a couple good scraps" in every game in that era either. Are you sure you'e talking about the 90's or the 70's???

 

 

My post says early 90s as I was describing my initial reasons for getting into hockey. At no point did I say mid 90s or late 90s, because yea that was awful hockey dominated by teams like New Jersey who were hell bent on winning 1-0 every night. As far as the hits you mentioned, you are fueling my point because you can actually pinpoint 2 open ice hits...because thats how few there are in today's game. Plus those were the playoffs, not the regular season, so there is obviously going to be a heightened amount of intensity in those games, which was not the point of my original post because we're not talking about playoffs where that is expected.

 

As far as the clutching and grabbing, how do you take my post about physical play and hitting and translate that into "clutching and grabbing?" I'm just curious as to the logic there, or lack of.

[Quickdraw]

What was the name of that hockey game for the Nintendo or the Sega where if you got in a fight, the loser ended up going to the penalty box? The NHL needs to introduce that as a rule.

[hopeleslyobvious]

I like goals and fancy passes and all that, but I remember when I first started watching hockey it was because of the physical aspect of the game. It was the early 90s and there was still a great deal of toughness in the game. Players had to pay the price for a dirty hit and take a beating to stand in front of the net. The open ice body check, which is now almost an extinct art, was common back then, as were a couple good scraps each and every game. Well folks, although I am glad this new NHL favors teams like Buffalo who are built for finesse and speed, I am angry that we are subject to such a watered-down version of hockey.

 

There are hardly any good hits anymore, the role of the enforcer (which is always a hot topic of debate among fans) has virtually been eliminated, and lets be honest...the overall intensity just isn't there some nights...at least it wasn't last season. Plus it seems like every little thing is a penalty, and there is no accountability for cheap shots (third man in and instigator rule are partially to blame). I'm not looking to have fight night on ice each game, but a couple scraps a game and more hits would suit me just fine.

 

So my question to you is do you think this second post-lockout year will spawn more intensity/rivaries/physical play than we saw in the first post-lockout year? Do most of you miss this aspect of the game or are you content with the just the increased scoring?

 

The reason hitting was down IMHO is not because the league frowns on hitting, but pre-lockout days, if you lined a guy up for a hit and missed, you could just clutch and grab him to tie him up. Maybe that makes hits less frequent, but I would rather see less hitting, then teams get obstructed up and down the ice.

[Goodfella25]

What was the name of that hockey game for the Nintendo or the Sega where if you got in a fight, the loser ended up going to the penalty box? The NHL needs to introduce that as a rule.

 

 

Blades of Steel.....fantastic