I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Being a Blackhawks fan I am supposed to hate the Blues. I certainly don't like them, but I was a big fan of Brett Hull growing up and I dislike Dallas more. So, I'm pleased that the Blues have eliminated them but that is the last I root for St. Louis. I will say their fans deserve the thrill & spoils of seeing their team lift the Cup, though.
I liked Hull, but God did I love Al Macinnis. He had that 100 mph slapper from the point, that came off like a ton of bricks. Dude had to back off of it for fear of hurting people. How many players have ever done that??
I remember playing NHL '94 on SNES. You could never shut out Calgary because he'd ALWAYS end up with a one-timer. Never failed.
Ha, it's like a glitch in Double Dribble down in the corner with teh Lakers. You couldn't miss. Here's something I didn't know about Al..
In 1999, he injured teammate and goalie Rich Parent during warmups, breaking his protective cup and rupturing a testicle.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I hate this more than any other replay issue in sports. If you over slide a bag by a foot, okay. But the natural body movement when you hit a bag is stupid. I don't mind baseball replay for fair pole home runs, out at first, and the like, but this one gets me.
What did you guys think of the replay call on the goaltenders interference last night (was that last night?). To me, that was interference that should have been called, and it was missed. I don't mind that. The player elbowed the goalie in the end, and pushed him out of the crease. It should have been no goal AND a penalty.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I hate this more than any other replay issue in sports. If you over slide a bag by a foot, okay. But the natural body movement when you hit a bag is stupid. I don't mind baseball replay for fair pole home runs, out at first, and the like, but this one gets me.
What did you guys think of the replay call on the goaltenders interference last night (was that last night?). To me, that was interference that should have been called, and it was missed. I don't mind that. The player elbowed the goalie in the end, and pushed him out of the crease. It should have been no goal AND a penalty.
agree 100% with you and Dyer. I like to say that type of call is against the spirit of the rule. It's not why replay was put into the game. Replay was put in to atone for obvious or egregiously missed calls. not a quarter of an inch off the base, etc.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I hate this more than any other replay issue in sports. If you over slide a bag by a foot, okay. But the natural body movement when you hit a bag is stupid. I don't mind baseball replay for fair pole home runs, out at first, and the like, but this one gets me.
What did you guys think of the replay call on the goaltenders interference last night (was that last night?). To me, that was interference that should have been called, and it was missed. I don't mind that. The player elbowed the goalie in the end, and pushed him out of the crease. It should have been no goal AND a penalty.
It was not last night? All 3 goals were legit last night.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I hate this more than any other replay issue in sports. If you over slide a bag by a foot, okay. But the natural body movement when you hit a bag is stupid. I don't mind baseball replay for fair pole home runs, out at first, and the like, but this one gets me.
What did you guys think of the replay call on the goaltenders interference last night (was that last night?). To me, that was interference that should have been called, and it was missed. I don't mind that. The player elbowed the goalie in the end, and pushed him out of the crease. It should have been no goal AND a penalty.
It was not last night? All 3 goals were legit last night.
I believe he means the Boston-CBJ game 6 call. Boston's over turned goal in the 1st period.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
Yes, I do agree that they would need to do some trials. I do think with the focus being youth and speed, young stars like McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, McKinnon, Dahlin, Marner, etc could really shine. I sometimes watch old games, and the smaller players, smaller goalies, with 1 ref... plus, an overall slower speed, there just seems to be so much space. You can really distinguish the good players from the others.
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I hate this more than any other replay issue in sports. If you over slide a bag by a foot, okay. But the natural body movement when you hit a bag is stupid. I don't mind baseball replay for fair pole home runs, out at first, and the like, but this one gets me.
What did you guys think of the replay call on the goaltenders interference last night (was that last night?). To me, that was interference that should have been called, and it was missed. I don't mind that. The player elbowed the goalie in the end, and pushed him out of the crease. It should have been no goal AND a penalty.
It was not last night? All 3 goals were legit last night.
Was it the Bruins game? Geez, I've watched so much hockey, it's blending together. Don't you remember, the forward came around and knocked the goalie out of the crease and then pushed him out further with a forearm to the back of the head. Immediately the puck came out a few feet same side, and the other forward shot it in. The goalie never had a chance to get back in position. I think it was Bobrovski now that I'm thinking about. Actually I'm sure it was because Torts did the challenge.
I am no basketball fan...but in no way can you ever convince me that basketball playoffs compare to the NHL playoffs...what did philly lose by in game 5...30 points or so...lol, how but that great competitive...bucks v Celtics...LMFAO if people think basketball is better than hockey.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
Video replay is ruining sports. Taking away a goal because someone's skate was half a pinky toenail length across the line - something that one could only even determine by stopping the video frame by frame - is not what replay is designed for. It's the same in baseball when a runner's hand or foot lifts off the bag half a centimeter while the tag is still applied; that is not an out and not what replay is designed for. Or in football when the tip of cleat is on the sideline and they call it out of bands. None of that is why replay was instated. If you can't watch the video at full or I'll even give you half or quarter speed and make an obvious call one way or the other, the call on the ice/field should stand. It's funny how the TV announcers will shove it down your throat about how it has to be "clear and convincing evidence to overturn" then sit there and show you every fucking frame of video while the officials overturn the call based on microscopic measurements that the human eye could never possibly determine at full speed during a live moment.
I agree. it has gotten out of hand. The baseball one with losing contact with a base by a millimeter, (probably saving a broken ankle some of the time) makes me crazy. The talk of the NHL implementing 5 minute major reviews pisses me off. Let the ref make the call. If they get it wrong, and my team gets screwed, so be it.
All this reliance on technology is also making referees lax as they have this safety net.
The more reviews the longer the games will. Did not know the league was considering reviewing majors, does this include non-calls? Let the ref make the call every time, get rid of replay period...the game is played by humans, let humans officiate it and make all calls...
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
Yes, I do agree that they would need to do some trials. I do think with the focus being youth and speed, young stars like McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, McKinnon, Dahlin, Marner, etc could really shine. I sometimes watch old games, and the smaller players, smaller goalies, with 1 ref... plus, an overall slower speed, there just seems to be so much space. You can really distinguish the good players from the others.
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
A friend of mine said to me, and this was about 15- 20 years ago, that the Goalies have so much equipment that they look like the Michelin Man:
I am no basketball fan...but in no way can you ever convince me that basketball playoffs compare to the NHL playoffs...what did philly lose by in game 5...30 points or so...lol, how but that great competitive...bucks v Celtics...LMFAO if people think basketball is better than hockey.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
Yes, I do agree that they would need to do some trials. I do think with the focus being youth and speed, young stars like McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, McKinnon, Dahlin, Marner, etc could really shine. I sometimes watch old games, and the smaller players, smaller goalies, with 1 ref... plus, an overall slower speed, there just seems to be so much space. You can really distinguish the good players from the others.
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
A friend of mine said to me, and this was about 15- 20 years ago, that the Goalies have so much equipment that they look like the Michelin Man:
I am no basketball fan...but in no way can you ever convince me that basketball playoffs compare to the NHL playoffs...what did philly lose by in game 5...30 points or so...lol, how but that great competitive...bucks v Celtics...LMFAO if people think basketball is better than hockey.
It’s not even close in my opinion hockey rules ..
Jose...if things ever get so bad with Trump you can move to Canada...you'd be a great Canadian...you love weed and hockey...do you like beer? If so, you might be Canadian already...
I am no basketball fan...but in no way can you ever convince me that basketball playoffs compare to the NHL playoffs...what did philly lose by in game 5...30 points or so...lol, how but that great competitive...bucks v Celtics...LMFAO if people think basketball is better than hockey.
It’s not even close in my opinion hockey rules ..
Jose...if things ever get so bad with Trump you can move to Canada...you'd be a great Canadian...you love weed and hockey...do you like beer? If so, you might be Canadian already...
Lmao yes yes yes thanks I’d love too but my 1st choice would be to move back to Chile that’s where my heart is , you Canadians are the best I’m drinking a beer as I type 🤘
I was hoping for a last second goal to go to OT, but the Avs were fun to watch. Hopefully the conference finals will continue to be as exciting as the rest of these playoffs.
Virginia Beach 2000; Pittsburgh 2000; Columbus 2003; D.C. 2003; Pittsburgh 2006; Virginia Beach 2008; Cleveland 2010; PJ20 2011; Pittsburgh 2013; Baltimore 2013; Charlottesville 2013; Charlotte 2013; Lincoln 2014; Moline 2014; St. Paul 2014; Greenville 2016; Hampton 2016; Lexington 2016; Wrigley 2016; Prague 2018; Krakow 2018; Berlin 2018; Fenway 2018; Camden 2022; St. Paul 2023; MSG 1 2024
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
Yes, I do agree that they would need to do some trials. I do think with the focus being youth and speed, young stars like McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, McKinnon, Dahlin, Marner, etc could really shine. I sometimes watch old games, and the smaller players, smaller goalies, with 1 ref... plus, an overall slower speed, there just seems to be so much space. You can really distinguish the good players from the others.
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
A friend of mine said to me, and this was about 15- 20 years ago, that the Goalies have so much equipment that they look like the Michelin Man:
I posted this way upthread, but:
Patrick Roy circa 1986
Patrick Roy 2001
Not to mention you have larger and faster defenders with larger equipment, all trained to collapse in front of the net to reduce any chance of scoring a clean, not ricochet goal to roughly 0%
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
Yes, I do agree that they would need to do some trials. I do think with the focus being youth and speed, young stars like McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, McKinnon, Dahlin, Marner, etc could really shine. I sometimes watch old games, and the smaller players, smaller goalies, with 1 ref... plus, an overall slower speed, there just seems to be so much space. You can really distinguish the good players from the others.
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
A friend of mine said to me, and this was about 15- 20 years ago, that the Goalies have so much equipment that they look like the Michelin Man:
I posted this way upthread, but:
Patrick Roy circa 1986
Patrick Roy 2001
Not to mention you have larger and faster defenders with larger equipment, all trained to collapse in front of the net to reduce any chance of scoring a clean, not ricochet goal to roughly 0%
Increase the goal size if there is a safety concern.
I agree on the equipment, as long as they don't sacrifice protection. Goalie equipment needs to be minimized where possible. IMO, they could increase the size of the nets too.... even just a few inches in either direction could make a lot of difference.
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
You have some very good ideas. I do not want international size. Before the NHL move to mandate large ice surface, I think it would be a good idea to experiment first...which means they would need to construct an ice surface that can be adjusted and tested out in the exhibition, otherwise it's just a guess if it will make the game more exciting...international hockey is boring...Mike Babcock has stated larger ice surface decreases scoring...
Yes, I do agree that they would need to do some trials. I do think with the focus being youth and speed, young stars like McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, McKinnon, Dahlin, Marner, etc could really shine. I sometimes watch old games, and the smaller players, smaller goalies, with 1 ref... plus, an overall slower speed, there just seems to be so much space. You can really distinguish the good players from the others.
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
A friend of mine said to me, and this was about 15- 20 years ago, that the Goalies have so much equipment that they look like the Michelin Man:
I posted this way upthread, but:
Patrick Roy circa 1986
Patrick Roy 2001
Not to mention you have larger and faster defenders with larger equipment, all trained to collapse in front of the net to reduce any chance of scoring a clean, not ricochet goal to roughly 0%
That's very telling.
Back then a winger could come flying down the wing and could actually SOME net to take a shot at. Now? They see NO net.
Comments
Don Cherry coaches corner talking about equipment at the 2:20
And please do away with stupid, counter-productive "coaches challenges". All the offsides and goalie interference challenges serve is to drain the game of even more goals and excitement. You cant challenge an incorrect offsides call to get a scoring chance back, it only works 1-way. In both cases it is unnecessary and cumbersome. In 35 years of watching hockey, I had never desired anything close to those rules. Video review should be reduced to: did the puck cross the line?
Other, more revolutionary things? Increase the height of the glass in each team's zone, and if not, standardize the netting and make it in play. Move the net away from the boards a couple feet.
Also, with each new building from here on in (or major structural renovation), mandate that the ice surface is larger. Not necessarily olympic/international sized, but larger. Players are way too large and move too efficiently for the size of the ice. There is very little room. It may take 50 years for all teams to have the larger ice surface, but when I grew up there was variance, and it ended up dictating teams' styles which was cool.
What did you guys think of the replay call on the goaltenders interference last night (was that last night?). To me, that was interference that should have been called, and it was missed. I don't mind that. The player elbowed the goalie in the end, and pushed him out of the crease. It should have been no goal AND a penalty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjX3NpyCVRA
look at all the 'apparent' space as well as how small the goalies appear.
I honestly would be interested to see how an NHL game would look on an International rink. I think an overall width increase of 15 feet would be a good thing, and may bring forth more 1 on 1 potential mismatches as Connor McDavid comes bearing down on Dion Phaneuf or some lugnut who would be undressed.
All this reliance on technology is also making referees lax as they have this safety net.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Blues/Bruins sounds a bit like UCLA, no?
Sharks for Joe Thornton in his 21st year would be cool.
Patrick Roy circa 1986
Patrick Roy 2001
Not to mention you have larger and faster defenders with larger equipment, all trained to collapse in front of the net to reduce any chance of scoring a clean, not ricochet goal to roughly 0%
Back then a winger could come flying down the wing and could actually SOME net to take a shot at. Now? They see NO net.