For the ones who had a notion, a notion deep inside
That it ain't no sin to be glad you're alive
ORGAN DONATION SAVES LIVES http://www.UNOS.org
Donate Organs and Save a Life
I was really looking forward to getting a jersey; now I'm not sure. What's up with the fake laces and the stars?
Awful jerseys. If they didn't have the stars on the shoulders, they would look pretty good. Nike always tries to do too much....can't just keep it simple.
drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
better than the USA hockey jerseys, and they kept the crest... but its pretty poor. Just keep it simple, dummies. I dont know why they refuse to understand that.
1998 ~ Barrie
2003 ~ Toronto
2005 ~ London, Toronto
2006 ~ Toronto
2008 ~ Hartford, Mansfied I,
2009 ~ Toronto, Chicago I, Chicago II
2010 ~ Cleveland, Buffalo
2011 ~ Toronto I, Toronto II, Ottawa, Hamilton
2013 - London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo
i still dont think its nearly as bad as the Boston teddy bear, Islanders hunting uniforms, or the Dallas uterus jerseys... mong others.
I can't think of anything uglier than the Mooterus.
drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
At the Traverse City prospects tournament, Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland decided to test 3-on-3 overtime in a game between the Dallas Stars and the Minnesota Wild.
According to Craig Custance of ESPN ($), the reviews for the format were uniformly positive.
Wild GM Chuck Fletcher declared that “every line change was an odd-man rush,” and wondered what it would look like if Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin shared the ice during it. New York Rangers assistant GM Jeff Gorton said, “The three-on-threes were pretty fun. It was good, especially when they had fresh ice. The kids were racing up and down, trading chances.”
Custance writes that the positive reviews are part of the momentum building to have the format become part of NHL overtime:
The comments from his fellow executives echo conversations Holland has had in private. There's an appetite among the decision-makers in the NHL to change the current overtime solution. The biggest reason is that parity has made things so tight around the NHL that one point can make or break a playoff berth. More GMs would prefer that the deciding playoff spots be earned by something more closely resembling hockey, rather than points gathered by winning shootouts.
It's safe to say he'll be making his proposal again this year at the GM meetings. Now there is momentum building for it.
Holland has been pushing for 3-on-3 overtime for years. In 2012, he proposed a 10-minute OT period in the regular season with the first 5 minutes in 4-on-4 hockey and the last 5 played 3-on-3 – all sudden death, all designed to avoid the shootout.
This is all tremendously good news for those of us who are fans of equity, fairness and actual team play.
That said, it’s still a gimmick. I get that. Dave Lozo and I had a Twitter debate about 3-on-3 hockey and he labeled it as the evil of two lesser: That at least the shootout features something (a penalty shot) that you might see during the game with more regularity than a freak show like 3-on-3 hockey.
But here’s how I see it: 3-on-3 is a significant improvement on the shootout, to the point where I can overlook its flaws.
Passes being attempted! Defensemen playing defense! Games – and thus, playoff qualification – being decided by something that at least resembles the 60 minutes that preceded it!
But above all else: Unpredictability.
The shootout has gotten stale, which is something even an early adopter of skills competition bashing like yours truly could have never guessed would happen. But we’ve seen almost every move, almost every scenario. We’ve seen too many games that seemed destined for the shootout because one team or the other believes it has the advantage there to earn the extra point.
I’ve found it tedious for years, but I’ve grown increasingly aware that I’m not alone.
My perfect world scenario has always been teams trading sudden death 4-on-3 or 5-on-3 power plays in OT, with the home team having first crack. At the very least, 3-on-3 satisfies my desire to see games decided with something resembling hockey and the NHL’s desire to dish up sexy offensive highlights to SportsCenter.
At the Traverse City prospects tournament, Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland decided to test 3-on-3 overtime in a game between the Dallas Stars and the Minnesota Wild.
According to Craig Custance of ESPN ($), the reviews for the format were uniformly positive.
Wild GM Chuck Fletcher declared that “every line change was an odd-man rush,” and wondered what it would look like if Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin shared the ice during it. New York Rangers assistant GM Jeff Gorton said, “The three-on-threes were pretty fun. It was good, especially when they had fresh ice. The kids were racing up and down, trading chances.”
Custance writes that the positive reviews are part of the momentum building to have the format become part of NHL overtime:
The comments from his fellow executives echo conversations Holland has had in private. There's an appetite among the decision-makers in the NHL to change the current overtime solution. The biggest reason is that parity has made things so tight around the NHL that one point can make or break a playoff berth. More GMs would prefer that the deciding playoff spots be earned by something more closely resembling hockey, rather than points gathered by winning shootouts.
It's safe to say he'll be making his proposal again this year at the GM meetings. Now there is momentum building for it.
Holland has been pushing for 3-on-3 overtime for years. In 2012, he proposed a 10-minute OT period in the regular season with the first 5 minutes in 4-on-4 hockey and the last 5 played 3-on-3 – all sudden death, all designed to avoid the shootout.
This is all tremendously good news for those of us who are fans of equity, fairness and actual team play.
That said, it’s still a gimmick. I get that. Dave Lozo and I had a Twitter debate about 3-on-3 hockey and he labeled it as the evil of two lesser: That at least the shootout features something (a penalty shot) that you might see during the game with more regularity than a freak show like 3-on-3 hockey.
But here’s how I see it: 3-on-3 is a significant improvement on the shootout, to the point where I can overlook its flaws.
Passes being attempted! Defensemen playing defense! Games – and thus, playoff qualification – being decided by something that at least resembles the 60 minutes that preceded it!
But above all else: Unpredictability.
The shootout has gotten stale, which is something even an early adopter of skills competition bashing like yours truly could have never guessed would happen. But we’ve seen almost every move, almost every scenario. We’ve seen too many games that seemed destined for the shootout because one team or the other believes it has the advantage there to earn the extra point.
I’ve found it tedious for years, but I’ve grown increasingly aware that I’m not alone.
My perfect world scenario has always been teams trading sudden death 4-on-3 or 5-on-3 power plays in OT, with the home team having first crack. At the very least, 3-on-3 satisfies my desire to see games decided with something resembling hockey and the NHL’s desire to dish up sexy offensive highlights to SportsCenter.
While I like it, if only because I've always hated the shootout, I can imagine games would end really, really fast, and also some really, really tired top lines and checking lines.
But like I said, I'm for it, because it would at least get rid of the shootout. It's the equivalent of ending a baseball game with a home run derby, a basketball game with a dunk contest, and a football game with a, er, field goal contest. (OK that last one would be pretty sweet).
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2023-08-31 Wrigley 2 2023-09-15 Fenway 1
Wild single game tickets go on sale Saturday (presale tomorrow). Going to try to grab 3 games.
Absolutely love the new divisions, with the exception of Detroit in the "Atlantic" conference. It just seems really weird. Minnesota dodged a bullet with that one (the Red Wings have always owned us).
For the Central, some of the old Norris is back together (counting a "Minnesota" team), which will be fun. Chicago and Winnipeg are natural rivals for us, and it will be cool to play St. Louis more.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2023-08-31 Wrigley 2 2023-09-15 Fenway 1
Also, again, 3 points for a win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss.
i've been preaching 3 points for a win, 1 point for OT/SO loss for a long time.
need more separation between teams winning in regulation and teams losing in OT. it's crazy that an 8th seed team can sneak into the playoffs with 3-5 less regulation wins than the ninth seed.
the shootout doesn't bother me as much as it bothers others. i am huge fan of goaltending and think the shootout showcases it at its absolute best.
if you want to do away with the shootout, my vote would go to a 4-4 ten minute OT rather than a 3-3 five minute OT. that much open ice will make for some beautiful offensive skill, but i get weary when there is that much room and guys are able to skate as fast as they can. can be a nasty recipe for some brutal open ice hits.
Comments
I wonder if this will happen to the Devils in the above photo now that Bettman is taking over?
:think:
96)Randalls Island I,II
98)NJ,MSG I,II
00) Virginia Beach Jones Beach I,II,III Saratoga Springs Seattle I
03)Nassau Camden I MSG I,II NJ
04)Boston I,II Reading
05)Montreal Ottawa Toronto Borgata I,II Philly
06) Irving plaza Albany Hartford Camden I,II NJ I,II LA I,II Gorge I,II
07)Lolla
08)Roo Camden I,II MSG I,II Hartford Beacon
09)Chicago I,II Philly II,III,IV
10)Hartford Newark MSG I,II
11)PJ20 I,II
13)Wrigley Brooklyn I,II Hartford
14)Moline,milwaukee
15)Central Park
16)MSG I,II
17)Wrigley I,II
18)Wrigley I,II
22)MSG,Camden
24)MSG I,II
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Bill ... story.html
That it ain't no sin to be glad you're alive
ORGAN DONATION SAVES LIVES
http://www.UNOS.org
Donate Organs and Save a Life
At least they are better then Ivan's ...
Nike obviously turned the design over to someone that doesn't watch hockey.
I say we petition to use the jerseys from the last games and just make them the official olympic jersey from this point on ...
Awful jerseys. If they didn't have the stars on the shoulders, they would look pretty good. Nike always tries to do too much....can't just keep it simple.
:?
going with a similar crest on the 2013 US soccer jerseys (which are bad ass by the way, but look terrible enlarged and on a hockey sweater).
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/buffalo-sabres-reveal-perhaps-nhl-worst-jersey-pass-165440118--nhl.html
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Next!"
All that I once held as true
I stand alone without beliefs
The only truth I know is you.
at least its only a 3rd
that is wretched
2003 ~ Toronto
2005 ~ London, Toronto
2006 ~ Toronto
2008 ~ Hartford, Mansfied I,
2009 ~ Toronto, Chicago I, Chicago II
2010 ~ Cleveland, Buffalo
2011 ~ Toronto I, Toronto II, Ottawa, Hamilton
2013 - London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo
I can't think of anything uglier than the Mooterus.
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Next!"
Imagine finally making it to the NHL and then they tell you to put that fucking thing on. :oops:
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu ... --nhl.html
At the Traverse City prospects tournament, Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland decided to test 3-on-3 overtime in a game between the Dallas Stars and the Minnesota Wild.
According to Craig Custance of ESPN ($), the reviews for the format were uniformly positive.
Wild GM Chuck Fletcher declared that “every line change was an odd-man rush,” and wondered what it would look like if Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin shared the ice during it. New York Rangers assistant GM Jeff Gorton said, “The three-on-threes were pretty fun. It was good, especially when they had fresh ice. The kids were racing up and down, trading chances.”
Custance writes that the positive reviews are part of the momentum building to have the format become part of NHL overtime:
The comments from his fellow executives echo conversations Holland has had in private. There's an appetite among the decision-makers in the NHL to change the current overtime solution. The biggest reason is that parity has made things so tight around the NHL that one point can make or break a playoff berth. More GMs would prefer that the deciding playoff spots be earned by something more closely resembling hockey, rather than points gathered by winning shootouts.
It's safe to say he'll be making his proposal again this year at the GM meetings. Now there is momentum building for it.
Holland has been pushing for 3-on-3 overtime for years. In 2012, he proposed a 10-minute OT period in the regular season with the first 5 minutes in 4-on-4 hockey and the last 5 played 3-on-3 – all sudden death, all designed to avoid the shootout.
This is all tremendously good news for those of us who are fans of equity, fairness and actual team play.
That said, it’s still a gimmick. I get that. Dave Lozo and I had a Twitter debate about 3-on-3 hockey and he labeled it as the evil of two lesser: That at least the shootout features something (a penalty shot) that you might see during the game with more regularity than a freak show like 3-on-3 hockey.
But here’s how I see it: 3-on-3 is a significant improvement on the shootout, to the point where I can overlook its flaws.
Passes being attempted! Defensemen playing defense! Games – and thus, playoff qualification – being decided by something that at least resembles the 60 minutes that preceded it!
But above all else: Unpredictability.
The shootout has gotten stale, which is something even an early adopter of skills competition bashing like yours truly could have never guessed would happen. But we’ve seen almost every move, almost every scenario. We’ve seen too many games that seemed destined for the shootout because one team or the other believes it has the advantage there to earn the extra point.
I’ve found it tedious for years, but I’ve grown increasingly aware that I’m not alone.
My perfect world scenario has always been teams trading sudden death 4-on-3 or 5-on-3 power plays in OT, with the home team having first crack. At the very least, 3-on-3 satisfies my desire to see games decided with something resembling hockey and the NHL’s desire to dish up sexy offensive highlights to SportsCenter.
While I like it, if only because I've always hated the shootout, I can imagine games would end really, really fast, and also some really, really tired top lines and checking lines.
But like I said, I'm for it, because it would at least get rid of the shootout. It's the equivalent of ending a baseball game with a home run derby, a basketball game with a dunk contest, and a football game with a, er, field goal contest. (OK that last one would be pretty sweet).
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2023-08-31 Wrigley 2
2023-09-15 Fenway 1
Absolutely love the new divisions, with the exception of Detroit in the "Atlantic" conference. It just seems really weird. Minnesota dodged a bullet with that one (the Red Wings have always owned us).
For the Central, some of the old Norris is back together (counting a "Minnesota" team), which will be fun. Chicago and Winnipeg are natural rivals for us, and it will be cool to play St. Louis more.
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2023-08-31 Wrigley 2
2023-09-15 Fenway 1
Also, again, 3 points for a win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss.
yeah ... the OT points should not exceed the regulation points ... doesn't make sense ...
i've been preaching 3 points for a win, 1 point for OT/SO loss for a long time.
need more separation between teams winning in regulation and teams losing in OT. it's crazy that an 8th seed team can sneak into the playoffs with 3-5 less regulation wins than the ninth seed.
the shootout doesn't bother me as much as it bothers others. i am huge fan of goaltending and think the shootout showcases it at its absolute best.
if you want to do away with the shootout, my vote would go to a 4-4 ten minute OT rather than a 3-3 five minute OT. that much open ice will make for some beautiful offensive skill, but i get weary when there is that much room and guys are able to skate as fast as they can. can be a nasty recipe for some brutal open ice hits.