Now that hockey's R&D camp is over

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

What needs to be changed? Rules on the ice, practises off it, etc.

 

1- Market your stars. Everyone knows who Michael Jordan and LeBron James are, and we pretty frequently see jerseys of them being worn. The NBA are masters of doing this.

 

2-Exploit rivalries. Edmonton-Calgary, Detroit Colorado, Leafs-Habs, Chicago-Boston. Take full advantage of the emotion seen when these teams play each other.

 

3- A quick look at rule changes:

 

Yes, to the shoot out. Ultimately, I don't care for it, but I seem to be in the minority. It is exciting to an extent, but I feel it'd wear thin quickly. I would like to see ties gotten rid of some how, but again, I seem to be alone on this.

 

Yes to tag up off-sides and no touch icing. No debate here.

 

Leave the lines where they are. Leave the nets as they are.

 

Think about it. Watch a game with two teams you're indifferent to. Let's say, for me, Nashville vs Phoenix or whatever. Walker and Hartnell are on a 2 on 1 on Dave Tanabe. Hartnell passes over to Walker with a wide open one timer. Keeping in mind you don't care about either team, which is more exciting? An incredible save by Boucher, or a goal by Walker? I'd say the scoring chance. A good scramble is always entertaining.

 

IMO, the key to bringing fans back is creating more scoring chances and good PR work, not necessarily more goals.

 

And by the way, I don't believe for a second all the Canadian fans who say they won't ever watch another NHL game.

[Red Baron 0]

Its simple.

 

Eliminate obstruction and the game is as good 15 years ago.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I'm with you 100% on ties. Lose them. Lose overtime losses too. A loss is a loss. The end. You shouldn't be rewarded with credit for a tie if you lose, just because you dragged your shitty boring trap-laden game through regulation. Standings should not look like 36-32-9-5. Give me 45-37. I don't care if it takes a shootout. I don't mind shootouts.

 

"Well guyz NFL is the best league and they don't have shootouts!"

 

Yeah well their overtime sucks too, but that's another discussion.

 

"It will ruin the sanctity of our great sport!"

 

There's none left.

 

"Nobody likes them!"

 

Everybody likes them. It'd be the smartest overture to casual fans yet, seeing as EVERY FUCKING ONE SO FAR HAS FAILED.

 

Don't cut the season down to 60 games or some bullshit like that. No thanks. I sort of like watching hockey games. Or I did until I forgot what it was like to watch one, thanks Bob & Gary. I don't think having fewer of them makes me want to watch the remaining ones more. If I have to wait too long between games, which are not the weekly events that football games are, I'll just lose interest. 82 games is too much work? The season used to be 84 games! Whoa! Suck it up. You're the toughest fucking bastards in sport. Play 82 games. Plus I can't fathom the ticket prices at the ACC going even higher due to fewer home dates.

[Guest BrokenWings]

If they haven't removed the red line yet, do that. Coming from someone who has played without one competitively the last two years, it quickens up the game by leaps and bounds, and will open up the ability for new plays.

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

I know I live in California and I'm a Ducks fan so my opinion means nothing but I think short handed goals should be counted as two on the score board. I know it's kind of rediculous but it would give team the opportunity to take a big risk instead of icing the puck.

[Kismet 0]

Goalie pads, gotta reduce them. I can live without some of the other proposed changes, but those and the clutch n' grab to me are some of the biggest problems.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I know I live in California and I'm a Ducks fan so my opinion means nothing but I think short handed goals should be counted as two on the score board. I know it's kind of rediculous but it would give team the opportunity to take a big risk instead of icing the puck.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I see what you're going for, but this isn't like a three-pointer in basketball where you can make a high-risk attempt worth a little more, because goals are so much fewer and far between in hockey. It's like an event. And I don't know if being shorthanded by just one skater justifies an entire bonus goal. Plus, that's two goals on the goaltender's GAA. That reflects really poorly on him, more than it ought to.

 

Here's an idea: white at home, white at home, white at home. That's what we all grew up with, if we've been watching from any point after the advent of color TV, and it's confusing as hell to get used to the flip-flop. Also, if you're a fan of the Leafs or Wings, now your team has to wear its shitty dark sweater at home. I know it has something to do with packing alternate sweaters on the road or something, but really knock it the fuck off with alternate sweaters too.

 

I think there's finally a backlash against alternates in sports. I read baseball columns by guys who are sick of the Cubs wearing blue every day, the Astros wearing red every day, the Mets and Rockies wearing whatever the fuck they wear they have like nine permutations, and applaud the Cards, Yankees, Dodgers, and Phillies for having two sets and that's IT. And that's baseball. Overused as they are, the Cubs blues aren't THAT offensive.

 

Meanwhile, the 3rd sweaters almost always look like shit. The Blackhawks look acceptable in black, but when the white and red look so perfect, why wear them less? Predators wear ducktailed mustard-colored alternates. The Dallas Stars have a constellation of a uterus or something. The Islanders wear bright orange. They look really bad. Stop making them. Stop wearing them. Nobody buys them.

[the max 0]

Not mentioned (not that it has to be) is the Saddington Bear Bruins 3rd that makes 95% of fans want to gouge their eyes out at the very sight of it.

 

 

 

I'm not a fan of shootouts, since I wouldn't ask football to decide a game by taking turns to kick field goals or a baseball game to be decided by a homerun derby. However, since the NHL's name has been essentially whittled to nothing, we have to start somewhere. As long as the sanctity of the game is kept in the playoffs (meaning NO SHOOTOUTS IN THE PLAYOFFS) I have no issue with them being introduced.

 

RE: Lines and nets. I posted this over on another board, as it is my interpretation of the new "Sinden rules" or something. I heard on the radio that they tested this and the refs really only needed their whistle to call penalties and out-of-plays.

 

 

Basically, as I understand it, once you cross your defensive blueline you are free to pass without getting called for a two-line pass (since there's no red line). This, to me, opens up the game since teams like Jersey can't trap you as much and force you into making a high-risk pass that turns into a turnover and a chance for them.

 

RE: Offsides/No-touch icing. I'm for 'em. Offense needs to return to the game.

 

As for other things, I'm not a fan of the shorthanded goal counting for two, since this isn't a sport where goals are easy to come by and that's a potentially crippling type of thing to happen in a game. It's bad enough to give up a shorty as it is, it'd be even worse if that was a bonus shot. I might have been one of the few fans who didn't mind dark jerseys at home...

 

My only gripes with the marketing is that ESPN seemed to ignore the fact that there is a team in Ottawa, ONT, Canada. They go by the name of the Senators. But you wouldn't know that they play a regular season game, since they were never televised until the playoffs. That has to change. There are young stars all over the NHL. I'm not saying that any of them can singlehandedly bring the NHL out of this mess, but certainly players like Nash, Gaborik, Iginla, and Luongo can help.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

I also like the international quick puck drops. Move it along and get people into the game.

 

RE: No touch icing; should have happened long long ago.

 

RE: Shootouts; Not personally a fan, but anything is better than a tie, ties are for 3rd grader's teeball games.

 

 

As for getting casual fans into the game, putting a mike on the linesmen when they call the penaltys, and then having the announcers show a replay and EXPLAIN what the penalty was and why would really go a long way. The television coverage for hockey is far far behind the other three major sports coverages in this aspect. We all make fun of Madden, but the reason he is still doing what he does is that he caters to the casual, rather than to the fantasy geek who knows all the players stats by heart, and think they could coach better than 1/2 the NFL coaches. THINK CASUAL FAN!!

[nl5xsk1 0]

Changes I'd make ...

 

1) Contraction. This always pisses off fans in these areas, but it's illogical to have 3 teams in Cali, 2 in Florida, and one in places like Phoenix, Nashville, Columbus, etc. Contract the league down by 6 - 8 teams and you're losing the bottom defensemen and 4th line scrubs from each team. Get rid of Florida and have the Lightning play X number of games in Sunrise, get rid of the Ducks and Sharks (sorry UndertakerHart) and have the Kings play X number of games in Anaheim and SJ. The Celtics used to play some home games in Hartford, so it's nothing that hasn't been done before. I'd also have the teams that abandoned cities play some games in those cities (e.g. Colorado plays X games in Quebec City).

 

2) Rule changes. Adopt Sinden's rules. Go back to tag-up offsides. Add no-touch icing. Make icing still icing when a team is on the PK. Clutching and obstruction are to be called as seriously as highsticking or slashing. Get rid of that horrid "instigator" rule and let the players police themselves.

 

3) Goalie pads/new-fangled sticks. These 2 go hand-in-hand for me. Goalies equipment should be policed to stop the Irbe/Roy-style of sofa cushions for pads. But skaters that can already fire the puck at 100+ mph shouldn't be allowed to use sticks made of ANYTHING besides wood.

 

4) Sorry, but I HATE the idea of a shootout. I have no problems watching 60 minutes of regulation plus 5 minutes of OT and still have the game end in a tie, as long as those 65 minutes of hockey are pure entertainment.

 

5) International-sized ice ... man, I'd love to watch someone like Ilya or St Louis (the player, not the team) play with so much more ice to work with.

 

And some small details ... Home teams wear white, road teams where dark. No 3rd sweaters. Rename the conferences and divisions as they were before the Bettman era (or, rename them with modern-names: Gretzky, Howe, Orr and Messier, or something like that). All star games are Campbell vs Wales, not NA vs the world.

[MrRant 0]

No ties.

 

Sports are about either winning or losing. Play the 2 - 5 min OTs and then start lining up to take potshots at the goalie.

[smh810 0]

Hockey doesnt need gimmicks or radiical changes just some tweaks:

 

A. enforce obstruction

 

B. reduce the goalie pads

 

C. Ditch the instigator rule

 

If thats done most of the on-ice problems with the game will be allieviated.

[nl5xsk1 0]

No ties.

 

Sports are about either winning or losing. Play the 2 - 5 min OTs and then start lining up to take potshots at the goalie.

 

See, I don't think a tie is that bad. To me, shootouts are not part of the game.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

Hockey doesnt need gimmicks or radiical changes just some tweaks

 

 

Absolutely. The on ice problems are minor in my opinion. I really think that with better announcing/coverage in general you can reach a larger number of casual fans.

[MrRant 0]

No ties.

 

Sports are about either winning or losing. Play the 2 - 5 min OTs and then start lining up to take potshots at the goalie.

 

See, I don't think a tie is that bad. To me, shootouts are not part of the game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

There needs to be a winner and loser.

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

Look, I don't want to get into a big debate about contraction but the Ducks were sold to a family who seem to legitimately care about the the team. They are open to changing the logo and actually getting the team to the playoffs. I think the amount of teams are fine as long as the ownership of each team markets the team. Disney could have done a better job letting people know when the Ducks were going to play.

 

I did a report on the lockout and I might post on here. I read the book "Power Plays" by Gil Stein who was the interm president of the NHL and he did a lot for them before that and he said a lot of things that made sense. Hockey is not one of those games most people can follow on TV (I don't mean the glowing pucks), you have to either watch it live or play it. I went to one game during the 2001 - 2002 season and I was hooked. I went to about 8 games including both playoff games against the Red Wings, and ond one game for the other series.

 

Hockey means a lot to me. About a year after watching my first live game, I started roller blading so I could play hockey. Well I did that and I'm still playing. There are a lot of people at that rink even though there is a lockout going on. If you get the people in the arenas then they will watch on TTV.

 

I'm still not sure if I'll watch the Ducks if they come back. I believe the owners lost money and the players were denial. I really have not that hockey has been going cause I was already excited about entering college and now I'm playing hockey again.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Bring back Peter Puck to cater to the casual fan or those ignorant to hockey.

 

If you're hell bent on more goals, decrease the pad size. Leave the nets as they are.

[The Czech Republic 0]

No ties.

 

Sports are about either winning or losing. Play the 2 - 5 min OTs and then start lining up to take potshots at the goalie.

 

See, I don't think a tie is that bad. To me, shootouts are not part of the game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

There needs to be a winner and loser.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's true. When you win, you can look back on the game and see what you did right. When you lose, you can look back on the game and see what you did wrong. You can't learn a lot from a tie. As a fan I feel dissatisfied with no definite outcome after devoting so much time to watching a game.

 

As for shootouts, you could do 60 minutes of regulation, 5 minutes overtime, shootout for the regular season, and a shootout win would be counted as a one-goal win. In the Stanley Cup playoffs, of course no shootouts. Gotta be sudden death.

[the max 0]

Yeah, if they go to shootouts in the playoffs, they've lost me forever. But I don't think they can be THAT stupid.

 

And while I'm with nl5 in that I don't mind ties, I'm thinking of the casual fan here. Go to a shootout in the regular season, except maybe in the last week of the season or something, when points really matter for teams that are on the bubble of making it in, that way they can still get a point or something.

[MrRant 0]

No.

 

Other sports do it just fine without "points".

 

It's Ws that get you in the playoffs.

[the max 0]

Every sport goes by points if you want them to.

 

Assign two points for every win and there's points for the standings. Hockey's point system is a good way to have it, since it creates interesting matchups in the playoffs that are easier to understand for casual fans (like my girlfriend, who doesn't like the 'games back' in baseball, but understands hockey's points)

[MrRant 0]

Fine. I can accept tieing + points and - points to Ws and Ls.

 

But no ties. It's not a competition if you have a tie. You play to win, not tie.

[BruiserKC 0]

Come playoff time...don't stretch the playoffs out forever to make it seem like every single game has to be on. Do it like they do with the NCAA basketball tournament...have about four games at once...regionalize the watching. People in the Midwest would be more up for St. Louis vs. Chicago for example as opposed to Montreal vs. Buffalo, etc.

 

This way...if one game is a blowout and another is going to the wire they can switch to it and then go back to the other without missing much.

[nl5xsk1 0]

It's true. When you win, you can look back on the game and see what you did right. When you lose, you can look back on the game and see what you did wrong. You can't learn a lot from a tie. As a fan I feel dissatisfied with no definite outcome after devoting so much time to watching a game.

Czech, the world's not a black and white place. The winning team doesn't always play better, and the losing team doesn't always deserve to lose.

 

In my mind, the winning team can't just say "we won, so this is what we did right, what we did to win". What about when Smith scored on his own goal - off of the back of Fuhr's legs ... what does Calgary look back at? "Well, we did a better job of not scoring on our own goal". ?!?

 

Or, if shootouts get passed as a new rule, and a team wins on shootouts, what do

they look back at? "well, we did a better job of scoring on today's shootout."?

 

 

But no ties. It's not a competition if you have a tie. You play to win, not tie.

They'd still be playing to win, Rant. Just the same way that when a team loses a game, they were still playing to win. They just happened to not achieve their goal for that day. And it'd still be a competition, it just wouldn't be one that had a winner. But the teams could both take away what they did well, and what they did poorly, and thus be better prepared for future games.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I AM AN AMERICAN

 

I DON'T WANT TO WATCH A GAME THAT NOBODY WINS

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Saying that ties are okay is absurd. However, I don't understand the hate for it, since NFL allows ties too.

[The Czech Republic 0]

But with the NFL's ridiculous overtime, ties are few and far between, so nobody complains too much. In the NHL ties can account for like 16 decisions per season.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Which is why a shootout or something is needed, to make ties more of a rarity.

[Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0]

With ties in the playoffs, if after extra time the game is still tied, why don't they have a replay of that match if it is needed at the end of the series. That way the teams win and the fans win. It has worked over here in Australia, once in a Grand Final. That way, there is a clear, definitive winner, not some team that didn't deserve the win by getting lucky in a shootout, like there was in the FA cup earlier this year.

[MrRant 0]

There are no ties in the playoffs.