Please read and support the game we love
View Single Post
01-22-2007, 02:45 AM
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Section A Lynah Rink
Originally Posted by
Which old days? Over 8 goals per game in the 40s? Are we talking the 5 goals per game Golden Era? Or the 9 goals per game era of the 1980s? Or the 5 goals per game of the late-90s, early 00s? I always get confused when I hear people reference the old days.
this is a great point. Hockey fans have been talking about the 'lost art' of the body check since the forward pass was introduced 70 years ago. Hockey was always, faster, better and more physical when viewed through the prism of time. We forget that there where complaints about the game in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's too, and some of those complaints where pretty similar to the ones you hear today.
THe fact is that obstruction was killing the game. Even those of us that still watched every game didn't like the product on the ice prior to the lockout. It's never a good thing when a sport allows mediocre players to suffocate brilliant ones, and this is what was happening durring the obstruction era.
Not to say that there arn't problems. I abhore special teams fests as much as anyone, and I would love to the game allowed to breath a bit more than it is now. Hopefully over the next few years we will see the players adjust to the way the game is called and commit fewer of the mindless hooks and holds that get called so frequently. Whether this is a plausible or mearly wishful thining is hard to say.
I'm with them on a few issues. I'd like to see the instigator done away with, it interfears with a policying system that was entrenched in the sport and protected stars. Fighting wasn't nearly the sideshow that it is now until the instigator came into being. What's the point of a fight if both sides have to agree to it? What does that deter?
Shootouts can and should be done away with. I've never understood the logic behind deciding a hockey game with a process that rarely ever happens within the game itself. I don't get what is so wrong with ties, there are 82 games! who cares if 8% of them don't have a winner?
As for rivalries and dynsties? It's hard to imagine teams accumulating dynasty talent and keeping it in the cap era. How many players would have the 70's Candians have had to give max money too? We talk about finding one or two franchise players to build around, that team had 9 hall of famers (Dryden, Lafleur, Lapoint, Robinson, Cournoyer, Gainey, Lemair, Savard, Shutt.)
You can't put those types of teams together in a capped league and this league, as presently constituted, need the cap. Now If it where up to me I would simply liquify 15 teams and do away with the cap (you wouldn't need it anymore), but that will never happen.
Last edited by xander: 01-22-2007 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by xander