Not giving up on hockey, but the NHL is ****ed. There's absolutely no way the league will ever recover from this lockout. There's just no way.
I really enjoy watching WHL and OHL hockey. AHL hockey is... Emotionless? It certainly doesn't seem like any of the players in that league actually give a **** about their team. Only personal gain, which is fair because they're competing for a big boy spot. Just don't enjoy it anymore.
Bettman is absolutely wrecking this sport beyond recognition. Hockey used to be about playing hard-nosed, quick witted play. The 'clutch and grab era' was the greatest era of this sport bar none. That's hockey. These new rule changes where goalies can't play the puck, more open ice (causing concussions) and the equipment changes have ruined the sport I used to play. 12 year contracts? Wtf? Trade deadline day is an absolute joke now. All of the jerseys across the league look the same. Food quality in ALL of the arenas has reached absolute ****, thanks to corporate contracts.
The leagues TV situation? ****ing pathetic. We used to be able to watch all of the teams across ESPN. Now NBC shows the original six and... The original six.
Teams that shouldn't even be surviving and tanking the league are still up and kicking. ( Dallas will be another PHX if this **** keeps up)
The NHL is dead. It will never return. The joke that comes from this lockout will be a horrible product, and will push people from the sport even more than they already have been.
**** you Gary Bettman. **** you.
This is the sadest part to me in the long run. Dallas is obviously a team that has or had a lot to be excited about. We're finally young and not stale, we've spent money on some really solid players in UFA and there is a lot to be excited about. You could sense the anticipation in us hardcores and it's a shame that the interest that could have been there will more than likely not be now. Or at least the interest level will take a significant hit in the local market relative what we'll see for the teams north of the border. Add to it some crappy uni's and this could all get really ugly for Dallas.
On another note, anyone who likes hockey by default hates Buttman. But, as far as the game, IMO it's improved greatly (speed, athletes, parity) and that's why I think the NHL as a brand will still grow on the other side of this debaucle of a season.
But as for concussions and injuries, no one likes to see them but its part of today's game and I feel like the players deserve a little bit of head trauma for not signing already. No not really, but given the average length of a players career, there has to be a rift in the PA and I was thrilled to hear Neuvirth's comments last week. Egotistical multimillionaire owners and egotistical multimillionaire superstars is what this is about, which is why my optimism is fading that we'll see hockey this year. Thank **** for junior hockey, but I'm a fool, I will be back as soon as the NHL is.
Your rose colored glasses have rose colored glasses Cin. I used to watch pre lockout hockey when I wanted to take a nap, that's how boring it was. Clutch and grab is slow and boring and stifles creativity and speed. Not to mention it's coming back anyway, the playoffs were clutchier and grabbier than they have been in quite a while. ESPN sucked for hockey as well, though I would rather have that than NBCSN just because it's one of those channels that most people don't get and it certainly isn't worth upgrading to a new package to get it. That being said it does a much better job covering hockey than ESPN ever did, it doesn't treat it like an ugly neglected stepchild like ESPN would have.
I kind of enjoy your flair for the dramatic but in the grand scheme of things this lockout has lasted about two months of a regular season, it's fairly insignificant in the long run I would say. Yes, some fans won't come back, and I agree the NHL will absolutely take a hit but it won't kill the league. I would say the lockout would have to go into next season for it to kill the league, though an entire season lockout would probably get us a good part of the way there in many non traditional markets that are just now building up a fan base.
I get so annoyed when people put so much hate on Gary Bettman, I mean that is half his job. The man is a sponge for people who don't seem to realize he does what the owners want him to do, he gets paid 9 mil a year to do that. By the way, the owners want those 12 year contracts gone as much as you do, and that means Bettman by extension. I won't defend the guy who has been at the head of three lockouts, but I get so tired of watching people hate the **** out of one guy like there aren't dozens of other people on both sides that are equally at fault.
Your rose colored glasses have rose colored glasses Cin. I used to watch pre lockout hockey when I wanted to take a nap, that's how boring it was. Clutch and grab is slow and boring and stifles creativity and speed. Not to mention it's coming back anyway, the playoffs were clutchier and grabbier than they have been in quite a while. ESPN sucked for hockey as well, though I would rather have that than NBCSN just because it's one of those channels that most people don't get and it certainly isn't worth upgrading to a new package to get it. That being said it does a much better job covering hockey than ESPN ever did, it doesn't treat it like an ugly neglected stepchild like ESPN would have.
I kind of enjoy your flair for the dramatic but in the grand scheme of things this lockout has lasted about two months of a regular season, it's fairly insignificant in the long run I would say. Yes, some fans won't come back, and I agree the NHL will absolutely take a hit but it won't kill the league. I would say the lockout would have to go into next season for it to kill the league, though an entire season lockout would probably get us a good part of the way there in many non traditional markets that are just now building up a fan base.
I get so annoyed when people put so much hate on Gary Bettman, I mean that is half his job. The man is a sponge for people who don't seem to realize he does what the owners want him to do, he gets paid 9 mil a year to do that. By the way, the owners want those 12 year contracts gone as much as you do, and that means Bettman by extension. I won't defend the guy who has been at the head of three lockouts, but I get so tired of watching people hate the **** out of one guy like there aren't dozens of other people on both sides that are equally at fault.
Well said. Bettman doesn't work for "hockey" or hockey fans, he works for the owners. He wants to watch hockey as much as anyone. He isn't just poking hockey fans with a stick because it seems like fun.
Your rose colored glasses have rose colored glasses Cin. I used to watch pre lockout hockey when I wanted to take a nap, that's how boring it was. Clutch and grab is slow and boring and stifles creativity and speed. Not to mention it's coming back anyway, the playoffs were clutchier and grabbier than they have been in quite a while. ESPN sucked for hockey as well, though I would rather have that than NBCSN just because it's one of those channels that most people don't get and it certainly isn't worth upgrading to a new package to get it. That being said it does a much better job covering hockey than ESPN ever did, it doesn't treat it like an ugly neglected stepchild like ESPN would have.
I kind of enjoy your flair for the dramatic but in the grand scheme of things this lockout has lasted about two months of a regular season, it's fairly insignificant in the long run I would say. Yes, some fans won't come back, and I agree the NHL will absolutely take a hit but it won't kill the league. I would say the lockout would have to go into next season for it to kill the league, though an entire season lockout would probably get us a good part of the way there in many non traditional markets that are just now building up a fan base.
I get so annoyed when people put so much hate on Gary Bettman, I mean that is half his job. The man is a sponge for people who don't seem to realize he does what the owners want him to do, he gets paid 9 mil a year to do that. By the way, the owners want those 12 year contracts gone as much as you do, and that means Bettman by extension. I won't defend the guy who has been at the head of three lockouts, but I get so tired of watching people hate the **** out of one guy like there aren't dozens of other people on both sides that are equally at fault.
Couldn't have said it better myself Captain Awesome. The people who constantly badger on about Bettman are just those fans who constantly complain about something and want a figurehead to use while they shout. I can't STAND IT.
I don't recall saying Bettman is the only one at fault. To simply blame one owner is a bit much.
The simple truth here is that Bettman has the job he has, and that means I'm going to hate him for it. He carries out the destruction of the game. What's not to hate? He's the ring leader.
You didn't like the clutch and grab era. Okay.
Casual fans did. It brought more contact to the sport, and created game that were more intense. Say what you want to combat this, but the playoffs the past 3-4 years have been absolutely abysmal.
NBC has better NHL coverage than ESPN did? Who are you trying to kid? At least ESPN showed ALL of the teams, and even had shows outside of games.
NBC had what? Brett Hull?
Some of you truly are fans if you're supporting the **** that's happened to this sport.
I have moved this series of posts to the appropriate thread.
Cin, I don't really agree with most of your points in this case.
Clutch and grab didn't increase the amount of casual fans. The recent playoffs have suffered at times because they've reverted to clutch and grab. The reason why you remember it fondly is because the Stars were good at clutch and grab and enjoyed their greatest period of success during that era. Fans around the league don't think wistfully back on those Stars teams -- it was boring hockey.
It didn't have more contact either. Maybe low-level run-of-the-mill contact. Today's game has the most violent contact that I can remember. That's part of the whole question of whether the league is purposefully letting clutch and grab back into the game to curtail serious injuries and collisions.
NBC can't really be separated from NBC Sports Network. Sure NBC proper doesn't show many teams, but combined they show a very representative cross-section of the league. And there are simply more games broadcasted over more days of the week. The current arrangement is better than what they ever had with ESPN. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved growing up watching National Hockey Night with Thorne and Clement. It's nostalgia talking though.
Missed half a season in 94-95, missed all of 2004-05, missing god knows what of 2012-13. I used to reserve my disdain for Bettman and instead place it on the larger picture/owners/players, etc. until I heard Bettman talk to BaD Radio during last season. The guy comes off as a ***** of the highest degree to the point that it's really easy for me to see how he would be damn near impossible to sit at a negotiating table with. Who knows how much actual love he has for the game; to me he comes across as a lawyer who presides over a (semi-major) professional sports league. I don't "blame" him for the lockout but it's not as if he's been a pillar of strength and leadership during his tenure. This talk of him being only beholden to the owners, while perhaps technically correct, is utter ********. When you listen to Roger Goodell talk he never comes across as a mouthpiece of NFL owners. He comes across as a steward of the game of football. Bettman is anything but that. He and his stupid ****ing owners, the guys who fell all over themselves handing out 10-12 year contracts, are to blame for there not being hockey.
Rinse. Wash. Repeat. This is the same song and dance we heard during the last lockout and it always comes back to the owners ****ing themselves over because they seemingly couldn't give two ***** about losing hockey for any significant period of time. Thank god I'm living abroad this year or I'd probably actually be butthurt.
I have moved this series of posts to the appropriate thread.
Cin, I don't really agree with most of your points in this case.
Clutch and grab didn't increase the amount of casual fans. The recent playoffs have suffered at times because they've reverted to clutch and grab. The reason why you remember it fondly is because the Stars were good at clutch and grab and enjoyed their greatest period of success during that era. Fans around the league don't think wistfully back on those Stars teams -- it was boring hockey.
It didn't have more contact either. Maybe low-level run-of-the-mill contact. Today's game has the most violent contact that I can remember. That's part of the whole question of whether the league is purposefully letting clutch and grab back into the game to curtail serious injuries and collisions.
NBC can't really be separated from NBC Sports Network. Sure NBC proper doesn't show many teams, but combined they show a very representative cross-section of the league. And there are simply more games broadcasted over more days of the week. The current arrangement is better than what they ever had with ESPN. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved growing up watching National Hockey Night with Thorne and Clement. It's nostalgia talking though.
Going to have to agree to disagree then.
I'm not sure how any of you can say that the clutch and grab era was boring. Maybe because I was playing then? No clue. The game was much, MUCH more intricate. Boring? Because defense was played? Because we didn't have 9 goals a game? Perhaps it's just the big numbers thing for most of you? Not really sure.
NBC vs ESPN. That's a battle I'll have all day. ABC's coverage of the NHL was SPECTACULAR!
It's not just about the scoreboard, although I think in general more goals is preferable to less goals. It's about the style of play and how many legitimate scoring chances there are in each game.
Defense does not equate to clutch and grab. It's perfectly possible to play masterful defense, and to appreciate watching that defense, without doing any of that. Is Sheldon Souray going 2 strides out of his lane to interfere with a forechecker great defense? Is Brenden Morrow reaching out to hook the faster puck-carrier great defense?
I really got into hockey during the dead puck era. That's the version of hockey I fell in love with. Call me an idiot but I just don't see it as a lesser version of the sport. I'm typically drawn to the tactical aspect of sports quite a bit and that aspect of the late 90's - early 2000's game was significantly higher than it currently is. Yeah, maybe Richard Matvichuk being allowed to ride Forsberg into the ice isn't beautiful but what was (objectively speaking) was the way that Forsberg fought through that to still be a dominant player capable of routinely pulling off beautiful hockey plays. The cream always rises to the top and the players capable of really getting the job done now would also be able to get it done then. I don't like how you don't have to fight for your space as much now as you did then.
Call it boring slow hockey if you want, but the head trauma we see now is directly linked to the increased speed of the game. Space is given where it used to be earned. The difference between the game then and now is the difference between rugby and American football.
It's not just about the scoreboard, although I think in general more goals is preferable to less goals. It's about the style of play and how many legitimate scoring chances there are in each game.
Defense does not equate to clutch and grab. It's perfectly possible to play masterful defense, and to appreciate watching that defense, without doing any of that. Is Sheldon Souray going 2 strides out of his lane to interfere with a forechecker great defense? Is Brenden Morrow reaching out to hook the faster puck-carrier great defense?
In the older generations of the game? Certainly.
Hockey used to be about being tough and gritty. It doesn't matter if the current rules now outlaw that stuff. That's how it used to be, and people loved it.
I really got into hockey during the dead puck era. That's the version of hockey I fell in love with. Call me an idiot but I just don't see it as a lesser version of the sport. I'm typically drawn to the tactical aspect of sports quite a bit and that aspect of the late 90's - early 2000's game was significantly higher than it currently is. Yeah, maybe Richard Matvichuk being allowed to ride Forsberg into the ice isn't beautiful but what was (objectively speaking) was the way that Forsberg fought through that to still be a dominant player capable of routinely pulling off beautiful hockey plays. The cream always rises to the top and the players capable of really getting the job done now would also be able to get it done then. I don't like how you don't have to fight for your space as much now as you did then.
Call it boring slow hockey if you want, but the head trauma we see now is directly linked to the increased speed of the game. Space is given where it used to be earned. The difference between the game then and now is the difference between rugby and American football.
With more and more rules we're turning into another NBA. Half of the people in the stands now can't even keep up with all the rules that are in place. Trying to explain hockey to somebody who has never seen it before takes the whole damn game now. It used to just be "Well there's icing, offsides, two-line passing, and you cant elbow somebody, hit them when they don't have the puck, or slash their wrists/ankles violently."
Tugging and pulling was believe it or not an integral part to the sport. Coaches would train you on how to do it properly so you don't injure the opposing player. The respect was there, and the players policed it themselves.
Can't handle being hooked while you have the puck in one of the worlds most contact sports? It's clearly not for you then. Don't like being slashed because it hurts? Sorry, but this is hockey and it's how we play. Maybe you should get stronger so you don't put yourself in those situations?
Peter Forsberg is the greatest example ever for all of this. This is a warriors sport, not basketball.
With more and more rules we're turning into another NBA. Half of the people in the stands now can't even keep up with all the rules that are in place. Trying to explain hockey to somebody who has never seen it before takes the whole damn game now. It used to just be "Well there's icing, offsides, two-line passing, and you cant elbow somebody, hit them when they don't have the puck, or slash their wrists/ankles violently."
Tugging and pulling was believe it or not an integral part to the sport. Coaches would train you on how to do it properly so you don't injure the opposing player. The respect was there, and the players policed it themselves.
Can't handle being hooked while you have the puck in one of the worlds most contact sports? It's clearly not for you then. Don't like being slashed because it hurts? Sorry, but this is hockey and it's how we play. Maybe you should get stronger so you don't put yourself in those situations?
Peter Forsberg is the greatest example ever for all of this. This is a warriors sport, not basketball.
This is ridiculous to me. All that stuff was always against the rules. It has nothing to do with being a "warrior's sport".
How much contact was Jere Lehtinen involved in each game? How much contact is Loui Eriksson involved in each game? How many rules do they break? How are they not warriors?
I wholeheartedly agree with the larger point that the current rules are too many in number and too complex in nature -- but not for the reasons you listed. You even cite the 2 line pass as an example of a simpler time... which is totally backwards. That's one area where they have successfully rationalized the game. They can go further by eliminating the goalie trapezoid which has negligible impact on the game while substantially increasing confusion amongst new fans. Eventually they need to make the full switch to no-touch icing as well. Puck goes over the end line? Icing. Simple. And you missed perhaps the most obvious streamlined rule that's been changed from the "glory" days... perhaps you remember it... something about a foot in the crease...
This is ridiculous to me. All that stuff was always against the rules. It has nothing to do with being a "warrior's sport".
How much contact was Jere Lehtinen involved in each game? How much contact is Loui Eriksson involved in each game? How many rules do they break? How are they not warriors?
I wholeheartedly agree with the larger point that the current rules are too many in number and too complex in nature -- but not for the reasons you listed. You even cite the 2 line pass as an example of a simpler time... which is totally backwards. That's one area where they have successfully rationalized the game. They can go further by eliminating the goalie trapezoid which has negligible impact on the game while substantially increasing confusion amongst new fans. Eventually they need to make the full switch to no-touch icing as well. Puck goes over the end line? Icing. Simple. And you missed perhaps the most obvious streamlined rule that's been changed from the "glory" days... perhaps you remember it... something about a foot in the crease...
Lehtinen and Louie adapted, they didn't complain.
Nowhere in there did I say taking away two-line passing was bad. It's certainly helped with more concussions in this new 'open game' we have now.
Foot in the crease? Who cares? It's hockey. Don't like that guy standing there? Knock his ass out of the crease.
It all comes down to differing opinions in the direction the game is going. I see the game leaning towards less contact, more rules, and less fan interaction.
I liked the old hockey, and so do TONS of other fans. It really comes down to how long you've been with the sport perhaps. Does this make you less of a fan? Absolutely not. It's just different generations of the sport, and I prefer the old.
Gretzky and Lemieux got me into hockey. So that's where I'm coming from.
You say there's less contact, yet admit there are more concussions. Personally I find the high-impact collisions much more exciting than low-level clutching and grabbing. Concussions are definitely a major problem that the game faces though. What's the solution? It might be a combination of things, none of which involve purposefully making the game slower IMO. You can't put the cat back in the bag when it comes to players getting bigger, stronger, and faster. The biggest changes are going to have to come in the form of equipment and behavior modification.
Gretzky and Lemieux got me into hockey. So that's where I'm coming from.
You say there's less contact, yet admit there are more concussions. Personally I find the high-impact collisions much more exciting than low-level clutching and grabbing. Concussions are definitely a major problem that the game faces though. What's the solution? It might be a combination of things, none of which involve purposefully making the game slower IMO. You can't put the cat back in the bag when it comes to players getting bigger, stronger, and faster. The biggest changes are going to have to come in the form of equipment and behavior modification.
Agreed. Bringing back "clutch and grab" hockey isn't going to stop concussions. Guys like Lindros, Deadmarsh, Primeau, and LaFontaine all had their careers ended by concussions while playing "clutch and grab" hockey.
probably limits him to a backup role for the rest of his career too. Tough luck for a good guy.
