HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Ottawa Senators
Notices

Changes I want to see the NHL make

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-05-2013, 06:24 PM
  #1
Stylizer1
BoomBapOriginalRap
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 50
Changes I want to see the NHL make

Credit the player who scores the winning shootout goal with the point.
If you score the goal that wins it for your team you deserve the point.

The winning team of the shootout gets only 1 point. 2 points for a regulation or overtime win. No points for a loss.

If you are in the penalty box and overtime is still tied you have to shoot last on your team.

Teams who are in first place in their division get a top 8 seeding based on their points but are not guaranteed to be in the top 3.

No icing the puck on a penalty kill. Icing should be icing always

Stylizer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 06:30 PM
  #2
mcnorth
Registered User
 
mcnorth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,718
vCash: 500
I like no icing on penalty kill quite a bit.

I guess it was a flow of play type of decision to allow it, but it is just plain dumb to me to give the penalized team a break/easy out. Hell, if teams are just going to ice it and make the game boring, how about if they're killing a penalty and they ice it you give the team on the power play possession? Have a 'face-off' with only the offensive team in the face-off circle. That'd stop the icing right quick. And improve scoring. I also like serving the full two-minutes.

mcnorth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 06:31 PM
  #3
Novak Djokovic
MARC METHOT's #1 FAN
 
Novak Djokovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,118
vCash: 966
No icing on the penalty kill? Are you kidding me? That would be awful and very, very mean.

Novak Djokovic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 06:32 PM
  #4
Marvelous Manked
Part Time Drag Queen
 
Marvelous Manked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sudbury/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,303
vCash: 50
For that last one, I can almost personally guarantee that the average PP% would be 50% or greater.

That's way too much influence that a penalty has on a game.

Marvelous Manked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 06:43 PM
  #5
Caeldan
Moderator
 
Caeldan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,991
vCash: 732
Honestly I don't care so much about the point for a loss in OT... I just want to see all games equal value.
So 3 w, 2 ot/sow, 1otl is fine with me. Or 2 for a win, 0 for a loss.
I would like 5 shooters on the shootout though, having only three makes it too much of a lucky shot wins. Plus you have 5 skaters a side, more natural extension.
Puck over the glass should be icing, not a penalty.

Caeldan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 07:17 PM
  #6
Stylizer1
BoomBapOriginalRap
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caeldan View Post
Honestly I don't care so much about the point for a loss in OT... I just want to see all games equal value.
So 3 w, 2 ot/sow, 1otl is fine with me. Or 2 for a win, 0 for a loss.
I would like 5 shooters on the shootout though, having only three makes it too much of a lucky shot wins. Plus you have 5 skaters a side, more natural extension.
Puck over the glass should be icing, not a penalty.
The way I see it you want teams to play harder for the win. Making it 4 on 4 is opening up the game for a better opportunity to score and win. Teams would dread going to the shoot out and would try more for the win. Many say that the shootout isn't hockey in a sense that you play a 65 minute team game that can be determined by a 1 on 1 play. For that reason the shootout shouldn't hold as much value.

As for the puck over the glass, I like that they get a penalty.

Stylizer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 07:28 PM
  #7
Tundraman
GoneCountry
 
Tundraman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: North
Posts: 5,438
vCash: 500
I'd like them to outlaw the high flip above players heads usually used to clear the puck out of the zone.

Tundraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 08:25 PM
  #8
backdoorpass
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
should have no trapezoid

backdoorpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 09:00 PM
  #9
gatosauce12345
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
I would like to see longer Overtimes. Maybe 10 minutes then shotout. More entertaining I find then the shootout.

gatosauce12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 09:04 PM
  #10
2CHAINZ
@EverythingPawg
 
2CHAINZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: We global Son
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,481
vCash: 177
All arenas should have strip clubs. All unintelligent people should not be allowed to post about the NHL on the internet.

2CHAINZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 09:48 PM
  #11
DrEasy
Get well soon, BM!
 
DrEasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,006
vCash: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caeldan View Post
Honestly I don't care so much about the point for a loss in OT... I just want to see all games equal value.
So 3 w, 2 ot/sow, 1otl is fine with me. Or 2 for a win, 0 for a loss.
I would like 5 shooters on the shootout though, having only three makes it too much of a lucky shot wins. Plus you have 5 skaters a side, more natural extension.
Puck over the glass should be icing, not a penalty.
Yes please to all of the above!

DrEasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:20 PM
  #12
Stylizer1
BoomBapOriginalRap
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patizzie View Post
All arenas should have strip clubs. All unintelligent people should not be allowed to post about the NHL on the internet.
accidentally on purpose

Stylizer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:28 PM
  #13
SilverSeven
Registered User
 
SilverSeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,045
vCash: 500
Colour on colour whenever possible. There is no reason we shouldnt be able to wear our red jerseys tomorrow night, while the Leafs wear their blue.

SilverSeven is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:37 PM
  #14
Flamingo
Registered User
 
Flamingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,417
vCash: 500
Instead of being a man down, penalized teams remain at full strength while opposing teams don't have to obey on-side or goalie interference rules.

Flamingo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:41 PM
  #15
Flamingo
Registered User
 
Flamingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,417
vCash: 500
Officially change sport name to "hackey". Switch back an forth between that and "hockey" on five-year rotation to appease all regional fan bases.

Flamingo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:46 PM
  #16
trobby
Registered User
 
trobby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylizer1 View Post
Credit the player who scores the winning shootout goal with the point. If you score the goal that wins it for your team you deserve the point.
Don't like it. You'd need to have both team have all 3 shooters shoot, even if the game is decided after 2 shooters. IE: Ottawa is up 2-0 on the Leafs. Leafs have 1 more shooter. At this point the player doesn't give a crap. If he scores, do you award the goal to the 1st shooter, or the 2nd shooter for the Sens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylizer1 View Post
The winning team of the shootout gets only 1 point. 2 points for a regulation or overtime win. No points for a loss.
I'd like 3 RV, 2 OTV OR SOV, 1 OTL OR SOL. Yes it screws up a bunch of historical stats, but too ME it makes the most sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylizer1 View Post
If you are in the penalty box and overtime is still tied you have to shoot last on your team.
Agreed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylizer1 View Post
Teams who are in first place in their division get a top 8 seeding based on their points but are not guaranteed to be in the top 3.
You need to award Division winners with something (I'd say move them down to 4th seed, no lower). In your proposal, you might at well just do away with divisions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylizer1 View Post
No icing the puck on a penalty kill. Icing should be icing always
You better get a couple of more defibrillators in the building...that would be insane.

trobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:54 PM
  #17
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 10,807
vCash: 500
- get rid of the trapezoid & let the goalies play the puck again
- get rid of the instigator rule
- automatic icing when puck crosses red line
- call icing on the PP
- 3 pts for regulation win, 2 pts for ov win, 1 pt for SO win, loser still gets pt for ov/so loss
- eliminate penalty for over the glass clear outs in defensive zone
- make the nets one inch higher & two inches wider
- increase draft eligibility to 19 yrs old, not 18 & have an 8th round
- eliminate staged fighting by throwing them out of the game
- 2 min penalty & game misconduct for hits to the head of any kind, pending review
- 2 min penalty & game misconduct for any reckless play resulting in injury, pending review
- if offensive player is in your crease, crosschecking him below the shoulders is allowed

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 11:03 PM
  #18
Stylizer1
BoomBapOriginalRap
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobby View Post
Don't like it. You'd need to have both team have all 3 shooters shoot, even if the game is decided after 2 shooters. IE: Ottawa is up 2-0 on the Leafs. Leafs have 1 more shooter. At this point the player doesn't give a crap. If he scores, do you award the goal to the 1st shooter, or the 2nd shooter for the Sens. The player who scores the winning goal gets the point.



I'd like 3 RV, 2 OTV OR SOV, 1 OTL OR SOL. Yes it screws up a bunch of historical stats, but too ME it makes the most sense.
This is why I don't want 3 points to be awarded. Teams shouldn't be rewarded for losing.


Agreed



You need to award Division winners with something (I'd say move them down to 4th seed, no lower). In your proposal, you might at well just do away with divisions. When a 3rd place team has less points than the 8th place team and is awarded 3rd overall, that isn't right. It can never happen that 2 division leaders finish with not enough points to make the playoffs so I guess it would only pertain to one. If the 5 worst teams in the league are all in the same division the best of the lot shouldn't get home ice in the playoffs but should be given a spot for winning the division. Most likely 8th. That's the gift.



You better get a couple of more defibrillators in the building...that would be insane.
It's about more entertainment.

Stylizer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 11:06 PM
  #19
Mawlrat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Coaches challenge. Use it like the NFL does. One per coach per game.

As much as I believe the refs are trying to do their best, I find that some calls are really so terrible that end up deciding the game or giving one team momentum that is undeserved. I think the coach should be allowed to challenge those types of calls and the video judge takes a look and decides either play on the ice stands or is reversed. (similar to the goal judge)

Mawlrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 11:07 PM
  #20
Stylizer1
BoomBapOriginalRap
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
- get rid of the trapezoid & let the goalies play the puck again
- get rid of the instigator rule
- automatic icing when puck crosses red line
- call icing on the PP
- 3 pts for regulation win, 2 pts for ov win, 1 pt for SO win, loser still gets pt for ov/so loss
- eliminate penalty for over the glass clear outs in defensive zone
- make the nets one inch higher & two inches wider
- increase draft eligibility to 19 yrs old, not 18 & have an 8th round
- eliminate staged fighting by throwing them out of the game
- 2 min penalty & game misconduct for hits to the head of any kind, pending review
- 2 min penalty & game misconduct for any reckless play resulting in injury, pending review
- if offensive player is in your crease, crosschecking him below the shoulders is allowed
I think by giving 3 points for a win you would be knocking teams out by early December. The way the points are given now at least keeps the majority of teams in contention longer.

Stylizer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 11:26 PM
  #21
Sarcasticus
Registered User
 
Sarcasticus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 342
vCash: 50
- I like giving 3 points for a win, 2 pts for shootout win, 1 pt ot/shootout loss.

- Someone above mentioned the idea of a penalty for "reckless play causing injury" but I would give 5 and a game and automatic Shanahan review. "Reckless play" is somewhat subjective, so that would be up to the refs.

Sarcasticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 11:32 PM
  #22
SilverSeven
Registered User
 
SilverSeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
-
- if offensive player is in your crease, crosschecking him below the shoulders is allowed
This is basically allowed.

If they knew it was totally allowed, players would be pissing blood after a period. Defencemen would unload on them.

SilverSeven is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 12:50 AM
  #23
arglebargle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 1225
- no touch icing

- mandatory visors

- first punch/facewash after the whistle results in a roughing penalty

arglebargle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 01:30 AM
  #24
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,895
vCash: 500
3 points for regulation win. 2 pts for OT win. 1 pt for OT loss.

No touch icing.

Smaller goalie gear or larger nets.

Tougher enforcement of restraining fouls.

More games against Western conference.

World Cup of Hockey replaces NHLers in Olympics. Play it in autumn every 2-4yrs.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 02:59 AM
  #25
Topside
Registered User
 
Topside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,178
vCash: 500
No such thing as an instigator penalty.

Goalie interference which results in a no goal call is reviewable.

No retards with mics in-between or on the bench.

Topside is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:38 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.