HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

NHL should be playing like WJC

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-30-2004, 06:47 PM
  #1
TheZherdev
Registered User
 
TheZherdev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
NHL should be playing like WJC

have any of you guys watched the speed intensity from the WJC. THIS IS HOW THE NHL GAMES SHOULD PLAYED. it reminds me of a decade ago, when it wouold be common to have atleast 5 goals a game. to be perfectly honest this is the most exciting hockey ive seen in a couple years. anyone share this opinon?

TheZherdev is offline  
Old
12-30-2004, 07:09 PM
  #2
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackburn2727
have any of you guys watched the speed intensity from the WJC. THIS IS HOW THE NHL GAMES SHOULD PLAYED. it reminds me of a decade ago, when it wouold be common to have atleast 5 goals a game. to be perfectly honest this is the most exciting hockey ive seen in a couple years. anyone share this opinon?

yea its been fun to watch. Its physical, it has speed, and it has goal scoring and good defensive plays. I enjoyed it. Better than the stupid trap.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline  
Old
12-30-2004, 07:20 PM
  #3
Theoren Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,535
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Theoren Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackburn2727
have any of you guys watched the speed intensity from the WJC. THIS IS HOW THE NHL GAMES SHOULD PLAYED. it reminds me of a decade ago, when it wouold be common to have atleast 5 goals a game. to be perfectly honest this is the most exciting hockey ive seen in a couple years. anyone share this opinon?
The olympics to me was the most exciting hockey I've seen since the Rangers were a competitive team years and years back. I haven't seen any of the WJC as of yet but from what people are saying, it sounds pretty good.

However, at least 5 goals per game to me doesn't seem very ideal...I could easily watch a 2-1 or a 3-2 game as long as the chances and the excitment was there.

Theoren Fan is offline  
Old
12-30-2004, 07:26 PM
  #4
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theo Fan
The olympics to me was the most exciting hockey I've seen since the Rangers were a competitive team years and years back. I haven't seen any of the WJC as of yet but from what people are saying, it sounds pretty good.

However, at least 5 goals per game to me doesn't seem very ideal...I could easily watch a 2-1 or a 3-2 game as long as the chances and the excitment was there.
yea i agree to that as well. As long the effort is their.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline  
Old
12-30-2004, 08:50 PM
  #5
007
You 'Orns!
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,491
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theo Fan
The olympics to me was the most exciting hockey I've seen since the Rangers were a competitive team years and years back. I haven't seen any of the WJC as of yet but from what people are saying, it sounds pretty good.

However, at least 5 goals per game to me doesn't seem very ideal...I could easily watch a 2-1 or a 3-2 game as long as the chances and the excitment was there.
I have to agree, the Olympics were just awesome. Some of the high-scoring games we have had in the NHL have been as a result of just incompetent defending, more than offensive skill, and that just looks like terrible pond-hockey.

007 is offline  
Old
12-30-2004, 10:01 PM
  #6
bmoak
Registered User
 
bmoak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,637
vCash: 500
Do you think it has something to do with the larger ice surface for international events?

A lot more room for skating and puck-moving and a lot harder to trap with the bigger neutral zone.

bmoak is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 02:29 AM
  #7
Sad London Ranger
RIP Boogie
 
Sad London Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: london england
Posts: 2,455
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Sad London Ranger
04 WC in Prague where Canada beat Sweden was equally great.

Is their a trend here?: Large ice surface.

I was advocating increasing the NHL ice surface especially since recently a flurry of
new barns was being built.

you put 10 - 6'+ footers on the ice 3 refs and the goalies supersized mitts and their is now way you can score goals.

I am actually watching the Swiss Spengler Cup in Switzerland and I have the opportunity to see Thornton, Nash, and St. Louis etc and you can see clearly the
trap is completely ineffective on the bigger ice rinks.

I know increasing the ice pads will probably never happen and sinceI have my doubts the intellect and integrity of the clowns who run the NHL anyway, and their serious desire to improve the product, I'd say the game is in jeopardy.

Sad London Ranger is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 05:26 AM
  #8
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,885
vCash: 500
i think the trend isn't larget ice surfaces but better competition. the nhl did fine for a long time with the dimensions they are using now. heck the blackhawks and bruins had smaller dimensions and plenty of skill players played for those teams. we all know what the problem is with the league and shootouts and stricter goalier rules aren't the answer. the answer is lose 6 teams.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 07:32 AM
  #9
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,944
vCash: 500
The larger icesurface is a factor, but the game in Europe was even more defensive and less scoring then in the NHL today untill they removed the redline offsiderule. Everyone was against it at first, coaches and players threatened to strike ect. because it would destroy the game, but today its obvious that its have had a tremendous positive effect for the game.

Ola is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 07:55 AM
  #10
Sad London Ranger
RIP Boogie
 
Sad London Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: london england
Posts: 2,455
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Sad London Ranger
I still think the rule sucks! I am not convinced taking the red line has made hockey better. The bigger ice allows skilled and fast players to stand out, defensive players
tend to lose a bit of an advantage.

I reckon NHL ought to find a compromise of a half way size between olympic and
nhl regulations.

but it will never happen.....

Sad London Ranger is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 08:44 AM
  #11
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by london ranger
I still think the rule sucks! I am not convinced taking the red line has made hockey better. The bigger ice allows skilled and fast players to stand out, defensive players
tend to lose a bit of an advantage.
The WJC is maybe not a fair example since junior hockey always is a bit less defensive. But Iīve followed the SEL very close the last 8-10 years and there is a distinct positive effect.

A extremly popular word among coaches today is "decision making", where as 10 years ago there was no real decision to make. Teams that didnīt have defense first on there priority list never accomplished anything.

There is always gooing to be traps, old or redefind. The fact that it worked in Europe isnīt a gaurantee that it would work in the NHL, but I personally canīt see how it could get worse. And the list of advantages is long and I donīt belive for a second that it would take much hitting out of the game, defensemen who are slow will have some disadvantage, fewer Rich Pilon could mean less hitting but...

For example there are more "lucky" oppertunitys, more goals scored on extremly fast transtition plays ect. Maybe not fair goals, but it opens up the games allot. Of course, important games can be just as boring and slow as with the redline, but once things opens up some games become extremly entertaining. You have to give up more defensivly to attack, and its harder to defend when you canīt use the redline as a 3rd defensemen...


Last edited by Ola: 12-31-2004 at 08:51 AM.
Ola is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 08:45 AM
  #12
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,977
vCash: 500
The Canadian team is tremendous.They could win the tournament by playing with no goalie.That's how good they are.

5 first round picks on defense and 6 first round picks up front plus Patrice Bergeron who is a NHLer plus the top young player in the world in Sidney Crosby

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 10:20 AM
  #13
Onion Boy
Registered User
 
Onion Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: Japan
Posts: 2,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
we all know what the problem is with the league and shootouts and stricter goalier rules aren't the answer. the answer is lose 6 teams.
Agreed completely.

Onion Boy is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 10:36 AM
  #14
Riddarn
1980-2011
 
Riddarn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 9,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by london ranger
I still think the rule sucks! I am not convinced taking the red line has made hockey better. The bigger ice allows skilled and fast players to stand out, defensive players
tend to lose a bit of an advantage.

I reckon NHL ought to find a compromise of a half way size between olympic and
nhl regulations.

but it will never happen.....
I agree with you. I think the removal of the red line was positive at first but now it's starting to go the other way. The fear of that long pass has made teams more defensive when games actually matter. Bigger rinks in North America and smaller ones in Europe, with pre-1994 NHL rules all over the globe would be the ideal solution to me. NHL regulation rinks are 85feet wide, IIHF rinks are 100 feet wide. Compromise and make them 92 feet wide all across the globe!

Riddarn is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 10:44 AM
  #15
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,805
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Son of Steinbrennerwe all know what the problem is with the league and shootouts and stricter goalier rules aren't the answer. the answer is lose 6 teams.[/QUOTE]
Couple that with the fact that most of the time the refs simply refuse to call obstruction away from the puck, and you have the current NHL product.

"I reckon NHL ought to find a compromise of a half way size between olympic and
nhl regulations."

Never going to happen as that would require almost every arena in the league to alter their respective dimensions. Those things cost lots of $$$.

True Blue is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 11:21 AM
  #16
barrel_master
Amber Heard
 
barrel_master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy
The Canadian team is tremendous.They could win the tournament by playing with no goalie.That's how good they are.

5 first round picks on defense and 6 first round picks up front plus Patrice Bergeron who is a NHLer plus the top young player in the world in Sidney Crosby
Ha ha, that's a bit far now don't you think?

barrel_master is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 11:41 AM
  #17
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddarn
I agree with you. I think the removal of the red line was positive at first but now it's starting to go the other way. The fear of that long pass has made teams more defensive when games actually matter. Bigger rinks in North America and smaller ones in Europe, with pre-1994 NHL rules all over the globe would be the ideal solution to me. NHL regulation rinks are 85feet wide, IIHF rinks are 100 feet wide. Compromise and make them 92 feet wide all across the globe!
You canīt have seen many games from the SEL when there still was the redline offside rule...

Ola is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 12:00 PM
  #18
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,977
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
Ha ha, that's a bit far now don't you think?
Want to compare the Team Canada roster to the Rangers,Penguins and Capitals?

Team Canada would beat all three teams

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 12:27 PM
  #19
Riddarn
1980-2011
 
Riddarn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 9,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
You canīt have seen many games from the SEL when there still was the redline offside rule...
I agree that the last part of the '90s before the red line rule was pretty horrible.

Riddarn is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 12:42 PM
  #20
barrel_master
Amber Heard
 
barrel_master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy
Want to compare the Team Canada roster to the Rangers,Penguins and Capitals?

Team Canada would beat all three teams
Don't get me wrong, Canada has an excelent team... I was just saying that if they didn't play with a goalie they probably wouldn't win that many games.

Also, although they've dominated their group... who exactly have they beaten? Their toughest team was finland (in my opinion) and although they have tons of heart they also lacked experience. It will all boil down to beating Russia or the USA and even though the US goaltending has been an issue, I still think it's better then what Canada has to offer. I still hope/think that Canada will win though.

barrel_master is offline  
Old
12-31-2004, 07:34 PM
  #21
Sad London Ranger
RIP Boogie
 
Sad London Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: london england
Posts: 2,455
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Sad London Ranger
[QUOTE=True Blue]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrennerwe all know what the problem is with the league and shootouts and stricter goalier rules aren't the answer. the answer is lose 6 teams.[/QUOTE
Couple that with the fact that most of the time the refs simply refuse to call obstruction away from the puck, and you have the current NHL product.

"I reckon NHL ought to find a compromise of a half way size between olympic and
nhl regulations."

Never going to happen as that would require almost every arena in the league to alter their respective dimensions. Those things cost lots of $$$.
this is where the NHL has its head up the respective a..e!
they were building new barns around north america and they were clinging to the old format.how many new arenas were introduced in the late 90's during the expansion years? 12/16 is my guess (florida, boston, la, minny, columbus, atla, philly, nash,
trnto, mtrl, carolina, phoenix as far as I remember)

instead they the league was advocating expansion, expansion and expansion. the talent was thinly spread so that many stars were able to command huge
salary premiums for what? who knows.

Now the wisdom says shrink the league. and the hockey players are the ones getting a bad rep.

half the league could have already had wider rinks.......

Sad London Ranger is offline  
Old
01-01-2005, 12:34 AM
  #22
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
The reason for the excitement and high scores has very little to do with the ice surface (which is by the way a bit smaller than regular international ice).

The elimination of the red line is probably the greatest contributing factor to the fast pace of the game. In addition the relative inconsistency and inexperience of these young players provides for mistakes which translate into goals. Lastly, there are 3-4 talented/semi-talented teams in which the game by virtue of comparison is quite honestly boys playing against men (eg. Canada vs. it's pool).

It's great hockey no doubt, and I've become an advocate for eliminating the red line as have numerous substantial hockey minds. With that said however, a larger ice surface is not the answer. The Swedish Elite League is the most defensive league in the world and they'll be the first to tell you that bigger isn't necessarily better.

BigE is offline  
Old
01-02-2005, 07:31 PM
  #23
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
The reason for the excitement and high scores has very little to do with the ice surface (which is by the way a bit smaller than regular international ice).

The elimination of the red line is probably the greatest contributing factor to the fast pace of the game. In addition the relative inconsistency and inexperience of these young players provides for mistakes which translate into goals. Lastly, there are 3-4 talented/semi-talented teams in which the game by virtue of comparison is quite honestly boys playing against men (eg. Canada vs. it's pool).

It's great hockey no doubt, and I've become an advocate for eliminating the red line as have numerous substantial hockey minds. With that said however, a larger ice surface is not the answer. The Swedish Elite League is the most defensive league in the world and they'll be the first to tell you that bigger isn't necessarily better.
Right on, in Europe there is talk about making the ice NHL size. Finland has already begun cutting down the size of the rink.

Taking away the redline offside rule will change the game, not big changes however. But it would be noticeable. I doubt Dave Anderchuk would survive in the NHL without a redline. And I can understand why people are afraid of these changes, I was really against it when the redline was removed in sweden. But today nothing talks against removing it IMO. Its not a desparate "it canīt get any worse why not try it" action. All the facts talks in favor of it.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-02-2005, 08:49 PM
  #24
Roger's Pancreas*
 
Roger's Pancreas*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,363
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Roger's Pancreas*
Even though its almost set in stone for Canada to whoop United States I do agree with the title. I love this tournament, we're watching the best prospects go at it tooth and nail w/o a single fight. Good riddance

Roger's Pancreas* is offline  
Closed Thread

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 01:49 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. Đ2015 All Rights Reserved.