HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

This Summer's Strike (If there is one)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-01-2004, 05:05 AM
  #1
FrankieD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
This Summer's Strike (If there is one)

With the end of the current CBA this summer, I know that the finance of the league will be changed either drastically, with a salery cap, or minorly, with some kind of luxury tax, as in baseball. As a Ranger fan, of course, I hope not the see anything too radical like a salery cap. With that being said, what I hope the league deals with is what I see as the biggest problem in the game: "The Trap". Hockey has changed alot during the '90s and into the 21st century. As the players have become bigger, coaches have used that advantage, and use the sytem as we all know as the trap. No longer do we see Stanley Cup finals like we saw in 1994 when two teams that depended on basically offence made it to the finals. Last years lackluster final between the Ducks and the hated Devils is a great example of what im talking about. No hockey fan wants to see the 5 opposing team' s players skating backwards or clogging up the neutral zone. I don't want to see that. But, no matter what, I don't think refs could call that a penalty. There are other ways the league could deal with it though. Heres what I would do:

1) Bigger Ice Surface (Particularlly Olympic Size) Although teams would lose seating due to the change, I believe this is the best way to speed up the game.
2) Elimination Of the Red Line-------More Pritty passes, more breakaways, more odd man rushes. It worked in the Olympics, I bet it will work in the NHL.
3) Goalies can be hit when they leave the goal crease-------I believe it'll help the flow of the game. Goalies won't play the puck on dump-in as much leaving the dirty work near the boards to the players. And if goalies like Brodeur want to play the puck, they better be willing to get hit.
4) If after an overtime 4 on 4 the teams are still tied up, there should be a 5 man Shootout-------Has nothing to do with ending the trap, but imagine the excitement it would create. It would also almost eliminate ties.


I certanly think these changes would be great for the game and great for teams with alot of talent and speed. The big slow defencemen (ex. Punrington) would also be facing extinction in my eyes. Teams like the Devils would also be in trouble.

FrankieD is offline  
Old
02-01-2004, 05:27 PM
  #2
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
the ice surfaces will not be made bigger, that isnt even an option. there is no way the owners will give up the revenue by removing seats

NYR469 is offline  
Old
02-01-2004, 06:04 PM
  #3
Bure9*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR469
the ice surfaces will not be made bigger, that isnt even an option. there is no way the owners will give up the revenue by removing seats
I don't think that will solve the problem, anyway. In Russia it is also very low scoring even though they have bigger ice surfaces. It's not very different in other European leagues. If you want to open things up then the league has to go to 4 on 4.

A salary cap is the best thing that can happen to the Rangers, so I don't know why you oppose that FrankieD. It will probably be a soft cap with a heavier tax than the NBA has if you go above the cap.

Bure9* is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 03:54 PM
  #4
kazo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Plymouth, MA
Posts: 959
vCash: 500
Get rid of the 2 ref system and allow the game to get back to being more physical (the way it was meant to be) and watch the game open up a lot more than it is now.

kazo is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 03:59 PM
  #5
E-Train
Registered User
 
E-Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,255
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=FrankieD](ex. Punrington)[QUOTE]

Is that Gary Thorne posting here?

E-Train is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 04:09 PM
  #6
Larry Melnyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Gloomsville, USA
Posts: 4,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankieD
With the end of the current CBA this summer, I know that the finance of the league will be changed either drastically, with a salery cap, or minorly, with some kind of luxury tax, as in baseball. As a Ranger fan, of course, I hope not the see anything too radical like a salery cap. .
Honestly, a salary cap is the only thing that can POSSIBLY save the Rangers from themselves and their myopic owners and GM (if he's still here)...If not, no matter what changes are made to the game, the rangers will still be the laughinstock and a cause for nightly indigestion...

OTOH, an opening up of the game would make it easier to root for a secondary team like the Thrashers.....

Larry Melnyk is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 04:18 PM
  #7
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
i think you start messing with the number of players on the ice and you start messing with records and the integrity of the game, and what if it doesnt work? you just magically forget those 4 on 4 season?

that's a dangerous solution to offer.

i dont believe that the players are too "big" to play on that surface.

I do believe there is too much grabbing and hold by players not taught to play the game and not worried enough about costing their team the game.

Perfect example is the superbowl last night. even in the final 5 minutes you saw all kinds of penalties being called because THOSE ARE THE RULES. Hockey can't even do that in a regular game, let alone one where the championship is on the line.

Edge is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 04:39 PM
  #8
Bure9*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
i think you start messing with the number of players on the ice and you start messing with records and the integrity of the game, and what if it doesnt work? you just magically forget those 4 on 4 season?

that's a dangerous solution to offer.

i dont believe that the players are too "big" to play on that surface.

I do believe there is too much grabbing and hold by players not taught to play the game and not worried enough about costing their team the game.

Perfect example is the superbowl last night. even in the final 5 minutes you saw all kinds of penalties being called because THOSE ARE THE RULES. Hockey can't even do that in a regular game, let alone one where the championship is on the line.
Anybody who watches overtime hockey knows that it will work. As far as the records, Gretzky benefited greatly whenever the Oilers threw Semenko(sp) out there to start a fight so they can send Gretzky and Messier out on the ice for the 4 on 4 hockey. Back then the penalty was a full two minutes, I believe, even if they scored.

Bure9* is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 06:05 PM
  #9
kazo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Plymouth, MA
Posts: 959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bure9
Anybody who watches overtime hockey knows that it will work. As far as the records, Gretzky benefited greatly whenever the Oilers threw Semenko(sp) out there to start a fight so they can send Gretzky and Messier out on the ice for the 4 on 4 hockey. Back then the penalty was a full two minutes, I believe, even if they scored.
Why not go ahead and make it REAL exciting with 3 on 3 hockey?

Bastardizing the game will solve nothing. By the way, the full two minute penalty goes back to the 40's or 50's.

kazo is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 06:18 PM
  #10
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
i think you start messing with the number of players on the ice and you start messing with records and the integrity of the game, and what if it doesnt work? you just magically forget those 4 on 4 season?

that's a dangerous solution to offer.

i dont believe that the players are too "big" to play on that surface.

I do believe there is too much grabbing and hold by players not taught to play the game and not worried enough about costing their team the game.

Perfect example is the superbowl last night. even in the final 5 minutes you saw all kinds of penalties being called because THOSE ARE THE RULES. Hockey can't even do that in a regular game, let alone one where the championship is on the line.
---Yeah the officiating in the NHL is a joke. The whole "let the players decide it" approach has yielded too much boring hockey. Defensive systems don't bother me. Watching the league's best players get mugged away from the puck late in close games without a call does. I'd like to see a legit crackdown on all of the clutching, grabbing and obstruction that goes on before any other major changes to the game are considered.

Laches is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 07:50 PM
  #11
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bure9
Anybody who watches overtime hockey knows that it will work. As far as the records, Gretzky benefited greatly whenever the Oilers threw Semenko(sp) out there to start a fight so they can send Gretzky and Messier out on the ice for the 4 on 4 hockey. Back then the penalty was a full two minutes, I believe, even if they scored.
Yes BUT it was done naturally {through fighting}. That goes back to my original point on the matter {in other posts} that if get rid of the stupid instigator rule and start calling the real penalties you will open the ice up. I am all for 4 on 4 situations but it has to be done naturally, not as a starting point.

4 on 3 powerplays just seems to roller hockey-ish to me.

Laches hit the nail 100% on the head with his comments. Defense isnt the problem, CHEATING and laziness is. Defensive systems have been around since the game was played on frozen ponds. Clutching and grabbing is a lazy habit that has taken seed in the past decade as officiating has gotten worse. That is not what the trap is about. The trap is a defensive system that tightens the game up, but it is not impossible to beat. However you can't go anywhere if you are being held onto.

The league is trying to find any excuse not to look at itself in the mirror. If the NHL does away with instigating that means Betteman is admitting it was a bad idea. If the NHL has to admit it's officiating is bad then they have another PR problem.

Betteman knows people blame him for the state of the game, but if he starts undoing his mistakes he's never gonna work again. It's all office politics and a matter of saving face.

Time will only tell if anyone can save the NHL from it's biggest problem.....itself.

Edge is offline  
Old
02-02-2004, 08:07 PM
  #12
tony
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: new jersey
Posts: 194
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Yes BUT it was done naturally {through fighting}. That goes back to my original point on the matter {in other posts} that if get rid of the stupid instigator rule and start calling the real penalties you will open the ice up. I am all for 4 on 4 situations but it has to be done naturally, not as a starting point.

4 on 3 powerplays just seems to roller hockey-ish to me.

Laches hit the nail 100% on the head with his comments. Defense isnt the problem, CHEATING and laziness is. Defensive systems have been around since the game was played on frozen ponds. Clutching and grabbing is a lazy habit that has taken seed in the past decade as officiating has gotten worse. That is not what the trap is about. The trap is a defensive system that tightens the game up, but it is not impossible to beat. However you can't go anywhere if you are being held onto.

The league is trying to find any excuse not to look at itself in the mirror. If the NHL does away with instigating that means Betteman is admitting it was a bad idea. If the NHL has to admit it's officiating is bad then they have another PR problem.

Betteman knows people blame him for the state of the game, but if he starts undoing his mistakes he's never gonna work again. It's all office politics and a matter of saving face.

Time will only tell if anyone can save the NHL from it's biggest problem.....itself.
the instigator rule isn't going anywhere because it'll be viewed to the layman as encouraging more fights. that sucks. they never should've brought it in to begin with. the on ice respect level that is shown by the players to one another is appalling. sure you can blame some of it on bad officiating but in the end you have too many players willing to take liberties not because they won't be penalized by the refs but because they won't get penalized by an opposing player. sad really.

tony is offline  
Old
02-03-2004, 06:15 PM
  #13
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
i'd say a combination of the two.

everyone is afraid to get their tails kicked but more importantly you don't wanna cost your team a big game.

everyone is gonna lose a fight sometime, but costing your team a game is a lot harder to get over.

As for the league never getting rid of the instigator rule, i'd never say never. With the lockout a gurantee right now and the game heading into the toilet, things are gonna have to change.

Edge 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 01:17 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.