HFBoards

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

Shot of the experimental wider blue line currently being used in the AHL

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-28-2003, 04:23 PM
  #1
Unthinkable
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Shot of the experimental wider blue line currently being used in the AHL



http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=970081593064

AHL hopes to see if size matters
League starts test of thicker blue lines

DAMIEN COX
HOCKEY COLUMNIST

HAMILTON—Not nearly thick enough.

After one guinea-pig game, that would be the initial observation.

Of course, it was a rather one-sided guinea-pig game between the Hamilton Bulldogs and St. John's Maple Leafs last night at Copps Coliseum, and one-sided games often produce all kinds of skewed assessments and determinations.

This was the first of a series of American Hockey League games in which wider blue lines will be used on an experimental basis to provide information to the NHL as to whether such a scheme might break up the hopeless logjam that has gummed up the works in this, the Dead Puck Era.

For the record, the Bulldogs beat the Baby Leafs 5-1.
.
.
.

 
Old
12-28-2003, 04:40 PM
  #2
Unthinkable
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Another article about this in the Sun

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Toront...28/298451.html

Sun, December 28, 2003

One small creative step
Positive reaction to first of eight experimental AHL games with new-line structure
By MIKE KOREEN, TORONTO SUN

HAMILTON -- The American Hockey League staged a line dance last night at Copps Coliseum and the invited guests seemed to enjoy the outing. After the the first of eight AHL games -- requested by the NHL -- with the blue lines and red line widened by two feet apiece, members of the Hamilton Bulldogs and St. John's Maple Leafs and AHL president/CEO David Andrews said they noticed a few positive changes.

Eye-popping changes they were not, but some long passes stayed onside and it was easier for players to exit the attacking zone when the puck came out with the blue line expanded. The impact of the bigger neutral zone wasn't huge during the Bulldogs' 5-1 win before a curious season-high crowd of 6,774, but it's a concept worth examining.

"I don't think it will revolutionize hockey, but there were certainly six or seven plays that would have been blown down as two-line passes with the regular lines," Andrews said. "It's a little difficult to evaluate on one game when you have two teams that are normally pretty offensive minded (the two highest-scoring teams in the AHL) and don't trap a lot ... One thing I will say is I didn't see any negatives about it. I thought it created a few good things."

Designed to create a larger neutral zone (the changes did not increase the size of the offensive zone) and to help break the trap, the new line structure did not lead directly to any goals. In time, however, Bulldogs veteran defenceman Karl Dykhuis thinks the best offensive players will adapt.

"More offence means the better players are going to have an advantage," Dykhuis said. "You're not talking a major advantage, just a small, small advantage. But any advantage is good because there are fewer and fewer goals."
.
.
.

 
Old
12-29-2003, 06:07 AM
  #3
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
It's a BS ploy by Bettman to make people believe he is actually doing something. The plan was originally proposed by Bobby Smith, but in his version each blue line would be expanded to six feet, and the blue lines would be expanded in both directions, making both the offensive and neutral zones bigger when the puck moved into them.

1. Bettman shrunk Smith's proposed size, thus limiting the impact of the whole system.

2. He didn't extend the line into the neutral zone, so the offensive zone sees no benefit.

3. It's only being tried in eight games. How can you possibly evaluate anything in so few games?

Clearly Bettman has set this experiment up to fail, that slob. No more proof need be offered other than Bettman's own statement on the experiment: "No. I think as a practical matter in terms of the aesthetics of the rink, at some point it wouldn't make sense."

He's such a dog.

dedalus is offline  
Old
01-01-2004, 10:34 AM
  #4
GoM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus
It's a BS ploy by Bettman to make people believe he is actually doing something. The plan was originally proposed by Bobby Smith, but in his version each blue line would be expanded to six feet, and the blue lines would be expanded in both directions, making both the offensive and neutral zones bigger when the puck moved into them.

1. Bettman shrunk Smith's proposed size, thus limiting the impact of the whole system.

2. He didn't extend the line into the neutral zone, so the offensive zone sees no benefit.

3. It's only being tried in eight games. How can you possibly evaluate anything in so few games?

Clearly Bettman has set this experiment up to fail, that slob. No more proof need be offered other than Bettman's own statement on the experiment: "No. I think as a practical matter in terms of the aesthetics of the rink, at some point it wouldn't make sense."

He's such a dog.


GoM is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:36 AM
  #5
Stastny
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: almost not locked ou
Posts: 1,437
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Stastny
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus
It's a BS ploy by Bettman to make people believe he is actually doing something. The plan was originally proposed by Bobby Smith, but in his version each blue line would be expanded to six feet, and the blue lines would be expanded in both directions, making both the offensive and neutral zones bigger when the puck moved into them.

1. Bettman shrunk Smith's proposed size, thus limiting the impact of the whole system.

2. He didn't extend the line into the neutral zone, so the offensive zone sees no benefit.

3. It's only being tried in eight games. How can you possibly evaluate anything in so few games?

Clearly Bettman has set this experiment up to fail, that slob. No more proof need be offered other than Bettman's own statement on the experiment: "No. I think as a practical matter in terms of the aesthetics of the rink, at some point it wouldn't make sense."

He's such a dog.
Great Post. Sums it up perfectly.

Stastny 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 08:41 PM.

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.