armchairgm
all sports, all you
+ Add Friends
You are not logged-in.
Sign Up - Log In
Main Page
Sports
Write
Articles
Hot Links
Images
Meet People
Fun
Explore
MLB - NFL - NBA - NHL - College Basketball - College Football - Soccer - Nascar - Other
Article - Locker Room Discussion
All Articles - New Articles - Today's Articles
Submit a Link - Approve Links
Picture Game - Ratings - Polls - Pick Game - Quiz Game - Spring Silliness
Random Page - Random Image - Random Fan
Edit
Page history Discuss pageWhat links here

Is Hockey fixable?

9
Vote

by user TehLoki

While watching Around The Horn a few days back, an intersting topic came up. Is hockey fixable? We all know these past 2 season were uneventful and horrible with ratings. Not to mention the Stanley Cup finals were a snore. Which begs the question..Can hockey be brought back to the days of old?

There's only 1 solution. Bring back the old rules, bring back the enforcer, bring back the violence and bring back the love of the game. Ever since these new rules came into effect (although I LOVE the no more 2 line pass), hockey has been boring. It's all about speed and finesse, no longer are you required to have a few goons rattle a teams morale. Guys like Brashear, Fedourk, Rob Ray, Barnaby, Kasperitis, and many more infamous instigators are no longer needed other than small support roles or to go out and land cheap shots (i.e Simon).

I used to love watching hockey, nothing was better than watching the Devils and my Flyers face off. it was physical, there was strategy and best of all, the rivalry. The Flyers and Devils were the 2 toughest teams in the league. Building with a mix of speed and power, the teams dominated so easily, although most of the wins going to the Devils ( : ( ) because Broduer is the beat goalie in the NHL, probably ever (No offense Roy lovers).

Now, it's just boring. I don't wnat to see 6-5 games, or 7-2 blowouts. I miss seeing the 1-0 close games, or the 0-0 games. The true games. I agree we should keep the shootout method, I LOVE that, it's great. Please, bring back the ways of old. These new rules make the Broad Street Bullies cry themselves to sleep at night, knowing the game they once loved is now a sissy sport.


Enable Comment Auto-Refresher
Awrigh01All-Star
925 days ago
Score 3+-
They need to cut down on the number of teams. If they did that the games would be better.
Permalink | Reply
TehLokiVarsity Captain
925 days ago
Score 1+-
Well if they do that, what teams would the get rid of? The worst? The lowest attendent teams?
Permalink | Reply
JuTMSY4Legend
925 days ago
Score 0+-
The teams in the south!!!
Permalink
False ProphetAll-Star
925 days ago
Score 0+-
I agree with Ju. Cut teams without success in states that are not natural Hockey fan bases
Permalink
JuTMSY4Legend
925 days ago
Score 0+-
That would most likely include teams w/ low attendence...phoenix and florida come to mind...you could cut a Cali team...the ducks attendence is really only up because of how good they were... overall the talent is just diluted and there's a lack of interest in some spots...
Permalink
JuTMSY4Legend
925 days ago
Score 1+-
Is what fixable?
Permalink | Reply
False ProphetAll-Star
925 days ago
Score 1+-
I've probably said this a thousand times by now, but here's my take:

If you think that the NHL should be panicking, and that they have a problem, you're wrong. After the Lockout, the NHL hit the reset button on their history, and said "If you want to watch us, you have to like the new NHL, not the old one. Like us for who we are now, and not what we once were."

Btw, I like the new NHL better
Permalink | Reply
Alex HolowczakHall of Famer
925 days ago
Score 0+-
Hockey is a great game. They should play the international rules - hockey is popular in Sweden etc. and Russia, so use those rules for the game. Also, it would help Canada and the US come Olympics time.

The number of teams need to be 30. With more and more international players looking to play in the NHL, it is important that there are enough places for them. It will help internationalise the game, which is good for it (although not from a US perspective).

My question is, does hockey need to be popular to succeed? The quiet life can be quite appealing to some players. And fans. In Britian hockey is a minority game, but games are filled to capacity. But there's no media coverage. The NHL doesn't need to be back page news to be great.
Permalink | Reply
TehLokiVarsity Captain
925 days ago
Score 0+-
How not from a US perspective? I love watching olympic hockey. I root heavily for us. Hockey is losing it's buzz because it's just not the same. The game remains popular in Canada since it's their game, and it's popular in Europe but it's shorter seasons and smaller rinks. I don't see how that'd help the NHL. I played street hockey (Was banned form playing ice hockey, I was huge for my age and too aggressive.) for 10 years, under standard NHL rules. Me and like 60 people put our own league together and played. The old rules were great. You needed strategy to win, you needed speedsters and enforcers alike. Nowadays, it's whoever has the smaller, faster team wins. The new NHL has it's good point (No 2-line pass, shootout format) but it's just not what it used to be. Like I said, give me 1-0 games anyday, with big guys fighting and bench clearing brawls between rivals. Those were the days.
Permalink
False ProphetAll-Star
925 days ago
Score 2+-
you obviously have no idea what your talking about because the rest of the World uses larger rinks than the NHL
Permalink
JuTMSY4Legend
925 days ago
Score 0+-
Mostly wider if I remember correctly?
Permalink
Alex HolowczakHall of Famer
925 days ago
Score 0+-
My point was that with more Europeans in the NHL, it wouldn't help the US perception of it, but it would help the European perception of it. And season length is nominal really.

I loved the old rules too. The new goalie restriction zone is utterly pointless, for instance. And I prefer the NHL to the International Icing rule. I like the two-line pass rule when it was allowed, it helps with breakaways etc.

I think it depends what people prefer. Pace and skill against strength and stamina. I prefered the strategic rules too, I must admit (as a package).

Bigger rinks may lead to higher scoring too, since there's more open ice space for the players to use.
Permalink
Alex HolowczakHall of Famer
925 days ago
Score 0+-
I think NHL is 85ft wide, and International Rules are 100ft wide. I'm prepared to be wrong though... But those numbers sound familiar.
Permalink
TehLokiVarsity Captain
924 days ago
Score 0+-
I prefer strength and stamina with strategy involed. This fast pace shit bores me. I remember in the old days you heard of more than 3 plays constantly. You had Leclair, Stevens, lindros, Messier, Jagr, the Bure Brothers, Karyia, Hull, Shanahan, Federov.

There were tons of stars, not all you hear is Ovechikin(sp?), Crosby, Malkin.It's just boring now.

If playing international rules allows more strength and the resurgence of enforces to implicate some strategy to the game, then let's do it.
Permalink
False ProphetAll-Star
924 days ago
Score 0+-
I like the faster pace, but think playing on an Olympic rink would be better. I've seen games played on both, with the Gophers playing on an Olympic rink, and the Wild playing on the NHL rink. I prefer the Olympic rink. A high scoring game can be physical as well. Look at Lacrosse. Same game played on foot with 11 guys instead of 5. Usually about 16-17 goals per game. No fights, but it gets pretty physical.
Permalink
TehLokiVarsity Captain
924 days ago
Score 0+-
No fights? You kidding? I've been to many Wings games. Lots of fights they balance the game out when the game gets boring. Lacrosse is supposed to be high scoring, hockey isn't.
Permalink
False ProphetAll-Star
924 days ago
Score 0+-
there doesn't need to be fights in Lacrosse. Hockey could be Lacrosse on Ice. Why not? Still physical, but exciting pace
Permalink
ChristofMVP
924 days ago
Score 1+-
Hockey is fixable. This is rock bottom for the sport. IF they keep the style of play of the past two seasons, and get amarketing department with a combine IQ over 70, then things should take off.
Permalink | Reply
Taytay 24All-American
924 days ago
Score 0+-
Agreed. The game does not need major changes. The NHL office is the problem here. Getting the league on a decent network marketing the players would go a long way.
Permalink
HogpageWaterboy
924 days ago
Score 0+-
The new rules were supposed to make the game more popular. More scoring. Faster. You said in the opening paragraph that the last to Stanley Cup finals have been a snore. Last years finals went to 7 games. It was awesome. The problem was, unless you just love the game of hockey (like me) you didn't watch because of the small-market matchup, Carolina/Edmonton. It's not the game. The game is exciting. It's all on the shoulders of the worse commish in sports. Gary Fucking Bettman

__________________________ The Pig Pen

http://hawgs...logspot.com/
Permalink | Reply
KelsdadAll-Star
924 days ago
Score 2+-
All they need is a national TV contract. At least to start. We all hear about Sidney Crosby, but how many have seen him?
Permalink | Reply
JuTMSY4Legend
924 days ago
Score 0+-
But they signed that big contract with versus...pfffff...hahaha...ok i couldn't say that with a straight face...you got me!
Permalink
Anonymous Fanatic #1
924 days ago
Score 0+-
"Not to mention the Stanley Cup finals were a snore... I miss seeing the 1-0 close games..."

Um... did you watch the finals this year? Let's review: 1) Game 2's final score: 1-0, with the only goal scored late in the third by a grinder, not a superstar. Intense game. 2) Every game except the final one was tightly contested on the ice and on the scoreboard. Yeah, Game 5 was a blowout, but that sort of collapse has happened many times in the NHL, not just since they cracked down on fights. 3) The Ducks had by far the most fighting majors in the league, and play an incredibly physical game (just ask Chris Pronger).

The Ducks are the most old-school team in the league right now, and they won the Cup — as it should be.

Granted, fighting overall is way down, and the league needs to ditch that stupid instigator rule. Fighting is, and should be, part of hockey. And yes, the refs need to lighten up and "let 'em play," and not make the players so afraid to hit that the game becomes figure skating.

But reducing the clutch-and-grab of the 90s has improved the game; watching another neutral zone trap team bore their way to a Cup is not what I want to see brought back. Let 'em skate fast and hard, without the old obstruction, and we'll see more scoring AND more big hits. All the league needs to do to improve play is let the fights and clean hits continue without reverting to the tedious traps and wrestling-on-ice that plagued most of the 90s and early 00s.

Now that TV contract is another story... Hmm, let's put hockey on the friggin' bass fishing channel! Great idea! Blah.
Permalink | Reply
TehLokiVarsity Captain
924 days ago
Score 0+-
That's all I want is the ways of old. Let us big guys play, let us hit. Sheesh. Watching the game's little guys play is boring, they just run : (
Permalink
TylersaltAll-Star
924 days ago
Score 0+-
Go back to the original six!
Permalink | Reply
Taytay 24All-American
924 days ago
Score 0+-
Think you might be in the minority on this. In general, people like speed and scoring, not clutching and grabbing. Physical play in the new NHL is still required, but the old goons need to go with their Plan B.
Permalink | Reply
Add your Comment
ArmchairGM welcomes all comments. If you don't want to be anonymous, Register or Login. It's free


Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Is_Hockey_fixable%3F"

This page was last modified 20:02, 14 June 2007. Content is available under the GFDL.

Contribute

ArmchairGM's pages can be edited.
Is this page incomplete? Is there anything wrong?
Change it!

Edit this page Discuss this page Page history

Recent contributors to this page

The following people recently contributed to this article.

Embed this on your site

Main Page About Special Pages Help Terms of Use Advertise