RicPerrott

Members
  • Content count

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About RicPerrott

  • Rank
    Albany Devil

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.njdevilsbook.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Jersey
  1. What about the time I got you the Devils tickets?? Or the PS2??? (Wait, that was Christmas wasn't it?) Ah screw it.... HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!! p.s. check your XBL
  2. Scott Pellerin. Scored one of the prettiest, most exciting goals in Devils' history against the Kings. Always loved his feistiness.
  3. Nic will get to keep his #28 too if Leach isn't playing. I think this was a good move if the staff felt that Anssi was an unfixable asset. It's not unfathomable that NJ could retain Havelid for one more year after this. I think it depends how far in the playoffs NJ goes.
  4. Ok, if that's the case it makes a little more sense just to be rid of him.
  5. Can someone explain how it makes sense to Dallas to do this? Doesn't half of Avery's salary count against the cap for the next 3 years? Not to mention having to pay half the money as well. What's the upside for Dallas? They could have left him to linger in the minors and not had any cap hit. It seems like a lose-lose for Dallas here. Any insight?
  6. Have the team that kicked the ball off to start the game have the choice for OT. That way the coin flip is at the start of the game as it's always been, and there is an added bit of pressure on the team winning the flip knowing that if they choose to receive, then they may very well be kicking off to start OT if necessary. Takes the "luck" factor out of it, although as has been pointed out, the team winning the toss in OT wins less than 60% of the time overall and only 35% of the time on that initial drive. But above all keep the NFL OT to sudden death. That should never change.
  7. The puck has to touch the goal line in order to be a goal either way. Your way of determining what's NOT a goal is the same exact way one would determine what IS a goal under this change...if any portion of the puck crosses the goal line, it's a goal.... simple. The definition of "close" does not change one iota, only the definition of Goal does. Then why have video review at all?
  8. Which is exactly what the NHL wants yes? And I doubt they'll be reviewing post shots, it's a pretty fair assumption that if the puck struck the post at an angle that caused it to cross the goal line even a little, it would not be coming back out in a way that would be confused. If you nitpick enough you can find fault with virtually every rule in the book. The current one isn't working all that well either.
  9. And how will it do that exactly? If a shot is close enough to be reviewed, it's going to be reviewed, regardless of what the determination of a goal is. You're trying to say that the league would make judgment calls as to which pucks are "close enough" to be reviewed differently under this scenario which is just silly.
  10. Disagree. Most of the issues with video review center around whether or not the puck "fully crossed the goal line." This completely eliminates that issue, as even if 1 millimeter of the puck is across the line, it's a goal. Also, if the puck is hidden from view, either by a body or glove, it is easier to determine whether or not any portion of the puck is over the line rather than is the ENTIRE puck over the line, which is the cause of most of the consternation today. Is it totally foolproof? Of course not. But it's certainly a hell of alot better than what they have today, and better IMO than adding another line that they can argue over.
  11. You want to make virtually all of these issues go away? Since the NHL seems to have no problem bastardizing classic rules of the game to serve its purpose, I present you with a (virtually) foolproof solution to video review goals... If ANY PORTION of the puck is across the goal line, it's a goal, period. Reduce the goal line from its current width to 1/3 of its current width. If any portion of the puck, no matter how insignificant is across that line.... GOAL. End of Story.
  12. This may be one of the most brilliant things I've ever read here. Seriously.