Jump to content

Things the NHL needs to fix


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, thecoffeecake said:

This idea that #1 and #2 have to meet in the conference finals is dumb. Competing more directly with local rivals is good for the game, both in terms of jostling for playoff position and meeting in the playoffs consistently. Beat the teams in your region, then move on from there. It makes sense. We wouldn't get Washington - Pittsburgh every year without this format.

Disagree with this largely, ESPECIALLY if you're of the opinion that the divisional teams need to meet more often in the regular season as well.  I mean, why have a 30 team league at all?  Why not just start up your own "Northeastern United States" Hockey League featuring the Devils, Islanders, Rangers, Penguins, Flyers, Bruins, Sabres and Capitals, and call it a day? 

Beyond that, a team with the better record should get the reward of playing a team that just barely squeaks into the playoffs, that's the whole point of a long regular season and enduring 82 games.  Otherwise, it's just a formality and why even bother?  

I definitely agree that divisional teams should play each other more often than other teams in the same conference, and certainly more than teams in the opposite conference, but to that point, I think there's even enough animosity and rivalry based on sheer proximity and geography, that they don't need any help by segregating teams in the playoffs.  The league is 100 years old and traditions and rivalries already exist and are doing just fine.  If you keep it this way where teams don't re-seed, you're going to end up with the same boring matchups every post-season, and it's going to water down the regular season.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Playoff format is garbage. There is no reason the #1 and #2 teams in the league should be playing each other in the second round meanwhile Ottawa has home ice in the first 2 rounds. 

Scrap the divisions, 1v8 in conference, launch offside review into the sun, goalie interference review moves from officials to NHL Hockey Ops, crack down on slashes/obstruction. 

Offside challenges, and the intent to blow the whistle sh!t.  Also refs need to be more patient with the puck being handled by the goalie before calling the play dead.  And. fvck Cro

Just now, Toasterleavins said:

Ohh, get rid of the shootout and bring back ties for the regular season.

 

Institute a 3-1-0 points system for Wins, Ties, and Losses.

And why don't we all just make out with our sisters while we are at it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, roomtemp said:

So what's the solution to the shootout? Unlimited OT is unrealistic in the way the schedule is laid out and no one but weirdos on hockey message boards like ties so what is it? Or are we going to pretend the penalty shot was never apart of hockey before this and just yell about how its not hockey.

The day the NHL regresses and goes back to ties is the day I stop watching.

 

A penalty shot is a part of hockey when it's earned. It's a recreation of the breakaway & scoring chance that was denied.

A shootout is a completely different. It's an entirely different sport being played after the end of a hockey game. You're deciding one event with a completely different event? Huh?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

-I'd like to see point distribution go to a zero sum game.

  • My preference is to remove shootouts and go with Win / Tie / Loss = 2 / 1 / 0, I never found ties to be boring but I know I'm in the minority on that.
  • short of that, Reg. Win / OT Win / OT Loss / Loss = 3 / 2 / 1 / 0


-Remove the trapezoid

-I'd like to see the "puck over glass" penalty modified to either go back to ref's discretion or be challenge-able.

-I don't really have a probably with challenging offside or goalie interference right now, but if it becomes abused a little too much maybe the punishment for getting a call wrong is a "delay of game" penalty instead of losing a timeout

On the positive side, after thinking I would hate the hybrid icing I think it works great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a single fan would stop watching if the NHL abolished shootouts. It's probably not going to happen, but it wouldn't have any effect on fan support for the league in general.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, '7' said:

Not a single fan would stop watching if the NHL abolished shootouts. It's probably not going to happen, but it wouldn't have any effect on fan support for the league in general.

You don't know that. I said it if the NHL is stupid and regressive enough to go back to ties I'm not watching.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roomtemp said:

So what's the solution to the shootout?

Do it NHL '94 style. 

Both teams pull the goalies, whoever scores the most goals in 10 minutes wins. 

Sudden death after the 10 minutes. 

Edited by mfitz804
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a sudden-death (playoff style) overtime at 3 on 3. In the extreme off chance that it goes longer than 20 minutes, wipe the ice and bring them out again. That would be some serious fvcking entertainment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with 3 on 3 as well, and I think it would also bring a little magic back to penalty shots in general, and even the skills competition during all-star weekend, since we wouldn't be seeing as many breakaways and opportunities for players to showcase and test out individual and dynamic moves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, roomtemp said:

So what's the solution to the shootout? Unlimited OT is unrealistic in the way the schedule is laid out and no one but weirdos on hockey message boards like ties so what is it? Or are we going to pretend the penalty shot was never apart of hockey before this and just yell about how its not hockey.

The day the NHL regresses and goes back to ties is the day I stop watching.

 

Penalty shots are part of the game because they happen organically. Lining 3 guys up per team and taking turns is manufactured attempt to solve a problem.

One of the biggest problems of the shootut is the NHL thinks so lowly of them, they do not count towards the playoffs [tie-breaker, specifically.] If you're taking actions to make them not matter when settling tie-breaks, then why the hell have them?

Probable counter point: other sports use them, and they're used on the international/world stage. Problem with this point: nearly everyone of the losing side and neutral parties flip out because of how artificial it is.

Wanna keep the shootout? Fine, then make them actually count in the standings and do away with the ROW -OR- Make a 3-2-1 or 3-1-0 point system.

Edited by jagknife
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, jagknife said:

Penalty shots are part of the game because they happen organically. Lining 3 guys up per team and taking turns is manufactured attempt to solve a problem.

One of the biggest problems of the shootut is the NHL thinks so lowly of them, they do not count towards the playoffs [tie-breaker, specifically.] If you're taking actions to make them not matter when settling tie-breaks, then why the hell have them?

Probable counter point: other sports use them, and they're used on the international/world stage. Problem with this point: nearly everyone of the losing side and neutral parties flip out because of how artificial it is.

Wanna keep the shootout? Fine, then make them actually count in the standings and do away with the ROW -OR- Make a 3-2-1 or 3-1-0 point system.

Neither does any extended amount of 3 on 3 but that's okay despite no one earning it because?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jagknife said:

Penalty shots are part of the game because they happen organically. Lining 3 guys up per team and taking turns is manufactured attempt to solve a problem.

One of the biggest problems of the shootut is the NHL thinks so lowly of them, they do not count towards the playoffs [tie-breaker, specifically.] If you're taking actions to make them not matter when settling tie-breaks, then why the hell have them?

Probable counter point: other sports use them, and they're used on the international/world stage. Problem with this point: nearly everyone of the losing side and neutral parties flip out because of how artificial it is.

Wanna keep the shootout? Fine, then make them actually count in the standings and do away with the ROW -OR- Make a 3-2-1 or 3-1-0 point system.

Excellent point.  Never thought of it that way before.  I've actually always hated the "ROW" stat and column in the standings, but never really associated it that way.  When you put it that way, it trivializes the shootout even more.  

I've probably said this a jillion times, but my personal preference is just put ties back in.  I mean, if teams are evenly matched, why can't they tie?  At least for the regular season anyway.  Playoffs is a whole different story and thank God they haven't messed with that, and I agree in the post-season you need to declare a winner because at that point you're in a tournament to decide the best of the best...but in the regular season?  Let them tie.  So what?

Have a standard 5 minute OT, hell, at this point it could be 5 on 5, 4 on 4, or 3 on 3, I don't care, but if it happens to be tied after 5 minutes of extra time, so be it.  Just end the game and award teams a point.  No need to over-complicate things, no need to come up with crazy rules and try to fix what isn't broken.  2 for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss, and 0 for an OT loss.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, CarpathianForest said:

How about going back to pre-05-06 rules with the exception of ones related to safety. NHL is continually becoming like NBA with ticky tack penalties and pushing like 2 or 3 teams on a constant basis.

What game have you been watching? Interference and holding has been coming back. Thank God we haven't gotten back to water skiing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a hardcore purist when it comes to hockey, so some of these ideas are definitely not popular, but here's my list...

(1)  Fix overtime.  Eliminate the shootout.  Penalty shot contests are something you do at the end of practice for fun, not something that should determine who gets a point in the standings.  Also without a 3-2-1-0 point system, unless you are a very good team, you should just try to get every game finish tied, and then all you'd have to do is go .500 in the shootout and you'd finish with 123 points and probably win the Presidents Trophy without ever winning an actual hockey game.  As for overtime, ice hockey is played 5 on 5 except for when there are penalties.  I don't like 3 on 3 and I didn't even like 4 on 4.  Five minutes of overtime is too short, especially when the teams know they can just take their chances in the shootout instead.  I say do an ice cut after regulation ends (with two Zams this can easily be completed and frozen in 5 minutes), and then have a 10-minute 5-on-5 overtime.  If nobody scores, the game is a tie.  To be honest, I would even be okay with no overtime at all, at least that way every game is the same length.

(2)  Fix the standings.  3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss.

(3)  Trapezoid.  They might as well have made it a rule to not make passes from behind the other team's net so that Gretzky couldn't be so good.

(4)  Make the consequence for shooting the puck over the glass from your defensive zone the same as icing--faceoff in your zone and you can't change lines.  If it is clearly intentional, then it should be a penalty, but it's completely asinine that teams are going shorthanded for accidentally shooting the puck over the glass.  This was done after the 2005 lockout as a way to artificially increase scoring.  I've seen numerous times where a team goes down shorthanded from a call that could go either way, and then while killing the penalty they accidentally send the puck into the stands, and now they have to kill off a 5 on 3 when they maybe shouldn't even have been shorthanded at all.

(5)  Let the refs review any call they want.  If they deem it to be an important decision and they feel they need to get another quick look at it to make the correct call, why are we not allowing that?  People argue it will slow down the game too much.  Well first of all, it is way more important that the correct call be made, and if you fix the review process so that it is the same as the NCAA where the ref just goes into the scorekeeper's box and watches the replay himself, it won't take nearly as long as wasting time with phone calls.  In the NCAA, the refs have a lot more that they can review.  There was a national playoff game a few years back where a puck was shot out of play and they originally ruled that it went off the attacking team, who was down by a goal with about 30 seconds left.  They reviewed it and saw that the puck was sent out by the defending team.  This isn't a delay of game in college, but they wanted to make sure they put such a crucial faceoff in the right spot.  The review didn't take that long, they saw they got the call wrong, so they came out and had the faceoff in the zone where it should be.  The attacking team won the faceoff and scored the tying goal to send it to overtime where they ended up winning.  If the refs couldn't review it, their season probably ended, but instead they moved on to the Frozen Four.  If getting the call correct is this important for the NCAA, it should be just as important in the league that competes for the Stanley Cup.  To hell with human error being a part of the sport.  The players are the ones playing the game.  Let their actions be what determines the outcome--if the officials need to take a second look at such actions, then so be it.  Calls should be made on what actually happened, not what the ref thinks happened.  The counterargument to this is that there would be a million reviews, but that isn't the case.  They would be able to use their discretion on whether or not to review a play.

(6)  Fix the Tampa Bay and Florida anomaly in the division alignment.

(7)  Add a rule that prohibits anyone else from ever making any rule changes after mine are implemented.

(8)  Bring back the Devils jerseys we know and love.

Edited by devilsfan26
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2017 at 4:32 PM, newjerseydamo said:

the intent to blow the whistle sh!t. 

Also refs need to be more patient with the puck being handled by the goalie before calling the play dead.

Are you saying they need to wait longer to make sure the goalie has the puck covered, or do you mean if the goalie has the puck and wants to play it, they should give him a chance to do so before blowing the whistle?  If you're saying they should wait longer to blow the whistle so that they can make sure the puck is actually covered, you would pretty much just invite the forwards to start jabbing away at a goalie that is covering the puck, especially if you eliminate the intent to blow the whistle portion of that rule.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.