NHL HAS RIPPED HEART OUT OF GAME

[Rock]

NHL HAS RIPPED HEART OUT OF GAME

by Larry Brooks

http://www.nypost.com/sports/53985.htm

November 6, 2005 -- SLAP SHOTS IT'S THE conversation that Gary Bettman simply doesn't acknowledge, the one that takes place dozens of times a day between people long steeped in the culture and tradition of hockey who do not recognize the game that's been foisted upon them, and who fear that changing the sport entirely

[NJDevs4978]

But how about this? In 2003-04, there were 4.31 goals-per-game at even-strength. Through Friday, there were 3.89 goals-per-game at even-strength. That's right: scoring is down at even-strength, which, fundamentally forms the basis of the game, does it not?

Two years ago, with an average of 8.47 power plays per, less than a goal a game came on the specialty teams. This year, with 12.96 PP's per, 2.4 specialty team goals per game are being scored.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I love how he points out the increased number of power plays in the second paragraph and then says even-strength scoring has gone down in the first. Well of course there's not as much even-strength scoring because there isn't nearly as much even-strength play. If there was as much even-strength time as there was there'd be far more even-strength goals.

I'm so tired of hearing people whine about hitting being legislated out of the game, games I've seen hits have gone up the last several games as people have been adjusting. Particularly in the corners and along the boards. To me the people who complain about the NHL's aversion to contact have only two main beefs, the inability to make contact in front of the net and fighting.

And I don't know what you do about the in-front of the net contact without allowing illegal cross-checks, stickwork and holding. More people have to learn how to hit like Scott Stevens obviously, clean open-ice hits. Part of the problem too is because speed has such an advantage now, the big hitters often can't catch the little guys in open ice and smack them regardless of what is and isn't being called. Defensemen have to become more mobile and have better positioning to be able to legally hit attackers. And they will over time.

And the aversion to fighting I've had a problem with for a while, though all they have to do IMO to increase fighting is take out or at least relax those wussy instigator penalties. I'm not sure they're willing to do that, I do think Bettman thinks fighting is evil for some reason. I understand part of the rationale behind it was you didn't want one person (like a Domi) starting a fight then turtling so he can draw the instigator. And if one person does that or beats up on another without warning fine give him an instigator, unsportsmanlike whatever. But calling an instigator on a guy that throws the first punch a second before the other guy is lame.

Also with all the open-ice now you can't have one-dimensional goons anymore, now fighters have to be more complete players and able to play at least a couple of real shifts. I'm not sure I'm entirely against this part of it.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Hasan4978

[Triumph]

I agree with Brooks to an extent - battles in front of the net definitely have to come back. Scrums along the boards I can do without, for the most part. But we're what, 15 games into this new experiment? Everyone is so impatient.

But stupid of course forgets that the reason why the games are so 'heartless' is because much of the league has changed teams. Almost the entire Rangers roster is new players. Rivalries are not going to be the same when hatred hasn't had a chance to form.

Scoring was not kept down to give expansion teams a chance, it was kept down because the league was already bleeding money, and any increase in scoring would mean a consequent increase in salaries - it would take a few seasons for the market to normalize.

Football has the same mentality. You can barely touch a quarterback, any contact after 5 yards is a flag - yet NO ONE is saying that 'contact' is being removed from the game. It's not being removed from hockey either - did he watch the Rangers-Devils game yesterday? - it's just that the ILLEGAL contact is being removed. Where are the columns by Steve Serby about how the NFL is going down the toilet? Oh wait - there are none.

[RowdyFan42]

Such bitterness from Brooks. He should go on tour with George Carlin.

I must say, I think that's the first time I've seen Bettman blamed for the trap rather than the Devils.

[Fidgetess]

All I can say is thankfully the AHL is not like the NHL. I watched my first complete Devils game since the season opener yesterday, and I was completely bored watching it and really couldn't wait until it was over.

Yes, I know there's the "adjustment period" where there's going to be the 12 power plays per game, but you know what? I don't want to see 12 power plays per game. I want to see 5-on-5 action. I want to see the battles in the corner and the pushing in front of the net. I miss fighting. And to an extent, I even miss the holding and hooking because then the game could at least progress without having so many stops in play, which is exactly why I hate sports like football and baseball.

I used to go to at least 1 Devils game per year, but I'll stay strictly with the AHL this year. And be happier for it.

[NJD Jester]

I agree with Brooks. The game is nearly completely devoid of the physical battles and passion that made me a hockey fan to begin with.

That said, it's a game-to-game thing. I thought yesterday's Devils game featured some great hitting, if little of the true animosity these teams had in the past. I'm hoping the playoffs are the thing that brings the heart back in hockey.

As for Bettman, the most ridiculous thing he and the league are floating is this attendance record for the month of October business. OK -- you take a year off, cut ticket prices, and then unbalance the schedule so the rivals come to town twice as much. Yeah, that MIGHT increase attendance a bit, no?

<JESTER>

[Don]

As for Bettman, the most ridiculous thing he and the league are floating is this attendance record for the month of October business. OK -- you take a year off, cut ticket prices, and then unbalance the schedule so the rivals come to town twice as much. Yeah, that MIGHT increase attendance a bit, no?

Well, you see sir, many, many, many people during the lockout said that they were cancelling their season tickets, said they would never ever go to a game again, were fuming that everyone was greedy and were not going to be a part of it. The guy in the office next to mine said he'd never go to an NHL game ever again because he was pissed off at what they did to the fans. There were expectations that attendance would be down no matter what they did. They were expecting attendance to be down.... WAY WAY WAY down.

Remember baseball after their strike? Despite ticket price cuts attendance WAS WAY WAY DOWN. So for there to be an increase in attendance, no matter the ticket price drops and schedule is a minor miracle.

BTW - the fellow from my office was at the 6-0 game last night.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Don

[Don]

And to an extent, I even miss the holding and hooking because then the game could at least progress without having so many stops in play, which is exactly why I hate sports like football and baseball.

I was wondering how long it would be before people started calling to have clutching and grabbing back.

When we discussed the problem of game flow back in 2002, 2003, 2004 and throughout the lockout the vast majority of posters said the way to get the flow back in the game was to call the rules that were already in the rulebook. Hooking. Holding. Cross-checks. Call them all.

It was pointed out that this would cause a lot of penalties and people said that the players would have to adjust.

I can pull up the threads if you want me to.

So the NHL has granted the wishes of the majority of hockey fans. And now they are suffering the consequences of listening to the fans. The fans point out that all these penalties are stupid and they want their clutching and grabbing back.

So maybe the NHL will ease off on the penalty calls like they did in the past because the fans are getting upset and want them to stop calling the penalties.

Then the fans will be upset that they stopped calling the penalties and clutching and grabbing returned to the game. So the NHL will try it again the next year. And the fans will say that the NHL never follows through on their promise to crack down on clutching and grabbing.

It's unfortunate that the NHL has the most ridiculous fans of any sport known to mankind.

[NJD Jester]

Well, you see sir, many, many, many people during the lockout said that they were cancelling their season tickets, said they would never ever go to a game again, were fuming that everyone was greedy and were not going to be a part of it. The guy in the office next to mine said he'd never go to an NHL game ever again because he was pissed off at what they did to the fans. There were expectations that attendance would be down no matter what they did. They were expecting attendance to be down.... WAY WAY WAY down.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who were "they?"

Not I. Maybe those marketing gurus that figured hockey fans would react like baseball fans, even though hockey didn't offer a cocktease of a season before cancelling the Cup playoffs.

Don, are you saying that having a year away from hockey, reduced ticket prices, an unbalanced schedule, and a basic remodeling of the game with a slate of new rules DIDN'T have anything to do with a first-month surge in attendance?

<JESTER>

[SueNJ97]

I don't want the clutching, grabbing and hooking back. But I really don't like holding my breath wondering with each clean hit if it is going to be penalized. It's no way to watch a game. And I just wonder how many hits are not made because players know they have at least a 50-50 chance of going to the box for them.

Yesterday's game wasn't too bad in terms of the hitting. But in between periods, I think it was either Dano or Chico raised a great point on one of the hits. I believe it was Jaime had hit Jagr, cleanly, when he was carrying the puck and the refs, to their credit did NOT call it. Jagr gave him a look like "what the hell are you doing touching me, no BREATHING on me" in this new league and yelled at him and the refs for it. Because he now expects to NOT be hit, or if he is, to have the person who touched him be sent to the box. So I think there IS a problem.

[Don]

Don, are you saying that having a year away from hockey, reduced ticket prices, an unbalanced schedule, and a basic remodeling of the game with a slate of new rules DIDN'T have anything to do with a first-month surge in attendance?

Sure they did. I said that DESPITE those things, it is a miracle that attandence isn't down further. The NHL and NHLPA numbers exepected a drop of revenue of 20%. Given the attendance, the only drops will be in advertising and television and won't be near 20%.

There were people HERE on njdevs.com that said they wouldn't attend any games. And while those in Jersey have kept their word, people in Tampa Bay, Calgary, Ottawa... all have NOT kept to their promise to not go to any games.

[RowdyFan42]

It's unfortunate that the NHL has the most ridiculous fans of any sport known to mankind.

And it's unfortunate that you've been on a "my God, you people are all so STUPID!" kick ever since the season started. What's worse is that you deliberately ignored the bolded "to an extent" phrase -- meaning that she doesn't want to completely turn back the clock, just have the referees back off a little bit so we're not blowing the whistle every 30 seconds -- just so you can go off on another one of your rants about how much you can't stand us mere mortals. If you want to disagree, fine, but get off your high horse and knock it off with the sweeping generalizations.

[Don]

What's with the knight in shining armour routine?

So Rowdy, are *YOU* for the referees backing off?

Edited November 6, 2005 by Don

[devildave00]

I have to agree. After watching the game at the Garden yesterday I was bored most of the time. Very little hitting, Really no passion, on and off the ice. After the game on the street people were asking if they liked what they saw and overall the answer was NO! Bring back the passion. Watching a powerplay for 2 plus periods sucks. Tickets cost too much. At least give us something entertaining to watch. Thats my opinion and I am sticking by it.

[Don]

I have to agree. After watching the game at the Garden yesterday I was bored most of the time.  Very little hitting,  Really no passion, on and off the ice.  After the game on the street people were asking if they liked what they saw and overall the answer was NO!  Bring back the passion.  Watching a powerplay for 2 plus periods sucks.  Tickets cost  too much.  At least give us something entertaining to watch.  Thats my opinion and I am sticking by it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So never mind the "to an extent".... you are full blown for a return of clutching and grabbing?

[RowdyFan42]

What's with the knight in shining armour routine?

You're right, I should've waited until you went off on a male so that my outrage would have more credibility.

So Rowdy, are *YOU* for the referees backing off?

Slightly. I don't like seeing guys afraid to throw clean hits because they think it'll cost them two minutes. I don't like seeing defensemen reluctant to clear out the front of the net because they know they'll get called on it. I'm definitely all for the crackdown on clutching, grabbing, and hooking, but it's been seemingly expanded to cover all sorts of contact, and I don't like it. Hockey players shouldn't be afraid to play hockey.

I know you don't care what I think, but I also know you respect Sue's opinion. Go back and read her post (#10) in this thread. She's saying pretty much the same thing.

[Triumph]

I think clean hits have become less and less penalized as the season has gone on. Those hits are usually penalized for interference, rather than other things - there's not as much time to hit someone.

How many players have been suspended so far? Is it just Boulton and Havlat? That's important too - I do think the non-calling of penalties late in blowouts led to a lot of suspendable plays.

The problem with cross-checking in front of the net is how do you mandate it by a rule? I want it back too - but how?

Edited November 6, 2005 by Triumph

[NJDevs4978]

I don't want the clutching, grabbing and hooking back.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Hasan4978

['7']

Well attendance has gone down recently, something like 700 fans per game league wide.

Calgary and Ottawa was never the problem, everybody knew they'd be back. But how does NJ not sell out a home game against the Rangers and how do they only draw 10,000 barely against the star studded Penguins?

The NHL could've done this at any time, and I refuse to believe the league sabotaged its own sport from 1994-2004 just to keep salaries down. If you had a major crackdown in say 1998 and actually followed through, you wouldn't see salaries go through the roof because everybody would score more. So the monetary value of a goal would change. A 30 goal scorer making 4 mil wouldn't be entitled to 8 mil just because he scored 60 in a more wide open league the next year. The value of goals would change, salaries wouldn't go through the roof.

The league just let things get away, there were crackdowns in the past 10 years but they never really followed through, eventually everybody just threw there hands up and let things be.

[Jas0nMacIsaac]

New Jersey isn't a hot hockey market, success and profit is the only reason they are still here.

[JesterDevil]

There's been how many 10-1 or 10-2 games this year?

This game just ain't the same. Scoring chances are what exciting. Not 10 or 12 goal games.

[Triumph]

Well attendance has gone down recently, something like 700 fans per game league wide.

Calgary and Ottawa was never the problem, everybody knew they'd be back. But how does NJ not sell out a home game against the Rangers and how do they only draw 10,000 barely against the star studded Penguins?

The NHL could've done this at any time, and I refuse to believe the league sabotaged its own sport from 1994-2004 just to keep salaries down. If you had a major crackdown in say 1998 and actually followed through, you wouldn't see salaries go through the roof because everybody would score more. So the monetary value of a goal would change. A 30 goal scorer making 4 mil wouldn't be entitled to 8 mil just because he scored 60 in a more wide open league the next year. The value of goals would change, salaries wouldn't go through the roof.

The league just let things get away, there were crackdowns in the past 10 years but they never really followed through, eventually everybody just threw there hands up and let things be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is delusional. The NHL couldn't do this at any time - you're right to say they didn't deliberately sabotage their sport, but they didn't try to open up scoring as much in previous years either. Salaries, however, would go through the roof - not proportionally, but arbitration awards would be far higher, and as a result UFAs would demand more as well.

[NJD Jester]

New Jersey isn't a hot hockey market, success and profit is the only reason they are still here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Profit?

<JESTER>

[MantaRay]

Sadly, I agree with Brooks I find the new NHL boring, tentative and without the passion of the last season.

I would rather see a tough played 2-1 game than a defense-challenged-7-6 fiasco.

[thefiestygoat]

Sadly, I agree with Brooks I find the new NHL boring, tentative and without the passion of the last season.

I would rather see a tough played 2-1 game than a defense-challenged-7-6 fiasco.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree 100% I hope there is more passion come playoff time.