If you were an NHL GM...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]Getting unanamous on the "no touch icing" and I say hell yah as well! I like the suggestions out there for the extra time 4 on 4 for the first 5Mins of OT then 3 on 3 the last 5Mins. Keep the trapezoid "stay in your freakin net!" and keep the red line out of the game as it has increased one of the most exciting plays in all of sports the "breakaway". Agree with Crowles on the shoulder pads but will the manufactures lobby the NHL to keep the hard plastic (whatever other materials they use) in ? And for Pete's sake get rid of the "instigator rule" once and for all!
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    Can't believe that I missed eliminating the instigator rule in my 6-point plan.  Make it a 7-point plan now.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM... : But like I said 49, that's a problem for engineers to tackle, not GM's. The link I posted above is an example of something that could be immediately eliminated from the game and make a difference in safety. BTW How'd you weather the storm? Barely even touched East Van unlike the rest of the region.
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]

    Very blustery down here in Steveston. Woke me up several times during the night, scattered the recycling all over the yard, tossed our garbage can 70m down the alley, and combined with the rain, caused me to decline my run this morning.

    However, the power stayed on all the way through!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Definitely no-touch icing. It's stupid and causes injuries. If a player on the attacking team clearly can get the puck, you could waive off the icing, but those races are no good.

    The other rules are fine. People forget that removing the red line opened up the game, the trapezoid helped reduce trapping because players can dump it in the corner without the goalie firing it back out and the point for OT losses was put in because teams were playing to tie. Those changes have all made the game better.

    The thing about no red line causing injuries is so stupid. Someone mentioned it one time and now people repeat it. Very few plays in hockey involve a two line pass. They aren't causing head injuries. Head injuries happen because of dirty plays, charging hits, inferior helmets and over-protective shoulder and elbow pads. To reduce them they need to call charging like they used to (is it ever called now?), continue to suspend hits that target the head, make helmets better and elbow and shoulder pads softer. Those pads should lessen the blow of hits, not make them worse. So simple.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM... : True, but they're GM's not engineers. When better helmet designs come along, bring them in, but until someone invents it, there's nothing they can do. But the sponge rubber already exists, my shoulder pads have a 3/4 inch covering so I know for a fact they are made. There's no way something like this http://www.hockeygiant.com/eassynrsspsr.html should be allowed on the ice.
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]
    There is no way to make a helmet that will stop the brain from moving inside the head. You can protect the head that may decrease the movement , but the brain doesn't need to be jiggled much to cause PCS.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Agree with the consensus on a lot of these.

    Like the trapazoid - stay in the net keep.  Not paying to watch you shuffle across the ice and push the puck away from a forechecker.  Hate the trap and everything that benefits it.

    Like the OT outlined by NAS, Sandog and others.  Let them play down to a verdict.  No gimmicks, no charity points.

    Like Crowls suggestion with the shoulder pads.  Long overdue.

    Keep the red line out, speed is good.  Suspend anything targeting the head.

    No touch iceing.  Works in college.

    Crack down on diving.  Call it as a stand alone penalty and allow the league to fine guys after games for dives that are obvious on replay.

    No biting.  Is that already a rule?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    I see some people talking about hybrid icing, whether or not there is a challenge for the puck.  That's the time the icing needs to be called!  There is no danger to a defenseman skating in alone and tapping the icing.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    I'm glad they got rid of the red line, the game has been much better since they did. I would MUCH rather them outlaw all hits to the head than see the league take a step backwards to the old-congested neutral zone that used to plague hockey in the 90s.

    Do NOT bring back the two-line pass rule.

    Icing is about the most boring play in hockey, the quicker they can speed it up, the better IMO. I don't need players getting hurt during these "game of chicken" races to the puck. There is almost never any skill on display during an icing, and that's all I really enjoy watching... skill.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    No touch icing for sure. 
    http://youtu.be/AErMCUzLdgg


    It's been used in European pro leagues since 1990 after a Czech player raced to get an icing call, crashed into the boards resulting in bad injuries to his spine and died a few weeks later.  I think Al Macinnis badly hurt himself on a similar play. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    There is a "penalty" to the offending team when icing is called, in that they can't change, and there's no TV time out, except when on the PK.  How about a slight change to the rule so that a team that's on the PK can't ice the puck -- but they can change.  That way, the team on the PP still gets an offensive faceoff out of the deal, but the defending team can still use the icing as a semi-effective PK tactic.

    Thoughts?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Not a big fan of the 3-on-3 or shootout... both are far too radical from 5-on-5 play that occurs for most of 60 minutes. 

    However, I do like 4-on-4 to open it up a bit.  Extend the OT to 10 minutes and play 4-on-4.  If there is no goal scored, game ends in a tie.  Even if there is a tie, I'm sure there would be plenty of excitement for the paying fans in those 10 minutes to leave happy without it being too gimmicky or like soccer with the shootout...  Also a fan of no points for a loss and 3 points for a regulation win.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]There is a "penalty" to the offending team when icing is called, in that they can't change, and there's no TV time out, except when on the PK.  How about a slight change to the rule so that a team that's on the PK can't ice the puck -- but they can change.  That way, the team on the PP still gets an offensive faceoff out of the deal, but the defending team can still use the icing as a semi-effective PK tactic. Thoughts?
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    49 - I think they did that back in the WHA days as one of their innovations to differentiate themselves from the NHL.  Might be worth a try.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    I think the penalty of boarding should be revisited.  I consider boarding up there with kneeing, slewfooting, ducking, and spearing in terms of severity.

     If players are hitting guys in the numbers ( a la Malkin) or leaving their feet, the penalty should be more than a 2 minute minor and not left to the ref's disgression.
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Remove the trapezoid and remove goalie interference behind the goal line. If a goalie wants to play the puck behind the line, then he will run the risk of getting hit or stuck behind the net.

    Hate it when I see a goalie use his body to hold off an opposing forechecker knowing that if he is hit, it's a penalty.

    Goalies should get all the protection in the world in the crease and in front of the goal but I don't see one reason why they should get more protection than a defenseman when they play the puck behind the net. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Modification of the instigator rule - A player will not be called for an instigator penalty if the player he attempts to fight with was just called for a minor or major penalty (excluding delay of game and too many men on the ice).

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    That's a novel idea that I haven't heard before. Most players like the instigator rule though.

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]Modification of the instigator rule - A player will not be called for an instigator penalty if the player he attempts to fight with was just called for a minor or major penalty (excluding delay of game and too many men on the ice).
    Posted by nrguy[/QUOTE]
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    With respect to points, I think that it should work as follows:
    2 points for regulation or overtime win, none for either as a loss.
    A game that goes to a shootout is considered tied.  One point each.  Shootout wins would be tracked as a tie-breaker, possibly the third after point-percentage and normal wins.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]That's a novel idea that I haven't heard before. Most players like the instigator rule though. In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM... :
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    I like the instigator rule as I don't want to see Thornton going after Crosby or Stamkos for no reason. That's just stupid.

    However, I do have a problem with guys like Cooke, Avery or Subban laying out a dirty hit then turtling behind the ref and hiding behind the instigator rule.

    This alteration is really to counter guys from taking runs at guys, getting a penalty, and then the retaliation gets an offsetting instigator penalty. That is the definition of stupid.

    If you're going to allow fighting in the game, allow it as a policing tool like it used to be rather than the staged carp we've been watching.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    I'm late on this one and most of you already discussed my points therefore just a little input.

    No-touch icing? Agree
    Removal of the trapezoid? since I agree on "no touch icing" keep the trapezoid.  Otherwise yes remove it.
    Reinstatement of the red line? won't change the concussions. Lindros , Kariya and Lafontaine got them with the red line. Do not re-instate the red line .
    Change to overtime? Yes,  don't like a point given for shot out. Make it 10mins, if no goal 4 on 4 gor 3 on 3.
    3 points for a regulation win?  If they do not remove the mercy point for OT then this would be a good idea.                   

    Oh, one more thing, can they make it obligatory for the tie on a GM to at least be ties and not worn as a scarf.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Weird idea on icing - Goalie can touch it up and get an icing call.

    What if you remove the trapezoid but allow the goalie to touch up on the icing call. This removes the dangers of icing in its current form as two players aren't going to be racing when the goalie can just touch it up but it allows the stretch passes as a goalie won't leave the crease if it's a 1-1 battle knowing that if he loses the race, with the forward, it's an open net.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    Finally read thru all these comments, and agree as follows:

    Change to " no-touch" icing called by the linesman

    Keep the trapezoid

    Reduce the armor plating on elbows and shoulders, and cover with 1 inch padding as RED suggested.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from gaaucoin. Show gaaucoin's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]What would you be pushing at the meetings? No-touch icing? Removal of the trapezoid? Reinstatement of the red line? Change to overtime? 3 points for a regulation win?
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]
    1. Get rid of the damn trapezoid.
    2. Re-instate the Red Line
    3. 2 points for a win...0 points for a loss...(no matter how a tie is broken)

    The red line will slow the game down (main problem) but make passing have to improve...that is shorter and more crisp , accurate. Takes some of the speed thru the neutral zone away, thus less severe collisions in open ice. hopefully less injuries (concussions)?
    Maybe I'm fulla baloney.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: If you were an NHL GM...

    In Response to Re: If you were an NHL GM...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to If you were an NHL GM... : 1. Get rid of the damn trapezoid. 2. Re-instate the Red Line 3. 2 points for a win...0 points for a loss...(no matter how a tie is broken) The red line will slow the game down (main problem) but make passing have to improve...that is shorter and more crisp , accurate. Takes some of the speed thru the neutral zone away, thus less severe collisions in open ice. hopefully less injuries (concussions)? Maybe I'm fulla baloney.
    Posted by gaaucoin[/QUOTE]
    I agree with everything but the no point for a 60 minute tie. I've never had a problem with a hard fought tie.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share