1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

All-purpose hockey thread...

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by hockeybeat, Nov 2, 2005.

?

How do you like the new NHL, compared to what the sport used to be?

  1. I love it!

    39 vote(s)
    38.6%
  2. I hate it!

    4 vote(s)
    4.0%
  3. I could not care less!

    11 vote(s)
    10.9%
  4. They're playing hockey? When did this happen?

    10 vote(s)
    9.9%
  5. I don't like hockey, but I love the fights.

    2 vote(s)
    2.0%
  6. Is Wayne Gretzky still playing?

    1 vote(s)
    1.0%
  7. Is Sidney Crosby a girl?

    5 vote(s)
    5.0%
  8. I like what I've seen so far but I'm not sure if I love it yet

    29 vote(s)
    28.7%
  1. hockeybeat

    hockeybeat Guest

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    But that was a standing in 03-04. So, it wasn't implemented this season.
    That said, it's a ridiculous standing. No team should get a point for losing in OT. Wins and losses and nothing else.
     
  2. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    And then you'd go back to the days when OT was a giant snorefest because teams didn't want to risk losing their single point. And no way should you get two points for winning in a shootout.
     
  3. ondeadline

    ondeadline Active Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    I love the free flow of the new NHL and the way that clutching, trapping teams are going to have a tougher time (although the Sens appear to be doing OK with it.) Speedy players really are excelling. Who thinks that Eric Staal would be having such a good season under the old NHL?

    I agree that I don't like the shootout. But as a big-time hockey fan, if it brings casual or non-fans into the sport then I think it's worth it.

    I also don't think that a team should get a point just for extending a game into overtime. If you gave no points to an overtime or shootout loss, then I don't think that the overtimes would be defensive exercises that are boring. Also, if you simply have "W-L" in the standings instead of "W-L-OT," it's a heck of a lot easier to figure out where teams are relative to each other. Now you have to figure out how many games a team has in hand. If it's simply "W-L," you can have a GB column. Because of tradition, you'd still have a points column but it wouldn't be as relevant.
     
  4. Hank_Scorpio

    Hank_Scorpio Active Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    If you got rid of the overtime point, the end of regulation in one-goal or tie games would likely be more exciting, since teams wouldactually fight to get the two points or nothing.
     
  5. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Well-Known Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    Eric Staal would be reason enough to like the new system, which is basically reviving the old system.

    What's old is new again ... which helps take away some of the lockout sting. It's a combination of the old-style hockey, with Bettman's constant attempt at cutting down on fighting. Yes, we still have fighting, but more of it is the code than just guys dropping gloves for funsies.

    So far, so very good. Now to get enough nights off so I can see some more games for myself. :-\
     
  6. RedCanuck

    RedCanuck Active Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    Personally, I still think too many penalties are being called for the wrong infractions to totally love the new hockey, but I don't hate it. I would have liked to see the rule changes - i.e. the thicker bluelines, zone changes, tag-up off-sides, icing rules, smaller pads, etc. alone before imposing the rules crackdown at the same time. Then they'd know whether they would work on their own or if you'd need a crackdown.
     
  7. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    If they didn't call the obstruction and stick infractions, all the other changes wouldn't have meant a damn thing.

    The penalties have screwed up the flow of some of the games but I think as the season progresses and the players 1) realise what they can and can't get away with 2) get rid of years of habits that are no longer tolerated, the games will improve.

    The one rule I absolutely think is flat out stupid is that trapezoid area behind the net. Limiting the goalies puck handling outside that area is plain dumb. Besides it only affects a handful of goalies. On the other hand, it prevents guys like Hasek from fucking around with the puck when he clearly has no clue what to do with it.
     
  8. soccer dad

    soccer dad Guest

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    jr,

    i really like that rule. i remember watching devils-leafs prior to the lockout, and it was so awful because brodeur and belfour were so good with the puck. it was shot in, and they got it right back out.

    this new rule has demanded offences forecheck better, which leads to more deep-zone turnovers and more chances. it also demands defencemen who can move the puck quickly. it's another example of needing skill players and not stiffs on your blueline. halfmiler pointed out wade belak -- the maple leafs now realize they cant play him at defence for that reason. (soon, they'll realize they cant even play him at forward.)

    dont be surprised if the shootouts are eliminated next year and the 4-on-4 overtime is expanded to 10 minutes.
     
  9. Hank_Scorpio

    Hank_Scorpio Active Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    One thing that would help things would be to protect the goalie better.

    As it is now, since players aren't hooked and held, they are coming into the zone full steam and barreling into the goalie.

    Make it between the dots you can hit a guy to stop his progression to the net. It's hockey. They did that all the time in the 60s and 70s.

    You have to be able to protect your goalie and not let him get run over.
     
  10. Double J

    Double J Active Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    I think it was the Star that recently mentioned that Belak had had a typical "Belakian" game on defence, which is to say that he sucked. Pretty clever.
     
  11. friend of the friendless

    friend of the friendless Active Member

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    Mr J,

    Defencemen who weren't so mobile could get towed by strong-skating forwards in the old days. No longer. Plodders need not apply. Seeya Lyle Odelein.

    YHS, etc
     
  12. hockeybeat

    hockeybeat Guest

    Re: New NHL vs. the old NHL

    Allow me to quote from the Greatest of All Time: "I've already told our scouts that I don't even want to hear about a defenseman who's smart and tough but isn't mobile," Wayne Gretzky in the newest SI.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page