Jump to content

Mandatory rules changes that have to happen or else...


aziz

Recommended Posts

by popular demand (which is to say, CoachX), a thread dedicated to rules changes in the NHL that would MHAA (Make Hockey Awesome Again).  Should be a fun thread, but tend towards the serious.  Serious, though, meaning you think they'd be a good idea, not that they are likely.  Also, serious meaning not entirely dumb.  Though that is probably subjective, so hey.  Let them fly.

 

To get it started, the two I put in the thread now dedicated to chewing on Tucson:

 

1. All wood sticks (a la MLB).  Reduce shot velocity and release times from non-slapshot shots.  Creates a more predictable offensive environment (in terms of who is in a position to shoot and who isn't), and allows for a reduction in goaltender armor.  The combination of more observable shot releases and reduction in required protection for goaltenders creates (maybe surprisingly) a more dynamic and deliberate offensive zone situation.  Shots can still come from any angle, but will require more time and space to cleanly release, and goaltenders will be able to pick up shots far more cleanly (goalies today are taught to basically play the entire game from their knees, as shots come from anywhere at any time with no warning, and covering low for weird random crap is the order of the day.  It's lame.  Get the goalies back on their feet, and we let some quick but not 6'5" guys play).  With this, offensive possession starts to look to build strategic advantages, rather than rely on momentary tactical missteps.  A team that can BUILD time and space for a shooter is rewarded, a team that relies on chaos and surprise shots is not.  And, as hinted, it allows the discussion of goalie equipment size reductions to be practical.

 

2.  Add a backchecker to penalty shots.  A defender of the defending team's choice starts at the far zone's hashmarks.  This puts the defender 60 feet behind the shooter.  This is plenty of space for the shooter to execute a breakaway without pressure, so long as he plays it like a normal game situation.  He even has a few extra seconds to get clever, but only a few seconds.  This eliminates the 2 MPH, back and forth, make a million "dekes", turn the goalie inside out stupidness of the current implementation.  You are awarded a breakaway, and you will have a free and clear path to the goalie without interference, so long as you aren't Patrick Kane about it.  The advantage of the PS is preserved, but the unenjoyable clownshow of modern shootouts goes away.  Honestly, every time I watch them, it reminds me of that a**hole that wants to put moves on the goalie during pre-game warmups.  Either you can beat the goalie at game speed or you can't.  I don't care -and neither should the league- that you can dangle like a crazy person while under zero pressure.  Get rid of that crap.

 

Ok, ice broken.  Let's hear it.  I do not enjoy the current game, really at all.  The nuance of the game has been lost in speed and chaos, and we need to find a way back to a sport that is built on a blend of talent, perseverance and structure.  How do we do that.  Yes, this is as though anything we say means anything other than posts on a forum, but hey, express the dream.

  • Like 1
  • Good Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want the penalties called. 
Right now the defending team killing a penalty pretty much needs to injure a player to get a second penalty called. 
Also cross checking has absolutely no consistency on what’s called and not called. 
It also seems that certain penalties can’t be called after the whistle blows, especially after a goal is scored. 
Penalties also need to be consistent from regular season to playoffs. 
#2 would be either totally eliminate the shoot out, or have the shoot out players being picked based on the lowest scoring players from each team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, aziz said:

by popular demand (which is to say, CoachX), a thread dedicated to rules changes in the NHL that would MHAA (Make Hockey Awesome Again).  Should be a fun thread, but tend towards the serious.  Serious, though, meaning you think they'd be a good idea, not that they are likely.  Also, serious meaning not entirely dumb.  Though that is probably subjective, so hey.  Let them fly.

 

To get it started, the two I put in the thread now dedicated to chewing on Tucson:

 

1. All wood sticks (a la MLB).  Reduce shot velocity and release times from non-slapshot shots.  Creates a more predictable offensive environment (in terms of who is in a position to shoot and who isn't), and allows for a reduction in goaltender armor.  The combination of more observable shot releases and reduction in required protection for goaltenders creates (maybe surprisingly) a more dynamic and deliberate offensive zone situation.  Shots can still come from any angle, but will require more time and space to cleanly release, and goaltenders will be able to pick up shots far more cleanly (goalies today are taught to basically play the entire game from their knees, as shots come from anywhere at any time with no warning, and covering low for weird random crap is the order of the day.  It's lame.  Get the goalies back on their feet, and we let some quick but not 6'5" guys play).  With this, offensive possession starts to look to build strategic advantages, rather than rely on momentary tactical missteps.  A team that can BUILD time and space for a shooter is rewarded, a team that relies on chaos and surprise shots is not.  And, as hinted, it allows the discussion of goalie equipment size reductions to be practical.

 

2.  Add a backchecker to penalty shots.  A defender of the defending team's choice starts at the far zone's hashmarks.  This puts the defender 60 feet behind the shooter.  This is plenty of space for the shooter to execute a breakaway without pressure, so long as he plays it like a normal game situation.  He even has a few extra seconds to get clever, but only a few seconds.  This eliminates the 2 MPH, back and forth, make a million "dekes", turn the goalie inside out stupidness of the current implementation.  You are awarded a breakaway, and you will have a free and clear path to the goalie without interference, so long as you aren't Patrick Kane about it.  The advantage of the PS is preserved, but the unenjoyable clownshow of modern shootouts goes away.  Honestly, every time I watch them, it reminds me of that a**hole that wants to put moves on the goalie during pre-game warmups.  Either you can beat the goalie at game speed or you can't.  I don't care -and neither should the league- that you can dangle like a crazy person while under zero pressure.  Get rid of that crap.

 

Ok, ice broken.  Let's hear it.  I do not enjoy the current game, really at all.  The nuance of the game has been lost in speed and chaos, and we need to find a way back to a sport that is built on a blend of talent, perseverance and structure.  How do we do that.  Yes, this is as though anything we say means anything other than posts on a forum, but hey, express the dream.

Get rid of the shoot out completely,it's nothing but a gimmick. Get rid of the ridiculous three on three OT, that's another total joke.  Go to a ten minute OT and if its tied after ten, then it's a tie and nobody gets a point for losing .

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, aziz said:

by popular demand (which is to say, CoachX)

HA! Im popular...who knew?

 

I hate the shootout and want it gone. Here is what I would do if we kept it:

 

Shooting teams goalie would have the puck. The shooter would start from the redline boards on the bench side. On the whistle the shooter would have to skate into his defensive zone and take a pass from his goalie, before reaching the goal line. If the pass is fumbled or missed, shot attempt fails. If connected the shooter then has to stick handle around his net, skate the full length of the ice and take his shot. A time clock will be set forcing the shot to be taken before time is up. The shooter must have the puck in contact with his stick the entire time until the shot is taken, and the puck must constantly be moving toward the defending goaltender

 

Next rule change....instigator is gone and so is that BS rule about only one guy dropping his gloves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

HA! Im popular...who knew?

 

I hate the shootout and want it gone. Here is what I would do if we kept it:

 

Shooting teams goalie would have the puck. The shooter would start from the redline boards on the bench side. On the whistle the shooter would have to skate into his defensive zone and take a pass from his goalie, before reaching the goal line. If the pass is fumbled or missed, shot attempt fails. If connected the shooter then has to stick handle around his net, skate the full length of the ice and take his shot. A time clock will be set forcing the shot to be taken before time is up. The shooter must have the puck in contact with his stick the entire time until the shot is taken, and the puck must constantly be moving toward the defending goaltender

 

Next rule change....instigator is gone and so is that BS rule about only one guy dropping his gloves

Another reason to dump the OT..How many times did we see the Rangers when they had Lundquivst, basically play a zone defense  in the OT and go to the shootout . They knew 95% the time they were winning that shootout.  The Flyers on the other hand have the worst shootout percentage since it's inception due to years of crappy goaltending and a lack of creative finishers up front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

Another reason to dump the OT..How many times did we see the Rangers when they had Lundquivst, basically play a zone defense  in the OT and go to the shootout . They knew 95% the time they were winning that shootout.  The Flyers on the other hand have the worst shootout percentage since it's inception due to years of crappy goaltending and a lack of creative finishers up front.

sounds like what the NFL wants to do to with the "tush push" because the Eagles are so good at it; can't get on board, but you make a great point. I fcking hate the Rangers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never been one to hate the shootout. It may not show exactly who the better team is, but it does show who has more talent and skill. I'm not being a jerk when I say this, but is it a coincidence that the fans of the worst shootout team in history hate the shootout? I blame the flyers for never addressing it as if it never existed. Their lack of success in the shootout is directly associated with the lack of talent.

I also think the 3 on 3 is usually pretty exciting and I think it determines a winner more times than not.

One thing I can't support is a tie. Although it wouldn't matter all that much in the regular season, I still would feel jipped if I went to a game that ended in a tie. I think soccer is OK, but when I hear the game ended in a tie, especially on a stage such as the world cup, it just makes me never want to watch.

I'm open for some different way to get a winner but I'm not sure what that would be. So for now I'm fine with a 3 on 3 OT, and then letting skill determine it if needed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, icehole said:

I've never been one to hate the shootout. It may not show exactly who the better team is, but it does show who has more talent and skill. I'm not being a jerk when I say this, but is it a coincidence that the fans of the worst shootout team in history hate the shootout? I blame the flyers for never addressing it as if it never existed. Their lack of success in the shootout is directly associated with the lack of talent.

I also think the 3 on 3 is usually pretty exciting and I think it determines a winner more times than not.

One thing I can't support is a tie

ok. gotcha. So do you have any rule change ideas, or are ya just gonna keeping pooing on those of us who do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, CoachX said:

ok. gotcha. So do you have any rule change ideas, or are ya just gonna keeping pooing on those of us who do?

I don't think I have any game play rule changes. They do have problems outside of rule changes that are killing the sport. Their scheduling and league setup (who they play and when) makes me not want to watch sometimes. Too many bad teams isn't good. 82 games is about 42 too many in my opinion.

 

If you want to see the flyers play Vancouver, Calgary, LA, San Jose, or any other west coast team, those games should be on Saturday or Sunday and be at 4 or 7pm EST. They should probably be in the middle third of the season also. They should try to play a lot of division rivals early and late in the season.

 

They need to find a way to promote these rivalries more. I would never miss a game live because there was always intensity and anger that you couldn't reproduce during a replay the next day. Since those emotions aren't there anymore, and the game is mostly just skill, I just watch that in about ten minutes on YouTube the next day.

 

I'm not pooing on anyone's rule changes but the shootout and 3 on 3 have been exciting to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, icehole said:

Too many bad teams isn't good. 82 games is about 42 too many in my opinion

I think you're right but I would split the difference.

 

Contract the league to 30 teams, contract the regular season to 62 games, start the season in mid November.

I like the idea of a chaser on the shootout, that would make that awful event a smidge more exciting. I'd prefer a longer 3 v 3 overtime in lieu of the shoot-out. If there is no winner after the longer OT...tie game, zero points for either team.

 

 

Edited by mojo1917
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2023 at 7:01 AM, SCFlyguy said:

Mods, please rename thread to "Old Man Yells At Cloud".  Thanks.

lol, you aren't wrong.

 

It's a weird thing, though.  I can't see the things I loved about hockey in the current game, and would really like those aspects to come back.  It's strange to look at a thing you were completely obsessed with for 30 years, and one day realize it has become something utterly different, something you actually actively dislike.  And I do actively dislike the current game.  It's become a game of frantic end to end random chaos, roll three lines of up-tempo stick handlers and force chances from all angles, screw all concepts of counterplay (other than counter rush) or strategic depth.  Which some people like, and the game has pivoted to their preference.  And fair enough.

 

The thing is I'm 48.  Old man, sure, but not OLD man.  It's weird that checkers overtook chess that quickly.  "Back in my day" now means 15 years ago, not 40.  It's how things progress at this point, I guess.  I can dream the game can become deeper than it is now, though, can't I?

  • Like 1
  • Good Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2023 at 12:23 PM, CoachX said:

Shooting teams goalie would have the puck. The shooter would start from the redline boards on the bench side. On the whistle the shooter would have to skate into his defensive zone and take a pass from his goalie, before reaching the goal line. If the pass is fumbled or missed, shot attempt fails. If connected the shooter then has to stick handle around his net, skate the full length of the ice and take his shot. A time clock will be set forcing the shot to be taken before time is up. The shooter must have the puck in contact with his stick the entire time until the shot is taken, and the puck must constantly be moving toward the defending goaltender

 

That's...really complicated.  😆

 

As you mention it, though, a timeclock accomplishes the same thing as the backchecker in my idea.  Set the clock to 5 seconds after the shooter touches the puck.  The point being:  make it a real breakaway situation, with little time to spare.  You get a free pass at the goalie, but you have to act fast.  I really respect a lot of things about Kane, but I hate him mostly for his shootout crap.  It's literally embarrassing to watch.  Make the PS happen at something close to game speed, ffs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2023 at 1:16 PM, MaineFlyFan said:

Can we make a rule that says after 3 BONEHEAD moves, the fanbase is allowed to chase the GM, naked, tarred, and feathered, down whatever street the arena sits on..... till they catch him? :)

 

yes, this, but someone has to yell "I declare shenanigans" right before.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2023 at 5:23 PM, icehole said:

It may not show exactly who the better team is, but it does show who has more talent and skill. I'm not being a jerk when I say this, but is it a coincidence that the fans of the worst shootout team in history hate the shootout?

 

My problem is the shootout as it currently stands is that it has everything to do with talent and skill, yes, but talents and skills that are not relevant to an actual game of hockey.  In no game ever would a shooter have 12 seconds to sweep left, then right, then left again, then right again, then deke, then go left, deke, go right, then left real quick, deke again, go right, deke, go further right, and finally put the puck in the back of an open net as the goalie has tried to track a play that cannot ever exist outside of that one scenario.

 

Make it all happen at game speed, and I suddenly have zero problem with the shootout.  It's not a good tell of the better team, so arguably shouldn't impact the standings, but I could accept it.  It's this crap that just has nothing to do with the actual game of hockey, this is crap you do in practice, and the goalie gets annoyed (and the poster calls it "dazzling", ffs):

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, icehole said:

If you want to see the flyers play Vancouver, Calgary, LA, San Jose, or any other west coast team, those games should be on Saturday or Sunday and be at 4 or 7pm EST. They should probably be in the middle third of the season also. They should try to play a lot of division rivals early and late in the season.

 

They need to find a way to promote these rivalries more. I would never miss a game live because there was always intensity and anger that you couldn't reproduce during a replay the next day. Since those emotions aren't there anymore, and the game is mostly just skill, I just watch that in about ten minutes on YouTube the next day.

 

this is really interesting, factoring in when-in-the-season for inter-conference games.  I'd be into someone exploring bulking inter-conference games to the middle of the season, leaving the start and end as intra-conference play.  That makes a ton of sense to me.  Have rival teams see each other early and often, and then see each other again late as they are competing against each other for standings.  The middle of the season sees a lot of cross-conference play as those teams position themselves, but then back to putting your own hands on the throats of your rivals.  No idea what logistical nightmare that might be, but a really interesting idea.  Love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aziz said:

lol, you aren't wrong.

 

It's a weird thing, though.  I can't see the things I loved about hockey in the current game, and would really like those aspects to come back.  It's strange to look at a thing you were completely obsessed with for 30 years, and one day realize it has become something utterly different, something you actually actively dislike.  And I do actively dislike the current game.  It's become a game of frantic end to end random chaos, roll three lines of up-tempo stick handlers and force chances from all angles, screw all concepts of counterplay (other than counter rush) or strategic depth.  Which some people like, and the game has pivoted to their preference.  And fair enough.

 

The thing is I'm 48.  Old man, sure, but not OLD man.  It's weird that checkers overtook chess that quickly.  "Back in my day" now means 15 years ago, not 40.  It's how things progress at this point, I guess.  I can dream the game can become deeper than it is now, though, can't I?

I'm 50 and I am absolutely not into sports in some ways as I was 15 or 20 years ago, but I assume a lot of that has to do with me and not the sports.  I guard against being nostalgic about the past in that way because that's old people talk and old people are the worst.

Same about music.  I hate hearing people complain about how music used to be better.  No, you used to be better, now you're just old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, SCFlyguy said:

I'm 50 and I am absolutely not into sports in some ways as I was 15 or 20 years ago

Damn it. You too?

 

Man, we all got old. It was only yesterday we were all young 30-somethings worshipping Jon Sim and Scotty Upshall. What the hell happened?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, aziz said:

 

My problem is the shootout as it currently stands is that it has everything to do with talent and skill, yes, but talents and skills that are not relevant to an actual game of hockey.  In no game ever would a shooter have 12 seconds to sweep left, then right, then left again, then right again, then deke, then go left, deke, go right, then left real quick, deke again, go right, deke, go further right, and finally put the puck in the back of an open net as the goalie has tried to track a play that cannot ever exist outside of that one scenario.

 

Make it all happen at game speed, and I suddenly have zero problem with the shootout.  It's not a good tell of the better team, so arguably shouldn't impact the standings, but I could accept it.  It's this crap that just has nothing to do with the actual game of hockey, this is crap you do in practice, and the goalie gets annoyed (and the poster calls it "dazzling", ffs):

 

 

I can agree with that. Although Kane was within the rules for that goal, it's sort of a cheat because of course he can move left to right faster than the goalie. I'm fine with improving the shootout but keeping it.

 

And maybe a shootout win doesn't get you an extra point, but maybe it serves as some sort of tiebreaker or playoff position at the end of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, aziz said:

 

this is really interesting, factoring in when-in-the-season for inter-conference games.  I'd be into someone exploring bulking inter-conference games to the middle of the season, leaving the start and end as intra-conference play.  That makes a ton of sense to me.  Have rival teams see each other early and often, and then see each other again late as they are competing against each other for standings.  The middle of the season sees a lot of cross-conference play as those teams position themselves, but then back to putting your own hands on the throats of your rivals.  No idea what logistical nightmare that might be, but a really interesting idea.  Love it.

There are a few reason the current setup bothers me.

1.  I'm old. I get up at 4am, so when 7pm rolls around, I get sleepy. 8pm rolls around, I go up and get ready for bed and to watch TV. 9:15pm, lights out. There's no way I'm watching a second of a 10pm game.

When the Flyers played Calgary the other week, the game was a Saturday at 10pm EST. Both teams played 2 or 3 nights prior, and nothing was scheduled at the arena until the game. Why couldn't they play earlier?

 

2.  A few years ago, I think the eagles started the season on a Monday night against the cowboys or another division rival. Everyone was amped for the season. I was excited for the flyers season, but they started against a team that had absolutely no rivalry with the flyers. Nobody cared. That just seems like bad planning. 

 

3. I hate the Christmas season west coast trip also. If I have some days off and want to have a few beers and watch the game, I can't because they're out west for a week or two starting at 10pm against teams I don't care about. That's bad marketing of the sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

I hate hearing people complain about how music used to be better.

This is absolutely true.

 

Take the Spotify top 50 from any of the last 3 years- then compare the music in that list to the billboard top fifty from 15, 20, 25 years ago and then try to tell me with a straight face what we're listening to today is better.

You won't be able to do it.

 

I'm a person that does listen to new music. 

In spite of the technical advances and the democratization of processes for producing music, it's not better. 

1 million monkeys with typewriters isn't producing Shakespear. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mojo1917 said:

This is absolutely true.

 

Take the Spotify top 50 from any of the last 3 years- then compare the music in that list to the billboard top fifty from 15, 20, 25 years ago and then try to tell me with a straight face what we're listening to today is better.

You won't be able to do it.

 

I'm a person that does listen to new music. 

In spite of the technical advances and the democratization of processes for producing music, it's not better. 

1 million monkeys with typewriters isn't producing Shakespear. 

 

99% of todays music is fake music. Computerized garbage, autotune  vocals, no real instruments,  no soul or groove at all and worst of all , pathetic lyrics that sound like they were written by a 8 year old. There is no originality and it all sounds the same. They are so bad they lip synching at live shows because they can't actually sing.

 

Back in the day every band sounded different  Pink Floyd,Zeppelin,Santana, Eagles, Creedence,etc..the list goes on and on.

Where are todays innovative guitar players like Beck, Hendrix, Gilmour, Eddie VH, Page, SRV,etc, who not only were great guitar players but also originators of a style and sound. 

 

There are great unknown musicians playing small bars and in subway stations but the hard part is not being able to play someone else's music note for note . The hard part is creating consistently good and original music and its all about the finished product, the actual song itself. Where are the prolific song writers and lyricists today. Where are todays James Taylor, Billy Joel, Elton John/Taupin, Fagen/Becker, Lennon/McCartney, Page/Plant,  Henley/Frey, people who can actually sing ,play their instruments well and write songs... other than Chris Stapelton,who does it all, there is nothing out there. When was the last epic album  released thats on par or even close to Dark Side of The Moon,Physical Graffiti, Sticky Fingers,Aja or Hotel California?  The answer is...there are none, todays music blows. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...