Huge no to 9; huge yes to 15.
Re: 15. I constantly read about low scoring and how to solve it here and on Hfboards. I completely agree with those that say that there can be a crazy exciting 1-0 or 2-1 game. But there has to be an openness to those games - crazy good chances at both ends, not a chess match with no chances. To me, more goals does not necessarily mean more exciting. Would hockey be a better game if there were soccer sized nets and the score was 54-53 just because more pucks went in? Does anyone know how coaching changes would adapt to try to prevent goals? And that, to me, is the key. Defense wins games, so coaches almost exclusively coach to prevent goals as the top priority, not to score them.... like they used to in the 80s. And for those of us that were around and watching back then, it was not only 7-6 because the goalies were terrible.... there were WAY more excellent chances to score because the game was played offensively first.
So, seems to me that one and maybe the only way to get coaches to coach offense first, not defense, is to reward them for doing it. Yes, at some point along the tiebreaking system, goals for is a tiebreaker still I think.. but it never comes into play. Make offense really count, by rewarding really high scoring teams with points in the standings, and I guarantee that scoring goes up league wide. With NO other changes to the rules or silliness like larger nets.
Who cares about unbalanced points for games... we already got over that hump with the current OT/Shootout system. Difference is only this system rewards teams who score in game play, not in a skills competition.
No idea why this is always panned (often by those complaining about lack of goals in the game...).
|