Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
For me, the entertainment value of hockey varies by era, by season, by game. I find a lot of hockey games pretty dull. I miss the era of odd men rushes. I don't think the game is perfect, and I'm happy enough try tweaks to make the game more entertaining. Fortunately, the people who run the NHL share my outlook, which is why they review the rules every year and make changes to try to improve the game.
A 1-0 game can be a great. It can also be dull. A 4-3 game can be great. It can also be dull. But all else being equal, with equal skill evident in both games, I'll take the 4-3 game. Because goals are fun - so fun that people usually stand up and cheer when they happen. And no, that doesn't mean 7-5 games would be better. Because a 7-5 game is evidence of sloppy pay and poor goaltending.
And let's not pretend this is only an issue with hockey. Soccer is the most popular sport in the world, but FIFA and various leagues have been experimenting with various ways to increase scoring for years.
|
It sounds like you find hockey pretty dull a lot of times. That's unfortunate. I disagree.
With any sport you are going to have games that don't live up to their billing. Sometimes players don't perform, sometimes coaching strategies cancel each other out, sometimes the game just has a lower energy level. Where is this mythical sport where every instance of the game is a classic? It doesn't exist. You can have a terrible NFL game, a terrible boxing match, a bad baseball game, a boring tennis match. This is not something isolated to the NHL and that they should, or even can rectify.
I would also say, to your soccer example -- the amount of experimentation is a drop in the bucket compared to the obscene amounts that happens in hockey. And you generally don't have fans clamoring for "more goals" all the time, because they respect what the sport is.