To add to my lengthy post from a few pages back (whilst also replying to comments about people pining for older eras), I would clarify that I agree with posters here who say that 80s era hockey was slow and clutchy/grabby. My nostalgia for that era rests solely with the passion displayed via the BOA. Never again will that intensity, ferocity and outright hatred be matched.
The truth about the game is that it IS better now, mainly because it’s faster and the players are more skilled (especially goalies). My frustration, however, is that its playing dimensions have not evolved along with these changes.
The game has become so “North/South” that zone-play and cycling dominate coaching and strategy(as many other posters have also mentioned). What makes hockey exciting is east/west play, puck movement and end to end rushes.
Perhaps if there had been someway the league could have mandated somewhat wider surfaces as new arenas were constructed in the 90s, we would have the benefits of faster players and more room. (Ironically, because it was built for the Olympics, the “crappy-old Saddledome” is likely the only NHL arena with the capacity to accommodate this).
This is simply a personal preference, nothing more. The game just seems so formulaic now, everything is analyzed to death, teams’ systems and styles are not that much different from one another, on average. Star performances are even more special now as a result-creativity is at a premium.
As I alluded to in my previous post, I think some of my tedium comes from the 82 game schedule. I think 70-75 games is about perfect, because games would matter so much more, right from the start. (The only reason early season games matter so much now is because of the loser-point, which is another turnoff about the league for me.)
Because the Flames exist, I have a team to follow, and I do find that fun still. But if they didn’t, I can’t say that I’d follow the league with more than a passing interest.
|