The Yzerman goal is looked upon as "classic" where as the Jets goal is looked upon as a blooper.
that's the difference? Christ, I thought it was one was double overtime, screened shot going post and in (you hear the clunk as it goes in). and the other was a whiff from centre ice.
I came to hockey as an adult - not from birth like most of you. I was a typical american kid crazy about baseball when I was a twerp. I expanded to basketball and later football, but I didn't see hockey until I was full grown and it is a completely different perspective than growing up with the game.
One thing that was instantly, obviously different was that baseball was completely mature. The 'modern era' of baseball started in about 1901 when the AL and the NL first decided to hold a 'world series'. Very little about the game had changed since then.
Hockey is still in it's infancy imo. One might argue that the 'modern era' started in 2005 or might even argue that it hasn't started yet.
If people really want more scoring, the game would have to take a radical change. ALL team sports have become more defensive in nature as time passes.
Forget the size of the goals or even less effective, the goalie equipment.
The BOG have to decide if they want to continue THIS game or change it to something else. That something else might be better - who knows - we haven't seen it yet. You KNOW there were people that insisted that inclusion of the forward pass would ruin the game. That the game has ALWAYS been played this way etc...
I love the game as it is - I say that there is no need to change it. I liked the way this post season went... many games were 0-0 going into the 3rd and then all hell breaks loose after the first goal was scored leading to an exciting 2-1 finish.
But if you want to make changes to allow more scoring - think big. I wouldn't mind a game were 7-11 final scores were the norm. At least I'd give it a try.
Crazy idea #1 - allow only 4 defenders in the defending zone. That means that the 5th player has to be outside the blueline. A cherry picker? Sure, but he would also be hell on the offensive players playing the point. Yes, it's a different game - might be a good game - dunno.
You guys do realize it's not 80's or how it is now? There are shades of gray to this thing. Maybe not 50, but...
Anyhow, what I don't want is goalies standing on their knees covering the whole not. Whether it's nets proportional to the athlete size or equipment reduction or both...
And you do also realize that a lot of 80's hockey looks bad because a lot of those players were bad (compared to today)? Increasing the net size is not going to make the actual hockey any worse... And I would like to see a goal off the wing rush once in a while a la Lafleur or Joey Mullen. Or even Iginla circa 2004...
Exactly, you don't have to look as far back as the 80s.
Look at Iginla's 50 goals in 2002, and then look at the goalies in the clip, they look much smaller in that clip then they do today even.
You see goals with slap shots from the wing, and the slot, you don't see that at all in today's game. The way goalie padding has blown up is ridiculous and they need to do more to bring it down.
Have shots really gotten that much harder in the last 13 years that goalies need more protection? Don't think so IMO, as 2002 was the first year of the Easton Synergy one piece.
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
Well, that post-season was underwhelming. Come to think of it, so was the regular season. At 5.03 and 5.32 goals per game, respectively, the two parts of 2014-15 combined to create another low-scoring season for goal-starved fans.
Immediately after that dud of a Stanley Cup final, in which just 23 goals (3.83 per game) were scored
so that was written by a casual fan of the game. Anyone who enjoys hockey had to like this past season and post season. High scoring games aren't the only good thing about the game.
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
so that was written by a casual fan of the game. Anyone who enjoys hockey had to like this past season and post season. High scoring games aren't the only good thing about the game.
And some very intense fans are a little too close to the forest to see the trees some times.
As more than a casual fan who watched the majority of the Final, I actually think the better team did NOT win. I picked Chicago to win the series in 6, but after watching the games I thought TB owned the majority of the play, was the faster, more creative, and more deep team. The thing is TB just didn't finish chances, and I think a lot of it was more Crawford 'getting in the way' of good chances more so than poor finishing or truly great/athletic goaltending. So then it becomes more of a toss up. And Chicago got a couple better bounces here and there and end up winning 1 goal games in which less than 4 non-EN goals are scored.
I get there's an element of luck involved in hockey and it's part of what makes the game fun. But in a 2-1 or 1-0 game the lesser hockey TEAM has a much better chance of winning regularly.
And some very intense fans are a little too close to the forest to see the trees some times.
As more than a casual fan who watched the majority of the Final, I actually think the better team did NOT win. I picked Chicago to win the series in 6, but after watching the games I thought TB owned the majority of the play, was the faster, more creative, and more deep team. The thing is TB just didn't finish chances, and I think a lot of it was more Crawford 'getting in the way' of good chances more so than poor finishing or truly great/athletic goaltending. So then it becomes more of a toss up. And Chicago got a couple better bounces here and there and end up winning 1 goal games in which less than 4 non-EN goals are scored.
I get there's an element of luck involved in hockey and it's part of what makes the game fun. But in a 2-1 or 1-0 game the lesser hockey TEAM has a much better chance of winning regularly.
Basically your last sentence negates your opening post to this thread. The NHL obviously doesn't need more goals if on any given night, the lesser team can pull out a victory.
The NHL wanted parity, and they got it. And now they are rolling in dough. Gary, the owners & the players. I don't think tweaking the rules at this point will increase the NHL's profit. Moving Phoenix and Florida would.
I do have my own pet rule changes I'd like to see implemented, but it's not supposed to directly increase scoring. The trapezoid and other minor things. Reshaping the posts, bigger nets, forcing goalies into smaller gear or fundamental rule changes = phooey to me.
When games are close, teams tend to play a tight conservative style and hope for a break. By contrast, if one team can stretch out a lead, it forces an opponent to counter more aggressively and opens the game up. Once that happens, scoring opportunities arise on the counter attack. Trading rush chances is the best part of hockey, and demonstrates everything these players are capable of doing – making plays one-on-one, shooting bombs. Everything isn’t just a game of pinball any more, where you shoot the puck into a crowd of legs and hope it caroms your way.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Basically your last sentence negates your opening post to this thread. The NHL obviously doesn't need more goals if on any given night, the lesser team can pull out a victory.
The NHL wanted parity, and they got it. And now they are rolling in dough. Gary, the owners & the players. I don't think tweaking the rules at this point will increase the NHL's profit. Moving Phoenix and Florida would.
I do have my own pet rule changes I'd like to see implemented, but it's not supposed to directly increase scoring. The trapezoid and other minor things. Reshaping the posts, bigger nets, forcing goalies into smaller gear or fundamental rule changes = phooey to me.
Truthfully the point of my post originally was not to say what changes the NHL should make to make the sport more popular, it was more to say what changes I'd like to see as a fan of the game for my own enjoyment. But you are right there is no doubt if they're looking for parity and upsets the current game is pretty darn well set up. Making it a little easier to score on goalies I think would probably help the more skilled teams that generate more chances than the less skilled ones...
The worry isn't just that scoring is down, but the direction of the trend. Goalies continue to get bigger and better-trained. Blocked shots per game continues to rise. I could easily see a drop of another goal per game over the next couple years. It makes sense to address the issue before fans start to turn out, not after...
First off, I do think that s reduction in the size of goaltenders equipment is a very good idea, but I do not agree that the current trend is projecting scoring to drop by another goal/game in a ten year time frame.
The reasons that scoring increased in 2005 had to do with a variety of adjustments to the game, and also capitalized on players' inability to make the same adjustments immediately. The drop in scoring actually occurred very quickly, within a three-year span, and scoring has actually been pretty consistent with only very small fluctuations from one year to the next since about 2009.
I think a reduction in the goaltenders' equipment is likely to increase scoring a little bit, which is fine. But I do not agree that the occasional additional goal is going to "improve" the game. Just as there are some terrible low scoring games, there are just as many—perhaps more—awful games that feature 9+ goals. The number of pucks that enter the net is not what makes the game great. It's how they get there and everything that happens when they do.
Sent from my iPhone
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I just want players to be able to score with a shot off the rush.
No screen, no deflection, just still be able to have some net to shoot at and beat a goalie clean.
If it can't be done by making the goalies wear equipment that is more like what was worn before 2003 (Start of the Gigure revolution), then make the nets bigger to compensate for the bigger equipment.
