[News] How to Fix the NHL, a League That's Broken

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

6) Bigger nets - I agree with.

Nets should be the size of soccer nets.

But to compensate, teams could use 2 goalies. Or 3 if they were all sisters. And not the Sedin kind, if you know what I mean? And that would bring pillow fights into the game.

But I digress.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

So this article is fun as all get out, and actually ranges from "this is obviously true" to "you're a madman, someone should lock you up immediately you madman". Gotta love Dave Lozo.

Also, this is awesome and I love it, even though I might actually like the "pick your opponent" format even more. https://sports.vice.com/en_ca/articl...e-the-playoffs

9) Home teams wear white, road teams wear dark. Bring it back.

Yes. I know, I know, C of Red, but give me back my childhood.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

This, 100%.

It's an internally inconsistent system and it's stupid. Everybody knows there are these unspoken rules that less is called in the 2nd half of a game and in the playoffs. But that leads to a situation where there is a penalty that just has to be called even in spite of that rule, so the refs are faced with not calling the rulebook or not calling the "unspoken" rulebook, and one team and its fanbase inevitably feels like they got jobbed.

Bettman said that every fanbase feels like they are getting screwed by the refs means it is working. No, it means the exact opposite, you dolt. There are two different rulebooks in the NHL and that is just ridiculous, and it means everybody feels like they're getting screwed because there is just way too much discretion involved in refereeing a game.

Call the god damned rulebook. Even if that means one team gets 16 penalties and the other gets two.

They've already thrown the "slashing crackdown" right out the window. Goalie interference is legendarily inconsistent.

No one should ever again utter the phrase "oh come on, you haven't been calling that all game!"

This has to be fixed.

You don't like makeup call? You know after they call a bad penalty or back to back penalties on one team it's in the back of their heads that they have to find an excuse to call a penalty on the other team to even things out just as it's written in the special unwritten rule book officials officiate by.

[afc wimbledon]

I always thought the Offside should borrow a little from soccer, if the player is offside without touching the puck then he should be allowed to skate out and clear his offside while the play goes on, the number of times a decent rush is stopped because one of three players has his skate an inch across the line is silly, let the play continue, he can circle back and clear his offside then reenter the zone.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

This, 100%.

It's an internally inconsistent system and it's stupid. Everybody knows there are these unspoken rules that less is called in the 2nd half of a game and in the playoffs. But that leads to a situation where there is a penalty that just has to be called even in spite of that rule, so the refs are faced with not calling the rulebook or not calling the "unspoken" rulebook, and one team and its fanbase inevitably feels like they got jobbed.

Bettman said that every fanbase feels like they are getting screwed by the refs means it is working. No, it means the exact opposite, you dolt. There are two different rulebooks in the NHL and that is just ridiculous, and it means everybody feels like they're getting screwed because there is just way too much discretion involved in refereeing a game.

Call the god damned rulebook. Even if that means one team gets 16 penalties and the other gets two.

They've already thrown the "slashing crackdown" right out the window. Goalie interference is legendarily inconsistent.

No one should ever again utter the phrase "oh come on, you haven't been calling that all game!"

This has to be fixed.

I actually find this funny.

Its the ultimate paradox, people complain about hockey the most when the referees do just that.

The Rulebook is an antique. Its awful.

Hockey, 'By the Book,' would be unwatchable.

Which is why Refereeing is brutal. Because it requires the refs to use some personal discretion and as such its why officiating is inherently inconsistent and infuriating.

Some refs call this, some dont, and sometimes both are on the ice at the same time staring at the same thing.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

In the 12 years since the salary cap has been introduced, the cup has been won 8 times by 3 teams.

That's the same as the 12 years preceding the salary cap.

There are still dominant teams.

Yes but my team isn't one of them. The league is broken.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Red

Go to 3 points for wins and 0 points for losses regardless of OT or regulation and the regulation games will pick up steam.

If there is zero points for a loss, be it OT or shootout, why bother increasing a win from 2 to 3 points?

It could be any number of points, it won't make a difference.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

In the 12 years since the salary cap has been introduced, the cup has been won 8 times by 3 teams.

That's the same as the 12 years preceding the salary cap.

There are still dominant teams.

I bet as the salary cap sinks in more and more, you'll have far less dominant teams, and way more Stanley cup winners.

The dominant teams are largely a holdover from the pre-salary cap era.

And I would argue that there are no dominant teams today. They are all flawed to some extent, some more than others. And that's why teams that haven't preformed all that will during the season can win a Stanley Cup. There is simply little margin between those teams that lead the league and those that squeak into the playoffs.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Beats the hell out of seeing the New York Rangers sign every top prospect in the game.

I have no idea how European fans cheer for teams that they know will never be able to compete with the big spenders.

Because I think they enjoy the things that make their clubs unique, have longer attention spans and don't feel entitled to a chance to win massive titles every couple years in order to stay fans. Also because in doing away with the draft at many clubs they are often supporting players who are actually from their city and/or came through the team's youth academy and people identify even more with their local clubs so I find the people who do follow it are a little more loyal and dedicated.

If you live in a small city in europe or south america you don't feel entitled to have your team beat teams from massive cities with huge fanbases, massive stadiums and commercial bases. Every so often they win a cup, or go on a run, and if they are from a smaller city maybe they win a lower division. There are still lots of things to celebrate and if you ask me having gone to lots of games, outside of playoff runs they have a lot more fun than the average NHL fan even at a lot of clubs that never win.

Bigger teams with more fans win more but over time the biggest clubs can also change if someone invests heavily in a team or a club is successful and has the population to draw from they can transform their fortunes and move into contention regularly. Teams like Chelsea, Man City and Paris SG were mid sized teams 20 years ago and are now massive - half the teams in the english premier league used to be at lower levels. Other big cities like Berlin have teams that are awful.

I don't think it's a perfect system, there are lots of things that don't work well there either but it's way better than North American sports leagues which are increasingly so "fair" they have become devoid of nuance outside of the game to game outcomes and feel like they are set up just to distract idiots with short attention spans. Every player is from somewhere else randomly assigned by a draft that rewards losing and every team has the same spending power to even things out. The only thing that's local or unique is the jersey and the owner.

[Red]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

If there is zero points for a loss, be it OT or shootout, why bother increasing a win from 2 to 3 points?

It could be any number of points, it won't make a difference.

You are correct. No difference. I'd go back to having ties for 1 point rather than shootouts. But a win should get 3 points regardless how the game ends.

[Beninho]

smaller goalie equipment is the only thing I would change. Looking at you Ryan Miller.

Some people will never be happy, Refs will always suck. Only way to fix that is let computers call the games

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

My personal opinion that the single biggest issue with the NHL is officiating. It's bad. Really, really, really bad. From night to night you have no clue what kind of game they will call and what's a penalty to some officials is not a penalty to others. I can't remember a playoffs like last season where officiating played such a big role in deciding the outcome of the games. The NHL really needs to fix this because to me it's ruining the game for fans across the league.

Let's say the refereeing was somehow much improved. Each team is still going to get 3-4 PPs per game. Nothing can really change (or do people really want to see a constant stream to the penalty box)?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Red

You are correct. No difference. I'd go back to having ties for 1 point rather than shootouts. But a win should get 3 points regardless how the game ends.

I'd much prefer 3 for a regulation win, 2 for an OT or shootout win, and 1 for a OT or shootout loss.

Or do away with OT and shootouts, and do it 3 for a win, 1 for a tie (soccer style).

[GioforPM]

I'd like one ref in the stands and one on the ice, connected by earphones. This happens in rugby and works great.

I'd like passes that hop over a guy's stick or go between his legs, or miss because he's tied up to not end up being icings - icings were always intended to be a punishment for just relieving pressure. While I'm at it, be more strict on D men dogging it back to try and get an icing. On the other hand, be more strict about dump ins near the red line.

Drop the puck quickly.

Smaller goalie pads.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

In the 12 years since the salary cap has been introduced, the cup has been won 8 times by 3 teams.

That's the same as the 12 years preceding the salary cap.

There are still dominant teams.

The Hawks were built pre-cap.

The Pens got at least one cup in on diving contracts.

Parity will slowly take over.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'd like passes that hop over a guy's stick or go between his legs, or miss because he's tied up to not end up being icings - icings were always intended to be a punishment for just relieving pressure.

The reason that rule was changed to create those icings is to discourage the strategy of firing a pass to a guy who just tips it into the zone (if you miss the tip you're off for icing). Being able to just ice the puck by firing it in the general vicinity of one of your guys is not a good thing for flow. Makes the game more boring. What you want is to encourage controlled zone entries.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The Hawks were built pre-cap.

The Pens got at least one cup in on diving contracts.

Parity will slowly take over.

Pitts also gets 2 of the top 5? players of the last 15 years as their core.

There’s no mechanism Calgary could ever get a player of their quality. There’s a good chance Malkin and Crosby both go down as top 50 players of all time

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The reason that rule was changed to create those icings is to discourage the strategy of firing a pass to a guy who just tips it into the zone (if you miss the tip you're off for icing). Being able to just ice the puck by firing it in the general vicinity of one of your guys is not a good thing for flow. Makes the game more boring. What you want is to encourage controlled zone entries.

I don't think it works, if that was the intent - it stops the game instead of keeping play going. Now, you are giving an icing for missing a pass. Anyway a tip into the zone is not much different than a dump in for a change, which is still allowed (and abused by players holding their stick out on the followthrough just to make the redline)

[Inferno]

Start disciplining officials for consistently making horrible calls. I'm not saying fire the guy as soon as he makes a bad call but if he's constantly making terrible calls lower the amount of games he works. If it doesn't improve then you let him go.

Yes, we're all human and make mistakes but make too many and we have to face the consequences. NHL officials shouldn't be any different. And with a lot of these calls you can't even use the "the game is fast" excuse.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Matty81

I don't think it's a perfect system, there are lots of things that don't work well there either but it's way better than North American sports leagues which are increasingly so "fair" they have become devoid of nuance outside of the game to game outcomes and feel like they are set up just to distract idiots with short attention spans. Every player is from somewhere else randomly assigned by a draft that rewards losing and every team has the same spending power to even things out. The only thing that's local or unique is the jersey and the owner.

Sports are supposed to be "fair". That's kind of the whole point of sports isn't it?

Would you want to watch a 100m race where you could buy your starting position and the richest competitor started at the 50 meters mark?