|
|
Post by masterplan200 on Jun 14, 2005 2:29:19 GMT -5
Got this off another forum
Smaller Goalie equip. AND Bigger nets...i like the fact that about 10 goals a game are scored and not 200 like basketball...more goals means more faceoffs which means more downtime.
No-touch icings...more faceoffs...more breaks in action
15 minute periods...then 5 min. 4 on 4 (unnecessary)...then 5 min. 3 on 3 (why)...then shoot out ( This broadcast just took up 5 hours of my life)
It would make sense just to have a shoot out after 3 periods.
Bigger ice surfaces (olympic size will due...larger than that is ridiculous)
It goes on and on.
|
|
|
|
Post by hurricaneoasis on Jun 16, 2005 15:22:48 GMT -5
i liked what I saw (well read) about the proposed rule changes they tested in toronto, especially the bigger nets.
just imagine how snipers could pick out corners in those things
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamikazi on Jun 16, 2005 16:12:15 GMT -5
The bigger nets is a good thing, but then there was the weird as fuck oval net, did you see that thing? and the thing was, guys were shooting high, because there was a gap where the goalies head is, so that's just dangerous
But I think that smaller goalie pads on the same size net would be good, and then no touch icing keeps players safer, I mean, there's been some ugly crashes
But I mean, I'm also getting sick of seeing the trap win so many fucking stanley cups
|
|
|
|
Post by StepOut on Jun 16, 2005 22:19:36 GMT -5
definitely like the smaller goalie equipment. I definitely think there should be a bigger rink, I find olympic hockey much better than the NHL.
|
|
|
|
Post by bedwetter_v2 on Jun 16, 2005 22:23:32 GMT -5
yes, bigger sized rink is more fluid, and there's more passing involved... not necessary as big as an Olympic sized rink, but I guess somewhere in the middle...
|
|
|
|
Post by macleod on Jun 16, 2005 23:28:42 GMT -5
i love hockey... but its in trouble the trap killed the flow of the game..and the athletes are too big now for the surface..think about it,, baseball juiced up the ball and built smaller parks to promote home runs
football has cripples the defensive backs to promote scoring
basketball allows guys to take 3 steps to dunk
but hockey keeps its rules as the players grow and the game is gettin stifled
i say this
either lose some money and expand the rink
or keep the arena capacity the same and wipe out the red line and icing and the 2 line pass..that will lead to hockey bein played like in its golden era of the 80s
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamikazi on Jun 17, 2005 0:41:10 GMT -5
The problem with moving out a couple rows of the rinks, is that the arenas apparently are designed so every seat has the best possible perspective, and in moving it out, some seats apparently get shafted on the seating arrangements and their view of the game.
That was on NHL.com
|
|
|
|
Post by bedwetter_v2 on Jun 17, 2005 13:20:11 GMT -5
The problem with moving out a couple rows of the rinks, is that the arenas apparently are designed so every seat has the best possible perspective, and in moving it out, some seats apparently get shafted on the seating arrangements and their view of the game. That was on NHL.com good point, plus the owners probably doesn't want to lose the revenue from those prime row of seats |
|
|
|
Post by MG on Jun 18, 2005 17:33:01 GMT -5
was just wondering,
in ice hockey - could ya just get a 30 stone guy and stick him in net to cover the entire goal or are there rules restricting the amount of space a keeper can cover
|
|
|
|
Post by nyr401994 on Jun 19, 2005 16:33:03 GMT -5
Got this off another forum Smaller Goalie equip. AND Bigger nets...i like the fact that about 10 goals a game are scored and not 200 like basketball...more goals means more faceoffs which means more downtime. No-touch icings...more faceoffs...more breaks in action 15 minute periods...then 5 min. 4 on 4 (unnecessary)...then 5 min. 3 on 3 (why)...then shoot out ( This broadcast just took up 5 hours of my life) It would make sense just to have a shoot out after 3 periods. Bigger ice surfaces (olympic size will due...larger than that is ridiculous) It goes on and on. i think that the goalie equipment should be made smaller. for one reason, it'll show who's got talent and who doesn't. for another, it'll be a lot more fun to watch. but concerning the bigger goals, i think it should be either the smaller equipment or bigger goals, one or the other. 15 minute periods?!? this ain't basketball. next! olympic size rinks? some arenas don't have the size to have rinks that big (*cough* pittsburgh *cough*) so i think it should be in between the nhl standard rink and the olympic sized rink. shootouts would be great, but i think we should only see them for playoffs, FOR NOW. we can see how it works. if the game goes past double overtime, there should be a shootout. that way games won't have to end up like game 7 of the '99 finals (remember, dallas beating the sabres over a goal that shouldn't have counted?) |
|
|
|
Post by nyr401994 on Jun 19, 2005 16:33:45 GMT -5
anybody hear about this: changing the color of the paint under the ice from white to blue?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamikazi on Jun 20, 2005 17:16:22 GMT -5
shootouts would be great, a penalty shot is the most exciting play in hockey
aaaand I remember that, they tried the blue paint in buffalo or something
It suits ye olde HD TV better apparently???
I think it'd just cause headaches
|
|
|
|
Post by countrygrammar on Jun 23, 2005 0:10:48 GMT -5
What's hockey?
|
|
|
|
Post by mape on Jun 23, 2005 0:31:23 GMT -5
^oh shit sorry countrygrammar - i hit modify instead of quote. must be getting late.
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5