|
|
#11
07-24-2005, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The new NHL rules
[ QUOTE ]
The league really needs to start awarding 3 pts for a regulation win. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. But there's no way this group is going to go with something as 'radical' as this with all the other changes. If things don't improve much in the next 2 seasons, look for this to come in. Actually, I'd prefer if they went with 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss. You shouldn't get a point for losing - it's just wrong. 
|
|
#12
07-24-2005, 07:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The league really needs to start awarding 3 pts for a regulation win. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. But there's no way this group is going to go with something as 'radical' as this with all the other changes. If things don't improve much in the next 2 seasons, look for this to come in. Actually, I'd prefer if they went with 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss. You shouldn't get a point for losing - it's just wrong. [/ QUOTE ] I agree completely. Either way would be fine. It makes no sense to me that some games award 2 points total while other games award 3 points total. I guess the same is true with soccer - but at least soccer discourages ties. Hockey has it backwards.
|
|
#13
07-24-2005, 08:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
The new rules are mostly good. I very much like the red-line elimination since it basically nullifies the trap.
I don't know about the icing rule. If you have to keep your players on the ice after an icing call, it might cause icing earlier in the shift and, hence, more often so that have time (while they still have energy) to try to win the faceoff, clear the puck, and get off the ice. The rule might inadvertantly cause less offense.
|
|
#14
07-25-2005, 10:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The league really needs to start awarding 3 pts for a regulation win. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. But there's no way this group is going to go with something as 'radical' as this with all the other changes. If things don't improve much in the next 2 seasons, look for this to come in. [/ QUOTE ] Hopefully, although 3 pts for regulation wins should have been introduced way back when 1pt for an OT loss was introduced. [ QUOTE ] Actually, I'd prefer if they went with 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss. You shouldn't get a point for losing - it's just wrong. [/ QUOTE ] I'm fine with this if the win occurs during OT and there are no shootouts. However, a team receiving 0 pts after losing in a shootout bothers me a little (and by a little I mean a lot).
|
|
#15
07-25-2005, 12:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
thanks god. I had all but given up on hockey.
does anyone know what the rosters of the current teams are at? are players planning on returning to play in the NHL or have some settled in European leauges?
|
|
#16
07-25-2005, 01:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
[ QUOTE ]
thanks god. I had all but given up on hockey. does anyone know what the rosters of the current teams are at? are players planning on returning to play in the NHL or have some settled in European leauges? [/ QUOTE ] Couple links for you, with the rosters as of the signing of the CBA. Any buyouts or signings that have happened aren't reflected. Eastern Conference Western Conference Chances are, most European players will be back, if they can get a contract. Money is still better over here for >90% of players. I haven't heard of any major players who said they are not coming back, FWIW.
|
|
#17
07-25-2005, 01:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
I hate the idea of shootouts deciding hockey games, it's like if a baseball game was tied after 11 innings and they went to a home-run derby to decide the winner. Ties are a part of hockey, people need to get over that.
I don't think eliminating the red line will open up the game as much as everyone else seems to. We'll have to wait and see on that. I don't think the goaltender equipment changes will be noticable at all. I like the delay of game penalty to a defender who clears the puck over the glass. Used to be only goalies were subject to this offense. All that aside, I can't wait to see hockey again.
|
|
#18
07-25-2005, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie. If you don't win or tie, you get zero. This isn't the Special Olympics where everyone gets a participation medal.
Instead of getting rid of the instigator rule, they stiffened it. Clown shoes. Crappy rules hockey is still better than no hockey though.
|
|
#19
07-25-2005, 09:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
the reason they decided on 2pt win, 1 pt tie/loss in OT, is because it keeps more teams in the hunt down the stretch (or so i heard in the press conference). That seems to be the biggest thing that the owners want in CBA, that their team can compete, and it's not the same 10 teams in the playoffs every year (+6 others in a crap shoot). This helps accomplish that.
|
|
#20
07-25-2005, 11:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The new NHL rules
All the new rules won't make a f-ing difference if they do not call obstruction.
The only rules I care about are the goalie equipment crackdown, moving the goals back and tag-up offsides. I'm skeptical of the "no red line" All the other rules suck especally the shootout. If they call obstruction the way it's meant to be called, i.e. if they don't have the puck you cannot touch them, or if they are skating away from you and you hook or grab them it is a penalty. Then more goals will be scored and there will be less ties. Ties wouldn't be a big deal if they didn't happen so much like they do now, b/c every game is 2-1 or 2-2 etc. However, the sabres should be good this year!!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
