On the first day of the NHL's research and development camp, hockey certainly looked different. But there's no reason for fans to expect any drastic change to the game.
There wasn't exactly a flood of support for having just one faceoff dot in the cent
Among the more unusual things on display Wednesday:
* Using 3-on-3 and 2-on-2 in overtime. * Altering the ice surface to have three faceoff dots, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink. * Placing red mesh in the nets rather than white to give shooters a better look at openings. * Having the puck already on the ice for a faceoff, which is started by a whistle rather than the traditional puck drop.
This is reminiscent of the yellow highlighted puck idea so the American's could keep up.
The hybrid icing is a great idea and long overdue. The 4 idea that were bullet pointed are nothing short of retarded. The thicker blue lines is stupid too. Why do defensemen need the benefit of being able to keep the puck in the offensive zone better? We already did away with the 2 line offside pass, that wasn't enough of a "cheat" to get high scores because too many Americans feel that unless there's 15 goals scored in a game, it's boring? Actually, the one thing I wanna see brought back is being allowed to nail the goalie if he's wayyyy over in the corner playing the puck. Once that goalie leaves his crease, he should be fair game like everyone else on the ice.
"PublicAnimalNo9" said The hybrid icing is a great idea and long overdue. The 4 idea that were bullet pointed are nothing short of retarded. The thicker blue lines is stupid too. Why do defensemen need the benefit of being able to keep the puck in the offensive zone better? We already did away with the 2 line offside pass, that wasn't enough of a "cheat" to get high scores because too many Americans feel that unless there's 15 goals scored in a game, it's boring? Actually, the one thing I wanna see brought back is being allowed to nail the goalie if he's wayyyy over in the corner playing the puck. Once that goalie leaves his crease, he should be fair game like everyone else on the ice.
Well I admit is was really entertaining (not to mention deserved) seeing Ron Hextall get nailed from behind and blasted flat to the ice but they got rid of it for very good reasons not the least of which was safety. A mostly standing still goalie getting hit from a barreling in forward going at full tilt had a real chance of causing permanent injury especially to the whiplash like affect on the neck and head.
The other factor was every such hit was a bench brawl magnet. Players had to protect their goalie from opposing teams looking to take out a hot goalie.
The rest of the hockey suggestions from the article are just retarded. If the Americans want to jazz up boring sports why don't they first try with baseball.
I agree with the hybrid icing as well. Too many players have gotten hurt getting nailed head first into the boards. Icing is usually pretty obvious and there's no reason not to blow the whistle sooner to call it.
However...
•Using 3-on-3 and 2-on-2 in overtime. •Altering the ice surface to have three faceoff dots, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink. •Placing red mesh in the nets rather than white to give shooters a better look at openings. •Having the puck already on the ice for a faceoff, which is started by a whistle rather than the traditional puck drop.
If they want lots of goals will just add more pucks. Multi-puck mode initiated!
These stories remind me of a story I heard in England. A few American big wigs wanted to spice the game up for the world cup in the US. They suggested something akin to basketball in that it was worth 1 goal if scored from the box, 2 goals outside of the box, and 3 if scored from half.
The response: Here is what we will do you you. If you score from here, 1 goal. From here, 1 goal. In fact if you score from anywhere on the pitch you get .... 1 goal. If the games isn't exciting enough for you then just do what you do to make baseball interesting and drink beer.
•Using 3-on-3 and 2-on-2 in overtime. •Altering the ice surface to have three faceoff dots, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink. •Placing red mesh in the nets rather than white to give shooters a better look at openings. •Having the puck already on the ice for a faceoff, which is started by a whistle rather than the traditional puck drop.
Bullshit. Might get hurt hitting the boards. For millions a year, you better be willing to shove your face clean through the boards and kiss the puck with what's left of your lips.
* Using 3-on-3 and 2-on-2 in overtime.
* Altering the ice surface to have three faceoff dots, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink.
* Placing red mesh in the nets rather than white to give shooters a better look at openings.
* Having the puck already on the ice for a faceoff, which is started by a whistle rather than the traditional puck drop.
This is reminiscent of the yellow highlighted puck idea so the American's could keep up.
Thank you but NO!
Actually, the one thing I wanna see brought back is being allowed to nail the goalie if he's wayyyy over in the corner playing the puck. Once that goalie leaves his crease, he should be fair game like everyone else on the ice.
The hybrid icing is a great idea and long overdue. The 4 idea that were bullet pointed are nothing short of retarded. The thicker blue lines is stupid too. Why do defensemen need the benefit of being able to keep the puck in the offensive zone better? We already did away with the 2 line offside pass, that wasn't enough of a "cheat" to get high scores because too many Americans feel that unless there's 15 goals scored in a game, it's boring?
Actually, the one thing I wanna see brought back is being allowed to nail the goalie if he's wayyyy over in the corner playing the puck. Once that goalie leaves his crease, he should be fair game like everyone else on the ice.
Well I admit is was really entertaining (not to mention deserved) seeing Ron Hextall get nailed from behind and blasted flat to the ice but they got rid of it for very good reasons not the least of which was safety. A mostly standing still goalie getting hit from a barreling in forward going at full tilt had a real chance of causing permanent injury especially to the whiplash like affect on the neck and head.
The other factor was every such hit was a bench brawl magnet. Players had to protect their goalie from opposing teams looking to take out a hot goalie.
The rest of the hockey suggestions from the article are just retarded. If the Americans want to jazz up boring sports why don't they first try with baseball.
However...
•Altering the ice surface to have three faceoff dots, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink.
•Placing red mesh in the nets rather than white to give shooters a better look at openings.
•Having the puck already on the ice for a faceoff, which is started by a whistle rather than the traditional puck drop.
Not! to the above ideas.
These stories remind me of a story I heard in England. A few American big wigs wanted to spice the game up for the world cup in the US. They suggested something akin to basketball in that it was worth 1 goal if scored from the box, 2 goals outside of the box, and 3 if scored from half.
The response: Here is what we will do you you. If you score from here, 1 goal. From here, 1 goal. In fact if you score from anywhere on the pitch you get .... 1 goal. If the games isn't exciting enough for you then just do what you do to make baseball interesting and drink beer.
Like everyone else. These are just plain dumb.
•Altering the ice surface to have three faceoff dots, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink.
•Placing red mesh in the nets rather than white to give shooters a better look at openings.
•Having the puck already on the ice for a faceoff, which is started by a whistle rather than the traditional puck drop.
For millions a year, you better be willing to shove your face clean through the boards and kiss the puck with what's left of your lips.