17 May 12
Originally posted by uzlessI disagree with tracing it back to Neilson. Until the mid-90s, playoff hockey was still much more wide open. I would trace low scoring clutch and grab and defend hockey to the Devils of the mid-90s. The Devils proved you could win the Cup with not much talent on offense by turning the neutral zone into muck and turning a few turnovers into goals. So everyone followed suit. It's a lot easier to find a bunch of Key Danyekos and Ulf Samuelsons than it is to find a bunch of Jaromir Jagrs and Evgeni Malkins. If you can win with the former, they why not?
Summarized nicely....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/globe-on-hockey/scotty-bowman-traces-current-style-of-playoff-hockey-back-to-roger-neilson/article2433273/
They've tried to change the rules to open the game up, but calling more clutching and grabbing doesn't work because:
1) Powerplay percentages are so low that taking a penalty just isn't enough of a disincentive. The goalies and the pads are so big and the defenses are so sophisticated and block so many shots that it's just too hard to score on the PP.
2) The refs swallow the whistle in the 3rd period anyway.
I know this is going to sound sacreligious, but I think the only way to open the game up is to make the goal bigger or the ice wider, or both. The current dimensions were not meant for goalies with pads the size they use now or for players as big as they are now.
22 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76I think that is the point of the article. Hockey WAS more open until the 90's when clutch and grabbing became the norm until 2004 when they started calling more penalties. When they started to call more penalties, teams couldn't use clutch and grab as a defensive technique so they went back to what Neilson did in the 70's.
I disagree with tracing it back to Neilson. Until the mid-90s, playoff hockey was still much more wide open. I would trace low scoring clutch and grab and defend hockey to the Devils of the mid-90s. The Devils proved you could win the Cup with not much talent on offense by turning the neutral zone into muck and turning a few turnovers into goals. So everyone fo ot meant for goalies with pads the size they use now or for players as big as they are now.
There really isn't any thing they can do to make the game more interesting if teams keep employing this defensive technique. By widening the nets, all you will do is increase the amount of goals scored...but that doesn't necessarily make the game more interesting to watch. A goal won't make the overall game enjoyable to watch, end to end action played at a high pace will.
The NHL lost its chance to fix the real problem; go to an olympic sized ice rink. They had the chance when all the arenas were being rebuilt within the last 10 years or so. As you say, players are too big and strong and fast...without a bigger rink, it's too easy to play defense.
Unfortunately, i think the NHL is doomed to this crap until the rinks need to be renovated....in the next 30-40 years! :-<
24 May 12
Originally posted by uzlessIf you widen the nets, you make powerplays more effective, thereby increasing the incentive to avoid penalties, thereby opening the ice.
I think that is the point of the article. Hockey WAS more open until the 90's when clutch and grabbing became the norm until 2004 when they started calling more penalties. When they started to call more penalties, teams couldn't use clutch and grab as a defensive technique so they went back to what Neilson did in the 70's.
There really isn't any thing th ...[text shortened]... oomed to this crap until the rinks need to be renovated....in the next 30-40 years! :-<
26 May 12
Originally posted by sh76The NHL could loosen up about the off sides rule, oreliminate it so that players can move in past the blue line ahead of the puck. Eliminating the blue lines in essence.
If you widen the nets, you make powerplays more effective, thereby increasing the incentive to avoid penalties, thereby opening the ice.