What needs to be done to make the game Better?

Alright The lockout will be over soon. They just want to make a big deal and make it look like there is no deal now so all the hockey fans can get excited. We all know new rules will be added to the game and all types of changes. This is what I think should be done without going crazy. Tell me what you think. Or tell me what you rather see done.Yup, I’m back. Almost summer and not even close to hockey season….. but I’m back. For the few left that remember me, what’s up people! And for the new people I never met…. spelling corrections are welcome.

Alright well first and foremost. What’s up again. Hope everyone has been doing good, and I miss the game of hockey like a fat kid miss’s cake.

So this is what I think needs to be done to make the game better to watch and fun for the fans and the players.

1. The obvious first…. Goalie pads make smaller… but nothing crazy.

2. Nets a little bigger… but nothing stupid like the new nets you might have seen. That’s the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Maybe an inch bigger on each post side and an inch taller. That’s all for now.

3.Pull the nets back to where they used to be. No more fcuking 5 man party’s behind the net.

4. Zero tolerance on clutching and grabbing.

You grab…. you go to the box. That’s all no questions asked.

5. Tag up offside’s. The redline we won’t move BUT No more 2 line passing, take 2 line passing out of the game. Keep the Redline for the icings and forget about “no touch icings”…… Let the players race for the puck to try and beat out the icing.

6.The most important thing I want to do is the Win, Loss, overtime loss, and tie situation. This is what should be done. 2 points for winning a game.. 0 for losing…for overtime 4 on 4 for 5 minutes… yeah keeping all that stuff the same obviously. Now if you loss in overtime you get one point. if overtime ends and there is no winner…. 5 man shootout. The loser of that gets a point for overtime loss the winner gets the 2 points from the win. If no one wins after the shootout THEN IT’S A TIE.

And that’s all People. This doesn’t get crazy on changing the game but opens the ice up and makes the game fun to watch. We gotta remember that you have to keep the game of hockey somewhat the same or else it isn’t the hockey that we all grew to love.


33 Responses to What needs to be done to make the game Better?

  1. wheresthesoda says:

    good article sands, i agree on just about everything…

    the red line situation, i’d like to see no red line. The icings, can be done from your own blue lines.

  2. RichterFan says:

    The shootout to me is the most important issue. I think because it is the most exciting play in hockey you have to install it. It will give the fans something to cheer about. But I do not like the current overtime rules. I think once the game goes into overtime the shootout should be used instead of the boring 4-4 system. Icings should be automatic so there are no injuries with players racing for the puck and crashing into the wall. Other that i’m contempt with the rest of the game.

  3. Sands says:

    I thought about that and originally had that as the icing rule on this post, but I figured if someone dumps it right at there blue line it kind of makes everyone chase the puck a little to much and gives players like a chance to really slow the game down to lot’s of dumping and chasing. I kind of want to see some more like break out’s into zone’s and crisp pass’s from longer distances. like i said no more 2 lines pass’s but i’d like to keep the red line….. maybe i’m just a little old fashion

  4. hockeyhead says:

    some other ideas THEY ARE trying out.

    1. 3 15 minute periods. 5 min 4-4 ot. 5min 3-3 ot and if still tied…shoot out.

    2. defensive changes made first on faceoff. fast faceoffs.

    3. attempt pass or pinching dman= no icing. no touch icing.

    4. cant change up if you ice it.

    and more. like i have been saying nhl.com has a great article on what is going on. check it out, it is good stuff.

  5. LeafyMcLeaf says:

    Smaller pads, no touch icing, and then return the rules to the rules of the eighties. THE SHOOT OUT SUCKS!

  6. nordiques100 says:

    The 3 point game. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win 1 point for the overtime loser. OTs should be 4 on 4 then 3 on 3 then to shootout.

    reducing rosters would be nice. wouldnt mind 15-16 skaters 2 goalies. i rather see sundin play every 3rd shift rather than every 4th shift and be forced to see belak, wilm and other non skilled players waste 10 minutes of the game. all those 4th liners do is cycle. BORING!!

    I like the big nets. with the smaller equipment too the goalies have to be more athletic. it would make shots from the outside a better chance of going in. if more outside shots go in, it stretches the defence and opens the middle of the ice. i hate it when there is 10 guys standing in front of the crease where no pucks can go through.

  7. 19Yzerman says:

    1hour and 45 min games by way of rules which speed up the game. #4 I like it but, those bloody network and their sponcer buddies are far to much in control of the game. They want 3 hour games where we have to watch two idiot geeks driving an old duster interact with that dude in a Hemi truck who hates them.LOL

  8. nonhl2005 says:

    The refs need to call the penalties that are on the books and let the players play the game the way it is. What has changed since the days of the 80’s when it was exciting? The clutching and grabbing that’s what has ruined this sport ( along with Goodenow ). Call the penalties! You get more PP’s and eventually the players will need to stop the clutching and grabbing which will open it up more.

  9. hockeyhead says:

    have you checked out the article on nhl.com? i really like all the stuff that they are trying out.

    i am usually all about tradition but with these new rules and the potential of the game being better than ever (sort ta speak) i am excited.

    plus it has been so long…..i am dien’ for some boston bruins hockey.

  10. 19Yzerman says:

    #1 ,#2 and #3 all have to do with goal so the way I would address that area would be to show the goalies pictures of how the size of their species has evolved over the years and how the net has not changed. If a goalie is going to break the 103 shutout record of Terry Sawchuk they ought to feel damn lucky they didn’t have to do it without a mask like he did let alone having the EXTRA EXTRA padding. Its the upper body pads that need to be restricted. The excessive size of the jersey creates an arm pit webbing that stops a lot. No more Sasquatch looking goalies. Let the goalies vote on some proposed changes but, either way we want to see some space of open net from the frontal angle as we did in the 50’s. Change the rink size to the Olympic size but, keep the same behind net spacing. If there are 5 guys back there it would be three forwards who drew both Dmen back there causing them to abandon the front door at home.

    #4 no questions asked? I agree. Although I have never seen a player lobby his way out of going to the box once the arm goes up. I will add the whole time shall be served regardless of scoring or amount of penalty time accessed.

    #5 I think that they can keep the Redline but, allow 2 line passes. That will keep them from waiting at the blueline for a pass and allow them to sneak in uncontested. In our league we call them cherry pickers. I agree with not having no touch icings even though it does have its degree of increased possibility of injury. Who cares? Skate fast and take chances.

    #6They added the rule which allowed each team a point for having ended regulation in a tie so teams would not go into a defensive shell to retain that point in OT. I think the league should study how well that has worked in that respect and especially regarding points standings come seasons end for playoff positions having given a third point to be factored in amongst the two teams.

    #7Touch up offsides would be nice. How many times have you seen the game stopped when a player couldn’t stop but, could have curled out and then regained the blueline on side or a team goes for a line change and the Dman coughs up the puck into his own zone right at his own blueline to the other teams forward who had not left the zone yet but, could have played it out to a teammate and retained puck possession?

  11. 19Yzerman says:

    Hell yea.

    I looked at that article and it sounds like a lot of changes are coming that I have felt were much needed and much over due for all the right reasons.

    On the first saturday in Oct of 2001 at Spartan stadium in Lansing , Mi we had an outdoor college game which drew in 74,554 fans. The “Cold War” game was Michigan vs Michigan St. The 3-2 lead was taken by Michigan with only a few minutes left in the game but, State pulled the net minder and scored within the last minute of play to tie and it was fitting that these two teams battled right to the end. I went with a group of 4 so the last diget in the attenence number was us. I have heard that B.U. and B.C. have been considering doing the same. This article http://www.nhl.com/onthefly/news/2005/06/229738.html mentions lambau field being used. for one of those out dooor games. I would say That after other schools do this you will see the attendence numbers increase and then once that number eclipses 100,000 the “Cold War II” will be held at Michigan stadium which can hold over 111,000 fans.

  12. hockeyhead says:

    another thing that has people buzzing about hockey is cam neely going to the hall.

    many fans on this site argued against it and i send rasberries to thee.

    they had a 10 minute segment on nesn’s sports desk( whick is only 15 minutes) on cam neely. highlights and interviews.

    dennis leary (comedian/actor/die hard bruins fan) said it best….”cam made it exciting to go to a bruins game, that is why we went because of cam”

    “he was like bobby orr and terry o’rielly wrapped in one” AWESOME!!

    that has got me thinking hockey again. YES we CAM.

  13. 19Yzerman says:

    I think if you look up the word powerforward in the dictionary you will find no text. Only a picture of Cam Neely.LOL

    Dennis Leary. Is he a fireman fan or was he ever a fireman? I know the recent part he plays as a fireman but, I am quite sure he does take part in some sort of hockey beneifit game for the firefighters. ????????

  14. 19Yzerman says:

    Don’t ties suck worse?

    Wouldn’t it be cool if your team wins a game in a shootout after allowing 50 shots on goal and gave up three goals which were one on one break aways.When at the other end they only gave up 13 shots and three goals which were lucky bounce rebound easy goals?

    I am not only in favor of a shoot out as means to an end of a tie but, I wouldn’t mind if a shoot out was not allowed to end in a tie. Like if after 5 attempts neither goalie give up a shot. The shoot out should continue till one team score and the other doesn’t match it.

    This way standings would only have a win and loss colomn.

  15. hockeyhead says:

    i am not sure his tie to firefighters but yes he does hockey benefits and he is in that show rescue me which i am addicted to.

    i agree tho, neely was the first guy you heard of as being a power forward. there is truth to that.

  16. 19Yzerman says:

    Remove the instigator penalty so that players may once again police them selves.

  17. 19Yzerman says:

    I can remember first hearing a player being called a powerforward and actually thinking the NHL was adding a fourth forward. Kind of like the removal of the Rover which actually was a player position in the early years of hockey.

    Powerforward! I would say must be a forward position player who pocesses a combonation of Size, Strength, Speed and Shot power. I don’t think it is written anyplace exactly how to define an NHL powerforward.

  18. hockeyhead says:

    true, i guess it is like basketball…a forward who drives to the paint and either draws a foul or causes a charge.

    a player like tim kerr or espo i would not say is a power forward.

    i think you need to fore-check. take out defense men. drive to the net. take massive abuse in front. tip, screen. yes, fight (when needed) and score a whole mess of goals because of your aggression.

    there is a fine line between a guy that gets garbage goals (tim kerr) and a guy that is a scrappy goon (pj stock).

  19. electroreturns says:

    What do I think? I still think your a moron but it is good to see your learning to SPELL.

  20. Flyer_Fan_In_CT says:

    NO POINTS FOR TIES OR OVERTIME LOSSES

    NO SHOOTOUTS

    this will open the game up like nobody’s biz. no playing it safe. teams that need the point will play hard for the win….not safe for the tie.

    and shootouts will be soooooooooo boring. they are not hockey, and shouldnt decide anything outside of the allstar skills competition.

  21. 19Yzerman says:

    you could get that question answered by Shea and Brinkly during the intermision. on UPN38 .

    LOL

    Dear Mr Shea and Mr Brinkley

    I have heard the term Powerforward used during game commentation and I was wondering exactly what defines a player as a powerforward?

    I don’t think espo had the speed for the combination.

  22. 19Yzerman says:

    Yes 2 points for winner! loser gets the big ZERO and thats it. NO TIES as every game should end with one of each of the above no matter how they get there.

    Shootout

    Overtime playoff style

    Coaches bare knuckle fight at center ice

    Officials auction calls to owners after regulation

    Coaches wager the services of his players wives to the other team if they win.

    any ideas?

  23. ranger_fan says:

    If you look up Cam Neely, you get Seabass. WTF? lol

  24. rojoke says:

    After a year of watching it in the AHL, I fail to find anything exciting about it. Penalty shots are exciting because of the fact that they’re a rarity in the game. But these are not penalty shots, becuase no infraction occurred to warrant them. And except for the last one, you know there’s another one coming in a few seconds, so they are no longer a novelty.

  25. rojoke says:

    Seeing that everyone got a woody for shootouts, then that leads to question of making an OT/SO win either less valuable than a regular win (3-point system, if it’s adopted) or an OT/SO loss more valuable than a regulation loss. But there is a solution to this, and if it were any more obvious, they’d break their noses tripping over it. ABANDON THE POINTS SYSTEM ALTOGETHER

    It would break down this way. A win is a win, whether it takes 60 minutes, 65 minutes, 70 minutes, two days, a week, whatever. A loss is a loss. Simple as that. Two columns on the stats sheet. Standings based on winning percentages. Whoever wins the most games. The overtime has done nothing to significantly change the way teams play, so if you’re that averse to tie games, then why bother with it at all. I would personally like to see a 10 minute overtime, minimum, but I’m resigned to that happening after the Leafs win another Cup!

    I like the larger nets, but not the deformed ones that have been offered by the league. It comes off as too gimmicky. I like the rectangular nets. They retain the look of the old ones.

    Removing the red line for two line passes will not lead to more long bomb passes for breakaways, at least not as many as some people may think. Defencemen will simply play inside their blue lines more and not as high in the neutral zone during breakouts. What it will do is open up the neutral zone a little more, and combined with a larger neutral zone by moving the nets back, it should lead to an easier time for forwards to carry the puck up ice instead of just dumping and chasing – which will not go away. The only remaining piece of the puzzle is the officiating.

    First off, call the rule book. Not stick-on-body or body-on-stick contact anywhere, not just the neutral zone. Second, players have to stop *****ing and moaning about every single call. There’s not a game goes by where a penalized player swears out a ref – and every camera in the arena catches it – with impugnity. No fines afterwards, no extra penalties, nothing. Not even a misconduct. The league has to state, with some muscle to back it up, that this ends. Referees should have the authority and integrity to give them extra minor penalties for such hissy fits. Why extra minors? Because that puts the pressure on players to police themselves. Teammates will be after each other to not argue over every little infraction.

  26. bender says:

    I pretty much agree with all your ideas. All except for the Shoot outs. And Although I’m not a traditionalist and completely against the Shoot out. There’s another way I’ve seen it done that I much prefer. In fact, it was the most exciting game I’ve ever been too….Here goes.

    Game tied at the end of regulation.

    Start off with the Classic 5 on 5 for 5 mins OR just straight to 4 on 4 for 4 mins IF were worried about time.

    THEN…

    If no one scores. We take off another guy.

    3 on 3 for 3 mins.

    No score??

    2 on 2 for 2 mins.

    And if that doesn’t solve it. The each coach sends out his best player to go mano eh mano against the other teams best player.

    1 on 1 (All with goalies of course).

    No on ice stoppages after the puck drops. If the goalie saves it he passes it to his teammate behind the net Street Hockey style.

    After each time period expires. A short 30 second delay to set out a new set of guys and pucked dropped at center again. A coach can play the same guys if he chooses. But really, who would.

    Line changes are welcome.

    So….You get to HYPE up your STARS of the league. You get tense action all the way through a la Troy (Brad Pitt vs Eric Bana). You’ll get LESS ties. And TONS of EARNED breakaways.

    It’s a little radical. BUT MAN, is it FUN!!!

  27. bender says:

    Rules of the eighties??

    So every 3 out of 5 guys MUST wear mullets??

  28. Sands says:

    It sounds fun and truthfully I was always against the shootout idea.. but the NHL lost a lot of fans and sadly they know they will gain most back and then newer fans because shootouts are a big deal to none hockey fans. I like your idea but it is like you said a radical idea. Us true fans could care less, bring back the same old game we always watched and we’d be happy.

  29. hockeyhead says:

    his role was funnier than any role shaq has done. but i like terry bradshaw better in smokey and the bandit.

    lets just say that athletes should just stick to sports. what made seabass so funny was if you actually knew who cam neely was. if not….it is not that funny.

  30. hockeyhead says:

    “the ironing is delicious” bart simpson

  31. Flyer_Fan_In_CT says:

    while all the ideas you put forth are interesting, and each would have its supporters im sure….i’d prefer that the game remain a TEAM sport, and play until one team wins.

    going to a shootout would be exciting at first. like the first woman after a breakup/divorce or something like that. the first shuttle launches were exciting also. now i dont tune in to watch them.

    shootouts would eliminate everyone except the shooter, and the goalie. there is no fear of getting your clock cleaned while shooting. i know this can happen during a game with the breakaway, or penalty shot. but this isnt happening 10 times in rapid succession. and if it di, it would be BORING! even if my team was winning!

    think about the all star skills competition. that is some boring stuff.

    now think about all that makes hockey exciting….its a fastpaced, nonstop hardhitting game. shootouts would be like watching football or baseball with too many breaks in the action. the action itself may be exciting[when there is action], but with all of the stopping it would be somewhat anticlimatic.

    so my solution is this. play a predetirmined amount of OT and if there is still a tie, so be it then NO POINTS are awarded. this may seem punative, but when teams are dropping out of playoff contention because of this, coaches will compensate. coaches will begin to coach to win.

    this will make the game more exciting. its a very subtle attitude adjustment.

    and it keeps the GAME the same.

  32. NYRules says:

    Shootout should only be implemented if they are going to take away ties. If ties stay then its a tie after OT. If we want a victor, which is how i think it should be, add the shootout. OT could go on forever but a shootout should not last long. Only thing is no shootout ever in playoffs. Its great to break a tie after a season game but playoffs need the inteensity of gameplay.

Leave a Reply