1) According to stats released recently from the NHL, scoring is down through the first 25% or so of the 2006-2007 season compared to last year. This turn of events has to be alarming to Mr. Bettman & co. as this was one of their priorities after the lock out. Instituting new rules to try to increase scoring: a) Allow 2 line passes b) Goalie wandering restrictions c) Smaller pads for tenders d) Calling all obstruction tightly e) Offside tag up
2) As many of us postulated last fall, these would only be temporary fixes. The best players in the world are that for good reason; they can adapt with time to most any superficial changes such as these. It was merely only a matter of time before that happened. Most of us didn't think it would be so fast. Players apparently have adapted to the New NHL.
3) In reality the increased scoring last year as a mirage anyway. Most of the scoring was from the increased number of PP's. NOT from the other measures employed. As players adjusted to the new officiating style, the number of PP's has steadily waned. So it should not be surprising that scoring in general would also decrease.
4) Now the big question: what does the NHL do next? They apparently feel increased scoring equates to more fan interest, so we believe that the league will have to come up with new ways (gimmicks) to do this. One of the options discussed and not adopted last time around was the increasing the size of the goal nets. If the trend continues, look for this option to gain momentum, and at the very least be employed in the AHL either later this year or next as a pilot to see if this does in fact affect scoring.
5) Other possibilities might be to do away with the rule that minor penalties end when a goal is scored, further curtailing goalie wandering, or even more radical, to go with a 4 on 4 like OT is done now, but all game long. The ladder suggestion would not be popular with the players as it would decrease the number of employed NHL-ers.
6) Fauxrumors feels the game did/does NOT need to be altered in such silly/radical ways to make NHL hockey exciting. First we will list some common sense options to improve the game, then we will list some Bettman-like silly options that could be used.
7) Common sense options: a) League contraction- OK, sorry folks/fans of some of the teams that need to be contracted, as some have won the Cup recently, but that doesn't mean those franchises need to remain: NJ, Carolina,TB, FLA, Phoenix. All could be removed tomorrow and their talent re-distributed among the remaining 25 teams. ( We can see being even more draconian, but 5 would be a start)
b) Eliminate the instigator rule/most fighting inhibitors- No we're not advocating a return to the 1975 Flyers days, but fans like to see a 1 on 1 battle. Also, and as important, we feel the recent increase in checking/stick injuries can be traced to the reduction in fighting. No longer are players in fear that they may have to pay for their 'indiscretions'.
c) Allow goalies to wander/handle the puck all they want, BUT once they leave their crease treat them like any other skater. Can be body checked, etc. You'll see far less wandering without silly shapes painted on the ice.
d) Penalties should run to completion- Before the great Habs teams of the 50's, a team could score an unlimited number of PPG's on a minor. They were so good that they changed the rules. Revert it back.
8) Bettman may consider these: a) Use multiple pucks b) Leave the injured on the ice c) Vodka in goalie water bottles d) Instead of a shoot out, have (3) sets of players duke it out at center ice after regulation. e) Strobe lights periodically/arbitrarily used to confuse goalies
9) We're sure our readers can come up with their own 'common sense' as well as nutty rule changes. Feel free and add your own
We’ve moved!
15 years ago
16 comments:
A. Hey FAUX, you had better watch it here. I think NUTZ was the first one to break the story regrading the "vodka laced water bottles."
B. Here's a rule change to consider - During a fight, play continues.
C. I am sure there will be more to come.
scoring may be down, but teams that are scoring a whack of goals, say the sabres, the sharks,and the preds, are at the top of the standings.the teams that have embraced the new wide open nhl are thriving..the teams that feel like they need to play it safe and sit back, are middle of the road at best. the new nhl is a speed game...speed doesn't necessarily translate to goals, but its great fun to watch. the nhl does not need anymore rules, or structural changes...its been over tinkered with already...2 nets, 2 goalies, and five players on each side, drop the puck, and let them go at it..hockey is the perfect game, its when new york lawyers and their army of "briany" marketing types get their grubby hands on the game, that hockey loses its shine, and stagnates.
1) We agree Pinko, the game didn't need huge changes, but that's what has slowly been going on since our favourite "NY lawyer" took over the NHL 15 years ago
2) We have no problem with 'opening things up' as things did get quite boring the last few years, BUT we believe the cause was over expansion and the subsequent talent dilution
3) Also we do NOT like the New NHL's attempt to remove legit fighting. Some may disagree with its place BUT No one can argue that folks NEVER leave during a fight, and in some games is the most exciting occurrence
4) As for Antz idea to continue games if a fight starts, we will add that to our list of 'Bettman/silly' rule changes. ; )
I am not against contraction at all...30 teams has done nothing but thin the nhl talent pool..however, the new collective bargaining agreement, was a ruse by buttman and his small market owner's kabal, to ensure that 'small market', or er 'no market' owners can continue to ice sub par teams, and milk the true market teams, to stay afloat. there will be no contraction while buttman is commish, because contraction would be an admittence that his 15 year reign has been complete failure...so it aint gonna happen.
1) We already know his reign has been a failure. As one recent blogger noted. Most/all of the infusion/increase of income during Bettman's regime has come from sources that aren't sustainable, or he had nothing to do with it:
a) Canadian dollar assention
b) Expansion fees
c) 24% player salary roll back
2) With no further expansion on the horizon, unlikely the Canadian dollar will go much higher, Ticket prices already close to the max, TV revenues already over priced, there seems to be little room for revenue growth
3) This, among other reasons, makes us believe another labour dispute or player give backs will occur once this CBA expires.
4) We also agree little chance Bettman will admit failure and allow contraction willingly
Yes, Mr. Bettman speak with fork tongue
a. Another rule change:
If a team takes three successive minors in less than two minutes, then the teams play 5 against 2. Four penalties? You got it, 5 on 1. If increasing scoring is a priority, then there you go.
b. Also, how about increasing the size of the net, or make shots taken outside the blue line that go in worth 2 points.
c. The strobe light idea needs some tweaking. Instead of that type of distraction, play with the arena lights completely off periodically and without warning.
d. Make fighting mandatory. Teams that don't fight will be fined. That's not to increase scoring, but wouldn't it be fun? And finally, if a player is assessed a ten minute misconduct, then his team is shorthanded for ten minutes. Same concept with a game miscinduct.
f. On that ABSURD note, Gary Bettman is an idiot!!!!
Pretty sure the NHL won't take the $1.5 BILLION Hit to fold 5 teams!
No I didn't make that number up..came from Forbes...they estimated it would take double the franchise value to buyout and fold the team...the 5 teams mentioned are valued at a total of $750 Million...x2 = $1.5Billion!
OUCH!
I'm sure if some team wasn't making any money no one is gonna pay double to make it go away. That just doesn't make sense.
if those 5 teams are money drains, wouldn't their disapearence help everyone left? There would be fewer teams to get revenue sharing, and fewer to share any tv money
It was an estimate by Forbes...they valued each NHL franchise...the total for the 5 Faux indicated was $749 Million. The owners of these teams are not just going to say hey take them away for nothing...they would want the NHL to buy them out.
The other half comes from legal precedents that have been set in the US...the NHL would have to pay a variety of things including:
1. NHLPA lost revenue from dues to the equivalent # of player positions lost for a period of 5 years.
2. Payment of Pension topups for many of the players who don't end up with another team.
3. Termination fees associated with terminating team lease agreements on arenas.
4. Payouts on player contracts for any players who do not end up in the NHL system...Forbes estimated based on full salaries...I think the NHL could use their new CBA and BUY OUT these players contracts like any other NHL team could?
5. Payouts on all nonplayer staff (coaches, trainers, marketing, etc.). Yes they can just lay them off...but many have contracts that would need to be paid out.
Forbes listed a couple other things...I will track a link later...but Forbes basically calculated the cost of eliminating an NHL franchise to be double the franchise value.
Check Forbes.com (sorry about the link...not an intent to spam Faux!)
1) Firstly impressed with the Nutz's latest retort. It was devoid of the usually nonsense and actually used some facts in an intelligent post
2) Ofcourse we weren't saying it would be an easy/financially easy task to remove 5 franchises, or to do it simultaneously.
3) However, if these teams continue to struggle financially, the league, and the owners of those teams that would be draining the league, might find it to their benefit to disband and take a one time loss instead of a slow bleed over time.
4) Another unpleasant option, but one that would also work financially would to move one or more of those 5 franchises north of the border. If, NY can sustain 3 teams (Buffalo, rangers, islanders, why can't the province of hockey crazy Ontario or Quebec sustain 2?
No teams are going to Canada faux! They couldn't keep their teams so thats why they left to go south in the first place. They are not going to go back now,
the penguins are going to end up in southern ontario..other then that, bettman is going to continue to try and fail to juggle stuggling teams in and out of poor US markets..think KC, or Oklahoma City, etc...contraction is not going to happen...that only happens when say a commish (selig) is hell bent on screwing a specific market (mtl)...damn i miss my expos, sniff.
1) We can see the Penguin move. Infact if memory serves, that was a Faux prediction way back
2) As for contraction, even baseball avoided it with Montreal. Moving them to Washington D.C. Though one has to wonder how long some of those poorly performing (revenue-wise) franchises can sustain themselves
3) Moving them from one poor market to another seems silly. Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic
A lot of us were devastated when they moved the 'Spos out of Montreal. I secretly hope they fall on their faces in Washington
true the expos were not contracted, but bud, and his lachey loria, used the threat of contraction, to pretty much wipe out any hope that the fans might have had for a future of mlb in mtl...as for washington, i am not a fan, i will never cheer for them...i will stick with the twins, the expos sisters in the contraction battle years back.....
Post a Comment