This is how to make hockey better....?

Question

1. Don't make the goals bigger, make goalie equipment smaller.
2. Get rid of the offside rule.Less frequent stoppage.
3. Let inforcers protect star players , not the nhl with ridiculous bans.
4. Make the puck orange or give it a on screen halo so it becomes easier to see the puck for average tv audiences
5. make Bret Hull NHL commisioner.
6. Give 3 points for a win , 1 for a tie .
Any one else have suggestions, email the NHL....

Answer 1

1. As long as the protection is reasonable, regulating the goalie equipment is fine (and if they see fit to reduce it that's cool too - I mean there's gotta be a ton of light-weight materials available that are not bulky). Enlarging the net is a complete total and absolutely moronic joke. Bettman might as well finish the game off and put the nets 10 feet high in the air like the nba.

2. There really aren't a ton of offsides stoppage now since they went back to the tag-up offsides rule. This rule is reasonable as it prevents goal hanging and lazy play.

3. I think they've gone too far with the virtually no-check style that the new rules have engendered. As for fisticuffs, I can go either way on it, but for goodness sake make it a contact sport again!

4. Orange on white? That's harder to see. The Fox tracks thing was tried already and was basically yet another goofy idea. Basically the viewer just needs to be told HOW to follow the puck - watch where the players are focused and you'll figure out where the puck must be

5. Make Lou Lamoriello the commish (a huge sacrifice I'd be willing to make as a Devils fan in order to save this mess of a league). Hell, even bring back the goofy Ziegler-era - at least he was a guy who understood the game and gave a crap about it unlike Bettman. Whoever it is - they need to be a hockey guy first and businessman/lawyer second.

6. There's no more ties, which is lame (at least when the other option is the coin-flip, er I mean shootout, which isn't even real hockey). Seriously, they should just take every change that occured since Bettman became commish and start over again. The game would be for the better. Anyhow, if they MUST keep the lame shootout it should go like this. 3 for a regulation or overtime win, 2 for a lameout, er shooout win, 1 for a lameout loss, 0 for a regulation/overtime loss. Teams will play the full 65 minutes as something really is at stake. Anyone that says this will hurt the standings records because of the 3-points per win are totally ignoring what the extra loser point has done for the past few years with the ludicrousity that is 21 team out of 30 over "psuedo-.500")

A couple more.
7) Take back the red-line rule. Supposedly this has opened the game up, but watch: within a couple more years as teams figure out that if they don't have the skill they will need to pull their defensemen back and keep them from joining the rush. So what will we get? 3-on-5 offensive zone hockey. This is why the red-line was put in in the first place decades ago: to encourage defensemen to move up.
8) Fire Bettman. Sue him for incompetence.

Answer 2

LOL OHHH MAN LOL LOL LOL Sorry can't stop laughing at that 4, the whole puck thing. LOL Seriously man LOL don't you know Fox TRIED something like that. Yeah TRUE Hockey fans still have nightmares about that one. That would DESTROY the NHL, at least if THEY adopted it. It KILLED Fox's coverage. As to the goals and goalies, leave them alone. They made it smaller already and we don't need more goals. No one will really start watching just because the score is higher. With the offside rule you don't hear much with it. There really is no reason to get rid of it. I could deal with letting the enforces do their job, depending how far it went. We covered 4. As to Brett Hull I'm not sure that it would help or hurt. Last there ARE NO TIES. They are Overtime losses. I'm all for 3 points for a win, 2 for an OT win and 1 for an OT Loss.

Answer 3

Then its no longer Hockey.
1 OK put them back in 80's equipment.
2 your out of your mind!
3 That's called wrestling change the channel if that's what you want to see.
4 Fox did that. It does not work. The problem is the puck moves faster than the hand, thus TV has a hard time keeping up. I will grant that people who do not understand have a hard time understanding it on TV, you have to see it live to really get it.
5. Your best idea
6WHY? Instead give 2 points and a gold star for a win but a silver for a tie. How about snow cones for everyone who scores?

Why mess with it any more. Its the greatest game on earth lets keep it that way instead of turning into something else.

Answer 4

Looks good, however, items 2,3 and 4 should be taken off that list, specially the off side rule, there is a need for it to prevent behind the play loafers.

Anybody but Buttman for commissioner, give the job to John Ferguson Sr. he'll soon streamline the league.

#6. shoot outs are ok, but for my money, it makes team play a one man show. Not good for the overall game. I would leave it alone, OT if necessary You win you get points, you lose you get none, now, that is incentive.

The thing I would like most to see is streamlining the playoffs. As it stands, just about all teams can make the playoffs, with the actual formula there is no incentive to play hard all year. The first two teams of each division should go at each other, the winners go to conference final and the winners of that go for the hardware. That way, I don't have to watch hockey till the end of June. I know it is good for the owners, but we end up paying.

They could have more a**es on the seats if the ticket price came down a bit, so take less to make more in the end.

Answer 5

They tried the puck thing and it bombed, 3 points for a win would make a joke out of the points system and offsides prevents players from 'cherry picking.' Also, have a more balanced schedule, lose two teams, move a couple of others to Canada, and bring back the old names for the Conferences and Divisions (Prince of Wales, Campbell, Norris, Adams....just to name a few).

Answer 6

Ice Hockey is better effective because: there is checking you opt on better skill not as risky to fall 10000000 cases better interesting there are quite a number of better, yet i will't extremely call them because they could take in an finished web page. I have performed both and Ice Hockey is definitely better effective

Answer 7

1. Neither needs to be done. It's just fine the way it is.

2. Noooooooooooo! Do you want people cherry picking all night long?

3. That's exactly what they do now. When they sucker punch, or swing sticks I do not want them in the league. They should be banned FOR LIFE. There need to be limits.

4. I suppose, I don't think that's the big reason it doesn't get the TV ratings though.

5. Bettman is just a whipping boy. He does what everyone wants him to do, then takes the blame when it doesn't turn out.

6. That would be better, but I would just not have points or ties altogether. Two teams playing a baseball game go into extra innings, should we give them each one point? Ridiculous.

Answer 8

#1 i disagree. there have been numerous high scoring games this year. why not make basketball nets bigger and field goals wider.
#2 i disagree again. offside prevents cherry picking
#3 i disagree once more. although i don't mind a good tilt for good reason, why should a guy go after another for a good check on the "star" player. if he's that good he should be able to stick up for himself.
#4 i disagree TOTALLY!!! you must be american to suggest this. if you cant see black on white you need your eyes checked.
#5 i disagree TOTALLY again. brett hull is the biggest traitor whining crybaby to ever play the game. well next to theo flury. collin campbell or gretz gets my vote for commish.
#6 i AGREE. make regulation game play worth taking risks to win instead of playing for a tie.
MY SUGGESTIONS
#1 Olympic sized ice surface
#2 get rid of all teams in cities that draw less than 13000 per game ('m tired of seeing games on the tube where half the seats are empty
#3 top 16 teams in the league make the play offs. this will ensure the top 2 teams play for the cup. possible to see toronto vs. monteal or edmonton vs. calgary

Answer 9

Ew to giving the pucks haloes. ESPN tried giving them a little tail for a while years ago, and it was godawful. It was like a mini comet and it blocked half of the play that was going on. Everything else you suggested sounds plausible, especially the part where we can Buttman!

Answer 10

Orange puck! Halo around the puck, LOL You must be kidding. No Canadian would go for that. They tried that once and it was ridiculous. Drink more beer during the game and you'll see the puck better.