Rules Changes for the Upcoming Season

[Captain Slack]

I don't believe we have a unifed thread for discussion of this topic. If we do, forgive me for starting another one and please lock this one up.

Report: NHL considering super-sized nets


TSN.ca Staff


3/29/2005

The NHL has developed two prototypes for bigger nets that will be shown to GMs at their upcoming meetings in Detroit, according to a report on The Hockey News website.

According to the report, NHL senior vice-president Colin Campbell told The Hockey News the league will ask GMs to consider two super-sized net designs at their meetings scheduled for April 8-9.

The first new design features goalposts that curve outwards to provide shooters with a larger target. The posts remain six feet apart at the base.

The second new design simply adds two inches in height and width to the traditional rectangle goal.

The league has been looking at way to increase scoring and excitement for some time.ÂÂ* Other changes already being considered include smaller goaltending equipment and the use of shootouts the break ties.

"When we were talking about making changes to goalie equipment in the past few years, I had two respected coaches Roger Neilson and Jacques Demers say to me, 'Why dont you just make the nets bigger?'" Campbell told The Hockey News. "Basketball has its three-point play which rewards teams for taking risks on offense. We don't have that. Do you take a long shot late in a game when you know the odds of scoring are very low? No. Instead you drop back and play defense. We need to find a way to reward teams for taking chances on offense to encourage coaches to coach a more offensive style."

Apolinar and Goalie33: You guys are the local goaltending experts. Opinions?

[Captain Slack]

I don't believe we have a unifed thread for discussion of this topic. If we do, forgive me for starting another one and please lock this one up.

Report: NHL considering super-sized nets


TSN.ca Staff


3/29/2005

The NHL has developed two prototypes for bigger nets that will be shown to GMs at their upcoming meetings in Detroit, according to a report on The Hockey News website.

According to the report, NHL senior vice-president Colin Campbell told The Hockey News the league will ask GMs to consider two super-sized net designs at their meetings scheduled for April 8-9.

The first new design features goalposts that curve outwards to provide shooters with a larger target. The posts remain six feet apart at the base.

The second new design simply adds two inches in height and width to the traditional rectangle goal.

The league has been looking at way to increase scoring and excitement for some time.ÂÂ* Other changes already being considered include smaller goaltending equipment and the use of shootouts the break ties.

"When we were talking about making changes to goalie equipment in the past few years, I had two respected coaches Roger Neilson and Jacques Demers say to me, 'Why dont you just make the nets bigger?'" Campbell told The Hockey News. "Basketball has its three-point play which rewards teams for taking risks on offense. We don't have that. Do you take a long shot late in a game when you know the odds of scoring are very low? No. Instead you drop back and play defense. We need to find a way to reward teams for taking chances on offense to encourage coaches to coach a more offensive style."

Apolinar and Goalie33: You guys are the local goaltending experts. Opinions?

[Captain Slack]

I don't believe we have a unifed thread for discussion of this topic. If we do, forgive me for starting another one and please lock this one up.

Report: NHL considering super-sized nets


TSN.ca Staff


3/29/2005

The NHL has developed two prototypes for bigger nets that will be shown to GMs at their upcoming meetings in Detroit, according to a report on The Hockey News website.

According to the report, NHL senior vice-president Colin Campbell told The Hockey News the league will ask GMs to consider two super-sized net designs at their meetings scheduled for April 8-9.

The first new design features goalposts that curve outwards to provide shooters with a larger target. The posts remain six feet apart at the base.

The second new design simply adds two inches in height and width to the traditional rectangle goal.

The league has been looking at way to increase scoring and excitement for some time.ÂÂ* Other changes already being considered include smaller goaltending equipment and the use of shootouts the break ties.

"When we were talking about making changes to goalie equipment in the past few years, I had two respected coaches Roger Neilson and Jacques Demers say to me, 'Why dont you just make the nets bigger?'" Campbell told The Hockey News. "Basketball has its three-point play which rewards teams for taking risks on offense. We don't have that. Do you take a long shot late in a game when you know the odds of scoring are very low? No. Instead you drop back and play defense. We need to find a way to reward teams for taking chances on offense to encourage coaches to coach a more offensive style."

Apolinar and Goalie33: You guys are the local goaltending experts. Opinions?

[puck_it]

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo

i refuse to watch hockey with fake nets. the nets must not change.

[puck_it]

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo

i refuse to watch hockey with fake nets. the nets must not change.

[puck_it]

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo

i refuse to watch hockey with fake nets. the nets must not change.

[goalie33]

Reducing the goal pads from 12 inches in width to 10 inches in width (as they were in decades past) will add open space to the net without making the net any bigger physically. The protection argument some goalies make is total bunk, companies can make fully protective pads that are an inch thick and comform to the contours of the leg if they want.

Push the nets back, curtail the equipment, add tag-up offside...changing simple rules and geometry opens up the space for more scoring chances. Making the net bigger doesn't increase anything but headaches.

[goalie33]

Reducing the goal pads from 12 inches in width to 10 inches in width (as they were in decades past) will add open space to the net without making the net any bigger physically. The protection argument some goalies make is total bunk, companies can make fully protective pads that are an inch thick and comform to the contours of the leg if they want.

Push the nets back, curtail the equipment, add tag-up offside...changing simple rules and geometry opens up the space for more scoring chances. Making the net bigger doesn't increase anything but headaches.

[goalie33]

Reducing the goal pads from 12 inches in width to 10 inches in width (as they were in decades past) will add open space to the net without making the net any bigger physically. The protection argument some goalies make is total bunk, companies can make fully protective pads that are an inch thick and comform to the contours of the leg if they want.

Push the nets back, curtail the equipment, add tag-up offside...changing simple rules and geometry opens up the space for more scoring chances. Making the net bigger doesn't increase anything but headaches.

[puck_it]

Making the net bigger doesn't increase anything but headaches.

from a historical perspective its one more pain in the ass when comparing eras. plus its just bad

[puck_it]

Making the net bigger doesn't increase anything but headaches.

from a historical perspective its one more pain in the ass when comparing eras. plus its just bad

[puck_it]

Making the net bigger doesn't increase anything but headaches.

from a historical perspective its one more pain in the ass when comparing eras. plus its just bad

[Turbulence]

Anyway we do it, scoring needs to be increased. I'm glad they finally realized that to even think about drawing in casual fans, they needed to take some of these types of steps.
Now, let's see everyone agree on them and get them implemented.
I don't see what's so bad about making the nets bigger. It'll skew goalie and scoring stats for sure, but you couldn't compare 20 years ago to now anyway (Rocket Richard wouldn't have as many goals, and Terry Sawchuck's GAA would be lower because of the defensive systems we use now, but it's hard to say that because Iginla has fewer goals and Brodeur has a worse GAA that they're any worse players than the other two...) It would make it harder for goalies to stop all of the pucks, and that's what we want to accomplish.

[Turbulence]

Anyway we do it, scoring needs to be increased. I'm glad they finally realized that to even think about drawing in casual fans, they needed to take some of these types of steps.
Now, let's see everyone agree on them and get them implemented.
I don't see what's so bad about making the nets bigger. It'll skew goalie and scoring stats for sure, but you couldn't compare 20 years ago to now anyway (Rocket Richard wouldn't have as many goals, and Terry Sawchuck's GAA would be lower because of the defensive systems we use now, but it's hard to say that because Iginla has fewer goals and Brodeur has a worse GAA that they're any worse players than the other two...) It would make it harder for goalies to stop all of the pucks, and that's what we want to accomplish.

[Turbulence]

Anyway we do it, scoring needs to be increased. I'm glad they finally realized that to even think about drawing in casual fans, they needed to take some of these types of steps.
Now, let's see everyone agree on them and get them implemented.
I don't see what's so bad about making the nets bigger. It'll skew goalie and scoring stats for sure, but you couldn't compare 20 years ago to now anyway (Rocket Richard wouldn't have as many goals, and Terry Sawchuck's GAA would be lower because of the defensive systems we use now, but it's hard to say that because Iginla has fewer goals and Brodeur has a worse GAA that they're any worse players than the other two...) It would make it harder for goalies to stop all of the pucks, and that's what we want to accomplish.

[puck_it]

I'm glad they finally realized that to even think about drawing in casual fansBut i see it as an alienation of diehards of the game. which is better: bringing new fans or pissing off already pissed off fans?

[puck_it]

I'm glad they finally realized that to even think about drawing in casual fansBut i see it as an alienation of diehards of the game. which is better: bringing new fans or pissing off already pissed off fans?

[puck_it]

I'm glad they finally realized that to even think about drawing in casual fansBut i see it as an alienation of diehards of the game. which is better: bringing new fans or pissing off already pissed off fans?

[Cool Hand Luke]

I love the idea of shoot outs and some of the other ideas are worth considering in my opinion. It just doesn't sit well with me to make the nets bigger though. Will the NHL have bigger nets than everyone else in hockey? It seems like a hockey net size should be universally the same no matter where you play. They compare this to the NBA's 3point play? The NBA isn't making their hoop a larger size are they? The hoop is still only 10 feet tall like it's always been. How can the NHL explain that the best players in the world need a bigger net to shoot at than everyone else in hockey? I really think this idea is a bad one. Reduce the goalie equipment if you have to, but leave the net size alone.

If they would really make clutching and grabbing illegal and ENFORCE it, that would open up the game more and automatically increase scoring, plus more penalties would be called. I like some of Bucci's ideas in the penalty area. Three minor penalties and you are kicked out of the game. That should stop the clutching a bit if it's enforced! The superstars of the league all seem to agree that the clutching is what has ruined the game, not bigger goalie equipment.

[Cool Hand Luke]

I love the idea of shoot outs and some of the other ideas are worth considering in my opinion. It just doesn't sit well with me to make the nets bigger though. Will the NHL have bigger nets than everyone else in hockey? It seems like a hockey net size should be universally the same no matter where you play. They compare this to the NBA's 3point play? The NBA isn't making their hoop a larger size are they? The hoop is still only 10 feet tall like it's always been. How can the NHL explain that the best players in the world need a bigger net to shoot at than everyone else in hockey? I really think this idea is a bad one. Reduce the goalie equipment if you have to, but leave the net size alone.

If they would really make clutching and grabbing illegal and ENFORCE it, that would open up the game more and automatically increase scoring, plus more penalties would be called. I like some of Bucci's ideas in the penalty area. Three minor penalties and you are kicked out of the game. That should stop the clutching a bit if it's enforced! The superstars of the league all seem to agree that the clutching is what has ruined the game, not bigger goalie equipment.

[Cool Hand Luke]

I love the idea of shoot outs and some of the other ideas are worth considering in my opinion. It just doesn't sit well with me to make the nets bigger though. Will the NHL have bigger nets than everyone else in hockey? It seems like a hockey net size should be universally the same no matter where you play. They compare this to the NBA's 3point play? The NBA isn't making their hoop a larger size are they? The hoop is still only 10 feet tall like it's always been. How can the NHL explain that the best players in the world need a bigger net to shoot at than everyone else in hockey? I really think this idea is a bad one. Reduce the goalie equipment if you have to, but leave the net size alone.

If they would really make clutching and grabbing illegal and ENFORCE it, that would open up the game more and automatically increase scoring, plus more penalties would be called. I like some of Bucci's ideas in the penalty area. Three minor penalties and you are kicked out of the game. That should stop the clutching a bit if it's enforced! The superstars of the league all seem to agree that the clutching is what has ruined the game, not bigger goalie equipment.

[Turbulence]

But i see it as an alienation of diehards of the game. which is better: bringing new fans or pissing off already pissed off fans?

I won't be alienated, and I consider myself a diehard. Either way it's hockey, and diehards like us need to remember that the sport cannot and will not survive without casual fans. I'm not going to stop watching hockey because they made nets a couple of inches wider or taller. Now, whether they make the nets bigger or go the other route with smaller pads, limiting goalie play behind the net, taking away the center line...what's the difference between the two? An increase in scoring is an increase in scoring, any way you look at it.

[Turbulence]

But i see it as an alienation of diehards of the game. which is better: bringing new fans or pissing off already pissed off fans?

I won't be alienated, and I consider myself a diehard. Either way it's hockey, and diehards like us need to remember that the sport cannot and will not survive without casual fans. I'm not going to stop watching hockey because they made nets a couple of inches wider or taller. Now, whether they make the nets bigger or go the other route with smaller pads, limiting goalie play behind the net, taking away the center line...what's the difference between the two? An increase in scoring is an increase in scoring, any way you look at it.

[Turbulence]

But i see it as an alienation of diehards of the game. which is better: bringing new fans or pissing off already pissed off fans?

I won't be alienated, and I consider myself a diehard. Either way it's hockey, and diehards like us need to remember that the sport cannot and will not survive without casual fans. I'm not going to stop watching hockey because they made nets a couple of inches wider or taller. Now, whether they make the nets bigger or go the other route with smaller pads, limiting goalie play behind the net, taking away the center line...what's the difference between the two? An increase in scoring is an increase in scoring, any way you look at it.

[puck_it]

pads are bigger now then they ever were. im for reverting to the old days a bit to even the playing field a little. more protective but same size...

changing the net changes the dynamics of the game, allows for different angles... i just dont like it...

i dont think i could watch that product.

[puck_it]

pads are bigger now then they ever were. im for reverting to the old days a bit to even the playing field a little. more protective but same size...

changing the net changes the dynamics of the game, allows for different angles... i just dont like it...

i dont think i could watch that product.

[puck_it]

pads are bigger now then they ever were. im for reverting to the old days a bit to even the playing field a little. more protective but same size...

changing the net changes the dynamics of the game, allows for different angles... i just dont like it...

i dont think i could watch that product.

[goalie33]

Here's the thing.

The problem with the game that limits scoring is the clutching/grabbing/small surface that exists in the NHL right now. Making the goal bigger is a cheap way to add scoring. A bigger goal adds more goals in two situations: garbage goals and blueline slappers.

As I've always said, what we need is more scoring chances, not more goals. The chance of scoring is what causes excitement...a goal is just a payoff, like potential and kinetic energy. The idea that more goals on the scoreboard will magically make people excited is not giving much credit to the audience. More goals created legitimately in the context of the game of hockey will do that, and that comes from opening up the ice for skill players. No one is going to be enthralled if Tomas Holmstrom gets three more tip-ins a season because the posts are farther apart.

The way to create more scoring chances is to push the goals back where they belong, add tag-up offsides, or *GASP* call the penalties in the book. That opens up the ice, which increases scoring chances. Two inches each way on the net increases cheap goals on wayward slapshots, and those aren't even legitimate scoring chances.

Goals were standardized at 6' x 4' in 1926. Since then, goals per game has gone from two to ten and back down to five. The goal hasn't changed in size, and it doesn't need to.

If they want the two inches that badly, reduce goal pad width from 12" to 10", and you have your magical ratio of leg pad width to net width.

[goalie33]

Here's the thing.

The problem with the game that limits scoring is the clutching/grabbing/small surface that exists in the NHL right now. Making the goal bigger is a cheap way to add scoring. A bigger goal adds more goals in two situations: garbage goals and blueline slappers.

As I've always said, what we need is more scoring chances, not more goals. The chance of scoring is what causes excitement...a goal is just a payoff, like potential and kinetic energy. The idea that more goals on the scoreboard will magically make people excited is not giving much credit to the audience. More goals created legitimately in the context of the game of hockey will do that, and that comes from opening up the ice for skill players. No one is going to be enthralled if Tomas Holmstrom gets three more tip-ins a season because the posts are farther apart.

The way to create more scoring chances is to push the goals back where they belong, add tag-up offsides, or *GASP* call the penalties in the book. That opens up the ice, which increases scoring chances. Two inches each way on the net increases cheap goals on wayward slapshots, and those aren't even legitimate scoring chances.

Goals were standardized at 6' x 4' in 1926. Since then, goals per game has gone from two to ten and back down to five. The goal hasn't changed in size, and it doesn't need to.

If they want the two inches that badly, reduce goal pad width from 12" to 10", and you have your magical ratio of leg pad width to net width.

[goalie33]

Here's the thing.

The problem with the game that limits scoring is the clutching/grabbing/small surface that exists in the NHL right now. Making the goal bigger is a cheap way to add scoring. A bigger goal adds more goals in two situations: garbage goals and blueline slappers.

As I've always said, what we need is more scoring chances, not more goals. The chance of scoring is what causes excitement...a goal is just a payoff, like potential and kinetic energy. The idea that more goals on the scoreboard will magically make people excited is not giving much credit to the audience. More goals created legitimately in the context of the game of hockey will do that, and that comes from opening up the ice for skill players. No one is going to be enthralled if Tomas Holmstrom gets three more tip-ins a season because the posts are farther apart.

The way to create more scoring chances is to push the goals back where they belong, add tag-up offsides, or *GASP* call the penalties in the book. That opens up the ice, which increases scoring chances. Two inches each way on the net increases cheap goals on wayward slapshots, and those aren't even legitimate scoring chances.

Goals were standardized at 6' x 4' in 1926. Since then, goals per game has gone from two to ten and back down to five. The goal hasn't changed in size, and it doesn't need to.

If they want the two inches that badly, reduce goal pad width from 12" to 10", and you have your magical ratio of leg pad width to net width.

[apolinar]

Put it this way, Would basketball be the same if you increased the size of the basket? Would Baseball be the same if the homeplate could be bigger for a bigger strike zone? Would golf be the same if they increased the size of the hole to lower scores?

Me No Like bigger nets.

Smaller goalie equipment? Yes. Get back to the old days as far as size is concerned. Tretiak never needed huge leg pads nor did Bernie Parent or Jacques Plante. Get rid of the rectangular shoulder/clavicle pads that make Giguere look like sponge bob. Roy and Brodeur were magnificent in small pads when they first started too. Look how puny Jim Craig's equipment was, and he was a stand-up goalie. That would be in the same line as the Golf associations like USGA banning drivers with spring loaded or elastic faces. Ban certain types of equipment, but don't drastically change the goal. I might not notice it if it is a puny change, like one extra inch in width each side.

[apolinar]

Put it this way, Would basketball be the same if you increased the size of the basket? Would Baseball be the same if the homeplate could be bigger for a bigger strike zone? Would golf be the same if they increased the size of the hole to lower scores?

Me No Like bigger nets.

Smaller goalie equipment? Yes. Get back to the old days as far as size is concerned. Tretiak never needed huge leg pads nor did Bernie Parent or Jacques Plante. Get rid of the rectangular shoulder/clavicle pads that make Giguere look like sponge bob. Roy and Brodeur were magnificent in small pads when they first started too. Look how puny Jim Craig's equipment was, and he was a stand-up goalie. That would be in the same line as the Golf associations like USGA banning drivers with spring loaded or elastic faces. Ban certain types of equipment, but don't drastically change the goal. I might not notice it if it is a puny change, like one extra inch in width each side.

[apolinar]

Put it this way, Would basketball be the same if you increased the size of the basket? Would Baseball be the same if the homeplate could be bigger for a bigger strike zone? Would golf be the same if they increased the size of the hole to lower scores?

Me No Like bigger nets.

Smaller goalie equipment? Yes. Get back to the old days as far as size is concerned. Tretiak never needed huge leg pads nor did Bernie Parent or Jacques Plante. Get rid of the rectangular shoulder/clavicle pads that make Giguere look like sponge bob. Roy and Brodeur were magnificent in small pads when they first started too. Look how puny Jim Craig's equipment was, and he was a stand-up goalie. That would be in the same line as the Golf associations like USGA banning drivers with spring loaded or elastic faces. Ban certain types of equipment, but don't drastically change the goal. I might not notice it if it is a puny change, like one extra inch in width each side.

[Turbulence]

Excellent points. I never thought about it that way...it isn't just adding more goals, it's how the extra goals are scored. When you look at it that way, they really would be better off keeping the net the same size.

[Turbulence]

Excellent points. I never thought about it that way...it isn't just adding more goals, it's how the extra goals are scored. When you look at it that way, they really would be better off keeping the net the same size.

[Turbulence]

Excellent points. I never thought about it that way...it isn't just adding more goals, it's how the extra goals are scored. When you look at it that way, they really would be better off keeping the net the same size.

[Captain Slack]

Theodore didn't hold back any! :D My guess is we'll be hearing from Brodeur soon.

Theodore: Idea of bigger nets is ''junk''

TSN.ca Staff

3/30/2005

Following reports that the National Hockey League was considering bigger nets, Montreal Canadiens goaltender Jose Theodore didn't hold back on his opinion.

"Excuse my French, but this is bull----," Theodore told The Montreal Gazette from Stockholm, where he tended net for Djurgarden in the Swedish Elite League this season.

"This is junk, and I hope it's not serious," Theodore said. "The idea of a bigger net is crap. I was drafted as a goalie who has spent his life, since I was 7, learning to play the angles. And now, all of a sudden, they're thinking of doing this?"

On Tuesday, The Hockey News website reported that the league developed two prototypes for bigger nets. It was later learned by TSN that three new designs were under scrutiny. NHL senior vice-president Colin Campbell told The Hockey News website that the league will present the ideas to GMs at their upcoming meetings in Detroit.

"Basketball has its three-point play which rewards teams for taking risks on offense," said Campbell. "We don't have that. Do you take a long shot late in a game when you know the odds of scoring are very low? No. Instead you drop back and play defense. We need to find a way to reward teams for taking chances on offense to encourage coaches to coach a more offensive style."

"Colin is really wrong," said Theodore. "I respect the guy, but this is not smart.

"This would change the entire game. It's ridiculous, even stupid. It's wasting energy, and it's not looking at the right places to improve the game."

The league has been looking at ways to increase scoring and excitement for some time. Other changes already being considered include smaller goaltending equipment and the use of shootouts the break ties.

"Changing our equipment is crap, too," said Theodore. "About 10 years ago, when the pads were really wide, the NHL moved to make everything smaller. The next year, the goals-against averages were still low.

"Goalies are just getting really good technically, and guys are playing better defensively within a system."

In an interview with NHL Network on Tuesday, league vice president and chief legal counsel Bill Daly said he did not know which of the many proposed changes would be ratified, but he did note that change was certainly coming.

"The list of issues we are going to discuss is very broad," Daly said. "The list of issues that ultimately get resolved through a consensus of first the managers and then the board, is probably going to be a lesser list. It would be tough for me to speculate what the changes might be at this point in time."

[Captain Slack]

Theodore didn't hold back any! :D My guess is we'll be hearing from Brodeur soon.

Theodore: Idea of bigger nets is ''junk''

TSN.ca Staff

3/30/2005

Following reports that the National Hockey League was considering bigger nets, Montreal Canadiens goaltender Jose Theodore didn't hold back on his opinion.

"Excuse my French, but this is bull----," Theodore told The Montreal Gazette from Stockholm, where he tended net for Djurgarden in the Swedish Elite League this season.

"This is junk, and I hope it's not serious," Theodore said. "The idea of a bigger net is crap. I was drafted as a goalie who has spent his life, since I was 7, learning to play the angles. And now, all of a sudden, they're thinking of doing this?"

On Tuesday, The Hockey News website reported that the league developed two prototypes for bigger nets. It was later learned by TSN that three new designs were under scrutiny. NHL senior vice-president Colin Campbell told The Hockey News website that the league will present the ideas to GMs at their upcoming meetings in Detroit.

"Basketball has its three-point play which rewards teams for taking risks on offense," said Campbell. "We don't have that. Do you take a long shot late in a game when you know the odds of scoring are very low? No. Instead you drop back and play defense. We need to find a way to reward teams for taking chances on offense to encourage coaches to coach a more offensive style."

"Colin is really wrong," said Theodore. "I respect the guy, but this is not smart.

"This would change the entire game. It's ridiculous, even stupid. It's wasting energy, and it's not looking at the right places to improve the game."

The league has been looking at ways to increase scoring and excitement for some time. Other changes already being considered include smaller goaltending equipment and the use of shootouts the break ties.

"Changing our equipment is crap, too," said Theodore. "About 10 years ago, when the pads were really wide, the NHL moved to make everything smaller. The next year, the goals-against averages were still low.

"Goalies are just getting really good technically, and guys are playing better defensively within a system."

In an interview with NHL Network on Tuesday, league vice president and chief legal counsel Bill Daly said he did not know which of the many proposed changes would be ratified, but he did note that change was certainly coming.

"The list of issues we are going to discuss is very broad," Daly said. "The list of issues that ultimately get resolved through a consensus of first the managers and then the board, is probably going to be a lesser list. It would be tough for me to speculate what the changes might be at this point in time."

[Captain Slack]

Theodore didn't hold back any! :D My guess is we'll be hearing from Brodeur soon.

Theodore: Idea of bigger nets is ''junk''

TSN.ca Staff

3/30/2005

Following reports that the National Hockey League was considering bigger nets, Montreal Canadiens goaltender Jose Theodore didn't hold back on his opinion.

"Excuse my French, but this is bull----," Theodore told The Montreal Gazette from Stockholm, where he tended net for Djurgarden in the Swedish Elite League this season.

"This is junk, and I hope it's not serious," Theodore said. "The idea of a bigger net is crap. I was drafted as a goalie who has spent his life, since I was 7, learning to play the angles. And now, all of a sudden, they're thinking of doing this?"

On Tuesday, The Hockey News website reported that the league developed two prototypes for bigger nets. It was later learned by TSN that three new designs were under scrutiny. NHL senior vice-president Colin Campbell told The Hockey News website that the league will present the ideas to GMs at their upcoming meetings in Detroit.

"Basketball has its three-point play which rewards teams for taking risks on offense," said Campbell. "We don't have that. Do you take a long shot late in a game when you know the odds of scoring are very low? No. Instead you drop back and play defense. We need to find a way to reward teams for taking chances on offense to encourage coaches to coach a more offensive style."

"Colin is really wrong," said Theodore. "I respect the guy, but this is not smart.

"This would change the entire game. It's ridiculous, even stupid. It's wasting energy, and it's not looking at the right places to improve the game."

The league has been looking at ways to increase scoring and excitement for some time. Other changes already being considered include smaller goaltending equipment and the use of shootouts the break ties.

"Changing our equipment is crap, too," said Theodore. "About 10 years ago, when the pads were really wide, the NHL moved to make everything smaller. The next year, the goals-against averages were still low.

"Goalies are just getting really good technically, and guys are playing better defensively within a system."

In an interview with NHL Network on Tuesday, league vice president and chief legal counsel Bill Daly said he did not know which of the many proposed changes would be ratified, but he did note that change was certainly coming.

"The list of issues we are going to discuss is very broad," Daly said. "The list of issues that ultimately get resolved through a consensus of first the managers and then the board, is probably going to be a lesser list. It would be tough for me to speculate what the changes might be at this point in time."

[Cool Hand Luke]

You make some excellent points goalie33. Making the net size bigger might allow for more scoring, but how? It won't change the flow of the game as it is today, make it more wide open with more free flow. Higher scores alone won't automatically make the game more exciting.

If they want to make the game more exciting with higher scoring play, they need to figure out a way to increase scoring chances, not just allow more cheap goals. Good goalies in the NHL have about a 90% save percentage. Increase the number of shots and the scoring will go up, it's simple mathematics. Increasing shots will also increase the other apparently forgotten most exciting play in hockey, a great save! Yes, great saves are every bit as exciting as goals scored, IMO. That is what makes shootouts doubly exciting!

Increasing net size alone won't do a thing to make NHL hockey a more exciting game to casual fans, IMO. As goalie33 said, it's the easy way out, not the best way. Hopefully GM's will think this through long and hard during their meeting about this.

[Cool Hand Luke]

You make some excellent points goalie33. Making the net size bigger might allow for more scoring, but how? It won't change the flow of the game as it is today, make it more wide open with more free flow. Higher scores alone won't automatically make the game more exciting.

If they want to make the game more exciting with higher scoring play, they need to figure out a way to increase scoring chances, not just allow more cheap goals. Good goalies in the NHL have about a 90% save percentage. Increase the number of shots and the scoring will go up, it's simple mathematics. Increasing shots will also increase the other apparently forgotten most exciting play in hockey, a great save! Yes, great saves are every bit as exciting as goals scored, IMO. That is what makes shootouts doubly exciting!

Increasing net size alone won't do a thing to make NHL hockey a more exciting game to casual fans, IMO. As goalie33 said, it's the easy way out, not the best way. Hopefully GM's will think this through long and hard during their meeting about this.

[Cool Hand Luke]

You make some excellent points goalie33. Making the net size bigger might allow for more scoring, but how? It won't change the flow of the game as it is today, make it more wide open with more free flow. Higher scores alone won't automatically make the game more exciting.

If they want to make the game more exciting with higher scoring play, they need to figure out a way to increase scoring chances, not just allow more cheap goals. Good goalies in the NHL have about a 90% save percentage. Increase the number of shots and the scoring will go up, it's simple mathematics. Increasing shots will also increase the other apparently forgotten most exciting play in hockey, a great save! Yes, great saves are every bit as exciting as goals scored, IMO. That is what makes shootouts doubly exciting!

Increasing net size alone won't do a thing to make NHL hockey a more exciting game to casual fans, IMO. As goalie33 said, it's the easy way out, not the best way. Hopefully GM's will think this through long and hard during their meeting about this.

[nccanes]

I stumbled on this photo of the proposed net. Looks funky.

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/_photos/2005-04-01-sabres-nets-in.jpg

[nccanes]

I stumbled on this photo of the proposed net. Looks funky.

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/_photos/2005-04-01-sabres-nets-in.jpg

[nccanes]

I stumbled on this photo of the proposed net. Looks funky.

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/_photos/2005-04-01-sabres-nets-in.jpg

[AbNormal27]

Wild brass: AHL rule changes aren't working

TSN.ca Staff

According to a report in the Pioneer Press, Minnesota Wild coach Jacques Lemaire and general manager Doug Risebrough don't think the AHL game has changed much despite rule experiments designed to increase scoring.

"At the next general managers meeting, somebody is going to have to talk me out of making the nets bigger," Risebrough told the Pioneer Press. "And I'm not talking about a half an inch or an inch.

At the urging of the NHL, the American League adopted several new tactics this season. The nets were pushed back, the blue lines were widened and puck-handling by goalies was limited.ÂÂ* None of it has worked, according to the Lemaire and Risebrough.

"I'm glad I saw those games (in Houston)," Risebrough said. "The changes haven't had as much effect as we thought they would. We need to make the nets bigger and the goalies even smaller."

"There was a shootout last game," Lemaire told the Pioneer Press. "They made three out of 10, one goal on one side, two on the other. Maybe five out of 10 wouldn't be too bad. But three out of 10?

"The goalies are bigger. The equipment is bigger. It's just harder to score."

Both noted that the changes only served to increase clutching and grabbing in the AHL, as defenders went the extra mile to negate any advantages the rules gave to offensive players.

"I've seen some games," Lemaire said. "I'm telling you, they just hold and grab."

"Play has deteriorated," Risebrough agreed. "The skill players are trying to perform, but there is so much obstruction. I was disappointed by the level of officiating. With all the holding, it doesn't matter what you do to the ice surface.

Risebrough said the rulebook needed to be enforced to open up the game.

"People say there would be too many penalties," Risebrough said. "You want more offense? What's wrong with that?"

I think some of these comments are really rich coming from the man who developed the trap.

Also, that net looks stupid.

For gawdsakes people, do something smart and work on the goalie equipment! I heard Olaf Kolzig on the radio yesterday and he made the point that rule restrictions on size don't work for everyone because not all goalies are the same size (see Irbe vs Burke). He offered that the NHL would be better suited to adapt rules that restrict equipment size on a player by player basis. As it is right now, the shorter pads are only working against the taller goalies, so why should rules blanket the entire goalie frat?

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Wild brass: AHL rule changes aren't working

TSN.ca Staff

According to a report in the Pioneer Press, Minnesota Wild coach Jacques Lemaire and general manager Doug Risebrough don't think the AHL game has changed much despite rule experiments designed to increase scoring.

"At the next general managers meeting, somebody is going to have to talk me out of making the nets bigger," Risebrough told the Pioneer Press. "And I'm not talking about a half an inch or an inch.

At the urging of the NHL, the American League adopted several new tactics this season. The nets were pushed back, the blue lines were widened and puck-handling by goalies was limited.ÂÂ* None of it has worked, according to the Lemaire and Risebrough.

"I'm glad I saw those games (in Houston)," Risebrough said. "The changes haven't had as much effect as we thought they would. We need to make the nets bigger and the goalies even smaller."

"There was a shootout last game," Lemaire told the Pioneer Press. "They made three out of 10, one goal on one side, two on the other. Maybe five out of 10 wouldn't be too bad. But three out of 10?

"The goalies are bigger. The equipment is bigger. It's just harder to score."

Both noted that the changes only served to increase clutching and grabbing in the AHL, as defenders went the extra mile to negate any advantages the rules gave to offensive players.

"I've seen some games," Lemaire said. "I'm telling you, they just hold and grab."

"Play has deteriorated," Risebrough agreed. "The skill players are trying to perform, but there is so much obstruction. I was disappointed by the level of officiating. With all the holding, it doesn't matter what you do to the ice surface.

Risebrough said the rulebook needed to be enforced to open up the game.

"People say there would be too many penalties," Risebrough said. "You want more offense? What's wrong with that?"

I think some of these comments are really rich coming from the man who developed the trap.

Also, that net looks stupid.

For gawdsakes people, do something smart and work on the goalie equipment! I heard Olaf Kolzig on the radio yesterday and he made the point that rule restrictions on size don't work for everyone because not all goalies are the same size (see Irbe vs Burke). He offered that the NHL would be better suited to adapt rules that restrict equipment size on a player by player basis. As it is right now, the shorter pads are only working against the taller goalies, so why should rules blanket the entire goalie frat?

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Wild brass: AHL rule changes aren't working

TSN.ca Staff

According to a report in the Pioneer Press, Minnesota Wild coach Jacques Lemaire and general manager Doug Risebrough don't think the AHL game has changed much despite rule experiments designed to increase scoring.

"At the next general managers meeting, somebody is going to have to talk me out of making the nets bigger," Risebrough told the Pioneer Press. "And I'm not talking about a half an inch or an inch.

At the urging of the NHL, the American League adopted several new tactics this season. The nets were pushed back, the blue lines were widened and puck-handling by goalies was limited.ÂÂ* None of it has worked, according to the Lemaire and Risebrough.

"I'm glad I saw those games (in Houston)," Risebrough said. "The changes haven't had as much effect as we thought they would. We need to make the nets bigger and the goalies even smaller."

"There was a shootout last game," Lemaire told the Pioneer Press. "They made three out of 10, one goal on one side, two on the other. Maybe five out of 10 wouldn't be too bad. But three out of 10?

"The goalies are bigger. The equipment is bigger. It's just harder to score."

Both noted that the changes only served to increase clutching and grabbing in the AHL, as defenders went the extra mile to negate any advantages the rules gave to offensive players.

"I've seen some games," Lemaire said. "I'm telling you, they just hold and grab."

"Play has deteriorated," Risebrough agreed. "The skill players are trying to perform, but there is so much obstruction. I was disappointed by the level of officiating. With all the holding, it doesn't matter what you do to the ice surface.

Risebrough said the rulebook needed to be enforced to open up the game.

"People say there would be too many penalties," Risebrough said. "You want more offense? What's wrong with that?"

I think some of these comments are really rich coming from the man who developed the trap.

Also, that net looks stupid.

For gawdsakes people, do something smart and work on the goalie equipment! I heard Olaf Kolzig on the radio yesterday and he made the point that rule restrictions on size don't work for everyone because not all goalies are the same size (see Irbe vs Burke). He offered that the NHL would be better suited to adapt rules that restrict equipment size on a player by player basis. As it is right now, the shorter pads are only working against the taller goalies, so why should rules blanket the entire goalie frat?

Aaryn

[Cool Hand Luke]

I also think the net looks stupid.

Hopefully all this talk of changing the net size is just a strategy to get the goalies to agree to smaller equipment. Up to know, they have been fighting it. If they are given a choice, change net size or equipment size, perhaps they will choose changing their equipment size as a lessor of 2 evils for them.

[Cool Hand Luke]

I also think the net looks stupid.

Hopefully all this talk of changing the net size is just a strategy to get the goalies to agree to smaller equipment. Up to know, they have been fighting it. If they are given a choice, change net size or equipment size, perhaps they will choose changing their equipment size as a lessor of 2 evils for them.

[Cool Hand Luke]

I also think the net looks stupid.

Hopefully all this talk of changing the net size is just a strategy to get the goalies to agree to smaller equipment. Up to know, they have been fighting it. If they are given a choice, change net size or equipment size, perhaps they will choose changing their equipment size as a lessor of 2 evils for them.

[aLADDin]

I stumbled on this photo of the proposed net. Looks funky.

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/_photos/2005-04-01-sabres-nets-in.jpg


:smoke: And... (checking the calendar) today happens to be April Fool's Day. That net looks like a neat practical joke. Wonder how many of our boys would regularly clang one off of THOSE posts!

[aLADDin]

I stumbled on this photo of the proposed net. Looks funky.

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/_photos/2005-04-01-sabres-nets-in.jpg


:smoke: And... (checking the calendar) today happens to be April Fool's Day. That net looks like a neat practical joke. Wonder how many of our boys would regularly clang one off of THOSE posts!

[aLADDin]

I stumbled on this photo of the proposed net. Looks funky.

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/_photos/2005-04-01-sabres-nets-in.jpg


:smoke: And... (checking the calendar) today happens to be April Fool's Day. That net looks like a neat practical joke. Wonder how many of our boys would regularly clang one off of THOSE posts!

[nccanes]

Were you serious about it being a joke?

Maybe it was, but here's the USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/sabres/2005-04-01-bigger-nets_x.htm

[nccanes]

Were you serious about it being a joke?

Maybe it was, but here's the USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/sabres/2005-04-01-bigger-nets_x.htm

[nccanes]

Were you serious about it being a joke?

Maybe it was, but here's the USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/sabres/2005-04-01-bigger-nets_x.htm

[aLADDin]

No, not serious at all. I'm one of those paranoid people on April 1 who is looking under every rock to make sure that I don't get practically joked, that's all. :evil: Sorry to imply that the new net was a joke. :cry:

Warren

[aLADDin]

No, not serious at all. I'm one of those paranoid people on April 1 who is looking under every rock to make sure that I don't get practically joked, that's all. :evil: Sorry to imply that the new net was a joke. :cry:

Warren

[aLADDin]

No, not serious at all. I'm one of those paranoid people on April 1 who is looking under every rock to make sure that I don't get practically joked, that's all. :evil: Sorry to imply that the new net was a joke. :cry:

Warren

[nccanes]

Oh - no problem, just wasn't sure and then I started doubting myself, lol.

:D

[nccanes]

Oh - no problem, just wasn't sure and then I started doubting myself, lol.

:D

[nccanes]

Oh - no problem, just wasn't sure and then I started doubting myself, lol.

:D

[goalie33]

The idea behind the curved-post design is that it not only expands the net opening, but the rounded shape makes it more difficult for goalies to hug the posts to block short-angle shots.

Once again, the NHL's best idea for increased scoring is to handicap a goalie's ability to simply play the game. Hugging the post has nothing to do with equipment size...a goalie could be wearing a protective jumpsuit that only adds half an inch to the size of all body surfaces and nothing would get through with proper post-hugging technique.

[goalie33]

The idea behind the curved-post design is that it not only expands the net opening, but the rounded shape makes it more difficult for goalies to hug the posts to block short-angle shots.

Once again, the NHL's best idea for increased scoring is to handicap a goalie's ability to simply play the game. Hugging the post has nothing to do with equipment size...a goalie could be wearing a protective jumpsuit that only adds half an inch to the size of all body surfaces and nothing would get through with proper post-hugging technique.

[goalie33]

The idea behind the curved-post design is that it not only expands the net opening, but the rounded shape makes it more difficult for goalies to hug the posts to block short-angle shots.

Once again, the NHL's best idea for increased scoring is to handicap a goalie's ability to simply play the game. Hugging the post has nothing to do with equipment size...a goalie could be wearing a protective jumpsuit that only adds half an inch to the size of all body surfaces and nothing would get through with proper post-hugging technique.

[tommy]

The idea behind the curved-post design is that it not only expands the net opening, but the rounded shape makes it more difficult for goalies to hug the posts to block short-angle shots.

Once again, the NHL's best idea for increased scoring is to handicap a goalie's ability to simply play the game. Hugging the post has nothing to do with equipment size...a goalie could be wearing a protective jumpsuit that only adds half an inch to the size of all body surfaces and nothing would get through with proper post-hugging technique.

exactly - that would be like decreasing scoring by taking the blade off of the players' sticks - it's a normal functioning piece of the game - just like goalies hugging the post

[tommy]

The idea behind the curved-post design is that it not only expands the net opening, but the rounded shape makes it more difficult for goalies to hug the posts to block short-angle shots.

Once again, the NHL's best idea for increased scoring is to handicap a goalie's ability to simply play the game. Hugging the post has nothing to do with equipment size...a goalie could be wearing a protective jumpsuit that only adds half an inch to the size of all body surfaces and nothing would get through with proper post-hugging technique.

exactly - that would be like decreasing scoring by taking the blade off of the players' sticks - it's a normal functioning piece of the game - just like goalies hugging the post

[tommy]

The idea behind the curved-post design is that it not only expands the net opening, but the rounded shape makes it more difficult for goalies to hug the posts to block short-angle shots.

Once again, the NHL's best idea for increased scoring is to handicap a goalie's ability to simply play the game. Hugging the post has nothing to do with equipment size...a goalie could be wearing a protective jumpsuit that only adds half an inch to the size of all body surfaces and nothing would get through with proper post-hugging technique.

exactly - that would be like decreasing scoring by taking the blade off of the players' sticks - it's a normal functioning piece of the game - just like goalies hugging the post

[Captain Slack]

McKenzie: Brace for on-ice changes

TSN.ca Staff

4/1/2005

Everyone knows changes are coming to the NHL's on-ice product, once it gets back on the ice, of course. Whether it's in the form of wider blue lines or more penalties being called or the introduction of the shootout or smaller goalie equipment, all these changes are coming, of that there is no doubt.

The big question, though, is how much further will the changes go.

That's something to be discussed by NHL general managers, when they meet next Thursday at a Detroit airport hotel. Some radical notions will be explored and some of them could very well be introduced in the post-lockout NHL.

Such as removal of the centre ice red line for the purposes of a two-line pass. Within the last couple of years, general managers voted 30-0 against taking out the red line, but more and more are thinking it's the way to go and it's now thought a majority of them would be in favour of no red line, thinking it will create the desired effect of opening up the game. Don't be surprised if this one flies.

The same could be said for the restrictions on goaltenders handling the puck in a designated area behind the goal line, which is being test driven in the AHL this season. It's not a slam-dunk but the feeling is there may be enough support to limit the goalies puck play.

The issue of automatic or no-touch icing continues to be a hot-button topic. It, too, could be adopted. Hockey purists like the idea of racing for the puck but when weighed against injury considerations, well, safety should win out. Some would like to see shorthanded teams not able to ice the puck, but it's questionable how much support there is for that.

Another debating point will be the concept of giving teams three points for a regulation time victory, two points for an overtime win with no points for an overtime loss or a tie that goes to shootout. But some will argue that three points for a regulation time win could actually promote ultra-defensive hockey, the opposite of what they're looking for, because once a team gets a regulation time lead, they would play a shut-down brand of game.

Perhaps the most radical notion is that of increasing the size of the nets. Three prototypes of larger nets will be on display for the general managers to look at and while it's an interesting concept, no one actually believes the league is ready to take that giant leap.

With a six-hour meeting set for next Thursday to discuss all of this, and more, there are a lot more issues than time allotted for this session. Think about the laundry list of items out there...the pros and cons of the instigator penalty, what to do about diving, when and/or where teams are able to make line changes, colored ice, composite sticks and the size of the curve, roster size, schedule length, how television covers the game...

The truth is hockey people could go on for months about this stuff, and undoubtedly will, but for the general managers, six hours next Thursday is all they've got on the subject of "changing the game."

At least for now.

The meeting on Friday will be all about the collective bargaining agreement and isn't that a return to the stark reality of where the game is at right now.

For TSN.ca, I'm Bob McKenzie.

[Captain Slack]

McKenzie: Brace for on-ice changes

TSN.ca Staff

4/1/2005

Everyone knows changes are coming to the NHL's on-ice product, once it gets back on the ice, of course. Whether it's in the form of wider blue lines or more penalties being called or the introduction of the shootout or smaller goalie equipment, all these changes are coming, of that there is no doubt.

The big question, though, is how much further will the changes go.

That's something to be discussed by NHL general managers, when they meet next Thursday at a Detroit airport hotel. Some radical notions will be explored and some of them could very well be introduced in the post-lockout NHL.

Such as removal of the centre ice red line for the purposes of a two-line pass. Within the last couple of years, general managers voted 30-0 against taking out the red line, but more and more are thinking it's the way to go and it's now thought a majority of them would be in favour of no red line, thinking it will create the desired effect of opening up the game. Don't be surprised if this one flies.

The same could be said for the restrictions on goaltenders handling the puck in a designated area behind the goal line, which is being test driven in the AHL this season. It's not a slam-dunk but the feeling is there may be enough support to limit the goalies puck play.

The issue of automatic or no-touch icing continues to be a hot-button topic. It, too, could be adopted. Hockey purists like the idea of racing for the puck but when weighed against injury considerations, well, safety should win out. Some would like to see shorthanded teams not able to ice the puck, but it's questionable how much support there is for that.

Another debating point will be the concept of giving teams three points for a regulation time victory, two points for an overtime win with no points for an overtime loss or a tie that goes to shootout. But some will argue that three points for a regulation time win could actually promote ultra-defensive hockey, the opposite of what they're looking for, because once a team gets a regulation time lead, they would play a shut-down brand of game.

Perhaps the most radical notion is that of increasing the size of the nets. Three prototypes of larger nets will be on display for the general managers to look at and while it's an interesting concept, no one actually believes the league is ready to take that giant leap.

With a six-hour meeting set for next Thursday to discuss all of this, and more, there are a lot more issues than time allotted for this session. Think about the laundry list of items out there...the pros and cons of the instigator penalty, what to do about diving, when and/or where teams are able to make line changes, colored ice, composite sticks and the size of the curve, roster size, schedule length, how television covers the game...

The truth is hockey people could go on for months about this stuff, and undoubtedly will, but for the general managers, six hours next Thursday is all they've got on the subject of "changing the game."

At least for now.

The meeting on Friday will be all about the collective bargaining agreement and isn't that a return to the stark reality of where the game is at right now.

For TSN.ca, I'm Bob McKenzie.

[Captain Slack]

McKenzie: Brace for on-ice changes

TSN.ca Staff

4/1/2005

Everyone knows changes are coming to the NHL's on-ice product, once it gets back on the ice, of course. Whether it's in the form of wider blue lines or more penalties being called or the introduction of the shootout or smaller goalie equipment, all these changes are coming, of that there is no doubt.

The big question, though, is how much further will the changes go.

That's something to be discussed by NHL general managers, when they meet next Thursday at a Detroit airport hotel. Some radical notions will be explored and some of them could very well be introduced in the post-lockout NHL.

Such as removal of the centre ice red line for the purposes of a two-line pass. Within the last couple of years, general managers voted 30-0 against taking out the red line, but more and more are thinking it's the way to go and it's now thought a majority of them would be in favour of no red line, thinking it will create the desired effect of opening up the game. Don't be surprised if this one flies.

The same could be said for the restrictions on goaltenders handling the puck in a designated area behind the goal line, which is being test driven in the AHL this season. It's not a slam-dunk but the feeling is there may be enough support to limit the goalies puck play.

The issue of automatic or no-touch icing continues to be a hot-button topic. It, too, could be adopted. Hockey purists like the idea of racing for the puck but when weighed against injury considerations, well, safety should win out. Some would like to see shorthanded teams not able to ice the puck, but it's questionable how much support there is for that.

Another debating point will be the concept of giving teams three points for a regulation time victory, two points for an overtime win with no points for an overtime loss or a tie that goes to shootout. But some will argue that three points for a regulation time win could actually promote ultra-defensive hockey, the opposite of what they're looking for, because once a team gets a regulation time lead, they would play a shut-down brand of game.

Perhaps the most radical notion is that of increasing the size of the nets. Three prototypes of larger nets will be on display for the general managers to look at and while it's an interesting concept, no one actually believes the league is ready to take that giant leap.

With a six-hour meeting set for next Thursday to discuss all of this, and more, there are a lot more issues than time allotted for this session. Think about the laundry list of items out there...the pros and cons of the instigator penalty, what to do about diving, when and/or where teams are able to make line changes, colored ice, composite sticks and the size of the curve, roster size, schedule length, how television covers the game...

The truth is hockey people could go on for months about this stuff, and undoubtedly will, but for the general managers, six hours next Thursday is all they've got on the subject of "changing the game."

At least for now.

The meeting on Friday will be all about the collective bargaining agreement and isn't that a return to the stark reality of where the game is at right now.

For TSN.ca, I'm Bob McKenzie.

[nccanes]

I know we were having this discussion in the Women's WC thread, but I suppose it fits better here.

So the other day I was thinking about how you could get rid of the shootout idea, but still have reg season games end w/o ties and w/o having marathon games. I thought about how the NFL did it.

So I'm standing in the shower and laughing at myself for even spending time thinking about it. Anyway, I suppose the nearest thing to what the NFL does would be to have alternating power plays. Each team could have a 2 minute power play. If it's still tied after the 1st round of PPs, then you make it a 4 on 3 power play for the next round. Surely somone would score right? If it's still tied then I don't know what you'd do. (maybe have a shootout? :evil: )

I suppose most people that don't like shootouts wouldn't like that solution either, huh? Anyway, it was an interesting thought to kill time in the shower. :beatup:

[goalie33]

I'm not sure which thread this should go in, but I found an interesting little tidbit in an article about Vinny Lecavalier's time playing in Russia:

"It is a different game over here," Lecavalier said. "The ice is bigger, but the buildings are smaller. You're used to playing in front of 18,000, and some nights you might play before a couple of thousand or a few hundred. I like the NHL better. With all the hooking and slashing and clutching and grabbing over here, I'll never complain about the NHL again."

[nccanes]

Article at NHL.com about the R & D "camp" going on with the newfangled rules, nets, equipment.

Video commentary by Coach Mo.

http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/features/rd_camp_day2_060705.html

[puck_it]

the video of a larger (still rectangular) net with a goalie in front and a normal with the same goalie is pretty dramatic. i dont like the idea of changing the nets but talk about ROOM

and it was good to see Mo doing stuff :D

[goalie33]

Well, folks, no one ever posted this, so here are the new goaltender's equipment rules. Goalies are going to look WAY different next season, but I don't really think that it'll increase scoring against anyone not named Garth Snow.

2005 NHL Hockey Operations
Sizing Specifications For Goaltender's Equipment

The Leg Guards (Pads):

1. The leg guards worn by the goaltender shall not exceed eleven inches (11") in extreme width when measured on the leg of the goaltender.

2. The maximum length from the bottom mid-point to the top mid-point of the pad shall not exceed thirty-eight inches (38").

*During the procedure of standard and surprise inspections, which will be carried out throughout the upcoming season by Hockey Operations, as series of measurements will be conducted on NHL goaltenders to determine the maximum length of the leg pad that will be permitted to be worn by each specific goalie during future NHL games. Hockey Operations and the NHLPA will determine the date at which this size specific maximum length of the leg pad is to be implemented.

3. The boot of the goal pad is to be no less than seven inches (7") in length.

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/3.gif

4. The Knee Strap Pad (KSP, outer pad) must not exceed six inches (6") in lenghth, five and a half (5 1/2") in height and one and a half inches (1 1/2") in width or thickness. (See diagram) The Knee Strap Pad must be fastenedto the inner raisers (Velcro) to prevent the KSP from crowding the 5-hole, thus keeping the pad width within the 11" maximum width allowed.

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/4.gif

5. The total width measurement of the entire inner knee padding (pad risers), including the outer Knee Strap Pad, must not exceed two and a half (2 1/2") in total thickness. (See diagram) The inner pads are not to exceed seven inches (7") in length, five and a half inches (5 1/2") in width and two and a half (2 1/2") in thickness. The seven (7") is measured from where the inner padding attaches to the leg pad and back to the end of the inner pad. (See diagram)

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/5.gif

6. The calf protectors must follow the contour of the calf and ankle and be no thicker than one and a half (1 1/2"). This measurement includes all padding in this area, both outer and inner calf protecting padding.

7. No raised ridges will be permitted on the calf protector that would be deemed to act as deflectors of pucks.

8. The boot channel of the goal pad must be flat or concave and not convex in appearance. (See diagram)

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/6.gif

9. Medial rolls (raised seam ridges) will not be permitted. (See diagram)

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/7.gif

The Chest and Arm Pads:

1. No raised ridges are allowed on the front edges or sides of the chest pad, the inside or outside of the armr, or across the shoulders.

2. Layering at the elbow is permitted to add protection but not to add stopping area. This layering, both across the front and down the sides, to protect the point of the elbow shall not exceed seven inches (7"). This elbow hinge must be fixed/attached so they do not move on the arm.

3. Shoulder Cap Protectors must follow the contour of the shoulder cap without becoming a projection/extension beyond or abov the should or shoulder cap. This contour padding must not be more than one inch (1") in thickness beyond the top ridge of the shoulder and shoulder cap. To assure contouring in this area, a fixed strapping from the shoulder caps to the back straps should be used.

4. On each side the shoulder, Clavicle Protectors are not to exceed seven inches (7") in width. Their maximum thickness is to be one inch (1"). This protection is not to extend or project above or beyond the shoulder or shoulder cap nor extend beyond the armpit. No insert isallowed between the Shoulder Clavicle Protector and the chest pad that would elevate the Shoulder Clavicle Protector.

5. If, when the goalie assumes his normal crouch position, the shoulder and/or shoulder cap protection is pushed above the contour of the shoulder, the chest pad will be considered illegal.

6. Rib protection must follow the contour of the body.

7. Length and size (L or XL) to depend on individual goalies body length (height) and chest measurement. Customized alterations can be addressed to accommodate specific goalie's needs, with approval from Hockey Operations.

Note:

Hockey Operations must be allowed to control sizing by visual determination. The combined look of the upper body, pant and jersey combination will determine whether size changes will be enforced.

Goaltenders Pants:

1. The maximum width (measured in a straight line) of the thigh pad across teh front of the leg is ten inches (10"). All thigh pads must follow the contour of the leg. Square thigh pads are illegal.

2. No external or internal blocker or "cheaters" are permitted on the pant leg or waist. This includes blocks previously found on the waist and in the 5-hole.

3. All knee protection must be strapped and fit under the thigh pad of the pant leg and not exceed the ten inches (10") allowed for the width of the thigh pad.

4. Goalies will be sized using specific "slotting scale" which will be determined by the individual's waist measurements.

5. Pants can be increased in "butt area" to accommodate those goalies who require more room in this area. This enlarging of the "butt area" must not "visually" increase the pant size when viewed from the front.

6. Higher hip/kidney paddin may be necessary for taller goalies and can be customized on an individual basis with Hockey Operations approval.

*There is no longer a need for our goalies to wear XXL pants. Pants must be narrower at the hips so they visually flow with the look created by the tighter fitting jersey.

The Blocking Glove:

1. The protective padding attached to the back or forming part of the goalkeeper's blocking glove shall not exceed eight inches (8") in width nor more than fifteen inches (15") in legth at any point, including the bindings.

2. The flap protecting the thumb and wrist must be fastened to the blocker and this protection must follow the contour of the thumb and wrist. This protective piece must not exceed seven inches (7") in lenghth when measured from the top of the blocking surface. (See diagram)

3. Raised ridges are not to be added to any portion of the blocking glove.

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/1.gif

The Catching Glove:

1. The perimeter of the catching glove (the complete distance around) is not to exceed forty-five inches (45").

2. The wrist cuff width (height) must be four inches (4").

3. The wrist cuff length must be no more than eight inches (8").

4. The T-basket must be no more than eighteen inches (18") in length. (See diagram)

http://goaliesonly.com/go/images/stories/NHLSpecs/2.gif

I know this may be a little technical, but I think the diagrams help, and I'll be happy to explain anything else.

[puck_it]

did you see the article about bower on NHL.com the other day? talked about equipment back when he played. was a good read... ill see if i can dig it up.

[goalie33]

I think that article is kind of skewed in the way it's edited. It should be an article about what goalies were like back then, but they edit it to make it seem like Bower is putting down the goalies of today. If Johnny Bower had access to a Koho 590 chest protector back then, he would've worn it.

Anyway, for fun I just measured all my equipment according to the new rules. I would say that I wear average-sized equipment for a goaltender, I don't have an extra-large 50" catch glove or a big chest protector like Giggy, as I value my upper body movement over pure blocking area. Here's how my stuff measures up:

Leg pads:

1. My pads are 11.5" wide, but were made before the 11" rule. Used to be fine, now illegal.
2. My pads are 35" long. Legal.
3. The boot of my pad is 8" long. Legal.
4. My knee strap pad is 6"x8"x5/8". Second dimension is illegal. It is not velcroed to the knee padding, but the inner strap holds it to my knee.
5. My Knee padding is 5.5"x7"x2.5", second dimension is illegal.
6,7. Calf protector is legal, calf wedge is not specifically discussed. Legal.
8. My boot channel is concave. Legal.
9. No medial rolls on my pads. Legal.

Chest and arms:

1. No raised ridges on my C/A. Legal.
2. Rule is a little vague here, width of front and side elbow pad is 7.5", but just front is 7". Pad is anchored, but can move a bit. Based on what people like Giggy wear, I'll say legal.
3. This is going to be the hardest rule to build a C/A for. Every protector on the market has some degree of shoulder extension, and even mine, with a very short extension, is illegal.
4. My clavicle floaters are 6" wide and aren't lifted or extended past the contour of the chest pads. Legal.
5. Honestly, this is impossible in my eyes. The very physics of a one-piece chest and arm protector dictate that if it fits right when standing, it's going to ride up a bit when you crouch. I guess that means mine is illegal.
6. No rib protection on mine. Legal.
7. Size is right, I don't like sloppy big (I had one, it was a mess). Legal.

Pants:

1. The thigh pads on my pants are square, don't follow my leg contour, but are less than 10" wide. Pretty darn illegal.
2. Big cheaters in the five hole, very slight ones that flare a little on the outside, though some have huge blocks sewn on the hips. Illegal.
3. Knee protectors are 11" wide and go outside my pants (they're attached to the pads). Illegal.
4. Pants correspond to my actual waist size by sizing chart (Large = 34-36"), but for my 35" waist the pads measure 40-42. Probably illegal.
5. Lots of butt padding in my pants, but you can't see it. Legal. :beatup:
6. Legal.

Blocker:

1. My blocker face is 8.375"x15.875". Illegal.
2. Sideboard is a little more than 8" tall, illegal by more than an inch.
3. Big raised ridge to seal the hole under the right arm when pulling arms in, totally illegal.

Catcher:

1. Perimeter of my catcher is 48", legal under the old rules, now illegal.
2. Wrist cuff is 5" high, mandated at 4" to keep the perimeter rule from reducing wrist protection. Illegal.
3. Cuff length is 8". Legal.
4. Not sure about this one. Length along plane of the glove is 15", length along surface is 19". Since I'm testing the rest of the limits with this thing, I'll say that the rule probably applies to the surface, so my glove is illegal.

So, what do we have? Out of 29 specific provisions, I'm illegal on 15 of them. I really don't think scoring will go up by any noticeable figure with these new rules, aside from the big cheaters like Snow.

If anyone other than me found this interesting, I'll be happy, as I pretty much did it to take stock of my stuff and have fun with rules and numbers. If anyone is confused, I can take pictures or something.

[puck_it]

i found it pretty intresting... its amazing how much stuff was made illegal

[AbNormal27]

RED IS Martin Havlat's colour of choice.

The Senators winger has joined a chorus of players who are saying publicly and privately they don't want the centre-ice red line removed when hockey resumes play.

While an 11-man committee -- which includes NHLers Trevor Linden, Brendan Shanahan, Rob Blake and Jarome Iginla -- wants the red line gone, many are balking at the idea.

"I don't know how you can have four guys making the decisions for all the players in the league," Havlat told the Sun yesterday. "Before it was the GMs who made all the rule changes without any input from the players.

"Now, you've got these guys making all the decisions. We're players in the league as well. Shouldn't we have a say on the changes that are made? I don't think removing the red line would be a good thing for the game. I know that it has not worked in Europe, but there are no European players on the committee."


Havlat isn't the first to state that the removal of the red line is a bad idea. A league executive told the Sun on the weekend that "the movement" to make the major change to the game must be stopped.

The committee is under the impression it will open up the game and create more flow.

Havlat, who played in Russia and the Czech Republic last season, said the experiment has been a massive failure overseas.

"What you have now (are) teams lining up at the blue line trying to defend against the rush. You don't have any forechecking and there's no room in the neutral zone. At least with the trap, you have some guys attacking to make things happen," said Havlat.

"That's not going to happen. There aren't going to be any more breakaways if you take away the red line. It's going to be even worse on a smaller ice surface because there's less room to move out there.

"I'm not just saying this because I'm a Czech, but I think they went with no red line five years ago and now they're putting it back in because it hasn't worked. I really don't think that doing this would be a good move for the NHL."

Aaryn

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I agree with Havlat.

Many of you know how I feel about the shootout. I actually think taking out the red-line is an even WORSE idea in terms of the impact on the game. I'd much rather see shoot-outs than no red-line.

As far as rules changes, I've pretty much just resigned myself to whatever sh*t they come back with, though. Afterall, a remake of the game is the only concession they appear to be making to the fans league-wide.....forget that many fans didn't think the game needed remaking. *sigh*

[Shell]

It's official:
http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/rules_changes072205.html

The following rules changes will take effect for the 2005-06 NHL season:

DIMENSIONS OF THE RINK


The neutral-zone edges of the blue lines will be positioned 64 feet from the attacking goal line and 75 feet from the end boards in the attacking zone. The addition of four feet in each of the offensive zones should encourage more offensive play, particularly on power-plays.

The goal lines will be positioned 11 feet from the end boards, two feet closer to the end boards than previously.

The size of the neutral zone will be reduced to 50' from 54'.

The blue lines and center line will remain at 12 inches in width.


Click the thumbnail images below for larger diagrams of the new rink dimensions.

Rink Dimensions
Crease Detail
Faceoff Detail


FEWER STOPPAGES, INCREASED "FLOW"


Passes from behind the defensive blue line to the attacking blue line will be considered legal. The center red line will be ignored for purposes of the "two line pass".

"The Tag-up Rule" will permit play to continue if offensive players who preceded the puck into the zone return to the blue line and "tag" it.


Click the thumbnail image below for larger diagrams of the two-line pass and "tag-up" offsides.

"Tag-up" Offsides
Two-Line Pass


ICING THE PUCK


Icing the puck offenses still will be penalized by a face-off in the defensive zone of the team that ices the puck.

A team that ices the puck cannot make a line change prior to the ensuing face-off.

"Touch" icing will remain the practice, although the Linesman will have discretion to wave off apparent icing infractions if they are deemed the result of an attempted pass. Providing the discretion to the Linesman also should have the effect of reducing the number of situations in which a race for the puck might result in an injury to a player.


INSTIGATOR RULE


A player who instigates a fight in the final five minutes of a game will receive a game misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension. The length of suspension would double for each additional incident.

As well, the player's Coach will be fined $10,000 -- a fine that would double for each such incident.


LIMITS ON GOALTENDERS


The dimensions of goaltender equipment will be reduced by approximately 11 percent. In addition to a one-inch reduction (to 11') in the width of legpads, the blocking glove, upper-body protector, pants and jersey will also be reduced in size.

Goaltenders may play the puck behind the goal line only in a trapezoid-shaped area defined by lines that begin six feet from either goal post and extend diagonally to points 28 feet apart at the endboards.


Click the thumbnail image below for a larger diagram of the goaltender trap zone.

Goaltender Trap Zone

OFFICIATING POINTS OF EMPHASIS


Zero tolerance on Interference, Hooking and Holding/Obstruction.

Goaltenders who play the puck behind the goal line but outside the designated puck handling area will be penalized for delay of game.

Goaltenders will be penalized for delaying the game if they "freeze" the puck unnecessarily.

Any player who shoots the puck directly over the glass in his defending zone will be penalized for delay of game.


SHOOTOUT


Following a scoreless five-minute overtime, three players from each team participate in the order the coach selects.

Each team takes three shots. The team with the most goals after those six shots is the winner.

If the score remains tied, the shootout will proceed to a "sudden death" format.

Regardless the number of goals scored during the shootout portion of overtime, the final score recorded for the game will give the winning team one more goal than the score at the end of regulation time.


See more detail on the shootout.

UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT


In addition to the minor penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct/diving that may be assessed by the Referee during a game, Hockey Operations will review game videos and assess fines to players who dive or embellish a fall or a reaction, or who feigns injury in an attempt to draw penalties.

The first such incident will result in a warning letter being sent to the player.

The second such incident will result in a $1,000 fine.

The third such incident will result in a $2,000 fine.

The fourth such incident will result in a one-game suspension.

Public complaints or derogatory comments toward the game also will result in fines.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

INSTIGATOR RULE

A player who instigates a fight in the final five minutes of a game will receive a game misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension. The length of suspension would double for each additional incident.

As well, the player's Coach will be fined $10,000 -- a fine that would double for each such incident.

I believe this will make nccanes happy....it should cut down on those blow-outs that collapse into thuggery-fests. No more big fights at the end of games.

[Mona]

$10,000 for the coach? PL won't be very nice to anyone that is guilty of this. :eek2:

[puck_it]

im curious about the new goalie stats. will playoffs have the new "OT" stat? and do OT losses still count against them in the palyoffs??

[goalie33]

I think I'll just chime in with something I noticed on Wednesday.

I've never had a definite stand on the shootout. I can see the advantages and the disadvantages. Personally, I have no problem with a tie, but I understand the argument.

I was scorekeeping a playoff game at the Ice House on Wednesday. Format there is a five-minute OT followed by a five-man shootout due to time constraints.

Well, this game was tremendously well-played, and the goal that made the score 2-2 was a minute from the end. The game went to a shootout where one team won 2-1.

Now, maybe it was just because I knew it was a playoff game, but I felt a lot better after watching 65 minutes of quality tied hockey than I did after I saw ten more shots and a winner. The shootout result was highly unsatisfying.

So now, I declare myself firmly against the shootout, even though it's too late to matter. :D

Also:


Goaltenders will be penalized for delaying the game if they "freeze" the puck unnecessarily.

Any player who shoots the puck directly over the glass in his defending zone will be penalized for delay of game.

The first rule is not new, and the second is just an expansion of the DoG rule that applies to goalies, which I like.

[Mona]

I saw Kevyn and PL on the WRAL news tonight. Kevyn was excited about the fans... and PL was talking about how exciting the game will be and how clean it will be without all the grabbing and clutching. Should be a new game. :D

[puck_it]

idunno if you saw this yet goalie, but this caught my eye (i saw it earlier now i cant find it :mad: )

any way no more tie category for goalies. theres an OT category. OTL doesn count as an L for goalies. nor does a shootout L. they just go to OT. not sure about playoff OTLs, ill see if i can find out.

[goalie33]

Meh, I don't really like that. A goalie's job is to stop the puck and win the game. Regulation, OT, or shootout, a win is a win and a loss is a loss.

[puck_it]

yeah thats what i said. all those older goalie's stats arent going to be converted. meh im ok with not counting shoot out OTL's since the tie and OT would reflect about the same thing. But if you lose it as years past. in 4 on 4 hockey, you deserve the L.

[nccanes]

INSTIGATOR RULE

A player who instigates a fight in the final five minutes of a game will receive a game misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension. The length of suspension would double for each additional incident.

As well, the player's Coach will be fined $10,000 -- a fine that would double for each such incident.

I believe this will make nccanes happy....it should cut down on those blow-outs that collapse into thuggery-fests. No more big fights at the end of games.

Heh - yeah, I never really was a fan of those, but I suppose people that are seeing their team blown out enjoy that last minute exclamation point for their money, huh?

Interesting that they mention instigator though - I suppose that if 2 parties are willing, then it's not an instigator? Maybe this should just be called the Bertuzzi Rule?

As an aside, I wondered how broadcasters could say "setting the tone for their next game" with a straight face. I always thought it was "sucks to lose bad, doesn't it"?:beatup:

[Mona]

I see lots of penalties coming on the goalies because it is instilled in them how they play the puck. It is going to be hard for them to stay in the "pocket" and not instinctively (sp) go after the puck. Should be interesting with not so much room to work with.. Drop the puck please. :D

[aLADDin]

It's official:
http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/rules_changes072205.html

The following rules changes will take effect for the 2005-06 NHL season:

INSTIGATOR RULE


A player who instigates a fight in the final five minutes of a game will receive a game misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension. The length of suspension would double for each additional incident.

As well, the player's Coach will be fined $10,000 -- a fine that would double for each such incident.

Help me with something. Does this mean that no change was made in the instigator rule for the first 55 minutes of play? Just wondering. Thanx to anyone who has the official answer.

Warren

[apolinar]

It's still open fighting time up until 5 minutes left in the game. If a statement needs to be made, I would make it with 5:05 left in the game. Thus you can avoid the instigator penalty and still give your team time to score. If I were boulerice I'd learn some time management fast.

[e2ipiand1]

I really like this rule change:

A team that ices the puck cannot make a line change prior to the ensuing face-off.

How many times has a team that has been forced back on their heels iced the puck just so they could get fresh legs on the ice?

[ssangste]

I really like this rule change:

A team that ices the puck cannot make a line change prior to the ensuing face-off.

How many times has a team that has been forced back on their heels iced the puck just so they could get fresh legs on the ice?

I really like this new rule even if it might hurt us as a team.

I'd really like them to take this rule a little further and combine it with a new rule about having icing on penalties. It would limit the amount of flailing around the penalized team does trying to wildly fling the puck down the ice and relieve pressure. It would change the way penalty kills are coached and implemented.

[puck_it]

Goaltenders will also be forbidden (wtf, pay attention please)from playing the puck in a trapezoid-shaped area directly behind the net.

hi, im scott burnside and im a friggen moron.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2114523

[Gipper]

It's still open fighting time up until 5 minutes left in the game. If a statement needs to be made, I would make it with 5:05 left in the game. Thus you can avoid the instigator penalty and still give your team time to score. If I were boulerice I'd learn some time management fast.

Define 5 minutes left. What if it's tied or there is one goal difference? If there is a fight at 4:12, and the game goes more than 49 seconds into OT, do the refs then have to re-allow the player in since the instigator happened with more than 5:00 to play?

[puck_it]

its assumed to be regulation.

[goalie33]

Note that it's still an "instigator" rule, meaning that if the fight is a standard glove-dropper, neither player will be suspended, tossed, or handed more than a standard five. This rule is simply to prevent teams that get waxed from taking out their frustration on the other team physically.

With that said, if you're down a goal or tied with five minutes left, you should be focused on scoring, not fighting. Even if the purpose was motivational, five minutes is a little late on to try and hype up your teammates for an equalizer.

[apolinar]

Don't forget that this rule has a negative backlash. The final five minutes will become a full 5 minutes where you are free to put a career ending hit on Sidney Crosby and laugh in the face of the opposing coach because he can't send his goon out to you to instigate a fight in the last 5 minutes because of the 10 grand fine and ensuing risk of suspension. You may actually see coaches sitting their best players in the last five minutes if there is any kind of lead to protect them from the career ending hit. This really opens people up to the hits like naslund took that started the whole bertuzzi revenge incident. What this rule does is make goons aware of when to fight (before five minutes in regulation) and encourage people to hit with abandon the last 5 minutes with no fear of retaliation.

[puck_it]

good point art. really good point.

[Gipper]

No, because then the player simply gets hit back. Oops, my stick slipped, didn't see his face there, sorry. :beatup:

[goalie33]

All the hitting back in the world doesn't make up for a potentially career-ending hit.

I hadn't even thought of it that way, Art. Looks like a mice and men type of plan. Thinking about it in this new way, it seems like the problem with all the other rule changes. The game would open up without new rules if they put the nets back at ten feet from the boards and called the penalties in the book. Similarly, the problems we have with dirty hits might very well be resolved if the original instigator rule was removed from the rule book.

[tommy]

Art, extremely good point... ugh, there is no way to resolve this rule other than just tossing it completely, methinks...

[Gipper]

All the hitting back in the world doesn't make up for a potentially career-ending hit.

I hadn't even thought of it that way, Art. Looks like a mice and men type of plan. Thinking about it in this new way, it seems like the problem with all the other rule changes. The game would open up without new rules if they put the nets back at ten feet from the boards and called the penalties in the book. Similarly, the problems we have with dirty hits might very well be resolved if the original instigator rule was removed from the rule book.

Sure it does. Take out one of their players. You hurt one of ours, we'll take one of yours. Just ask Steve Moore.

[tommy]

Brilliant. See, this is what we're trying to get rid.... nevermind.

[goalie33]

And this, friends, is why it's really hard to explain, even to a rational person, why fighting is a necessary part of hockey.

Rob Ray would be proud.

[StormShaman]

And this, friends, is why it's really hard to explain, even to a rational person, why fighting is a necessary part of hockey.

Rob Ray would be proud.

As long as guys like Bryan Marchment are allowed to cheap-shot people, there will always be a place in the game for fighting.

[corylav]

I think fighting in hockey is the same as intentionally beaning someone in baseball. If done right (a ball in the tush), it sends a message without truly trying to inflict harm. While any fight certainly has intention from both sides to inflict harm, it's easy to get out of it if you feel you've lost (fall down). Self-policing is part of the game.

[tommy]

But don't you just love it when one too many near-beans causes a bench-clearing brawl?

Only kidding!

[caveman]

I like the "no 2-line pass rule" rule. I love tag-up offsides. I might marry the reduction in goalie equipment size rule, but only if bigamy is allowed so I can also marry the re-placement of the goal back closer to the end boards.

I'm kind of lukewarm on the penalty for shooting the puck over the glass from your own defensive zone. I feel a bit queezy about the instigator rules.

I might vomit on the part of the rulebook that describes the shootout. I dunno, maybe I'll love it. How will stats work? They've said the "final score" will just be increased by one goal for the team winning the shootout, but how does that count against goalie GAA or save percentage? What about the other shootout stats? Maybe entirely new categories? Do players get credit for the goals they score in shootouts, or is it an entirely new category, not part of their totals? These questions and more must be answered.

I boggle with inredulity at the "goalie no-touch trapezoid". Seriously, double-you tee eff? What a lame, needless complication. I suppose in basketball we have 3-second violations, traveling, double dribble, and other "weird" rules but try explaining the goalie trapezoid to someone. I dare you. Even offsides and icing can be explained more easily. Further, if you want to increase scoring, why not just take away the goalie's stick, or disallow him from playing the puck "at all". Hell, take the goalie off the ice, he keeps the other team from scoring! I just don't get this rule at all, it was crap when it was thought up, and it is crap now.

Hm... what am I missing... oh yes:

I have no idea what I think yet about the "no line change allowed for the team called for icing". It sounds good in theory.

[ssangste]

One rule that I think is an absolute necessity in the NHL but will likely never get put in place:

If a goalie leaves the crease to play the puck, he's fair game.

I know that may not be popular with some folks. But it aggravates me to no end how goalies abuse the rules to interfere with opposing team players coming in to attack the puck.

I have no problem whatsoever with goalies wanting to play the puck. Forget this stupid zone where a goalie can and can't play the puck. Let them play it from anywhere they choose.... BUT, if you leave that crease, you're just as wide open to be checked as the Dman coming back.

The goalie is better protected from injury than a Dman... and it will teach them to keep their head up to be prepared for the check.

It aggravates me to no end how goalies turn their backs to the approaching forechecker to appear as if they are going to be blindsided, all the while being a big obstruction blocker to help with the Dman coming back to pick up the puck.... For that matter, I'm not a fan of the way a lot of forwards and Dmen are purposely going up against the boards face first and never looking behind them, as if daring folks to board them. If the guy checks you off the puck, he gets a penalty. Otherwise, you have time to control the puck and move it however you choose.

Climbing down off my soapbox....

I'm curious to see how much floating players will do now with the lack of a two line pass. I'm also very curious to see if they actually call the obstruction and interference consistently.

[corylav]

I like the "no 2-line pass rule" rule. I love tag-up offsides. I might marry the reduction in goalie equipment size rule, but only if bigamy is allowed so I can also marry the re-placement of the goal back closer to the end boards.

I'm kind of lukewarm on the penalty for shooting the puck over the glass from your own defensive zone. I feel a bit queezy about the instigator rules.

I might vomit on the part of the rulebook that describes the shootout. I dunno, maybe I'll love it. How will stats work? They've said the "final score" will just be increased by one goal for the team winning the shootout, but how does that count against goalie GAA or save percentage? What about the other shootout stats? Maybe entirely new categories? Do players get credit for the goals they score in shootouts, or is it an entirely new category, not part of their totals? These questions and more must be answered.

I boggle with inredulity at the "goalie no-touch trapezoid". Seriously, double-you tee eff? What a lame, needless complication. I suppose in basketball we have 3-second violations, traveling, double dribble, and other "weird" rules but try explaining the goalie trapezoid to someone. I dare you. Even offsides and icing can be explained more easily. Further, if you want to increase scoring, why not just take away the goalie's stick, or disallow him from playing the puck "at all". Hell, take the goalie off the ice, he keeps the other team from scoring! I just don't get this rule at all, it was crap when it was thought up, and it is crap now.

Hm... what am I missing... oh yes:

I have no idea what I think yet about the "no line change allowed for the team called for icing". It sounds good in theory.

I read somewhere that it will be just one goal added to the score.

[puck_it]

Sure it does. Take out one of their players. You hurt one of ours, we'll take one of yours. Just ask Steve Moore.

WAY TO PROMOTE HOCKEY AS BEING POSITIVE.

HEY GUYS, I HAVE AN IDEA, LETS ALL GO BERTUZZI ON HIS ASS. (i feel the need to calrify, I'm not talking about gipper, im posing this as a hypothetical player going after a hypothetical opponent)

and yes, shootouts will count only as one goal, no player will recieve credit for scoring it.

[caveman]

They've said the "final score" will just be increased by one goal for the team winning the shootout
I read somewhere that it will be just one goal added to the score.
and yes, shootouts will count only as one goal, no player will recieve credit for scoring it.

I get the final score being X+1 to X where "X" was the final score prior to the shootout. What I don't (fully) get yet is how all these shootout goals scored and goals against will or will not count towards the Art Ross (goal scoring) or Jennings (GAA) trophies, or records such as the career goals record, etc.

pick_it's comment seems to say that "they won't count at all towards either trophy". That's fine, but this -does- mean that the stats freaks (that's meeeeee!!) will be keeping a big tally of shootout stats. Maybe it's not too late to update the fantasy league engine...

I'm a lot happier with the "shootout" rule if this is indeed how it's going to work. I hated the idea of punishing goalies with vastly increased GAA and lowered save percentages, and rewarding players with easy goals.

This way, we get a whole new set of stats to pore over for months on end. Shootout stats for skaters: attempts, goals, misses (not a goal or a save). Shootout stats for goalies: goals against, saves (maybe keep track of misses against them also, I'll have to think about it).

More questions:
1. What about game-winning goals? In ze past, ve had a game with a winner, ve vould alzo have a game-vinning goal. Now we'll have a winning team but no winning goalie, losing goalie, or game-winning goal?
2. What about standings points for teams? 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss, period? No overtime-loss point for losing in the 5 minute OT (glad to see that one go, personally)? No shootout-loss point for staying even for 65 minutes? I don't know how I feel about taking 65 minutes of playing even with a team and rewarding that effort with 0 points based on some shootout goals. Losing in OT should never have gotten you a point, IMHO, that's still "real" hockey, skate to win. Are they still going with the 4-on-4 overtime? It's okay but a bit forced in my book.

Edit: I see that the OT is still 4-on-4 (NHL ADOPTS SHOOTOUT ROUND FOR REGULAR-SEASON PLAY (http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/shootout072205.html)) and still rewards teams with a point for losing in either OT or the shootout. Ah well, would really have liked to see the "point for losing while everyone is still skating" go away. Some questions still remain to me, though: who goes first (home or away), and how exactly does the "sudden death" part of the shootout work? Does the 2nd team to shoot still get a chance to "match" the first shooter?

[puck_it]

sudden death goes each tem gets a shot. if you both miss each tem gets another shot. if both make it each team gets another shot. if one makes and the other misses it end there.

[caveman]

We can say the NHL is "unique" in that it's the only sport in which you're actually supposed to knock the snot outta each other.

Not true: the NFL also has encouraged slobber-knocking.

We can say the NHL is "unique" in that it's the only sport with so many cheap shots.

Not true: both the NFL and the NBA are rife with cheap shots. The NFL waaaay more so than the NBA. Try seeing what goes on between O and D lines in an NFL game... ewwwww, cartilage.

We can say the NHL is "unique" in that there is such a possibility for premeditated injury.

Not true: with MLB you've bean-balls, spikes up slides into second to break up a double play, bone-crunching (and pad-less) plays at the plate; with the NBA you've got under-cutting a guy who's in the air; with the NFL all manner of spearing, blind-side hitting and blocking.

So, that being out of the way, what's the status of fighting in the various leagues.

NBA: Well, if you ignore Ron Artest for a moment, few incidents of either blatant injury causing, cheap shotting, and fighting. Why? Because cheap shotters get BIG TIME suspensions. Fighters get HUGE suspensions.

MLB: There is the occasional bean ball, the occasional bench-clearing stare down. Very, -very- rarely there is a "brawl" which is more a glorified hug-fest than anything. Why? Because to play in MLB you have to be a skill player with your hands. You can't afford to even tweak your hand on someone by throwing a good punch, and a player who takes a bat to someone will never, ever, ever play in the league again. Suspensions are pretty much worthless in this area, and that is likely why every time one team gets beaned, they come back and bean the beaners back.

NFL: Fighting is almost non-existent, even though players line up and mash into each other every play in some kind of organised meat-grinding dance gone wrong. Cheap shotters get booed and reviled, there is some kind of gladiatorial respect from one side to the other such that there really aren't that many cheap shots (Warren Sapp's destructo-blindside-block on an unaware Packers lineman notwithstanding).

NHL: There seems to be this mentality that cheap shots are okay, because the fighters will come out and take care of it in due course. When that doesn't happen, there is retaliation, often sickening in its scope (Tie Domi vs. Scott Niedermeyer; Todd Bertuzzi vs. Steve Moore). Enter the instigator rules. Pain. Suffering. On the one hand, some fans like to see the fighting here and there. On the other hand, pointless face-smashing among goons at the end of a game is kind of bizarre in a macabre way. With swift, decisive, and meaningful suspensions and fines for cheap shots, the NHL can go a long way towards eliminating the need for fighting, especially of the latter sort.

How meaningful? Well, let's hope that #1 the refs catch the perp in the act. 5-minute major, game misconduct for starters. This penalizes the perp's team immediately. Now, disregarding #1, after the game the perp gets more than a slap on the wrist. Depending on past behavior, gank em from the league for a good week to a month without pay and see how they enjoy it. Keep your sticks and elbows to yourselves, respect each other and the game. Fighting is not the only way to keep cheap shots out of the game. Creating an atmosphere of no tolerance for cheap shots can go a long way. If a team feels that a player's punishment was stiff enough, there won't be the escalation that inevitably follows. If Steve Moore had been suspended for a month without pay for hacking Naslund, would Bertuzzi have still gone after him?

[apolinar]

See, that's all well and good for a "cheap shot" But there are a cheap shots, and there is sending all your guys on Sidney crosby with clean hits. These are not illegal and no penalty will be called. But there is no policing them with fines if they aren't illegal.

Here's an example. Eric Cole's breakout game against the Penguins in 2001-2 where he laid out the most beautiful hit on one of their star players (kovalev?). He hit him hard in the middle of the game and everyone on the penguins bench saw it as a rookie trying to make a name for himself by taking off a star's head. It was a beautiful clean hit, no penalty since he had the puck but in dangerous center ice. But so good it could have ended kovalev's career. Cole could have done just as well just nudging him off the puck but that doesn't make the highlight reel. No ability to have a penalty or fine whatsoever.

Next time cole was on the ice he had to drop the gloves with the Pens' resident goon. Cole took it like a man and luckily defended himself quite well. There was no ability to fine cole, there was no other way to protect other players on the pens except to let rookies know that if you go for the big hit, expect to be in a fight your next shift.

So with this five minute rule, you can let out all your frustrations by trying to make as many clean hard hits on star players as you can, without any fear of retaliation. If the game is a blowout and there's nothing else to do, might as well go out there and try to put hard clean hits on your opponents because any retaliation will garner suspensions and fines. There ARE clean hits that can end careers that really don't need to happen. If there's absolutely no reason to think twice about it, you don't think twice. You do it.

It's the same effect as hockey helmets. More hits from behind, more elbows to the head, more concussions were the result of introducing mandatory helmet rules. When people didn't wear them there was more respect over what could happen to someone if you were unscrupulous with your hitting. Watch a game before the era of helmets and you'll actually see opposing players protecting their OPPONENTs' heads and adjusting where they hit during their hits. That doesn't happen anymore.

So caveman, you are right that fighting is not the only way to keep cheap shots out of the game only holds water if you are talking about cheap shots that are punishable by a penalty. There are uncalled for hits too that are very clean. Would a hard check into the boards be justified with five minutes left in a 7-0 game? Perfectly legal but perfectly meaningless and also perfectly dangerous. But there is no way you can fine it. You can only "make a statement"

[tommy]

So caveman, you are right that fighting is not the only way to keep cheap shots out of the game only holds water if you are talking about cheap shots that are punishable by a penalty. There are uncalled for hits too that are very clean. Would a hard check into the boards be justified with five minutes left in a 7-0 game? Perfectly legal but perfectly meaningless and also perfectly dangerous. But there is no way you can fine it. You can only "make a statement"

Well said, apolinar... that's definitely the truth of the matter.

I have a feeling that that situation (a blowout) will be when this rule really gets tested and we see what happens.

[caveman]

So caveman, you are right that fighting is not the only way to keep cheap shots out of the game only holds water if you are talking about cheap shots that are punishable by a penalty. There are uncalled for hits too that are very clean. Would a hard check into the boards be justified with five minutes left in a 7-0 game? Perfectly legal but perfectly meaningless and also perfectly dangerous. But there is no way you can fine it. You can only "make a statement"

Well said, apolinar... that's definitely the truth of the matter.

I have a feeling that that situation (a blowout) will be when this rule really gets tested and we see what happens.

Have to agree -- there's no "unnecessary roughness" penalty in hockey, is there :beatup:

[VandyCane]

One rule that I think is an absolute necessity in the NHL but will likely never get put in place:

If a goalie leaves the crease to play the puck, he's fair game.

I know that may not be popular with some folks. But it aggravates me to no end how goalies abuse the rules to interfere with opposing team players coming in to attack the puck.

I have no problem whatsoever with goalies wanting to play the puck. Forget this stupid zone where a goalie can and can't play the puck. Let them play it from anywhere they choose.... BUT, if you leave that crease, you're just as wide open to be checked as the Dman coming back.



I completely agree with this! Talk about adding excitement to the game. Forget the goofy trapezoid...I love to see goalies wander out, but if they think they are so tough, they should deal with the consequences. And before I get chastised for causing goalies injures, if you're afraid of getting hurt well then don't leave the front of the net!

[Shell]

Guyute and I definitely agree with that too.. If Marty wants to come out and show how truly great he is, then fine.. but watch out because you might get checked! They definitely need a protected area (the crease) but after that, fair game buddy!

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I'm down with that idea too but I'm waiting for goalie33 to come in and explain why it's just not a good idea before I make up my mind completely.

Basically, though, you know you don't want to get hit? You know it will take you waaay too long to get up therefore it opens up the possibility of letting a goal in unencumbered? Then keep your a** in the net. :beatup:

I agree that the trapezoid thing is just unnecessarily complicated. As if trying to explain offsides and icing to the noobs wasn't bad enough!

[apolinar]

You know, that's another situation that comes up in the last 5 minutes with the instigator penalty/suspension/fines. You can run into the opposing goalie as much as you want without worrying about retaliation. You can go as hard at the net without regard for injuring the goalie, because what idiot would defend the goalie after a perfectly legal hit. Perfectly legal, but one that could have been avoided if the threat of retaliation hung over the head of the perpetrator. As long as you are coming at the goalie to shoot the puck, might as well run into him to shake him off his game.

This is the same thing that happened since goalposts were changed to the ones that give way when you run into the goal. Before that there was a lot of respect for the post. Not only could you hurt the goalie and get retaliation, you could get hurt yourself going into the net. People actually let up and turned the closer they got and respected the goalie and the net. Now you see it all the time... defensemen tripping up players going at the net because they know their goalie has less of a chance of getting hurt, and they themselves won't get as hurt if they fall in the process. Top players elbowing goalies in the head going at top speed.

With the new instigator rule in the last five minutes there's no harm in running the goalie in the last five minutes of a game as long as you are in a shooting motion. It's all perfectly legal, and it discourages an enforcer from enforcing the unwritten rule, "don't hit my goalie".

[goalie33]

The goalie is better protected from injury than a Dman... and it will teach them to keep their head up to be prepared for the check.

Well, SHC set me up very nicely there, but it was ssangste's comment that really caught my eye.

Yes, goalies wear a hell of a lot of padding.

None of it is designed to absorb a body check.

A goalie's mask is designed to deflect the impact of a puck. That's why it's made of rigid fiberglass and made with no flat spots on the front (a flat spot could transfer force directly to the head/spine, Mike Richter's career-ending injury came when a puck struck the flat area on the side of his mask). If you get hit with a puck in a mask, no problem. If you get hit by a person, the risk of concussion is much higher in a mask than in a player's helmet. Most player's helmets now feature EPP foam, the kind in bike helmets, which is designed to absorb the impact of a large force like hitting the glass or pavement. When a forward slams into you in a mask, all that energy goes straight into your head and neck because it cannot be dispersed by the properties of the glass/carbon/kevlar. Also, because modern goalie masks feature a floating back plate as a means for attachment, the back of the head is effectively unprotected from impact (it protects from abrasion, puncture, but any impact allows it to transfer force completely to the head). The plastic helmet broomball helmet that Gretzky wore absorbs more impact to the back of the head than a modern mask.

Similarly, goalies have no rigid knee or elbow pads, and the back and outside of the leg is completely unpadded. While there is plenty of rigid padding on the front of the chest, arms, and shoulders, the back and reverse of the shoulders are completely exposed. Goalie pants are super-padded in front, but even more sparsely padded in the back than player pants; some don't even have a tailbone pad. The blocker hand of a goalie is also particularly exposed, with no padding for the fingers other than flaps designed to protect from a puck. Finally, a hit from the side or throwing the goalie off-balance immediately carries a high risk of an ankle injury, as goalie skates are low-rise and don't have the stiff ankle or Achilles support of a player skate.

BTW, this is by no means a flame of ssangste. I wouldn't expect anyone other than a goalie to know what's under all that nylon and clarino.

[caveman]

So caveman, you are right that fighting is not the only way to keep cheap shots out of the game only holds water if you are talking about cheap shots that are punishable by a penalty. There are uncalled for hits too that are very clean. Would a hard check into the boards be justified with five minutes left in a 7-0 game? Perfectly legal but perfectly meaningless and also perfectly dangerous. But there is no way you can fine it. You can only "make a statement"

Then why isn't there fighting in the NFL? When the score is 40-10 and there's a big hit, that might be considered "uncalled for" and "meaningless" but it happens fairly rarely, and when it does there isn't this disgusting escalation of ugliness.

It goes back to: "respect each other as athletes and respect the game". Where has that spirit gone in the NHL? Why would you light someone up big time when you're up 7-0 or run a goalie in the last five minutes or any other time?

As far as sending everybody out to cleanly check Crosby -- Crosby can either take the heat or get out of the kitchen, just like a wide receiver going across the middle can either take the hit and go for the ball, or wince up, bring in his hands and protect himself against the free safety and forget the ball. He can stay on the bench, keep his head up, etc, if he doesn't want to get a body check.

[corylav]

The goalie is better protected from injury than a Dman... and it will teach them to keep their head up to be prepared for the check.

Well, SHC set me up very nicely there, but it was ssangste's comment that really caught my eye.

Yes, goalies wear a hell of a lot of padding.

None of it is designed to absorb a body check.

A goalie's mask is designed to deflect the impact of a puck. That's why it's made of rigid fiberglass and made with no flat spots on the front (a flat spot could transfer force directly to the head/spine, Mike Richter's career-ending injury came when a puck struck the flat area on the side of his mask). If you get hit with a puck in a mask, no problem. If you get hit by a person, the risk of concussion is much higher in a mask than in a player's helmet. Most player's helmets now feature EPP foam, the kind in bike helmets, which is designed to absorb the impact of a large force like hitting the glass or pavement. When a forward slams into you in a mask, all that energy goes straight into your head and neck because it cannot be dispersed by the properties of the glass/carbon/kevlar. Also, because modern goalie masks feature a floating back plate as a means for attachment, the back of the head is effectively unprotected from impact (it protects from abrasion, puncture, but any impact allows it to transfer force completely to the head). The plastic helmet broomball helmet that Gretzky wore absorbs more impact to the back of the head than a modern mask.

Similarly, goalies have no rigid knee or elbow pads, and the back and outside of the leg is completely unpadded. While there is plenty of rigid padding on the front of the chest, arms, and shoulders, the back and reverse of the shoulders are completely exposed. Goalie pants are super-padded in front, but even more sparsely padded in the back than player pants; some don't even have a tailbone pad. The blocker hand of a goalie is also particularly exposed, with no padding for the fingers other than flaps designed to protect from a puck. Finally, a hit from the side or throwing the goalie off-balance immediately carries a high risk of an ankle injury, as goalie skates are low-rise and don't have the stiff ankle or Achilles support of a player skate.

BTW, this is by no means a flame of ssangste. I wouldn't expect anyone other than a goalie to know what's under all that nylon and clarino.

I think it's important to note in all this "running into the goalie" talk that the instigator rule will still be at the discretion of the officials, and I'm sure if someone plowed into the goalie and a player stood up for their goalie, the officials, in most cases, wouldn't call an instigating penalty.

[caveman]

I think it's important to note in all this "running into the goalie" talk that the instigator rule will still be at the discretion of the officials, and I'm sure if someone plowed into the goalie and a player stood up for their goalie, the officials, in most cases, wouldn't call an instigating penalty.

Timing is everything. If it's the next shift, or several shifts later, then the penalty is likely going to be called. If it's right then, right away, someone on the ice takes care of business, heck, maybe you could even see the guy who ran the goalie being called for instigation...

[goalie33]

I think it's important to note in all this "running into the goalie" talk that the instigator rule will still be at the discretion of the officials, and I'm sure if someone plowed into the goalie and a player stood up for their goalie, the officials, in most cases, wouldn't call an instigating penalty.

I wrote all that stuff about goalie protection in response to the idea that goalies should be fair game outside of the crease.

[ssangste]

No offence intended. I'm not going to dispute your statements. You've worn the gear a lot longer than I have. I've only worn the gear a few times in my younger years and it obviously was different than it is now, both for goalies and non-goalies alike. It appears that goalies are less protected now and skaters are more protected. Why did it evolve that way? I used to get clobbered on the ice when I dressed in the goalie gear and I laughed my butt off at the guys doing the clobbering because I had so much protection, I think they were getting the worst of it

Serious general interest question that shows how little I follow the equipment nowadays: When did the shin guards for skaters get so protective? None of my shin guards ever did anything except save you from a shot straight on or slightly to the side... but you were still wide open to be slashed on the side of your calf and definitely from behind where you had no padding whatsoever. Are shin guards now custom molded to wrap around the player's legs?

I've never worn one of the new fandangled goalie masks. Yes, I'm dating myself. But they were waaaaaaaaaaay too expensive back then for someone who wasn't a full time goalie. I'm sure it's not the same thing as a regular hockey helmet.

Since there is such a deficiency in the padding on parts of the goalie, then it won't take them long to add that padding if they know they are going to get hit. I don't know how you work around the goalie mask thing.... but if we're talking about legal body checks where the person isn't head hunting, there shouldn't be THAT much trouble there. Lots of folks played for years in the league with no helmet at all and took body checks all the time. Craig McTavish, being I believe the last skater to go without a helmet in the NHL, isn't too much the worse for wear having played a number of years in the league and doling out and receiving checks without the aid of a helmet.

I, too, am not trying to start an arguement or flame. You obviously know a great deal more about what is worn now and the impacts that checking would have on goalies. I'm just trying to understand how my experience is different than the goalies of today and provide a counterpoint. clearly, a rule change of this magnitude would alter some things about the game, both in the goalie's attitude, and apparently, in the equipment they wear. Despite your influential post, I still think it is a great rule to be implemented.

[puck_it]

even if goalie hits were allowed when tehy wandered, youd have to be one ballsy guy to do it. Legal or Illegal you've got all the goonies breathing down your neck. The non-goons will still hit the piss out of you too. It would be like any guy that tried to lay a hit on Gretzky, you just dont do it.

[goalie33]

I don't know that the protection if player shin guards has skyrocketed, but there is definitely more wraparound protection now than there used to be (some of the older guys use shin guards from their junior days that are completely different from a modern guard).

I know that there are plenty of vunerable spots on a skater, and not necessarily that many more on a goaltender, but it's the combination of vunerability and the lack of mobility in a goalie that worries me. I was rattling off the vunerable spots to demonstrate that the back of a goalie is pretty much unprotected. The only part that really worries me is the mask, from personal experience. I've taken dozen of shots to the head with no problems at all; no ringing in the ears, no pain, no dizziness. I've been hit hard by a body twice in a modern-style (backplate) mask, and both times it took a minute or so before I was seeing straight, and to a certain extent I feel like I would've been less rattled had I not been wearing a mask at all.

As for the evolution of equipment, I think it follows the trend that everything has over the past thirty years. Technological advancements in design and materials have made things possible that players in the '60s would never have thought of. If you can make rigid shoulder caps that are lighter and more protective than thick, soft foam, why not make something more protective. Similarly, if a goalie knows he's probably not going to get hit, why not lighten the chest pad by doing away with the part of the harness that covers everything but the spine? Just as technology has given cyclists vastly different bike frames for time trials and road stages, specialization is the name of the game in performance sporting equipment, particularly when we're talking about hockey goalie equipment, as IMO the hockey goaltender is the position in sports that most lends itself to equipment specialization.[/i]

[corylav]

I think it's important to note in all this "running into the goalie" talk that the instigator rule will still be at the discretion of the officials, and I'm sure if someone plowed into the goalie and a player stood up for their goalie, the officials, in most cases, wouldn't call an instigating penalty.

I wrote all that stuff about goalie protection in response to the idea that goalies should be fair game outside of the crease.

I still think it applies ... like puck_it said, it'll take balls to ever make a run at a goalie.

[AbNormal27]

I still think it applies ... like puck_it said, it'll take balls to ever make a run at a goalie.

Or a cement head, and we know there's a few of them in the NHL (*paging Jason Doig*).

Aaryn

[apolinar]

Then why isn't there fighting in the NFL? When the score is 40-10 and there's a big hit, that might be considered "uncalled for" and "meaningless" but it happens fairly rarely, and when it does there isn't this disgusting escalation of ugliness.

I've seen it happen in the NFL. You've seen the big hit on the quarterback get retaliated especially in a meaningless game. If that weren't the case, why sit out donovan mcnabb for a whole game before the playoffs? Why do that if intent to injure in a meaningless game is "rare"? When I worked for a high school football team the coach taught his players to hit "as if you wanted to break the opponents ribs on every hit." People expect intent to injure on every play.

Why isn't there fighting in the NFL? because hitting someone with a bare hand on a plastic helmet makes no sense when a fractured hand can mean the end of your career or season, and the inevitable fines make no sense to take the risk. The average "fight" in the NFL comes down to grabbing helmets and pushing around because of the equipment. Also the flow of the game makes it difficult. You could penalize your whole team by delay of game if you try to start a scuffle. There are many guys to stand in and hold you back while the play is dead. In the NHL if you try to break up a scuffle you end up leaving your position and creating an unintended power play. I've seen escalations of ugliness in the NFL. That's why parents are shooting each other in the stands last year. In the NHL you'll see more ugliness with this 5 minute instigator rule. I myself don't see the NFL as this great example of how to control violence and fighting as you do, but don't get me wrong, I do respect your view completely caveman.

Bottom line, in my opinion there are too many unwritten deterrents (broken hand, anger from teammates for penalties) to fighting that make it inconvenient in the NFL, but it still happens despite that.



It goes back to: "respect each other as athletes and respect the game". Where has that spirit gone in the NHL? Why would you light someone up big time when you're up 7-0 or run a goalie in the last five minutes or any other time?

That's the problem. There are the Doig's out there who have no problem putting a knee on knee hit on Kevyn adams and almost ruining his season. If you have made rules that reduce that respect (instigator rule, mandatory helmets, breakaway goals), there has to be another way to keep it up. If the NFL respected each other and the game so much, why is there a steroid problem? The Doigs of the NFL exist too. If that was not a true statement why do we need a rule against helmet to helmet tackles in the NFL?

As far as sending everybody out to cleanly check Crosby -- Crosby can either take the heat or get out of the kitchen, just like a wide receiver going across the middle can either take the hit and go for the ball, or wince up, bring in his hands and protect himself against the free safety and forget the ball. He can stay on the bench, keep his head up, etc, if he doesn't want to get a body check.

So Wayne Gretzky wasn't really that great because of the way he carried his Edmonton protectors with him to LA when he was traded? He couldn't take the heat so should have quit his NHL career? Gretz was constantly getting hacked, hit, etc. If it weren't for protection from his teammates his career wouldn't have lasted as long. It's one thing to go down the middle in the NFL expecting a hard hit because you put yourself there. It's another thing when you are trying to play hockey with someone constantly on you to take you out when you are unprotected when there are no official rules against it. In the NFL it's part of the game to go after the quarterback.

The NFL has similar rules to keep out this "heat". Why did the "In the grasp rule" ever come into being in the past? Because too many people were going after the quarterback and hitting with extra umph when they were in their grasp? Intent to injure even though you knew you were getting a sack? I hate to say it but NFL players will injure within the rules if given the chance too. How many times have you seen a quarterback grabbed by the jersey, then spun around and slammed to the ground when they could just have easily been pulled down on one knee to make the sack? Fortunately for the NFL there's the unneccesary roughness penalty. I'm not sure you can write a specific rule like that in the NHL just because of the nature of the game.

[apolinar]

dreaded Double post

[RIO]

I just caught the last half of ESPN's "Outisde the Lines". Being interviewed were Doug Risebrough (the Minnesota Wild's GM) and Adam Proteau (writer for the Hockey News).

They were asked if they thought fans would come back after the lock-out, and of course they were all "yes and no". Not terribly enlightening. Naturally, the GM was more positive spin than the sports writer who mentioned something about what a blow the baseball lock-out dealt to struggling teams like the Toronto Blue Jays.

They were also asked to discuss their thoughts about the on-ice changes, uneven tv production qualities from city to city, and making the players more accessible by opening their lives up to the fans and putting mics on jerseys during games.

Anyone else watch this?

[StormChaserBH]

I watched... fairly content-free for anyone that's been remotely paying attention. Still nice to hear hockey words coming out from my tee-vee.

[goalie33]

If you have made rules that reduce that respect (instigator rule, mandatory helmets, breakaway goals), there has to be another way to keep it up.

More great points, Art. This reminds me of something that I've always believed and that Coach (our Coach) has talked about at times: facemasks reduce responsibility with the stick. Kids who play now (and guys who come to the NHL out of college) don't pay nearly enough attention to their sticks, because if you wack a kid with a facemask in the mouth, he doesn't get hurt.

Also, let us not forget that hockey is not a gentleman's game, but the self-policing system allows the men who play to keep their game from degenerating into something less than respectable. When you take away the ability to self-police or put it into the hands of people who do not completely understand the ins and outs of the environment (if you will) things can get out of hand rather quickly and in a way one might not expect.

[puck_it]

part of the reason kerry fraiser claims he stopped wearing a helemt is he got careless when he did. He got hit in the head because he wasnt focused as much.

[nccanes]

Tampa already has their ice down. Take a peek to see the new line configuration...

mms://streaming.esnet.com/sptf


So, can anyone tell if they are putting up boards at the RBC? I guess it's still early, but if Tampa is doing it....maybe?

http://www.carolinahurricanes.com/custom/radFD83E.asp

[nccanes]

Tampa already has their ice down. Take a peek to see the new line configuration...

mms://streaming.esnet.com/sptf


So, can anyone tell if they are putting up boards at the RBC? I guess it's still early, but if Tampa is doing it....maybe?

http://www.carolinahurricanes.com/custom/radFD83E.asp

[ssangste]

I don't know what they were doing when I was in there yesterday. Like the picture shows, the boards along the sides were up, but nothing in the corners or in the ends.

thanks for the link to see the new ice....

[ssangste]

I don't know what they were doing when I was in there yesterday. Like the picture shows, the boards along the sides were up, but nothing in the corners or in the ends.

thanks for the link to see the new ice....

[Mona]

Tampa wants that ice down so they can get that banner up in the rafters.. think Vinny will pull the string??

Thanks for the links E... it won't be long.. :)

[Mona]

Tampa wants that ice down so they can get that banner up in the rafters.. think Vinny will pull the string??

Thanks for the links E... it won't be long.. :)

[nccanes]

think Vinny will pull the string??


:lol: TLT can't reach. :evil:

[nccanes]

think Vinny will pull the string??


:lol: TLT can't reach. :evil:

[Mona]

think Vinny will pull the string??


:lol: TLT can't reach. :evil:

I should have known that TLT would creep in to this.. :laugh: Even on a ladder he still couldn't reach it... (mumbles Munchkin turd) :D

[Mona]

think Vinny will pull the string??


:lol: TLT can't reach. :evil:

I should have known that TLT would creep in to this.. :laugh: Even on a ladder he still couldn't reach it... (mumbles Munchkin turd) :D

[goalie33]

I don't know what they were doing when I was in there yesterday. Like the picture shows, the boards along the sides were up, but nothing in the corners or in the ends.

The side boards are always up.

[goalie33]

I don't know what they were doing when I was in there yesterday. Like the picture shows, the boards along the sides were up, but nothing in the corners or in the ends.

The side boards are always up.

[puck_it]

endboards going up :D

http://www.carolinahurricanes.com/images/netcam/roofcam.jpg

[puck_it]

endboards going up :D

http://www.carolinahurricanes.com/images/netcam/roofcam.jpg

[nccanes]

You can see Tampa's current paint job now.

mms://streaming.esnet.com/sptf


Very nice to put a thank you right there on the ice!

Psst. Canes - we don't care if you're original or not, so steal that idea. ;)

[nccanes]

You can see Tampa's current paint job now.

mms://streaming.esnet.com/sptf


Very nice to put a thank you right there on the ice!

Psst. Canes - we don't care if you're original or not, so steal that idea. ;)

[Mona]

You can see Tampa's current paint job now.

mms://streaming.esnet.com/sptf


Very nice to put a thank you right there on the ice!

Psst. Canes - we don't care if you're original or not, so steal that idea. ;)

THAT is freakin awesome.. :spin:

[Mona]

You can see Tampa's current paint job now.

mms://streaming.esnet.com/sptf


Very nice to put a thank you right there on the ice!

Psst. Canes - we don't care if you're original or not, so steal that idea. ;)

THAT is freakin awesome.. :spin:

[nccanes]

Isn't it?? :D

Hee hee -there's a zamboni out there now. What little things impress us these days. I hope we can survive a real game. ;) :lol:

[nccanes]

Isn't it?? :D

Hee hee -there's a zamboni out there now. What little things impress us these days. I hope we can survive a real game. ;) :lol:

[Mona]

Isn't it?? :D

Hee hee -there's a zamboni out there now. What little things impress us these days. I hope we can survive a real game. ;) :lol:

I agree.. I see ice and a Zamboni and I am ready to burst.. I can't even imagine when they give us a taste of our new game beginning on the Jumbotron.. all that.. the running board.. the music... the guys skating out and the crowd roaring........ OMG drop the puck!! :nanner:

[Mona]

Isn't it?? :D

Hee hee -there's a zamboni out there now. What little things impress us these days. I hope we can survive a real game. ;) :lol:

I agree.. I see ice and a Zamboni and I am ready to burst.. I can't even imagine when they give us a taste of our new game beginning on the Jumbotron.. all that.. the running board.. the music... the guys skating out and the crowd roaring........ OMG drop the puck!! :nanner:

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I forgot all about the running board!!

I haven't looked at that TB link. I don't think I can stand to see the ice this soon. Although, I'm planning on making a practice one day next week.....I won't be worth a thing after that. :beatup:

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I forgot all about the running board!!

I haven't looked at that TB link. I don't think I can stand to see the ice this soon. Although, I'm planning on making a practice one day next week.....I won't be worth a thing after that. :beatup:

[canefan2k1]

I think the ice is already down in Tampa for their FANtastic Fridays. http://www.tampabaylightning.com/prdetail.cfm?category=3&pressreleaseID=1104

Pretty cool if you ask me.

[canefan2k1]

I think the ice is already down in Tampa for their FANtastic Fridays. http://www.tampabaylightning.com/prdetail.cfm?category=3&pressreleaseID=1104

Pretty cool if you ask me.

[nccanes]

Very cool!

Wow - what a great idea. I realize they have all the momentum and excitement of being the Cup winners, but all the teams should do somethingl like this, even if it's a smaller scale.

[nccanes]

Very cool!

Wow - what a great idea. I realize they have all the momentum and excitement of being the Cup winners, but all the teams should do somethingl like this, even if it's a smaller scale.

[tommy]

Isn't it?? :D

Hee hee -there's a zamboni out there now. What little things impress us these days. I hope we can survive a real game. ;) :lol:

I agree... Forget scoring, I may just go into cardiac arrest if Erik Cole actually receives a pass and gets by a player of the opposing team. lol. The whole experience will be a cause of much excitement and much chest pain.

[tommy]

Isn't it?? :D

Hee hee -there's a zamboni out there now. What little things impress us these days. I hope we can survive a real game. ;) :lol:

I agree... Forget scoring, I may just go into cardiac arrest if Erik Cole actually receives a pass and gets by a player of the opposing team. lol. The whole experience will be a cause of much excitement and much chest pain.

[canefan2k1]

Vancouver has some pics up on their website. Looks like every team will put the "Thank You Fans" word mark on their ice.

http://www.canucks.com/theinsider/default.asp?sectionID=5&id=1262

[canefan2k1]

Vancouver has some pics up on their website. Looks like every team will put the "Thank You Fans" word mark on their ice.

http://www.canucks.com/theinsider/default.asp?sectionID=5&id=1262

[Turbulence]

I'd prefer "Thanks, y'all" but I'll take it. Interesting move by the NHL to make this mandatory...

[Turbulence]

I'd prefer "Thanks, y'all" but I'll take it. Interesting move by the NHL to make this mandatory...

[goalie33]

They don't paint the graphics in Vancouver. Crazy.

[goalie33]

They don't paint the graphics in Vancouver. Crazy.

[nccanes]

Interesting article about the new equipment. Guess Marty B. gets top priority. ;)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050820/NHLSIDE20/TPSports/Hockey

"It doesn't make a big difference," Brodeur noted this week of the shrinking of protective padding. "Goalies that like to react to pucks won't have a problem.

"Those goalies that block shots, instead of stopping shots, will find it's going to be a little tougher for them, especially in close."

Brodeur plays a reactive style, as does Marty Turco of the Dallas Stars. Roberto Luongo of the Florida Panthers and Jose Theodore of the Montreal Canadiens use butterfly techniques, relying on body positioning and making themselves appear big in the net.

[nccanes]

Interesting article about the new equipment. Guess Marty B. gets top priority. ;)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050820/NHLSIDE20/TPSports/Hockey

"It doesn't make a big difference," Brodeur noted this week of the shrinking of protective padding. "Goalies that like to react to pucks won't have a problem.

"Those goalies that block shots, instead of stopping shots, will find it's going to be a little tougher for them, especially in close."

Brodeur plays a reactive style, as does Marty Turco of the Dallas Stars. Roberto Luongo of the Florida Panthers and Jose Theodore of the Montreal Canadiens use butterfly techniques, relying on body positioning and making themselves appear big in the net.

[goalie33]

A big thing is that Marty has been using the same equipment for fifteen years, so all they had to do was shrink it an inch and send him on his way. Turco, Theodore, and others not only have to get smaller gear made to their specs, but they've also switched models or companies. Itech, for example, had to first clone Theodore's Vaughn pads, then shrink them an inch, then make them fit the visual style of their 11.8 retail line.

[goalie33]

A big thing is that Marty has been using the same equipment for fifteen years, so all they had to do was shrink it an inch and send him on his way. Turco, Theodore, and others not only have to get smaller gear made to their specs, but they've also switched models or companies. Itech, for example, had to first clone Theodore's Vaughn pads, then shrink them an inch, then make them fit the visual style of their 11.8 retail line.

[nccanes]

This made me chuckle:

"Some guys will have problems with the new equipment," Brodeur added. "My pads are 34 inches long and 11 inches wide. Guys that wear 38-inch pads will look really weird."

[nccanes]

This made me chuckle:

"Some guys will have problems with the new equipment," Brodeur added. "My pads are 34 inches long and 11 inches wide. Guys that wear 38-inch pads will look really weird."

[corylav]

really cool article ... thanks nccanes

while the butterfly certainly is a "reflex" style, I wonder how guys like Giggy, who openly teased the five hole only to slam it shut with enormous pads, will fare with the new rules. Giggy's RoboWear is a topic for another time ...

Serously, though ... to me, it seems the floppers (like Hasek) would be least affected. The gigantic stand-up guys will probably suffer the most (Kolzig, Burke, ect.)

Any thoughts from someone in the know?

[corylav]

really cool article ... thanks nccanes

while the butterfly certainly is a "reflex" style, I wonder how guys like Giggy, who openly teased the five hole only to slam it shut with enormous pads, will fare with the new rules. Giggy's RoboWear is a topic for another time ...

Serously, though ... to me, it seems the floppers (like Hasek) would be least affected. The gigantic stand-up guys will probably suffer the most (Kolzig, Burke, ect.)

Any thoughts from someone in the know?

[goalie33]

The part of the butterfly style that closes the five hole doesn't rely on pad width much at all, for a couple of reasons.

First, if the shot is along the ice and your stick positioning is solid, the puck never reaches the pads. Second, the width of the pad only comes into play along the top of the pad when the butterfly is executed properly, and there's double coverage there with the goalie's pants.

The biggest thing I can see happening in this area is not the restriction in pad width, but the change in the pants. Flat thighs on goal pants are no longer allowed, and neither are five hole cheaters that artificially seal the hole long before the legs are closed (providing blocking surface both in the five hole AND on the corners, since having your legs farther apart when fully closed up allows more hip flex and thus wider coverage at the toes). IMO, the only place you'll see more five hole goals is a speedy, well-placed shot above the pads, just between the thighs.

On top of all that, there are two styles of hand placement in the butterfly (passive, where the hands fall down to the pads and the arms seal to make a wall, and active, where the hands stay in the same place from stance to butterfly and come out to meet the puck) that affect coverage, and two modes of implementing the butterfly depending on shot depth (reactive, where you wait for the shot to come before dropping, and blocking, where you go down as soon as the puck is shot). If a goalie is properly positioned, a passive-hands butterfly should have almost the same coverage with smaller pads as it did before, since the idea of the blocking butterfly is to have the puck shot directly into your stomach.

This has been another needlessly complicated essay by goalie33 (my new team only has one goal cut jersey, #35 :().

P.S. Found a pic of Marty in his new pads, but it's 388KB so I'll just link it:

http://img395.imageshack.us/my.php?image=brodeur112fl.jpg

[goalie33]

The part of the butterfly style that closes the five hole doesn't rely on pad width much at all, for a couple of reasons.

First, if the shot is along the ice and your stick positioning is solid, the puck never reaches the pads. Second, the width of the pad only comes into play along the top of the pad when the butterfly is executed properly, and there's double coverage there with the goalie's pants.

The biggest thing I can see happening in this area is not the restriction in pad width, but the change in the pants. Flat thighs on goal pants are no longer allowed, and neither are five hole cheaters that artificially seal the hole long before the legs are closed (providing blocking surface both in the five hole AND on the corners, since having your legs farther apart when fully closed up allows more hip flex and thus wider coverage at the toes). IMO, the only place you'll see more five hole goals is a speedy, well-placed shot above the pads, just between the thighs.

On top of all that, there are two styles of hand placement in the butterfly (passive, where the hands fall down to the pads and the arms seal to make a wall, and active, where the hands stay in the same place from stance to butterfly and come out to meet the puck) that affect coverage, and two modes of implementing the butterfly depending on shot depth (reactive, where you wait for the shot to come before dropping, and blocking, where you go down as soon as the puck is shot). If a goalie is properly positioned, a passive-hands butterfly should have almost the same coverage with smaller pads as it did before, since the idea of the blocking butterfly is to have the puck shot directly into your stomach.

This has been another needlessly complicated essay by goalie33 (my new team only has one goal cut jersey, #35 :().

P.S. Found a pic of Marty in his new pads, but it's 388KB so I'll just link it:

http://img395.imageshack.us/my.php?image=brodeur112fl.jpg

[AbNormal27]

Eagle rips goalie rules

The Eagle is still steaming over the new rule changes to goalies handling the puck, writes the Toronto Sun.

"I think at this level (the rule) is a bit of a joke," a candid Belfour told the Sun. "Maybe some forwards should play with their opposite hand. Or, better yet, play with their sticks upside down. That's what I equate it to,"he said.

"I'm sure the general managers who don't have a puck-handling goaltender were the ones who voted for this rule."

This made me laugh.

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Eagle rips goalie rules

The Eagle is still steaming over the new rule changes to goalies handling the puck, writes the Toronto Sun.

"I think at this level (the rule) is a bit of a joke," a candid Belfour told the Sun. "Maybe some forwards should play with their opposite hand. Or, better yet, play with their sticks upside down. That's what I equate it to,"he said.

"I'm sure the general managers who don't have a puck-handling goaltender were the ones who voted for this rule."

This made me laugh.

Aaryn

[Guyute]

P.S. Found a pic of Marty in his new pads, but it's 388KB so I'll just link it:


wow, those look small. :D

[Guyute]

P.S. Found a pic of Marty in his new pads, but it's 388KB so I'll just link it:


wow, those look small. :D

[Mona]

Belfour's just trying to figure out how he can get pads that hold a can.. :laugh:

[Mona]

Belfour's just trying to figure out how he can get pads that hold a can.. :laugh:

[Cool Hand Luke]

Eagle rips goalie rules

The Eagle is still steaming over the new rule changes to goalies handling the puck, writes the Toronto Sun.

"I think at this level (the rule) is a bit of a joke," a candid Belfour told the Sun. "Maybe some forwards should play with their opposite hand. Or, better yet, play with their sticks upside down. That's what I equate it to,"he said.

"I'm sure the general managers who don't have a puck-handling goaltender were the ones who voted for this rule."

This made me laugh.

Aaryn

Didn't Eddie pull a back muscle last time he played the puck? :evil:

[Cool Hand Luke]

Eagle rips goalie rules

The Eagle is still steaming over the new rule changes to goalies handling the puck, writes the Toronto Sun.

"I think at this level (the rule) is a bit of a joke," a candid Belfour told the Sun. "Maybe some forwards should play with their opposite hand. Or, better yet, play with their sticks upside down. That's what I equate it to,"he said.

"I'm sure the general managers who don't have a puck-handling goaltender were the ones who voted for this rule."

This made me laugh.

Aaryn

Didn't Eddie pull a back muscle last time he played the puck? :evil:

[goalie33]

Speaking of Belfour, here he is in his new 11" pads and form-fitting sweater.

http://www.torontosun.com/PhotoGalleries/Sports/Leafs0824/2005/08/24/belfour400.jpg

[goalie33]

Speaking of Belfour, here he is in his new 11" pads and form-fitting sweater.

http://www.torontosun.com/PhotoGalleries/Sports/Leafs0824/2005/08/24/belfour400.jpg

[corylav]

In keeping with the goalie rule changes ... WTF is this??

Skating billboards

If you thought there was too much advertising already at NHL arenas, there may be a little more.

Sources have told Sportsnet that the NHL is considering placing advertising on goalies' jerseys. They would wear a different coloured jersey than the rest of the team to further stand out on the ice.

[corylav]

In keeping with the goalie rule changes ... WTF is this??

Skating billboards

If you thought there was too much advertising already at NHL arenas, there may be a little more.

Sources have told Sportsnet that the NHL is considering placing advertising on goalies' jerseys. They would wear a different coloured jersey than the rest of the team to further stand out on the ice.

[nccanes]

Yes, because I often confused Irbe with Malik, for example. I'm sure an alternate color/style jersey would help me. :lol:

Soccer does this so the refs can keep track of who is allowed to handle the ball, but nothing but $$$ as far as I can see for hockey goalies. I hope the goalies get to keep some of it, lol!

[nccanes]

Yes, because I often confused Irbe with Malik, for example. I'm sure an alternate color/style jersey would help me. :lol:

Soccer does this so the refs can keep track of who is allowed to handle the ball, but nothing but $$$ as far as I can see for hockey goalies. I hope the goalies get to keep some of it, lol!

[Mona]

Yes, because I often confused Irbe with Malik, for example. I'm sure an alternate color/style jersey would help me. :lol:



You did that too? I thought it was just me.. the physique is so similar. :laugh: I think advertisements on the goalie would be very distracting for both teams.. :crazy:

[Mona]

Yes, because I often confused Irbe with Malik, for example. I'm sure an alternate color/style jersey would help me. :lol:



You did that too? I thought it was just me.. the physique is so similar. :laugh: I think advertisements on the goalie would be very distracting for both teams.. :crazy:

[AbNormal27]

the NHL is considering placing advertising on goalies' jerseys. They would wear a different coloured jersey than the rest of the team to further stand out on the ice.

Dumbest. Idea. EVER!

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

the NHL is considering placing advertising on goalies' jerseys. They would wear a different coloured jersey than the rest of the team to further stand out on the ice.

Dumbest. Idea. EVER!

Aaryn

[goalie33]

Holy crap.

Advertising I can understand, but what doesn't stand out about a guy in ginormous leg pads, gloves, and a full face mask?

[goalie33]

Holy crap.

Advertising I can understand, but what doesn't stand out about a guy in ginormous leg pads, gloves, and a full face mask?

[apolinar]

Game worn goalie jerseys of the past just went up in value if this is true. Values of this year's jerseys just went down.

I'm trying to think of what products would be perfect for a goalie jersey. Deodorant?

[apolinar]

Game worn goalie jerseys of the past just went up in value if this is true. Values of this year's jerseys just went down.

I'm trying to think of what products would be perfect for a goalie jersey. Deodorant?

[corylav]

Game worn goalie jerseys of the past just went up in value if this is true. Values of this year's jerseys just went down.

I'm trying to think of what products would be perfect for a goalie jersey. Deodorant?

good topic ...

Luongo: Suave
Osgood: LensCrafters (for nearsightedness)
Theodore: Jose Cuervo
Kolzig: BMW
Giguere: The latest RoboCop sequel
Aebischer: Swiss Army Knives
Belfour: American Eagle?
Esche: Utica Club beer (he's from Utica :D)
Cechmanek: Rome (on HBO)

Anyone?

[corylav]

Game worn goalie jerseys of the past just went up in value if this is true. Values of this year's jerseys just went down.

I'm trying to think of what products would be perfect for a goalie jersey. Deodorant?

good topic ...

Luongo: Suave
Osgood: LensCrafters (for nearsightedness)
Theodore: Jose Cuervo
Kolzig: BMW
Giguere: The latest RoboCop sequel
Aebischer: Swiss Army Knives
Belfour: American Eagle?
Esche: Utica Club beer (he's from Utica :D)
Cechmanek: Rome (on HBO)

Anyone?

[goalie33]

I'm pretty sure the Suave ad should be on Phil Sauve.

[goalie33]

I'm pretty sure the Suave ad should be on Phil Sauve.

[Mona]

Game worn goalie jerseys of the past just went up in value if this is true. Values of this year's jerseys just went down.

I'm trying to think of what products would be perfect for a goalie jersey. Deodorant?

good topic ...

Theodore

Anyone?

My guess on that would be GQ Magazine.. :faint: :bye: :evil: I think Shady 80 would be a good candidate for that one as well.

How about for Modano... Alpo?? :laugh:

[Mona]

Game worn goalie jerseys of the past just went up in value if this is true. Values of this year's jerseys just went down.

I'm trying to think of what products would be perfect for a goalie jersey. Deodorant?

good topic ...

Theodore

Anyone?

My guess on that would be GQ Magazine.. :faint: :bye: :evil: I think Shady 80 would be a good candidate for that one as well.

How about for Modano... Alpo?? :laugh:

[corylav]

I'm pretty sure the Suave ad should be on Phil Sauve.

fair enough!

[corylav]

I'm pretty sure the Suave ad should be on Phil Sauve.

fair enough!

[StormChaserBH]

Here's our guy.... (sorry for the 3-minute Paint job)
edit - removed whitespace

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/7854/gerber9vp.jpg

[StormChaserBH]

Here's our guy.... (sorry for the 3-minute Paint job)
edit - removed whitespace

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/7854/gerber9vp.jpg

[corylav]

Here's our guy.... (sorry for the 3-minute Paint job)

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/5782/gerber9ja.jpg

LOL!

[corylav]

Here's our guy.... (sorry for the 3-minute Paint job)

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/5782/gerber9ja.jpg

LOL!

[Mona]

Good one SCBH.. :D

[Mona]

Good one SCBH.. :D

[puck_it]

Hasek- Rainbow flip flops

[puck_it]

Hasek- Rainbow flip flops

[AbNormal27]

Wings' Draper hopes 'trap' leaves NHL

Kris Draper hopes new rules and a crackdown on obstruction will erase the neutral zone trap from the NHL lexicon.

"Let's hope we don't hear that word 'trap' anymore," the Detroit Red Wings veteran said Thursday on a conference call. "I think everyone realizes what a negative impact it had on the game.

"It really slowed things down. Teams were successful playing that way, but it didn't lead to exciting hockey."

The NHL has promised higher-scoring, more free-flowing hockey when play resumes Oct. 5 after the 2004-05 season was wiped out by the lockout.

One of the aims is to rid the league of the stifling defensive systems like the dreaded trap that saw top offensive stars more often fighting through traffic at centre ice than making crowd-pleasing dashes to the net.

The league will allow two-line passes for the first time and has pushed nets back and shortened the neutral zone to leave more space to make plays in the attacking zone.

But most importantly, it has promised a real crackdown on hooking, holding and other forms of obstruction that helped make the many forms of trap work.

Draper said the Wings have been working on ways to check opponents without drawing obstruction penalties during their pre-camp workouts, but he knows it will take time to adjust.

"Training camp is going to be a learning experience and I don't think we'll have it all down by the season openers on Oct. 5," he said. "But they're committed to opening up the game, making it more entertaining and letting guys use their talent.

"We have such great athletes in ths sport. Let them skate."

Frustrating for the Red Wings, a powerhouse team before the lockout that is suddenly looking mortal, is that they have likely lost the player who would most benefit from extra skating room - speedy centre Pavel Datsyuk, who has signed to play for Dynamo Moscow in his native Russia.

The Wings were one of the league's highest-paid clubs and had to shed some key veterans to get under the league's new salary cap.

"Not only were we not able to get Pavel signed, we also had to buy out Darren McCarty, Ray Whitney and Derian Hatcher," said Draper. "That's the unfortunate thing about (the cap).

"It handcuffed Detroit. We lost a terrific player and that's a big gap to fill. There's not a lot out there right now. We were able to get Henrik Zetterberg signed, which is a big plus, but you don't replace a guy like Pavel Datsyuk.

"You can look at the Detroit Red Wings now as a model of how teams have been affected by the new CBA,"he added. "That's just how it is."

The puzzle for coaches now will be finding a way to play sound defensive hockey under rules that, on paper at least, favour the attack.

"I don't think they're going to have any choice but to open it up with the way the rules are," added Draper, himself an accomplished checking centre. "Guys who can skate are going to generate a lot of speed through the neutral zone.

"Down low, it's going to be a whole different mindset. The coaches are going to have to coach to the new rules and that's going to make for a lot of changes in philosophy."

Jeremy Roenick, now with the Los Angeles Kings, sounded amused at the headaches the changes may cause Ken Hitchcock, his former coach with the Philadelphia Flyers, or noted defensive coach Jacques Lemaire of the Minnesota Wild.

"I think it's going to be a circus for them," said Roenick. "I know Ken Hitchcock was sitting in his office for the last year and a half trying to come up with a system to defend against the no red line (two-line pass).

"So look for him to come up with something. I know in Minnesota, Jacques is trying to do the same thing. It's interesting to see what's going to work. We're going to have to work in a lot of systems to try to counteract no red line. It's probably going to drive me out of my mind, but they're going to have to find something to counter long-ice passes and guys cheating through centre ice."

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Wings' Draper hopes 'trap' leaves NHL

Kris Draper hopes new rules and a crackdown on obstruction will erase the neutral zone trap from the NHL lexicon.

"Let's hope we don't hear that word 'trap' anymore," the Detroit Red Wings veteran said Thursday on a conference call. "I think everyone realizes what a negative impact it had on the game.

"It really slowed things down. Teams were successful playing that way, but it didn't lead to exciting hockey."

The NHL has promised higher-scoring, more free-flowing hockey when play resumes Oct. 5 after the 2004-05 season was wiped out by the lockout.

One of the aims is to rid the league of the stifling defensive systems like the dreaded trap that saw top offensive stars more often fighting through traffic at centre ice than making crowd-pleasing dashes to the net.

The league will allow two-line passes for the first time and has pushed nets back and shortened the neutral zone to leave more space to make plays in the attacking zone.

But most importantly, it has promised a real crackdown on hooking, holding and other forms of obstruction that helped make the many forms of trap work.

Draper said the Wings have been working on ways to check opponents without drawing obstruction penalties during their pre-camp workouts, but he knows it will take time to adjust.

"Training camp is going to be a learning experience and I don't think we'll have it all down by the season openers on Oct. 5," he said. "But they're committed to opening up the game, making it more entertaining and letting guys use their talent.

"We have such great athletes in ths sport. Let them skate."

Frustrating for the Red Wings, a powerhouse team before the lockout that is suddenly looking mortal, is that they have likely lost the player who would most benefit from extra skating room - speedy centre Pavel Datsyuk, who has signed to play for Dynamo Moscow in his native Russia.

The Wings were one of the league's highest-paid clubs and had to shed some key veterans to get under the league's new salary cap.

"Not only were we not able to get Pavel signed, we also had to buy out Darren McCarty, Ray Whitney and Derian Hatcher," said Draper. "That's the unfortunate thing about (the cap).

"It handcuffed Detroit. We lost a terrific player and that's a big gap to fill. There's not a lot out there right now. We were able to get Henrik Zetterberg signed, which is a big plus, but you don't replace a guy like Pavel Datsyuk.

"You can look at the Detroit Red Wings now as a model of how teams have been affected by the new CBA,"he added. "That's just how it is."

The puzzle for coaches now will be finding a way to play sound defensive hockey under rules that, on paper at least, favour the attack.

"I don't think they're going to have any choice but to open it up with the way the rules are," added Draper, himself an accomplished checking centre. "Guys who can skate are going to generate a lot of speed through the neutral zone.

"Down low, it's going to be a whole different mindset. The coaches are going to have to coach to the new rules and that's going to make for a lot of changes in philosophy."

Jeremy Roenick, now with the Los Angeles Kings, sounded amused at the headaches the changes may cause Ken Hitchcock, his former coach with the Philadelphia Flyers, or noted defensive coach Jacques Lemaire of the Minnesota Wild.

"I think it's going to be a circus for them," said Roenick. "I know Ken Hitchcock was sitting in his office for the last year and a half trying to come up with a system to defend against the no red line (two-line pass).

"So look for him to come up with something. I know in Minnesota, Jacques is trying to do the same thing. It's interesting to see what's going to work. We're going to have to work in a lot of systems to try to counteract no red line. It's probably going to drive me out of my mind, but they're going to have to find something to counter long-ice passes and guys cheating through centre ice."

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Goaltenders confident they'll adjust

NHL goaltenders have tried their new, slimmed-down equipment and say it won't make much difference in games.

Of course, no one will know for sure until NHL shooters begin firing pucks in earnest at goaltenders wearing narrower pads and smaller gloves, chest protectors, pants and even jerseys.

But rules changes enacted July 22 to put more offence in the sport should at least end the era of bloated goalies blocking most of the net with oversize gear.

''I guess the shooters will see a little more,'' St. Louis Blues goalie Patrick Lalime said this week. ''It's been a bit of an adjustment, but I don't think it will be that much of a factor.

''I'm glad they didn't go for the bigger nets, which would have been a really big adjustment for us,'' he added.

Compared to the gaping nets - some nearly twice the size of the current four-feet by six-feet cage - that general managers were considering last spring, the restrictions on equipment size seem a moderate change.

Goaltenders have been receiving new pads from manufacturers in recent weeks and trying them out in informal workouts.

Lalime had his pads, catching glove and blocker, but had yet to receive his new pants and chest protector.

ÂÂ*''One thing is that we'll be a little lighter, a little faster,'' he said.

Goaltender's pads have been narrowed from 12 inches to 11 inches, and limits were set on the size of all other equipment.

Marty Turco of the Dallas Stars said smaller pads haven't changed how he positions himself in the net, but admits that ''every once in a while, where I used to make a save, the puck might glance off me or go in the net.

''I'll blame that on smaller equipment when I get into the regular season.''

Martin Brodeur of the New Jersey Devils, widely considered the league's top goaltender, didn't wear overly bulky equipment before and actually welcomed size limits.

''It's a level playing field now and definitely people will see a difference in how goalies look in the net,'' said Brodeur. ''How they'll play, I don't know.''

New rules also prevent goaltenders from skating into the corners to trap pucks dumped into the zone. Playing the puck behind the goal line will be limited to a trapezoid-shaped area that reaches 28 feet wide along the end boards. Goalies who play the puck outside that area will receive a two-minute delay of game penalty.

Brodeur was irked at that restraint. He and Turco are among the league's best at firing pucks out of their zone.

''This is a skill I worked on all my life,'' Brodeur said. ''A lot of goalies have worked on it and now it's been taken away from us, so it's tough to take.

''But we'll have to adjust and the better goalies will make the adjustment and make it work for themselves. Now there will be no red line, so we'll be able to make passes all the way to the other blue-line, so that's a positive.''

Actually, there will still be a red line on the ice, but two-line passes across it will no longer be whistled as offside.

Brodeur said restricting puck-handling by goalies will be toughest on the defencemen, who will risk taking major hits from onrushing forwards when they skate back to the corners to collect the puck.

''Goalies can't help them out any more, so you'll see a lot more banging and maybe your top defencemen getting hurt,'' he said.

Brodeur got to try one of the new shrunken goaltenders' jerseys while at camp with the Canadian Olympic team this summer and said it wasn't a problem.

''It was a little tighter, but it was flexible so it didn't restrain us at all,'' he said. ''I haven't seen the NHL one yet, but if it's similar to the once we had with Team Canada, I don't see it beingÂÂ* a problem.

''I think the players will like it because they can see the body of the goalie and not just loose material.''

Changes were not confined to goaltending as the NHL strives to make games more entertaining after the 2004-05 season was erased by a lockout.

As well as allowing two-line passes, the attacking zones have been made four feet longer by pushed the nets back and shrinking the neutral zone. And the league has promised to crack down on hooking, holding and other forms of obstruction.

All together, the changes sound like a nightmare for goalies, but Brodeur is not worried.

''We'll get more shots, but I don't know if we'll get more quality shots,'' he said. ''Making the offensive zone bigger, with less space behind the net, is going to create a lot of space on the outside.

''A good defensive team will play the house system, as they call it, and you'll get more shots - offensive players will get more time to make plays - but it will be hard to get good shots on net.

''We have to give it a chance,'' he added. ''I'm excited about all the changes the NHL made to make the game more exciting.''

And if reports are true they may start selling advertising space on goaltenders' jerseys?

''If I get a cut, it's not bad,'' Brodeur said.

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Goaltenders confident they'll adjust

NHL goaltenders have tried their new, slimmed-down equipment and say it won't make much difference in games.

Of course, no one will know for sure until NHL shooters begin firing pucks in earnest at goaltenders wearing narrower pads and smaller gloves, chest protectors, pants and even jerseys.

But rules changes enacted July 22 to put more offence in the sport should at least end the era of bloated goalies blocking most of the net with oversize gear.

''I guess the shooters will see a little more,'' St. Louis Blues goalie Patrick Lalime said this week. ''It's been a bit of an adjustment, but I don't think it will be that much of a factor.

''I'm glad they didn't go for the bigger nets, which would have been a really big adjustment for us,'' he added.

Compared to the gaping nets - some nearly twice the size of the current four-feet by six-feet cage - that general managers were considering last spring, the restrictions on equipment size seem a moderate change.

Goaltenders have been receiving new pads from manufacturers in recent weeks and trying them out in informal workouts.

Lalime had his pads, catching glove and blocker, but had yet to receive his new pants and chest protector.

ÂÂ*''One thing is that we'll be a little lighter, a little faster,'' he said.

Goaltender's pads have been narrowed from 12 inches to 11 inches, and limits were set on the size of all other equipment.

Marty Turco of the Dallas Stars said smaller pads haven't changed how he positions himself in the net, but admits that ''every once in a while, where I used to make a save, the puck might glance off me or go in the net.

''I'll blame that on smaller equipment when I get into the regular season.''

Martin Brodeur of the New Jersey Devils, widely considered the league's top goaltender, didn't wear overly bulky equipment before and actually welcomed size limits.

''It's a level playing field now and definitely people will see a difference in how goalies look in the net,'' said Brodeur. ''How they'll play, I don't know.''

New rules also prevent goaltenders from skating into the corners to trap pucks dumped into the zone. Playing the puck behind the goal line will be limited to a trapezoid-shaped area that reaches 28 feet wide along the end boards. Goalies who play the puck outside that area will receive a two-minute delay of game penalty.

Brodeur was irked at that restraint. He and Turco are among the league's best at firing pucks out of their zone.

''This is a skill I worked on all my life,'' Brodeur said. ''A lot of goalies have worked on it and now it's been taken away from us, so it's tough to take.

''But we'll have to adjust and the better goalies will make the adjustment and make it work for themselves. Now there will be no red line, so we'll be able to make passes all the way to the other blue-line, so that's a positive.''

Actually, there will still be a red line on the ice, but two-line passes across it will no longer be whistled as offside.

Brodeur said restricting puck-handling by goalies will be toughest on the defencemen, who will risk taking major hits from onrushing forwards when they skate back to the corners to collect the puck.

''Goalies can't help them out any more, so you'll see a lot more banging and maybe your top defencemen getting hurt,'' he said.

Brodeur got to try one of the new shrunken goaltenders' jerseys while at camp with the Canadian Olympic team this summer and said it wasn't a problem.

''It was a little tighter, but it was flexible so it didn't restrain us at all,'' he said. ''I haven't seen the NHL one yet, but if it's similar to the once we had with Team Canada, I don't see it beingÂÂ* a problem.

''I think the players will like it because they can see the body of the goalie and not just loose material.''

Changes were not confined to goaltending as the NHL strives to make games more entertaining after the 2004-05 season was erased by a lockout.

As well as allowing two-line passes, the attacking zones have been made four feet longer by pushed the nets back and shrinking the neutral zone. And the league has promised to crack down on hooking, holding and other forms of obstruction.

All together, the changes sound like a nightmare for goalies, but Brodeur is not worried.

''We'll get more shots, but I don't know if we'll get more quality shots,'' he said. ''Making the offensive zone bigger, with less space behind the net, is going to create a lot of space on the outside.

''A good defensive team will play the house system, as they call it, and you'll get more shots - offensive players will get more time to make plays - but it will be hard to get good shots on net.

''We have to give it a chance,'' he added. ''I'm excited about all the changes the NHL made to make the game more exciting.''

And if reports are true they may start selling advertising space on goaltenders' jerseys?

''If I get a cut, it's not bad,'' Brodeur said.

Aaryn

[Shell]

great article. thanks for posting.. Brodeur is definitely one of my favorite players.

[Shell]

great article. thanks for posting.. Brodeur is definitely one of my favorite players.

[Turbulence]

great article. thanks for posting.. Brodeur is definitely one of my favorite players.
I agree. He's always seemed like a great guy. And I like the attitude that he has about the changes going on.

He's been the league's best goalie at least since Roy left the game, maybe longer...and he's done it all with normal-sized pads. That says alot about the guy and his skill when Garth Snow wears his elephantitis pads and still isn't very good.

[Turbulence]

great article. thanks for posting.. Brodeur is definitely one of my favorite players.
I agree. He's always seemed like a great guy. And I like the attitude that he has about the changes going on.

He's been the league's best goalie at least since Roy left the game, maybe longer...and he's done it all with normal-sized pads. That says alot about the guy and his skill when Garth Snow wears his elephantitis pads and still isn't very good.

[puckin_A]

Wings' Draper hopes 'trap' leaves NHL


I do too...for our sake.....if we are not going to have a trapping team...we don't need other teams to take us out with it.

[puckin_A]

Wings' Draper hopes 'trap' leaves NHL


I do too...for our sake.....if we are not going to have a trapping team...we don't need other teams to take us out with it.

[goalie33]

For those of you still interested in the new goalie equipment, there's a little video on tsn.ca under "audio/video" called Goalie Police that shows the process all the gear is going through.

[goalie33]

For those of you still interested in the new goalie equipment, there's a little video on tsn.ca under "audio/video" called Goalie Police that shows the process all the gear is going through.

[AbNormal27]

Goalies no longer take loss in overtime

Goalies are having to make do with smaller equipment and restrictions on where they can play the puck this season. But they have caught a break with the NHL's new standings format.

For five seasons, starting with 1999-2000, goalies were tagged with a loss in their personal record whether it was a loss in regulation time or overtime. But the two were differentiated in the team standings, with a separate ''OTL'' section since overtime losses carried a point.

Goalies didn't think that was fair.

''I remember the last season that we played, I think I had 19 wins and 15 losses on my record, but a number of those losses in overtime,'' Minnesota Wild goalie Dwayne Roloson said Monday.

But with the advent of the shootout, the NHL has revamped its standings format yet again and this time goalies' personal records will reflect that of their team.

There will be no tie games with the introduction of the shootout this season. Instead, the NHL will record standings under three columns: W (wins), L (losses in regulation time) and OT (overtime and shootout losses).

Goalies will also carry the three-column record.

''It's good that the overtime losses are separate,'' star netminder Jose Theodore of the Canadiens said Monday in Montreal. ''I always said that, as a goalie, it was always frustrating to lose in OT. But overall, a loss or a win doesn't matter, we just want that extra point. At the end of the year, those might be big points.''

Said Roloson: ''That'll balance out the guys' records instead of having wins and a huge amount of losses because we lose in overtime. This will give a more fair understanding of what the goalies have been doing for their team and amongst the league.''

If Martin Biron had his way, the NHL would do even more to fix the oversight.

''Personally I think they should go back five years and change everything so that every overtime loss is re-adjusted and taken out of our personal stats,'' the Buffalo Sabres goalie said Monday. ''At least it's fair now. As a goalie you pride yourself on trying to be at a certain level of competitiveness.

''When you look at some guys' win-loss statistics sometimes, it doesn't truly represent what he did for his team.''

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

Goalies no longer take loss in overtime

Goalies are having to make do with smaller equipment and restrictions on where they can play the puck this season. But they have caught a break with the NHL's new standings format.

For five seasons, starting with 1999-2000, goalies were tagged with a loss in their personal record whether it was a loss in regulation time or overtime. But the two were differentiated in the team standings, with a separate ''OTL'' section since overtime losses carried a point.

Goalies didn't think that was fair.

''I remember the last season that we played, I think I had 19 wins and 15 losses on my record, but a number of those losses in overtime,'' Minnesota Wild goalie Dwayne Roloson said Monday.

But with the advent of the shootout, the NHL has revamped its standings format yet again and this time goalies' personal records will reflect that of their team.

There will be no tie games with the introduction of the shootout this season. Instead, the NHL will record standings under three columns: W (wins), L (losses in regulation time) and OT (overtime and shootout losses).

Goalies will also carry the three-column record.

''It's good that the overtime losses are separate,'' star netminder Jose Theodore of the Canadiens said Monday in Montreal. ''I always said that, as a goalie, it was always frustrating to lose in OT. But overall, a loss or a win doesn't matter, we just want that extra point. At the end of the year, those might be big points.''

Said Roloson: ''That'll balance out the guys' records instead of having wins and a huge amount of losses because we lose in overtime. This will give a more fair understanding of what the goalies have been doing for their team and amongst the league.''

If Martin Biron had his way, the NHL would do even more to fix the oversight.

''Personally I think they should go back five years and change everything so that every overtime loss is re-adjusted and taken out of our personal stats,'' the Buffalo Sabres goalie said Monday. ''At least it's fair now. As a goalie you pride yourself on trying to be at a certain level of competitiveness.

''When you look at some guys' win-loss statistics sometimes, it doesn't truly represent what he did for his team.''

Aaryn

[puck_it]

AH HA! it has resurfaced. i saw something like this the day the NHL returned. then saw nothing about it again. do you have a link for this stroy Aaryn? theres someone i want to send it to.

[puck_it]

AH HA! it has resurfaced. i saw something like this the day the NHL returned. then saw nothing about it again. do you have a link for this stroy Aaryn? theres someone i want to send it to.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

AH HA! it has resurfaced. i saw something like this the day the NHL returned. then saw nothing about it again. do you have a link for this stroy Aaryn? theres someone i want to send it to.

I'm not Aaryn but I saw this one this morning myself....
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=136913

[SouthernHockeyChick]

AH HA! it has resurfaced. i saw something like this the day the NHL returned. then saw nothing about it again. do you have a link for this stroy Aaryn? theres someone i want to send it to.

I'm not Aaryn but I saw this one this morning myself....
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=136913

[puck_it]

i suppose youll do SHC ;)

[puck_it]

i suppose youll do SHC ;)

[AbNormal27]

NHL considering new goalie jerseys

The new National Hockey League is considering yet another major change in time for the start of this regular season.

TSN has learned that all 30 NHL franchises received new jerseys Friday for their goaltenders and while it's a longshot,ÂÂ*fans could see them in game action on opening night.

The shirts are streamlined in a continued effort to reduce the amount of net they cover, and maybe even more significantly, they are different in colour and pattern like goalkeeper jerseys in soccer and would not match the rest of the team.

Talk of the new sweaters began at the general managers' meetings in Detroit as discussions surrounded the reduction in size of goalie equipment. They left with a consensus to reduce gloves, blockers and pads and the manufacturers would look into creating a more streamlined sweater. The manufacturers made it clear that the tigher version would not look like the teams current sweaters, but the NHL gave them the green light to proceed anyway.

The arrival of the sweaters Friday morning was met with mixed reaction.

Some franchises reacted quite positively, recognizing the marketing potentional in creating a "goalie sweater" taking a page from the huge success of soccer. However, there's been plenty of negative reaction as well.

A number of general managers are arguiung that there has already been so much change to the game that this would be too much, too soon, not to mention the fact that goalies will have little or not time to get used to playing in the new sweater.

"It may be too late to introduce the new steamlined sweater in time for this season," an NHL official told TSN.

"But rest assured, it is coming."

It isn't the first time this year that hockey jerseys have been re-designed dramatically.

In August, Canada's Olympic and world junior teams received new jerseys designed to be cooler, lighter and make the players faster.

Aaryn

[AbNormal27]

NHL considering new goalie jerseys

The new National Hockey League is considering yet another major change in time for the start of this regular season.

TSN has learned that all 30 NHL franchises received new jerseys Friday for their goaltenders and while it's a longshot,ÂÂ*fans could see them in game action on opening night.

The shirts are streamlined in a continued effort to reduce the amount of net they cover, and maybe even more significantly, they are different in colour and pattern like goalkeeper jerseys in soccer and would not match the rest of the team.

Talk of the new sweaters began at the general managers' meetings in Detroit as discussions surrounded the reduction in size of goalie equipment. They left with a consensus to reduce gloves, blockers and pads and the manufacturers would look into creating a more streamlined sweater. The manufacturers made it clear that the tigher version would not look like the teams current sweaters, but the NHL gave them the green light to proceed anyway.

The arrival of the sweaters Friday morning was met with mixed reaction.

Some franchises reacted quite positively, recognizing the marketing potentional in creating a "goalie sweater" taking a page from the huge success of soccer. However, there's been plenty of negative reaction as well.

A number of general managers are arguiung that there has already been so much change to the game that this would be too much, too soon, not to mention the fact that goalies will have little or not time to get used to playing in the new sweater.

"It may be too late to introduce the new steamlined sweater in time for this season," an NHL official told TSN.

"But rest assured, it is coming."

It isn't the first time this year that hockey jerseys have been re-designed dramatically.

In August, Canada's Olympic and world junior teams received new jerseys designed to be cooler, lighter and make the players faster.

Aaryn

[goalie33]

I completely understand the idea behind streamlining the sweaters, and even making them stretchy (though goalies will look super-weird, since even small arm blocks are rectangular and will make them look like robots), but there is absolutely no reason for them to be a different color. In soccer, it makes perfect sense. Aside from some thick latex gloves, a goalie in a mass of bodies doesn't look any different than a defender, so a different jersey is necessary to aid the referee. The ginormous equipment on a hockey goalie makes that extra distinction unneccesary.

[goalie33]

I completely understand the idea behind streamlining the sweaters, and even making them stretchy (though goalies will look super-weird, since even small arm blocks are rectangular and will make them look like robots), but there is absolutely no reason for them to be a different color. In soccer, it makes perfect sense. Aside from some thick latex gloves, a goalie in a mass of bodies doesn't look any different than a defender, so a different jersey is necessary to aid the referee. The ginormous equipment on a hockey goalie makes that extra distinction unneccesary.