PDA

View Full Version : N.h.l. - R.i.p.



Rocketboy
02-16-2005, 11:17 PM
As much as I love hockey, and the cancellation of the rest season was no surprise, it still ticks me off.
:frus:
Millionaires fighting millionaires.


*sigh*
:(

Kidhuman
02-16-2005, 11:18 PM
I agree, the owners are a bunch of tanks for this one. Hopefully they can get their shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtuff together in time for next year.Lord Stanley is turning over in his grave...

JetsAndHeels
02-16-2005, 11:30 PM
This is the first time a professional sports league has cancelled a season due to a labor dispute.
Also the first time a professional sports league has cancelled a season since the flu epidemic of 1919.
Welcome to the history books, NHL.
It is truly a sad day.

CaptainSolo1138
02-16-2005, 11:50 PM
ESPNews was showing a "What could've been" -type montage today. I'll be damned if I didn't start tearing up! It's hard to believe that when your talking the sick amounts of money they are, six million dollars couldn't be overcome somehow. What REALLY ticks me off is the greed involved. The cap that was offered by the NHL was (correct me if I'm wrong) $52 million. That was higher than the payroll of 70% of NHL teams. That means that the other 30% (teams including Detroit, Toronto, New York, and Philadelphia to name a few) ruined it for everyone (I don't believe that an expansion team like Atlanta would balk at 52 million, do you?). What I hated was every "zero-hour meeting" between the owners and players. Barry Melrose said it best: "I've felt like a toilet seat the last few days: up and down and up and down". Even after Gary Bettman's punk @$$ called the season, Darren "thank God for broadcasting" Pang was speculating that the NHLPA might give in during their press conference. Gimme a break. Let it go. These greedy bastards don't talk for monthes, yet people expected them to get it together in a week?! The NHL expanded too fast (*cough*Nashville Predators,Atlanta Thrashers, Minnesota Wild*cough*) and now they're paying for it. In a sense it serves them right. It sucks that we pay for it along with them.

jjreason
02-17-2005, 01:44 AM
In my opinion, everyone involved in the NHL has had delusions of grandeur since the league expanded past 21 teams. Pitching in baseball is a little thin because of the number of teams - well hockey is the exact same way AT EVERY POSITION. I think this will serve the game well in the long run (the GAME, not the fans, just the on-ice NHL product) if it leads to a rule review/changes and possibly contraction. I see a well-marketed league of 24 teams as a very viable option provided they all learn to live within their means. Revenue sharing IS a must (the league needs 6 teams above the border), I don't think a salary cap is. I like the Red Wings, and I have no problem with some of their revenue helping a team like Calgary with die-hard hockey fans get by. I don't want the money going to the Hurricanes or Florida Panthers knowing that no one down there gives a crap. Hockey is a great and beautiful game. Those who don't care to support it don't deserve teams anyhow. Review the rules, contract the league, get a collective deal done and drop the puck on time next year. I know none of this will happen, but it's a nice daydream.

CaptainSolo1138
02-17-2005, 11:24 AM
I don't want the money going to the Hurricanes or Florida Panthers knowing that no one down there gives a crap.
That's a big problem. All of these cities want an NHL team for economic reasons (i.e. bringing in tourists during tourism off season) and a championship. The Florida Panthers set the bar WAY too high when they made the finals in their second year. Now every Nashville, Atlanta, and Phoenix EXPECTS that type of performance. When the team doesn't deliver (read: plays how a typical expanion team does) the fans run away in droves and take their money with them. I'm not totally sold on revenue sharing. The only teams I'd like to see it help is the Canadian teams (we took their game, we might as well give them some of the money :D ), but unfortunately most of their teams have migrated (for the most part unsuccessfully) to the US already. Also, when your live in a state and are a fan of one of the top three or four NHL teams revenue sharing isn't such a hot idea. You don't go to a Wings, Avalanche, Flyers, or Devils game to donate. You go to see your team play, not help get the Penguins dig out of their financial hole.

Kidhuman
02-17-2005, 11:26 AM
Plain and simple...a luxury tax, just like baseball, it helps everyone out. If the owners wanna build a monster squad, have em pay for it....

CaptainSolo1138
02-17-2005, 11:28 AM
I couldn't agree more, KH. It obviously hasn't hurt the Yankees :rolleyes:

Kidhuman
02-17-2005, 11:40 AM
Exactly, put rules in place that are meant to be broken with a punishment:

We have a salary capof 35 million....you can go over but you willbe penalized..Rangers, Devils, Rockies Refd Wings, Blues, all the big market teams willhave to cough up some dough, but it willalso make them watch what they are doing and therefore, hopefully balance out the league with talent. Contraction isnt a bad idea also...

Vortex
02-17-2005, 12:12 PM
The NHL expanded too fast (*cough*Nashville Predators,Atlanta Thrashers, Minnesota Wild*cough*)


Dude, knocking the Wild, that's just a personal attack:)...Minnesota has always been a hot bed for Hockey. Need I remind you of the coach and bulk of the team who won gold in 80??? Our entire state shuts down for the High School Hockey tourney and the high school state playoffs pulls in more fans than pro games. Gee...lets see...we have how many D-I college hockey schools in this state??? Minnesota is the STATE of hockey.

Anyways, to be honest the Minnesota North Stars never should have been allowed to move to Dallas, Norm priced the tickets beyond reach for the average joe and wanted a new rink...on tax payers dime, when he's pulling in millions and millions on expensive tickets and advertising. He wanted us to pad his wallet and give him more money by shelling out for a new rink. Add in the fact that he was trying to beat a sex scandle and he wanted to get the heck out of town to make the lawsuit go away. Minnesota never should have lost a team, and the NHL never should have supported a move to Texas.

Same can be said for the old Nordiques, Whalers, and Jets. The Whalers and Jets moved down into the sunbelt...where the respect for hockey and understanding just isn't there. If this issue, and money problems would have been address years ago, when clubs were struggling the NHL wouldn't be in this situation.

I was more ticked at the changing of the names of the conferences, divisions and then this North America vs World all star crap.

Pro sports paychecks are way outta line these days anyways. When a 4th line player gets 2-3 mill just to sign, barely plays or sits in the minors for years, and still rakes in the money, the sport has a problem. All this guarenteed money is a joke no wonder clubs claim they are loosing money, its stupid stuff like this that gets them in trouble. I'm at the point where if this strike goes on for 2-3 years, I'd be fine letting the over paid players and greedy owners sit and think about what they had, and let teams fold.

Slicker
02-17-2005, 12:31 PM
Besides, the NHL can hardly afford to lose so many loyal fans by them locking out. The NHL is far behind the other 3 big sports in fan base and this strike/lockout can only damage there reputation as the last not-as-high paying sport.

CaptainSolo1138
02-17-2005, 12:45 PM
Dude, knocking the Wild, that's just a personal attack:)...Minnesota has always been a hot bed for Hockey.
I couldn't agree more, but my opinion still stands that the NHL expanded too quickly. It's not where they went as much as it was the principle. If you can't afford the kids you have, don't have any more.

Rocketboy
02-17-2005, 04:11 PM
I think one of the NHL's biggest problems was the 1990's. Hockey saw a big explosion in popularity in mid to late 90's, which lead to the unnecessary expansion and caused salaries and ticket prices to go up. When the bottom fell out and many of the newer fans went away, revenues went down, but the players kept the same salaries, leaving the teams and the league in financial trouble. The players need to be realistic. The NHL is no way close any of the other big leagues, but they seem to be dillusional and think they are worth $8 million a year contracts.

I'm on the NHL's side of this issue. If the players really wanted to play hockey, this thing would be settled and they'd have been on the ice months ago. They seem to be happy to be playing for relative peanuts in the minors and overseas, so why not agree to a cap?

Not sure how legal it would be, but I say the NHL should ignore the NHLPA and start fresh. Install a salary cap and hold open tryouts.

DarthBrandon
02-17-2005, 08:25 PM
Ah the NHL, where does one start with this mess, I guess the NHL itself & the owners. Like others have said, they expanded way too fast & caused a riff on its semi sailing wave of success. The owners on the other hand have pardon the pun screwed the pooch on just about every level. They created these large salaries all on their own. Are the players greedy, no not entirely, but they are not stupid either. If owner B wants to pay you 5 million over the next two years & owner C wants to pay you 8 million over the next two years, who are you going to sign with. It's a no brainer unless you really love the team & organization that owner B has to offer. Nine times out of ten the player will choose team C because of the extra money. Are they greedy, no just doing what everyone else in sports does, taking a larger piece of the pie. Do they make too much money? Yes, but they are underpaid compared to the other leagues out there (Basketball & Baseball).
The way I look at it, if Iím paying someone 180 million over the course of ten years they better learn how to fly because thatís what Iíll expect for my money. Sports is a crazy business & Iím not buying the NHLís whines this time around, they screwed up, they should fix it, not the players. The players tried many times to get something reasonable going on the table & all the NHL could say was CAP or take a hike. The final salary cap the league offered was around 42.5 million & the players wanted 49 million a difference of 6.5 million. This means that teams can only spend 42.5 million, therefore reducing the salaries of superstars & the average player. If youíre a player whoís worked hard & earned a good salary you donít want that to happen, if youíre a future player you definitely donít want that to happen. Bottom line the NHL should have took the 49 million offer along with profit sharing but this is an ego thing & it wonít be resolved anytime soon I believe. They had a whole summer to rectify this & look what happened when both sides met or how few they did. You can bet the rest of the leagues are watching closely on this one to see how it pans out for the future of the game. IMHO itís hurt the game for good in a lot of major cities. :cry:

Rocketboy
02-18-2005, 10:37 PM
It's probably a bunch of nonsense, but Yahoo! (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=565&ncid=755&e=1&u=/ap/20050219/ap_on_sp_ho_ne/hkn_nhl_lockout) says that the season could still be saved.

There might be an NHL season, after all. The NHL and the players' association will meet in New York on Saturday after the league requested the sides get together again. On Wednesday, commissioner Gary Bettman canceled the season, saying it was too late to play any semblance of a schedule. That made the NHL the first major North American sports league to lose a full season to a labor dispute.

Or did it?

"I think the timing has always been to get an agreement so that we can play," said New Jersey Devils president Lou Lamoriello, who has taken part in previous negotiations. "Right now, it's still get an agreement, and then if we get an agreement, then can we play?

"I think it's a little different than it was before."

In a statement released Friday night, the players' association said the NHL made the offer late Thursday night to get together. There was no immediate word on who would take part in the meeting.

"The way everything has transpired, nothing surprises me," said Lamoriello, who declined to say whether he would be in attendance.

NHL chief legal officer Bill Daly was involved in a closed-door meeting Friday evening and declined to comment.

There hadn't been any official contact between the NHL and the players' association since Tuesday night ó when the sides traded what they said were final offers.

All proposals were rejected, and Bettman went ahead and canceled the season Wednesday at a news conference that was scheduled two days earlier.

"I don't think anything was premature. It was a necessity," Lamoriello said. "It didn't appear to be going anywhere and there was too much jockeying going on.

"Right now, there's a chance of people getting down to possibly getting this done."

Bettman said in a letter to NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow on Tuesday that the league's salary-cap proposal of $42.5 million was as far as he could go and that there was no time or flexibility for negotiation.

Goodenow sent a letter back, proposing a soft cap at $49 million that could be exceeded by as much as 10 percent by teams twice during the course of the six-year deal.

It appeared there was momentum toward reaching a deal and that the season had a chance to be saved, since the sides were only $6.5 million apart on their cap numbers. But talking ceased after each side sent two letters to the other on Tuesday night.

There were big breakthroughs Monday in Niagara Falls, N.Y., when the NHL agreed to drop its demand that player costs be linked to league revenues, and the union, in turn, came off its steadfast opposition to a salary cap.

"We got through the philosophical end of it, so there's a better chance, but I think there is still a lot of work that has to be done and it still takes some ti Read the rest at the link.

Kidhuman
02-18-2005, 10:46 PM
I think this season is shot. BUt what they need to do is get a CBA for next season so this crud doesnt happen again. ANd with the NBA CBA up at the end of the season, I hope they are taking notes on what not to do.

Edit. ESPN is reporting an agreement in principle right now....

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=1994750

mabudonicus
02-19-2005, 09:35 AM
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1845&ncid=737&e=1&u=/cpress/20050219/ca_pr_on_na/nhl_lockout
then there's this
I hate to admit it, but I'm still hopeful, the Leafs could easily win the False Cup and I have to admit, I wouldn't care how thought what about it......

And at this new meeting Lemieux and the big G will be at the table..... I think the earnest face of the Greatest one will shine once more
(PS I know, I know, poor dumb Leafs fan :beard: but I'm still convinced that this is our year :D)

InsaneJediGirl
02-19-2005, 11:49 AM
Now I realise why I watch college football :D

I have to agree,non-hockey crazy cities,especially here in the South are useless.No one goes because hockey isnt the preffered sport around here.Perhaps they need to close some teams and "re-group" during the strike.

CaptainSolo1138
02-19-2005, 03:17 PM
Until the puck actually drops, I believe none of it. I don't understand how the agreed salary cap got so low. And as far as competition goes this year, we could all be screwed (you included, mab!!). It's gonna be such a patheticly short season that all it's gonna take is a hot streak for someone like the Blackhawks or Coyotes to win the False Cup. And on the other hand, it's gonna take a small cold streak for teams like the Red Wings and *GASP* Leafs :p to miss the playoffs altogether.

Slicker
02-19-2005, 05:13 PM
I don't like how they're going to do a shortened season if it gets going. It could be possible for the bottom of the barrel team to win the cup. It'd be like baseball going on strike then having a short season and the Tigers winning it all.

JetsAndHeels
02-19-2005, 05:28 PM
I agree with Slicker..I do not see what possible good could come out of the NHL starting a season up in Feb/March....Plus take into account the amount of interest lost by fans during the lockout. Is it possible for the NHL to have the same fanbase and following after such a labor dispute?

Kidhuman
02-19-2005, 10:57 PM
The only good thing to come of a shortened season is the rule changes. They want to try some stuff out like eliminating the nuetral zone trap and removing the red line. It gives a good oppurtunity for it.

Slicker
03-24-2005, 01:46 PM
Just an update. Now that the season is cancelled they have also cancelled the June draft. So because the two sides couldn't come to an agreement these kids that had hopes of playing in the NHL have to wait at least another year. Link. (http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl)

Vortex
03-24-2005, 01:50 PM
That's actually some what good. I'm a big college hockey supporter and maybe this will keep some of the good Sophs and Juniors at school for at least another year.

I hate it when they follow the cash and bolt after a year in a college program.

Darth Jax
03-24-2005, 08:01 PM
seems the ol NFL is having similar difficulties in negotiations as well. least their agreement isn't up til 2008 so they have some time to hash it out and avoid a work stoppage like the NHL.

Rocketboy
03-24-2005, 08:29 PM
Hopefully the NFL is taking careful notes.

Clonetrooper630
03-25-2005, 02:48 AM
Another reason they cancelled the Draft was because someone forgot to secure the hotel rooms for the event:rolleyes: NHL= NO HOTEL LEAGE :crazed:

Slicker
07-22-2005, 04:04 PM
I'll bring this thread back from the dead because the NHL has been brought back from the dead. The new season starts on October 5 and all of the teams will be participating. A new 6 year deal was signed so by the time the fans that were lost from this lockout get watching hockey again they'll lockout again.

They are changing some rules to try and increase scoring. They're gonna make goalie pads smaller and the best thing is there will be no more ties. They are now going to implement a shootout method with 5 players from each team going at it 1 on 1 with the goalie.

Vortex
07-22-2005, 04:18 PM
I'm not sure I liked the idea of doing away with the red line...gonna see a lot of campers on the blue line like in high school and college. It might make it interesting, but I've never been a fan of cherry picking.

The shoot outs will be fun to watch I'm looking forward to that, but I did really wish they'd go back to the old division names. I miss the Norris Division and Wales and Campbell tags.

I wonder how many big $ players will stay in the US or head back to europe. Many teams won't be able to have all-starts to put all-star teams together. Lanch fans can kiss the playoffs good-by for quite a few years.

Kidhuman
07-22-2005, 04:38 PM
To me the one rule that should change is if the Goalie comes out of the crease to play the puck, he needs to get nailed.

Rogue II
07-22-2005, 08:41 PM
I think they did change the rules of where the goalie can handle the puck. I'm not sure if I like the shoot out, but it is better than the 3-point win thing they did the past few years. I didn't mind ties, well, the old system at least.

It is good they made goalie pads smaller. Did you ever see Anaheim's Giguerre without his pads on? Noticed how his stats dropped off the year after they lost the Cup? Because that offseason, they made goalie pads smaller. There won't be that many players that head back to Europe. There is going to be major turnover on all the teams...tons of free agents out there. Colorado and some of the other big money teams are screwed because they are already pushing the cap limit, even after the 24% roll back in salaries.

Hopefully this Crosby kid lives up to the hype for the Penguins.

I miss the old divisions also.

jjreason
07-22-2005, 11:32 PM
The goalie's stickhandling is to be dealt with via assessment of minor penalties, as opposed to allowing the other team to drill him. They've also made it illegal for any defensive player (no longer just the goalie) to shoot the puck into the stands from their own end (usually done to get a stoppage and the line change that comes with it). Teams icing the puck will no longer be allowed to change lines after the whistle. Goalie pads are smaller and the 2 line pass will be allowed as mentioned above. They're also going to move the nets back to within 2 feet of the end boards, greatly reducing the space behind the net. The "tag-up" offside rule is back (allowing the play to continue as long as offside players clear the zone before joining the attack).

They want more space (and less clutching and grabbing) in the offensive zones to help maximize scoring and "showcase talent". For all it's worth, none of it will be worth jack squat unless they stop threatening the defensive players and start sending them to the box for holding.

I'm greatly relieved that the deal is done, and just a little satisfied to see the players take it this time. The owners really suffered through the last deal and the players had the option to sign a much more advantageous deal in February. Hindsight being 20/20, I'm sure many of them are wonding why it didn't get signed back then.

Crosby is the real deal. My London Knights had to cope with him during their Memorial Cup championship run in May, and he's about as dominant a player as has come along since Mario Lemieux. Even if he's slow to develop as a pro, take a look at guys like Scott Thornton and John Leclair that had to grow into their professional selves - mark my words: barring injury, Crosby will be an absolute ringer for years to come.

Rogue II
07-23-2005, 12:32 AM
I always liked the tag-up offsides rule better, although, it is hard to explain to someone who doesn't know hockey.

In the US this afternoon, ESPN News switched over to TSN for the draft coverage. It was nice to see someone besides Darren Pang, Barry Melrose, and Bill Clement covering hockey.

JimJamBonds
07-23-2005, 01:18 AM
What's the matter Rouge II you don't like Barry's mullet? I'm not much of a hockey fan but I do watch from time to time, its going to be tough for the league to get themselves out of this one. Rule changes and free parking isn't going to do it, what they need is what happened in baseball: something magical to happen. Something fans can all get behind.

Its good to see the lottery wasn't rigged and the Penguins got the #1 pick.

jjreason
07-23-2005, 02:12 AM
Well, speaking of something magical, I think Sidney Crosby might provide enough interest to bring back quite a few fans. Seems like Pittsburgh can't die - just when you thought they were completely through, another golden calf walks into the fold. I'd love to see Mario lace em up for at least one game with Sid the Kid, to pass the torch so to speak.

PO'd as as I was to miss a whole season, I've forgiven them and am ready for the season to start this year. Both sides had a job to do, and now it's done. Drop the puck.

EDITED: Even Chris Berman loves the old divisions - he always calls the NFC Central the "Norris" division as a nod to the old school NHL days.

Since there are now 6 divisions in the two conferences, who's names would you add?

CAMPBELL CONFERENCE

Smythe Division
Norris Division
Gretzky Division (to honour Wayne's achievements and development of the games grassroots in the southwestern US)

WALES CONFERENCE

Adams Division
Patrick Division
***** Division (to honour someone I can't name who's helped bring hockey to the southeastern US - though it seems to be barely hanging on in these markets).

2-1B
07-23-2005, 02:20 AM
They skipped a season of hockey ? Hadn't noticed. lol

mabudonicus
07-23-2005, 09:46 AM
Hmmm, you've presented a real poser there JJ
Not sure if I like the thought of 2 feet between the nets and the backboards
Tag-up offsides is a WICKED concept, I hadn't yet heard that nad am pleased as punch to know they got that incorporated
Not allowing the goalie to carry the puck behind the net is a good one too, although with the aforementioned changes to net location it won't be as big as if it were introduced a few years ago (when the "back 40" was created, IMO one of the main reasons for the shortage of scoring)

The "no-line changes after icing" rule could be an interesting one too, I imagine we'll see a lot of slip-ups in the first few months as teams attempt to work out quick changes after the face-offs.. and adding "delay of game" penalties (which I imagine must be in there somewhere) for players as well as goalies should help out a bit too- I can't STAND watching several face-offs in a few minutes as a team just keeps reefing the puck into the stands until they get the drop to shape up just so

I am curious to see how the TV deals shake down, especially up here- I really hope I can avoid getting cable, since hockey is the only thing I would really watch
Too bad about last season, but in my mind it may actually help me to enjoy hockey a bit more this season, and the rules changes have got me pretty stoked
I think a fat Blue and White tear just rolled down my cheek whilst typing this :beard:

Rogue II
07-23-2005, 12:26 PM
Its good to see the lottery wasn't rigged and the Penguins got the #1 pick.


No kidding, I was fully expecting to see the Rangers get the #1 pick. There was some guy on ESPN saying that the NHL needs Crosby in a big market in order to survive.

jjreason
07-23-2005, 03:06 PM
See, I'm not sure about that. Pittsburgh is a semi-traditional hockey city, having had a team for nearly 40 years at this point and having won 2 cups back in the early 90s. The league needs interest in these types of places, especially the ones in which interest has been fleeting of late (and I'm thinking of Pittsburgh, Buffalo and even Boston when I type this). The Rangers getting Crosby would have been a tragedy, they don't seem to be able to manage their team worth stink. They would have brought him in under such a fanfare that the rest of the team would have their noses out of joint - not that most of them don't already, the way they get spoiled in Manhattan. Lindros "needed" to be in a big US centre too, remember? And all he did in Philly was shy away from the camera, not live up to expectations, and miss games due to concussions received while he was busy looking at the puck he was stickhandling. No saviour there.

Crosby will rejuvinate interest in hockey in Pittsburgh, something I don't think anyone else, even Mario, could do at this point.

Rogue II
07-23-2005, 07:19 PM
I don't agree with that guy either. He actually ticked me off because he went as far as suggesting Bettman throw a couple extra balls in the pot for the Rangers. He put down small market teams like Pittsburgh, the Senators, and Buffalo. The Buffalo part really hurt, because they are my team. I can't quite remember who this jackarse was, but I think he was a former GM.

By the way, the Flyers bought out Leclair's and Amonte's contracts.

Rocketboy
07-23-2005, 10:37 PM
LOVE the shootouts! Ties are useless.


To me the one rule that should change is if the Goalie comes out of the crease to play the puck, he needs to get nailed. Could not agree more.

Did you ever see Anaheim's Giguerre without his pads on? Noticed how his stats dropped off the year after they lost the Cup? Because that offseason, they made goalie pads smaller.I call it a flash in the pan.

In the US this afternoon, ESPN News switched over to TSN for the draft coverage. It was nice to see someone besides Darren Pang, Barry Melrose, and Bill Clement covering hockey.Well, it does take a while to thaw 'em out. They've been in the back of ESPN's freezer for over year now.

***** Division (to honour someone I can't name who's helped bring hockey to the southeastern US - though it seems to be barely hanging on in these markets).Wouldn't that one be Gretzky? Wasn't that his main reason for helping Pheonix out - to bring hockey to places where hockey doesn't belong?

Rogue II
07-24-2005, 12:01 AM
If I were commisioner, I'd get rid of the Coyotes and Hurricanes and bring back the Jets and Whalers. And those Florida teams better watch it or one of them are movin' up north to Quebec. I'd also force the Anaheim franchise to change its name to remove any connectioin to those horrible movies.

Ok, sorry, I had to vent. I've been holding that in for the past few years since the NHL started migrating south.

jjreason
07-24-2005, 12:07 AM
Wouldn't that one be Gretzky? Wasn't that his main reason for helping Pheonix out - to bring hockey to places where hockey doesn't belong?

Yes. But that's why I named a division for him in the Campbell (Western) Conference. I think it would be a little confusing to have Gretzky Divisions in both conferences. :D

I was imagining someone more like Phil Esposito, who's been a force in moving hockey forward in Tampa. I guess I'll go with Esposito for my choice, he was a leading scorer for years and years, is a hall of famer, played so proudly on the national team for years - and has a brother with the same last name who is also a hall of famer. Great hockey name.

Slicker
07-24-2005, 12:10 AM
I totally agree with you Rogue II. If your state doesn't get cold enough to have ice form naturally then you shouldn't have hockey. Simple as that.

Rogue II
07-24-2005, 12:19 AM
Esposito would be good. How about Jacques Plante, who changed goaltending to what it is today? I'd like to throw Gordie Howe's name in the mix, but I don't know how to justify it.

CaptainSolo1138
07-25-2005, 09:08 AM
Well, it does take a while to thaw 'em out. They've been in the back of ESPN's freezer for over year now.
No, they came out a couple monthes ago when they were gonna settle. Now they're in about the middle of the freezer, somewhere between Steven A. Smith and Dick Vitale.


If I were commisioner, I'd get rid of the Coyotes and Hurricanes and bring back the Jets and Whalers.
Hell yes bring back the Whale! That way I could finally get a jersey.

As far as naming a division after someone after someone, I say Cam Neely. Why? Because Cam Neely is awesome, that's why! :D

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
07-27-2005, 06:32 PM
A lot has happened with the sport within the last few weeks. The CBA has been approved by both players and owners, the monstrous salaries that players were making have been drastically cut, changes have been made to try to improve the game, and a draft will be imminent with a superstar likely heading to Pittsburgh.

Let me say a few things about the changes:

1) Bob Goodenow, head of the player's union should be tarred and feathered by the players--not that I ever supported them, but because he passed up better deals during the lockout and now the salary cap which he vowed never to accept, is in place with a dramatic rollback in salary. We could have had a shortened season with a Cup awarded, but he was intent to sit out the whole season no matter what.

2) The rule changes such as shootouts and moving of the nets and elimination of the red line are all designed to increase excitement in the game and scoring. I simply believe that many of these changes are unecessary and that further cutting down on goaltender equipment size or enlarging the net would have simply negated these changes.

3) The NHL needs to worry about regions as oppose to expanding the game nationwide. Who cares about hockey in the South? I think Atlanta draws more opponents fans than they do home fans. These franchises are draining the talent pool and should not be exisiting. TV ratings for the NHL have never been high and to try to get people to watch year after year is difficult--especially with so much stuff on TV now. Just ignore the ratings and accept that as long as fans come to the game and interest in the 30 cities that have hockey teams is strong, than that's okay and don't alientate your core fans with these constant rule changes.

4) The fact that every team has a chance to get the number one pick sucks. Bettman said he was "compromising versus the teams that felt that every team should have an equal shot (the winners of the past year) and those who felt that only the nonplayoff teams should have a shot (the losers of the past year)." I think it sucks for teams like Florida, who haven't made the playoffs in years, to get the 29th pick, while teams like Tampa who won the Cup, could have gotten the 1st pick. If I am not mistaken, Montreal got three number one overall picks in the 1970's, despite the fact that they were consistent Cup winners--this only helped fortify their dynasty. I think it sucks and the old way was fine. BTW--it was kind of fishy to me that the team in dire straights, with the greatest need for the pick to save their teetering franchise, got the pick.

Rocketboy
07-27-2005, 07:05 PM
2) The rule changes such as shootouts and moving of the nets and elimination of the red line are all designed to increase excitement in the game and scoring. I simply believe that many of these changes are unecessary and that further cutting down on goaltender equipment size or enlarging the net would have simply negated these changes. Rule changes needed to be made. They have been discussed for years now, but never decided on.
As it was, the game had no flow. It was all clutch and grab and dive.
The NHL decided that the refs should start calling these penalties, which they did...when they felt like it.

Also I think the NHL would have many more fans if the game wasn't so "hard to understand," which seems to be the biggest complaint why people don't watch it.
For a while, ESPN would occasionally show a game and they'd explain a lot of rules so people would have a better understanding of the game. They were well done and weren't distracting at all to those that already know the game. Heck, I even learned a few things and I've been watching for years now. I think it'd be a smart idea to do these again.

Slicker
07-27-2005, 07:39 PM
I don't know if anyone watches the World Series of Poker but whenever they announcers say a poker phrase a little box comes up in the corner explaining what he said means in the game of poker. As Rocketboy said some of the rules are confusing to non hockey fans and if they took a cue from WSP than if would help out alot.

jjreason
07-27-2005, 08:45 PM
Yeah, they could use replays to show offside vs not, icing vs not, etc during breaks in the game (but only on American broadcasts as us Canadians are born with inate knowledge of the rules, and would find these lessons insulting :P :D ). It's like many other games though, get the (object) in the opposing team's goal. Not that complex. People just don't like what they don't know, and I don't really think there's any need to force feed Dixielanders hockey. Just make the existing fans happy, they'll spread the word.

The rule changes are fine by me. Something had to tried, and they're willing to do it after this long break. I'll be watching with baited breath to see how the game looks in the new format.

JetsAndHeels
07-27-2005, 10:48 PM
If I were commisioner, I'd get rid of the Coyotes and Hurricanes and bring back the Jets and Whalers. And those Florida teams better watch it or one of them are movin' up north to Quebec. I'd also force the Anaheim franchise to change its name to remove any connectioin to those horrible movies.

Ok, sorry, I had to vent. I've been holding that in for the past few years since the NHL started migrating south.

Hey, there has been alot of support for the Hurricanes here in NC. I go to alot of the games myself, and many people here were upset that the season was canceled. We really enjoy having a team here, no doubt about that. Fan support is not even a question.

jjreason
07-27-2005, 11:00 PM
Don't take this personally Jango, but weren't you guys drawing less than 10,000 fans per game? I could be way out in left field, but I thought I recalled numbers in and around that 6000 mark for Hurricanes home games being the rule as opposed to the exception. It doesn't matter if the tickets are sold and the people don't show up - but are they selling the tickets?

JetsAndHeels
07-27-2005, 11:08 PM
Carolina Hurricanes 1999-00 41 508,424 12,401
Carolina Hurricanes 2000-01 41 547,584 13,356
Carolina Hurricanes 2001-02 41 635,868 15,509
Carolina Hurricanes 2002-03 41 642,973 15,682
Carolina Hurricanes 2003-04 41 495,544 12,086
Carolina Hurricanes 2004-05 SEASON CANCELLED


Here is what I could find. The very last # on the right is the average attendance figure, and the # beside that (next to last) is the total.

here is the link if any questions about the numbers
http://www.kenn.com/sports/hockey/nhl/nhl_car_attendance.html

Rogue II
07-27-2005, 11:21 PM
Well, then there is Washington, who can't even sell out play-off games. Yes, there are some die hard Cap's fans, but often, there are just as many fans for the visiting team. My friend from Philly told me that there is a company in there who offers bus trips from Philly to DC for the games. Aparently, the price for those trips are cheaper than some of the Flyers' home games.

I saw a game in Denver during the first Avalanche season. There were just as many Sabres fans there as there were Av's fans. I assume that has changed since then. By the way, it was a classic goaltending duel between Hasek and Roy and ended in a 0-0 tie. Of course, the Avs went on to win the Cup that year.

Just found this website:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2004

Carolina had the second lowest average attendance.

Rocketboy
07-27-2005, 11:36 PM
Well, then there is Washington, who can't even sell out play-off games. Yes, there are some die hard Cap's fans, but often, there are just as many fans for the visiting team. My friend from Philly told me that there is a company in there who offers bus trips from Philly to DC for the games. Aparently, the price for those trips are cheaper than some of the Flyers' home games.There were a few times I considered doing something like that for a Wings game. Maybe Columbus or Chicago or somewhere realtively close. Wings tickets were damn near impossible to get for a while (they were still pretty tough to get during the last season).

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
07-28-2005, 12:42 AM
I believe that some of the rule changes were necessary (i.e. the goaltender equipment). I am not a hockey purist who doesn't believe that the game is fine as it is--I do know the lack of scoring and constant "chess-match" type games have put off fans, and this needs to be addressed. However, a shoot-out is unnecessary in my opinion. It favors teams that actually have talent as opposed to many smaller payroll teams that rely on muckers and grinders to get the job done. Yeah, it is exciting to watch but I think the 4 on 4 hockey in overtime was good enough as it did decrease the number of games that ended in a tie.

RogueII, I remember watching that game on tv--Avs v.s. Sabres 0-0 in late 96'. I think Colorado does an excellent job of supporting their team and is one of the few teams that was consistently supportive of a franchise that had relocated from another city.

Caps fans, you kinda feel sorry for from their lack of playoff success.

Atlanta, you don't because they are a city made up of many relocated people who tend to support their teams only when their native team comes to town (i.e. look at the Hawks attendance as well).

Tampa was a floundering franchise up until they won the Cup. They got lucky.

Florida was initially crazed about their team but they have lost steam just as their team does as well. Ditto for Phoenix.

Bettman needs to absolve two of these teams (throw in Anaheim too).

CaptainSolo1138
07-28-2005, 07:46 AM
Those poor Caps haven't been the same since Don Beaupre left. :D

I, too, think contraction is the real answer the the NHL's woes. Phoenix, Atlanta, Nashville, Carolina (sorry, JF96 ;) ), Florida, and Tampa Bay need to be the first ones axed.

Many would argue that you can't contract the champs. Guess what? Rumor has it that the Marlins won a championship once, too. Nip it in the bud before the real problems start. People will go this year just to see if they can do it again. But as soon as they start losing fifty games a season and/or Martin St. Louis skips town attendance is gonna drop again.

JetsAndHeels
07-28-2005, 09:31 AM
Those poor Caps haven't been the same since Don Beaupre left. :D

I, too, think contraction is the real answer the the NHL's woes. Phoenix, Atlanta, Nashville, Carolina (sorry, JF96 ;)

Ah, no problem my man. Business is business, and if the team is not generating enough money and interest then I guess something has to be done. Rogue II and myself both provided some numbers on their attendance, and well, numbers don't lie. We still have a pretty supportive fanbase, but I guess when it comes down to it that doesn't matter...what does is the number of tickets sold each game.
It's all good though, I still have my Hurricanes jersey and my memories of the Stanley Cup run they made a few years ago. Oh yeah, and I know my beloved TarHeels will never leave me. :D

mabudonicus
07-28-2005, 10:32 AM
I'll jump in here for the 'Canes :beard:
The new revenue-sharing business may help out some of the "newer" teams who don't have the luxury of being able to charge whatever they wanty for tickets due to their "legacies" (my own Maple Leafs are a PRIME example of this)
Contraction of the league would likely enhance the effects of revenue sharing, but I would leave Carolina as it is- it really did seem to me like hockey was sorta catching on there a bit (and yes, JJ- I think you are referring to the playoffs games where the attendance was nowhere near what most other teams can count on, a thing which was much ballyhooed in the press)

jjreason
07-28-2005, 12:19 PM
Well it's a tough argument. I don't necessarily disagree with attempting to broaden the game's horizons by putting it in new markets. I think maybe there should have been some considerations made when they created the new teams - maybe every new team should be given a "probationary" franchise, to explore the interest. If a team's business case is promising at the end of their probation, they get the team. If not, they move them to the next place on the list and see how it goes there. That way, the fans feel some urgency, and put their money on the line for tickets instead of sitting at home and watching the TV broadcasts (which, in my opinion, are no great shakes on the US networks). The game live has a whole different appeal, especially when you're in a building full of die hards. Hockey at the Joe is unlike any other experience, totally addictive. How could you NOT want to go back after seeing that?

Rocketboy
07-28-2005, 05:26 PM
The game live has a whole different appeal, especially when you're in a building full of die hards. Hockey at the Joe is unlike any other experience, totally addictive. How could you NOT want to go back after seeing that?Ah. if only everyone could see one game at Joe Louis Arena...it's a 2 1/2 hour adrenaline rush.

jjreason
07-29-2005, 09:08 PM
Ah. if only everyone could see one game at Joe Louis Arena...it's a 2 1/2 hour adrenaline rush.


No kidding. My childhood hockey game trips with my Dad were all to Joe Louis, even though we lived in London (halfway between Toronto and Detroit). Guess who Dad roots for? :D

I saw Gretzky twice, the 2nd time he scored his 76th goal of the season to tie Phil Esposito's record - he broke the record the next night in Buffalo.

To anyone who feels priced out by the unjust price on Wings tickets, please let me offer you a suggestion: every year around Christmas time, the Michigan Wolverines and Michigan State Spartans host the Great Lakes Invitational NCAA hockey tournament. It consists of 2 days 4 teams playing round robin games, followed by the Championship game and 3rd place game on the 3rd day. This is awesome hockey, and the tournament passes are very reasonably priced. My brother and I went every year for 4 years running while his high school locker partner played for the Wolverines - it was amazing. 3 out of the 4 years we saw Michigan (featuring John Madden of the Devils, Mike Knuble of the Bruins, Marty Turco of the Stars and Brendan Morrison of the Canucks) play Michigan State (featuring the unbelievably speedy Anson Carter) for the championship. Michigan was dominant in those times, and managed to win each year we went. It was awesome, and the multitude of crazy Spartans and Wolverines fans did an excellent job of recreating the excitement felt at the average Wings game.

2-1B
04-13-2008, 10:25 PM
Wow, I can't believe it's been over 3 years already since the NHL died. :cry:

Bel-Cam Jos
09-14-2012, 08:58 PM
Could it be another death this season? :( Will someone create a Skating Dead TV show?

Bel-Cam Jos
10-27-2012, 10:59 AM
... aaaaaaand there goes November. :mad:

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
11-09-2012, 10:19 PM
Devastating.

The NHL had a growing reputation, which is important for constantly being dead last in the 4 major professional sporting team leagues, especially with an initial Cup win in a long-standing popular franchise, but they chose to fritter away any momentum they may have gained. Goodbye to the many fans who showed any remote interest in the sport during last season's playoffs and goodbye to the casual fans who cannot stomach its 4th major labor stoppage in 20 years. If the NHL cancels another season I am done buying tickets for a great long time.

Bel-Cam Jos
11-23-2012, 10:15 PM
You know, why would hockey need things like the Outdoor Classic, All-Star Game, or any games before Dec. 14 anyway? :mad:

TeeEye7
11-24-2012, 03:36 AM
At least here in Cali we have some Reign to do us some good...

Bel-Cam Jos
11-24-2012, 12:24 PM
There've been some NHLers who are now playing in the ECHL minors this season.

Bel-Cam Jos
01-19-2013, 09:36 PM
Opening day... on Jan. 19th? :mad: Oh, well. Penguins win over the Flyers on the road.

Bel-Cam Jos
03-11-2013, 12:16 AM
Did this lockout chase all the hockey fans oot, eh? Mid-season and the Pens look pretty good (most road wins, good [enough] defense and good [enough] goaltending right now, with an amazing offense).

Bel-Cam Jos
03-20-2013, 10:09 AM
Penguins set one of those records that no one ever considers until it happens: first team in NHL history to have a 10+ game win streak in 3 consecutive years.

Bel-Cam Jos
04-06-2013, 11:12 AM
How is it that no teams, with the great runs like the Blackhawks or Penguins had, have clinched at least a playoff spot in the 48-game season yet? Less than 10 games left to play for many.

Bel-Cam Jos
04-21-2013, 10:22 AM
Playoff spots are getting nabbed like new, non-pegwarmer, fresh-from-the-case, unpunched figures.

I was torn yesterday, between the Bruins and the Pens. Like their city, Boston played tough at home.

Pittsburgh clinched the East; Chicago's close to the President's Trophy.

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
05-04-2013, 06:57 AM
Playoff matchups are mostly interesting this year.

I watched the Caps/Rangers the other night and saw how close a battle it was for those two teams. The Habs and Sens series had a bit of viciousness to it. The Isles shocked the Pens the other night. Anything can happen, that it what I like about the 2nd season.

Darth Metalmute
05-04-2013, 02:19 PM
Losing DeKeyser is a blow for the Wings. The rookie had stepped up and played exceptional.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-05-2013, 10:04 PM
Pens get an OT PP goal, to take a 2-1 series lead.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-11-2013, 08:57 AM
I really hope Pittsburgh closes it out today. However, that would mean Ottawa might seek revenge against Matt Cooke. Hey; playoff hockey is always tough. Very :beard: tough.

Darth Metalmute
05-13-2013, 07:55 PM
And the Wings win the first Game 7 of the 2013 Stanley cup Playoffs!

Two more tonight, hoping Toronto shocks the world.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-13-2013, 09:21 PM
Here's the way I see the symmetry of a Pittsburgh 2013 Cup:
10+ game winning streak for an NHL-record third straight year.
9 point lead over 2nd-seeded Washington in the East.
#8 seed NY Islanders beaten in first round.
#7 seed Ottawa taken out in second round.
6 seed NY Rangers defeated in conference finals.
#5 seed LA Kings go down in the Cup Final... for the
4th Stanley Cup in Penguins history, where in the clinching game
3 Penguins each score
2 goals, with Pittsburgh giving up just
1 goal to end the year.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-18-2013, 09:51 AM
Wow. Learned that this is the first 2-0 series lead for Pittsburgh since their '09 Cup run. Symmetry?

Darth Metalmute
05-24-2013, 01:27 AM
Red Wings are on the brink of eliminating the President Trophy winners. The Hawks still scare me though.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-24-2013, 10:03 AM
I hope that unanswered-6-goal run in game 4 didn't use up the Penguins' goals for game 5.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-25-2013, 10:39 AM
Nope.

If the Penguins face NYR in the conference finals, that means they'd have some rest. If the Bruins win the next game, the series would be... I don't know. Can't seem to find the "when" for the Cup Final, or the conference finals series. Do they just make it up as they go?

Darth Metalmute
05-25-2013, 06:07 PM
They don't have a set schedule like the NBA. If all series ends early, they all start earlier.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-29-2013, 11:27 AM
Goalies were huge in the SJ/LAK series, especially Game 7 last night.

Looks like Sat. 6/1 is Game 1 of the Pittsburgh/Boston Eastern Finals?!? :confused: Okay...

Bel-Cam Jos
06-02-2013, 09:37 PM
To pass the time during these blowout opening conference final games, who are your favorite high-numbers NHL players of all time? Here's a starter list (LISTS... :drool: ) with some upper-digits that come to my mind (with some no-brainers among them):
99
97
93
91
90
89
88
87
85
82
81
77
74
71
68
66
61
60
58
55
52
50
48
41
40
39
38

Bel-Cam Jos
06-06-2013, 10:13 AM
I'm not giving up hope, but I may have plenty of time to consider players' numbers. That, aside from the outcome of course, was a great game 3. Penguins are undefeated in OT this post-season... but 0-2 in 2OT. :( It's now a literal one-game-at-a-time scenario; just win the next game... four times.

Bel-Cam Jos
06-24-2013, 11:47 PM
Won't mention how the Penguins scored two total goals in a four-game sweep. Oops; just did. :(

Well, Chicago had the best record in this strike-shortened season, and they get to hoist the Cup by its end.