sparkychewbarky

...and he certainly didn't catch what he was fishing for.

According to Ken Campbell (Senior writer for "The Hockey News") there are 5 NHL Expansion bids so far... Las Vegas, Quebec, Toronto and 2 bids from Seattle.

Graeme Roustan discusses his bid for Tor2. Interesting listen... Roustan Interview

Something got messed-up in the translation from Coyotese to English. Here's how it should have read...

"500 million...Crazy" ...a pretty good read featuring been-there-done-that Peter Pocklington.

---

I agree with everything you're saying here Hedley...Coaches will do their damnedest to scheme the crap out of this but...this ain't football. The beauty of the 3on3 is that it's gonna be super-hard to put it into a box. The 3on3 is more fluid, chaotic and fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants than 5on5 or 4on4. How would you scheme a 1on1 competition? The fewer the players, the more it comes down to speed, skill and luck. This'll have coaches pulling their hair out. Their "scheme" will last 'til the first mistake and then it'll be good ol' pond hockey 101.

Hang on there one minute, ramalamadingdong... 136 games go into 4on4 overtime and there's 56 "game-winners"....That's a success rate of 41%. 80 games make it into 3on3 OT, where there's 45 "game-winners" ...That's a success rate of 56%. I'll swing by this neighbourhood around All-Star time next year, and you can attempt to call me "delusional" then. Bingo. If you lose in the shootout, you get a point and the other team gets a win that counts less. Most of all, you can't say you did anything wrong.You want to kill the shootout, kill the loser point. Keep breaking ties in the win column with ROWs, sure, but stop padding the points and teams will play to win. Yeah, that would work, but aren't we looking to be entertained? Several years ago I treated a rep team that I was coaching to a year-end 3on3 tourny. 3on3....change on the fly...no face-offs...clear the zone after a goal.... Even when a penalty was called, the play kept on, and the "offended" team was awarded a penalty shot in a game-end shoot-out. (So if my team had 2 penalties, the other team had 2 shots) Anyway, it was fantastic non-stop action...chances galore! I can remember addressing the parents in the lobby after the game. These were battle-hardened rep parents that had been-there, done-that. They couldn't contain their enthusiasm. We do the 3on3 thing every year now. I can almost guarantee you admiral, that the 3on3 OT will be the most exciting part of the game. And if you're worried about coaches ruining this with some sort of "super-system"...well don't. The fewer players on the ice; the harder it is to implement a "system'. It'll be chaotic, fast and fun, and I'm convinced that it'll work.

YES!! Well then, you won't like the new system. Rather than having the multi-goal shoot-outs, more games will be decided by one goal. 3-on-3 before now produced a lot of goals because it's something coaches rarely-to-never practiced. It's a situation that rarely happened, so what little precious practice time they got wasn't wasted on 3-on-3 situations. Now, the coaching staff has a reason to practice 3-on-3 situations because an extra point is on the line. They're going to figure out ways to slow down the game and clog up space in 3-on-3 play. Admiral's absolutely correct. 3-on-3 play is going to get figured out pretty quickly and we'll still see well north of 100 shootouts throughout the season. Maybe not 170, but closer to that number than 85. Don't forget just how conservative coaches and teams get after January 1st. They can accept losing a shootout rather than in OT because of the ROW tiebreaker. ...Didn't happen in the AHL. Apples and oranges. That extra ice is 42.5' away from the net! This past season, the AHL used a hybrid system of 3 minutes of 4on4, followed by 4 minutes of 3on3. 75% of games were decided before the shootout...more than double the previous season. I'll stand by my predictions.

No way. 3 on 3 means more ice, more chances, more odd-man rushes...mistakes won't be dangerous; they'll be deadly. On the fly changes better be bang-on. If the teams go all-out this will be fantastic! However, you're right, if teams play not-to-lose... it'll suck. I'd hope that not much more than a third of OT games go into a shoot-out. The zamboni guys'll be able to go home early. I'll put the percentage of shoot-outs after overtime at under 40%. I drink Chivas.

I'll cut that number in half and take the under. You're right that coaches will try a safe way to play this, but that's gonna be tough, especially at home.

Kudos to you ren, for taking the high road on this...but I'm calling B.S. on the folks at BYU and Torch Creative. One of two things happened... 1- Nobody was aware of, or saw your rendering...OR 2-They saw it, liked it, and pretty much just tweaked your work. The works are too similar for me to believe the first option, so I'm saying that the latter was probably the case. As Delayed Penalty observed...both works are "tracings" of an existing logo, so they will be similar. However, even in tracings, there's a hundred different ways to render it. I find that the weight and style of the lines, and the treatments of certain areas are just too similar to be coincidental. So, what would be the big deal for them to man-up, and admit that they were influenced by your excellent work, and give you some credit for this new product. That would be the right thing to do.

I just checked Doyle524's index, and it looks as though ren already did: Compare with: Whoa...That's close... If the new BYU logo isn't your work ren, I would say that it was definitely "inspired" by your work. The line "weights" are almost identical.

Yeah, the stuff flies through here doesn't it? If you miss a few days, you could miss an entire series. Would love to see a "condensed" version of this entire thread! So good!

Nicely done mods. I really think that a venture such as this will emphasize the "quality over quantity" factor. Some good ol' competition elevates performance. This will be good for the Concepts forums. Congrats to the mods and to the ones who put this all together. Thanks.

Seconded. The fact that a thread hasn't been pinned since 2010 is a bit concerning... I've reached out to several mods and haven't heard back. It'd be nice if we had a mod for (or at least a current mod that watched) the concepts section... Whether the mods agree or disagree with this effort... this effort should at least be acknowledged. I think we all agree that the concepts forum needs some changes. The multitude of templates available, have made the forum better, but unfortunately worse at the same time. It's much too easy to just re-colour a uniform or logo and throw it up... And all new topics should have at least one piece of artwork completed before being allowed to start. Good work flies off the first page much too quickly these days. I hear some concerns from the old guard that there are no inaugural inductee threads before '07. There, of course, should be. However this situation is quite understandable, when you realize that the members putting the effort into this topic have only been around since '08 at the earliest. Perhaps if the old guard wants some old guard content, they should get involved and offer up some suggestions. I also second GotPixels' suggestion that the concepts section needs some sub-sections. The mods need to pin this thread, or acknowledge it, or send down a bolt of lightning or something, to let us know that suggestions and efforts to improve the Concepts Forum are, at least being heard.

Holy Doodle... I'm away on holidays, so I've been off the grid for a few days. I found some wi-fi this morning, logged in and WHAM... I'm very honoured and very grateful. This is an ambitious, well thought-out, and so far very well crafted concept. I'm gonna put the avatar in place when I get home and will be wearing it proudly. Thanks again guys.

Hey ren...I always check out this series...some fantastic work here. I'm curious...have you had any feedback at all from any of the institutions that own these logos? Great work!

Great series ren! Nice clean work. Keep it going please.