Jump to content

NHL 15-16: wife-beaters, adulterers, cokeheads, rapists, pill-poppers, AND METHODISTS


the admiral

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

25 minutes ago, worcat said:

They need to just let the players play the game and not call penalties on every little infraction. The game is alot softer now than it was even 5 years ago. You look at someone the wrong way and you get a penalty. 

They need to call more penalties, not fewer.  The way the game actually is on the ice compared to how it's "supposed" to be played according to the rule book is a joke.  There have been fewer power play opportunities the last two years than in any year since at least 1963.  Most of that wouldn't even be linked to the decline of fighting, since fighting has mostly matching penalties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stuff like this drives me crazy.  Especially watch the closeup starting around 12 seconds in... the ref is less than 10 feet away and staring right at the play, but no penalty!  You could say, "It's just a tap; it doesn't do anything!", but why does Suter do it if he doesn't think it will make a difference?  The same kind of thing happens on most any breakaway where the defending player gets within swinging distance of the offensive player.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the video above: That's nothing to be upset about. If someone wanted that to be a slash or hooking call then maybe they shouldn't watch hockey anymore. It wasn't a hard slash by any means and it only aided in breaking up a play. Even if Sharp got off a 100% clean shot, the goalie was already in position to shut him down. This is a non issue. 

 

If you want to see more BS, like you propose calling more penalties - look up the clean hit Ryan Raves delivered on Chicago a few weeks ago and got kicked out of the game. So yeah, let's call a bunch of needless penalties. That'll fix it. :rolleyes:

 

 

And when play is stopped every minute for an exaggerated penalty that will really increase the desire of new fans to watch a sport they know nothing about. I don't want the pace of play to be jeopardized so that we can get an additional power play here and there. These players used to be tough, now they are glorified ballerinas  that expect a call anytime they are touched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, worcat said:

I don't see how anyone can argue that players are more talented now then they were 20 years ago. Sure some rules have changed but it's not like the human species has evolved and prevented players from being able to score. That's ridiculous. Only thing I would say the players have an advantage now with is medicine and conditioning and neither of those are helping them increase offense.

 

Actually it has. NHL players are larger people on average than they were 30 years ago. 

 

tumblr_nk1jtbKDKV1rlkq4mo1_1280.jpg

 

It's not ridiculous to reason that there is less space to work with than there used to be. Also you mentioned conditioning. That's not helping increase offense because conditioning makes defense better. A pass is faster than a man, but better conditioned players are quicker at filling passing lanes.

 

When people talk about increasing net sizes they're not talking feet. They're talking .5 inch on all 3 sides to make up for the growth in players. That's not a ridiculous assertion and I have no problem with a growth of that size. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, worcat said:

To the video above: That's nothing to be upset about. If someone wanted that to be a slash or hooking call then maybe they shouldn't watch hockey anymore. It wasn't a hard slash by any means and it only aided in breaking up a play. Even if Sharp got off a 100% clean shot, the goalie was already in position to shut him down. This is a non issue. 

I don't mean to drag this out like that specific play was some great travesty, but if that slash was inconsequential to the play, why did Suter do it?

 

The NHL admits that the Reaves hit was clean; they rescinded his game misconduct.  The difference is that stuff like that happens occasionally; stupid little slashes and interference stepping in front of a guy dumping a puck into the zone happens dozens of times every game.  I notice you ignored the fact that there are fewer power plays now than any other time at least since expansion... doesn't really fit with your "ballerinas" narrative.  Busting your ass to catch up to a guy that's going in on your goalie is an awesome athletic play; just getting close enough to take a "little" whack at his arms or legs to try to throw him off is lazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Cosmic said:

I don't mean to drag this out like that specific play was some great travesty, but if that slash was inconsequential to the play, why did Suter do it?

 

The NHL admits that the Reaves hit was clean; they rescinded his game misconduct.  The difference is that stuff like that happens occasionally; stupid little slashes and interference stepping in front of a guy dumping a puck into the zone happens dozens of times every game.  I notice you ignored the fact that there are fewer power plays now than any other time at least since expansion... doesn't really fit with your "ballerinas" narrative.  Busting your ass to catch up to a guy that's going in on your goalie is an awesome athletic play; just getting close enough to take a "little" whack at his arms or legs to try to throw him off is lazy.

Why does any player take a penalty??? Suter tapped him in the leg, oh well. It didn't affect the play. What it might have done was piss off Sharp and throw his mental game off. Calling that a penalty would be the same thing as calling a poke check an interference penalty. It's dumb. You're trying to be over technical, which then leads to every little thing that a player does is a penalty. Because then every hit would be a roughing and interference penalty. Ever hear of the expression "Just let em Play" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, chcarlson23 said:

Why does any player take a penalty??? Suter tapped him in the leg, oh well. It didn't affect the play. What it might have done was piss off Sharp and throw his mental game off. Calling that a penalty would be the same thing as calling a poke check an interference penalty. It's dumb. You're trying to be over technical, which then leads to every little thing that a player does is a penalty. Because then every hit would be a roughing and interference penalty. Ever hear of the expression "Just let em Play" ?

A poke check is something you do to a player who has the puck.  If you hit somebody who doesn't have the puck, that is interference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this is why scoring is down in the NHL... you're not a "real" hockey fan if you sympathize with the guy trying to score a goal instead of the defenseman well out of the play.

 

ERMAGOD I'M GOING TO SLIDE INTO THE NET CAN'T STOP CAN'T STOP CAN'T STOP CAN'T STOP CAN'T STOP CAN'T STOP CAN'T STOP and really get your shoulder into the net at the end to make sure it comes off the moorings.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So over time players have gotten taller? less room to move around? We're talking a few inches. If you want to get technical, players also have better equipment so they should be able to score more now, have better access to watch tape and review other players tendency's than older players did. It all comes down to talent and legends had better talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I think there are better solutions to the NHL's scoring problems than to fundamentally change the size of the nets that (I'm assuming) that have been used for quite a long time now. They have to get creative on what rules to change, sure (as some of you have done above), but that feels like a better solution to me. 

 

 

If if they absolutely insist on making the nets bigger, they should just go all the way with it and work towards implementing the European sized rinks (which is probably impossible, admittedly) as well. The argument is that the smaller rinks make the game more exciting, but I kinda don't buy that. I've always felt that all it does is make play much too crowded and rather than getting to see the skill players open up along the boards, everyone just gets jammed up in the corners and it becomes a giant bump into the boards and stick handle fest. If the players really have grown so much over the last twenty years, maybe the rink should as well. Changing just the size of the net while keeping the rink the same size feels like it could end up being a bad idea. I've lost more and more interest in hockey every single year to the point where it's well on the bottom of my "favorite" sports list for MANY reasons. But, part of the reason, as a casual fan, is that there just seems to not be enough room on the ice at times to keep the game as quick as it should be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, worcat said:

I don't want to see historical records be destroyed so we can increase scoring to bring in a few new fans while the traditional fans are sh!t on.

 

Functional illiterate Jamie Benn won last year's scoring title with fewer than 90 points. I don't think nudging the game toward more scoring is going to endanger Gretz's numbers.

 

11 hours ago, worcat said:

You look at someone the wrong way and you get a penalty. 

Ahh, time to revisit one of my oooooold favorites:

 

n725075089_288918_2774.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want to fix the game?  Ban any coach who has experience in the Western Hockey League.  Getting rid of the good ol' boy Canadian pluggers will put an end to the risk-averse coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cosmic If you were a real hockey fan, you would sympathize with the defenseman who even though was beaten, dove to try and knock the puck away... As much as it would make games a little more exciting with a few more goals every game, I don't want a defenseman to just stop back checking when he gets beat... That's lazy, and NOT hockey...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, worcat said:

So over time players have gotten taller? less room to move around? We're talking a few inches. If you want to get technical, players also have better equipment so they should be able to score more now, have better access to watch tape and review other players tendency's than older players did. It all comes down to talent and legends had better talent.

Okay, Oscar Robertson. The legends didn't have better talent. They were pack-a-day smokers with offsesason jobs playing against pack-a-day smokers who had offseason jobs. 

 

The better conditioning, better training, better equipment, bigger goaltenders (there aren't any Darren Pangs in the NHL anymore), and more emphasis on tape review all leads to better defense and lower scoring. 

 

Yeah I'm talking a few inches here, which also means they have longer reach with their sticks, which multiplied by the 12 guys on the ice adds up and because they're playing on the same size ice surface and that can't be changed the only way to make up that difference is a minor change in goal size. I'm not suggesting they adopt indoor soccer goals. Add a quarter of an inch to a half an inch on all 3 sides and you've increased the goal to a size relative to the size of the players are today. 

 

Would that make up for a lot of goals? Well everytime you hear a shot go off the post in today's game would mean a goal with the slightly bigger nets. That's not insignificant. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, chcarlson23 said:

@Cosmic If you were a real hockey fan, you would sympathize with the defenseman who even though was beaten, dove to try and knock the puck away... As much as it would make games a little more exciting with a few more goals every game, I don't want a defenseman to just stop back checking when he gets beat... That's lazy, and NOT hockey...

I said getting back after you've been beaten is a great play, but kinda catching up to the guy just to give him a whack or purposefully knocking the net off instead of getting back up and playing defense is not something I idolize, no. To be clear, in the second video I posted, I don't have an issue with alleged slashing as it seemed like he could have been going after the puck... but there's no question he knocked the net off intentionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Cosmic said:

I said getting back after you've been beaten is a great play, but kinda catching up to the guy just to give him a whack or purposefully knocking the net off instead of getting back up and playing defense is not something I idolize, no. To be clear, in the second video I posted, I don't have an issue with alleged slashing as it seemed like he could have been going after the puck... but there's no question he knocked the net off intentionally.

You say it like you know that he did it on purpose. The only thing he did on purpose was dive to stop the forward. He didn't mean to knock it off. If he did it on purpose, he would have gotten a delay of game penalty... He can't stop sliding, so he ran into the net. NEWS FLASH: Hockey is played on ice,and it's slippery... This isn't field hockey on grass, wear he could have stopped. Now I agree that not backchecking, or knocking the net off on purpose isn't defense, but what Hartnell did WAS defense. He went all out to stop the player from even getting a shot off. Now he didn't succeed, but actually gave the effort. You said you'd rather have him stand and watch the guy score, because EXCITING. Once that kind of stuff happens, we get games like an all star game 12-10. Goalies now have lacrosse like numbers... Why? To draw in a couple more fans with a few more goals, in games that are barely like hockey anymore. Let me guess, you'd like players to stop blocking shots... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.