Jump to content

NHL and NHLPA AGree on New Salary Cap System


KennyRock

Recommended Posts

In what is believed to be a six-year agreement, based on revenue projections by both sides, the salary cap will range from $34 million to $36 million, with the floor from $22 million to $24 million.

The league has previously demanded that the cap be 54 percent of a team's revenue.

And the league needs to stick to that, because I honestly don't think the NHL's going to survive with a cap as high as $36 million. They're grossly overestimating the fans willingness to return and the popularity of NHL hockey in the U.S. If they have a cap based on hard numbers as opposed to a percentage of revenue, they're fluffed down the road.

That being said, shootouts are long overdue even though I'm not really a fan of them. Either that or make OT periods 20 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would somebody quickly explain what "tag-up" offsides is as compared to regular offsides?

From user Shaotzu on the cbs.sportstline.com message boards:

A player is ruled offside if he has crossed the blue line prior to the puck being carried or passed over. A player in possession and control of the puck is allowed to skate in before he brings the puck into the zone (i.e., skating backwards with the puck).

Under current rules - immediate whistle if an offensive player is in the zone when the puck is in the zone.

Tag-up allows for all players to simulatenous be clear of the offensive zone (skate contact with the blue line) and re-enter the zone onside. However, during this delayed offside (when not all players have cleared the zone), no offensive player may play the puck.

The NHL got rid of this to help encourage play-making at the blue line - too many people were just dumping the puck when being pressured, trusting everyone to clear the zone, and then they could "dump and chase" from there. Getting rid of the tag-up meant they had to try to make a legitimate play at the line. Amateur (USA Hockey) does it this way, and it does slow the game down, and with the pros, I don't see any reason not to let them dump the puck in and clear if they think it will work. It would surely help clear up the neutral-zone trap problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shootout will return...??  :therock:

Yep. No more tie games.

The worst thing that they ever did was add that fourth column for overtime losses, or OTL, that was awful. for a non-hockey fan to look at a team's record, they would have no clue what that meant. i would love the records just to be W-L. Maybe they should do it like baseball and basketball and do games-back :D , or just 2 pts for a win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my eyes, the ideal format for hockey:

3 20-minute periods, followed by 5 minutes of 4-on-4 OT, followed by a shootout.

2 points for a win, 1 point for a shootout loss, 0 points for a regulation or overtime loss.

And so the standings read Wins-Losses-Shootout Losses (W-L-SL).

Simple, yet it works. Also gives teams an additional reward for getting it done in standard OT instead of the shootout.

Whatcha think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my eyes, the ideal format for hockey:

3 20-minute periods, followed by 5 minutes of 4-on-4 OT, followed by a shootout.

2 points for a win, 1 point for a shootout loss, 0 points for a regulation or overtime loss.

And so the standings read Wins-Losses-Shootout Losses (W-L-SL).

Simple, yet it works. Also gives teams an additional reward for getting it done in standard OT instead of the shootout.

Whatcha think?

I think that would be perfect. I hated giving teams a point for just making it into OT but i do think you should if they make it through OT tied. The SL is good and the 0 for an OT loss is really good too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would somebody quickly explain what "tag-up" offsides is as compared to regular offsides?

For me tag-up offsides is regular offsides. Why they reverted to the boring delayed, wasting time garbage I have no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would love the records just to be W-L. Maybe they should do it like baseball and basketball and do games-back :D , or just 2 pts for a win.

Exactly what they should do! With the garbage shootout added, one team WILL win, the other team WILL lose -- no matter what. So, why continue to reward a teams desire to win by taking a game to OT or a shootout??

There's no playing for a tie so there's no need for the bonus, "phantom" point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pardon the pun, but what's the "point" in giving teams points now? There will be a winner and loser, so there would really be no need for points. The article didn't say what effect this would have on the points system.

Whatever the case, I think this is both a good and a bad idea. It's bad because determining a hockey game on a shootout in my eyes is a bad idea. Hockey is about more than scoring goals. However, it's a good thing because it'll stop playoff games from going into 15 or so overtimes. It's a mixed situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, it's a good thing because it'll stop playoff games from going into 15 or so overtimes. It's a mixed situation.

Uhh, I belive if the NHL does ever go to a shoot out it would be regular season only like 4 on 4. I haven't ever heard the idea of the shootout for the playoffs. I don't think the NHL wants to get rid of playoff overtime because the drama in it. It's one of the things that make playoff hockey so great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the reg season they should do a 4-4 OT, then shootout, and have a Wins-Losses record and do the games back in the divisions. Playoffs should stay the same with the 20 min OTs. Perfect, Done. I should become the guy that decides this. I'd do better than whoever it is now.

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.