NHL Rule Changes

[Brass]

We're def going to see new styles of hockey. Remember in the Olympics, I think it was Sweden or Finland, they had a play called the 'Tornado' or 'Cyclone'? It worked pretty good and I think that we're going to see hockey like that soon.

[winters in buffalo]

Nobody mentioned the line moves.

The blue lines have been moved to shrink the neutral zone from 54 to 50 feet, and the goal lines are now 2 feet closer to the board, adding 4 feet to the attack zone.

[NJTank]

Im glad they didnt touch the nets the goalies are already getting hit with equipment amnd not allowe dto touch puck as often, plus the no red line.

[winters in buffalo]

I can't foresee any changes to the net just yet. As it is, scoring should jump considerably.

If it gets to the point where every game is a 12-10 final, I'll be very upset.

[Huskyfan82]

I really wonder how much scoring will go up though? I mean, they've instituted rules before to increase scoring and it hasn't done much good. I do think this will increase it a little bit, but not a ton. Maybe we'll have more 6-4 games rather then 2-1.

David

[jkrdevil]

A lot of people are excited about the removal of the red line but I don't see it changing a thing at even strength. If a team has a decent forecheck the wingers aren't going to leave the zone for a long pass. Because if the lose control the attacking team has an odd man advantage until the wingers get back. If the dumps the puck in for a change the goalie can't just send it up to the forwards at the other blue line because goalie play has been restricted. By the time the D man get to the puck (they will probably be at their blue line when the puck is dumped) there will be a few new players on the ice to attempt to intercept a long pass. The only time I see the 2 line pass come into play is on a power play. I've played hockey for 13 years and although never at a real high level I've seen the 2 line pass at even strength happen maybe a dozen times. I just don't see it opening up the game like some people think. That real long pass isn't going to happen often at even strength.

I think looking at the Olympics for rule changes is a joke. Of course the Olympics are going to be exciting hockey, it features the best players in the world. Gretzky passing to Mario is going to be exciting. And when you have players of that skill level playing it's going to be more open. It's an All-Star tournament and your not going to get that level skill with a regular season NHL game. I like a lot of the changes the league made, and I like this one. I just don't think it's going to be this great change everyone thinks it will be.

[-kj]

I'm sorry... I know what you all mean... but I have to say it...

THE RED LINE IS NOT BEING REMOVED.

The two-line "offside" pass is no longer an illegal play. That is all.

[-kj]

I can't believe they didn't adopt the new nets.

I can't tell you how upset I would be had they messed with the net dimensions/shapes... especially if they'd chosen that goofy monstrosity.

[CC97]

I'm sorry... I know what you all mean... but I have to say it...

THE RED LINE IS NOT BEING REMOVED.

The two-line "offside" pass is no longer an illegal play. That is all.

Thanks Kev I hate when people say "Red line is being removed" -- it'll still be there.

I was half-excited thinking that the OTL was being eliminated, but it's still there -- There should be the same amount of points awarded per game, not 2 for most and 3 for some. If you want to award an OTL then go 1½ pts to the winner and ½point to the loser.

Woot

[-kj]

I've got a crazy idea. If you're going to go with the shootout (and by know you all know I hate the idea), do it this way...

Win not decided by shootout: 3 points

Win decided by shootout: 2 points

Loss decided by shootout: 1 point

Loss not decided by shootout: 0 point

That way, there are no "bonus" points for overtime games, and the reward for winning and avoiding the shootout is greater.

I know it's non-traditional, but if you're going to blow out tradition by adopting the farce that is a shootout, you might as well try and be logical about the standings ramifications.

[NJTank]

I like your point system Mockba

[redsfan39]

I've got a crazy idea. If you're going to go with the shootout (and by know you all know I hate the idea), do it this way...

Win not decided by shootout: 3 points

Win decided by shootout: 2 points

Loss decided by shootout: 1 point

Loss not decided by shootout: 0 point

That way, there are no "bonus" points for overtime games, and the reward for winning and avoiding the shootout is greater.

I know it's non-traditional, but if you're going to blow out tradition by adopting the farce that is a shootout, you might as well try and be logical about the standings ramifications.

sounds good to me. or you know, we could just go by wins-losses-ties

[Stampman]

I've got a crazy idea. If you're going to go with the shootout (and by know you all know I hate the idea), do it this way...

Win not decided by shootout: 3 points

Win decided by shootout: 2 points

Loss decided by shootout: 1 point

Loss not decided by shootout: 0 point

That way, there are no "bonus" points for overtime games, and the reward for winning and avoiding the shootout is greater.

I know it's non-traditional, but if you're going to blow out tradition by adopting the farce that is a shootout, you might as well try and be logical about the standings ramifications.

Well yeah--if they're tossing out tradition--still I like the idea of an extra point to go all out before the shootout--

But on the other hand--there will be more scoring records that don't have the name "Wayne Gretzky" beside them...

If I had enough money I would pay the NHL to not have shootouts...

[BBTV]

I hope that the standings go back to three columns, but I think there's just as good of a shot we'll see W-L-OTL-SOL in our newspapers come October.  And bully for bringing in the shootout while not scrapping standard overtime.  Shootouts are riveting stuff, and when I saw my first one in the IHL I thought "why on Earth doesn't the NHL do this?"  Come to think of it, maybe the first hockey shootout I ever saw was on Blades of Steel.  But I digress.  My only complaint is that I wish the standings points were distributed like this:

IT will be 3 coloums because the shootout is considered part of the overtime.

The Philly Inquirer reported that there will be 4 coloums.

Win, Loss, Shootout Loss, OTL.

[wheateater]

The Philly Inquirer reported that there will be 4 coloums.

Win, Loss, Shootout Loss, OTL.

Considering how the AHL had those four columns this past year, I'd have to believe the NHL will follow suit in this regard.

[jkrdevil]

Well, no surprise here Brodeur doesn't like the goalie restriction rule changes. Though he does have a point With the "2-line pass" being legal now allowing the goalies to play the puck opens up the game because if a team dumps the puck the goalie can send it up to the opposing blue line. Now it's harder for them to that. The NHL is trying to open up the game but the goalie restrictions close up again. Look I'm fine if you want to make the goalies fare game outside of the crease however I don't think you should limit them playing the puck.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Sports/Sunday/2...145461-sun.html

[wheateater]

I agree, jkr. Brodeur (and Turco, among others) are the elite puck-handling goaltenders in the league, and limiting their range of motion on the ice is like telling Peter Forsberg to never take a dive. It ain't right.

The least they could do -- to cut down on delay of game activity by goalies (i.e.- chipping the puck out of their zone or cutting it off around the boards), as well as to allow those goalies to play the puck -- is, say, let them play the puck below the icing line or maybe below the face-off dots. That way, it keeps the goalies from looking like forwards and also allows them to move the puck up ice in an attempt to start fast break opportunities. But we'll see how strictly this new rule is followed or if it's just another "obstruction" deal...