Jump to content

What rules would you change to improve the game?


Habs77

Recommended Posts

There are a million of them:

- no red line

- bigger nets

- remove the larger ice behind the net back to what it was before

- make penalties a full 2:00 like the old days

- reduce goalie equipment

- reduce teams from 4 lines 6 D to 3 lines 4 D

- reduce # of teams

- no longer allowed to ice puck on PK

-... many more

Personally:

- I agree with removing the red line, removing the extra space behing the net to what it was before

- reduce the goalie equipment in a major way

- don't touch the nets

- full 2 minutes penalty I don't mind either but I'm afraid refs will be even more scared to call penalties... I prefer them finally just calling the damn penalties *sigh*

- reducing players is a nice idea, Guy Lafleur's idea, but the NHLPA will never accept it so we can forget it.

- reducing # of teams would be nice but that won't happen either.

- if icing is no longer allowed on PK there will just be a bunch of icings... we want to give some flow to the game not take it away.

What are your opinions?... and I know I forgot some possible changes, please add on.

One of my personal suggestions that the NHL is not even considering would be penalizing players for delay of game automatically if they shoot it in the stands... just like the goalies.

This would penalize teams that just keep banking the pucks mindlessly off the glass, and reward those who carry it out and move the puck out effectively.

Encourages the players to keep the puck on the ice, and play hockey.

If it's off a deflection then no penalty of course. And if a guy shoots a rolling puck over the net & in the stands then too bad, learn to aim. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offside on entry into offensive zone. Players are permitted to enter the offensive zone before the puck, assuming there is no two line pass being committed. Once the puck leaves the offensive zone the referee holds his arm up indicating a delayed offside until all the offensive players clear the zone, at which point the process starts over again.

Outcome:Defensemen are forced to follow forwards that rush past them, thus opening the neutral zone for the other players; meanwhile offering more creative and fast-paced plays.

TimeFrame: Introduce it in two NHL pre-season games per team and the AHL level next season and then full-time immediately following CBA negotiations.

Clear-the-zone shorthanded icing. Teams that are killing a penalty must clear their zone (cross the blueline) before icing the puck. Failing to do so will result in an icing call.

Outcome: Eliminating any advantage to a penalized team while encouraging more skilled puck handling rather than mindless dumping.

TimeFrame: Immediately following CBA negotiations.

Shrink all equipment. Set up a system in which the size of all equipment, of both skaters and goaltenders, are at a strict limit. Furthermore, all current and in-coming equipment must be given league approval, based on security only, before being permitted into circulation.

Outcome: Reduced size in goalie equipment will offer more open net and reduced size in skater equipment will create marginal, but essential space on ice.

TimeFrame: Immediately

Full-length Penalty. Penalized players are forced to serve their full penalty time regardless of power play goals. On the other hand, if a team scores shorthanded, its penalty will be nullified. (Except for double minors, majors, repeat in-game offenders, and any penalties to a team pass a certain limit.)

Outcome: Give bigger emphasis to a power play and bigger punishment for an infraction, while offering a certain safety net for shorthanded teams.

TimeFrame: Two seasons following CBA negotiations.

Restructuring of ice markings. Authorize all three major zones (both end zones and the neutral zone) to be 60 feet each, thereby making the behind the net areas 10 feet each.

Outcome: Create more ice physically in front of the net to encourage more open play, and less scrap play behind the net.

TimeFrame: Immediately

Subjective Icing calls. Allow the linesmen to make the judgement of whether to leave the icing call as a touch up rule or an automatic rule, according to the situation. If the linesman judges there be a legitimate chance for a cancellation of the icing by the icing team, then he treats it as a touch up rule. If he sees no effort or no legitimate chance to cancel the icing by the offending team, then he shall use the automatic rule. Communication between the lineman and the players shall be at a maximum.

Outcome: This shall create a more efficient flow to the game by saving 3-6 seconds of game time per obvious and blatant icing dump. However, it will also allow icing teams the opportunity to cancel an accidental icing.

TimeFrame: Two seasons following CBA negotiations.

Re-arrange team schedules. Re-introduce the 80-game schedule having divisional rivals play 7 times against each other, conference rivals play four times against each other and teams play 12 games against specific teams. (EX: original- six Canadian teams (Habs & Leafs) play 3 times against western Canadian teams, one time against western original six teams, and one more time against each other.)

Outcome: Creating more intense, divisional games, while limiting travel to inter-conference games, for the most part.

TimeFrame: Immediately following CBA negotiations.

Re-arrange league scheduling. NHL regular season begins, at the latest, on the 7th of October, nonetheless at the first Wednesday of October. Also, finishing the regular season, at the earliest, on the 28th of March, always on the last Sunday of March. The playoffs would start on the following Wednesday, the earliest would be the 31st of March.

Outcome: The league would then have a standard schedule to work with every season, while allowing for a more traditional ending period for the NHL Stanley Cup Final.

TimeFrame: Immediately following CBA negotiations.

Limitations to Icing. The most outrageous idea would be to limit the number of icings allotted to each team per period to a certain number, eg. 6. Surpassing the limit would result in a brief, 45-second icing penalty to be served by a player on the penalized team. This penalty would be in a category of its own and would not affect powerplay and penalty-killing efficiencies nor players penalty totals.

Outcome: Would provide a greater importance to icings and would discourage safe-dumping by teams late in the game.

TimeFrame: Three seasons following CBA negotiations.

Re-structure the Free Agency System. As part of the new CBA, the league would create only 6 free agency groups:

GR.1: players between the ages of 25 and 28, or younger with 6 years of NHL experience, they are restricted and are subject to a right to match and compensation.

GR.2: players between the ages of 28 and 31, they are free to negotiation with any team, free from compensation and are only subject to a right to counter offer once a formal, foreign offer has been made. Players are free to choose either contract. *

GR.3: players 32 years old and higher, they are free to negotiate and sign at their will.

GR.4: Players under 28 years of age who were not rendered a qualifying offer by their respective teams, they are free to negotiate and sign at their will. (Players 28 years old and over are not subject to qualifying offers)

GR.5: Players of any age who were formally released by their respective teams. They are free to negotiate and sign at their will. (Players with less than 8 years of NHL experience may be released without condition; however players with 8 years or more must pass through 72-hour waivers unclaimed to be released.)

GR.6: Players who are five years removed from their draft year and have yet to appear in a certain amount of NHL games. They are free to negotiate and sign at their will.

- Players under 25 years old with fewer than six years of NHL experience will be limited to the NHL average salary of the previous year for the base salary, with only their performance bonuses subject to negotiations. First contracts must be three years; others are renewed on a yearly basis with qualifying offers. Bonuses are at a limit and can only triple the seasonal salaries of these players

* Individual players’ salary limit will be placed at 7 million per season. However teams may counter offer to a maximum of 25% per season. more to resign there own group 2 and 3 free agents. Total bonuses in an individual contract cannot exceed 15% of the total monetary value of the contract over the life of the contract, excluding option years.

-Players are permitted to exceed the 7 million dollar limit, regardless of contract, free agency group and originating team, once they have met performance bonuses: 6 of the 10 in the previous 3 seasons, or 8 of the 10 in the previous 5 seasons.

For forwards: Art Ross, Rocket Richard, Hart, Conn Smythe, Selke, 1st team all-star 3 times, 2nd team all-star 4 times, nominee for Hart twice, top 10 in plus/minus, top 5 in Art Ross or Rocket Richard twice.

For Defensemen: Norris, Conn Smythe, Hart, Defensive points leader, 1st team all-star 3 times, 2nd team all-star 4 times, nominee for Norris three times, leader in plus/minus, top 15 in plus/minus, top 3 in Defensive points twice,

For Goalkeepers: Vezina, Conn Smythe, Hart, GAA leader, SP leader, wins leader, nominee for Vezina three times, top 5 in GAA three times (or top 3 twice), top 5 in SP three times(or top 3 twice), top 5 in wins three times(or top 3 twice).

Outcome: This scenario would create a greater financial balance and regular salary increase based on experience, success and age. Players will receive greater autonomy as compensation for stricter salary limitations.

TimeFrame: Immediately following CBA negotiations.

That's what I would like to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by GoHabs2002

No offside on entry into offensive zone. Outcome:Defensemen are forced to follow forwards that rush past them, thus opening the neutral zone for the other players; meanwhile offering more creative and fast-paced plays.

Eliminating the red line accomplishes the same outcome and is much easier for refs to enforce, and fans to understand. Plus the precedence for removing the red line is already there.

And you could still have guys waiting at the other end of the ice late in games... and a D man can try to shoot the puck towards an opponent's skate hoping it'll go to the end of the ice and provide his teammate with a breakaway late in games they are behind.

The offside rule is just so fundamental you can't just remove it like that. I wouldn't be for that at all.

Clear-the-zone shorthanded icing. Teams that are killing a penalty must clear their zone (cross the blueline) before icing the puck. Failing to do so will result in an icing call.

Outcome: Eliminating any advantage to a penalized team while encouraging more skilled puck handling rather than mindless dumping.

Why not make it the red line as in regular play to simplify things, why the blue line?

And as I said many GMs feel teams will often clear the puck anyway... resulting in more play stoppages, which the league wants to cut down & not increase.

Shrink all equipment. Set up a system in which the size of all equipment, of both skaters and goaltenders, are at a strict limit.

I think everyone agrees with that one, but should a 6'4'' goalie be restricted to the same size equipment than a 5'8'' goalie?.. I'm thinking pads here.

For gloves they should be vastly reduced in size, those things are ridiculous nowadays.

Then there is the enforcement issue... but anyway, some type of control on equipment seems necessary. For goalies to increase scoring, for players to decrease injuries.

Full-length Penalty. Penalized players are forced to serve their full penalty time regardless of power play goals. On the other hand, if a team scores shorthanded, its penalty will be nullified.

As I said, on paper I like the full time served because it should increase scoring and the league has a precedent for it.... but refs would be even more scared to call penalties in big games. And you could potentially see a bad call cost a team 2 goals... ugh

The more I think of it, the more I'm convinced we shouldn't change it... simply start calling all the penalties for a change would do more good.

And if a team scores short-handed it's penalty is over too?... what?!? :guru:

Restructuring of ice markings.

Moving the nets back seems logical... again that's how it used to be. If it can help get rid of the stupid & boring cycling... amen.

Subjective Icing calls. Allow the linesmen to make the judgement of whether to leave the icing call as a touch up rule or an automatic rule, according to the situation.

It should be plain automatic. If subjective you'll end up with situations where the ref figured there was no shot when there was near the end of a game... a few extra seconds were saved and the game is tied late.

The less the refs can be subjective about the better.

Re-arrange team schedules.

There's already been a move towards focusing on developping rivalries... I agree that should be emphasized.

Re-arrange league scheduling.

You can't have a precise schedule because the playoffs schedule depend on how long each series goes.

If anything I'd have the league start a week or two earlier... so they'd have time to play the World Championships during a 2 week break with the best players there... would garner more interest for the sport.

Or if that's not important to the league, then starting a week or 2 earlier would allow to ease the scheduling a little... fresher players make for better games. That plus focusing on division play would reduce travel, another way players to remain fresher during the season grind... makes for better games and might cut down on injuries too.

Limitations to Icing. The most outrageous idea would be to limit the number of icings allotted to each team per period to a certain number, eg. 6. Surpassing the limit would result in a brief, 45-second icing penalty to be served by a player on the penalized team. This penalty would be in a category of its own and would not affect powerplay and penalty-killing efficiencies nor players penalty totals.

Whao now, you're getting way too creative here... seriously :)

Re-structure the Free Agency System.  

That really doesn't address the question of thread which is how to improve the game on the ice.

Btw a per player cap will never fly with the NHLPA... I prefer trying to find solutions that actually have a chance at happening.

The most interesting idea in terms of increasing player accountability is that the NHL is planning to ask the non-guaranteed contracts after the first 2 years of the contract. You can sign a guy to a 10-year deal but release him after the 2nd year if he hasn't delivered... like the NHL/CFL does.

That would mean UFAs won't be able to cash in with ridiculous 5-6 year deals that pay them way too much for the last years of their careers when they're past their prime and no longer worth the $$... they'll simply be dropped.

Mistakes like Jagr, Yashin could also be dumped and not haunt a franshise for a decade... Audette comes to mind.

And the NHL brass is a conservative bunch, I doubt they'll make more than 1 or 2 changes at once... so if you could only change only 2 which would they be?

I'd say move the nets back and remove the red line.

That would cut down on cycling & help break the trap in the neutral zone. Both will bring more flow to the game, like the old days.

Regulating equipment is not a "rule change" per say, that should obviously be done.

And call the damn penalties, just apply the damn rule book.... that's not a rule change but it would help a lot.

One more rule I'd like to consider is no longer allowing the goalies to leave go behind the goal line to stop a clear in... it prevents the offense from applying pressure on the D, leads to less offense. Let the players play, and the goalies stop pucks.

Or if they do leave the net, at least make them fair game... they'll stop going on their own pretty quick.

For them to have immunity in the corners and behind the net is silly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Removing the red line, i Think would create more icings than the league needs. The reason it works in international hockey is that in most cases the teams consist of the most talented players possible, while the NHL does not have that luxury. SOme players just cant make or accept a decent pass 6 times out of 10. Also, The neutral zone can still be as clogged up as it is now.

BUt with my offside rule, the defending team can clog the neutral zone all they want, if the offensive team can pass the red line (to eliminate the chance of a two line pass) with the puck one of their players will have a chance to skate pass one of the defenders, hence forcing them to go back. The neutral zone gets less clogged and the play will speed up and be more creative.

And it is not that complicated. GOing into the offensive zone there is not offside whatsoever. However once the puck leaves the zone, the offensive team must clear the zone entirley. The only time an offside is called is when the puck is re-entered before the zone is cleared entirely. THats it thats all.

Thats the first thing i would do.

THe second thing I would do is fix the ice markings and the equipment. Both are marginal so they should be included together. The equipment should be fixed in proportion to the players' bodies. But for goalies, protection of body must be enforced not protection of goal.

those are my two

but for my shorthand-goal-kills-the-powerplay idea. Its just to provide incentive for shorthanded teanms. IF a powerplay is goin to be a full two minutes, there should be one way to provide some way to kill the powerplay so the shorthanded team does not get killed with 3-4 powerplay goals each time.

Finally, for my penalty killing icing idea, its just sympathy i guess. IF they are shorthanded, they should be given loose icing rules. BUt i wouldnt be upset if it is the red line. BUt either way i would love to see the limitations on icing. BUt thats two modern, for the traditional governors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by GoHabs2002

Removing the red line, i Think would create more icings than the league needs. The reason it works in international hockey is that in most cases the teams consist of the most talented players possible, while the NHL does not have that luxury. SOme players just cant make or accept a decent pass 6 times out of 10.

I've heard that argument made a million times, I just don't buy it. Sure the talent is more watered down, there might be more icings because of it... but that will be off-set by all the "two-line" whistles we will no longer have to endure.

Also, The neutral zone can still be as clogged up as it is now.

Point is the trap will have to spread from blue line to blue line instead of blue line to red line... effectively doubling the room for the offense.

If teams don't want to spread their trap and decide to move it back instead from the red line to their own blue line... then that gives the offense a clear shot at making the red line and dumping the puck in the offensive zone, thereby avoiding the trap altogether.

Either way, a form of trap will still exist but the offense will have more of a chance to overcome it.

I also like how it'll make the rule uniform with rules in Europe... as that fan base is likely key to the future of the league that's a good thing too.

BUt with my offside rule, the defending team can clog  the neutral zone all they want, if the offensive team can pass the red line (to eliminate the chance of a two line pass) with the puck one of their players will have a chance to skate pass one of the defenders, hence forcing them to go back.  The neutral zone gets less clogged and the play will speed up and be more creative.

You'd have the Dman behind his net waiting start the play and a forward already in front of the opposing net hoping for a tic-tac play via a player at the red line.... would make for a totally disjointed game, players at all ends of the ice all game long... ugh, no thanks.

... and realistically it's just not anything the league will ever consider so why even go there.

THe second thing I would do is fix the ice markings and the equipment.  Both are marginal so they should be included together. The equipment should be fixed in proportion to the players' bodies.  But for goalies, protection of body must be enforced not protection of goal.

Moving the nets back will at least bring the dull cycling plays closer to the net... equipment everyone can agree on but the details of the regulation will be the cumbersome part, as well as enforcement.

but for my shorthand-goal-kills-the-powerplay idea. Its just to provide incentive for shorthanded teanms. IF a powerplay is goin to be a full two  minutes, there should be one way to provide some way to kill the powerplay so the shorthanded team does not get killed with 3-4 powerplay goals each time.

Makes as much sense to me than giving a point for an OT loss... and again too creative, will simply never happen so why bother.

Hockey is a game of tradition... instead of inventing new creative rules I rather focus on getting back to the old hockey the way it used to be.

There's more chance of gaining a concensus among GMs by taking that approach as well, we have to be realistic here.

- get the equipment back to normal like the 80s

- move the net back like the 80s

- the only innovation would be no more red line, because sadly we can't go back to the coaching of the 80s, the trap is here and we have to deal with it.

And no red line is hardly science fiction, it's already the norm in the international game, and has been tried in the minor leagues.

We have more teams than in the 80s, but we have many more Europeans than in the 80s... so although contracting a few teams wouldn't hurt I think we can do well despite 30 teams if the other measures are taken.

And goalies didn't leave the net like they do today, something has to be done about that... either outlaw them going being the red line to play the puck or make them truly fair game if they leave their crease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go back to the old offside rule: No more delayed offside. Once the defending team has played the puck within their zone, the offside is nullified. I also don't like that hand passes are allowed in the defensive zone. If a dman loses his stick, or happens to get knocked down near the puck, tough luck. If it's not allowed in either the neutral zone, or the offensive zone, it shouldn't be allowed anywhere else on the ice.

Those are two rules that are designed to aid a defending team clear the puck.

I also concur with the equipment regs and the nets being moved back. The red line removed, while a good idea, will simply not happen. Damn traditionalists!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hockey is a game of tradition... instead of inventing new creative rules I rather focus on getting back to the old hockey the way it used to be.

Thats probably the biggest problem in the NHL, they tend to recycle ideas rather than think creatively and offer something new and never-before seen to the fans.

They need something to create a buzz, and any radical change will, but i think doing something no one ever thought of would be even more positive.

You'd have the Dman behind his net waiting start the play and a forward already in front of the opposing net hoping for a tic-tac play via a player at the red line.... would make for a totally disjointed game, players at all ends of the ice all game long... ugh, no thanks.  

That is a scenario that will not and cannot happen on a regular basis. You think Anaheim would have been able to accomplish that play with a Devils Player intercepting the past, I doubt it. Maybe teams would try that with only seconds left or something but i think teams would use the offside rule to establishing a better rushing attack.

How many times have you seen a rush of any kind, three on three or whatever, be cancelled out because someone's feet was ahead of the puck. Or how many times did you see someone rushing with the puckhandler(who is slower), having to kill all his speed and wait for the puck to cross. And how many times have you seen (especially with the Habs) three or four players wait and literally stand around along the blueline just itching a waiting for the puck to be dumped in because thats all the team can do.

My offside rule would eliminate all these situations and would encourage creative offensive strategies that does not only involve passing plays.

it's just not anything the league will ever consider so why even go there.  

that is true. Which is too bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these rules wont change a thing. No matter what, you will always have little Valeri Bure who has great skills and speed not have a chance in hell to pass besides, under, over or thru guys like Zdeno Chara and whoever plays next to him.

You will still have guys like Turner Stevenson be effective because they big, even though they are slow as hell.

IMO, there is only one way to fix the game, and that's slightly bigger ice-rinks... but still smaller than the international ones. The best way to improve the game is to improve the players that play it. Turner Stevenson wont stand a chance on the large surface against Valeri Bure... or even Petrov. They wont even have time to hook the opposing player because there will be room on the ice.

We would see of those skilled players that are great, but just couldn't get to the NHL because of their size, and we'll see less of those big, large, slow, dumb players that can't play but still manage to make it because of their size.

Smaller equipment = more goals, not better hockey. If you have more players in the ice with skills, there will be more goals anyway. All 3 or 4 lines will have players who can handle the puck, and put it past the net.

Remove the red line, and 4 of the Devils forwards will stay at the blue instead.

Improve the players, and you will improve the game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone thought of getting Broomball nets?

Or making the rinks bigger than international... and adding another player called the 'Rover'! (the first Australian to play ice hockey competitively in North America was a 'rover', and a damn good one at that.

Or take away helmets...

Allow bigger curves for stick blades?

Take away the goalie's stick?

Put Lacrosse rules in?

Make a bigger puck? A smaller puck?

How about an XHL?

How about no Scott?

:lol:

:nono:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by CerebusClones

You will still have guys like Turner Stevenson be effective because they big, even though they are slow as hell.

Not if they can't hold or hook. If the rules were called as they are written in the rulebook I disagree with your statement.

If they aren't applied.. then yes slower/bigger players will still manage to bring the game down to their level.

IMO, there is only one way to fix the game, and that's slightly bigger ice-rinks... but still smaller than the international ones.

I think it would help too, but like I said earlier no point coming up with solution that have no chance of happening. Most NHL cities have recently constructed new buildings, the opportunity to increase the ice-size has come and gone.

We have to find a solution with the means available.

It's like a guy who washes up on a deserted island and has to figure out a way to start a fire... and all he can think of is "I need a lighter".

He's not wrong, but he's no closer to starting that fire.

The best way to improve the game is to improve the players that play it.

I know that's not the way you meant it, but reducing the number of teams would accomplish this... that could happen.

Smaller equipment = more goals, not better hockey.

So true... smaller equipment will not change how the game is played, just the result on the scoreboard.

And yet it might attract more fans, and that can't be ignored.

Remove the red line, and 4 of the Devils forwards will stay at the blue instead.

If they stay at their blue line instead, that means they gave you the red line... from which point you can now shoot it in and avoid the trap altogether.

(People don't realize how much of a key difference that is, between a trap at the red line and one at the blue line)

Combine that with no longer allowing the goalies to leave the net to play the shoot ins... and you've just solved the trap.

If they put 4 guys on the line your forwards will get to the dump ins first... eventually the teams will understand that they have to have 2 guys back to avoid this, and now you can carry it in too.

Improve the players, and you will improve the game...

Can't dispute that... and I say that if you call the rules to the letter, a lot of 3rd-4th liners would lose their jobs... replaced with smaller players who have the talent but couldn't make it because of their size.

The more we expand the practice of the sport in other countries the larger pool of players the NHL will have to choose from, increasing quality in the process.

If a few teams who can't make it financially are contracted quality will increase there too.

There a lot of ways the game can be improved, I disagree a slightly larger ice surface would solve everything (although it would help), and I disagree it's the ONLY way to effectively improve the game.

[Edited on 12-6-03 by Habs77]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not if they can't hold or hook. If the rules were called as they are written in the rulebook I disagree with your statement.  

A few guys would lose their jobs, but not enough. We need to give the smaller, but faster ans smarter players a chance to pass by the larger dumber ones. Im actually pretty sure that some of the very good players in the NHL today would have a hard time keeping their job if that happened.

I know that's not the way you meant it, but reducing the number of teams would accomplish this... that could happen.

I agree that it would help, but I disagree with most people that it is necessary. There are plenty of players out there who can't make it into the NHL because of their size that could improve the quality of the game.

We just need teams to value skills over size, and force them if we have to ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...