Would red netting increase scoring?

[Ogie Oglethorpe 14]

I think red would be harder to see through (mostly perception). So if you are trying to look from the front to someone behind the net, you would have a harder time since the white net matches the boards usually and any contrast is a person (thier stick etc).

I think a red net would be harder to see the puck inside the net from behind as well so anyone behind the net (like a camera) showing the puck, the contrast with the white net would not be there.

If they want more scoring they should get what they have in my req leauge. A bunch of defensemen who don't work together and give the puck up alot ;)

More scoring would be nice the thing is it makes records less meaningful.

If they want more scoring there are plenty of things they can change that would affect scoring and the statistics are far more predictable

1) call more penalties

2) taller or wider net

3) reduce size limit on goalie pads

4) Get rid of 2 line pass rule (make a 3 line pass rule :) )

5) Start the first 5 minutes of the period with an open net

6) Each team gets 1 penalty shot at the end of every period

7) Goalie gets a whiffleball bat instead of a stick

The idea is to increase scoring, and, for the most part, there's not a lot of it done from behind the net. So, if it's harder to see things behind the net, that's not the worse loss. Besides, if you have a harder time seeing the puck or the person behind the net, then it makes them more elusive, and puts them in better position to score.....

I think as far as rule changes go, any tugging with the stick - what so ever - is a penalty.

Also, make players serve the FULL penalty (like they do 5 minute majors). It used to be that way (they got rid of it when Edmonton and Montreal made a killing with their special teams).

Eliminate the no-whistle icing rule on penalty kills. This way, you wear the defending team down more, and should end up scoring more.

[Sticks of Fury 0]

Good ideas Ogie Oglethorpe!

Add a mandatory course for all players before the season starts and go over the rules with them. Stringently!!!!!

If players break the same rules repeatedly they have to report to a mandatory "re education" program :lol: . Include electric shocks until they can follow the rules ie no interference

[Edge 0]

I like the idea. It couldn't hurt in my opinion.

Main things that i would like to see:

Touch up offsides

wider nets

no 2 line pass rule

and this red net thing i like.

[iceholes 0]

phew...now I have an excuse...

gimme red nets... worth a try in the minors

[Tanner23 0]

well they are playing with white nets for like hundrets of years.. so why should it get changed?

Ya I agree why do we have to change everything whats wrong with the game how it is ?

[Chadd 916]

well they are playing with white nets for like hundrets of years.. so why should it get changed?

Ya I agree why do we have to change everything whats wrong with the game how it is ?

The color of nets isn't the problem. Anyone who is old enough to remember the NHL from before 1997 or so would never ask a question like that.

[Jbone 0]

I really couldn't care less what they do to the apperance of the game as long as they keep the rules the same.

[ladystorm3 0]

next thing we know the pucks will be colored also

[warrior37 0]

WHA kids, WHA

[hockeyfalcons456 0]

I like the game just the way it is ,I dont really like alot of goals in a game I like a 2-1 ,1-0 game with alot of chances and big saves and high intensity.

[Chadd 916]

I like the game just the way it is ,I dont really like alot of goals in a game I like a 2-1 ,1-0 game with alot of chances and big saves and high intensity.

Less than 10 legitimate scoring chances a game isn't entertaining.

[hockeyfalcons456 0]

Less than 10 legitimate scoring chances a game isn't entertaining.

Just because the NHL is like that,you cant say every other league only has 10 quality scoring chances a game.

[Chadd 916]

Less than 10 legitimate scoring chances a game isn't entertaining.

Just because the NHL is like that,you cant say every other league only has 10 quality scoring chances a game.

The NHL is the only league considering making the changes. Obviously many of the changes will filter down to the minor leagues but many of those leagues aren't all that entertaining.

[biff44 0]

I don't know about red nets...but I definitely think red underwear would improve scoring!

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID...DC583414B7F0000

[jjtt99 0]

I played some shinney this morning and took a good look at the netting. In this case it was so old it was kind of brown, but I thought the idea had some merit. I guess one thing to keep in mind is would it affect the fan's view of the game.

JJ

[Stampede 0]

I really like the idea.

At least there's a bit of science about it, rather than the guess work for all the other ideas.

Think got to take the red line out, at least it makes for a few more break aways which gets fans out of their seats.

[kevinbelt 0]

I like the game just the way it is ,I dont really like alot of goals in a game I like a 2-1 ,1-0 game with alot of chances and big saves and high intensity.

that's the thing. i think people think increasing scoring will lead to a better quality of play. the two are related, but not the same. i think the nhl should focus on improving quality of play instead of increased scoring.

the problem w/ today's game is that there isn't "alot [sic] of chances and big saves and high intensity." you have a bunch of guys who get by on obstructing the opposition on defense, then dumping and chasing when they get the puck. it's boring hockey. making the nets bigger won't really help that much. in fact, it will probably hurt, since it will give mediocre shooters more goals.

on the other hand, if you have a game with a lot of tape-to-tape passing, phenomenal saves, and great positional defense, but the score is only 2-1 at the end, it's great hockey. i'd rather see that than see a game played the status quo way but with a 7-5 final score.

think of soccer. goals are rare, but because of that, the focus isn't so much on merely scoring. especially in countries like brazil and the netherlands, players focus more on creative play with the ball - thinking of new ways to beat defenders, make passes, stuff like that. a team might only get 10 shots off in a game, but every single one makes you say "whoa."

ideally, nhl players would do this on their own, but it seems like whenever a guy like kovalev or jagr really works on that aspect of his game, he's labelled "soft" because he doesn't focus as much on hitting, etc. that's the real problem with the nhl: the culture favors mediocrity over talent. if you're an average player who goes into corners, gets dirty, etc., you'll have a longer career than a more skilled player. the goal should not be to simply increase the number of goals in a game (although i'd bet that scoring would go up if you improved the quality of play); it should be to shift the balance back in favor of skill.

with that in mind, i think the best things the nhl could do would be a) enforce more penalties (although i don't think they will - i think you'll need some sort of eye-in-the-sky to really do it), B) make penalties harsher (e.g. cause an injury, get a suspension, intentional or not), and c) open up the ice surface, widening it to int'l proportions and taking away the red line. do that, and you'll expose a lot of players for what they are: boring, unskilled hacks. (not that i'm not a hack, but then again, nobody pays to watch me play crappy.)

it's simple economics: incentives and disincentives. right now, the nhl game is set up to provide a lot of incentives for boring, uncreative play. change that, the game gets better. the number of goals doesn't really matter.

-k

[hockechamp14 0]

WHA kids, WHA

wait, weren't the finals for the bobby hull classic supossed to happen yesterday? <_<