David Stern sent us Bettman

[Jason Harris 31]

People say Extreme Fighting is going to surpass hockey in terms of popularity soon, and possibly even other more well known sports. Clearly, as the name indicates, Extreme Fighting is based around physicality and as some would say "barbarity". But the NHL sought to eliminate the "barbarity" with different rules, enforcement, etc., but instead of helping the league, it's hurt it. Kind of ironic. What we tried to eliminate is exactly what's making another sport even more popular.

I believe the irony is not that hockey has hurt itself, because the fact that the salary cap is scheduled to increase seems to be indicative that its recent rules changes haven't hurt, but rather that spectators will allow "barbarity" when it's upfront but not as a sidenote to a sport. In other words, you're correct that Extreme Fighting will probably surpass hockey, yet hockey is castigated for allowing goonery. The audience has given different levels of expectations to each sport.

[Chadd 916]

People say Extreme Fighting is going to surpass hockey in terms of popularity soon, and possibly even other more well known sports. Clearly, as the name indicates, Extreme Fighting is based around physicality and as some would say "barbarity". But the NHL sought to eliminate the "barbarity" with different rules, enforcement, etc., but instead of helping the league, it's hurt it. Kind of ironic. What we tried to eliminate is exactly what's making another sport even more popular.

I believe the irony is not that hockey has hurt itself, because the fact that the salary cap is scheduled to increase seems to be indicative that its recent rules changes haven't hurt, but rather that spectators will allow "barbarity" when it's upfront but not as a sidenote to a sport. In other words, you're correct that Extreme Fighting will probably surpass hockey, yet hockey is castigated for allowing goonery. The audience has given different levels of expectations to each sport.

A benchclearing brawl in baseball is just some "goold old fashioned fun" while two guys settling their differences in a hockey game is "thuggery". That said, there is no reason to have guys whose sole purpose on the team is to fight. Team toughness and willingness to stand up for themselves is far more important than having one guy who may or may not be able to eventually catch up to someone in an effort to settle a score.

[JJ Thompson94 0]

If anyone reads John Buccigross' column on ESPN.com he's been pushing for larger nets. One day i'm for it, the next day I'm against it. Maybe a goal thats 2 inches wider and 1 inch higher can make a huge difference. That with more rules on goalie equipment scoring will definitly increase. Goalies are SO MUCH better than they used to be. Half of goals they show gretzky and lemiex score back in the day would not be going in today. You know what i'm talking about. Maybe it's time to make bigger nets. we should at least give it a shot at AHL.

If anyone has the NHL network, you'll know, but there are these commercials that are these quick "frozen in time" stories. They have a bunch, one on gretzky, bossy and and more, but theres on on Tom Barrasso and theres this quick shot of him skating in practice with no helmet. The shot is from the waist up, but you can't see his blocker and glove. You would never know thats a goalie from that shot. His chest equipment and shoulders were so small I thought he had no equipement on but the zoom out and he's wearing everything but the helmet. Thats what goalies should look like.

[chippa13 1844]

Goalies are bigger, stronger, and better athletes. Blah, blah, blah. So are the players.

[Chadd 916]

Goalies are bigger, stronger, and better athletes. Blah, blah, blah. So are the players.

Goal pads are supposed to protect the players, not enable them to cover more of the net. Giggy is the perfect example, the guy is a beanpole but in his gear he looks like the Michelin man.

[chippa13 1844]

The impact of a 100 mph shot has to be dispersed somehow and thick, lightweight padding is how. Sure, the leg pads can be trimmed some and the cheater on the catching glove seems a little over the top but there isn't all that much you can take without putting goalies at risk of injury.

[mrusse01 0]

Goalies are bigger, stronger, and better athletes. Blah, blah, blah. So are the players.

Goal pads are supposed to protect the players, not enable them to cover more of the net. Giggy is the perfect example, the guy is a beanpole but in his gear he looks like the Michelin man.

Exactly.

The argument that less equipment is unsafe for the goalies doesn't hold water...look back at the low-tech, low-mass equipment of the 70's and 80's and look at guys now. I don't think players can shoot the puck THAT much harder these days, and the increase in equipment size has gone off the charts. How did guys stop Bobby Hull back in the 60's when he could apparently shoot harder than any player can today AND they had no restriction on curves so the puck could get up a lot quicker?

I think making the nets bigger is a retarded idea. Aside from having to get rid of every net currently on every rink in the world, it would really screw with the angles that goalies need to play. I know one of the guys I play with freaks out if the net is a few inches off centre (as it is at many rinks), I can't imagine what it would be like if they changed the dimensions entirely.

[chippa13 1844]

The pads of the 70's and 80's were also heavier and held water better than the Hoover dam.

[mrusse01 0]

The pads of the 70's and 80's were also heavier and held water better than the Hoover dam.

Are you suggesting that 30-40 years ago they could manufacture equipment that is safer than the stuff made today with modern materials?

I'm sure they can make pads today the exact same size as in the 70's that are lighter, retain less water, AND are more protective.

[cxo 0]

Technology has allowed for serious weight reduction and cool graphics. Padding is padding still, and back then, it was thicker/heavier/more protective.

[chippa13 1844]

The pads of the 70's and 80's were also heavier and held water better than the Hoover dam.

Are you suggesting that 30-40 years ago they could manufacture equipment that is safer than the stuff made today with modern materials?

I'm sure they can make pads today the exact same size as in the 70's that are lighter, retain less water, AND are more protective.

Not what I suggested at all. The pads from yesteryear were filled with thick padding. That is why they were safe enough to the time. Also, because most guys weren't getting the kind of quick loading and releases from sticks as they are today, goalies had that split second to face a shot. That isn't the case anymore. As Brodeur says, "Everybody is shooting from everywhere." That means padding has to be more than just dead ahead, there has to be some wrap around or goalies are going to get hurt.

Shrink the catching glove, shorten the leg pads, make sure noone has the Garth Snow shoulder tabs and there isn't much left, other than maybe the cheater and the elbow boxes. This won't change the shape of the overall goalie much.

[Jason Harris 31]

I think shrinking the width of leg pads to the 11" that's been suggested is enough wraparound to be effective. Even if a goalie had 7" shins, which would be incredibly stocky legs, he'd still have 2" extra on each side. I've only played goalie occasionally, but 2+" seems to be ample protection.