NHL BOG Meetings on Wednesday - What is at stake?

[Fletch 219]

I posted this at HFBoards, but I wanted to post it here too to see what you guys think.

What exactly will be talked about on Wednesday? Will this meeting decide the new rules that will be put in place when the NHL resumes?

Here are the rule changes I would like to see -

1. Tap-up offsides brought back

2. Nets pushed back to where they were a few years ago

3. Goaltender leg pads reduced to 10" from 12"

4. New size restrictions put on goaltender chest/arm pads, as well as catching glove

5. Instigator rule needs to go

6. Two-referee system needs to go

7. Drop the word "obstruction" altogether

8. Subtract one skater off of each roster for games - from 18 skaters to 17

9. Institute a 2 mintue delay of game penalty for a skater who intentionally fires the puck over the glass instead of icing the puck (this means you, Chris Chelios). Goaltenders get a penalty for it, even if it's unintentional and skaters should have to face similar consequences.

10. The refs MUST call the game as the rulebook says to call it, all the time. That is the only way the clutching and grabbing will go away.

I would also like to see the NHL consider taking an inch off of the shaft of a goaltender's stick. It would be interesting to see if it would make a difference.

The NHL should leave these parts of the game alone. These aspects of the game are fine the way they are:

1. Icing

2. Blue line width

3. Red line

4. Net size

5. Color of ice, blue lines

As for the shootout situation, I have to admit that I am open to seeing it in the NHL. It will be exciting to watch, and fans will feel like they are getting something out of a game rather than seeing a tie. I personally don't mind ties, but a lot of people do, especially if they're shelling out $30 for a nosebleed seat. I think it should at least be given a chance. Also, news channels in the states will fianlly have something to show other than fights in their sports segments .

And as far as the playoffs go, and the idea of adding a "mini-tournament", it's something that I could do without, but I would be willing to see how it works. I read somewhere that they tried it in the AHL already. If they haven't yet, maybe they should try it out for a season in the A before trying it in the NHL.

And regarding the draft, I think it should defintely be a weighter lottery. Each team has a shot, but the teams that missed the playoffs the past few seasons have more of a shot at landing Crosby. Having it Colorado or Ottawa having just as much of a chance as Pittsburgh or Florida isn't fair, IMO.

Thoughts?

[mack 44]

I'd get rid of the curve limit too.

[Eazy_b97 1]

I generally agree. Right now I don't care about the icing, really it won't make a difference. Goaltenders equipment, after seeing some 12" Pads I have to believe most goalies are well above it. If they tweak the 12" rule and make height maximums (even by %, which I know causes problems) I think it'll help. If that fails, then go down to 10".

- Shootouts, I like, but if they are put in place its purely for fan enthusiasm (which I have no problems with)

- Draft. Bigger NHL markets have lost ALOT of revenue this years teams like Detroit, Colorado and Toronto, who were at the top of the league will have severly altered rosters when the NHL starts up. They should be in the lottery and have the oppurtunity, I don't mind weighing the picks, but nothing severe. These markets have helped bloom the game and deserve something in return, even if its just a chance at the Crosby sweepstakes.

My purposal for shootouts - Have them going into the second period. Then everygame the fans get to see a shootout, teams may even consider dressing someone who is just there for that. Then going into OT, knowing you'll lose if its tied, you can opt to pull your goalie or coach the situation a little bit. Really I am indifferent to this Idea, I've had it at some Tourneys and its got pros and cons. I think it'll make more highlights, but could also create more defensive style hockey in tight games. I'm just throwing out for ideas.

[Chadd 916]

1. Tap-up offsides brought back

It's coming back, no doubt about it.

2. Nets pushed back to where they were a few years ago

It was moved back in the AHL this year with no makor differences noted. It does actually help the goalie get back to play the puck.

3. Goaltender leg pads reduced to 10" from 12"

That's why the NHL started talking about bigger nets, now smaller pads don't seem so bad.

4. New size restrictions put on goaltender chest/arm pads, as well as catching glove

Just like players, some goalies like their pads tight, other like them loose. It's going to be very hard to enforce a size on chest and arm pads.

5. Instigator rule needs to go

Worst thing they could do. You will see more skill guys get jumped if that happens. I can see altering it slightly but trashing it will not benefit the league in any way.

6. Two-referee system needs to go

Just as bad as removing the instigator. I've watched it in the AHL and you have so much cheap crap going on behind the play the ref is always missing dangerous situations. Removing one ref and asking them to call everything as you do later makes their job impossible.

7. Drop the word "obstruction" altogether

That was done for new fans. It helps explain why it's ok to mug one guy but not touch another. I have no problem with just calling the penalties by their real names.

8. Subtract one skater off of each roster for games - from 18 skaters to 17

Hell go to 16, I'm in favor of it all the way.

9. Institute a 2 mintue delay of game penalty for a skater who intentionally fires the puck over the glass instead of icing the puck (this means you, Chris Chelios). Goaltenders get a penalty for it, even if it's unintentional and skaters should have to face similar consequences.

The rule is already there for doing it intentionally but is rarely called. Goalies are called if it was intentional or not. The AHL tried calling any player any time the puck cleared the glass and that idea was a bomb.

10. The refs MUST call the game as the rulebook says to call it, all the time. That is the only way the clutching and grabbing will go away.

Agreed. The teams and players have to suck it up and stop bitching about it too. The reason it stops getting called is because the coaches, players and some GM are always on tv or in print bitching about all the penalties.

[Fletch 219]

I'd get rid of the curve limit too.

Ah, good point. I forgot about that. That's such a ridiculous rule.

[Fletch 219]

Also, I'd like to add that the Goaltenders should only be able to play the puck behind the net. If they go into the corners, they can be hit. However, if the goaltender's team is on a power play, he can go into the corners.

[Fletch 219]

Chadd -

Instigator rule - I don't think it will increase star players getting jumped. If anything, it will reduce the frequency of that happening. Seriously, with the instigator rule in place, how many times have you seen a star get run? I have seen clips of Naslund, Palffy, Forsberg, St.Louis, etc. getting run. Guys that run star players are protected by the instigator rule. If it is gone, they will have to deal with enforcers going after them. That will likely lead them to think twice about running the other team's stars.

Two ref rule - The biggest problem with the two ref rule is that each ref in the NHL has his own "style." It is very bad for the league when you see a situation where a call is made right in front of both one ref, and the one waaay behind the play makes the call. It's a joke. The only way (IMO) they can keep the two ref system is to make sure each ref is on the exact same page. Hell, maybe they can tell the ref trailing the play not to make any calls that aren't in his "zone."

[Chadd 916]

Chadd -

Instigator rule - I don't think it will increase star players getting jumped. If anything, it will reduce the frequency of that happening. Seriously, with the instigator rule in place, how many times have you seen a star get run? I have seen clips of Naslund, Palffy, Forsberg, St.Louis, etc. getting run. Guys that run star players are protected by the instigator rule. If it is gone, they will have to deal with enforcers going after them. That will likely lead them to think twice about running the other team's stars.

Two ref rule - The biggest problem with the two ref rule is that each ref in the NHL has his own "style." It is very bad for the league when you see a situation where a call is made right in front of both one ref, and the one waaay behind the play makes the call. It's a joke. The only way (IMO) they can keep the two ref system is to make sure each ref is on the exact same page. Hell, maybe they can tell the ref trailing the play not to make any calls that aren't in his "zone."

Why don't those players stick up for themselves? I'm sick of players who feel that it's up to another player to settle the score for them. Suck it up and deal with it or man up and take matters into your own hands. Do it once and you put the other guys on notice that you won't put up with any crap. The fact there are fewer guys with no real purpose other than fighting is one of the best things about the NHL right now.

I think the refs should be set up in crews, much like the NFL or MLB. The group of four travels together and has the same guy or two as subs to cover vacations. Like players, the more they work together, the better they will work together. Top crews get playoffs, not the top individuals.

[Fletch 219]

Chadd -

Instigator rule - I don't think it will increase star players getting jumped.  If anything, it will reduce the frequency of that happening.  Seriously, with the instigator rule in place, how many times have you seen a star get run?  I have seen clips of Naslund, Palffy, Forsberg, St.Louis, etc. getting run.  Guys that run star players are protected by the instigator rule.  If it is gone, they will have to deal with enforcers going after them.  That will likely lead them to think twice about running the other team's stars.

Two ref rule - The biggest problem with the two ref rule is that each ref in the NHL has his own "style."  It is very bad for the league when you see a situation where a call is made right in front of both one ref, and the one waaay behind the play makes the call.  It's a joke.  The only way (IMO) they can keep the two ref system is to make sure each ref is on the exact same page.  Hell, maybe they can tell the ref trailing the play not to make any calls that aren't in his "zone."

Why don't those players stick up for themselves? I'm sick of players who feel that it's up to another player to settle the score for them. Suck it up and deal with it or man up and take matters into your own hands. Do it once and you put the other guys on notice that you won't put up with any crap. The fact there are fewer guys with no real purpose other than fighting is one of the best things about the NHL right now.

Why don't players like that stick up for themselves? Simple - it's not their role to play. Hence the term "role player." Ziggy Palffy's role is to score goals. He doesn't have the physicality to hit or fight. He's good at scoring.

A perfect example is Dave Semenko. He was Gretz's "bodyguard" for years in Edmonton, and Semenk was so feared that Gretz rarely got run (rare, like twice in 8 years rare). A team needs to protect it's stars. The instigator rule has been a failure since it's inception.

[Fletch 219]

Suck it up and deal with it or man up and take matters into your own hands.

Also, player "taking matters into their own hands" is part of the problem. That's why there's so much stickwork inthe league these days.

[Chadd 916]

Chadd -

Instigator rule - I don't think it will increase star players getting jumped.  If anything, it will reduce the frequency of that happening.  Seriously, with the instigator rule in place, how many times have you seen a star get run?  I have seen clips of Naslund, Palffy, Forsberg, St.Louis, etc. getting run.  Guys that run star players are protected by the instigator rule.  If it is gone, they will have to deal with enforcers going after them.  That will likely lead them to think twice about running the other team's stars.

Two ref rule - The biggest problem with the two ref rule is that each ref in the NHL has his own "style."  It is very bad for the league when you see a situation where a call is made right in front of both one ref, and the one waaay behind the play makes the call.  It's a joke.  The only way (IMO) they can keep the two ref system is to make sure each ref is on the exact same page.  Hell, maybe they can tell the ref trailing the play not to make any calls that aren't in his "zone."

Why don't those players stick up for themselves? I'm sick of players who feel that it's up to another player to settle the score for them. Suck it up and deal with it or man up and take matters into your own hands. Do it once and you put the other guys on notice that you won't put up with any crap. The fact there are fewer guys with no real purpose other than fighting is one of the best things about the NHL right now.

Why don't players like that stick up for themselves? Simple - it's not their role to play. Hence the term "role player." Ziggy Palffy's role is to score goals. He doesn't have the physicality to hit or fight. He's good at scoring.

A perfect example is Dave Semenko. He was Gretz's "bodyguard" for years in Edmonton, and Semenk was so feared that Gretz rarely got run (rare, like twice in 8 years rare). A team needs to protect it's stars. The instigator rule has been a failure since it's inception.

Gretzky was the first real star who didn't have to stick up for himself. It's the only bad thing that can be attributed to him that I can think of.

I'm sorry but the logic of dumping the instigator rule eludes me. I've watched a lot of hockey and I've seen very few incidents where allowing some neanderthal to jump on the ice and beat up a guy would have improved the situation. You don't get a suspension until your second offense, then it's one game. That's per player, not per team. Why is everyone too good to fight other than just one guy?

You want to change it? I'm ok with that. I just don't want to see a player whose only talent is dropping his gloves. 2, 5 and 10 for an instigator is ok with me. But if the other guy turtles and he keeps pounding away, you have to toss him.

[Chadd 916]

Suck it up and deal with it or man up and take matters into your own hands.

Also, player "taking matters into their own hands" is part of the problem. That's why there's so much stickwork inthe league these days.

The problem is they don't act like men when they do that. Not to mention the stickwork often follows a perfectly clean hit.

[Fletch 219]

Chadd -

Instigator rule - I don't think it will increase star players getting jumped.  If anything, it will reduce the frequency of that happening.  Seriously, with the instigator rule in place, how many times have you seen a star get run?  I have seen clips of Naslund, Palffy, Forsberg, St.Louis, etc. getting run.  Guys that run star players are protected by the instigator rule.  If it is gone, they will have to deal with enforcers going after them.  That will likely lead them to think twice about running the other team's stars.

Two ref rule - The biggest problem with the two ref rule is that each ref in the NHL has his own "style."  It is very bad for the league when you see a situation where a call is made right in front of both one ref, and the one waaay behind the play makes the call.  It's a joke.  The only way (IMO) they can keep the two ref system is to make sure each ref is on the exact same page.  Hell, maybe they can tell the ref trailing the play not to make any calls that aren't in his "zone."

Why don't those players stick up for themselves? I'm sick of players who feel that it's up to another player to settle the score for them. Suck it up and deal with it or man up and take matters into your own hands. Do it once and you put the other guys on notice that you won't put up with any crap. The fact there are fewer guys with no real purpose other than fighting is one of the best things about the NHL right now.

Why don't players like that stick up for themselves? Simple - it's not their role to play. Hence the term "role player." Ziggy Palffy's role is to score goals. He doesn't have the physicality to hit or fight. He's good at scoring.

A perfect example is Dave Semenko. He was Gretz's "bodyguard" for years in Edmonton, and Semenk was so feared that Gretz rarely got run (rare, like twice in 8 years rare). A team needs to protect it's stars. The instigator rule has been a failure since it's inception.

Gretzky was the first real star who didn't have to stick up for himself. It's the only bad thing that can be attributed to him that I can think of.

I'm sorry but the logic of dumping the instigator rule eludes me. I've watched a lot of hockey and I've seen very few incidents where allowing some neanderthal to jump on the ice and beat up a guy would have improved the situation. You don't get a suspension until your second offense, then it's one game. That's per player, not per team. Why is everyone too good to fight other than just one guy?

You want to change it? I'm ok with that. I just don't want to see a player whose only talent is dropping his gloves. 2, 5 and 10 for an instigator is ok with me. But if the other guy turtles and he keeps pounding away, you have to toss him.

It's not that Gretz wouldn't stick up for himself, it's that he couldn't. He wasn't built for that kind of play. Scorers score. Grinders grind, fighters fight.

I do agree that it sucks to waste a roster spot on a guy who's only asset is that he can thrown 'em. But as the years have gone by, some of the "enforcers" in the league can actually play too (Sandy McCarthy, Chris Simon, Bob Probert, Georges Laraque, Tie Domi, etc.). Hopefully that will continue to be the case.

[hip check 0]

I love the idea of officials crews working together. That's got to happen.

Instigator rule, nah leave it in place. Make the star players keep their heads up. They have to play honest too. Everyone would get all silly without the rule and we'd have fights every 5 minutes. Modano, St. Louis, Fedorov Kovalchuk - if you can catch 'em, go ahead and hit 'em! The Gretzky era is long gone.

Smaller goalie gear - sure.

Shootouts - definitely. Is it for the fans, yes. Who's paying for this again??

Unlimited curves - yep, and stick length can be made a couple inches longer, too. Got to be some help for the defensemen here.

Smaller roster - makes so much sense, and keeps the talent pool just that little bit deeper. Think, in theory the 30 weakest players are cut. Should make the AHL a touch better following that same theory.

[joshy207 15]

Here's my thoughts...

-Bring back tag-up (sounds like it's a done deal). This rule change completely backfired and helped breed the neutral-zone trap.

-Move the nets back, between 5' and 8' from the end boards. This will increase the size of the neutral zone and eliminate wasted space in deep.

-Narrower goal pads. 10" is plenty wide, none of these goalies' legs are that thick.

-Limit chest/arm pad size (can't be thicker than a set limit) and glove size (blocker length/width and trapper circumference). Today's goalies are athletic enough and technically sound enough to stop the puck on their own.

-Get rid of the instigator rule. I'm with Fletch here, I think this rule gave the average nitpicker the confidence to run at talented players with little consequence. Should every player be able to stick up for himself? No. There wouldn't be any skill players left, just a bunch of roided-up bangers. Besides, almost all of today's enforcers can play the game a little, too.

-Smaller rosters... I'd prefer to see a smaller league, like 20 or 24 teams, but cutting the dress limit to 17 or 16 skaters wouldn't be all bad... might have to shrink the season by a few games to reduce the wear and tear on the players.

-Enforce the rules the way they're written. Brilliant! How come this isn't happening already?

-I would like to see the wider lines. Yeah, they look funny, but once the players get used to them, I think they'll be able to take advantage of the several extra feet in each zone that they'll have. Maybe the biggest problem with this experiment in the A is that 2' isn't wide enough. Why not try the original idea for 6' lines?

-Goalies should be fair game outside of an outlined area. If they want to come play the puck in the corner, they can be bumped. Not ran, not laid out... bumped.

-Reduce or eliminate the limitation on stick curvature. 1", 1.5", 2", 3", no limit... it'll confuse the goalies some, but it'll score a few goals here and there.

-Shootouts. I really don't like shootouts, not for deciding a hockey game. If the league is so vehement about putting them in, put them in but don't award a point for winning a shootout. Keep an extra column or whatever, but don't give a point for winning a shootout. This can keep the purists happy (or at least not piss them all off even more than they already are) and it'll create some excitement for the fans who have to see a winner every time 2 teams take the ice. Besides, we might see some really creative moves in a no-points shootout... like Hisey's move... things that players wouldn't dream of trying with points on the line.