1 clone ovy
2 clone mcdavid
3 clone Marner

Repeat

(Quotes not working; In response to the NBA Jersey Scheme being worth $100 Million)

Divided by 30 teams, soon to be 32, we're only talking a couple of million per team. If teams are that desperate for an extra 3 mill, we should be talking contraction, not expansion.

Coaches challenge is fine with me if they made it like the illegal stick rule of the past. You call a coaches challenge and your wrong (meaning refs were right) you get a two minute delay of game penalty. This would eliminate many challenges as a coach would have to be pretty sure he is right to ask for one.

To increase scoring I would have a Power play last two minutes regardless if a goal is scored or not. You get a two minute infraction then you serve two minutes. More PP goals would happen.
- sparky

The PP rule would effectively ruin games, I think. Too much cost for a penalty, it'd lead to mayhem when refs no longer call anything in the last ten minutes of any game.

Good idea about the coach's challenge. If you have to keep it, which I don't see why, at least make the penalty matter.

Unpopular as it may be to do so, their is enough evidence to state unequivocally that bare-fisted face punching between guys trying to balance on skates is way too dangerous, and comes with too high of a post-career risk to continue

Mr tanner can you elaborate further on that please?
- rinaldo

I am not a scientist, and clearly I haven't personally conducted research on the matter, but there does seem to be a disproportionate amount of ex-NHLers who meet terrible, preventable ends who also happen to be ex-fighters.

Perhaps a coincidence, but I doubt it.

I like this, honestly I have no gripes with the coach's challenge. I like the fact that they can do that. I don't care about "slowing the game down." If that's what you're female doging about, might as well get rid of commercial breaks, and intermissions and just play one 60 minute period. Take away icings, and offsides, and if the puck goes out of play, just make the fans throw it back on the ice to keep the action going. Don't slow the game down!!
- j.boyd919

Nay, that's an extreme position. No one is saying to keep running the clock or to hurry games up, but the delays for minutia are ridiculous and annoying.

Just because you want to adjust something doesn't mean you have to go crazy in that direction - you can want the game to speed up without being ridiculous. Plus no TV timeouts would be great - though I can accept them as a necessary evil.

But the worst part about a coaches challenge is it takes the fun out of the building when a big goal is scored. It's such a terrible let down and it comes with basically no reward to offset the high cost.

As for letting underaged players play in the ahl. The nhl cant do that to its best development league. The chl could in retaliation force players to sign contracts to play until they're 20. Just because we want marner to play pro next year doesnt mean we can damn a whole league. If the nhl and chl could agree to a 19 year old draft it will fix this problem for future players in marners situation and keep players in their chl markets for a extra guaranteed year.

As I point out relentlessly, the offside challenge does not "get it right" instead it systematically gets it wrong. Every missed offside is dead time in which a goal cannot be scored unless a team scores twice. The time counts if no no score but no score will be allowed. This *penalizes *the possession team *every time* a ref misses the offside.
- TartanBill

This. At least, what I think you meant by this.

I'd be curious to know what makes OV the best goal scorer in the history of the game.
- Tanuki

http://www.sportsnet.ca/h...al-scorer-in-nhl-history/

Should of just put this in the post/.

As for letting underaged players play in the ahl. The nhl cant do that to its best development league. The chl could in retaliation force players to sign contracts to play until they're 20. Just because we want marner to play pro next year doesnt mean we can damn a whole league. If the nhl and chl could agree to a 19 year old draft it will fix this problem for future players in marners situation and keep players in their chl markets for a extra guaranteed year.
- Wissler

A 19 year old draft wouldn't fix the problem, you'd still have over-qualified junior players wasting a year of development, they'd just belong to no one , so no one'd care.

No reason each team couldn't have a single exception so guys like Strome and Marner, who have no business in the OHL and nothing to learn from just destroying the league like their playing a bunch of nerds, could play in the AHL. It's not like an extra ten or so players every year is gonna make too much difference.

But, counter point: They'd probably always be the junior league's most marketable players, so it might actually be a problem.

I am not a scientist, and clearly I haven't personally conducted research on the matter, but there does seem to be a disproportionate amount of ex-NHLers who meet terrible, preventable ends who also happen to be ex-fighters.

Perhaps a coincidence, but I doubt it.
- James_Tanner

Huge difference between a person who's role it was in the past to be a fighter, and a player today who gets in a fight a few times a year. Seems like you are implying any hockey player who gets in a fight, will meet the same demise as those handful of ex-fighters you are referring to.

Well done. Should be required reading and discussion for all serious NHL fans - and the league's Board of Governors.
Keep up the good work.

A 19 year old draft wouldn't fix the problem, you'd still have over-qualified junior players wasting a year of development, they'd just belong to no one , so no one'd care.

No reason each team couldn't have a single exception so guys like Strome and Marner, who have no business in the OHL and nothing to learn from just destroying the league like their playing a bunch of nerds, could play in the AHL. It's not like an extra ten or so players every year is gonna make too much difference.

But, counter point: They'd probably always be the junior league's most marketable players, so it might actually be a problem.
- James_Tanner

It would be a huge problem. The chl would never go for it. At first that rule would be used on special players like marner and strome but not every team has prospects of that ilk. Every team would use that exceptional spot every year and thats 30 real good chl players gone each year.

Huge difference between a person who's role it was in the past to be a fighter, and a player today who gets in a fight a few times a year. Seems like you are implying any hockey player who gets in a fight, will meet the same demise as those handful of ex-fighters you are referring to.
- leonkennedy

How could it possibly seem like that is what I'm saying?

There is no justification for keeping fighting in the game. It is dangerous and serves no purpose other than being entertaining.

Well done. Should be required reading and discussion for all serious NHL fans - and the league's Board of Governors.
Keep up the good work.

- itwasin

Appreciate you saying so. Thanks.

(Quotes not working; In response to the NBA Jersey Scheme being worth $100 Million)

Divided by 30 teams, soon to be 32, we're only talking a couple of million per team. If teams are that desperate for an extra 3 mill, we should be talking contraction, not expansion.
- James_Tanner

That was the low end of an estimate and besides its for a logo patch on either side of the jersey that's literally 2.5 by 2.5''. I think they're just testing the waters at this point.

But could you imagine what an extra 3 million could do for teams like FLA and ARI?

I just feel like Gary is going to want to try it out if it succeeds in the NBA and the fan reaction is not negative

I am not a scientist, and clearly I haven't personally conducted research on the matter, but there does seem to be a disproportionate amount of ex-NHLers who meet terrible, preventable ends who also happen to be ex-fighters.

Perhaps a coincidence, but I doubt it.
- James_Tanner

well I believe it is. How many fighters have their been over the nhl's history? a lot of them.

How many meet a terrible end as you worded it? not many at all. not a significant difference is my guess. As like you I have done no research though only a few have really meet a terrible end that I recall when you compare to how many made a career out of fighting. So making a mountain out of a molehill imo.

well I believe it is. How many fighters have their been over the nhl's history? a lot of them.

How many meet a terrible end as you worded it? not many at all. not a significant difference is my guess. As like you I have done no research though only a few have really meet a terrible end that I recall when you compare to how many made a career out of fighting. So making a mountain out of a molehill imo.
- rinaldo

The NHL needs a Bennett Omalu to:

A) perform autopsies and find a new disease (the name CTE isn't scary enough)
B) go up against Gary Bettman and the nhl machinery
C) create the script for a new sh*tty hockey movie

That was the low end of an estimate and besides its for a logo patch on either side of the jersey that's literally 2.5 by 2.5''. I think they're just testing the waters at this point.

But could you imagine what an extra 3 million could do for teams like FLA and ARI?

I just feel like Gary is going to want to try it out if it succeeds in the NBA and the fan reaction is not negative
- DeflatedPucks

Fan reaction will be extremely negative until people just accept it and move on, at which point no one will really care. You don't need to test anything to know that.

But what if the NHL was just like "We respect our fans and this is an affront to decency and a concession to immense greed, so we're going to pass." Basically, don't sell your dignity for a tiny little piece of money. Not to mention that, eventually it's going to be an accepted fact that we're essentially 'ad blind' and the bottom will drop out of the price of advertising.

well I believe it is. How many fighters have their been over the nhl's history? a lot of them.

How many meet a terrible end as you worded it? not many at all. not a significant difference is my guess. As like you I have done no research though only a few have really meet a terrible end that I recall when you compare to how many made a career out of fighting. So making a mountain out of a molehill imo.
- rinaldo

So what you're saying is that there is an acceptable number where it's OK for some guys to suffer terrible brain damage? I mean, just off the top of my head Kordic, Probert, Belak, Bougard, Avery. How many non-fighters do we hear about with brain damage and post career problems likely related to such? Can't think of one. They are literally all enforcers.

I don't like the challenge, but there is in fact a positive that comes along with it......they are actually getting the calls right.

If it's offside it's offside.

I don't like the challenge, but there is in fact a positive that comes along with it......they are actually getting the calls right.

If it's offside it's offside.
- sbroads24

But it's not the right call. If you're fractionally offside, you gain literally zero advantage. It's a stupid, pedantic rule that is applied far outside the reason offsides were invented in the first place.

So what you're saying is that there is an acceptable number where it's OK for some guys to suffer terrible brain damage? I mean, just off the top of my head Kordic, Probert, Belak, Bougard, Avery. How many non-fighters do we hear about with brain damage and post career problems likely related to such? Can't think of one. They are literally all enforcers.
- James_Tanner

Avery...that d bag is still kickin throwing rocks at speeding cars.

Fan reaction will be extremely negative until people just accept it and move on, at which point no one will really care. You don't need to test anything to know that.

But what if the NHL was just like "We respect our fans and this is an affront to decency and a concession to immense greed, so we're going to pass." Basically, don't sell your dignity for a tiny little piece of money. Not to mention that, eventually it's going to be an accepted fact that we're essentially 'ad blind' and the bottom will drop out of the price of advertising.
- James_Tanner

Its literally the size of your palm on the arms of the jersey. I don't its very noticeable or about as much as a team logo or number written on the side. So I don't see how fan negative would necessarily be negative.

And by testing, it will start small until who knows, Premier League size logos replace them.

Eliminate fighting ? Yah let's make it easier for players to run around and take liberties on teams best players with no fear!! Brilliant !!!! They need to eliminate the instigator and allow teams to patrol the ice because the league has proven they can't suspend properly.

So what you're saying is that there is an acceptable number where it's OK for some guys to suffer terrible brain damage? I mean, just off the top of my head Kordic, Probert, Belak, Bougard, Avery. How many non-fighters do we hear about with brain damage and post career problems likely related to such? Can't think of one. They are literally all enforcers.
- James_Tanner

That is not what I said or implying at all. What I said was it is not a significant difference. Say you have 500 fighters and 5 meet a bad end. That’s 1%. Stat wise insignificant. Run a T test to confirm.

You can’t think of 1 player who wasn’t a fighter who has post-concussion issues (hence I would say that equates to some type of brain damage no?).

Brain damage is brain damage no matter how you get it I think you would agree. If not, then why don’t you agree. So then if 1 person suffers from it then no one should suffer, is that correct?

You want fighting banned because it is way too dangerous you stated and comes with too high of a post-career risk to continue. So then why not ban hitting as way more injuries occur because of hitting than fighting. Fact.