What change to NHL rules would you be in favor of?
John Grigg recently posted his Top10 list of rules changes that changed hockey. Among them are the advent of video replay, icing and the mandatory wearing of helmets. Topping Grigg’s Top 10 list was the introduction of the forward pass in 1929.
Gotta admit…it’d be kinda tough to play/watch ice hockey without players being allowed to pass the puck up-ice.
As you can see, rules changes have been a part of the game pretty much since the game has been around. Recently, there were a number of rules changes that have shaped the NHL game in the post-lockout era. Two-line passing was permitted and players having to remain on the ice after icing the puck were two changes I personally like the most.
That stupid trapezoid behind the net, well, I don’t much care for that at all. If goalies have the skill and ability to play the puck in the corner, why take that away from them? Also, I still am not a big fan of the shootout. I just don’t like having the outcome of a team sport determined by an individual skills competition. However, I recognize I’m in the minority opinion there and given that it is a hit with the NHL masses, it shall remain.
With that said, I will now ask you to put a little cerebral activity to the rules of NHL hockey and come up with one…just one… thing you would change if you had the ability to do so. Whether it be to eliminate a current rule, change a current rule or add something new altogether…what do you feel needs to be tweaked a bit to make an already exciting sport just that much better?
Would you change the overtime rules…maybe adding an extra five minutes before going to the shootout?
Would you go back to power plays lasting the full two minutes, regardless of how many goals might be scored? That’s the way it was done before 1956.
How about not being able to ice the puck when you’re killing a power play?
Maybe you think touch-up icing is too big a risk for injury. Thus you would push for no-touch icing, the whistle is blown once the puck crosses the red line.
Or would you advocate something as radical as changing the size of the goal, maybe larger to allow for more scoring? I wouldn’t, but I’m sure there are some among us that might like to see that.
Me…what I would do away with is that silly trapezoid rule that the league has experimented with for the last five seasons. Like I said, let the netminders play the puck in the corners if they see fit.
That…or maybe I’d like to see refs have to make a public apology to the crowd if they blow a call. You know, like they do in Japan with baseball umpires.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
196 comments Add your comment
Alan R.
August 19th, 2010
4:06 pm
*pokes at the blog with a stick*
GIMME MY POST! Stop eating things that aren’t yours! *poke, poke*
MB
August 19th, 2010
4:26 pm
Based upon the choices being suggested, it’s clear that we’re WAY too early in Thrashers history to be considering a Mount Puckmore in these parts.
If I were a fan of another team I’d be laughing be tail off at the mere suggestion of it, but since I’m a Thrashers fan, well, it’s just sad to see how lame our Mount Puckmore would be.
Maybe shelve that idea until we’ve actually accomplished something as a team and have had some players that deserve to be memorialized for their successes and contributions.
KLS1
August 19th, 2010
4:37 pm
1. Enforce the diving rule
2. Take the netting down around the glass
Let the fans catch a puck, even if it is in the teeth.
Jack
August 19th, 2010
5:49 pm
HUH?? Not sure how my comment said blow?
Krust
August 19th, 2010
8:59 pm
I am with you Iceman, I don’t like shootouts unless a player has been hacked down on a break away. It is terrible way to decide a game. I would be in favor of a extra full period. Change the point system back to 2 points for a win, 1 point for tie and no points for a lose. I don’t care how you loose but getting a point for a shootout lose is rather miss leading. You lost, you get nothing..
World Be Free
August 19th, 2010
9:18 pm
I have to admit, I hated the netting when it first went up but I have no issue with it now. I have seen a few people get mangled by pucks in my day. So keep the netting.
Hang in there Sara.
World Be Free
August 19th, 2010
9:21 pm
I have a rule change-free beer for everyone who attends a game in a Thrashers’ jersey. Make up for the lost revenue by charging fans in opposing jerseys double.
I think my homies from Buffalo will more than make up for lost revenue for an entire season.
Flagstaff
August 19th, 2010
9:25 pm
WBF for commissioner!
Jack
August 19th, 2010
9:50 pm
Then charging the people who wear jerseys of teams not even playing triple.
Brendan
August 19th, 2010
10:00 pm
I nominate R.Stroz’s 2:58 PM post about Atlanta hiring a goaltending coach. http://blogs.ajc.com/iceman-thrashers-blog/2010/08/18/what-change-to-nhl-rules-would-you-be-in-favor-of/comment-page-2/#comment-35373. However, I reserve the right to nominate R.Stroz, again, for a future post that can ACTUALLY WIN the “guest blogger” honor.
Dwayne
August 19th, 2010
10:33 pm
Yippeee, someone typed my name other than me, multiple times on one story!!!!
Sara, I enjoy your posts, you are very insightful and witty. Saying suck and blow was a bonus.
Sara
August 19th, 2010
11:56 pm
WBF and Jack have had strokes of genius … I fully support those ideas!
Dwayne, I can live with that.
Sharon
August 20th, 2010
2:09 am
“so now we got us two girls with intent to blow, let me guess, you’re both married?!? They all quit blowing when they get married, amirite, boys?”
Hahaha! No, I’m not married and I play by an entirely different set of rules. Sorry fellas. I do enjoy your filthy blog postings though.
World Be Free
August 20th, 2010
6:27 am
I guess Meyer takes Pops’ spot onthe depth chart. I was a fan of Pops, but I guess one in and one out. That’s the life of a fringe NHL player.
Hope the folks at Gorin’s and the “more beer guy” outside the CNN / Philips entrance aren’t mad at me for the free beer suggestion.
glovesave29
August 20th, 2010
8:27 am
Half price if you are wearing a jersey of the Atlanta Flames or Knights (but 10x charge if you scream during the anthem) and 25% off if wearing an all star or olympic jersey of a current Thrasher.
R. Stroz
August 20th, 2010
8:39 am
I never did like those filthy zebras always blowing their whistles, especially Massenhoven.
stendek
August 20th, 2010
8:50 am
Morning Bill. Was in pretty good mood. Posted on heartless Fal-Cons sites after debacle against Patriots. Just popped over to say howdy. Saw photo on page. DON WADDEL! Oh well. Breakfast felt whole lot better going down! Best to you and yours friend. Peace.
rob
August 20th, 2010
9:00 am
How about this? In order to get the season off to a good start attendance wise. Any FORMER season ticket holder can get 2 available lower seats for $20 or 2 upper for $10. Only available the day of the game, but on a best available seating location? Bring them back….with a friend. Make it for the month of Oct……maybe add the first 4 games in Nov too. These are people who committed once before, were turned off by Dumbwad and Octotards lack of……….well all matters hockey. Attempt to show them we are trying, and that Duds style of hockey may be what they were looking for the 1st go around. Maybe, I know it’s a stretch, but maybe Duds can show the Octotards the light. Exciting hockey and commitment = fans in the stands, and by starting with the burned bridges of the last decade, maybe we can start again. Just an idea, I am sure it will be trounced by those who would not ever want to watch a game, but for those who want a reason to come back, this might be a way to do so.
By the way I am NOT and have never been a STH, I can’t commit to that much time. I am more of a 10-20 game person.
kracker
August 20th, 2010
9:17 am
Good attedance? Just win, baby!
Cliff Fletcher
August 20th, 2010
9:23 am
Tough to get the internal salary cap above the Mendoza Line without people in the seats. I know that’s not what you people want to hear because so many want to churp about the past, but “thems” the facts folks. If you don’t go to games you can’t sit on your couch or a blog and complaint about the team not spending money.
Just like Brooklyn Dodger fans complaining about Da Bums leaving Brooklyn when nobody was showing up for games to support them. They left town and 50 years later, people are still crying.
Happy Friday
stendek
August 20th, 2010
9:27 am
Want fannies in seats? Thrashers must display heart for 60 full minutes plus any overtimes! Thrashers must play with a Bobby Orr heart. Thrashers must be physical win or lose! Thrashers must be overwhelmingly successful on home ice. Thrashers must be willing to forget manicures and get nasty during games! Thrashers must be willing to forget self for team aka Herb Brooks. Thrashers cannot make transparent excuses (whine) after defeats! If Thrashers do all of above the wins will take care of themselves. So will attendance problems! Thanks for listening. Peace.
Mikey
August 20th, 2010
9:30 am
Wow! Bob McKenzie just tweeted, “People from Quebec just started new fan club for Nordiques! 2000 members in only two hours!”
http://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/21663627379
Zombie Steve
August 20th, 2010
9:32 am
Stroz: Re-chuck-ed?? Is that like puking again after you’ve already hurled in the stands once??
I like the mud wrestling for tickets idea – but I’ve got a better one: have the Blue Crew mud wrestle for the heck of it, and we watch. Everyone wins.
SomaAtl95
August 20th, 2010
9:36 am
Stendek, I completely agree with you.
Cliff Fletcher
August 20th, 2010
9:38 am
Stendek-totally agree
No disagreements with the past, just can’t understand how people expect this team top spend to the cap TODAY with low attendance.
rob
August 20th, 2010
10:28 am
Agreed as well. That is why the idea to reach out. I think Duds has the right idea here, and even if they don’t gel quickly (not a stretch with all the new faces top to bottom) it should be entertaining hockey, and what better way to start then by getting the old base excited again? That shows the young players, the new players, and the fans that the organization knows it has been bad, and needs to make up for that in order to move forward.
Joe Friday
August 20th, 2010
11:10 am
“Any FORMER season ticket holder can get 2 available lower seats for $20 or 2 upper for $10. Only available the day of the game, but on a best available seating location? Bring them back….with a friend. Make it for the month of Oct……maybe add the first 4 games in Nov too.”
Now this is a heck of an idea. I know I’m a former, but really, I think this will work. I know a lot of guys that would like to go back, but we’re all in Missouri mode.
“I’m not married and I play by an entirely different set of rules.”
You play for the other team?!? Sweet.
Happy Friday, indeed!
GaVaHokie
August 20th, 2010
11:14 am
Found an interesting perspective on Freddy Meyer, to give you an idea of what to expect. Seems to be a guy who plays bigger than his size.
Can’t say I watched many Islanders games last year.
http://www.lighthousehockey.com/2010/6/4/1500683/grading-the-islanders-freddy-meyer
Cliff Fletcher
August 20th, 2010
11:23 am
If people don’t show up for games this season, the Missouri mode may be enforced-like move the team to Kansas City, Missouri.
rob
August 20th, 2010
11:57 am
JF,
exactly. If they reach out to those ex-sth and give them a plausible reason to come back and get bit by the hockey bug again……if the team is playing actual hockey and not figure 8ing…..and if the team is going to play hard nosed hockey, how about getting the old Flames guys on board too? This really isn’t rocket science here, right? The fans who were driven away need motivation to come back. The first part of the season may not be winning a lot while the pieces are put in place, but pack the place, make some noise, and show the players the fans support them and the team shows the fans they are trying. Win-win right?
R. Stroz
August 20th, 2010
12:00 pm
Here’s the question for ex-STHs:
Can Dudley Undo What Donny Has Done?
World Be Free
August 20th, 2010
12:07 pm
Stroz, I think he already has in a sense. Different players, North American players with N.A. attitudes. And Todd White out of town to boot. We asked for Torchetti or Ramsay as H.C., I think most fans would have been happy with either guy. We ended up getting both!
He’s already made it his team.
J.B.
August 20th, 2010
12:24 pm
One Ping only Brendan…
Did anyone make note of the Hunt For Red October reference here? If not, kudos NYC…
rob
August 20th, 2010
12:25 pm
Stroz, let’s ask them. ex-STHs,
As thing stand here, if the club reached out to you in a case like this, and attempted to in part at least, bury the hatchet, would you give them an opportunity to earn your support again? Would your curiosity get the better of you? They haven’t changed completely, but I think a change has been made for the better, and if the two sides can come back together (owners/fans), this has a chance to work don’t you think? Or is it too little too late for the majority of you? I pose this question here because, as has been stated before, the team does monitor the blogs, and maybe a show of people would lead them to re-think some of this, for the good of everyone.
Joe Friday
August 20th, 2010
2:11 pm
Rob, put me down as an ex who says “yes”, good idea and it would get me back in the barn (for weekend games anyway, can’t make 7pm starts and hold down a job)
kracker
August 20th, 2010
2:44 pm
C Viv says deals w/ Zubarev and Little look close.
Archie
August 20th, 2010
3:02 pm
I simply don’t understand the “skills contest” criticism of the shootout. Isn’t EVERY sporting event a “skills contest”. Somebody please give me a better factor in determining the outcome of a sporting event than players’ skills. If a team has better shooters or better goalies than their opponent, then so be it. Also, shootouts in hockey are NOT the crapshoot that soccer shootouts are. By midseason, statistics will show which teams are better at shootouts than others, so there is a skill and strategy to it.
My problem with the shootout lies with overtime in general, it’s not the same in the postseason as it is in the regular season. Games MUST be decided by the same rules in the regular season and postseason. I can understand a little variation, but not as much as we have now. Having 5 minutes of OT and a shootout is an entirely different game plan and strategy than full sudden death overtime. My rule change would be a compromise of the two.
Regular Season- (1) 10 minute period of 4 on 4 OT, sudden death, shootout if necessary
Playoffs- 20 minutes periods of 4 on 4 OT, repeat as necessary
Hokie P. Clisters
August 20th, 2010
3:08 pm
When discussing rules I always remember Barney Fife describing the process to the prisoners in that one memorable episode on The Andy Griffith Show:
“Here at the Rock we have a few simple rules”
“Rule # 1: Obey all Rules”!
I don’t remember the rest……………………..
Jack
August 20th, 2010
3:16 pm
Sorry I like the playoffs sudden death as it is. However I like the 10 minute overtime in the reg season.
Rawhide
August 20th, 2010
3:18 pm
Archie – Yes…every sporting match is a “skills competition”. The only problem I have in regards to the shootout is that hockey is a “team” sport and a valuable “W” in the standings is determined by an “individual” skills competition.
But like I said, I fully understand I am in the minority of opinion here, so I really don’t see the shootout going the way of the dodo bird any time soon.
It is what it is
Jack
August 20th, 2010
3:28 pm
Good point Rawhide, if we could only establish the current playyoff sudden death rules to the regular season..
Brendan
August 20th, 2010
3:42 pm
NYC got it. “One ping only, Vassili.”
Rawhide
August 20th, 2010
3:43 pm
Ya know…with all the talk about who might be placed upon our Mt. Puckmore, I wonder who you might place upon Thrasherville’s Mt. Flushore.
Archie
August 20th, 2010
3:47 pm
It wouldn’t hurt my feelings at all if they got rid of the shootout. I’m just pointing out that there are bigger problems with the shootout than the fact that it matches up a team’s 4 best skill players (not 1, but 4 players) against another team’s 4 best skill players.
Personally, I LOVE the 4 on 4 overtime play they gave us after the lockout. It opens up more free space and doesn’t allow teams to use the ole “park the bus” defensive strategy. Leads to the end to end action that league executives and fans want to see. Regardless of the shootout, we need more of it.
kracker
August 20th, 2010
3:49 pm
Everybody hating on the shootout should volunteer to go out and skate 20-minute-period after 20-minute-period, after you have already played three 20-minute periods, until there is a winner. On a Tuesday night. If you are lucky you will get to do it again Wednesday night. And perhaps again on a Friday or Saturday night or a Sunday afternoon.
Y’all are as bad about squandering the players’ limited energy resources as Dimocrats are about spending other peoples money. Do you really want the playoff teams’ a$$es dragging before the playoffs even start? If the players haven’t already succumbed to injuries due to fatigue.
That’s what I think about when some yahoo (who is also a valued poster
goes on about wanting to keep playing until there is a winner or to play it the same way as in the playoffs. How much “skill” will these guys have left in the 3rd overtime of the 4th game they have played in six days?
Brendan
August 20th, 2010
4:02 pm
J.B. got it, too.
Achie, I can appreciate the sentiment in your post. Games are won and lost based on the skill of the players as a collective unit. But the game isn’t 60-minutes of breakaways, of course. That it gets decided by that format was something to which the league gave careful consideration, then ultimately decided, “I see GUARANTEED SportsCenter highlights coming out of this. And that means MORE EXPOSURE for our league. Approved!” I never did support the shootout to determining a win in the standings. But, since that’s how the NHL does it, and it’s not going to change, all I ask is … make the team that loses suffer the full effect of the loss, the way the team that wins the shootout enjoys the full effect of the win. Games are won and lost. There are no tie games. Therefore, there is no need to share points. Or to have points, at all. W-L, .pct, Games Up and Games Back would work. People just fear change. Hockey has had points in its standings for as long as probably any of us can remember. It seems “wrong” not to say, “two big points tonight.” But really, saying, “big game tonight, need a win” works just as well. And the 100-point season line of demarcation is simply replaced by the 50-win season. Fear shootouts? Alter your strategy. You have 60 minutes to procure a win. Five more in the 4-on-4 overtime. If, after 65-minutes, your team still hasn’t won … then unfortunately you will face the consequences of the shootout, including the possibility of losing the game. I can support that. For some markets, they RELY on the shootout. Edmonton has to have one of the better shootout records. For them, maybe the strategy is … remain tied through 65 minutes, then win in the shootout. That’s a strategy. It won’t work in the playoffs, but it will in the regular season. The goal of every single game ought to be … to win the game. And the “value” of the game … is “one game out of 82.”
I haven’t yet seen the piece of evidence that says that “poor or economically DISADVANTAGED markets” tend to fare worse than the rich ones do. So, with that in mind, I still like W-L, .pct, Games up and Games back. Maybe, even, the shootout is “leveling force” of the CBA. One of the ideas coming out of the lockout was to create a “level ice surface” for the markets of the league.