|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 7, 2011 8:39:31 GMT -8
Never get rid of this . Please.
|
|
|
Post by alex on Dec 7, 2011 9:01:47 GMT -8
haha excellent. It does build in some flexibility. It also evens things up a little travel-wise for everybody but the Florida teams. That said, they benefit from getting more original six visits which will bring in bigger crowds full of retired/vacationing Canadians.
All around it's a good move. There are a few issues that need time and clarification though.
|
|
|
Post by Pea on Dec 7, 2011 9:07:38 GMT -8
So what do you Canadians think about the Montreal Impact entering the MLS this coming season and the complete restructuring of the conferences and scheduling for 2012??
Ooooook I'll go back to my lonely soccer thread now...
|
|
|
Post by davers on Dec 7, 2011 9:16:19 GMT -8
I dont really care too much about the conferences being unfair, it happens and different conferences will be stronger than others each year. I just liked the race at the end of the season. I love that right up until the last game you dont know who is going to squeak in that 8th spot. With the new system this seems far less likely to happen as often. And the 7-8 teams per conference seems kinda bogus, especially when 6/7 Canadian teams are in ones with 8 (let the Bettman hating Canada theories begin).
And whats this about creating rivalries? I'm sick of the NHL trying to manufacture grudge matches. That is what they said when they made every team play every other team in its division 8 times. It didnt create rivalries, it was boring. You cant make these things, they have to come out of good games, repeated playoff matches or just things that happen in the game. The MLB didnt manufacture the Red Sox / Yankees rivalry.
That being said I am happy about every team playing every other team twice a season, but that could have been done leaving it a 2 conference league. I will have to see how next season goes before I really pass judgement, but overall I'm not super impressed by some of the choices.
|
|
|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 7, 2011 9:53:22 GMT -8
I don't mean manufactured rivalries. The way things are now, if you only see a team once every three years, big deal. I'm just talkin' numbers. Once you play a team at least twice every year, there is a bigger oppertunity for those games to be more exciting.
|
|
|
Post by davers on Dec 7, 2011 11:09:21 GMT -8
I dont think 2 games a year (as opposed to the current 1) is going to make a huge difference in terms of rivalries. The main benifit of that is that fans of teams not in their city get at least 1 game a year where that team will be in town. This is a great because all the snow birds down south get a chance to see their favourite teams every year which will hopefully increase revenue and keep those teams afloat.
Rivalries will happen on their own. Does anyone know how the other 34 games are distributed? Is it all among the conference or do they just sprinkle them randomly around the league?
|
|
|
Post by emptyfox on Dec 7, 2011 18:16:26 GMT -8
7 other teams in you conference X 6 games is 42 games... 22 remaining teams X 2 is 44 games.... 4 too many but my understanding is that you will play some teams in your conference 5 times one year and than 6 games the next year, while the teams you played 6 times the year before, you only play 5 times.
I think that may be the worst sentence ever.
|
|
|
Post by davers on Dec 7, 2011 20:58:50 GMT -8
Sounds like it could be interesting but I still forsee a much more boring end of the season. I would hope they make the schedule so every team plays teams in their conference for the last few games. I cant really decide if I like 1 team coming out of each conference.
I think I'm becoming a bitter old hockey fan afraid of change.
|
|
|
Post by davers on Dec 7, 2011 21:07:16 GMT -8
Quick question to anyone watching the Oilers game. How was that hit on Skinner any different than Rome's hit on Horton in the playoffs last year?
|
|
|
Post by alex on Dec 8, 2011 7:15:05 GMT -8
it wasn't.
I'd love to see some consistent reffing all around.
|
|
|
Post by davers on Dec 8, 2011 14:41:32 GMT -8
Thank you for confirming that I'm not just biased. Well, I am, but at least not in this case.
One has to wonder if there was an injury in there if it would have made any difference, or if Horton just got up and skated off in game 1 if Rome still would have gotten 7 games.
|
|
|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 8, 2011 14:43:00 GMT -8
but Tim Thomas would have still stopped all your shots so...
|
|
|
Post by alex on Dec 8, 2011 14:50:52 GMT -8
The hit on Horton was clean, just like the hit on Skinner.
The hit on Ponikarovsky is pretty questionable though. I don't agree with Ray Ferraro's immediate analysis that he left his feet (he didn't leave his feet until after the hit was delivered), but he did definitely target the head, and for that he should be suspended.
|
|
|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 8, 2011 14:56:35 GMT -8
I just reviewed the two plays with my youtube/tsn technology and I would have to say that the hits were pretty different. Rome leaves his feet and makes clear contact with Horton's head well after he passed the puck, plus Horton wasn't even looking in that direction as he had already dished off the puck. Sutton hit Skinner, who had the puck and didn't even get him in the head. It looks like his elbow is about to come up, but it doesn't. Skinner just kind of hit the side of his arm. Sutton doesn't come close to leaving his feet either, unlike his hit on Ponikerovski earlier in the game.
Rome, blind side hit to the head well after Horton passed the puck and he left his feet
Sutton, hit Skinner with the puck, no head contact, didn't leave his feet.
|
|
|
Post by alex on Dec 8, 2011 15:03:13 GMT -8
Count it out. The rule is 3 seconds after posession for interference. Even on the slow-motion replay of that Horton hit it wasn't 3 seconds before contact was made.
Rome definitely made contact with Horton's head. I'm not disputing that. There was not headshot rule last year though (that I remember anyway), so it was 'clean'.
Maybe I need to re-watch the Skinner hit. I'm just going by memory here.
|
|
|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 8, 2011 15:06:32 GMT -8
The Skinner hit didn't even make the sportsnet highlight reel. It was a non issue if you ask me. Hitting to the head was a penalty last year and has been for a while. It just wasn't called as much and rarely were you given any further discipline past the penalty.
|
|
|
Post by alex on Dec 8, 2011 15:07:49 GMT -8
I can't even find it online. Link?
|
|
|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 8, 2011 15:11:12 GMT -8
I went to tsn's video thing tsn.ca/nhl.
Also the rule on finishing a check is that a player is still deemed in play only immediately after losing possession of the puck. If you count 3 one thousands, I don't think that looks too "immediate". Anyways, not trying to be a dick at all here, love talking hockey!
|
|
|
Post by Friendly Destroyer on Dec 8, 2011 15:13:32 GMT -8
"Possession of the Puck: The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession. The player deemed in possession of the puck may be checked legally, provided the check is rendered immediately following his loss of possession." Sutton, tsn.ca/nhl/Rome, www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUYqTE3cnuQ
|
|
|
Post by alex on Dec 8, 2011 19:21:28 GMT -8
I figured I was fast-counting even. I wouldn't want Shanahan's job.
|
|