October 25th, 2006, 01:11 PM #11
hockey is the worst damn sport ever created!! people gotta watch golf more often.. now that's the true "barbaric" and manly sport!!
October 25th, 2006, 01:15 PM #12
Can Hipcheck be the commissioner?
Originally Posted by PPharoah
I agree with everything he wrote.
And the #1 problem is mega-expansion. There are simply too many teams that carry marginal-talent-players. I would go farther though, I would dump 6 teams minimum.
The #2 problem is that if you're not on ESPN, you're not viewed as a national sport, period. Either that, or Vs. (what a stupid name) needs to become a basic cable service to someday become a "recognized" sports network.
I bumped into ESPN last weekend, and they were showing some playground-gangsta-style basketball w/ rap music in the background.?? WTF??? ESPN should be embarassed to show shiat like that and the NHL should be embarassed that they let ESPN slip away to broadcast stuff like that.
Over the long haul, ESPN exposure is worth so much more than more OLN $$ before the 05-06 season.
October 25th, 2006, 05:51 PM #13
NHLs Saving Grace
The NHL is a horse **** league. If it really wanted to entertain the audience it would give us a fast tempo 4 on 4 hockey. Power plays would be more effective because their would be more room to roam and much less traffic. And the goaltenders would handle much more rubber which would lead to more shell shock,which is a good thing. Fans that think that the NHL would be better dumping 6 clubs aren't living in reality. It will not happen. There are solutions out their but that is not one of them. I wish that another rival(WHA) league would start up that came up with some innovative ways to spice things up .Seems the NHL has run out of ideas, except how to make the game close and screw the fans out their hard earned money. Their is a sucker born every minute they say... Make every free agents and lets scrub the draft everyone that has a mind knows the talent is never dispersed evenly...so let the CAP talk and let free agency mean free...then and only then would we see even steven hockey(of course there has to be 4 on 4 too)...
October 26th, 2006, 01:26 AM #14
Thats funny. I start thinking about how to reconfigure the league too when the Kings are playing like crap. Glad I'm not the only one.
Guess I'll get on my soap box too: The perfect NHL would have two conferences with two divisions in each conference and six teams in each division for a total of 24 teams. The top four teams in each divison make the playoffs where its 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 in every division for the first round. Second round is for the division championship. Third round is for the conference championship. Fourth round is for the Stanley Cup. There is only one referee, stick checking is legal, and you're allowed to protect the front of the net.
Sounds like the NHL before Gary Bettman to me. At least I have tapes of old games to watch.
October 26th, 2006, 03:57 AM #15
Absolutely, Bettman's "expansion-itis" was terrible. There is no way there should be more than 24 teams in the league. Cut the teams, expand the rosters by 2-3 players for each team and grant the players free agency after four years in the league. Oh, and get rid of the TERRIBLE instigator rule.
November 1st, 2006, 05:30 PM #16
How would you feel if LA was one of the contracted teams? Would it make the NHL better by spreading our talent around to other teams? I mean, the largest (or second largest?) media market in the US can't support (American) FOOTBALL, why do you think it could, or should, be able to support hockey? Sad to say, but I think LA would be one of the first to go if the league contracted by 4 teams, and almost certain if by six.
There are just too many options for your entertainment dollar around these parts that hockey, of all things, is the LAST thing the new Casual NHL Fan is going to be interested in.
That being said, I think things would be fine with some MORE rules changes, or rather, rules rescinding, the first being the God forsaken instigator rule.
Very good points about the UFC/PRIDE popularit and casual fan vs. 'real' fan and what they mean to NHL success.
November 2nd, 2006, 09:47 PM #17
i think the best way to sum up bettman's murder of our sport...an exclusive deal w/ xm radio(starting 2007). xm is to satellite radio as beta was to home taping. and a deal w/ versus instead of espn. so, a game or two wedged in between cattle wrestling and noodling contests and the constant scorn of espn personalities and sportscenter highlights relegated to bottom feeding moments. sounds like a solid business plan. add to that the f'd up scheduling...where you get sick to death of local rivalries and out-of state fans(like me, GO DEVILS!!!!) only get to see their teams locally once every 3 years. way to go gary! how 'bout you go poke out your eyes w/ a spoon and go kill yourself? way to single handedly guarantee that we remain a "niche" sport and the butt of everyone's jokes. oh, and d'ya ever notice the only time the mainstream media takes notice of our beloved hockey is when some retard(bertuzzi) goes way outta line. all of a sudden it's all hockey talk...f#gs!:vampire: