Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, MafiaMan said:

So the players are bigger, stronger, and faster than ever and take up more space than ever.  After completely messing with OT and moving it from 5x5 to 4x4 and now 3x3, you don’t suppose it’s crazy to think the NHL might view taking another guy off the ice full-time in regulation to, you know, increase scoring chances.

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say there’s a hint of sarcasm here, no? 

Posted
56 minutes ago, Godsmack said:

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say there’s a hint of sarcasm here, no? 

We’re all familiar with the 2:00 power play and the 5:00 major.  Up until the 1956 season in the NHL, players receiving 2:00 penalties stayed in the box the whole 2:00, regardless of how many goals were scored.  How much of an impact has that decision had on the game in the last 60+ years?  I could totally envision the current generation of casual fans pushing the envelope for ideas on evolving the game further.  

If we love 3x3 OT so much because it creates so much open space and more scoring chances,  why isn’t the game played that way ALL the time?  I won’t tell you why myself but you can go watch an old NHL All-Star game where the scores were 17-14 or 16-13 and find out for yourself.  BORING!

  • Upvote 2
Posted
1 hour ago, MafiaMan said:

We’re all familiar with the 2:00 power play and the 5:00 major.  Up until the 1956 season in the NHL, players receiving 2:00 penalties stayed in the box the whole 2:00, regardless of how many goals were scored.  How much of an impact has that decision had on the game in the last 60+ years?  I could totally envision the current generation of casual fans pushing the envelope for ideas on evolving the game further.  

If we love 3x3 OT so much because it creates so much open space and more scoring chances,  why isn’t the game played that way ALL the time?  I won’t tell you why myself but you can go watch an old NHL All-Star game where the scores were 17-14 or 16-13 and find out for yourself.  BORING!

Not sure where you come up with this stuff.  They play the game.  The game will always be 5x5.  Sure there will be minor  tweaks, take out the red line... but the game is the game.

After the game has concluded there are a few options.  Leave a tie, play 5x5 for some duration, play 4x4 for some duration, play 3x3 for some duration, or have a shootout.  There are way more ties happening so leaving it as a tie isn’t an appealing option.  In the past, games tied after regulation were just deemed a tie.  Back then ties were relatively rare.

I’ve never heard anyone advocate for anything by 5x5 and I can’t believe anyone would advocate for anything else.

i don’t get the feeling that,  “we love 3x3 so much.”  It’s just a reasonable way to break a tie at the end of a formal game. No more no less.  No one is calling for huge nets or 3x3 or any other crazy modification to regulation.

  • Upvote 1
Posted
4 hours ago, MafiaMan said:

We’re all familiar with the 2:00 power play and the 5:00 major.  Up until the 1956 season in the NHL, players receiving 2:00 penalties stayed in the box the whole 2:00, regardless of how many goals were scored.  How much of an impact has that decision had on the game in the last 60+ years?  I could totally envision the current generation of casual fans pushing the envelope for ideas on evolving the game further.  

If we love 3x3 OT so much because it creates so much open space and more scoring chances,  why isn’t the game played that way ALL the time?  I won’t tell you why myself but you can go watch an old NHL All-Star game where the scores were 17-14 or 16-13 and find out for yourself.  BORING!

I hear that might bring back you can score as many times as you want on a 2 minute power play.

I’ve been watching The Hockey Guy’s NHL history videos. Some of the old rules were crazy. One being you can’t make a forward pass.

Posted
2 hours ago, Walsh Hall said:

Not sure where you come up with this stuff.  They play the game.  The game will always be 5x5.  Sure there will be minor  tweaks, take out the red line... but the game is the game.

After the game has concluded there are a few options.  Leave a tie, play 5x5 for some duration, play 4x4 for some duration, play 3x3 for some duration, or have a shootout.  There are way more ties happening so leaving it as a tie isn’t an appealing option.  In the past, games tied after regulation were just deemed a tie.  Back then ties were relatively rare.

I’ve never heard anyone advocate for anything by 5x5 and I can’t believe anyone would advocate for anything else.

i don’t get the feeling that,  “we love 3x3 so much.”  It’s just a reasonable way to break a tie at the end of a formal game. No more no less.  No one is calling for huge nets or 3x3 or any other crazy modification to regulation.

In the absolute best of all worlds, they would break ties using proxy teams of 4 and 5-year olds. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
3 hours ago, burd said:

In the absolute best of all worlds, they would break ties using proxy teams of 4 and 5-year olds. 

Careful...that could open up the doors for Minnesota to get their first-ever verbal commit from that age group.

  • Upvote 3
Posted
13 hours ago, MafiaMan said:

So the players are bigger, stronger, and faster than ever and take up more space than ever.  After completely messing with OT and moving it from 5x5 to 4x4 and now 3x3, you don’t suppose it’s crazy to think the NHL might view taking another guy off the ice full-time in regulation to, you know, increase scoring chances.

As much as a disagree with your take on 3x3 deciding a regular season game...I honestly don’t think your take is all that crazy.  A buddy and I were just talking about this.  Moving to 4x4...and taking body checks out of the game (yet contact would remain similar to women’s hockey). This will probably get a response :)

Posted
18 hours ago, MafiaMan said:

Careful...that could open up the doors for Minnesota to get their first-ever verbal commit from that age group.

Plus, it's already difficult to tell with them, they're such little people.

Posted
On 8/11/2018 at 10:32 AM, Goon said:

That's a big loss for BU. 

It is easy to see why any kid might be attracted to college life in Boston, but does anybody know what it is that that staff has been doing the last 4-5 years to get so much high end talent.  Forget for the moment what they are doing with it.   The recruiting assistants have deep connections or just really recruit well?  As  said, on top of having the greater Boston university environment to market. 

And yeah, I get that not every elite hockey player cares about the University "milieu."

Posted
1 hour ago, burd said:

It is easy to see why any kid might be attracted to college life in Boston, but does anybody know what it is that that staff has been doing the last 4-5 years to get so much high end talent.  Forget for the moment what they are doing with it.   The recruiting assistants have deep connections or just really recruit well?  As  said, on top of having the greater Boston university environment to market. 

And yeah, I get that not every elite hockey player cares about the University "milieu."

Coaches, city, high end school

Posted
1 hour ago, MafiaMan said:

The last two Northeastern logos were absolutely brutal.  This is a step in the right direction.

The last Husky logo looked as if it were drawn by a third grader. 

Posted

Given the timing of CC athletic director Ken Ralph’s departure, it’s indicative of the manner in which he held his post at CC. This article was way too kind, IMO, in addressing Ralph’s tenure as AD. For those of you who read this and inquire about the part of the story that talks about Scott Owens’ departure, apparently, he wasn’t even given the courtesy of being told to his face that he was being let go. No wonder Owens hates the school so much. 

https://www.csbj.com/2018/08/22/opinion-colorado-college-needs-to-work-on-diplomacy/

Posted
6 minutes ago, Godsmack said:

Given the timing of CC athletic director Ken Ralph’s departure, it’s indicative of the manner in which he held his post at CC. This article was way too kind, IMO, in addressing Ralph’s tenure as AD. For those of you who read this and inquire about the part of the story that talks about Scott Owens’ departure, apparently, he wasn’t even given the courtesy of being told to his face that he was being let go. No wonder Owens hates the school so much. 

https://www.csbj.com/2018/08/22/opinion-colorado-college-needs-to-work-on-diplomacy/

As someone who worked in college hockey in the springs, Ken was never a favorite. Lots of awkward behind the scenes stuff with Owens leaving and hirs failure of a replacement coming in. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, AlphaMikeFoxtrot said:

Shannon Miller is trying to get even more money out of Duluth. Wow.

Would love to hear a rationalization for this from one of her apologists.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/news/crime-and-courts/4490409-shannon-miller-seeks-3-million-more-university-minnesota-duluth
 

I thought she was coaching a pro woman’s team. I’ve heard she’s looked for NHL and men’s college hockey positions.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...