- 4-on-4 overtime: I like this idea. I've always liked 4-on-4, because even in the "gritty" NHL the players can't piss around hitting each other when it is 4-on-4. Also usually when you get to overtime in the regular season both teams want the win, so they put in the effort. I consider this a compromise between the there shouldn't be any difference between playoff OT and playoff regulation except sudden
deathvictory camp and the dude just do the penalty shots and give me my winner now camp. - Less is more: Again I approve. Instead of sending 16 teams to the playoffs, just send 8. And drop the stupid division-leaders seeding, let's get the teams which can do the business to do the business. The hockey will be better and we'll start our summer two weeks earlier. This will never fly because the playoffs are not about hockey, the playoffs are about revenue.
- Shorter broadcasts: I like the reduced TV time-outs and the general flow of the play. Again, this won't happen because of the lost revenue that fewer TV time-outs would cost. If I had a choice between fewer TV time-outs and shorter breaks between periods, I'd take the fewer TV time-outs because I can always go to the fridge while Don Cherry is on. Lets face it -- the talking heads talk during the intermissions because there's nothing else to do. What would you prefer -- a live shot of the lineup to use the can?
Friday, March 5, 2010
Learning From The Olympics
StayClassy discusses how the NHL could learn from the Olympics. I'm going to cherry-pick his list: