Hawerchuk Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 I totally agree with Sylvester on this. The NHL needs to reduce the schedule by 10 games in my opinion. I know all the owners and players will whine about lost revenue, but look at last nights game for example. Two tired teams resulting in one boring game. Plus my biggest beef is playing for the Cup in June. My god, I hate that. Alot of people don't even like hockey, so having it in June is worthless. Playoffs should be April, Cup awarded in May. Start the season around the same time. 74 games total. Anyone agree? Here is the link: http://sabres.nhl.com/team/app/?service=pa...rticleid=395634 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 I totally agree with Sylvester on this. The NHL needs to reduce the schedule by 10 games in my opinion. I know all the owners and players will whine about lost revenue, but look at last nights game for example. To tired teams resulting in one boring game. Plus my biggest beef is playing for the Cup in June. My god, I hate that. Alot of people don't even like hockey, so having it in June is worthless. Playoffs should be April, Cup awarded in May. Start the season around the same time. 74 games total. Anyone agree? Here is the link: http://sabres.nhl.com/team/app/?service=pa...rticleid=395634 Didn't watch the link, but I think 80 is fine. One of my favorite parts about hockey is that if your team is any good they, they play 9 months out of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 Won't ever happen. Not only will the owners never agree to this, but NHLPA won't either. Less games = less pay for it's guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 I totally agree with Sylvester on this. The NHL needs to reduce the schedule by 10 games in my opinion. I know all the owners and players will whine about lost revenue, but look at last nights game for example. Two tired teams resulting in one boring game. Plus my biggest beef is playing for the Cup in June. My god, I hate that. Alot of people don't even like hockey, so having it in June is worthless. Playoffs should be April, Cup awarded in May. Start the season around the same time. 74 games total. Anyone agree? Here is the link: http://sabres.nhl.com/team/app/?service=pa...rticleid=395634 Whether or not it would ever happen is another thing, but I totally agree. 74 would be a solid number. I love hockey as much as anyone and the last couple years I found myself getting a little "hockeyed out" come May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 Whether or not it would ever happen is another thing, but I totally agree. 74 would be a solid number. I love hockey as much as anyone and the last couple years I found myself getting a little "hockeyed out" come May. Agreed. I know it won't happen, i would love a shorter schedule. Another thing that won't happen but i wish would, is bigger ice. It'd hurt the teams that grab and trap, and teams with speed would be more successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 Agreed. I know it won't happen, i would love a shorter schedule. Another thing that won't happen but i wish would, is bigger ice. It'd hurt the teams that grab and trap, and teams with speed would be more successful. I agree with the bigger ice. I would really like to see just for sh*ts and giggles a game played on a big slab of ice... Say 3/4's of a football field and just as wide... Same number of skaters... Oh... I like the shorter schedule too.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 Two tired teams resulting in one boring game. There may be many reasons why Monday's game sucked, but IMO none of the reasons have anything to do with the teams being "tired"? If this was true, how do you explain that after playing an 82 game season, there are tremendous levels of play in the playoffs when teams play every other night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 There may be many reasons why Monday's game sucked, but IMO none of the reasons have anything to do with the teams being "tired"? If this was true, how do you explain that after playing an 82 game season, there are tremendous levels of play in the playoffs when teams play every other night? Because it is "worth something" then... Call it a second wind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 Because it is "worth something" then... Call it a second wind. BS...If the players don't consider the regular season games as "worth something", than the coach is not doing his job and/or DR and his GM wannabe need to find some different players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 There may be many reasons why Monday's game sucked, but IMO none of the reasons have anything to do with the teams being "tired"? If this was true, how do you explain that after playing an 82 game season, there are tremendous levels of play in the playoffs when teams play every other night? I think they were tired, just not from playing 4 in 6. I know how I felt on Monday after three days of turkey sandwiches and lots of holiday beer..um...I mean...cheer, holiday cheer. I didn't set my workplace on fire either. Both teams played that way. Just wish ours would have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 I have supported a 74 game season for a few years now. 6 games against your division and 2 games against everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 3, 2008 Report Share Posted December 3, 2008 Whether or not it would ever happen is another thing, but I totally agree. 74 would be a solid number. I love hockey as much as anyone and the last couple years I found myself getting a little "hockeyed out" come May. Shorten training camp (it is kind of short already though) and start the season earlier. We're in the era of ridiculously conditioned athletes who work year round. How much time do they really need to get into game shape? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Wings Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 Shorten training camp (it is kind of short already though) and start the season earlier. We're in the era of ridiculously conditioned athletes who work year round. How much time do they really need to get into game shape? Bingo. This is also the reason I don't like hearing about how a team loses because they're "tired". If they're ridiculously conditioned, fatigue shouldn't be an excuse. Not to mention...isn't the game itself less taxing than some of their workouts? As for the schedule, I've never had a problem with 80 games, but it seems like it's too stretched out. Many schedules I've seen were something like 3 games in 4 days, then 4 days off, then 2 games in 3 days, then 3 days off, etc. I think it's a little more consistent now, but I never liked that. I understand there are travel considerations and all, but maybe unless they're flying across all three time zones, I don't see the need for 3-4 days off in between games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 Shorten training camp (it is kind of short already though) and start the season earlier. We're in the era of ridiculously conditioned athletes who work year round. How much time do they really need to get into game shape? I'd have no problem with starting the season in mid to late September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 Bingo. This is also the reason I don't like hearing about how a team loses because they're "tired". If they're ridiculously conditioned, fatigue shouldn't be an excuse. Not to mention...isn't the game itself less taxing than some of their workouts? It's not so much fatigue, but they get banged up over the course of the year. Each year, things don't heal as quickly as they did when these guys were younger. That much I understand. The one thing I have no feel for is how much jumping on a plane night after night can impact these guys. Blue, and I'd love to see some form of hockey year round (oh wait, I do). Maybe someday they'll figure it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.