Some of the following would obviously require legal work, approval of the NHLPA and other unions and will not be popular with all. So please don't respond with, "The NHLPA would never agree to that"...I know, this is just my own thoughts and what not.
First of all, adios to the shootout. It's a gimmick and a joke that the NHL uses it to settle games that can make or break a playoff berth. Hockey is a team game. Guys like Mike Komisarek are just as important as guys like Jussi Jokinen-Hell, more important. I understand that some people hate tie games, and will call the sport a competition, but resolving a game with a gimmick that includes only a small part of the actual competition solves nothing.
For fans that miss the shootouts, I have another idea: NHL Showdown 2.0. After each game, each team gets to choose 5 shooters. They each shoot against the opposing goalie, and stats are kept. At the end of the year, awards are given to the best shooters and goalies, with donations made to the players' favorite charities.
Keeping in line with that, wins would be worth 2 points. You get nothing for a loss or a tie. The point is to win, and if you fail, you get no reward. Games tied at the end of regulation go to a 10 minute, 4 on 4 OT. After that, they end, tied or not.
Second, There will be a World Cup every four years, in non-Olympic years. It will be a joint presentation of the NHL and IIHF, and held after the season of all interested leagues. There would be NO break in the NHL schedule for the Olympics.
Third, All Stars Rosters will be chosen by a committee selected by the commisioner's office. This would be comprised of GM's, Coaches, players and Broadcasters. Fan voting would be allowed, but would only make up 50% of the total score for electing players to the team.
Fourth, The NHL/NHLPA would have to agree to a luxury tax system. The salary cap would be abolished. A luxury tax threshold would be established at a number that would be determined by an independent arbitrator based on an agreed percentage of league revenues. Teams whose payroll was above that level would be taxed at a 250% rate, with the tax money going into a fund to be shared by the lower revenue teams. The caveat being that all money from luxury tax MUST be spent on team payroll(Hockey executives and coaches included in this amount).
There would also be a salary floor, to be determined by the same arbitration process.
Fifth, there will be ONE on-ice referee at games. The power of linesmen would be increased so they could call infractions behind the play(at least blatant ones). Far too often, having a two referee system means a poorly or inconsistently called game.
The goal is uniform enforcement of all rules. If it's a penalty at the 10 minute mark of the first, it is a penalty with one minute left in the third of a one goal game.
Fifth-A, All suspensions that are not automatically enforced will be decided by a committee agreed upon by the BOG. This will be a 5 person panel made up of former executives, coaches, players and league personnel.
Sixth, Goodbye East and West. Hello Campbell and Wales. Also, goodbye Atlantic, Southeast, et al...Hello, Norris, Smythe, Patrick, Adams, Gretzky and Howe.
Seventh, Contraction and relocation would be considered in a multi-point plan. The key considerations being team revenue, attendance, location and closeness to other NHL markets, stability of the marketplace over an extended period of time and historic contributions to the league and history of hockey.
No Canadian or original six team would be contracted or relocated.
Eighth, To ensure the widest possible audience is reached, an agreement with ESPN would be struck to not only televise NHL games, but also to guarantee coverage of a minimal level on the network's showcase program, Sportscenter.
All NHL games would be required to be broadcast in HD.
Ninth, Every NHL arena would have at least one section of low priced, "family" tickets for sale for every game.
Tenth, Teams would not be allowed to change their uniforms more than once every ten years.
If they want to settle a game and have a win they could do each team has a power play 5on4 until some 1 scores and the other does not like one shoot out shot would be a 1 min PP for the team. Makes it more of a team ending and longer but better. and if three rounds of 5 on 4 do not work they could lower it to a 5 on 3
I agree(STRONGLY) with number Nine. Prices are ridiculous in Toronto for families. Ridiculous...I still have never been to the ACC to watch a hockey game...
clap.........clap..........clap.......clap.....clap....clap..clap.clap.clap.clap. I couldn't have said it any better myself. Get rid of the shootout!!!! Why is a team game resolved by a hot dog eating contest? I like your resolution to have a charity shootout after each game.
montreal has a sectionall places should have similar price plans so for example toronto fans do not need to do go down to buffalo to watch a cheap game or travel to ottawa they can watch it at home. Buffalo probably has the best ticket prices then anywhere else
I'd have to think more about the PP thing, because at least it's team vs team. Philly also has a family section. I just think that it's needed, because the future of hockey depends on getting kid hooked on it, and nothing hooks you faster than seeing a game live.
Charity shootout is more to sooth fans of the gimmick. I don't hate the shootout, just that it counts as much as winning an actual game.
with PP thing have more excitment if the other team scores you would have to pull goalie and all and have much more tense moments then a 5 second dash to the net to try to pot one.
I just want to eliminate two things-a gimmick to get a winner and teams playing ping-pong to make sure they get one point near the end of tied games.
Good points, with the OT points system being the best. The overall rules of the game have been amended too much for the "new" fan. They gave it a shot, has it worked? I don't think so. The league should admit their mistakes and fix where possible.
I agree with most points made, but disagree on the point system for wins. I have always been a fan of the 3 point win. That way if the game ends in a tie, a team will each get 1 point each. Thus ensuring that teams will continue to play for the extra point. It should also be limited to 5 minutes, the issues wish crappy ice and the need for the zambonis again will diminish flow and you will end up with a 3 hour product. The selling point of hockey is that is constantly holds your attention.On point 7, relocation and contraction...the three teams that should be relocated (and I apologize fans of respective teams)...1 - Either Tampa or Florida...there is no reason for two teams in Florida. 2 - Columbus due to the fact that it has very few major sports franchises and it is a college town. 3 - Either Atlanta or Carolina. The Thrashers are horribly run, and the Hurricanes introduced bloody hockey cheerleaders. (I like a cute girl just as much as the next guy, but are you REALLY watching the girls?) And cities with new teams - Hamilton, Las Vegas, SeattleSo final realignment:Smythe - Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, Colorado, SeattleNorris - Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, St. Louis, PittsburghGretzky - Anaheim, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Las VegasPatrick - Philadelphia, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey, BostonAdams - Toronto, Ottawa, Hamilton, Montreal, BuffaloHowe - Washington, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Dallas, NashvilleGotta love a good blog to help you procrastinate!
that would be bad for dallas would have to feel sorry for them
LOL. good stuff. Re: the shootout... i think they should add 1 extra OT, for a total of 2x OT before the SO.
Good blog Jsaq, you stole my thunder on a bunch of this... I was going to write a blog to a similar effect this week. : ) The shootout, while entertaining, is stupid and is not hockey. The only positive is that ESPN (once they realize hockey exists and trumps and NBA) would love the shootout and it would get major exposure on Sportscenter. Regardless, I'd scrap it. Luxury tax is the way to go, and the league needs to contract 2-4 teams and relocate 2-4 others.
Amen brother...amen.
MarkMerc - that's the kind of thinking that gives hockey fans a bad name. You're concerned about gambling wins, and you think doing something great for charity is retarded? And you actually admit that publicly? Time to re-evaluate the priorities, my friend.
Yo plots4: none of the NHL's post-lockout changes have had any discernible effect on American markets. This includes the shootout. If you have an argument as to why this will change, and how exactly "ESPN would realize hockey exists" I'd like to hear it. Great stuff as always Jsaquella, though I'd like to hear some elaboration on why you favor a luxury tax instead of a cap.
MarkMerc - enjoy gambling on single players goes down to the SO you can easily lose your money due to maybe the worse team has a SO specialist and you get %^
I would like 3 points for a win, 2 for OT win and 1 for OT lost 0 for a lost
You forgot one important one...WHITE JERSEYS AT HOME!