What’s Wrong With a Low Scoring Game?
Posted 10:18 AM ET | Comments 0
Absolutely nothing. So why is there all this talk about bigger nets? It would seem as though the Garry Bettman and the other NHL executives are obsessed with increasing the amount of goals scored. We’ve already heard Roberto Luongo’s take on bigger nets saying that he will retire if they are imputed, however he also made one other perhaps more important point that seems to have been forgotten about. He said that more goals do not equal more excitement, more scoring chances however do.
The “new” NHL is great, more shots, more goals, and more excitement. But I don’t feel that more goals necessary means more excitement. More scoring chances however do. There’s nothing exciting about seeing a player score from the red line, however there is excitement every time the goalie comes up with a big save. After the lockout the NHL has done great, increased revenues, increased attendance, and for the most part teams are very economically stable. The game is more wide open and more exciting to watch it would appear as though the new rules have done there job, so why keep making changes.
There are certain aspects of the game that should remain untouched; the net size is one of them. Hockey has many traditions that should be honoured, the size of the net has been enshrined in our game and to change them now would be senile. To me changing the net size would be no different than changing the colour of the puck and how many players can say that they would honestly be in favour of using a pink, green, yellow, or even blue puck? Players have played with the same size nets for over a century so why change them now. If the NHL started using bigger nets then wouldn’t ever NHL record set using them becomes void? How would you justify having a player higher on the all time goals list who had scored the majority of his goals on a bigger net above a player who had scored all of his goals on a smaller net?
Perhaps I am biased against Gary Bettman but I don’t feel that he truly understands the tradition of the game of hockey. He seems to feel that it can be tampered with and played with to better suit the United States market that he seems to strive for better. Maybe its because he himself never played hockey that he fails to see that tradition behind the game. You can change the game of hockey all day and eventually yes you may land a major TV contract on ESPN but at what point has it stopped being hockey and started being a lucrative creation that’s sole purpose is to entertain.
The “new” NHL is great, more shots, more goals, and more excitement. But I don’t feel that more goals necessary means more excitement. More scoring chances however do. There’s nothing exciting about seeing a player score from the red line, however there is excitement every time the goalie comes up with a big save. After the lockout the NHL has done great, increased revenues, increased attendance, and for the most part teams are very economically stable. The game is more wide open and more exciting to watch it would appear as though the new rules have done there job, so why keep making changes.
There are certain aspects of the game that should remain untouched; the net size is one of them. Hockey has many traditions that should be honoured, the size of the net has been enshrined in our game and to change them now would be senile. To me changing the net size would be no different than changing the colour of the puck and how many players can say that they would honestly be in favour of using a pink, green, yellow, or even blue puck? Players have played with the same size nets for over a century so why change them now. If the NHL started using bigger nets then wouldn’t ever NHL record set using them becomes void? How would you justify having a player higher on the all time goals list who had scored the majority of his goals on a bigger net above a player who had scored all of his goals on a smaller net?
Perhaps I am biased against Gary Bettman but I don’t feel that he truly understands the tradition of the game of hockey. He seems to feel that it can be tampered with and played with to better suit the United States market that he seems to strive for better. Maybe its because he himself never played hockey that he fails to see that tradition behind the game. You can change the game of hockey all day and eventually yes you may land a major TV contract on ESPN but at what point has it stopped being hockey and started being a lucrative creation that’s sole purpose is to entertain.