All-Purpose Hockey Thread II

...don't forget Tommy Hanrahan, John Brophy, Jay Gatsby and Daisy Buchanan.

 

KPD has a great article in todays Globe about fighting in the NHL.....and why the league needs to embrace that part of the game. To sum it up for those that don't feel like reading it, it made sense in the early 90's to phase fighting out of the sport, the NHL was trying to expand to the entire U.S. and they wanted to showcase the speed and skill of the players, not the braun. Back then tv was still very "family friendly"....but not anymore. People gravitate towards gruesome shows, Ultimate fighting is bigger than boxing, the public isn't turned off by the site of blood or fighting......bring it back.

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/articles/2006/11/26/lets_punch_it_up_a_little/

 

Sorry, Ashy, Dupont is just plain wrong in this column.

Yes, fighting is down for one simple reason: in a salary cap world, teams aren't going to fill a roster spot with a one dimensional player who might get two minutes of ice time a game for one and one reason only: to take on the other team's designated non-hockey player.

The new prototype is probably someone like Chris Neill of the Sens who can score, hit and fight almost anyone else's tough guy.

But because fighting is down that doesn't mean the passion or the violence is down. The ability to zoom through the neutral zone unimpeded means that violent hits are up and everyone has to pay a little more attention. Dmen are adding a little more step to their game on shoot-ins so the oncoming (unimpeded) forechecker doesn't put them through the glass.

And Lord help us if hockey panders to the Ultimate Fighting crowd. No way the NHL should return the game to the neanderthal days of the Broad Street Bullies just to satisfy US TV networks. The game hasn't been this good in about twenty years.

Sorry, that column was just plain dumb. But I guess if I had to watch the Boston Bruins every night, I'd be pulling my hair out as well.

 

The damage control is already starting to fly in the Edmonton Sun in preparation for the return of Chris Pronger tomorrow. The first three pages of the sports section are dedicated to it. The front is a large graphic that leads to the page three story that basically says that if it wasn't for Pronger's request to be traded that we wouldn't still have a number of players, so in a round about way we should be thankful or something. I don't know. The page two story is Lupol urging the fans to "Show their class." This is one time I wish they really would show their class as well, but I'm not holding high hopes for it. The Ducks apparently are paying for increased security at their hotel, the arena, and any local establishments they may possibly go to eat after or before. Personally if I were them, I would have him staying at a completely different hotel, under an alias, and order him to stay in his room and order room service or take out.

 

Beef, is that going to be a nationally televised game? Won't want to miss it.
Still a little chilly in your neck of the woods?

 

I think the game is only available through pay per view. Definitely worth the $10 to watch, although some of the side production stuff is amateurish, but the game itself should be a good one.
here's the link off their website for pay per view info
http://edmontonoilers.com/schedule/ppv.php

 

Well, I don't have Bell Expressvu and Rogers won't have it.

Doesn't matter. I wouldn't pay anyway.

 

Double J;
Has that every been confirmed or is it just terrific malicious gossip?

 

Switching gears, the Chicago Blackhawks have fired head coach Trent Yawney and replaced him with former Hawk great Denis Savard, who had been an assistant.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Chicago/2006/11/27/2516614-cp.html

Apparently it's Yawney's fault that Michal Handzus and Martin Havlat got hurt, sidelining pretty much all of the team's offensive punch.

 

JR....we'll agree to disagree. I think he's talking about the Chris Neils of the league, and he specifically mentioned how the "staged fights" have no place in the game. A fight takes nothing away from the sport, in fact its unique. The NHL tried to everything possible to attract new fans by eliminating the figthing....unfortunately they lost a large number of their existing fans in the process.

You talk about open ice and speed, well there's a good argument that the game would open up even more if players had to think twice about running a Crosby or Staal.

The NHL is a better product today than 5 years ago, but it's not nearly as good a game as 15-20 years ago.

 

Ashy, I'm not against fighting per se but to promote it as means of selling the sport is just a backwards step.

And we'll have to agree to disagree because I think the game now is as good as it's ever been--including 15 or 20 years ago.

And coincidentally the Star's media (sports) critic lambastes the Canadian networks in his column today for all the fights in their highlights-despite the fact that fights are way down.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1164581411560&call_pageid=968867503640&col=970081593064&t=TS_Home