Bettman says he’s okay if you want to bring back the rule against forward passes, he doesn’t mind if you want to revert to old-school icing, he just demends you keep it to one rule change; you know, evolution is better than revolution…

What rule are you changing, tweaking, binning or creating.

6 points

Instead of the shootout we have another period of OT with 2 pucks

permalink
report
reply
5 points

The number of OT periods is the number of additional pucks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’d like to combine this with the other guy’s suggestion of having fewer players for each OT round.

Round four, 1v1 with four pucks, should go pretty quick

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

And both are glowing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

All these suggestions are DUMB!

2 goalies in each net, but only one set of equipment. They have to share.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

make the nets wider by just a few inches. Increases scoring, goalies can keep there armor. what do we lose?

permalink
report
reply
5 points

It wouldn’t change much, but a defender clearing the puck over the glass should be treated the same as icing. If the team clears the puck over the glass before exiting their zone after the subsequent face off then call a Delay of Game.

I can’t stand the Delay of Game rule for accidental pucks over the glass, though. It doesn’t feel in the spirit of what Delay of Game means to me, at least not anymore than intentionally icing the puck.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Agreed. Even in the dead puck era it just didn’t happen that often. Time to lighten the punishment

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think I’d agree. You would have to treat icing the same way; a delay of game for either icing the puck or tossing it over the glass a second time without clearing the zone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think the big difference is the potential for injury.

Intentionall icing just sends the puck down the ice, intentional puck-over-the-glass could really hurt someone, especially if its a kid or an older person.

I think keeping it as a penalty makes sense to discourage its use as a tactic to relieve the pressure like you do with icing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I should be clear, I’m advocating for a return to how it was called pre-lockout. Putting the puck over the glass wasn’t an automatic delay of game, but it could be a penalty at the ref’s discretion (e.g. team is on the penalty kill and puts it over the glass to get a breather).

Prior to the lockout, this just didn’t happen that often, at least not much more often than it happens today. The reason the rule was introduced coming out of the lockout was to increase the amount of goals by increasing the number of ways teams could go on the power play.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Drop the shootout in OT and replace it with the following

  1. 5 mins of 4v4 (as it is now)
  2. 5 mins of 3v3
  3. 5 mins of 2v2
  4. 5 mins of 1v1
  5. if still no one scored, then the goalies meet in center ice for a good ole goalie fight. Winner of the fight wins the game for their team.
permalink
report
reply
2 points

OT is currently 3v3 in the NHL

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Dumb mistake on my part

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Perhaps we can arm home goalie with nets and a Trident, visitor gets spear and shield.

…But refs have to stand in a circle around the combatants and hold hands.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Community stats

  • 142

    Monthly active users

  • 650

    Posts

  • 2.6K

    Comments