You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on LA Kings Talk within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. After reading an article in the Hockey News by Adam Proteau seen here...
http://thehockeynews.com/articles/12...opian-NHL.html
My response to this article goes like this;
- I
- I agree with everything in his League structure column, except the 9th and 10th place teams playing one game for a playoff spot and the top team in the confrenece getting a by into the second round. That would never fly.
- I agree with the television schedual except i actually like the FSN feed for Los Angeles, i'm not sure how well VS. is when it come to hockey so i'll have to watch a game on center ice sometime... And the whole blackouts for NHL Center Ice piss me off so much, i cant stand it... i live in BC, what if i was a canuck fan?? Center Ice would be obsolete, nobody in BC would buy it. But it is good because i'm a kings fan so...
- In the Rule Changes... I dont think mandatory visors are a good thing, it should be up to the player to choose, its not as bad as playing without a helmet, and players still get facial injuries with visors so bah! I do believe that players in the shootout should have to option to take their helmets off, i always thought that seeing the players in the All Star game with no helmets was kinda cool. And YES for christs sake shrink the goaltenders equipment, they look like lacross goalies out there now.
- Disipline.. the only thing i'd change to what Adam put would be, yes abolish the instigator rule, but dont kick a player out of the game for a fighting major, thats just dumb...
- Misc... The olympics are lame, NHL players should not play in them. One outdoor game every couple or so years, with option to play it in Europe or elsewhere. i'm not sure if the NHL should play in Europe, maybe but not london.
i'm not going to spend any more time on this, so feel free to check out the article and blog away to my rambles...
- I agree with everything in his League structure column, except the 9th and 10th place teams playing one game for a playoff spot and the top team in the confrenece getting a by into the second round. That would never fly.
- I agree with the television schedual except i actually like the FSN feed for Los Angeles, i'm not sure how well VS. is when it come to hockey so i'll have to watch a game on center ice sometime... And the whole blackouts for NHL Center Ice piss me off so much, i cant stand it... i live in BC, what if i was a canuck fan?? Center Ice would be obsolete, nobody in BC would buy it. But it is good because i'm a kings fan so...
- In the Rule Changes... I dont think mandatory visors are a good thing, it should be up to the player to choose, its not as bad as playing without a helmet, and players still get facial injuries with visors so bah! I do believe that players in the shootout should have to option to take their helmets off, i always thought that seeing the players in the All Star game with no helmets was kinda cool. And YES for christs sake shrink the goaltenders equipment, they look like lacross goalies out there now.
- Disipline.. the only thing i'd change to what Adam put would be, yes abolish the instigator rule, but dont kick a player out of the game for a fighting major, thats just dumb...
- Misc... The olympics are lame, NHL players should not play in them. One outdoor game every couple or so years, with option to play it in Europe or elsewhere. i'm not sure if the NHL should play in Europe, maybe but not london.
i'm not going to spend any more time on this, so feel free to check out the article and blog away to my rambles...
You really brought up the points I had problems with. 9th seed vs. 10th seed game is stupid. Visors should not be mandatory, you're correct. And players should have the option of removing their helmets in the shootout...well, that'll end when someone smacks their head after falling. Making the trap illegal is just stupid. The winter classic every year, I don't agree with either but if it's going to be every year, it should be the the hosting team vs. The defending Stanley Cup Champion. Mandatory organ music is ridiculous.
and this...
"Full media access for qualified bloggers." HAHAH! Only in America...
they probably did, although i'm sure they kind of knew that it was either the LA kings or the California Seals that would survive, thank god it was the kings.
After the original six, there was the Calfornia Seals (changed name to Oakland Seals midway through the first season, then the California Golden Seals), LA Kings, Philidelphia Flyers, Minnesota North Stars, St.Louis Blues, Pittsburg Penguins... only the Seals and the Stars teams have been moved since.
- Buffalo and Vancouver were next in 70-71...Atlanta Flames and NY Islanders 72-73
- 74-75 the Kansas City Scouts and Washington Capitals were added
- 76-77 the Seals Franchise was moved to Cleveland and renamed the Barons and the Kansas City franchise moves to Colorado to form the Rockies
- 78-79 the Cleveland franchise merges with the Minnesota North Stars
- 79-80 the WHL blows a tire and the Edmonton Oilers, Winnepeg Jets, Hartford Whalers and Quebec Nordiques join the league
- 80-81 Atlanta is moved to Calgary
- 82-83 Colorado is moved to New Jersey
- 91-92 San Jose joins the club (22 teams at this point)
- 92-93 Tampa Bay and Ottawa Senators join
- 93-94 Anaheim Might Ducks fly in along with a team with just as ugly jerseys the Florida Panthers, the Minnesota North Stars become the Dallas Stars
- 95-96 Quebec is moved to Colorado, Winnepeg is moved to Phoenix
- 97-98 Hartford is relocated in Raliegh and named the Carolina Hurricanes
- 98-99 Nashville comes in to play
Atlanta comes back in 99-00, and Minnesota and Columbus in 00-01
30 teams.... oh yea, i dont think nashville should have a team either.
- 9
I'm going to invite all sorts of scorn and leading questions about my masculinity for saying this, but I think visors should be mandatory, and I also think grandfathering them in is going to be the way it happens.
There is no compelling reason not to mandate that athletes getting paid millions of dollars take one relatively minor measure in order to reduce the incidence of serious eye and facial injuries.
Granted, as someone pointed out already, a visor won't prevent all injuries incurred from errant sticks or pucks to the face. But it will cut down on those career-jeopardizing eye injuries, which is only a good thing.
And all the whining that's likely to happen from macho players saying this demeans them, or players complaining about adjusting to a visor, I don't buy a lot of it. For one, there are very few players in the league these days who likely never played with a full face shield -- not just the half-visor worn by some in the NHL -- at some point in their amateur careers.
That said, by just instituting a grandfather clause that allows current players not using a visor to play out the rest of their careers sans visor (a la the helmet rule that allowed Craig MacTavish to keep his curly locks on display into the late 1990s), you can avoid a lot of the griping and resistance from players if they aren't required to adopt it themselves. Obviously I'd still rather see everyone wearing a visor (and I'm glad that so many of the Kings' key players like Kopitar, Johnson, Cammalleri, etc. wear visors), but this is a politically pragmatic way to make that happen.
The whole debate over visors reminds me a lot of the really stupid argument a Ducks fan tried to pick with me probably ten years ago, when he assailed the manhood of Stephane Fiset because Fiset wore a plastic throat guard while Guy Hebert had no throat and neck protection on his mask. There wasn't much of an argument, mostly because he didn't have a good explanation for why Fiset (or any goalie) should be risking a puck to the throat by now wearing a simple piece of safety equipment.
I know that serious eye injuries aren't all that common in the NHL, but they happen often enough, with devastating results, that I'd hate to think it'll take some big-time star being legally blinded in one eye for people to wake up and realize there's no acceptable excuse for not mandating visors.
I'm going to invite all sorts of scorn and leading questions about my masculinity for saying this, but I think visors should be mandatory, and I also think grandfathering them in is going to be the way it happens.
There is no compelling reason not to mandate that athletes getting paid millions of dollars take one relatively minor measure in order to reduce the incidence of serious eye and facial injuries.
Granted, as someone pointed out already, a visor won't prevent all injuries incurred from errant sticks or pucks to the face. But it will cut down on those career-jeopardizing eye injuries, which is only a good thing.
And all the whining that's likely to happen from macho players saying this demeans them, or players complaining about adjusting to a visor, I don't buy a lot of it. For one, there are very few players in the league these days who likely never played with a full face shield -- not just the half-visor worn by some in the NHL -- at some point in their amateur careers.
That said, by just instituting a grandfather clause that allows current players not using a visor to play out the rest of their careers sans visor (a la the helmet rule that allowed Craig MacTavish to keep his curly locks on display into the late 1990s), you can avoid a lot of the griping and resistance from players if they aren't required to adopt it themselves. Obviously I'd still rather see everyone wearing a visor (and I'm glad that so many of the Kings' key players like Kopitar, Johnson, Cammalleri, etc. wear visors), but this is a politically pragmatic way to make that happen.
The whole debate over visors reminds me a lot of the really stupid argument a Ducks fan tried to pick with me probably ten years ago, when he assailed the manhood of Stephane Fiset because Fiset wore a plastic throat guard while Guy Hebert had no throat and neck protection on his mask. There wasn't much of an argument, mostly because he didn't have a good explanation for why Fiset (or any goalie) should be risking a puck to the throat by now wearing a simple piece of safety equipment.
I know that serious eye injuries aren't all that common in the NHL, but they happen often enough, with devastating results, that I'd hate to think it'll take some big-time star being legally blinded in one eye for people to wake up and realize there's no acceptable excuse for not mandating visors.
Right on brother!!!!
Questioning the manhood of a player for wearing safety gear is like saying your a pussy for refusing to take an undefended punch to the face....In which case I am a pussy!
And whats with all the hate on fighting? If Ivanans and Parros beat the **** out of each other tonight, even to the point of both or one player(s) getting injured,(which would make my ticket to see the Kings lose to their arch rivals worth it) why should either one of them be SUSPENDED. Pronger should have been suspended for ATTACKING Handzus but that Was'nt fighting...was it? Should fighting be regulated in regards to the protection of the stars that sell the game???...yes! but this puritanical,collective-thinking way of going about it (ALL fighters,EVEVEY player that fights,AUTOMATIC suspensions) is scary and could ruin one of the biggest aspects of the game that attracts NEW fans. When reffs choke on their wistle's then it is'nt the privlige or the right but the duty of the players to take matters into their own hands.
1-Move the Panthers to Quebec and re-form the Nordiques
2-Move the Coyotes back to Winnipeg and re-form the Jets
3-Move the Predators to Hartford and re-form the Whalers
4-Contract the Jackets and distribute their players via supplemental draft
5-Contract the Thrashers and distribute their players via supplemental draft
6-Increase the size of the rink to 210' by 100' and re-institute the 2 line pass
7-Remove the fight instigator penalty
8-Every team must be involved in an outdoor game each season
9-Roll the schedule back to 80 games
10-No road trips for any team longer than 4 games or 10 days
11-Trash the Reebok "Uniform Spooge System" and go back to sweaters
12-Re-name the conferences Wales and Campbell, and the divisions Smythe, Patrick, Adams, and Norris
That's my NHL utopia.
__________________ I am the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be.
ha ha thats funny, 9th and 10th team have a play in, and 1st place gets bye. Your whole tree would be messed up. Who gets the bye in the second round, when there are 5 teams left in each conference? Does the 1st place team get a free pass to the conference finals?
My Utopian NHL. 
FabulousForum
