Hockey Fights...

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Thu May 31, 2007 3:56 pm

I was about the net today and stumbled upon a signature that led me to a whole site dedicated to hockey fights. Even goes as far as ranking the fighters.
I can remember some fine brawls, and scraps here at BG and in thinking I bet if some one ....you know one of the of those usless effers at the MKT dept opened the hockey film vault and pulled out and made a BGSU Hockey fights video it would sell well.
To that end...making the "old Days" avail on DVD would be rather nice as well, just even the home games from the days gone by.

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Thu May 31, 2007 4:48 pm

There's a big reason you'll never see the marketing department do something like that, and it's the NCAA's view on it. The NCAA doesn't think fighting should be a part of hockey.

bgmaggot00 · Post by **bgmaggot00** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:12 am

BGDrew wrote:The NCAA doesn't think fighting should be a part of hockey.

Well, because it isn't. I personally think its garbage that hockey players are allowed to get away with as much as they do. Can you tell me any other sport (excluding Boxing) that allows/encourages players to lock arms and start fighting, without any sort of SERIOUS penalty? Five minutes is nothing. You pull that in Soccer, Baseball or Basketball, and you'll be kicked out of the current game, in addition to future games. Heck, in soccer your team will have to play down a man for the rest of the match. Imagine that in Hockey, a perpetual Power Play for the other team.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:32 am

In the NCAA fighting is a game misconduct. I think you also get suspended for a game for each game misconduct you've recieived. So...if you fight against Michigan and get kicked out you sit a game. If you then fight against Notre Dame, you'd get kicked out and have to sit two games.

That's not exactly a slap on the wrist

Personally, I'd rather see a couple of guys drop the gloves and throw a few than watch all of the cheap shots and stick work that players try to get away with when they don't have to worry about a guy like Georges Laraque pounding them into dust.

Peregrinner · Post by **Peregrinner** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:01 pm

Flipper wrote:Personally, I'd rather see a couple of guys drop the gloves and throw a few than watch all of the cheap shots and stick work that players try to get away with when they don't have to worry about a guy like Georges Laraque pounding them into dust.

Exactly. I'm not a huge fan of fights in hockey, but I know what purpose they serve and I know that, especially in the NHL, they are necessary. If you want proof, look at the number of ridiculous cheap shots that have been happening lately as they've been trying to make fighting disappear. I won't say they haven't happened at all before, but it seems to me they're on the rise. Fighting is a structured and (usually) safer way for the players to take care of that sort of tension on the ice, and when it's necessary, I have no problem with it.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:16 pm

Like it or not its part of the game...the continuous contact etc. Now while its not as much a part of the game these days and as mention the crap candy ass cheap s**t has taken over( with little repercussions due to the severity of the penalty for kicking some cheap hacks ass,) a video of old falcon fights would have no bearing on todays game...and quite frankly the NCAA would have no say over it as it clearly is not a violation....

not to mention as far as governing bodies go...the NCAA is about as wholistically bad as one could be.
at any rate they should make an effort to make avail the old games before they gone for ever to the degrading fof the media they are stored on, it will be a horrible loss of falcon history.;

h2oville rocket · Post by **h2oville rocket** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:06 pm

Flipper wrote:In the NCAA fighting is a game misconduct. I think you also get suspended for a game for each game misconduct you've recieived. So...if you fight against Michigan and get kicked out you sit a game. If you then fight against Notre Dame, you'd get kicked out and have to sit two games.

That's not exactly a slap on the wrist

Personally, I'd rather see a couple of guys drop the gloves and throw a few than watch all of the cheap shots and stick work that players try to get away with when they don't have to worry about a guy like Georges Laraque pounding them into dust.

Call me crazy but it seems to me that firm rules against fighting and chippy play combined with competent, consistent officiating would resolve the problem better than fighting. If there are still fights about that sort of play then that sort of play hasn't gone away due to fighting. And anyone who thinks the NHL couldn't stop fights almost overnight if they really wanted to is decieving themselves.

hockey fan · Post by **hockey fan** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:53 pm

Frankly, I love hockey. I love the North American style of hockey and that style includes a certain amount of fighting. I've sometimes wondered what exactly would be the result of stiffer penalties against fighting. How much impact would that have on the rest of the game as a whole? My conclusion is that I don't really want to find out.

I'm not a fight fan necessarly, but I do think a lot of the physical play (aggressive body checks, crashing the net, etc.) would go away if fighting were removed entirely. It does seem to work well the way the NCAA does it, but I think it would be different on the professional level.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:19 am

not that this is exactly on topic but speaking about how to expand the game to more viewers and make it more exciting some converstion has taken place among the NHL on air personalities about this recently and some thought the idea of 2 halfs like football or baskeball would be good...but everyone knows that by min 25 the ice would be about as unsafe as you could imagine. One fella had an interesting idea and that was to iniate a 2pt line, much like the 3pt line in basket ball...it would run out from about 4 feet off the boards near the dots to the blue line and across to the other dot. he figured this could force team to take more shots and make the game more exciting esp when taking into consideration the long shot and passing needed to get them....
i dont see any changes coming but that is one that could be entertaining.

Peregrinner · Post by **Peregrinner** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:34 pm

MACMAN wrote:not that this is exactly on topic but speaking about how to expand the game to more viewers and make it more exciting some converstion has taken place among the NHL on air personalities about this recently and some thought the idea of 2 halfs like football or baskeball would be good...but everyone knows that by min 25 the ice would be about as unsafe as you could imagine. One fella had an interesting idea and that was to iniate a 2pt line, much like the 3pt line in basket ball...it would run out from about 4 feet off the boards near the dots to the blue line and across to the other dot. he figured this could force team to take more shots and make the game more exciting esp when taking into consideration the long shot and passing needed to get them....
i dont see any changes coming but that is one that could be entertaining.

Personally, I'm not sure I like either idea. Part of what I like about hockey is the fact that it's not like most of the other major sports that have variable point shots/scores and things like that. It's a basic formula, but it's an exciting game.

Besides, plenty of the teams that have advanced in the playoffs have already established plenty of offense from the point, Detroit had Chelios and Lidstrom ripping shots from the line, the Ducks have Pronger's huge shot (not to mention his rocket-elbow), and even the Sens had Volchenkov blasting a few from up top. I don't really see how much good that would do.

Like you, I doubt either of those changes would ever happen, but if they did, I would be quite disappointed.

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:03 pm

Sports like hockey and soccer aren't popular because most of their rules aren't as known as a sport like football. Offsides is a rule that Americans hate because they love high scoring affairs.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:17 pm

Peregrinner wrote:Besides, plenty of the teams that have advanced in the playoffs have already established plenty of offense from the point,

Also, the two goals that won the Cup last year were from defensemen. But I only add that because my days of "defending Cup champion-ness" are waning.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:46 pm

Peregrinner wrote:
MACMAN wrote:not that this is exactly on topic but speaking about how to expand the game to more viewers and make it more exciting some converstion has taken place among the NHL on air personalities about this recently and some thought the idea of 2 halfs like football or baskeball would be good...but everyone knows that by min 25 the ice would be about as unsafe as you could imagine. One fella had an interesting idea and that was to iniate a 2pt line, much like the 3pt line in basket ball...it would run out from about 4 feet off the boards near the dots to the blue line and across to the other dot. he figured this could force team to take more shots and make the game more exciting esp when taking into consideration the long shot and passing needed to get them....
i dont see any changes coming but that is one that could be entertaining.
Personally, I'm not sure I like either idea. Part of what I like about hockey is the fact that it's not like most of the other major sports that have variable point shots/scores and things like that. It's a basic formula, but it's an exciting game.

Besides, plenty of the teams that have advanced in the playoffs have already established plenty of offense from the point, Detroit had Chelios and Lidstrom ripping shots from the line, the Ducks have Pronger's huge shot (not to mention his rocket-elbow), and even the Sens had Volchenkov blasting a few from up top. I don't really see how much good that would do.

Like you, I doubt either of those changes would ever happen, but if they did, I would be quite disappointed.

not that its easy to see..but in most things I dont see need for change. I most likely would not get on board with the 2pt idea either, but for a moments its fun to entertain. the game is fine as it is, better as it once was, but fine.

hockey fan · Post by **hockey fan** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:49 pm

Something like a two-point line in hockey would be awful. It would actually encourage the laziest possible play in the offensive zone. The perimeter shot with no one in front of the net is almost like turning the puck over.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 4:16 pm

Yep...unless you have a rocket of a shot any NHL netminder worth his salt can stop a shot from the point if he has a bead on it.

The NHL game is getting choked by the size of the players. Every team has a number of guys well over that 6ft 200+ lb mark. There just isn't as much room to operate as there was back in the day when the averag forward was 5-10 and 185lbs. Make the surface bigger call the clutching and stick work closer and the game will flow more naturally