You are NHL Commissioner, can do what you like for the game.

911 wrote:Les - keep in mind that these decisions must be approved by unions and that the commissioner isn't the be-all-end-all of the NHL. We both agree that Bettman's made some mistakes but some of these aren't necessarily his fault.

That said,

1: As long as your schedule allows for every city in the league to see the best players in the league at least once I'm cool. Rivalries are great and all but how many new ones form?

This schedule I have does that

2: I don't care about preseason and if anything would rather that teams be able to opt out of preseason entirely. Those who wish to play can play.

I hate preseason too but teams do need a few games to assess talent and work systems, but I think 4 games over 8 days is enough. Not like what some teams have done playing up to 10 preseason games.

3: Players unions do a good enough job of constraining training camp. 5 days is WAY too short and if I had my way I'd make them lower intensity but a full two weeks. Team sports is about a team and I would try to make training camp a real bonding experience as well as conditioning.

The Union has shortened training camp to less than 5 days and it's enough because players come to camp in shape. In Vancouver alone [I assume similar in all 29 other cities] players have been skating on their own or in groups since mid-August already.


4: Don't be a retard and set a ridiculous date regardless of whatever else is going on. Face it les, the NHL will fail if it competes on opening night against college or pro football. I don't necessarily like it either but we want to expose all sports fans to hockey.

The NHL will not fail, it already competes on these nights against baseball, NFL, and College Football. It must not worry about this. The league usually starts around the 5th of October give or take a day or two normally. Oct 1st. can be done and it need not be every team playing that night. It can be a special opening night matchup like the WHL does on its opening night here in Western Canada. Teams do not have to all begin on the 1st but games should start on the 1st. It should be hyped by marketing to be a special night for hockey fans. In some US cities where it may conflict with other sports they can pick another night near the 1st. or begin on a road trip. It's really not that difficult.


5: Does this even say anything? Who said anything about widening playoffs?

The NHL owners do. They have been talking about adding another round for a few years now, going up to 20 teams making the playoffs. I'd make is a mandate to never go above 16 teams.

6: All fine and good but try to schedule that with 84 games starting Oct.1 and ending allowing all series to run 7 games. As much as I think June hockey is stupid your math doesn't quite work here.

Starting almost one week earlier than normal, I'd do away with the waste of time All star game and the 4 lost days there and you can get the cup won by the 30th. of May.

7: Players unions would never agree and rental players are a real part of both the bulking up and the rebuilding process. It gives GMs a tool to say either 'ok, we're contenders' or 'ok, we're done'.

No it should not be a problem because there are already rules governing trades. By moving the Deadline up earlier to Feb 1st makes it more palitable for players and team as they still have 1/3 rd season to play in the new location. The players also know they have stability for at least one season in the city which may be popular for family men.

8: That gives us a ridiculous setup like the MLB. I say follow the NFL's model which is the only real and functional salary cap in pro sports. Salary caps are necessary or teams like the Wild would never succeed.

No, it is better because the current NHL salary cap will blow up soon. esp. for less viable US markets. The lower floor of a min. of $40million is larger then the max. cap was once the lockout ended a few years ago. There are likely 6-7 teams that cannot meet the $40 million cap and make money today. My idea has a midline bar set up each year based on league revenues, teams can stay at or below it. If they wish to piss money away going above it they are taxed $1 for $1 and the money is given equally to teams that are more fiscally responsible. There will be no low end line so if a cheap ass owner wants to only spend a pittance he can, his team may likely suck but it's his choice. If teams say NYR or Det want to blow a wad say $20 million above the supposed $50 million line they pay a $20 million tax each to the league. It work best and will not blow up in the face like the NHL cap will likely do in a few seasons.

9: I think the current OT rules are great except maybe extend the 4v4 for 10 mins before the shootout. Also, 5 shooters minimum.

Shootouts suck, they are boring and do not represent the game of hockey. The current points system is simply stupid, no sport can be credible if it gives a losing team points in the standings.

10: Who the fuck cares?

Marketing cares. Road sweaters look better. When you play 42 home games per year to see all the visitors looking essentially the same 'WHITE' is boring. Dark sweaters on the visitors is more appealing. Go to a NHL game and you see the home team in darks ALL THE TIME but you never get to see the Habs glorious red sweater,the Hawks stunning red sweater, the Wings simple but classic red sweater or the Bruins black and gold sweater. It just looks better to fans in the arena. It use to be this way from 1970-2000 home teams wore white and road teams wore dark.

Les_Vipers_rule wrote:

911 wrote:Les - keep in mind that these decisions must be approved by unions and that the commissioner isn't the be-all-end-all of the NHL. We both agree that Bettman's made some mistakes but some of these aren't necessarily his fault.

That said,

1: As long as your schedule allows for every city in the league to see the best players in the league at least once I'm cool. Rivalries are great and all but how many new ones form?

This schedule I have does that

Yeah I know. Which is why I said I'm cool with it.

2: I don't care about preseason and if anything would rather that teams be able to opt out of preseason entirely. Those who wish to play can play.

I hate preseason too but teams do need a few games to assess talent and work systems, but I think 4 games over 8 days is enough. Not like what some teams have done playing up to 10 preseason games.

Then let the teams decide, not the league. If a team wishes to opt out of training camp let them.

3: Players unions do a good enough job of constraining training camp. 5 days is WAY too short and if I had my way I'd make them lower intensity but a full two weeks. Team sports is about a team and I would try to make training camp a real bonding experience as well as conditioning.

The Union has shortened training camp to less than 5 days and it's enough because players come to camp in shape. In Vancouver alone [I assume similar in all 29 other cities] players have been skating on their own or in groups since mid-August already.

You could actually read what I said - if the training camps are only 5 days they will be 5 incredibly grueling days. I say make them a more relaxed two weeks. You're right in that they're not really conditioning camps though due to excellent off season individual training.

4: Don't be a retard and set a ridiculous date regardless of whatever else is going on. Face it les, the NHL will fail if it competes on opening night against college or pro football. I don't necessarily like it either but we want to expose all sports fans to hockey.

The NHL will not fail, it already competes on these nights against baseball, NFL, and College Football. It must not worry about this. The league usually starts around the 5th of October give or take a day or two normally. Oct 1st. can be done and it need not be every team playing that night. It can be a special opening night matchup like the WHL does on its opening night here in Western Canada. Teams do not have to all begin on the 1st but games should start on the 1st. It should be hyped by marketing to be a special night for hockey fans. In some US cities where it may conflict with other sports they can pick another night near the 1st. or begin on a road trip. It's really not that difficult.

That's shortsighted arrogance les. It should be the first Friday night of October as far as I'm concerned, whether it's the first of the seventh. Don't try to compete with football - you will lose. The NHL actually didn't schedule Sunday night marquee games last year until the NFL season was over and that's for a reason.

5: Does this even say anything? Who said anything about widening playoffs?

The NHL owners do. They have been talking about adding another round for a few years now, going up to 20 teams making the playoffs. I'd make is a mandate to never go above 16 teams.

Let's not quibble about hypothetical situations with little chance of occurring regardless of who's making the decisions

6: All fine and good but try to schedule that with 84 games starting Oct.1 and ending allowing all series to run 7 games. As much as I think June hockey is stupid your math doesn't quite work here.

Starting almost one week earlier than normal, I'd do away with the waste of time All star game and the 4 lost days there and you can get the cup won by the 30th. of May.

All Star game will not be cancelled - again a revenue and publicity thing.

7: Players unions would never agree and rental players are a real part of both the bulking up and the rebuilding process. It gives GMs a tool to say either 'ok, we're contenders' or 'ok, we're done'.

No it should not be a problem because there are already rules governing trades. By moving the Deadline up earlier to Feb 1st makes it more palitable for players and team as they still have 1/3 rd season to play in the new location. The players also know they have stability for at least one season in the city which may be popular for family men.

Les - these people are getting paid millions upon millions of dollars to play hockey. Frankly, fuck their preference. This would eliminate rental players entirely because of cap implications

8: That gives us a ridiculous setup like the MLB. I say follow the NFL's model which is the only real and functional salary cap in pro sports. Salary caps are necessary or teams like the Wild would never succeed.

No, it is better because the current NHL salary cap will blow up soon. esp. for less viable US markets. The lower floor of a min. of $40million is larger then the max. cap was once the lockout ended a few years ago. There are likely 6-7 teams that cannot meet the $40 million cap and make money today. My idea has a midline bar set up each year based on league revenues, teams can stay at or below it. If they wish to piss money away going above it they are taxed $1 for $1 and the money is given equally to teams that are more fiscally responsible. There will be no low end line so if a cheap ass owner wants to only spend a pittance he can, his team may likely suck but it's his choice. If teams say NYR or Det want to blow a wad say $20 million above the supposed $50 million line they pay a $20 million tax each to the league. It work best and will not blow up in the face like the NHL cap will likely do in a few seasons.

Well that's something that must be controlled - the NHL is voluntarily raising the cap like this such that the higher spending teams don't weigh themselves down too much but now they're giving contracts based on speculative higher future salary caps which is ridiculous. But les, look at the MLB - A-Rod and Derek Jeter get paid more than the entire Blue Jays (not a low spending team per se) starting lineup. That is clearly a broken system and the Rays success this year is a crazy fluke that will happen maybe every 20 years. I like the cap minimum such that it makes every team sort of stay competitive. I guarantee your plan would have 4 teams moving cities within 10 years and that's not good. And they won't be going to places like Kitchener, they'll be going to large cities with the economy to support but not the fanbase.

9: I think the current OT rules are great except maybe extend the 4v4 for 10 mins before the shootout. Also, 5 shooters minimum.

Shootouts suck, they are boring and do not represent the game of hockey. The current points system is simply stupid, no sport can be credible if it gives a losing team points in the standings.

I like it, it adds an extra bit of strategy. You're just an old coot who's completely out of touch on this one.

10: Who the fuck cares?

Marketing cares. Road sweaters look better. When you play 42 home games per year to see all the visitors looking essentially the same 'WHITE' is boring. Dark sweaters on the visitors is more appealing. Go to a NHL game and you see the home team in darks ALL THE TIME but you never get to see the Habs glorious red sweater,the Hawks stunning red sweater, the Wings simple but classic red sweater or the Bruins black and gold sweater. It just looks better to fans in the arena. It use to be this way from 1970-2000 home teams wore white and road teams wore dark.

You're just friggin nitpicking here man. It's still half and half.

911 wrote:As much as I don't like Gary Bettman all that much, your rules would have the NHL in a financial hellhole in 10 years flat les. The fan part and the Commissioner part have to stay separate.

Les_Vipers_rule wrote:

911 wrote:As much as I don't like Gary Bettman all that much, your rules would have the NHL in a financial hellhole in 10 years flat les. The fan part and the Commissioner part have to stay separate.

I don't agree, what rules of mine (which btw are often shared by many hockey writers in the media) would cause that? The current CBA is soon to explode in the NHL's face especially given the growing financial meltdown in the USA.

911 wrote:And les, the OT rules are such that TV networks will pay more for the coverage, which allows the lesser teams in particular to take extra money in. Change that and lose TV deals.

911 wrote:It's also quite likely that while many small market teams don't like the cap rising so high they would vehemently oppose removing it instead of controlling it.

Swerve wrote:Disband the league.

Actually, I like NHL. Channel 10 is creating a 24 hour sporting network here, so I'm guessing they'll have to fill the time with traditionally unpopular sports such as ice hockey. I'd watch it.