The Voice of the UMD Bull Dawgs Bruce Ciske Ciske Bloghas posed a number of questions to college hockey bloggers on what part of the rules we would like to see changed to make college hockey a better sport to watch.
Has the college game truly seen in increase in stick work in recent years?
In my opinion there is too much stick work in college hockey and it does affect the game quite a bit. In my opinion there is way too much stick work/stick swinging in NCAA hockey. I think a lot of it has to do with the full shield/mask and the disqualification penalty for fighting. If a player knows he is going to get clobbered for using his stick they are going to think twice about high sticking someone. Stick work is dangerous and there is no room for it in college hockey.
Although the NCAA would never approve of this, I am all for getting rid of the DQ penalty for fighting and giving the players only a five minute major and a game misconduct for fighting. I laugh when I hear people say that fighting is not part of the game of hockey but it is. That way a player wouldn't be punished so severely for fighting and it would allow the game to police itself, allow some fighting in college hockey and I think that the amount of stick work would go down in the NCAA. I think the amount of stick work would go down in the NCAA.
Do officials do a good job of calling "clutch-and-grab" infractions consistently?
I feel that the officials in the college hockey do not do a good job of calling the clutching and grabbing, hooking and holding and interference. It is the Goon's opinion that WCHA officials allow way too much interference. If you watched WCHA hockey on a regular basis you would see that certain teams even the national champion Wisconsin Badgers do quite a bit of the clutching and grabbing that goes uncalled and is basically over looked.
Earlier this winter I asked the head of the WCHA officials one time why the WCHA couldn't call the game like the NHL is right now. Sheppard's response to my question was that the league coaches would never go for it. What I am a little confused here. The WCHA will not call the game the way its supposed be called because the coaches will never go for it.
This adds to confusion that hooking, holding, obstruction is some how confused with smart defensive hockey and being a system. In the Goon's opinion this is horrible a line of thinking. In my humble opinion Is what is wrong with college hockey today. It also means your team can not skate with the uptempo teams like the Gophers, Sioux, Tigers, Eagles, Pioneers and this is your teams only hope of winning. If you're a coach and your team can't play the game the way its suppose to you might need to recruit some players that can skate. Get quicker defenseman or a goalie that can stop a ton of shots.
Here is an example of hockey the way it is suppose to be played. The Buffalo Sabres are a team made up of role players that can all skate. Gone are the Rob Rays and Brad Mays. Each player is awesome on their skates. They ran the Flyers right out of the building for 6 games. Philly was lucky to win two games. This is the way that college hockey should be played. Not some of the crap we say the last couple of years.
A perfect example of hockey that is hard to watch is rewind to the Cornell and Wisconsin game. That was god aweful hockey. No offense to the champs to the East but I just don't want to watch that crap. That is what the NHL was two years ago before they decided to start calling the game the way is supposed to be called. , God awful hockey to watch.
What do you think of the "checking from behind" crackdown?
I think the checking from behind penalty has to be cleaned up a bit. The rule book needs to be tweaked a bit to be more flexible. I have see the 5 minute major CFB penalty called when in fact it should have only been a two minute minor. The refs took it too far and called hits that weren't checking from behind-checking from behind. I don't have a problem with the league calling more CFB penalties but please lets make sure that it was actally a penatly. This is a sore spot for me and not going to waste a lot of time talking about it since the Fighting Sioux seemed to get called for this a lot in the last season and I think a lot of them weren't warranted.
What NHL rules change would you like to see adopted in college hockey, and which one do you want college hockey to stay away from?
The only thing I really want from college hockey is that I would like to see the game called the way its suppose to be called. Please call the penalties like the NHL, the game has sped up a lot. No longer are you seeing the neutral zone trap as much. That is horrible hockey to watch.
I would also like to see the 4x4 overtime followed by a shoot out. Why not. Its exciting hockey. I know hockey purist hate it but once you get to overtime I think both team should be rewarded with at least one point. Even in the NCAA.
What do you think of the increased use of replay in college hockey?
I would like to see the NCAA tweak this policy too. Use more than one camera angle, I was watching a game where Michigan scored a goal but since the replay didn't have the right angle a sure goal was ruled a no goal, the puck was clearly in the net. The puck did in fact go into the net, everyone saw it except the replay officials. What a shame it could have cost Michigan a trip to the playoffs. The NCAA needs to get this right.
What is one random change you'd like to see made in hockey?
I have been accussed of being off message a lot so here goes I have pretty much covered this alreay. The fighting penalties this should not be confused with promoting fighting but making the penalties more realistic. Fighting happens in hockey people need to realize this. The threat of getting your but kicked for committing an agregious act should get players to play smarter and maybe cause them to look over their shoulder next time they commit a dirty act. Change the DQ to a game disqualificaiton.
No comments:
Post a Comment