Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 203

Thread: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

  1. #41
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marquette, MI
    Posts
    6,397
    Quote Originally Posted by joecct View Post
    Nobody's watching hockey either...
    The WCHA Championship game was televised to in incredibly strong audience in its market because a media outlet found it to be a worthwhile investment.

  2. #42
    R!!!!...I!!!!!...T!!!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    1,878

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by SpauldingSmails View Post
    Yes. And go back to having rules about the size of curves...maybe even flat sticks to increase the use of backhanded shots.
    And re-instate the ban on forward passes.
    Can't we all just get along?
    Always remember... This is just a game we're talking about here. Let's not take it all too seriously.

  3. #43
    R!!!!...I!!!!!...T!!!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    1,878

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
    Perhaps we should consider another example: soccer. That's approximately 50 minutes of straight broadcast (45 minute half, a couple minutes stoppage time, 1 minute for intro, 1 minute for outro). An ice hockey period without commercials is around 30 minutes. How does soccer get away with it? What can we learn from those lessons to apply to our game?
    Soccer never stops. It's not a matter of getting away with anything. That's just how the game is played. TV has figured out to just run ads alongside the game like they do with NASCAR. I'm not sure what radio broadcasts of soccer games do for commercials. I can't imagine a scenario where I could ever be found listening to soccer on the radio... unless I was suffering from insomnia.
    Can't we all just get along?
    Always remember... This is just a game we're talking about here. Let's not take it all too seriously.

  4. #44
    R!!!!...I!!!!!...T!!!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    1,878

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
    Haven't been to a game at RPI lately, eh?
    No, I haven't. It's been a few years. Couldn't even make it out when the Tigers visited in 2016... darn kids
    Can't we all just get along?
    Always remember... This is just a game we're talking about here. Let's not take it all too seriously.

  5. #45
    Let's go RED!
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Juneau WI
    Posts
    9,957

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by davyd83 View Post
    Those media timeouts are very valuable to your radio and TV partners. You donít get on TV without those time outs. Your radio outlets have a harder time meeting their expenses without those timeouts.
    Quote Originally Posted by brassbonanza View Post
    Do you like the idea of TV and radio outlets no longer covering college hockey at all?
    Pre-game, in between periods, postgame. Squeeze in one per period at when a penalty occurs. All these media timeouts shorten the bench too much.
    Wisconsin Hockey: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 WE WANT MORE!
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
    "Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
    Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"

  6. #46
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marquette, MI
    Posts
    6,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Timothy A View Post
    Pre-game, in between periods, postgame. Squeeze in one per period at when a penalty occurs. All these media timeouts shorten the bench too much.
    Those pregame, between periods and postgame spots are full as well. What youíre asking is for me to give up the revenue that, over the course of the season, pays for my plane ticket, hotels and meals for that trip to Fairbanks.

  7. #47
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alaxsxaq
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by TigerFan86-87 View Post
    Soccer never stops. It's not a matter of getting away with anything. That's just how the game is played. TV has figured out to just run ads alongside the game like they do with NASCAR. I'm not sure what radio broadcasts of soccer games do for commercials. I can't imagine a scenario where I could ever be found listening to soccer on the radio... unless I was suffering from insomnia.
    Walking billboards.

  8. #48
    2009 NCAA Champions Sean Pickett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    I compiled the results for the 1988-89 season as that was the last one that had 10 minute overtimes, except for CCHA conference games which were 5 minute overtimes. I also realized that I had the 2008-09 season and that I could count all overtimes for the 1975-76, 1984-85 and 1988-89 (except for CCHA games) seasons, since all overtimes were 10 minutes. Therefore, all multiple overtime games were counted as ties.

    Code:
    Season  RS games OT games won tied %OT games   % won  % tied
    1975-76    582       65    46   19    11.17%  70.77%  29.23%  includes 2 multiple OT games counted as ties
    1984-85    876      115    79   36    13.13%  68.70%  31.30%  includes 4 multiple OT games counted as ties
    1988-89    714       92    56   36    12.89%  60.87%  39.13%  includes 5 multiple OT games counted as ties
    w/o CCHA
    1988-89    144       29    12   17    20.14%  41.38%  58.62%
    CCHA only	
    1998-99    922      144    55   89    15.62%  38.19%  61.81%
    2008-09    990      205    76  129    20.71%  37.07%  62.93%
    2012-13   1002      196    62  134    19.56%  31.63%  68.37%
    2013-14   1003      168    55  113    16.75%  32.74%  67.26%
    2014-15   1002      190    78  112    18.96%  41.05%  58.95%
    2015-16   1021      219    78  141    21.45%  35.62%  64.38%
    2016-17   1018      186    58  128    18.27%  31.18%  68.82%
    2017-18   1016      189    72  117    18.60%  38.10%  61.90%
    
    2012-18   6062     1148   403  745    18.94%  35.10%  64.90%
    Based on the 1988-89 season, the change from a 10 to 5 minute overtime resulted in shift from wins to ties of 19.5%. Since the 1988-89 season the shift to ties has been almost 0% (2014-15) to 10% (2012-13 % 2016-17), with an average of 6%. The shift to ties from 1975-76 to 1988-89 was also 10%. So, from this data it appears that the increase in ties is split almost equally between the change from 10 to 5 minute overtimes and the improvement of goalies and their equipment.

    Sean
    Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
    Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

    Watch BU Hockey highlights
    NCAA Hockey Financials
    Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games

  9. #49
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Less than 10 minutes from Yost...
    Posts
    1,876

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    I compiled the results for the 1988-89 season as that was the last one that had 10 minute overtimes, except for CCHA conference games which were 5 minute overtimes. I also realized that I had the 2008-09 season and that I could count all overtimes for the 1975-76, 1984-85 and 1988-89 (except for CCHA games) seasons, since all overtimes were 10 minutes. Therefore, all multiple overtime games were counted as ties.

    Code:
    Season  RS games OT games won tied %OT games   % won  % tied
    1975-76    582       65    46   19    11.17%  70.77%  29.23%  includes 2 multiple OT games counted as ties
    1984-85    876      115    79   36    13.13%  68.70%  31.30%  includes 4 multiple OT games counted as ties
    1988-89    714       92    56   36    12.89%  60.87%  39.13%  includes 5 multiple OT games counted as ties
    w/o CCHA
    1988-89    144       29    12   17    20.14%  41.38%  58.62%
    CCHA only	
    1998-99    922      144    55   89    15.62%  38.19%  61.81%
    2008-09    990      205    76  129    20.71%  37.07%  62.93%
    2012-13   1002      196    62  134    19.56%  31.63%  68.37%
    2013-14   1003      168    55  113    16.75%  32.74%  67.26%
    2014-15   1002      190    78  112    18.96%  41.05%  58.95%
    2015-16   1021      219    78  141    21.45%  35.62%  64.38%
    2016-17   1018      186    58  128    18.27%  31.18%  68.82%
    2017-18   1016      189    72  117    18.60%  38.10%  61.90%
    
    2012-18   6062     1148   403  745    18.94%  35.10%  64.90%
    Based on the 1988-89 season, the change from a 10 to 5 minute overtime resulted in shift from wins to ties of 19.5%. Since the 1988-89 season the shift to ties has been almost 0% (2014-15) to 10% (2012-13 % 2016-17), with an average of 6%. The shift to ties from 1975-76 to 1988-89 was also 10%. So, from this data it appears that the increase in ties is split almost equally between the change from 10 to 5 minute overtimes and the improvement of goalies and their equipment.

    Sean
    Thanks, makes sense but more hockey is always a good thing right?
    Quote Originally Posted by alfablue View Post
    Still bitter, eh? Gotta get over it someday. He left, and UMICH was right.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Papagiorgio View Post
    I think Notre Dame should wear sparkly silver helmets to match all their runner-up trophies.

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    20904/13677/07677/07621
    Posts
    35,449
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    I compiled the results for the 1988-89 season as that was the last one that had 10 minute overtimes, except for CCHA conference games which were 5 minute overtimes. I also realized that I had the 2008-09 season and that I could count all overtimes for the 1975-76, 1984-85 and 1988-89 (except for CCHA games) seasons, since all overtimes were 10 minutes. Therefore, all multiple overtime games were counted as ties.

    Code:
    Season  RS games OT games won tied %OT games   % won  % tied
    1975-76    582       65    46   19    11.17%  70.77%  29.23%  includes 2 multiple OT games counted as ties
    1984-85    876      115    79   36    13.13%  68.70%  31.30%  includes 4 multiple OT games counted as ties
    1988-89    714       92    56   36    12.89%  60.87%  39.13%  includes 5 multiple OT games counted as ties
    w/o CCHA
    1988-89    144       29    12   17    20.14%  41.38%  58.62%
    CCHA only	
    1998-99    922      144    55   89    15.62%  38.19%  61.81%
    2008-09    990      205    76  129    20.71%  37.07%  62.93%
    2012-13   1002      196    62  134    19.56%  31.63%  68.37%
    2013-14   1003      168    55  113    16.75%  32.74%  67.26%
    2014-15   1002      190    78  112    18.96%  41.05%  58.95%
    2015-16   1021      219    78  141    21.45%  35.62%  64.38%
    2016-17   1018      186    58  128    18.27%  31.18%  68.82%
    2017-18   1016      189    72  117    18.60%  38.10%  61.90%
    
    2012-18   6062     1148   403  745    18.94%  35.10%  64.90%
    Based on the 1988-89 season, the change from a 10 to 5 minute overtime resulted in shift from wins to ties of 19.5%. Since the 1988-89 season the shift to ties has been almost 0% (2014-15) to 10% (2012-13 % 2016-17), with an average of 6%. The shift to ties from 1975-76 to 1988-89 was also 10%. So, from this data it appears that the increase in ties is split almost equally between the change from 10 to 5 minute overtimes and the improvement of goalies and their equipment.

    Sean
    I blame the introduction of the red line.

  11. #51
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    214

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by John J. MacInnes View Post
    First of all, you haven't seen a media timeout in the final minute. If the last one hasn't been taken by the 1:00 mark, it gets dropped.
    My understanding is that if a media timeout doesn't happen by 18:00 Hockey Time, it gets dropped. Source: it happened at a game I was working last year.

    TBF I can't confirm if this is set by the NCAA or by conferences or what.

  12. #52
    Made in the USA
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    45,563

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by tape View Post
    My understanding is that if a media timeout doesn't happen by 18:00 Hockey Time, it gets dropped. Source: it happened at a game I was working last year.

    TBF I can't confirm if this is set by the NCAA or by conferences or what.
    There's no protocol in the official rule book. Typically, it is set by the conferences and/or tournament hosts. The ECAC mandates first non-no-change (and should also be non-goal, RPI) stoppage at even strength after 10:00 in period. AHC mandates three at 5:00 intervals. Other leagues I imagine have similar.
    It was an honor to present your colors, RPI. Let's Go 'TUTE!
    May 14th, 2011, 11:00 PM ET: 2147483647

    "Better to be infamous than never famous at all." -Roger Stone

    Quote Originally Posted by French Rage View Post
    Ahh crap I agree exactly with what FlagDude said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Handyman View Post
    And yet, even if Flaggy is complete tinfoil hat, every day it looks closer and closer to the truth.
    Quote Originally Posted by burd View Post
    So flaggy: you win.

  13. #53
    Still upright
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    6,509

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Just my opinion but things I would like to see and why.

    4 on 4 ot. it would make defensive teams come out of their shell.
    Less penalties on a gentle push being checking from behind. Too often some guy dives and gets a call he doesn't deserve. (Especially Duluth.)
    I'm all for protecting players but embellishment could be a stand alone call couldn't it?

    Things I would be totally against.
    the b1g age rule. if you want smaller programs to drop hockey, implement it and see what happens.
    the "I can transfer any time I want to" proposal. see above.
    MTU: Three time NCAA champions.

    It never get's easier, you just go faster. -Greg Lemond

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    20904/13677/07677/07621
    Posts
    35,449
    Quote Originally Posted by manurespreader View Post
    Just my opinion but things I would like to see and why.

    4 on 4 ot. it would make defensive teams come out of their shell.
    Less penalties on a gentle push being checking from behind. Too often some guy dives and gets a call he doesn't deserve. (Especially Duluth.)
    I'm all for protecting players but embellishment could be a stand alone call couldn't it?

    Things I would be totally against.
    the b1g age rule. if you want smaller programs to drop hockey, implement it and see what happens.
    the "I can transfer any time I want to" proposal. see above.
    If you go to 4x4, then a win in regulation has to be worth more than a win using less than 5x5.

    The WCHA overtime is a good starting point for debate.

  15. #55
    C'mon Q! MarkEagleUSA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    113 @ the Bank!
    Posts
    11,006

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by joecct View Post
    If you go to 4x4, then a win in regulation has to be worth more than a win using less than 5x5.
    Tied at end of regulation: 1 pt to each team. OT winner gets additional point.
    Quinnipiac Bobcats
    2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16 ECAC Regular Season Champions
    2013 East Regional Champions, Frozen Four
    2014 East Regional
    2015 West Regional
    2016 ECAC Tournament Champions, East Regional Champions, Frozen Four

  16. #56

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    20904/13677/07677/07621
    Posts
    35,449
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkEagleUSA View Post
    Tied at end of regulation: 1 pt to each team. OT winner gets additional point.
    I don't like the loser point. Points have to add up. A game is worth 2 points that ends in 60 minutes has less value if it ends before 65 minutes.

    I prefer 3-2-1.

  17. #57
    Made in the USA
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    45,563

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by joecct View Post
    I don't like the loser point. Points have to add up. A game is worth 2 points that ends in 60 minutes has less value if it ends before 65 minutes.

    I prefer 3-2-1.
    ...contact!

    Sorry, had to.

    Maybe it's just me, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with a tie. Heck, I'd be OK with having a tie after 60 minutes. This whole skills contest and changing the game for overtime is plain garbage. Either have a tie, or do OTs playoff style.
    It was an honor to present your colors, RPI. Let's Go 'TUTE!
    May 14th, 2011, 11:00 PM ET: 2147483647

    "Better to be infamous than never famous at all." -Roger Stone

    Quote Originally Posted by French Rage View Post
    Ahh crap I agree exactly with what FlagDude said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Handyman View Post
    And yet, even if Flaggy is complete tinfoil hat, every day it looks closer and closer to the truth.
    Quote Originally Posted by burd View Post
    So flaggy: you win.

  18. #58
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Less than 10 minutes from Yost...
    Posts
    1,876

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkEagleUSA View Post
    Tied at end of regulation: 1 pt to each team. OT winner gets additional point.
    That's exactly what the NHL does and I think there's a better way. Call me bias but I actually like what the B1G does in hockey. 3 points to a winner in regulation, 3 points to a winner in OT, OT ends in a tie then each team gets a point and the winner of the shootout gets the 3rd and final point. OK, I'm not totally thrilled with SO's but the casual fan wants closure so we have to. The SO's of course are not counted in NCAA standings, they only matter for league standings.
    Quote Originally Posted by alfablue View Post
    Still bitter, eh? Gotta get over it someday. He left, and UMICH was right.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Papagiorgio View Post
    I think Notre Dame should wear sparkly silver helmets to match all their runner-up trophies.

  19. #59
    \../ \../
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Patiently awaiting changes I know are not coming.
    Posts
    2,125

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by manurespreader View Post
    I'm all for protecting players but embellishment could be a stand alone call couldn't it?
    There is a stand alone rule. Diving. The rule book specifically refers to it as a "stand alone" penalty. Embellishment is called when a player is fouled, the penalty is called, but the referee decides the player tries to "sell" the penalty with too much acting. Diving is called when no foul is committed but a player acts like someone committed a penalty. In my opinion diving is not much of an issue in the college game. (I don't watch enough NHL hockey anymore to know if it is there) I think embellishing is an issue, and I'd like to see it penalized with both a 2-minute minor for embellishment AND an addition 10 minute misconduct penalty.

  20. #60
    Made in the USA
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    45,563

    Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?

    Quote Originally Posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    There is a stand alone rule. Diving. The rule book specifically refers to it as a "stand alone" penalty. Embellishment is called when a player is fouled, the penalty is called, but the referee decides the player tries to "sell" the penalty with too much acting. Diving is called when no foul is committed but a player acts like someone committed a penalty. In my opinion diving is not much of an issue in the college game. (I don't watch enough NHL hockey anymore to know if it is there) I think embellishing is an issue, and I'd like to see it penalized with both a 2-minute minor for embellishment AND an addition 10 minute misconduct penalty.
    Could have fooled me; we saw a couple "Unsportsmanlike Conduct - Diving" calls this past year. And given the derogatory nicknames of some of the teams that are thrown around college hockey, it's a good thing it exists. Not sure it needs to be that harsh, so much as let's get over the hurdle of it actually being called.
    It was an honor to present your colors, RPI. Let's Go 'TUTE!
    May 14th, 2011, 11:00 PM ET: 2147483647

    "Better to be infamous than never famous at all." -Roger Stone

    Quote Originally Posted by French Rage View Post
    Ahh crap I agree exactly with what FlagDude said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Handyman View Post
    And yet, even if Flaggy is complete tinfoil hat, every day it looks closer and closer to the truth.
    Quote Originally Posted by burd View Post
    So flaggy: you win.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •