scotzman 29 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Jim Kelley's article on fighting... ...forward thinking GM's huh? Amazingly, it sounds like Kenny leans toward no fighting or being ejected from the game for fighting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skacore 2 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Let's remove fighting and watch the game blossom Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scotzman 29 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Let's remove fighting and watch the game blossom Seems like that is what the "forward thinkers" would like to see... I'm all for cleaning up "goonery" (which I don't think happens that often anyway), but protecting skilled players will always be a necessity in my opinion. Too bad Kenny doesn't agree. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
55fan 5,133 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 As long as there are cheap-shotters, you need fighting to take care of them. It's protection of your star players. Get rid of the guys who take cheap shots, and then you can get rid of fighting. But only then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SouthernWingsFan 854 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Fighting will always have or should have its part in the game. Stuff like concussions or smacking your head on the ice is a risk people take. What about getting a puck to the face from a slapshot. Skate blade to the face? Those are all risks you take as well. Are we going to ban slapshots or reduce the sharpness of blades on the skates then? I'm not one who goes extra ga-ga when a fight happens, I don't get any more or less excited by a fight than by such things as good skating, a great snap shot, glove save, etc., but it should always have its part in the game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lets go pavel 2 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Jim Kelley's article on fighting... ...forward thinking GM's huh? Amazingly, it sounds like Kenny leans toward no fighting or being ejected from the game for fighting. Perhaps because this would affect the Red Wings 2, maybe 3 times all season? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest E_S_A_D Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Let's remove fighting and watch the game blossom Yes indeed, the emergency room surgeons could use more work for all the stick work that will take place with fighting removed. Let the elbows, slahses, spears, flourish! Amen! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManLuv4Clears 7 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Wow, I actually agree with Burke on something. Horrible idea by Campbell. When fighting was more prevalent the game, it seemed like there were less Steve Downie's of the world taking 16 strides and then jumping at an unsuspecting opponent’s head. There was justification for actions like that and people would have his head every game, hence not making him last long in the big show. Then comes the instigator penalty, which doesn't allow retaliation without consequence for cheapshots. Now considering banning fighting completely? Bad move. As others have posted, watch the cheap shots increase. Do these "executive decision makers" that seem to think that fighting deters fans from coming to the game or believe that if they take it out it won't affect the fan base ever been to a minor league game? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GordieSid&Ted Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Jim Kelley's article on fighting... ...forward thinking GM's huh? Amazingly, it sounds like Kenny leans toward no fighting or being ejected from the game for fighting. That's because Kenny (as much as I love him) knows he builds teams incapable of fighting their ways out of a wet, paper bag. Why not eliminate something the Wings never do nor can use to their advantage but other teams try to employ as physical intimidation against the Wings? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DatsMyWings13 4 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Bob Probert is half the reason I started watching hockey, I'd be very sad to see fighting completely removed from the game. I was just watching some of Proberts fights on youtube the other day. No fighting = big mistake!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_redwing 495 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 lol @ Holland. As the only team without an enforcer Im pretty sure hes gonna be the sole person who backs up Campbell. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManLuv4Clears 7 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 lol @ Holland. As the only team without an enforcer Im pretty sure hes gonna be the sole person who backs up Campbell. Yeah, and to take this to a new level the other GM's should not only veto this, but vote to take down the instigator rule as well. That would have Kenny in a real bind eh? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted January 23, 2009 If the argument against fighting was so strong, they wouldn't wait until incidents like this happen to try and gather up support as it would be inherent fighting is so terrible since it occurs pretty much every single day there are hockey games on TV. Yet, this douchebag thinks we should pay attention to the extremely small percentage of things that could happen like severe injuries. Well, maybe with at least a few lacerations due to skate injuries, maybe players shouldn't be using skates anymore. Those sticks have been swung to cause injury many times and even assault charges, so maybe we can do without the sticks. This is a game we would get if we change things based upon small percentage of bad occurrences happening. Sadly, bad stuff happens in every sport and every facet of life. However, logic is far more behind fighting than it is on Jim Kelley's side. Problem is, being part of the media, he's expected to blow s*** out of proportion. Hopefully the league doesn't listen to him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest micah Report post Posted January 23, 2009 This team would be interesting to watch if there were no instigator rule, just like there wasn't for over 75% of the NHL's existance. They would have to either learn to man-up, or simply not contend. I'm all for the removal of the rule - I grew up watching '80s hockey, even with all the clutching and grabbing and gooning, and enjoying it very much. I still love the wings, and I'm glad that they've been succesful - but honestly, despite their lack of success, the product they iced in 1986 was more entertaining and more fun to follow than the succesful product they're selling us today. I really don't understand the fight debate. I've never seen a poll that indicated that even a quarter of fans (or players, for that matter) are in favor of the instigator rule or a ban on fighting. Why are there some people who continually try to push these rules down the throats of fans and players who have oppined time and time again that they do not want them? I really don't understand it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DRW Dominance 255 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 I don't care if it stays or if it goes. I don't think hockey would get watched any less if there were no fighting either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skacore 2 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 The new OHL rule is a horrible idea as well. Watching this video makes me want to puke. Greenop is arguably the top dog in the OHL right now and in this fight he clearly has the upper hand against Stevens, but when Stevens gets his bucket knocked off... suddenly Greenop is mugged by two grown men and eats 2-3 shots to the face where he can't even defend himself! That just makes my blood boil... can't even describe it... that's great, just what we need in hockey. THAT IS HOW GUYS GET HURT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skacore 2 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 I don't care if it stays or if it goes. I don't think hockey would get watched any less if there were no fighting either. You'd be surprised how much attendance would go down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 It's unfortunate that a player died in a fight, but honestly if the league is serious about protecting its athletes, the blows to the head are a much bigger threat. The odds of dying from it are pretty low, but how many guys have already had their brains partly scrambled from and elbow or shoulder to the head? More players surely get injured in a season as a result of the hard shelled pads than they do from hitting their head on the ice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManLuv4Clears 7 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 The new OHL rule is a horrible idea as well. Watching this video makes me want to puke. Greenop is arguably the top dog in the OHL right now and in this fight he clearly has the upper hand against Stevens, but when Stevens gets his bucket knocked off... suddenly Greenop is mugged by two grown men and eats 2-3 shots to the face where he can't even defend himself! That just makes my blood boil... can't even describe it... that's great, just what we need in hockey. THAT IS HOW GUYS GET HURT. What a joke, just wait until a ref jumps in at the wrong time and takes one upside the skull and gets knocked the f' out. What is the leauge going to do then. The OHL is going to have to realize this is a horrible rule. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
up2here 41 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 You'd be surprised how much attendance would go down. I think youd be surprised how little it would go down. People who love hockey,love hockey and will watch with it with or w/o fighting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_redwing 495 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 I don't care if it stays or if it goes. I don't think hockey would get watched any less if there were no fighting either. Theres a reason why the Joe sold out for the first time in months when McCarty came back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opie 308 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Theres a reason why the Joe sold out for the first time in months when McCarty came back. Yeah there was reason to go, to see Mac make his comeback, a fan favorite who (at the time) was a big part of 3 cups, had just about thrown his career away, and now was working his ass off to make it back on a team. He provided something different, instead of going to see the Wings (odds are) win another game ho hum, there was no reason for people in the poorest city in the US (or worst economic crunch whatever) to spend the extra $$$. Mac was making his comeback, it was a big night for a guy who was a fan fav. It wasn't solely the fact that he might fight, in fact the odds of him fighting in that game were low. I love how some people think fighting and fighting only is the reason for empty or full seats, there is more than one impacting factor here. Did the place sell out for Downey's first game? No, why, because the cost of going to the games (esp in Det) was not viable for a lot of people. Mac didn't just represent a potential fight, there were so many reasons to be there rooting for Mac, hoping he would fight was probably one of the reasons, but not the only. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManLuv4Clears 7 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 I think youd be surprised how little it would go down. People who love hockey,love hockey and will watch with it with or w/o fighting. True, but it would still go down a little. At this rate, this day will come. I'd like to see the effect on attendence if fighting were toincrease. I think we would all be a little suprised how much that may help attendance. I do know Bettman would cry in the fetal position in the corner of his bedroom if this happened. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DatsMyWings13 4 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Fans love fights, anyone who has gone to a game where a fight broke out should understand that. It's often the most excited the crowd gets in any given game. It's also what use to make the Wings Avs game a must watch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
