Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NHL itinerary for the "Shanahan Summit"


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 12:53 PM

The NHL is holding their second "Shanahan Summit" the itinerary is below. Looks like they are considering several different options for overtime. I can't even imagine what 3 minutes of 2 on 2 would look like. <_< Here is the complete list of what they are looking at:

Wednesday August 18 (all times ET; subject to change)

10:00 a.m. – Noon
* Hybrid icing rule;
* No line change for team committing an offside;
* Crease reset rule;
* Face-off variation (face-off controlled by whistle in place of traditional puck drop);
* Overtime: three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on- 2 followed by shootout (5 players per team).

2:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.
* Bigger crease;
* Verification goal line (additional line situated behind the goal line);
* Wider blue lines;
* Line changes zone in front of each bench;
* Face-off variations (infringement results in the offending player moving back further, three face-off dots down the middle of the ice);
* No icing the puck while shorthanded;
* OT – three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on-2 with long line changes; followed by three shooters per team shootout (if tied after three shots then players who have shot previously can shoot again).

Thursday August 19 (all times ET; subject to change)

9:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.
* No touch icing;
* Team that commits an offside infraction cannot make a line change and face-off is in offending team zone;
* Face-off variation: after a face-off violation, opposition center may choose his face-off opponent;
* Second referee located off the playing surface;
* Delayed penalty rule
* No icing the puck while shorthanded;
* OT – 4-on-4 (with long line change) followed by a shootout with five players.

1:30 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.
* Variations of special teams play;
* OT – 4-on-4 (with long line change).

Here is the link


Edit: corrected link

Edited by Frozen-Man, 06 August 2010 - 12:53 PM.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#2 Dave

Dave

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,177 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Virginia

Posted 06 August 2010 - 12:59 PM

PP goals are gonna be WAY up if pkers can't ice the puck.

#3 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 01:05 PM

PP goals are gonna be WAY up if pkers can't ice the puck.


Yeah I agree, that will make it incredibly hard for the team on the penalty kill. I would think it would raise PPG 15-20%.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#4 jollymania

jollymania

    Heavy Hitter

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 06 August 2010 - 01:31 PM

everything is mindblowingly retarded besides maybe the bench area thing for too many men calls and the verification line on the goal line (if it somehow helped)
"I assure you the hits along the boards he(Aaron Downey) constantly threw SEVERAL TIMES EVERY SHIFT were far more damaging hits that what Kronwall throws."
- uk_redwing
HockeyArchive Twitter

#5 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 01:42 PM

everything is mindblowingly retarded besides maybe the bench area thing for too many men calls and the verification line on the goal line (if it somehow helped)


I can't even imagine NHL hockey 2 on 2 and it just seems wrong for the ref to just blow the whistle instead of dropping the puck (plus that would add a whole new problem with the intent to blow the whistle rule :lol: )

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#6 Electrophile

Electrophile

    Ipsa scientia potestas est.

  • Silver Booster
  • 9,390 posts
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 06 August 2010 - 02:18 PM

everything is mindblowingly retarded besides maybe the bench area thing for too many men calls and the verification line on the goal line (if it somehow helped)



That's putting it mildly. I agree that there are some changes that need to be made, but holy crap that's not some of them.

electrophilewingsfloyd.jpg

"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff."  -- The Doctor


#7 Hank Dats 'N Homer

Hank Dats 'N Homer

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 953 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 02:22 PM

The NHL is holding their second "Shanahan Summit" the itinerary is below. Looks like they are considering several different options for overtime. I can't even imagine what 3 minutes of 2 on 2 would look like. <_< Here is the complete list of what they are looking at:

Wednesday August 18 (all times ET; subject to change)

10:00 a.m. Noon
* Hybrid icing rule;
* No line change for team committing an offside;
* Crease reset rule;
* Face-off variation (face-off controlled by whistle in place of traditional puck drop);
* Overtime: three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on- 2 followed by shootout (5 players per team).

2:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.
* Bigger crease;
* Verification goal line (additional line situated behind the goal line);
* Wider blue lines;
* Line changes zone in front of each bench;
* Face-off variations (infringement results in the offending player moving back further, three face-off dots down the middle of the ice);
* No icing the puck while shorthanded;
* OT three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on-2 with long line changes; followed by three shooters per team shootout (if tied after three shots then players who have shot previously can shoot again).

Thursday August 19 (all times ET; subject to change)

9:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.
* No touch icing;
* Team that commits an offside infraction cannot make a line change and face-off is in offending team zone;
* Face-off variation: after a face-off violation, opposition center may choose his face-off opponent;
* Second referee located off the playing surface;
* Delayed penalty rule
* No icing the puck while shorthanded;
* OT 4-on-4 (with long line change) followed by a shootout with five players.

1:30 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.
* Variations of special teams play;
* OT 4-on-4 (with long line change).

Here is the link


Edit: corrected link


I think the verification goal line in the net is long overdue and is a good idea. How would it work though? Would they have a second line exactly the distance of a full puck behind the original goaline? that way if any part of the puck touches that line its a defenite goal? Or how else would they be working it? That seems to make the most sense to me, but maybe there is a better idea out there.

The 2 on 2 overtime seems crazy and probably wont happen, mainly because people would get tired reallllly quick haha

Also, i dont think the no icing rule on the PK is going to go through. How else are teams going to get any relief when on the PK to get a line change? Taking away the icing of the puck would almost gurantee a goal on the PP everytime, especially if the pk is a 5 on 3. I understand that it will increase goals and more goals = more excitement= more money, but you got to draw the line somewhere. I think being down a man for 2 minutes is penatly enough rather than taking away the only way of getting releif when the Pk'ers have been on the ice for over a minute.

#8 Jasper84

Jasper84

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,739 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 02:39 PM

I think the verification goal line in the net is long overdue and is a good idea. How would it work though? Would they have a second line exactly the distance of a full puck behind the original goaline? that way if any part of the puck touches that line its a defenite goal? Or how else would they be working it? That seems to make the most sense to me, but maybe there is a better idea out there.


I'm not too sure that this would be helpful in all cases. What I think of when reading this is, when a puck is on it's side or even not completely flat on the ice, that second line wouldn't be too helpful. There has to be another way.

#9 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 02:51 PM

I'm not too sure that this would be helpful in all cases. What I think of when reading this is, when a puck is on it's side or even not completely flat on the ice, that second line wouldn't be too helpful. There has to be another way.


That's what I was thinking, I wonder what exactly they mean by a goal verification line.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#10 arentino

arentino

    Jr. Prospect

  • Member
  • 19 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 02:59 PM

Hmmm I thought the blue line was already going all the way across...

#11 Blazer

Blazer

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 34 posts
  • Location:Norway

Posted 06 August 2010 - 03:17 PM

Hmmm I thought the blue line was already going all the way across...


Yeah, I guess they meant thicker, not sure if its the offensive zone or the neutral zone (or both) they are going to decrease.

#12 Mors

Mors

    The Red Death

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,995 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 04:05 PM

A lot of these seem like ideas for a video game, not actually plausible changes to improve the sport. Particularly the "Overtime: three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on- 2 followed by shootout (5 players per team)." which is just ridiculous.

#13 WorkingOvertime

WorkingOvertime

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,424 posts
  • Location:Columbus, OH

Posted 06 August 2010 - 04:24 PM

No.

#14 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 06 August 2010 - 04:42 PM

Hybrid icing rule, ref off the ice, goal verification line, line change zone...all could be good.

What would be the point of changing the blue line though?

The rest are stupid.

#15 cjm502

cjm502

    This man was born to kick ass.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,612 posts
  • Location:Mid Michigan

Posted 06 August 2010 - 04:45 PM

I'm not too sure that this would be helpful in all cases. What I think of when reading this is, when a puck is on it's side or even not completely flat on the ice, that second line wouldn't be too helpful. There has to be another way.

Officials that aren't blind, better people in Toronto's war room. Problem solved.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image

#16 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,738 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 06 August 2010 - 07:08 PM

Why can't they just get rid of the instigator rule and call it a day at these meetings?
According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#17 CaliWingsNut

CaliWingsNut

    PeeWee Bettman

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,744 posts
  • Location:Sonoma County, CA

Posted 06 August 2010 - 10:04 PM

2 on 2... Z and Lids? or Z and dats?

Figures don't lie, but liars sure figure. - Mark Twain


#18 zettie85

zettie85

    Selke Candidate

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,777 posts
  • Location:Dryden, Ontario

Posted 06 August 2010 - 10:35 PM

Hybrid icing rule, ref off the ice, goal verification line, line change zone...all could be good.

What would be the point of changing the blue line though?

The rest are stupid.


I agree. Those are the only ones that would actually improve the game.

They are beginning to treat hockey like some experimental sport. I hate it.
Posted Image
Thanks TeeMan!

#19 SweWings

SweWings

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,917 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 06 August 2010 - 11:11 PM

2 on 2... Z and Lids? or Z and dats?

Z, Lids and Dats. No goalie.

#20 shoe

shoe

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 07 August 2010 - 08:57 AM

* Bigger crease; Posted Image
* Verification goal line (additional line situated behind the goal line);Posted Image
* Wider blue lines; Posted Image
* Face-off variation: after a face-off violation, opposition center may choose his face-off opponent;Posted Image ya pick a defenceman and screw up the other teams positioning


* Second referee located off the playing surface;Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
* No icing the puck while shorthanded; Posted Image but I think hockey minds will find ways around that eg bang it off the boards at an angle where it wont ice or once defending team gets the puck they will learn to move it out fast and get it to a guy breaking down the ice he will skate it down and leave it in the corner



I think the instigator rule and clearing the puck over the boards penalties should be looked at as well.








Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users