Any thoughts based on what you have seen tonight?
I saw the Sabres beat the Islanders 6-4 in a back and forth game where all obstructions were tightly called. It was amazing.
What did you see in the game(s) you watched?
P.S. Center Ice is an amazing thing :-D
The refs called Flyers-Rangers very closely, too...and unfortunately, the Flyers went 1-10 on the power play and blew a 3-1 lead to lose.
I'm definitely thinking about getting Center Ice once this free trial ends.
By the way, did anyone else watch the OLN broadcast? Was the camerawork really bad, especially early on, or was it just me not being rusty as a TV hockey viewer?
[Q]Tub(a) Wrote:
Any thoughts based on what you have seen tonight?
I saw the Sabres beat the Islanders 6-4 in a back and forth game where all obstructions were tightly called. It was amazing.
What did you see in the game(s) you watched? [/q]
Flipped between the Sabers/Islanders and the Flyers/Rangers and was impressed with the "70's-80's-esque " flow. Cycling is much more fluid allowing for better possion. That said, I think the impact on defense in the zone was minimal. Other than not committing stupid penalties, solid stay-at-home positioning is still the name of the game. I thought the new rules in combination with stricter enforcement of the rules already on the books made for an entertaining game. [Capt Obvious] There were definitely more penalties (as expected) but things should settle as the players learn what they can and cannot get away with. [/Capt Obvious]
All-in-all the "New NHL" looks like a better product than pre-lockout.
On a side note [rant] … the Berenson boundary seems like a super-duper screw-up in the making. Upon seeing the new NHL rules in play, I’d gladly see the NCAA adopt their package with smaller neutral zones and pushing the goal closer to the end boards. With these changes, the offense gains ~340 sq ft (assuming 85’ width) and 400 sq ft on an Olympic sheet. This Berenson absurdity gives a NA sheet (200’x85’) an awesome 2125 extra sq ft (assuming 25’ neutral zone) within witch to play offense and 2500 sq ft on Olympic ice. This proposal is dumber than the curved nets the NHL came up with last spring. [/rant]
btw Harvard sucks … needed to be said.
I couldn't believe how tightly the refs called hooking, but luckily, from a Rangers' perspective, it didn't end up hurting us. The offensive zone is enormous and led to a lot of sustained pressure and long possessions on the PP. Gotta love the opening night penalty shot; man what an exciting game to watch. These weren't the Rangers of the past few years. Not that they're necessarily going to be good or anything, but my God, they were moving! I mean skating hard and fast and completing passes! Wow that was exciting. Now with a Cornell Rugby win and the Atlantic division leading Rangers, I turn to see if a perfect sports day can be completed with a Yankee win.
Canucks keeping it real with a meager 3-2 win over Phoenix. The refs were particularly focusing on calling stick checks, looked like. There were still some pretty hard hits going on along the boards, and Vancouver has usually played a wide-open game, so I didn't notice a whole lot of difference in flow other than several end to end momentum shifts within seconds of each other.
Judging by the numerous camera close-ups, Gretzky already looks jaded with his terrible, terrible team. It could easily have been a 2-0 or 3-0 game if it weren't for Vancouver's questionable goaltending.
Who else caught the first period of Colorado at Edmonton? Two goals apiece before ten minutes had elapsed. Geez oh man. It was like watching a basketball game on ice. I hope that's not going to become the usual fare.
Still not a fan of the shootout format. Oh well.
I was also using Center Ice for the first time, and although I was a bit overstimulated most of the time, it is a really nice thing to have. Great to have the game back.
Most of my attention was on the Stars-Kings matchup, and I'm probably the only one in Ithaca who can say that. It's been one night and there has already been a comeback from a 4-0 deficit to win in regulation. This game was also extremely tightly called, with the Stars benefitting from (at least) five straight Kings' penalties in the second period. I also noticed the prevelence of hooking calls, including those on plays where the player was basically unaffected by the hook. And 5 goals unanswered for a team known primarily for their defense! Sure, it's opening night, but there was a very tangible difference in play. The one thing I noticed most was the tendency to carry the puck into the offensive zone rather than dump and chase. I guess this was to be expected with traps being all but eliminated, but it was a really nice thing to see.
Much excitement. Hope you're all enjoying this as much as I am.
[Q]Karlmoose Wrote:
I also noticed the prevelence of hooking calls, including those on plays where the player was basically unaffected by the hook. [/q]
Yeah, that's the new thing. Getting the stick and the free hand out of the way of the play. I have to admit, as long as that's been going on, it really is the fair way to call it. You shouldn't be using your stick to hold up another player, as inconsequential as it may be.
And, I was glad to see, in the Devils-Penguins game, they called it once or twice on an offensive player too, when the D was going for a puck and a stick ended up around him. So they're being fair about it on both ends, which I was worried about.
I was at the Caps opening night. Alex Ovechkin is incredible. The two goals he did score were awesome, and he nearly had his third on a breakaway coming out of the penalty box. He wasn't afraid to bang the body around, that kid is going to be good.
I'd like to see Ovechkin kill Crosby in scoring this season, and win rookie of the year. :)
All around, I like the new rules. The elimination of the center-ice line for two-line passes is the best change.
I definitely like the new flow. Much more entertaining to watch, but with the usual beginning-of-season caveat. They need to stick with it for the whole season. Obviously they're taking it more seriously than in seasons past, but I still have that fear that halfway through the season it will be back to business-as-usual with the hooking and grabbing. If you can keep it called tightly long enough so that all the bad habits are broken *cough* Kaspar *cough* then it will manage itself. If the refs get lazy before the players relearn the game, it will end up right back where it was.
As for the Rangers themselves, they looked ok. Both of Jagr's goals were stoppable and they got lucky with some screens. They certainly looked better than they have in years. Even Jagr. But I still don't like the coaching staff. I don't see where Tom Renney got his team ready for the new rules at all. Still had stupid players making stupid penalties and I don't know what the hell Jagr was thinking. The new rules will be good for the Rangers and should give a chance for some of the smaller, more creative young players to make an impact.
As for OLN... Well... I don't think anyone would mistake it for anything but their first game ever. Lots of miscues. The director seemed completely lost at times. The sound levels were terrible and Sam & JD's volumes bounced around more than a $10 hooker at shore leave. The high camera definitely tried to shoot the game much tighter. I can see how this decision came about. "People say they can't see the puck." "So let's make the puck bigger." "Can't do that." "Can we make the puck glow?" "We're poor. We can't even afford to donate more than $25,000 to hurricane relief. That's like 3 glowy pucks." "So zoom in."
It's likely most of the same camera operators that used to do it. It's just the first game and they're trying to adjust to a tighter shot. That having been said, it's retarded. Much like watching baseball on TV, you're missing half of what's going on at the expense of, what, the little black dot being a little bigger? I hope OLN grows out of it. If not, at least the regional broadcasts should be business as usual.
[q]If the refs get lazy before the players relearn the game, it will end up right back where it was. [/q]The onus will stay on the refs. Smart players will always try to push the envelope of what is legal. If the refs relax their enforcement guys will take advantage. It doesn't matter if it's next week or next year.
The most amazing thing about opening night was that arenas were 99% full, even after the year off. Did the year off actually make ppl realize that they really like hockey or was it some kind of deal the NHL had in order to draw attendance up? Either way the new NHL seems like it is going to promotoe better skaters and the reffing that I saw the first day was alrite at times, and somewhat horrendous at others (the hookin call that lead to the Habs winning the game).
The MCI Center in Washington was not full. There are cheap $10 seats at the top of the rink that were packed, and plenty of seats just below that level that were empty. The 200 "club level" was virtually empty. Caps fans are not willing to pay the prices Teddy L. is asking until the product improves.
Overall, there was a good turnout for the first night : http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2006
TB had 112% of capacity. Did anybody call the fire marshal?
[Q]JDeafv Wrote:
The MCI Center in Washington was not full. There are cheap $10 seats at the top of the rink that were packed, and plenty of seats just below that level that were empty. The 200 "club level" was virtually empty. Caps fans are not willing to pay the prices Teddy L. is asking until the product improves. [/q]
I could see the same thing happening in Boston - at least, from my perspective. The last 2 rows in the corners are $10 seats, with some cheap seats way back there too. Middle of the upper deck is $35. Front of the upper deck is $68. You're telling me I can get 7 people in for the price of one just by buying the worst seats in the house and moving down later?
Um, right, I'm really gonna pay $70 per person for upper deck. It's a shame. I'd really like to catch some Bruins game, but since those $10 seats seem to typically be gone, $35 per peson is a good bit to ask. They really need to consider making prices more resonable. I can get very good Fenway seats (if you order within a week of them going on sale ;) ) for the price of poor upper deck Bruins tickets. Yeah, yeah, capacity and all that, but not that it matters to my wallet. Heck, it's not like reducing ticket prices would hurt the owners, it'd just knock down the salary cap ;)
Meanwhile, I may go to 1 or 2 NHL games just to be there, and the rest of my time will be college or AHL if I need a hockey fix. It won't be NHL at those prices.
I'm going to see Florida at the Rangers in a couple of weeks, but mostly to see Joey.
Beeeej
[Q]JDeafv Wrote:
The MCI Center in Washington was not full. There are cheap $10 seats at the top of the rink that were packed, and plenty of seats just below that level that were empty. The 200 "club level" was virtually empty. Caps fans are not willing to pay the prices Teddy L. is asking until the product improves.
Overall, there was a good turnout for the first night :
TB had 112% of capacity. Did anybody call the fire marshal? [/q]
Well put. I live in the DC area and would love to go when I'm home, but for a halfway decent seat they're asking too much considering the overall quality of the team (well, unless Ovechkin makes 2 goals a night a habit). Even with salaries going down, I didnt see any price decreases.
Living in Mississippi, I won't see any games this year, unless I trek 6 hours to Atlanta, Dallas, or Nashville. But I have Center Ice and HD. I saw the Canucks-Phoenix game on HDNet last night... 52" of pure beauty. Seriously, hockey is meant to be watched in HD.
[Q]French Rage Wrote:
[Q2]JDeafv Wrote:
The MCI Center in Washington was not full. There are cheap $10 seats at the top of the rink that were packed, and plenty of seats just below that level that were empty. The 200 "club level" was virtually empty. Caps fans are not willing to pay the prices Teddy L. is asking until the product improves.
Overall, there was a good turnout for the first night :
TB had 112% of capacity. Did anybody call the fire marshal? [/Q]
Well put. I live in the DC area and would love to go when I'm home, but for a halfway decent seat they're asking too much considering the overall quality of the team (well, unless Ovechkin makes 2 goals a night a habit). Even with salaries going down, I didnt see any price decreases.[/q]
The Sabres actually did something right for once. They have a tiered pricing system. I think you can go to a game for as little as 10 bucks. Some games you can sit in the best seats in the house for under 50 dollars. The better the opponent, the higher the price. There are 4 tiers of pricing.
[Q]nyiballs Wrote:
Seriously, hockey is meant to be watched in HD.[/q]I disagree. Hockey is meant to be watched in person, HD is just the next best thing. :-P
Nice NCAA preview on the front page of NHL.com: http://www.nhl.com/features/college/index.html
[Q]... Eastern Collegiate Athletic Conference
In a strict definition of parity, the ECACHL takes the title of late. The past few seasons had the No. 1 and No. 12 teams separated by as few as 12 points. This year should be different. Dartmouth loses Hugh Jessiman early to the Rangers; Harvard graduates most off its defense and goaltender. All the while, Cornell returns 14 lettermen, led by sensational Hobey Hat Trick finalist David McKee in goal; and captain and top-10 national scoring machine Matt Moulson. All McKee did was to post 10 shutouts and sport a 1.24 GAA.
Cornell will go box to wire in the league. Colgate, Dartmouth, and Harvard, St. Lawrence, Brown and Clarkson will compete for home ice in the league playoffs. Rensselaer, Union, Princeton, and Yale seek respectability. Ditto for newcomer Quinnipiac that joins the ECACHL from Atlantic Hockey....[/Q]
[Q]jmh30 Wrote:
[Q2]nyiballs Wrote:
Seriously, hockey is meant to be watched in HD.[/Q]
I disagree. Hockey is meant to be watched in person, HD is just the next best thing. [/q]
You're both wrong. Hockey is meant to be played.
Too bad I suck.
First, does anyone know if Adidas-Reebok (RBK) (http://www.adidas-salomon.com/en/investor/events/2005/2005-08-03a.asp) has plans to manufacture their own hockey gear instead of just slapping their RBK name on someone else’s equipment? And speaking of re-branded equipment, does anyone know to whom RBK paid to allow their name to be put all over their stuff?
EDIT: Answered my own question ... A quick search shows a division of Reebok, The Hockey Company (THC) (http://en.rbkhockey.com/news/read.php?pr_id=213), controls CCM/KOHO/JOFA and is now just branding with the RBK name.