HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Sun, 26 Jul 1998 15:42:00 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
> The reasons most teams in the NHL aren't worth watching are three-fold: 1)
Overexpansion,
 
Possibly, although the expansion of the talent has kept pace with the number
of NHL slots.  I'd put forward as the worse problem the "dilution of
interest" -- it's simply more interesting to have 16 teams than 32.  More
continuity and more tradition surrounds teams that way.  This is one more
reason why the current (hopefully short-lived) over-expansion of Div. I is
bad for the college game.
 
> The bogus idea that Bigger=Better (Eric Lindros proves that wrong every
season)
 
True enough, though Lindros --though the poster child for the trend -- is
still an exceptional talent.  As long as the game remains primarily clutch
and grab, for all the usual Missing the Point (tm) reasons, you'll still see
the GM's go for the big guys.  Under the current style it makes some sense,
however much we'd like to see the current style go away.
 
> The Major Juniors are putting out garbage-calibre talent.
 
(Sound of buzzer for incorrect answer)  The top line on even a mediocre team
in the WHL has more finesse, skating strength, and ability than the top line
on any NCAA team.  I watched a substantial number of games in both the
juniors and the colleges last year, and if there is a talent difference
between the two, the advantage goes to the juniors.  I wince when I say that
, as a huge booster of college hockey, but the draft and performance in the
NHL overwhelmingly argue against the disparaging comment above.
 
 
> However, I'm more concerned with the general attitude so many people have
> these days that makes that situation possible.  People seem to accept as
> fact that we have to have everything "in our face".
 
Agreed completely.  I don't see any difference between putting ads on the
ice and boards and putting them on the players' uniforms.  Wouldn't *that*
just be classy?  I can see it all now: the Golden Arches on the Golden
Gophers, Tony the Tiger on the Princeton jerseys, and don't get me started
on Colgate...
 
-- Greg
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2