Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:05:45 -0600 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Ambrose" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: College Hockey/Olympic USA Hockey
> From what I have heard and read here in Boston, the speed of these Olympic
> games has caught the fancy of the hockey loving public. In addition, I
saw
> a quote from Brett Hull today that, if it was up to him, he would have the
> no red line and larger rink become part of the NHL. From all I have seen
on
> TV these past few days, a change in the rules should be a no-brainer.
> Hockey is supposed to be a game of speed and skill, not one about
clutching
> and grabbing.
Hull has been saying stuff like this for years. We'll see if they ever
start listening to him.
>
> However, there is an opposing view. These points seem obvious to most of
us
> but I did talk to a couple of guys in my office today who like the NHL
just
> the way it is. They seem to think that opening up the game would
eliminate
> the physical part of things and make it more like the "prissy" European
> style. They want to see some hard checking (and some fights), something
> that they think would be eliminated if the NHL went to Olympic rules.
When
> I told them that there was plenty of hard hitting in college hockey, they
> were pretty skeptical.
Tell them to ask Keith Tkachuk if *he* thinks that the larger ice surface
means that there isn't hard hitting.
J. Michael Neal
|
|
|