I agree.  Due to the nature of the "problem", mandating a standard
rink size is something that would take decades to accomplish due to
the huge amount of money involved. I've heard convincing arguments for
both the Olympic size rinks and the NHL size rinks.  Currently, the
biggest problem is the fact that we have both. A team that plays half
its games on the big rink has to be disadvantaged when they play on
the smaller just as the team playing on NHL rinks is disadvantaged
when playing on the big rink


On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:55:16 -0800, Clay Satow <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> --- Joe Makowiec <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > . .  .What do people think about going to an Olympic-sized
>
>
> > sheet?  The nominal North American rink is 200 x 85 feet, with some
> > allowance in both dimensions, plus I think that there are standards for the
> > radius of the corners.  Olympic/European/International/whatever rinks add
> > 15 feet to the width.
> >
> > The argument goes that the larger area:
> > - opens up more area
> > - puts a premium on speed and maneuverability
> > - creates more passing space
> >
> > I realize that this can be impractical in old buildings.  But how about
> > mandating that in new buildings, they at least have space for 200x100, if
> > not actually building it right now?
> >
> > Joe
>
> Of course the arguments are predicated on an assumption that the defensive players will contest
> possession throughout the whole width of the rink.  Another way of coping with a larger rink --
> especially for a team that would otherwise clutch and grab -- it to still defend the 85 foot
> width.  Also the wider rinks have some other characteristics that aren't immediately apparent.  My
> son -- a defenseman -- said he hated playing point on the power play on the wide rinks because
> there's so much more rink to cover when the shorthanded team tries to ice the puck.  And of course
> the extra 15 feet doesn't really help the power play, because the shorthanded team concedes the
> perimeter anyway.  Mandating the larger rink is a $$ issue; it's either fewer seats for the same
> size building, or a larger building for the same number of seats (though of course a wider rink
> means more front row seats).
>
> I think that the wider home rink is a disadvantage to UNH when the postseason is predominantly on
> NHL rinks, and the Frozen Four almost certainly is and will continue to be.
>
> Clay
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
>