It's time to eliminate home team last change

[Matt_T83]

I've mulled this over for a while, and the Senators-Penguins series has convinced me that the home team having the last line change for faceoffs is unfair in a 7 game playoff series. The series looked tight in games 1-2, but that's because the Penguins had last change. When the Senators had control of the matchup in game 3, they blew them out of the water. This was 100% because of matchups dictated by the last change. The Senators should be 3-0 in the series right now.

 

But how would you determine who gets last change? I will agree that one team needs to have last change, or coaches would just endlessly delay at every faceoff. I would suggest the team on the offensive side of the ice always get last change. In other words, if your team has a faceoff in your half of the ice, you must change your lines first. This gives the offensive team the ability to dictate matchups, which in my opinion would also help increase scoring ever so slightly. The exception to this would be center ice facecoffs, which could still go to the home team.

 

That would be chaos! Games would take forever. A common argument against any rule change is that it will confuse players, delay games, and generally ruin the game. This is almost always made by ignorant people that are blind to history. Players and coaches are smart people. Within half a season of this rule change taking effect they will have adjusted.

 

But you play all season for home ice advantage! It has been earned. Sure, you play all season for home ice advantage in the playoffs. That's why you get an extra home game in your arena, in front of your hometown fans (if the series goes 7 games). That extra home game is reward enough. Having a tangible advantage within the game itself is too much.

 

 

Edit: I'm a Sens fan! I'm surprised that people are thinking I'm a salty Penguins fan. I'm definitely a Sens fan, and I am arguing that the Sens should be 3-0 right now. The only reason they lost game 2 was they had to change their lines first every game. I just think having last change for the home team is too much of an advantage.

[MikeyBoy44]

I'm sorry your Penguins lost. However home team last change is about as fair as it gets.

[Spitfire_Spiky]

2 minutes ago, MikeyBoy44 said:

I'm sorry your Penguins lost. However home team last change is about as fair as it gets.

I gotta agree with this. The whole whatever end the play is in could definitely be incorporated but what happens when the faceoff is at center ice?

[Fanuck]

That Pens loss had little to do with line changes - but nice try.

[Matt_T83]

47 minutes ago, MikeyBoy44 said:

I'm sorry your Penguins lost. However home team last change is about as fair as it gets.

Quite the opposite. My Senators won. I'm complaining that the Penguins shouldn't have won a single game. They only split the first 2 games because they had the last line change.

[higgyfan]

Home team advantage goes to the team that played the best during the regular season and that's fine by me. That's hockey!

[timberz21]

1 hour ago, Matt_T83 said:

I've mulled this over for a while, and the Senators-Penguins series has convinced me that the home team having the last line change for faceoffs is unfair in a 7 game playoff series. The series looked tight in games 1-2, but that's because the Penguins had last change. When the Senators had control of the matchup in game 3, they blew them out of the water. This was 100% because of matchups dictated by the last change. The Senators should be 3-0 in the series right now.

 

But how would you determine who gets last change? I will agree that one team needs to have last change, or coaches would just endlessly delay at every faceoff. I would suggest the team on the offensive side of the ice always get last change. In other words, if your team has a faceoff in your half of the ice, you must change your lines first. This gives the offensive team the ability to dictate matchups, which in my opinion would also help increase scoring ever so slightly. The exception to this would be center ice facecoffs, which could still go to the home team.

 

That would be chaos! Games would take forever. A common argument against any rule change is that it will confuse players, delay games, and generally ruin the game. This is almost always made by ignorant people that are blind to history. Players and coaches are smart people. Within half a season of this rule change taking effect they will have adjusted.

 

But you play all season for home ice advantage! It has been earned. Sure, you play all season for home ice advantage in the playoffs. That's why you get an extra home game in your arena, in front of your hometown fans (if the series goes 7 games). That extra home game is reward enough. Having a tangible advantage within the game itself is too much.

 

 

Edit: I'm a Sens fan! I'm surprised that people are thinking I'm a salty Penguins fan. I'm definitely a Sens fan, and I am arguing that the Sens should be 3-0 right now. The only reason they lost game 2 was they had to change their lines first every game. I just think having last change for the home team is too much of an advantage.

The reason they lost game 2 is they went through a span of 20 minutes without registering a shot on goal.   They stood back all game long, waiting for an opportunity that never came.  All Pittsburgh needed is 1 goal to win the game.

 

You don't score 4 goals in 12 minutes because of line matchup.   The Penguins were just terrible in that game, plain and simple. 

 

To me the rules are fine as they are.  I wouldn't change it.

[Xbox]

No way, that's what the teams fight for all season to get home advantage and it's not like all 7 games are in one building.

 

Relax about the Senators. They did what they had to do and won one game in Pittsburgh. Now that they stole the home ice, all they have to do to win is continue using the very thing you don't want anymore. This is what the playoffs are all about.

 

Honestly I think the team with the first two games on the road have the advantage, as long as it doesn't go to 7. All you gotta do is do a split on the road then you have momentum and home advantage for the series. Nashville has nailed that.

[Toews]

OP must not follow basketball if he thinks home ice is too much of an advantage in the NHL.

[Mr.53]

I actually don't think it's a bad idea. Like it or not, the league has to find a way to increase scoring. People like us on this forum, or hardcore hockey fans can sit down, watch a 2-1 game and respect what we watched, the defence that was played, and the overall game as a low scoring contest. When it comes to the casual/doesn't usually watch but doesn't dislike the sport, a 2-1 game is boring and they don't get the same fulfillment out of it.

 

I've always said, if the league could find a way to make the average score 5-4 in a game, they will see popularity rise, especially in the unites states significantly. It would also make the occasional 2-1 game very interesting because you know a goal can happen any second, and the occasional 10-8 game which will get eyeballs everywhere.

 

Also, I never really liked the idea of home ice advantage actually being more of an advantage than just playing in front of your home crowd. Last change is a fairly significant advantage. Like you get to dictate matchups, which can be huge. I have always disagreed with that. It should be the same standard for every game with the difference being you get to sleep in your own bed, and have your crowd chant your teams name. I would even say that after a goal is scored, you should make it that either the team that scored, or the team that got scored on get's last change. You get my point, the game should change minimally where you play.

 

I actually really like this idea. I think you're on to something. Forget the haters. It's a good idea.

[D-Money]

2 hours ago, Matt_T83 said:

Having a tangible advantage within the game itself is too much.

No...it's not. Hence the term, "Home Ice Advantage".

 

Besides, the team having last change switches back and forth between games. The home team only potentially gets 1 extra game with it.

[Team Bagues]

I'd rather see them get rid of wearing away jerseys on home ice.

Who's the zipper-head that came up with that one.

I'm guessing the same numbskull that created the flaming 'Fox' puck.

Last change is a part of the game - otherwise you'd have both coaches playing 'chicken' waiting to see what the other will do.

 

[Stelar]

2 hours ago, Matt_T83 said:

Quite the opposite. My Senators won. I'm complaining that the Penguins shouldn't have won a single game. They only split the first 2 games because they had the last line change.

Well they finished with more points than the Sens so they should have an advantage.......

[oldnews]

3 hours ago, Matt_T83 said:

I've mulled this over for a while, and the Senators-Penguins series has convinced me that the home team having the last line change for faceoffs is unfair in a 7 game playoff series. The series looked tight in games 1-2, but that's because the Penguins had last change. When the Senators had control of the matchup in game 3, they blew them out of the water. This was 100% because of matchups dictated by the last change. The Senators should be 3-0 in the series right now.

 

But how would you determine who gets last change? I will agree that one team needs to have last change, or coaches would just endlessly delay at every faceoff. I would suggest the team on the offensive side of the ice always get last change. In other words, if your team has a faceoff in your half of the ice, you must change your lines first. This gives the offensive team the ability to dictate matchups, which in my opinion would also help increase scoring ever so slightly. The exception to this would be center ice facecoffs, which could still go to the home team.

 

That would be chaos! Games would take forever. A common argument against any rule change is that it will confuse players, delay games, and generally ruin the game. This is almost always made by ignorant people that are blind to history. Players and coaches are smart people. Within half a season of this rule change taking effect they will have adjusted.

 

But you play all season for home ice advantage! It has been earned. Sure, you play all season for home ice advantage in the playoffs. That's why you get an extra home game in your arena, in front of your hometown fans (if the series goes 7 games). That extra home game is reward enough. Having a tangible advantage within the game itself is too much.

 

 

Edit: I'm a Sens fan! I'm surprised that people are thinking I'm a salty Penguins fan. I'm definitely a Sens fan, and I am arguing that the Sens should be 3-0 right now. The only reason they lost game 2 was they had to change their lines first every game. I just think having last change for the home team is too much of an advantage.

I have no idea how people read this and mistook you for a Pens fan, when you clearly state that the Sens should/would be up 3-0.

 

The problem with your alternative imo - that the attacking team get the last change - is that I think it would tilt the ice even steeper in favour of stronger teams, and could produce some more lopsided victories in favour of good puck possession teams.  If you were really intent on this change, I think you'd have to go to something like the NBA's alternating possession rule, and have it be alternating last changes (which would take time for teams and officials to track and slow the game slightly, but wouldn't be very complicated or difficult to apply).  That way, you have more parity in each particular game, however it does water down home-ice advantage somewhat.

 

Something like that might be an option, but giving last change to the attacking team would be a consistent advantage to the team that generates more offensive zone starts ie the team that is already winning the possession battle - I'm not sure that would enhance the game.

 

Another rule change I would consider is the elimination of the delay of game for shooting the puck over the glass in one's own end - in favour of a possession advantage.  In those instances, instead of a fairly severe two minute man advantage, I'd prefer to see the offending team surrender a non-contested faceoff - not unlike inbound possession in the NBA.  The attacking team would regain the advantage as opposed to a two minute minor.  The offending team could not make changes, just like in an icing situation. So what would happen would be that as opposed to a faceoff, the linesman would simply place the puck on the dot, the offending team would have to approach all else like a regular faceoff, but the opposition could freely draw the puck without contest or interference, whereever they wanted and gain essentially a fluid possession advantage - like a cleanly won draw.  If they insist on retaining the two minute advantage, perhaps reserve it to instances where there appears to be clear intent, leave a bit of discretion (although I prefer to take discretion out of the hands of most NHL officials).

[Heretic]

What next? Eliminate home ice?  Play all games on the road?  

 

Sorry, the home team having the last line change is just fine.  

If a team can't prepare for that - then they don't deserve to win a cup.

[Ojibwa72]

Hell no. Its tradition and if they can't deal with it fold the team.

[JM_]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

 

The problem with your alternative imo - that the attacking team get the last change - is that I think it would tilt the ice even steeper in favour of stronger teams, and could produce some more lopsided victories in favour of good puck possession teams.  If you were really intent on this change, I think you'd have to go to something like the NBA's alternating possession rule, and have it be alternating last changes (which would take time for teams and officials to track and slow the game slightly, but wouldn't be very complicated or difficult to apply).  That way, you have more parity in each particular game, however it does water down home-ice advantage somewhat.

 

Something like that might be an option, but giving last change to the attacking team would be a consistent advantage to the team that generates more offensive zone starts ie the team that is already winning the possession battle - I'm not sure that would enhance the game.

 

good explanation. It may even make the games less entertaining if teams simply throw a puck on net to force the goalie to hang on to the puck to generate a o-zone face-off and get the last change. I think you'd see so much of that it would get pretty boring pretty fast. 

[stawns]

5 hours ago, Matt_T83 said:

I've mulled this over for a while, and the Senators-Penguins series has convinced me that the home team having the last line change for faceoffs is unfair in a 7 game playoff series. The series looked tight in games 1-2, but that's because the Penguins had last change. When the Senators had control of the matchup in game 3, they blew them out of the water. This was 100% because of matchups dictated by the last change. The Senators should be 3-0 in the series right now.

 

But how would you determine who gets last change? I will agree that one team needs to have last change, or coaches would just endlessly delay at every faceoff. I would suggest the team on the offensive side of the ice always get last change. In other words, if your team has a faceoff in your half of the ice, you must change your lines first. This gives the offensive team the ability to dictate matchups, which in my opinion would also help increase scoring ever so slightly. The exception to this would be center ice facecoffs, which could still go to the home team.

 

That would be chaos! Games would take forever. A common argument against any rule change is that it will confuse players, delay games, and generally ruin the game. This is almost always made by ignorant people that are blind to history. Players and coaches are smart people. Within half a season of this rule change taking effect they will have adjusted.

 

But you play all season for home ice advantage! It has been earned. Sure, you play all season for home ice advantage in the playoffs. That's why you get an extra home game in your arena, in front of your hometown fans (if the series goes 7 games). That extra home game is reward enough. Having a tangible advantage within the game itself is too much.

 

 

Edit: I'm a Sens fan! I'm surprised that people are thinking I'm a salty Penguins fan. I'm definitely a Sens fan, and I am arguing that the Sens should be 3-0 right now. The only reason they lost game 2 was they had to change their lines first every game. I just think having last change for the home team is too much of an advantage.

what a ridiculous idea

[oldnews]

14 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

good explanation. It may even make the games less entertaining if teams simply throw a puck on net to force the goalie to hang on to the puck to generate a o-zone face-off and get the last change. I think you'd see so much of that it would get pretty boring pretty fast. 

Yes, that's a good points as well, which could result in goaltenders trying to drop and move the puck in order to avoid their 4th line being trapped out against the opposition's top line - and lead to some misadventures - as well as the dump attempts hoping to generate faceoffs in the attacking zone.

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Yes, that's a good points as well, which could result in goaltenders trying to drop and move the puck in order to avoid their 4th line being trapped out against the opposition's top line - and lead to some misadventures - as well as the dump attempts hoping to generate faceoffs in the attacking zone.

can you imagine Luongo trying to do that