Hockey in the past vs hockey today

[whcanuck]

Hey guys

 

So I've been watching hockey for about 25 years now (not as long as some, but that's still a decent amount of time.) Started watching around the '92-93 season in the height of the Mario and Gretzky era and the early days of the Russian Rocket Pavel Bure :). Started really watching hockey a lot closer after the Canucks famous '94 Cup run and was an avid follower from then on. When I go back and watch the old highlights, especially from the 1990s, I get a sense the game was more exciting. The players' overall skill level was not as high as it is now, the guys that did have that high skill tended to dominate...the Bures, the Yzermans, the Sakics etc. It seemed especially that the old arenas, like the Pacific Coliseum, Montreal Forum, Maple Leaf Gardens, Chicago Stadium, provided a lot more intimate experience for the fan, like they were almost right on top of the ice and it seemed like those crowds could generate a ton of noise! (that may have something to do with lower ticket prices and fans were likely more everyday people than the high-rolling businessmen that fill NHL arenas now, but that's another debate). Just compare the noise level from Game 6 of the '94 Finals at the Pacific Coliseum to any Canucks game ever played at Rogers Arena (2011 Finals included) and I don't think the noise is anywhere close to what it was back then.

 

It seemed like the personalities were more interesting back then too, you could always spot Lemieux, Gretzky or Yzerman when they had the puck, now it seems that almost every player is so talented and similar that they all come off some assembly line that creates hockey players (a few exceptions of course, you can always spot McDavid and Crosby out there). The games back then seemed a lot more end to end, trading scoring chance for scoring chance, but now the players are so big and fast and the systems are so structured that it's become more like soccer, where you really have to work and be patient for a scoring opportunity.

 

I'm trying not to be too much the guy that always says "everything in the past used to be better" because that's not true. Players have tons of ability now and the goaltending position has evolved in leaps and bounds throughout the past quarter century. Plus the latter half of the 90s wasn't so great with the Devils' implementation of the neutral zone trap and the merciless clutch and grab era. What would you guys do to make hockey more exciting?

 

 

 

[Toni Zamboni]

ive been watching since the 70's....and its been great to see it all and all the different evolution's of styles of play and styles of hair!.

 

ive gotten used to the new era, and ive come to prefer todays hockey.

 

[PhillipBlunt]

What would I do to make hockey more exciting?

 

Free beer.

[Squamfan]

i liked the era from 1990-2008 before gary implemented this soft game

[Heretic]

38 minutes ago, whcanuck said:

. What would you guys do to make hockey more exciting?

 

 

 

Get rid of the loser point, OT and shootout.  All it does is make the bad and mediocre teams look better than they really are as far as the standings go.

[SabreFan1]

I prefer old hockey.  It was more entertaining.  Problem is, the vast majority prefer today's hockey.  I want the game to continue to grow on the global stage so like it or not, the game is better off the way it currently is. 

[goalie13]

42 minutes ago, whcanuck said:

What would you guys do to make hockey more exciting?

Get rid of the coaches.

 

The talent in the league these days is insane.  I feel there is less of a gap between the top line players and the 4th liners than there has ever been before.  Add to that the coaching and the systems that everyone plays and you get what you have today.

 

Remove the coaches from the game and there would be far more mistakes, and far more creativity.

 

Look at the dead puck era.  Do you think that was the players' idea?  Nope.  That was because of the coaches.

[NUCKER67]

Before: Players played for pride and glory

 

Now: Players play for money

[whcanuck]

1 hour ago, goalie13 said:

Get rid of the coaches.

 

The talent in the league these days is insane.  I feel there is less of a gap between the top line players and the 4th liners than there has ever been before.  Add to that the coaching and the systems that everyone plays and you get what you have today.

 

Remove the coaches from the game and there would be far more mistakes, and far more creativity.

 

Look at the dead puck era.  Do you think that was the players' idea?  Nope.  That was because of the coaches.

Wow that's a really interesting insight. I think a lot of the old timers like Orr, Dryden, Gretzky have said that they want to see more creativity in the game too.

[J-23]

I want more hate, rivalries, fights, big hits, line brawls to go along with all this skill and speed in the current game. 

[NUCKER67]

Players will be paid a base salary by how many games they play (eg. 3rd liner - $25,000/game x 82 games = $2 million per year). Bonuses will also be awarded for their contributions. (goals $20,000, assists $10,000, team wins $5,000 per player, shutouts for goalies $20,000, etc)

 

If a player like this only plays 20 games during a season, then he only makes a base of $500,000, plus his awarded bonuses, if any.

 

Then you'd see effort.

[Rick Blight]

Very interesting topic.

I truly believe today's players are bigger, faster and more talented (generally) than their predecessors. Having said that, I prefer the way the games were played decades ago. There are a myriad of reasons for this IMHO but I will just list a couple that I believe have seriously impacted the game over the years.

1. Arenas used to come in all shapes and sizes but today's arenas are basically cookie cutters. Teams used to build their teams to suit their home arenas. Places like Buffalo, Boston and Chicago had smaller than average ice surfaces so they built teams with more size, toughness, grit and ability to operate in tighter spaces. This meant they had an advantage at home but would typically be at a disadvantage on the road as their team had to adapt to the larger ice surfaces. Teams would put the home penalty box next to their bench while the visitor bench would be on the opposite side of the ice. Home team doors to the player bench would be strategically placed in the neutral zone while the visitors would be inside the blue line. The point is, home teams could manufacturer home team advantage giving them an edge to win and keep their fans raucous and content. Look at today's game and you just don't see home ice advantage anymore.....I think the home team is about 8 games under .500 so far in this year's playoffs and that used to be unheard of.

 

2. The flow of the games was much better when there was a single referee. More calls were missed but the referee had a much better feel for the game and could be far more consistent in administering games from start to finish. Today's game is too clinical for my liking. I don't like the interruptions created by reviewing goals, coaches challenges, etc.......if referees make a bad call, so be it. They don't get it right all the time anyways after their reviews.

 

3. Teams used to openly hate each other, particularly during playoffs, but that doesn't always appear to be the case anymore. It was a bloody war out there when some of the old rivalries played as they played with so much passion and desire to win. Think of past Bruins/Canadiens. Oilers/Flames and Avalanche/ Wings series.....no quarter given and none expected on either side. Where has that hate gone?

[-AJ-]

I tend to think nostalgia plays a big role. That said, in the early-mid 90s, offense was way higher than it is in today's game, so perhaps that made a difference too.

 

I've only been watching since the 2000-01 season, but I have to say that the game is as close to as exciting as it's ever been. I could only perhaps cite the years immediately following the lockout (2005-2007) as more exciting. If we could get to the offense levels of those days (2.9-3.1 GPG), the game would be so thrilling to watch. The skill level of today's players seems so much greater to me than when compared to 25+ years ago. I love looking into hockey history, but every time I watch old clips from the 80s and before, the game seems much much simpler than today's game.

[MikeyBoy44]

1 hour ago, J-23 said:

I want more hate, rivalries, fights, big hits, line brawls to go along with all this skill and speed in the current game. 

This times a thousand. We only see traces of this in playoffs. I want to see this year round. The good ol days.

[ynwa]

I've been watching since the mid-70s and I think that the standard of hockey is getting better and better as time progresses, faster and more skillful. This is generally true of all sports both pro and amateur, you just have to look at track and field, records are continually being broken. So having said that I believe that the top teams today would probably beat the top teams from the '70s, '80s, and '90s. Which era would I prefer to watch? It's a very good question and quite honestly it's a tough one and although I think that perhaps nostalgia is clouding my mind, I tend to lean toward the '80s and '90s, I feel there were more characters in the game back then and that boosted the whole entertainment package.

[kilgore]

I started watching more consistently about the same time, 92, when Bure joined the team.

but I still remember watching sporadically when my dad was watching, when I was a kid. One thing I miss, which may not seem that important, is the clean white boards, no advertising. You could focus on the game and the puck, and the jersey's and logos didn't have to be over the top to compete with advertising. It was so much more enjoyable and less distracting.  Now they have virtual ads above the goalies. And I hate it when I am told..."that's just the way it is going you have to just accept it" BS.

 

[Bill Sikes]

Been watching since the early 70s, much prefer the 70's early 80s, the game seems too structured now, (the trap everyone blames the Devils for was actually started by the Canadians in the mid 80's), everyone has to play the system, most teams play the same way, few teams have an identity (Flying Frenchmen, Big Bad Bruins, Broad Street Bullies).  There is also less respect for your opponent now, I see a level of viciousness in today's game the 74 Flyers would cringe at. 

[Lancaster]

Nowadays, it's all about systems.  

 

I was watching some of the clips of the Red Wings during the 90's... you see guys like Fedorov and Yzerman just skating the puck across the blueline and towards the net.  Usually it doesn't work as they get checked and the puck gets turned over or something.  If a player attempted the same thing, the defenseman will probably strip the puck off you and then pass the puck up the ice for an out-numbered rush the other way.  

 

Dump and chase is pretty much a probabilities game and it's increases the chance of a goal for, and especially reduces the chance of a goal against.  

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

Nice topic!

 

I also grew up watching hockey around the same time 92-93 as a kid, but becoming a die hard fan after the 94 run, still haunts me to this day believe it or not. There's no question I enjoy the pace of the game more now a days then back then, but I found hockey back in the 90s more exciting then now because of the more open ice back then. This is one of the main reasons I have been preaching for bigger ice surfaces now in the NHL for years, too bring some of that old excitement back. 

 

As others have mentioned everyone now a days is so talented and skilled, it's hard for the really skilled players to find open ice to shine like back in the day and rack up points like Gretz, Mario, Bure, Kariya, Sakic, Yzerman, etc. This is why I feel if you create more open ice for the gifted players now a days to create more opportunities to score, it will become more exciting like back then. The NHL keeps tinking with the rules too try and create more scoring excitement, but it's just not working imo, it's actually making it more controversial then creating offensive opportunities. 

 

Again I know this isn't something that can happen tomorrow due to costs and revenue losses and seating, but it's something that really needs to be looked at for the future of this game. 

[Gaudette Celly]

70s - no names on the jerseys because no helmets = you could tell you everyone was.  Who doesn't remember the wind-swept flows of Shack and Lafleur?

80s - Habs, Isles, Oilers dynasties.  Oilers had offensive firepower that simply ran teams over.  Spectacular to watch, but also distressing being on the whipping end of it.

 

Goalie equipment was so sparse there wasn't much need for slapshots, guys could easily bury wrist shots if they were open.