3074326;1941143; said:
Tonyank;1941126; said:
presumably the georgia street viaduct. where a road and sidewalk cross the viaduct right by the arena. (how you get from gm/rogers/etc to trillium park for those of you vaguely familiar with the area)
if you go back to when shootouts were implemented, essentially the playoff outcomes are the same if the games tied, in the old fashion. the 20 minute golden goal ot are just not reasonable for the regular season. it is not close to equitable, nor would you get a good product if teams faced golden goal ot at a time when back to back are commonplace (especially in the west where you may have back to back with 1,000 or 2,000 miles of travel.). further, few seem to remember the kiss your sister feeling of the old tie rule. while id agree many teams play for ot, or the skills competition, it certainly gives finality to the game. however, i do agree that it has lost significant luster, and appeal. im not sure of a truely viable alternative though.
yes, but not to this extent. hockey has two distinct advantages for the home team that make it very unique. the home team is allowed the "second change." this means the road team is required to ice their players (put their team out on the ice out on the ice) first after a stoppage in play, the home team is given sometime (sometimes as much as 20-30 seconds) to counter with their lineup. so essentially it is a huge match up advantage for the home team. furthermore, the home team's centre puts his stick on the ice second for faceoffs. basically when hes ready and set the linesman drops the puck. it is usually worth a couple % points on the dots, and thus results in 2-3 more possessions for the home team.
jimotis4heisman;1941410; said:
jimotis4heisman;1941436; said:
jimotis4heisman;1941436; said:
generaladm;1941442; said:Google 'montreal women', and...
...I'm sorry, what was the question?
BuckeyeMike80;1941156; said:
BuckeyeMike80;1941156; said:
