lake@alberta.UUCP (Robert Lake) (05/02/85)
One of the reasons I like the Oilers (aside from the obvious one of them being my home-team) is the new insights they have provided with the game of hockey. I cannot recall any team in the past (especially a Stanley Cup competitor) which has emphasized offence over defence the way the Oilers have. I find their play to be very refreshing and inno- vative - how many other teams would want to put the likes of Messier and Gretzky on the penalty killing role? To me, the Oilers with their style of play combined with Gretzky's skills have done more for the game of hockey in North America than anything else since the league expanded in the late '60s. If the Oilers can win the Stanley Cup again this year, I think they will provide a new trend for teams who wish to build Stanley Cup champions. Rather than concentrating on first building an offence around your defense, do the reverse. The net result from this will be even more exciting hockey, and probably some of the best Stanley Cup finals ever played. Robert Lake (alberta!lake) University of Alberta
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (05/03/85)
> One of the reasons I like the Oilers (aside from the obvious one of > them being my home-team) is the new insights they have provided with > the game of hockey. I cannot recall any team in the past (especially > a Stanley Cup competitor) which has emphasized offence over defence the > way the Oilers have. I find their play to be very refreshing and inno- > vative .... > The net result from this will > be even more exciting hockey, and probably some of the best Stanley > Cup finals ever played. NONSENSE!! I think the Oilers are one of the most boring teams in the league. Who wants to watch the Oilers blow someone away 8-3 all the time? At least half of the Oiler games are over before the middle of the second period. What's so exciting about that? Even 7-6 games are usually boring because it's hard to get excited about a goal when the other team will probably come right back and get another one, and because games that are that high scoring usually contain so much defensive ineptitude that it's sickening to the educated hockey fan. It's much more exciting when teams have to earn their goals. I'll take a 2-1 game anytime. The best and most exciting games of the playoffs so far have been the defensive ones like Montreal-Boston and Washington-Islanders. > To me, the Oilers with their style > of play combined with Gretzky's skills have done more for the game of > hockey in North America than anything else since the league expanded in > the late '60s. > Robert Lake (alberta!lake) > University of Alberta I'll admit that they've done a lot for the game. Offence appeals most to novice, uninitiated fans and therefore will take more people off the streets and put them in arenas or in front of their TV sets, which is probably good for the game, but true hockey fans appreciate a classic defensive struggle. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff
ken@alberta.UUCP (Ken Hruday) (05/06/85)
>> One of the reasons I like the Oilers (aside from the obvious one of >> them being my home-team) is the new insights they have provided with >> the game of hockey. I cannot recall any team in the past (especially >> a Stanley Cup competitor) which has emphasized offence over defence the >> way the Oilers have. I find their play to be very refreshing and inno- >> vative .... >> The net result from this will >> be even more exciting hockey, and probably some of the best Stanley >> Cup finals ever played. >>NONSENSE!! I think the Oilers are one of the most boring teams in the >league. Who wants to watch the Oilers blow someone away 8-3 all the time? >At least half of the Oiler games are over before the middle of the second >period. What's so exciting about that? .... Apparently the erudite Mr. Richardson equates excitement with the uncer- tainty of a game's outcome. Of course uncertainty and high stakes are cause for excitement in any endeavour, but then you don't really need to know any- thing about hockey to derive this sort of enjoyment from the game - a total "novice" to the game with a $1000 bet would appreciate the "excitement" of a close match. I would think that an educated fan would appreciate the display of some of the skills which make the game. Of late, only the more defensive of these skills have emphasized. What Rob and I appreciate about the Oilers is their emphasis on offensive skills. A well executed offensive combination can be very exciting even if you know (with virtual certainty) that the other team is going to lose - but then enjoyment of the game shouldn't depend soley on winning or losing. >Even 7-6 games are usually boring >because it's hard to get excited about a goal when the other team will >probably come right back and get another one, and because games that are >that high scoring usually contain so much defensive ineptitude that it's >sickening to the educated hockey fan. ... Certainly ineptitude in anything detracts from enjoyment but you digress from Rob's point, which is simply that the offensive play of the Oilers is exciting. It would be far better to see the Oilers play a very strong defensive team i.e. the "irresistable force meets the immovable object" (pardon my pro-Oiler bias :-> ). To me this is far more interesting than "the immovable object meets the immovable object"!! :-)> >It's much more exciting when teams >have to earn their goals. I agree whole heartedly with this point. > I'll take a 2-1 game anytime. >The best and most exciting games of the playoffs so far have been the >defensive ones like Montreal-Boston and Washington-Islanders. Excuse me Mr. Richardson, but the final score of the game is no indication of its entertainment value. >I'll admit that they've done a lot for the game. Offence appeals most to >novice, uninitiated fans and therefore will take more people off the streets >and put them in arenas or in front of their TV sets, which is probably >good for the game, but true hockey fans appreciate a classic defensive >struggle. Thanks for setting us novices straight on hockey! But even you have to agree that without offense, an opposing team cannot fully show the prowess of it's defense nor can the skills of a good offensive team be fully exposed without the strength of a good opposing defense. Rob's point was simply that the offensive play of the Oilers is exciting because it is fresh - they are probably the only team today which combines an excellent offensive squad with a sound defense, rather than the reverse. Ken Hruday P.S. I'll bet you're a Maple Leafs fan! (:-))
dpb@philabs.UUCP (Paul Benjamin) (05/06/85)
*** REPLACE THIS OPINION WITH YOUR DRIVEL*** Jeff Richardson writes: > ... it's hard to get excited about a goal when the other team will > probably come right back and get another one, and because games that are > that high scoring usually contain so much defensive ineptitude that it's > sickening to the educated hockey fan. It's much more exciting when teams > have to earn their goals. I'll take a 2-1 game anytime. > The best and most exciting games of the playoffs so far have been the > defensive ones like Montreal-Boston and Washington-Islanders. > ... > I'll admit that they've done a lot for the game. Offence appeals most to > novice, uninitiated fans and therefore will take more people off the streets > and put them in arenas or in front of their TV sets, which is probably > good for the game, but true hockey fans appreciate a classic defensive > struggle. Well, I've been a hockey fan for over a quarter of a century, and I find the Oilers great to watch. I appreciate either an offensive game or a defensive game. The important point is the talent that is on display. High scores do not imply lousy defense. They can simply indicate outstanding offensive talent on the ice, as is the case with the Oilers. If all games were extremely low-scoring, that would get boring, too (see soccer). No one is saying that all games should be high-scoring, only that it is great that a team whose strength is in offensive capability can also be champion, and be interesting. Also, I am one of those fans who gets sick and tired of watching a great skater start to zip around a defenseman who has very little in the way of hockey skills, and seeing the defender grab or trip or do whatever else he can to compensate for his lack of speed and agility. This happens in every hockey game I have seen in years, and is directly attributable to the owners. They don't care that skating and stick-handling skills are being beaten by bullying and violence. This is the true concession to the uninitiated fans - make hockey a fighting sport instead of a finesse sport, because it sells tickets. This is one more reason that it is a pleasure to watch a team with so many SKATERS win the championship. The Oilers have their fair share of "enforcers", too. This is unfortunately inevitable in today's game. But they do more pure skating than the other teams. I know I'm dreaming, but I keep on hoping that the owners will get the message...
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (05/07/85)
>>NONSENSE!! I think the Oilers are one of the most boring teams in the >>league. Who wants to watch the Oilers blow someone away 8-3 all the time? >>At least half of the Oiler games are over before the middle of the second >>period. What's so exciting about that? .... >I would think that an educated fan would appreciate the display of some of >the skills which make the game. Of late, only the more defensive of these >skills have emphasized. What Rob and I appreciate about the Oilers is their >emphasis on offensive skills. A well executed offensive combination can be >very exciting even if you know (with virtual certainty) that the other team >is going to lose - but then enjoyment of the game shouldn't depend soley on >winning or losing. Maybe, but remember that hockey is more than just an exhibition of skills. It's a competition. And if there's no competition, it's not good hockey. Therefore, an 8-3 game is not a good game. >>Even 7-6 games are usually boring >>because it's hard to get excited about a goal when the other team will >>probably come right back and get another one, and because games that are >>that high scoring usually contain so much defensive ineptitude that it's >>sickening to the educated hockey fan. ... >Certainly ineptitude in anything detracts from enjoyment but you digress >from Rob's point, which is simply that the offensive play of the Oilers is >exciting. It would be far better to see the Oilers play a very strong >defensive team i.e. the "irresistable force meets the immovable object" >(pardon my pro-Oiler bias :-> ). To me this is far more interesting than >"the immovable object meets the immovable object"!! :-)> I'll admit that watching the Oilers play a team that is strong defensively (and good enough offensively to be competitive) would probably be very exciting, and that watching two defensive teams with inept offenses is pretty boring, but so is watching two offensive teams with inept defenses. >> I'll take a 2-1 game anytime. >>The best and most exciting games of the playoffs so far have been the >>defensive ones like Montreal-Boston and Washington-Islanders. >Excuse me Mr. Richardson, but the final score of the game is no indication >of its entertainment value. That's true, but I've noticed that in general, I've been getting much more enjoyment out of low scoring games lately. >>I'll admit that they've done a lot for the game. Offence appeals most to >>novice, uninitiated fans and therefore will take more people off the streets >>and put them in arenas or in front of their TV sets, which is probably >>good for the game, but true hockey fans appreciate a classic defensive >>struggle. >Thanks for setting us novices straight on hockey! But even you have to >agree that without offense, an opposing team cannot fully show the prowess >of it's defense nor can the skills of a good offensive team be fully exposed >without the strength of a good opposing defense. I never said anything to the contrary, but you practically never see a defence that is strong enough to "fully expose" the Oilers' skills, so their games are rarely close, and that's what makes them boring. You could say that it's not their fault that the other teams aren't good enough to challenge their offence, but the bottom line is that I (and a large number of other people) don't enjoy their games. >Rob's point was simply that the offensive play of the Oilers is exciting >because it is fresh - they are probably the only team today which combines >an excellent offensive squad with a sound defense, rather than the reverse. > Ken Hruday I guess the ideal situation is to have a few great teams of both kinds, but the Oilers' offence is just so great that nobody can compete with it, so they rarely get involved in a real nail-biter, which is the type of hockey I enjoy the most. The Canadiens, on the other hand, play excellent hockey and they seem to be at their best in close games. They are sound both offensively and defensively, and their games expose enough offensive and defensive skills to keep me happy. I know it's not exactly what Rob said, but I'm tired of people saying that offensive hockey is exciting and defensive hockey is boring. The points I was trying to make were: - Defensive hockey can be just as exciting as offensive hockey and sometimes more so, provided you have enough knowledge of the game to appreciate defensive skills. - The competition factor is more important than the skills exhibited. - The Oilers are boring because their games lack competition and are full of goals that don't mean anything. - Offence doesn't guarantee excitement. >P.S. I'll bet you're a Maple Leafs fan! (:-)) You'd be surprised at how many people who live in Toronto are not Maple Leafs fans. (Actually, you wouldn't be too surprised if you saw them play a few times this season.) I'd love to see the Leafs get better so that I could support the home team, especially since they're on TV about 50 times a year here, but I'm not going to hold my breath as long as Harold Ballard is alive. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff
msc@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Murray Campbell) (05/09/85)
Jeff,
It seems that you have two (and maybe more) criteria for 'good'
hockey games:
1. The game should be close.
I am sure that everyone would agree that 'close' games have
more excitement value. 'Close' is, of course, a relative term.
If, for example, the Penguins were down two goals to the Flyers,
we no longer have a close game. If the Oilers were down two
goals to the Penguins, we still have a close game.
2. The teams should play at least competently (and hopefully brilliantly),
both offensively and defensively.
Again, who would argue?
If you think the Oilers are in general boring because they are
better than almost all the other teams, and the games are rarely close,
then I cannot find fault with your reasoning. Dominating teams are
usually interesting to watch, and are to be admired, but if they
are too dominating the excitement of competition is lost.
If, however, you find the Oilers boring because they choose to emphasize
offence over defence, then I suggest you you are unreasonably
prejudiced. Saying that the *real* way to play hockey is to
play defence like in the old days comes off sounding like some
bitter old guy from the 'old league' who is jealous of the huge
salaries of today.
I admit that I tend to get bored by teams that always shoot the
puck in, never send more than one man in deep, line up 4 or 5 guys
on the blue line, force the other team to shoot it in (and
immediately clear it to center ice), and only really try to
score on power plays. Especially when they play each other.
Obviously there must be a balance between offence and defence.
But saying that the balance must tip towards the defensive side
is dogmatic. I think there is a range on both sides for good
hockey.
Murray Campbell (msc@cmu-cs-k)