Display posts from previous
Sort by

Re: Hull Said (On the radio) There Are Too Many Teams

5 by barnburner
blueslifer wrote:I think he's nuts. Look at the quality of players now compared to the 80's and 90's. It's not even close. Steve Ott is a fourth-liner on this team but would likely be on the top line on most Blues teams from that era. If you don't believe me, go back and look at those rosters. They were chock full of horrible players by today's standards.
The quality of players, in all sports, improves over the years. Players from the 70s and 80s, if they were starting out now, would be better than they were in their era.

Have to disagree with you on Ott. I like Ott, but I cannot imagine him being a first liner on any Blues team ever. The thing you have to keep in mind, is if Ott had played in those years, he would not have been as good as he is today. Training methods, nutrition, equipment, etc all factors.

Re: Hull Said (On the radio) There Are Too Many Teams

8 by blueslifer
barnburner wrote:
blueslifer wrote:I think he's nuts. Look at the quality of players now compared to the 80's and 90's. It's not even close. Steve Ott is a fourth-liner on this team but would likely be on the top line on most Blues teams from that era. If you don't believe me, go back and look at those rosters. They were chock full of horrible players by today's standards.
The quality of players, in all sports, improves over the years. Players from the 70s and 80s, if they were starting out now, would be better than they were in their era.

Have to disagree with you on Ott. I like Ott, but I cannot imagine him being a first liner on any Blues team ever. The thing you have to keep in mind, is if Ott had played in those years, he would not have been as good as he is today. Training methods, nutrition, equipment, etc all factors.
We'll have to agree to disagree then, which is fine. Using Ott as an example probably wasn't the best way to illustrate my point, I'll give you that. My point was is there were a lot more scrubs and goons playing then than there are now. The league is more talent-rich than ever. If Hull thinks talent is watered down now what the heck is he expecting, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen?

Re: Hull Said (On the radio) There Are Too Many Teams

9 by barnburner
blueslifer wrote:
barnburner wrote:
blueslifer wrote:I think he's nuts. Look at the quality of players now compared to the 80's and 90's. It's not even close. Steve Ott is a fourth-liner on this team but would likely be on the top line on most Blues teams from that era. If you don't believe me, go back and look at those rosters. They were chock full of horrible players by today's standards.
The quality of players, in all sports, improves over the years. Players from the 70s and 80s, if they were starting out now, would be better than they were in their era.

Have to disagree with you on Ott. I like Ott, but I cannot imagine him being a first liner on any Blues team ever. The thing you have to keep in mind, is if Ott had played in those years, he would not have been as good as he is today. Training methods, nutrition, equipment, etc all factors.
We'll have to agree to disagree then, which is fine. Using Ott as an example probably wasn't the best way to illustrate my point, I'll give you that. My point was is there were a lot more scrubs and goons playing then than there are now. The league is more talent-rich than ever. If Hull thinks talent is watered down now what the heck is he expecting, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen?
No doubt there are fewer no talent goons than before, but I think that is in great part to the rule changes in response to the changing legal climate. Nothing draws the casual fans like bench clearing brawls. If the league hasn't been forced to make changes, I suspect we would still be playing thug hockey today.

Re: Hull Said (On the radio) There Are Too Many Teams

16 by MissouriMook
Turk Sanderson wrote:After today's debacle, I'm thinking that adding more teams, would dilute an already shallow pool of quality on-ice officials even further.
I think I've mentioned this before, but many retired players have mentioned over the years that the 2 referee system was a mistake because of how it diluted the talent pool in on-ice officials. Tim Peel and Ian Walsh are simply exhibits A & B in that argument.

Re: Hull Said (On the radio) There Are Too Many Teams

17 by Turk Sanderson
MissouriMook wrote:
Turk Sanderson wrote:After today's debacle, I'm thinking that adding more teams, would dilute an already shallow pool of quality on-ice officials even further.
I think I've mentioned this before, but many retired players have mentioned over the years that the 2 referee system was a mistake because of how it diluted the talent pool in on-ice officials. Tim Peel and Ian Walsh are simply exhibits A & B in that argument.
I absolutely hate it...it clogs up the ice, and they rarely communicate in an attempt to get the play correct. Usually the guy that;s a hundred feet away from the play makes a bad call, and the guy ten feet away keeps his mouth shut so that his fellow ref doesn't look bad.

Re: Hull Said (On the radio) There Are Too Many Teams

18 by DJ Axeom
Battra wrote:During the second intermission, he was talking to Chase and said that there were bad players on every team and because of that, there are too many teams.

There has always been and will always be stinkers in the NHL.

It's just the nature of things.

What say you?
Well, Hullie's right... if all you want are a few all-star teams.

Brett's dead wrong, if that's what he said. Hockey is a glorious expression of "Passion and Chaos" (which is the name of my first album when I actually try to start writing the music)

MORE HOCKEY IS GOOD. LESS IS BAD. Just sayin'.
Post Reply

Return to “Hockey”