Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

[Nick]

Not with TBL's roster... holy stifle their high powered forwards...

and yes they were using it last year, yes it has been used since the dawn of time, however rarely to that extent with NO ONE crossing the offensive blue line, and essentially no one on attacking even past the red-line.

[Robin Hood]

Not with TBL's roster... holy stifle their high powered forwards...

and yes they were using it last year, yes it has been used since the dawn of time, however rarely to that extent with NO ONE crossing the offensive blue line, and essentially no one on attacking even past the red-line.

so what?

[Nick]

Its really shitty for the game of hockey... especially for a team that could be wicked exciting.

[Robin Hood]

Its really shitty for the game of hockey... especially for a team that could be wicked exciting.

The caps were wicked exciting to watch when OV was scoring 60 goals. Still exciting but a solid game plan is worth more when it comes to winning.

[Shep]

To a coach, winning > excitement.

[Nick]

Don't disagree there... am I wrong that with a forecheck and at least allowing the forwards to push, with the TBL roster they could push the pace of a game and win?

No harm in a 3rd line going extreme D, trap, committed 1-3-1 versus the Giroux line, but against every line? and with Stamkos-Vinny-MSL on a line together??? In run and gun I'd put that line against any line in the NHL...and they all play solid in their own zone!

[inferno31]

http://www.japersrink.com/2011/4/29/214 ... -the-1-3-1

Great link explaining the 1-3-1

Edit: Now thats from r/hockey Mike.

[Nick]

13 of 18 interviewed GM's blame TBL, 3 the flyers.

Good to hear the GMs value the game.

[Robin Hood]

that's a solid article neel.

[Robin Hood]

13 of 18 interviewed GM's blame TBL, 3 the flyers.

Good to hear the GMs value the game.

Blame TBL for what, Nick? I bet those GMs are bitching because their teams have to face that team.

[Nick]

Shiv do you think it's good for hockey?

[inferno31]

Shiv do you think it's good for hockey?

Is it good for hockey? Its part of hockey.. Its a tactic, fuck if its boring its boring but that doesn't mean it doesn't help a team win and isn't part of the game.

Is being able to ice the puck during a powerplay good for hockey? and so forth and so on. Some things aren't exciting, doesn't mean you need a rule to eliminate it. If you can't coach your team past it, responsibility lies at your feet.

[Nick]

And 13/15 GM's disagree with that view Neel. I remember the fucking dead puck era, it was lame. Going back towards that is bad for the sport I love.

[Scott]

I dunnio, I like the dead puck era. It was an aggressive style of hockey.

[Chris]

I agree with Scott. Hate to use the Millbury company line, but today's hockey has been pussified a bit.

[Nick]

What? Do you remember how slow it was? Or what happened when a road team was up by 1 or godforbid 2... Game was over!

I love the speed, the individual battles, and almost everything about our game. Refusing to forechecking or play past you own redline, ALL game, well... In that case I see nothing wrong with the flyers response.

[Shep]

:'(

[MSP4LYFE]

You guys miss the dead puck era? Sweet jesus...Games were over in the third period, especially on the road, the guest team would just hold back and protect the lead to close out the game, was a brutal, brutal style of hockey.

[Chris]

Kareem, weren't you in diapers then?

[Robin Hood]

Any tactic that helps you win is hockey. That's how I see it. I love watching Tampa play the 1-3-1 as much as I like any other style of play. Different strategies/styles are what keep it interesting.