jrh31584 Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 Here's how they should do it. Each game a total of 3 points is awarded. 3- For a Regulation Win2- Overtime/Shootout win1- Overtime/Shootout Loss0- For a Regulation Loss. It gives teams incentive to go for the regulation win has a reg. wins recieves more points than an overtime win. Makes for an exciting finish to regulation, especially late in the season where teams would need the points. This is what I would go with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 The best idea is simply the one that made sense for so many years...All wins - 2 ptsAll losses - 0 ptsAll ties - 1 ptIf a game remains tied after three 20 minute periods, play 5 minutes of 5-5 OT sudden death hockey.I hate how they changed the game and made it 4-4 in OT, and now they've changed it even more with the shoout out so that you can lose the game when your not even playing real hockey.And ever since the 1 pt just for making it to OT idea was implemented I've thought it sucked. Why are some games worth 3 pts and the others are worth just 2? That's dumb.As for it being boring, whatever. I think defense can be great, and I think ties can be great. If teams wanna settle for 1 pt, fine, let them. But the new rules on the ice will automatically make a difference in how boring the games are.Maybe it's just me, but I just think OT should be a short extension of regulation time to try and decide a winner. It shouldn't differ from the rest of the game. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 HOW ABOUT YOU EITHER WIN OR LOSE THE GAME.[Mod edit-- There was no need for that.] ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Clemente Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 HOW ABOUT WE ALL SHUT UP AND JUST COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW BAD OUR TEAMS ARE THAT THEY CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF NEW RULES???--Roger "Time?" Clemente.[Mod edit-- Nor that.] Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMMF Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 HOW ABOUT WE ALL SHUT UP AND JUST COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW BAD OUR TEAMS ARE THAT THEY CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF NEW RULES???--Roger "Time?" Clemente. [Mod edit-- Nor that.]Except for Dallas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 HOW ABOUT WE ALL SHUT UP AND JUST COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW BAD OUR TEAMS ARE THAT THEY CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF NEW RULES???--Roger "Time?" Clemente.[Mod edit-- Nor that.] New rules...old rules...I got nothing...nothing but next year... JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randyc Posted April 13, 2006 Share Posted April 13, 2006 well if the NHL went the NBA and MLB way to just W-L this years playoff race(s) would look like this-WESTERN CONFERENCE---GP-- W-L --GB1. x-Detroit---78--- 55-23 --- -2. x-Dallas---79--- 52-27 --- 3.53. x-Calgary---79--- 45-34 --- 10.54. Nashville---79--- 46-33 --- 9.55. Colorado---79--- 43-36 --- 12.56. Anaheim---79--- 42-37 --- 13.57. San Jose---78--- 41-37 --- 148. Vancouver---79--- 41-38 --- 14.5-----9. Los Angeles---79--- 40-39 --- 15.510. Edmonton---80--- 39-41 --- 1711. Minnesota---80--- 38-42 --- 18EASTERN CONFERENCE---GP-- W-L --GB1. x-Ottawa---79--- 51-28 --- -2. x-Carolina---79--- 51-28 --- -3. x-NY Rangers---79--- 44-35 --- 74. Buffalo---79--- 49-30 --- 25. Philadelphia---78--- 43-35 --- 7.56. New Jersey---79--- 43-36 --- 87. Tampa Bay---79--- 42-37 --- 98. Montreal---79--- 41-38 --- 10-----9. Atlanta---78--- 39-39 --- 11.510. Toronto---78--- 38-40 --- 12.511. NY Islanders---78--- 35-43 --- 15.512. Florida---79--- 35-44 --- 16since i'm a Canucks fan right now this would look best but that's being bias, i'm sure Leafland would be more excited with this way too but its not this way. also with the W-L format, it would make the playoff races in both conferences even more exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
friarcanuck Posted April 13, 2006 Share Posted April 13, 2006 I like the points system. It's still leaving the Canadian feel, like the CFL. I could really care less how many point is awarded for a win-loss-tie-regulation tie-overtime loss as long as wins are worth more that ties, etc and you get nothing for a loss.Just keep it so when you add up the number of wins, losses and overtime losses they equal the number of games played. Back when they had regulation ties the numbers didn't add up and it looked stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Of course W-L would lead to the most exciting races, but apparently a decisive conclusion is not the Canadian way of doing things!I mean, I just don't get why some of you are offering these contrived systems of "okay, you can get up to five points per period depending on your lead, how many penalties you got, and overall skating technique as rated by a panel of judges, and then one extra point for overtime, and two for a shootout, unless the game is in March, in which case all point values are doubled..." and so on. I suggest:1) 10-minute overtime2) Shootout3) The winning team is credited with a win. The losing team is credited with a loss.An extra five minutes reduces the chance of a shootout while still making sure that the game ends with a winner and a loser. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avenger Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 My ideal situation would be that you get a point for a shootout loss, but not an overtime loss.To me, losing in overtime is losing in an actual hockey game. In my mind, shootouts are a lot less hockey and a lot more of a seperate skills competition. I think they're exciting to watch, but I don't think a team should play as good as another team for 65 minutes, only to come away with nothing because an individual player got lucky on a forced breakaway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. no funny nickname Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I really don't like this now, the point of having the shootout (which I hate) was so that every game has a winner.The reason for the OT loss point was so that teams would be encoraged to go for the win in OT and not play dump & chase (minus the chase).No way should there be 3 points for a win, 2 points etc. Next thing you know we will have a BCS system for NHL playoffs.The problem isn't ties, the NFL has ties, the problem is 5 minuts of OT is not enough most of the time for teams to go for the win.If I had my way, I would have either 20 minutes of 5 on 5 OT, or 10 minutes of 4 on 4 overtime. That way ties would be less frequent. Still give out 1 point for a tie and 2 points for a win and nothing for a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Clemente Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I really don't like this now, the point of having the shootout (which I hate) was so that every game has a winner.The reason for the OT loss point was so that teams would be encoraged to go for the win in OT and not play dump & chase (minus the chase).No way should there be 3 points for a win, 2 points etc. Next thing you know we will have a BCS system for NHL playoffs.The problem isn't ties, the NFL has ties, the problem is 5 minuts of OT is not enough most of the time for teams to go for the win.If I had my way, I would have either 20 minutes of 5 on 5 OT, or 10 minutes of 4 on 4 overtime. That way ties would be less frequent. Still give out 1 point for a tie and 2 points for a win and nothing for a loss. I think the main problem with having another full OT period is it would wreak havoc on double-header time slots. (Particularly HNIC which, aside from the playoffs, has not had an early contest continue past the start of the late contest for the past five years.)--Roger "Time?" Clemente. Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winters in buffalo Posted April 20, 2006 Author Share Posted April 20, 2006 Well, it happened. The Canucks & Kings both missed the cut, despite having a better W-L record than the Oilers, who made it. In the East, Tampa & Montreal would have been flipped in the seedings if it was just W-L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBGKon Posted April 20, 2006 Share Posted April 20, 2006 In the East, Tampa & Montreal would have been flipped in the seedings if it was just W-L. Only if that were the way things panned out, I feel confident that the Bolts can beat both Ottawa of Carolina, but I'd feel a bit more confident if we were playing the 'Canes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.