BigMac12 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Why not just have the simple situation of 3 for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss, and ditch the shootout? I figure that in overtime, coaches will risk one point in an attempt to get three, assuming that they keep overtime. (They can ditch OT and I wouldn't care any)Because nobody wants a tie anymore. If NHL brings it back, a whole lot of fans, I included, would feel betrayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Why not just have the simple situation of 3 for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss, and ditch the shootout? I figure that in overtime, coaches will risk one point in an attempt to get three, assuming that they keep overtime. (They can ditch OT and I wouldn't care any)Because nobody wants a tie anymore. If NHL brings it back, a whole lot of fans, I included, would feel betrayed.Now a bunch of people in this thread alone have said they rather see ties than a shootout. I think that debunks your nobody theory. As far as shootout it gives you a winner in name only. The team didn't actually win the game because the shootout has nothing to do with what actually happened in the game. Like I said before it is removed from both the team aspect of hockey and the momentum of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Why not just have the simple situation of 3 for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss, and ditch the shootout? I figure that in overtime, coaches will risk one point in an attempt to get three, assuming that they keep overtime. (They can ditch OT and I wouldn't care any)Because nobody wants a tie anymore. If NHL brings it back, a whole lot of fans, I included, would feel betrayed.Now a bunch of people in this thread alone have said they rather see ties than a shootout. I think that debunks your nobody theory. As far as shootout it gives you a winner in name only. The team didn't actually win the game because the shootout has nothing to do with what actually happened in the game. Like I said before it is removed from both the team aspect of hockey and the momentum of the game.This 3-1-0 system is actually quite intriguing. It makes it worthwhile going after the win, because you're going to average ending up with 1.5 points in the long run instead of just 1 pt.That said, I prefer the 3-2-1-0 system myself. Four-on-four OT is wonderful, and the shootout is fun for most fans, although 4-on-4 until the game ends usually shouldn't take that long either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why dosnt the nhl do what every other sports league does and have continous overtime dont stop untill there is a winner. they do it in the playoffs why not in the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why dosnt the nhl do what every other sports league does and have continous overtime dont stop untill there is a winner. they do it in the playoffs why not in the regular season.Because that would leave the players dead tired for the next game? On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why dosnt the nhl do what every other sports league does and have continous overtime dont stop untill there is a winner. they do it in the playoffs why not in the regular season.Because that would leave the players dead tired for the next game?they do it in the mlb and in the nhl you usally get a day of before the next game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HatManTC Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 That is bad analogy. Score is kept but at the end of the allotted time the team come out even. A game gives you more of an indication of how each team played that night than a shouldn't which as I said before is completely removed from the game. There is no team work involved and there is no momentum carried in to it. It's a gimmick. If I'm watching a great game that goes into OT I find myself praying for someone to score in the OT because a shootout would completely ruin how great a game it was. You might as well decide games by just rock, paper, scissors because that tells you as much about the game as a shootout does.well then they should either A. give more time or B. have mulitple OT periods until a winner is decided. Tie-ing a a horrible to end a contest. These games are meant to have Winners and Losers, not you both did your best so we'll reward you both, here's your point. why even play the game if your just gonna start handing out points for showing up. by RoscoeUA by gingerbreadman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why dosnt the nhl do what every other sports league does and have continous overtime dont stop untill there is a winner. they do it in the playoffs why not in the regular season.Because that would leave the players dead tired for the next game?they do it in the mlb and in the nhl you usally get a day of before the next gameEasy... MLB players aren't quite getting as tired as much as NHL players, most of the time the next MLB game is in the very same city.5 mins of 4 v 4Then alternate 2 mins of 5 v 3 until there's a winner.Now that's hockey. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net  "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred T. Jane Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why dosnt the nhl do what every other sports league does and have continous overtime dont stop untill there is a winner. they do it in the playoffs why not in the regular season.Someone needs to make sure MLS, NCAA Football and the NFL got the memo about everyone doing continuous overtime. I think they didn't get it... [Croatia National Team Manager Slavan] Bilic then went on to explain how Croatia's success can partially be put down to his progressive man-management techniques. "Sometimes I lie in the bed with my players. I go to the room of Vedran Corluka and Luka Modric when I see they have a problem and I lie in bed with them and we talk for 10 minutes." Maybe Capello could try getting through to his players this way too? Although how far he'd get with Joe Cole jumping up and down on the mattress and Rooney demanding to be read his favourite page from The Very Hungry Caterpillar is open to question. --The Guardian's Fiver, 08 September 2008 Attention: In order to obtain maximum enjoyment from your stay at the CCSLC, the reader is advised that the above post may contain large amounts of sarcasm, dry humour, or statements which should not be taken in any true sort of seriousness. As a result, the above poster absolves himself of any and all blame in the event that a forum user responds to the aforementioned post without taking the previous notice into account. Thank you for your cooperation, and enjoy your stay at the CCSLC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HatManTC Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why dosnt the nhl do what every other sports league does and have continous overtime dont stop untill there is a winner. they do it in the playoffs why not in the regular season.Someone needs to make sure MLS, NCAA Football and the NFL got the memo about everyone doing continuous overtime. I think they didn't get it...in college how man times since the OT rule change with alternating possesions has there been a tie?NFL need to drop their current OT format as is. so they werent a great example.and MLS, well its soccer so enough said lol by RoscoeUA by gingerbreadman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeytonManningRocks Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I have a couple ideas that might or might not work....Change OT during the regular season to 10 minutes, therefore you're more likely to have the game decided in the OT period.Or, just treat it like the playoffs and play every game until someone wins. This might get a lot of complaints, but considering the jump in scoring in the NHL, it shouldn't hurt that much.And regardless, this idea is important...... either you win or you lose. The standings should just read "Wins" and "Losses" I don't care if the points system and the tie have been around forever, that is one tradition that doesn't have to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 3 for a win, 1 for an overtime loss, and for the love of almighty would someone get rid of the fourth column already? (e.g., 32-18-4-4)I like the shootout. If you're going to resurrect tie games, drop both the shootout and the overtime period proceeding it. Might as well let everyone go home early from the arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB61 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 For those that have been complaining about the "fourth column", I believe they did away with that when they did away with ties -- OL's and SL's are grouped together into what used to be the third column.I like the 3-2-1-0 system, but I would either make the 2 and 1 pointers exclusive to the shootout, or I would eliminate OT and go right to the shootout. Playing that extra 5 (or 10) minutes knowing that you may still walk away with nothing will make things less conservative in the OT.If one were to bring ties back, I'd go to 3-1-0. It makes wins that much more valuable.Ultimately though, I'd like to see it go to strictly W-L. I'm surprised in Bettman's NBA-ing of the league that that hasn't happened yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I like the 3-2-1-0 system, but I would either make the 2 and 1 pointers exclusive to the shootout, or I would eliminate OT and go right to the shootout. Playing that extra 5 (or 10) minutes knowing that you may still walk away with nothing will make things less conservative in the OT.No, it will make things more conservative as teams will play cautious to get to the shootout and get a guaranteed point. Also, I wouldn't go right to the shootout as that's something that needs to be cut down on as that isn't hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
griffelh Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I do think something needs to be done, and the 3-2-1-0 system is the best compromise. It is currently intriniscly unfair that games that go to overtime end up awarding a total of 3 points while those decided in regularion award 2. It creates point inflation for overtime games and thereby penalizes teams that win games in overtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.