Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
Playmaker-ch1

Overtime

Recommended Posts

we all hate games that end in a tie!! The only reason we have this thread is because for the last three seasons we stink at shootouts. if we had one them all this thread wouldn't exist.

I've actually got no problem with ties. But there really isn't a good way to deal with them once you've decided they are a problem. Any solution will involve either really lengthening games or turning the final result into a skill competition, because lets face it 3 on 3 is just as gimmicky as the shootout. But they're not going anywhere so we're just going to have to deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The multiple pucks is easy: 2 hands, 2 sticks, 2 pucks. I think in this case, both the shooter and the goalie are blindfolded.
Maybe the team mascots could face-off in the shootout? Against the Canadiens, I think Stormy could've easily covered more of the net than Cam. And Montreal's Youppi seems to have lost a step over the years...can't imagine that old redbeard has much of a shot either...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Missed an option some may like:

5 minutes of 4 on 4 followed by sudden death 3 on 3.(penalties do NOT carry over) (It is unlikely this will take very long).

Added Caveat- Any penalty in the 3 on 3 period is penalty shot.

I have said this is my prefered was of settling a game for yrs. I think it would be very exciting, and someone will score in a short period of time. And fans would be able to see players and and goalies at their best with all of the open ice. Also I have heard goalies don't like the shoot out, mostly due to the possibility of injury. I also like the 3-2-1 point system with ties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I voted for how it is today, altho I'd like to see the point system change to where you get 3 points for winning in regulation, 2 points for OT/SO win, 1 point for OT/SO loss and 0 points for regulation loss.

-or-

1 point each for the tie

1 point each for the overtime tie. (10 minute sudden death period 4 on 4)

1 point to the winner in the shoot out win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this idea... since shootouts are supposed to prevent multiple overtimes and prevent games from going until 3 AM, why not use them as such? A 5 minute 4 v 4 overtime is BS.. you cant even get a cycle going before the time runs out...

Hows this for as simple as it gets.. a full 20 minute, 5 v 5 overtime. If still tied after one OT pull out the shootout. The 5 minute OT is nothing but a chance for star players to sit on the bench and catch thier breaths while the goalies get worn the heck out.

If you went this way, nearly every game would be decided in the course of the OT, but I bet several games would still result in Shootouts.. especially low scoring games like a 0-0 tie or a 1-1 tie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You gotta understand the history behind this.

First OT was 5 Min (and it will never and should be longer than that) and 5 on 5. Two points for a win, 1 for a tie. Nothing for a loss.

You think hockey was boring when teams were up 3 or 4 goals with the old rules? You should seen OT. No one tried to score unless they REALLY needed two points. Instead, it was mainly dump it in and try to protect your point.

The NHL realized there was a problem and then made it 4 on 4 with the same amount of points. Sure, with fewer people on the ice this created a bit faster game and by all means made for less ties, but still teams weren't going for it.

The NHL then was like screw it, you get a point if you lost in OT or if you tie. This gave teams a reason to go for it and man OT got exciting. However, a four column record (wins - losses - ties - OT loss) looked silly.

The NHL then came up with the "must be a winner" idea and here we have shootouts. I would say that 75% of that decision being made was b/c it was post lockout. Hockey now had something cool and something that no matter how much you didn't like hockey, you were intrigued by this. Also, goals like the Marik Malek goal became instant SportsCenter Top 10 plays.

I think the current format is best but needs a bit of tweaking. I have no issues with a team losing in a shootout or in OT as long as they get a point. If you say that if you make it to the shootout you will at least get a point but if you lost in OT you won't, you will have the same ideas as you did before - sit around and wait for the shootout.

However I also don't think that a shootout should count the same as a win in regulation. You should get 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OT Win and 1 point for an OT loss. I believe this is the most popular idea out there. Due to the nature of hockey, I will never support a longer OT period or not awarding a team for making it to an OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However I also don't think that a shootout should count the same as a win in regulation. You should get 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OT Win and 1 point for an OT loss. I believe this is the most popular idea out there. Due to the nature of hockey, I will never support a longer OT period or not awarding a team for making it to an OT.

This is the point allocation that I like. Every game should be worth the same ammount of points. If you need to award 2 for an shootout win and 1 for a shootout loss, then a regulation or OT period win should be worth 3 points. To my miniscule intellect, that seems to make a lot of sense. It puts the pressure on a team to take care of business in regulation or the 5 minute overtime. The shootout would then still provide "closure" for the fans and players, but not by awarding more points than a regulation win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't really like the fact that it comes down to a skills competition..

i don't like a tie..

and i think that continuous would add too much more "wear and tear" to the regular season.. just imagine how many regular season 2,3,and 4 OT games there would be considering how many there are usually in the playoffs. and what if you have a back to back situation and you have a 4OT game then a game the day after??

i say full period of OT (20 min.) and then MAYBE a shootout, but make it 5 shooters.

if anything extend the shootout from 3 shooters each to 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we all hate games that end in a tie!! The only reason we have this thread is because for the last three seasons we stink at shootouts. if we had one them all this thread wouldn't exist.

Sorry but we dont all hate games in a tie --- I went to my first Hockey game in 1975 , it ended in a tie --- Some of the best games I ever attended ended in ties.

Although I voted for option 3 - I prefer the unlisted option , No regular season OT and games that end in a tie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry but we dont all hate games in a tie --- I went to my first Hockey game in 1975 , it ended in a tie --- Some of the best games I ever attended ended in ties.

Although I voted for option 3 - I prefer the unlisted option , No regular season OT and games that end in a tie.

Agreed we dont all hate ties (in fact so far 18 of us dont hate ties and 32 of us hate the shootout) and this life raft argument being used that this wouldn't be discussed if we didnt suck at the shootout is ridicolous. This is a topic on this forum every single season and even when we win it's lame to me. You can go and read all last seasons shootout GDT's if you'd like I made dern sure to express what I thought of the shootout even after a win so I couldnt be horse collared by the lame excuse that I only complain because we suck at them.

Give me an idea on how to finish a team game as a team then were talking. 3 v 3 for 10 minutes would certaintly do that and would be far more exciting to see the wide open gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not lke the shootout for tweo reasons. One, it takes a team competition and reduces its outcome to an individual competition. Two, a shootout win should be be as valuable points-wise as a regulation win. If the NHL keeps the shootout, they really need to chane the way points are awarded. Say, 3 points for a regulation or sudden death win and twp for a shoutout win and one point for a suddent death or shoot out loss. It would not break my heart, however, to see the shootout go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add a full sudden death period for OT. The winner takes 2 points and the loser gets none because they shouldn't deserve one.

If the 4th period ends without a winner then NEITHER team gets a point.

Maybe they'll try harder next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Add a full sudden death period for OT. The winner takes 2 points and the loser gets none because they shouldn't deserve one.

If the 4th period ends without a winner then NEITHER team gets a point.

Maybe they'll try harder next time.

thats cruel lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hockey should protect its team status like basketball and football. You would never see a basketball game decided by a foul shot and can you imagine the outrage if the winner of a football game was decided on the last play or in overtime by the individual efforts of a field goal kicker? Ridiculous! B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to see 3 points for a regulation win, 3 1/2 points if win is on the back end of back-to-back games. 2 points for an overtime win, unless it is a shootout win where all the shooters were right handed against a left handed goalie. In that case, only 1 3/4 points should be awarded, though I'm not sure why. Also, if the shootout is still tied after three shooters, each additional shooter will get multiple pucks to shoot at the same time. I'm still trying to figure out how many points that should be worth. B)

If you pass go, do not collect a 1st round draft pick nor get a free get out the penalty box card. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No history here, no "I've been saying," just some thoughts after having read all of the good comments above. The regular season seems to be for revenue and paring down the field for the play-offs. If this is true, then devise the system that puts the best in the playoffs. Give some reward for being tied at the end of regulation. Play a full 5 minute overtime. Have a SO with 5 shooters. (more of a team effort there, less one or two Ovenchickens deciding games with their individual skills.)

The shoot-out is taken with the starting line and the starting D pairing. How much more team can you get for SO? (We should have some advantage with our D pairings, but not the reason.) Tied after one round of SO? Go to the next line and pair, etc. Nobody gets 'worn out' for the next night - which for the loser really is a severe penalty. Possible 2 loses after playing very well in the first game.

3 points for a regulation win (every game, not just OT games)

2 points for an OT/SO win

1 point for an OT/SO loss

While we are about it, how about 3 points for a goal, 2 points for the primary assist, 1 point for the secondary assist. I can see the flaws in that from here, but it has occurred to me numerous times. A sacrifice fly doesn't count the same as a hit in baseball and a good block doesn't count as a TD in football. Just a passing thought, not a recommendation for change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hockey should protect its team status like basketball and football. You would never see a basketball game decided by a foul shot and can you imagine the outrage if the winner of a football game was decided on the last play or in overtime by the individual efforts of a field goal kicker? Ridiculous! B)

I can't really resist. Football games are decided by the kicker on the last play all the time.

Anything other than constant sudden death is gimicky, and ending in ties dampens the drama. I think it would be interesting to see 3 on 3 full ice, since you never see that in a game and it is still somewhat of a team effort. It may kill the participants though. Still, if they did it for even 4 minutes before the shootout it might be interesting, but who knows, we've never seen it. The shootout is dramatic, and I do think that most of us hate it because our team is turrible at it.

In the end though, they'll stick with the shootout. I do agree with the 3 point system though. Teams should be encouraged to go for the regulation win, and the regulation win should be worth more than the overtime win. This allows some reward for killing a team 7-1 vs eaking out a shootout win. Plus, there will be a constant number of points awarded. What is totally weird in the NHL is that there can be 2 or 3 points for any game, and in the end that affects who makes the playoffs. That randomness creates the "not a real sport" notion. 3 points up for each and every game.

Win in regulation and grab all 3.

Lose in regulation zero.

Win in OT get 2.

Lose in OT get 1.

Always 3 points per game.

It makes so much sense it hurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't really resist. Football games are decided by the kicker on the last play all the time.

Remkin, At least on the field goal you've got the whole team playing. The snap has to be right, the holder has to catch and set, the blockers have to hold the line, and th kick has to be good. Sure, fottball games are decided on a last minute field goal all the time, but it is a team effort. Just ask Tony Romo.

I think RedStorm's point was imagine deciding the outcome by having the kicker set up by himself at say the 20 and attempt an unimpeded kick to win what should be a team game.

I also like the three point suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NONE OF THOSE OPTIONS....

ive been preaching this for 4 years now....5 minutes of 4-on-4, 5 minutes of 3-on-3, THEN shootout.

and for god's sake, if we keep it like it is now, make it 5 shooters. this 3v3 nonsense is ridiculous.

This, but with no shootout. Play 3 on 3 until somebody scores. If you saw the Youngstars game last year you know it won't take long at all.

By the way, anybody notice the college Football OT format? It's basically a shootout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hockey should protect its team status like basketball and football. You would never see a basketball game decided by a foul shot and can you imagine the outrage if the winner of a football game was decided on the last play or in overtime by the individual efforts of a field goal kicker? Ridiculous! B)

umm im not sure, but i belive that there have been many b-ball and foot ball games won with a free throw and a field goal in ot. maybe your point was mistaken by the way you said it. no no other game has been won due to 1 player taking a shot on the goal. but no other major sport in our county save soccer has someone tending the goal. in this case one could argue that it would be better to see baseball go 9 innings then a home run durby following. i understand the need to shorten ot, the river rats last year played 2 whole games 1 in regulation and 1 in ot. i think 1 20 min ot sudden death period and then a shoot out, would be the best thing. imo. as far as the points. 1 point is given to each team for making it to ot, not losing. another point is given for the win. but some of you are right, why award points for the losing team. were the only sport that does, were also the only sport who takes a man away for a penalty. maybe other sports would be more interesting if penalties were done the same. i know football and basketball would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, anybody notice the college Football OT format? It's basically a shootout.

I would say College Football OT is closer to giving each team a powerplay and seeing who scores. Then if both or neither score you do it again until someone gets an advantage. The real closest thing to the shootout is Penalty Kicks in soccer, and people complain about them for the same reason as the shootout, you are deciding a game with a skill competition. But at least, unlike soccer, it isn't used in the playoffs to decide games.

As long as ties aren't allowed, the shootout really is the only realistic option because of back to back games against different opponents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...