Changes to hockey

[OilKiller]

Not gonna happen. Regular season only.

So why implement something in the regular season that you are not comfortable with and do not want to see happen in the playoffs?

If a rule can't be implemented for ALL hockey games, then why bring it in at all. It makes no sense to have different rules for the regular season and the playoffs to me.

Shootouts are about the WORST idea the League has had in a long time.

 

[mr gib]

So why implement something in the regular season that you are not comfortable with and do not want to see happen in the playoffs?

If a rule can't be implemented for ALL hockey games, then why bring it in at all. It makes no sense to have different rules for the regular season and the playoffs to me.

Shootouts are about the WORST idea the League has had in a long time.

they're gonna do it in the regular season - the guy in nashville wants it -

 

[OilKiller]

they're gonna do it in the regular season - the guy in nashville wants it -

I know they WANT to do it, what I am saying is why implement a rule for the reg season and not the playoffs. The answer is "Gee, we don't want to see the SC awarded at the end of a shootout". So why the hell should a reg season game be decided that way? The reg season game could be one that eliminates one team from the playoffs and gets another team in...

 

[Weary]

I know they WANT to do it, what I am saying is why implement a rule for the reg season and not the playoffs. The answer is "Gee, we don't want to see the SC awarded at the end of a shootout". So why the hell should a reg season game be decided that way? The reg season game could be one that eliminates one team from the playoffs and gets another team in...

Having shootouts will make hockey all the rage in the U.S. They only want regular season hockey to be popular in America. The Stanley Cup playoffs can just be popular in Canada. They way they get popularity in two countries. It's genius!

The NHL: We do not make dollars nor do we make sense.

 

[Bauer83]

Personally I love the shootouts in the AHL. I have witnessed quite a few now, and
have watched my home team lose, but it is still better then going home after watching very boring hockey. And when my team ways, it just fills the building with excitement. I am sorry, but shootouts in Edmonton are very exciting, and that is for everyone in the building. I hope that they implement them in the regular season, as after a minnesota edmonton game, I need something to cheer about. Now I have been a fan since coming into this world, and was around for the early nineties hockey, so don't try and say I am just a brand new fan to the game. (I was around for the early 80's hockey, but a 4 year old can't retain that much) I have also played it my entire life, and thoroughly enjoyed shootouts. It sucks to lose in one, but sure does feel amazing to win in one.

Keep playoffs the same, as come playoff time it matters. And that is why fans will actually remain in their seats for 6 periods of hockey, and love every minute of it. But in the regular season, keep the 4 on 4 OT, and then head to a shootout. It will cause more teams like minnesota to actually have to try in the overtime period, cause if not they might get killed in a shootout.

 

[Gary Buttman]

I was at an MLS game decided by a shootout...it was the coolest thing I'd ever seen. I'd still keep the OTL so that the team that lost the shootout got a point for hanging on so long. I'd also keep the 5 minute OT and then tack on the shootout. I've warmed up to this idea as long as its regualr season only.

 

[Boltsfan2029]

I'll go for the shootout when baseball ties are broken with home run derbies and football games are decided by a field-goal competition between kickers.

I hate the idea of a shootout. If we have to have a winner, keep playing the 5-minute OTs until a goal goes in. Team sport, let the best *team* win.

 

[mr gib]

I know they WANT to do it, what I am saying is why implement a rule for the reg season and not the playoffs. The answer is "Gee, we don't want to see the SC awarded at the end of a shootout". So why the hell should a reg season game be decided that way? The reg season game could be one that eliminates one team from the playoffs and gets another team in...

its a purist thing at that point - i'm ambivalent -

 

[OilKiller]

Team sport, let the best *team* win.

 

[OilKiller]

its a purist thing at that point - i'm ambivalent -

Well, I guess I'm a purist then because I like the game the way it is. I don't see a need for a ton of changes. A well played 1-0 game can be just as exciting as a 7-6 game. Goals are not the only form of excitement in hockey.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

They don't ask fans to come from the stands to shoot on goaltenders to decide the outcome of a shootout. Anybody who's wearing a number on their sweater is a part of the team. So the shootout is all about the team concept.

It actually could be argued that the shootout is at the very essence of what sports, TEAM sports is all about. You have the pressure to do the job (goaltenders and shooters), and you have the cheering, unconditional support from the bench of their teammates. If everybody is on the same page, and nobody feels slighted about not participating in the shootout, that proves great team chemistry and probably good coaching and definitely great leadership. I'm sure there would be players NOT happy if they don't shoot, but again that comes with the territory of playing a team sport. If they don't like it, they could always play bowling, golf or squash.

I don't buy the argument that the shootout is anti-team. In fact, I think it's pro-team.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Well, I guess I'm a purist then because I like the game the way it is. I don't see a need for a ton of changes. A well played 1-0 game can be just as exciting as a 7-6 game. Goals are not the only form of excitement in hockey.

Yes, BUT how many GREAT 1-0 games can you honestly remember? Conversely, how many bad 7-6 games would you desperately want to forget.

And that's the difference.

 

[Boltsfan2029]

They don't ask fans to come from the stands to shoot on goaltenders to decide the outcome of a shootout. Anybody who's wearing a number on their sweater is a part of the team. So the shootout is all about the team concept.

It actually could be argued that the shootout is at the very essence of what sports, TEAM sports is all about. You have the pressure to do the job (goaltenders and shooters), and you have the cheering, unconditional support from the bench of their teammates. If everybody is on the same page, and nobody feels slighted about not participating in the shootout, that proves great team chemistry and probably good coaching and definitely great leadership. I'm sure there would be players NOT happy if they don't shoot, but again that comes with the territory of playing a team sport. If they don't like it, they could always play bowling, golf or squash.

I don't buy the argument that the shootout is anti-team. In fact, I think it's pro-team.

It might be pro-team if all 5 shooters were on the ice at once, passing to each other until one took a shot.

IMO, a single shooter going against a single goalie is an individual match-up.

 

[OilKiller]

Yes, BUT how many GREAT 1-0 games can you honestly remember? Conversely, how many bad 7-6 games would you desperately want to forget.

And that's the difference.

Nope, don't agree. There have been a ton of low scoring games that I have enjoyed. I love the big hit, the big defensive play or great save. There can be a ton of action going on in the game without a ton of goals being scored.

 

[Weary]

It actually could be argued that the shootout is at the very essence of what sports, TEAM sports is all about. You have the pressure to do the job (goaltenders and shooters), and you have the cheering, unconditional support from the bench of their teammates. If everybody is on the same page, and nobody feels slighted about not participating in the shootout, that proves great team chemistry and probably good coaching and definitely great leadership. I'm sure there would be players NOT happy if they don't shoot, but again that comes with the territory of playing a team sport. If they don't like it, they could always play bowling, golf or squash.

I don't buy the argument that the shootout is anti-team. In fact, I think it's pro-team.

So the essence of team sports is not about playing with your teammates -- it's about playing without them.

 

[Hoek]

I used to be very averse to the concept of the shootout, but I really think it's worth trying. Get rid of the tie stat altogether. Someone either wins or loses. Is it a little ridiculous to place that much worth on something that comes down to individuals and luck? Sure, but sports in general are ridiculous when you boil it down, and a lot of regulation and even playoff results occur just because of blind luck, too.

Soccer allows for even the World Cup to be decided on a shootout, and honestly as a soccer fan many of my favorite, most memorable games ended in them and I'm glad they did. Did it feel cheap when the U.S. women's team won the '99 final on penalties? Not at all, it was exhilarating. The '94 mens final turned out to be a sour defining moment for Roberto Baggio as he blasted one over the bar, costing Italy dearly. '90 semifinal between Italy and Argentina was the chance for the backup Sergio Goycochea to shine and become a national hero overnight. We are talking instant classic games.

I'm not saying to bring it to the playoffs, because that's not hockey (even though the Olympics can decide a game on a shootout), but at the same time I think people sell the concept short just because it's different. You'll get used to it and love it if you give it a chance.

 

[regdunlap7]

I know they WANT to do it, what I am saying is why implement a rule for the reg season and not the playoffs. The answer is "Gee, we don't want to see the SC awarded at the end of a shootout". So why the hell should a reg season game be decided that way? The reg season game could be one that eliminates one team from the playoffs and gets another team in...

Don't we have rules now that are different between the regular season and playoffs? Right now the regular season has ties and the playoffs don't. Do you suggest we have ties in the playoffs or should we let regular season games go until there is a winner?

 

[regdunlap7]

Well, I guess I'm a purist then because I like the game the way it is. I don't see a need for a ton of changes. A well played 1-0 game can be just as exciting as a 7-6 game. Goals are not the only form of excitement in hockey.

I agree with what you say, adding goals doesn't mean you've added excitement. But those 1-0 games you like probably had a lot of scoring chances and shots on net. A great save is exciting as a great goal, but a trapfest 1-0 game with 25 combined shots isn't exciting.

Also, I like the idea of the shootout but not for the obvious reason. I think the benefit will be that there will be lots of highlights for the ESPNs to show. It will give some players more personality and name recognition for the non-fan. If someone pulls off a move like Cammallieri did it will lead to more hockey highlights on newscasts and more exposure for the league. That's a good thing.

I don't see how a shootout takes anything away from a game that otherwise would have been an OT tie.

 

[mr gib]

Well, I guess I'm a purist then because I like the game the way it is. I don't see a need for a ton of changes. A well played 1-0 game can be just as exciting as a 7-6 game. Goals are not the only form of excitement in hockey.

well the first time your team loses a playoff series or the cup to a shootout - jeez - dunno - regular season though could spice things up a bit - and i have said this before but i'm not slighting them but there are no ties in american pro sports - they can't bet on them and they just don't understand - jim rome and skip bayliss continue to hammer that thing on the radio and i think they got through to me - i also agree on the 1 - 0 point your making but they don't get that either - they can't see the game in the game - like soccer - you know the inner beauty - it's a broad stroke but they are trying to get the - casual fan - dunno

 

[mr gib]

at the risk of getting raspberried - i just saw a great goal in the stj - ham - ahl game - i stand somewhat corrected - van giants on sportsnet in van tonight by the by - oh yeah - man u needs a keeper bad!

 

[Doctor Zoidberg]

So let's look at logic...

The overtime games were great, and THEN they added a point for OTL.

Players started riding out the ties and the game suffered.

NOW, for EXCITEMENT, rather than fixing a mistake (and allowing to call their gaffe a mistake), they institute a shootout, as if this was a peewee league and parents get to see shootouts which are soon to be buzzkills.

They never stop killing everything that was great about the game prior to the "fixing" Bettman started, killing the sport. Kill fighting, now there's more heinous injuries. Kill OT....now there will be more unsatisfactory games. Anything the rule guys (headed by a basketball guy) institute turns into an achilles heel for the game.

Fix it once and for all and bring back the rulebook from 1992-94, when the game WORKED.

What? Overtime games were great? In what century was this? Regular season overtime games always sucked because neither team would even bother trying to score, both were happy with 1 point. That's why the stupid 4 on 4 overtime rule came in. I say go to a shootout, winner gets 2 points, loser gets none. Enough with this 1 point for losing crap.

 

[mr gib]

What? Overtime games were great? In what century was this? Regular season overtime games always sucked because neither team would even bother trying to score, both were happy with 1 point. That's why the stupid 4 on 4 overtime rule came in. I say go to a shootout, winner gets 2 points, loser gets none. Enough with this 1 point for losing crap.

no ties - no points for loser - watching champions league soccer - away goals count double - hmmm

 

[Doctor Zoidberg]

no ties - no points for loser - watching champions league soccer - away goals count double - hmmm

Huh?

 

[Habsfan 32]

I don't like the idea of shoot out to decide the game. I think it's only good for movies like Mighty Ducks.

 

[mr gib]

Huh?

shoot outs in the regular season - no ties - no points for anyone for the tie going into the 5 minute overtime - thus - no points for the loser - in the champions league of soccer in europe they play a home and away two game knockout to advance towards the final - all away goals for the two games count double - so - if the away team wins 1 -0 in the first game - the away team in the second game can only win the series by winning by two goals - it can get stranger should there be more goals - i was just putting out the idea maybe all away goals in the nhl should count as two - also - as in soccer overseas all wins are worth 3 points -