NHL likely to implement shootouts, other changes

[Bring Back Bucky]

I think all these people crying about tradition and the shootout are unbelievable drama queens. If you don't like it don't watch it. They do it in Europe in the AHL, what's wrong with it? The team losing in the shootout will get the point anyway, if it's like they did in the AHL. The only problem I have with it is that it cheapens an actual penalty shot a bit, but other than that what's there to lose?

I think you're a newbie princess..

 

[Traitor8]

I heard that even though shoutouts were in the AHL this past season, the best teams still finished top of the league and the worst teams still sucked so it won't change much in the standings but will just add some excitement to the games....Also the value of having superstars will increase instead of just having grinders or wtv...

That said, the Champions League games between AC Milan and Liverpool was described by many as the best soccer game ever...and it was decided by shootouts...

Italia vs Brazil in World Cup 1994 was decided that way too..

Nhl is more similar to soccer then basketball or baseball because in basketball and baseball, it is much easier to score "a basket" or a run then it is in the NHL or Soccer.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

The big deal? The shoot-out isn't a little thing, the overtime loss point is not a little thing (we all saw how that didn't work). Just because its change does not make it a positive event. I'm sorry if placating ESPN for a loadable 5 second clip to cut hockey to a total of 4 minutes of hockey for an hour isn't my favorite part of the day. I love how people treat it as both inevitable and will be in hindsight the greatest thing for the sport. That's just plain stupid. I'm damn glad that I won't be foolish enough to pay $50 to see a contest end in a near random skills competition which effectively sells a 60-65 minute product on the two minute after a game is over. This is about selling hockey and the shootout is not hockey.

I mean, the Americans clearly love the shootout so much that the MLS stopped using it. Lets repeat that... a fringe sport in the US (as most people tell me hockey is fringe)... stopped using the shootout when they realized it pissed off the very same people that pay them lots of money in season tickets and merchandise. The MLS realized they had to stop pandering to those who don't care and focus on the real fans. The NHL still doesn't see this.

Let's just skip 3 years of that and pre-emptively eliminate the shootout.

Well you're right that just because something changes, it doesn't make it positive. But without attempting change, youll never know if something is going to turn out positive or negative, thats the whole point. What if the idea of a shootout at the end of a game really catches on and people love it? This could actually happen. Also, what could happen is that no one likes and they do end up getting rid of it. The point is, no reward without risk.

As far as myself is concerned whether the shootout is implemented or not, i'll be watching the NHL either way. If it is i'll give it a shot, hell chances are I may not like it either, but im willing to keep an open mind about things.

 

[Patman]

That said, the Champions League games between AC Milan and Liverpool was described by many as the best soccer game ever...and it was decided by shootouts...

Italia vs Brazil in World Cup 1994 was decided that way too..

With the champions league final you'd have to ignore that Liverpool came back from 3 goals down which is near impossible to do in soccer. You'd also need to ignore that Italy-Brazil was ROASTED in the US press after a 0-0 final that went to a shoot-out.

Also, (why do I need to do this again) you are more likely to die in a car accident than to have any one professional soccer match end in penalty kicks.

 

[Cawz]

As far as myself is concerned whether the shootout is implemented or not, i'll be watching the NHL either way. If it is i'll give it a shot, hell chances are I may not like it either, but im willing to keep an open mind about things.

That kind of thinking isnt allowed in hockey. Youre supposed to whine about tradition and talk about how great hockey was in the good old days blah blah blah.

I swear, hockey fans complain more than any other sports fan when it comes to rule changes/evolution.

 

[Hasbro]

It is regular season. Which consensus has it is next to useless anyway.

I was laying in wait for the old chestnut "It will unfairly reward skilled teams." But I'll go ahead and say GOD FORBID THE NHL DO ANYTHING TO TIP THE BALANCED TOWARDS SKILLED PLAYERS AND NOT SOME KNUCKLE DRAGGING CLUTCH AND GRAB CEMENT HEAD!!

 

[MykeAbner]

I don't see why people are comparing hockey to Soccer/Football/whatever. Yeah, those don't have shootouts. Guess what else they don't have? Pucks. Ice. Hockey sticks. Just because there aren't shootouts in baseball doesn't mean that they can't work in hockey.

On the other hand, change is terrible and there is no point in ever giving anything a chance. Imagine how bad things would be ten years from now if they tried the shootout next season then removed it the year after because it didn't work! Or what if shootouts work in hockey and the game improves because of it? Gah, we can't have that. Hockey should go back to having 7 skaters on the ice and be done with it.

 

[GSC2k2*]

What the heck is wrong with shoutouts? I give em to my homies all the time.

 

[ResidentAlien*]

It is regular season. Which consensus has it is next to useless anyway.

I was laying in wait for the old chestnut "It will unfairly reward skilled teams." But I'll go ahead and say GOD FORBID THE NHL DO ANYTHING TO TIP THE BALANCED TOWARDS SKILLED PLAYERS AND NOT SOME KNUCKLE DRAGGING CLUTCH AND GRAB CEMENT HEAD!!

I was trying to get through reading this whole thread before I commented, but i have to say - Great Post

 

[Spankatola Jamnuts*]

What kind of a "hard core" fan is going to stop going to games because of shootouts anyway? I don't see why shootouts are any more arbitrary than ties. You have to figure out something to do with games where 60 minutes didn't decide anything...ties, shootouts, duels at 15 paces. To me, ties just don't feel done.

 

[coppernblue]

College football does have a "shoot-out" style system to decide games.

not really
college footballs overtime is a much better system then the NFLs
the NFLs if you win the coin toss ur guarnteed a posession so if you march down field and hit the 30 yard line u nail a field goal and u win, just after winning the coin toss
college football lets the opposing team get a posession after the team that won the coin toss so each team has equal posessions

 

[London Knights]

No, it won't. It'll take all of ONE game before some short-sighted chumps in the media, the front offices, and here online will be whining over-officiating.

I have to agree. I don't want to see 14-17 powerplays per team. It is just as boring to watch as obstruction. The problem is I can't trust the referees and the league to keep it up long enough to stop the obstruction. Power plays can be interesting when there is action but the constant whistles take all flow away from the game and it is just as unbearable to watch.

The real solution to the game is to get good officials for the junior leagues so that obstruction is learned out of the players in junior hockey instead of at the NHL level.

I don't like shootouts. It's fine, but how stupid is it if your team misses the playoffs because a team won more shootouts than them. I'm fine with it being used as a potential tiebreaker which doesn't count in the standings unless head-to-head doesn't break a tie but I am not in favour of teams being given a point for it. It's just as bad as the point for losing in overtime.

 

[jacketracket*]

I'm holding out hope that the league won't go to shootouts.

 

[King_Brown]

Im not a fan of the shootout but its coming. So lets do something to try to avoid going to a SO. Regulation win 3 pts, OT win 2 pts and SO win 1 pt. Loss=0 pts. THey should move to a soccer style OT, 2 halfs, 5 minutes each first 5, 4 on 4 and next half 3 of 3.

 

[Morbo]

Shootouts are stupid. Hockey is supremely a team sport and to have to face the possibility of losing home ice advantage or a division title, or even miss the playoffs entirely over a shootout is just ridiculous.

 

[Spankatola Jamnuts*]

Shootouts are stupid. Hockey is supremely a team sport and to have to face the possibility of losing home ice advantage or a division title, or even miss the playoffs entirely over a shootout is just ridiculous.

Whatever. Shootouts = ties = slapping each other in the nuts until someone pukes to determine who wins. If neither team is better at playing regulation hockey, you have to do something. You can say, "okay, no one wins, that was fun," which in my view is no more stupid than saying, "okay, shoot the puck until the score is uneven."

 

[Joey13]

The big deal? The shoot-out isn't a little thing, the overtime loss point is not a little thing (we all saw how that didn't work). Just because its change does not make it a positive event. I'm sorry if placating ESPN for a loadable 5 second clip to cut hockey to a total of 4 minutes of hockey for an hour isn't my favorite part of the day. I love how people treat it as both inevitable and will be in hindsight the greatest thing for the sport. That's just plain stupid. I'm damn glad that I won't be foolish enough to pay $50 to see a contest end in a near random skills competition which effectively sells a 60-65 minute product on the two minute after a game is over. This is about selling hockey and the shootout is not hockey.

I mean, the Americans clearly love the shootout so much that the MLS stopped using it. Lets repeat that... a fringe sport in the US (as most people tell me hockey is fringe)... stopped using the shootout when they realized it pissed off the very same people that pay them lots of money in season tickets and merchandise. The MLS realized they had to stop pandering to those who don't care and focus on the real fans. The NHL still doesn't see this.

Let's just skip 3 years of that and pre-emptively eliminate the shootout.

I disagree. IMO there is noting worse than spending $150 to go to a game that ends in a 1-1 tie. A tie is the most worthless feeling in sports. That problem is compounded by teams falling into the trap the last 10 minutes and playing what looks more like clutch and grab than hockey.

If it is about selling the game I think this will help. Four minutes on ESPN may be more than we see right now. They are not going to show highlights of Richard Matvichuk tackling a "skill" player to keep him from scoring. More ESPN could improve the likelihood of TV exposure and help the game. God knows it is needed.

I could care less about what soccer did. The NHL needs to be like the other leagues and change rules to promote offense. I have seen shoot-outs in minor league games and been in shoot-outs in hockey leagues and they are exciting. Fans love them and I think it is about the fans.

Finally, going to shootouts would allow a fix to the worst idea in hockey....the overtime loss point column in the standings. A team being 12-3-4-2 is preposterous. Bring on the shootouts and add the aspect that players won't wear helmets. Marketing SKILLED players is what the NHL needs.

 

[FLYLine27*]

How about.....5 minutes OT 4 on 4....then if no goal 5 minutes of 3 on 3...then shootout...that way Shootouts will barley happen. Shootouts are a joke. But they are coming...hopefully once the NHL realizes that no new fans will be drawn by this gimmick and they will get rid of them a year later...i can only hope.

 

[Spankatola Jamnuts*]

How is 3 on 3 not a gimmick?

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

I think you're a newbie princess..

Can you elaborate on how that line means that I'm a newbie?

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

It is regular season. Which consensus has it is next to useless anyway.

I was laying in wait for the old chestnut "It will unfairly reward skilled teams." But I'll go ahead and say GOD FORBID THE NHL DO ANYTHING TO TIP THE BALANCED TOWARDS SKILLED PLAYERS AND NOT SOME KNUCKLE DRAGGING CLUTCH AND GRAB CEMENT HEAD!!

Don't you read these boards? Big grinders are in skilled players because they may not be 6-4 are out. Men with too much testosterone drool over big grinders, and think that skill players are little wusses.

P.S. Regarding it not working I don't understand why not. Why would it make the NHL lose fans? Because some conservative die hard fans won't like it, give me a break. If they're really die hards nothing will make them lose fans. If they're not conservative die hards then they either won't care or will embrace this. Of course some fans will be lost, if you go by the laws of averages, but I would think more will be gained, although not that many.

 

[King'sPawn]

I'm not a fan of the shootout, but IF shootouts are used, it should only be after five minutes of OT.

And I'd prefer it to be 5-on-5 OT, not 4-on-4.

And get rid of the stupid OTL point.

 

[SedinFan*]

3 minutes 4 on 4, 3 minutes 3 on 3, then the shootout.

Is this shootout going to be ONLY during the regular season?

 

[Shakhan]

I'm all for the shootout, I think it sucks to goto a game and have it end in a tie.

If anything this will be a big plus for hockey, since sportscenter will flash hockey more!

 

[MykeAbner]

3 minutes 4 on 4, 3 minutes 3 on 3, then the shootout.

Is this shootout going to be ONLY during the regular season?

Of course. They just want to eliminate the worthlessness of a tie.