NHL likely to implement shootouts, other changes

[Crazy_Ike]

The best solution would be to have games go to overtime, winner gets two points, loser gets zero, and if nobody scores (it stays a tie) *both* teams get zero points.

Bet they'd go all out in overtime (and before) if a tie was as bad as a loss....

 

[Muleskinner]

All I can say is, .......Whaaaaaaaa!!! You traditional dweebs kill me! Team sport, blah, blah... You want to ***** and whine about keeping ties?!? Why??? When the game comes down to the goalies..and both teams best shooters for the WIN, how is that not still a TEAM game? Explain. If the TEAM wanted to win it bad enough they could have done it in Regulation time. Guy's...all this is gonna do is put more pressure on teams to go all out to win the game in reg. It will also put pressure on GM's to go after the goalies and shooters that can get the job done if it comes to a shootout. Is that so wrong? Its still a team game...but with more importance on the goalies and shooters. There will be a RUN on players that might not be on your first line, but can fake a goalie and win the game. You guys gotta wake up here and smell the tv ratings. I love this sport and I also love the NHL. I want to see it grow like it should be growing like the other major sports leagues are. It's high time for changes like these to improve the game to the national audience. If you cant learn to accept it, just keep watching your local minor league team......OH, wait...they do shootouts too!

 

[King_Brown]

The whole point is to eliminate ties, people want a winner. Only in the NHL/CFL/NFL can there be ties. NFL and CFL rarley have ties, the NHL teams make the playoffs dependent on ties. Im not a shootout supourter, but if thats what it takes to get some more exposure to our game and players, then so be it. But I want them to do all they can to have a winner from 5 on 5, 4 on 4 and 3 on 3 before going to a shootout.

 

[me2]

The problem was just that going to overtime the point total for that game was only going to increase, while with proposals that reduce the point total going to overtime teams should try harder to win in regulation.

3 point regulation games gives 1 point more incentive to finish it early.

 

[helicecopter]

3 point regulation games gives 1 point more incentive to finish it early.

I know..where i said otherwise?
It's just that i consider a team losing the shootouts a team that has tied (not lost) the game, hence the system i would personally employ:
4pts for regulation win
3pts for OT win
2pts for shootout win
1pts for shootout loss

 

[Roots73]

They way I heard it from Tambelini is that is will go 4 on 4, then 3 on 3, then if no one scores, then it will go to a SO.
I would have to think that a 3 on 3 is going to have a goal 80% of the time, so I dont think the shootout will be as frequesnt as implied here IMO

Good point. 3 on 3 should solve the majority of ties in OT. Although I'm not in favor of the shootout, for the few times that it will happen it shouldn't make that much of a difference in point standings. At least not as much as the OTL point that is given under the current setup. The OTL point has got to go.

I'm more worried about the lack of info on removing the red line for two line passes. I've heard of the Sinden no line rules and altering blue lines, but no info on whether they are going to get rid of the two line pass. Anybody who watched the World Juniors knows that this should be the first rule instated to help open up the game. But it seems that the NHL brass it totally ignoring it.

If that's the case, that will be the biggest mistake the league can make with rule changes.

 

[LordHelmet]

This is another change I thought of, but it doesn't really deserve it's own topic so I figure I'll just tack it on to the end of this thread...

I've been watching some of the 'best of' telecast that Fox sports has been doing of the Stars' playoff run in '99. I just finished watching the first round series against Edmonton. The boards - or at least the ring around the bottom of them - were apparently 'springier' in Edmonton than in other arenas..

I also remember the same thing during last year's finals - one of the two rinks (Calgary if I remember right) had a notable spring off of the boards..

Anyway, in several of these games with 'springy' boards, I rememebr lots of scoring chances being created - especially on pucks shot in off the endboards. In my mind, the NHL should at least look at the idea of increasing & standardizing this aspect of various rinks.

The job of a defender is to take options away from the offensive player. A springy board at the end of the rink gives the defender one more option to take away. More spring in the boards would also add passing options in the neutral zone. It would also keep the puck out of the corners, reducing the frequency of puck-battles along the boards (something that newcomers see as boring).

I'm not talking about a drastic increase in the spring of the boards, just do a little bit and see what happens.

 

[Captain Lou]

This is another change I thought of, but it doesn't really deserve it's own topic so I figure I'll just tack it on to the end of this thread...

I've been watching some of the 'best of' telecast that Fox sports has been doing of the Stars' playoff run in '99. I just finished watching the first round series against Edmonton. The boards - or at least the ring around the bottom of them - were apparently 'springier' in Edmonton than in other arenas..

I also remember the same thing during last year's finals - one of the two rinks (Calgary if I remember right) had a notable spring off of the boards..

Anyway, in several of these games with 'springy' boards, I rememebr lots of scoring chances being created - especially on pucks shot in off the endboards. In my mind, the NHL should at least look at the idea of increasing & standardizing this aspect of various rinks.

The job of a defender is to take options away from the offensive player. A springy board at the end of the rink gives the defender one more option to take away. More spring in the boards would also add passing options in the neutral zone. It would also keep the puck out of the corners, reducing the frequency of puck-battles along the boards (something that newcomers see as boring).

I'm not talking about a drastic increase in the spring of the boards, just do a little bit and see what happens.

I'll follow up with something else in the same vein.

What about increasing the height of the glass behind the net (From goal line, around to goal line)? This would decrease the number of times that a puck would leave the ice, resulting in less faceoffs and less time for players to grab a rest. There would at least be more changing on the fly and less stoppages of play, and more chances for a bad line change, which will at minimum bring more continuous game action and perhaps more goal-scoring chances. It's all of those stoppages, one after another, that really slow the game down. Also, why not a penalty for a defenseman that shoots the puck out of the playing surface on his own side of the other blue line (like the goalie rule, but extend it down past the benches and penalty boxes).

This is the main reason why I am in favor of the tag-up offsides rule being changed back to what it was. Tired defensemen are less able to play defense. And all those stoppages---that was the one thing that could take a good game and kill the flow and turn it into a snooze-fest.

 

[GentlemanOfLeisure]

The shootout has and allways will suck. I just dont understand people's thinking. The game was fine when we had the ties. Hell even before we had the OT the game was fine. Fix the game itself not the way games are decided.
Its a team game. Teams should decide who wins not in a one on one compitition. I realize that there is a group of fans out there that want a winner to be decided. Here's an idea :keep it 4 on 4 in OT BUT do not award the losing team anything. Right now a team allready figures it has a point so what is the point of playing hard? So if your getting NOTHING for losing in OT your gonna bust your ass for the 2 points, nevermind the extra point. I cannot believe more people think like i do, as in no GM's or players in the league. You lose you get NOTHING. I wouldnt even mind if we had a 10 minute 4 on 4 OT with the losing team not getting a thing. "awarding" a team for losing might have been the stupidest thing the league ever created.

get rid of the OTL
no to the shootout
get rid of the instigator
call the abstruction--ALL THE TIME

If you get rid of the instigator rule, you'll have little to no abstruction. You know it's funny how the NHL product itself was fine back in the mid eighties. Yet Bettman and his cronies have done everything possible to soil the product. And now the game sucks. Putting shootouts and bigger goals and horse sh*t like that makes it more p*ssified than it needs to be.

Most of us became a hockey fan because of the late eighties and early ninetees product. That was full of fights, bench clearing brawls, 100 point seasons for second line guys like Jimmy Carson, and conservative goalie equipment.

Off course Gary Bettman wants no part of that. Let's make it the NBAHL.

Put the NHL games on Spike TV. Let them market it as "Violence on skates". When you have a nationally televisioned Columbus Blue Jackets Vs. Philadelphia Flyers game sell it as, "Jody Shelly vs. Donald Brashear". Advertise the "potential" fighting match ups on Monday night Raw. That's how you'll get the NHL over.

BUT NOOOOOOOOOOO, the NHL will go back to espn with hat in hand for a forth of the money and they'll treat the NHL like a step child. .


Welcome to ESPN Sports Center folks. My name is Stuart Scott. Our lead story tonight was that Micheal Jordan just took a steamy sh*t while attending tonight's Spurs/Nuggets game. And oh yeh, by the way, the Tampa Lightning just won the stanley cup. We'll show you hightlights of the lightning win after we interview Dwayne Wade's finacee.

Sex and Violence sells in this country. There no sex with hockey, but there is violence. Sell the violence. Ratings will go up.

 

[Takeo]

Do they decide football games with field goal kicking contests?? Baseball games with a home-run derby??

Football games rarely end in ties. Baseball games never do. You're talking apples and oranges.

 

[Spungo*]

Football games rarely end in ties. Baseball games never do. You're talking apples and oranges.

I should mention that they actually *do* decide football games with "field goal kicking contests". Just thought I would throw that in there.

 

[Chili]

The most popular sport in the world frequently ends in a draw.

 

[Spungo*]

The most popular sport in the world frequently ends in a draw.

It also has shootouts.

 

[Chili]

It also has shootouts.

Very limited shootouts.

 

[Spungo*]

Very limited shootouts.

Still has 'em. So does Olympic hockey.

 

[Chili]

Still has 'em. So does Olympic hockey.

The point is that the most popular sport in the world has a significant % of their games end in draws (someone can do the math of some leagues but it appears higher than hockey in general).

I don't hear any suggestions of eliminating draws and going to shootouts every tie game in that sport.

 

[barnburner]

I think that the solution should be that the player sits the whole two minutes and no icing during the PK, that way coaches will refrain from pushing the obstruction game.

Not only that - it makes it easier for the pp unit to maintain puck control in the offensive zone, creating more offensive scoring chances, and goals scored - both things the nhl wants to see more of.

 

[Patman]

It also has shootouts.

which only gets used in like 1 in every 1000 games... god I hate people who ignore this reality... ("soccer does it"... yes, about as frequently as people get struck by lightning... "but they use it"... so what's the point?... "ties make my brain hurt"... well of course it does)

 

[Spungo*]

which only gets used in like 1 in every 1000 games... god I hate people who ignore this reality... ("soccer does it"... yes, about as frequently as people get struck by lightning... "but they use it"... so what's the point?... "ties make my brain hurt"... well of course it does)

Soccer uses shootouts, you can't escape that fact. So does international hockey, you can't excape that fact. Shootouts are a universally accepted way to determine a winner and a loser, you can't escape that fact either. If you don't oike them, that's a different argument. It's really too bad for you though as they are comming to the NHL next season, (which will start in January, not October).

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

Soccer uses shootouts, you can't escape that fact. So does international hockey, you can't excape that fact. Shootouts are a universally accepted way to determine a winner and a loser, you can't escape that fact either. If you don't oike them, that's a different argument. It's really too bad for you though as they are comming to the NHL next season, (which will start in January, not October).

maybe so , but they will be gone again in three years when everyone figures out how crappy they are.

The NHL has done without them for its first 88 years, you can't escape that fact. "Universally accepted"??? I don't think so

 

[GSC2k2*]

maybe so , but they will be gone again in three years when everyone figures out how crappy they are.

The NHL has done without them for its first 88 years, you can't escape that fact. "Universally accepted"??? I don't think so

Bucky, are you representing Mr. Hull's views in this matter as well? I would have thought that a man of Mr. Hull's offensive accomplishments would welcome the opportunity to add to his totals and punish more goaltenders with some wicked wide-open and unencumbered blasts of his.

Is it your contention that shootouts will not be welcomed in the superfantastic WHA???

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

Bucky, are you representing Mr. Hull's views in this matter as well? I would have thought that a man of Mr. Hull's offensive accomplishments would welcome the opportunity to add to his totals and punish more goaltenders with some wicked wide-open and unencumbered blasts of his.

Is it your contention that shootouts will not be welcomed in the superfantastic WHA???

Let me assure you, gsc, that Mr Hull gets his breakaways the old fashioned way- by earning them. He would fee' insulted by the very premise of the shoot-out padding his stats... And since among his other titles, i.e. commissioner, president, general manager, custodian, marketing co-ordinator is the title "all time number one scorer", I hardly feel he would need this pansy method of scoring goals.

The super fantastic WHA ends after regulation, our "ice time financing irregularities" have dictated that when our hour is up, the arena manager makes sure we are the hell of the ice..

There shall be no dog-poo shootouts in the fantastic wha

 

[Chili]

More than one goaltender just moved out of the way of Hull's slapshot (rather than be hit by it). It would look considerably more embarrassing during a shootout.

 

[HckyFght*]

I think that the solution should be that the player sits the whole two minutes and no icing during the PK, that way coaches will refrain from pushing the obstruction game.

This idea, along with so many others, is simply atrocious. How many goals is a minor infraction really worth? In a game where a 4-3 score is a lot, you now want a team to be able to score again and again because of some minor incident? Jeez, this league really does have basketball envy.

I remember when "flow of the game" dictated an officials priorities in penalty calling. That stopping a continuous action game was a serious matter, and not worth reacting to every petty malfeasance. Players, of course, are always going to scream "call everything," but it is quite simply a ruinous policy. In hockey, the dirty little secrtet has always been that officiation is subjective, not objective. A ref has to make a judement call, did what I just saw justify stopping the game? And more to the point, was the infraction I just saw worthy of possibly tilting the game in the favor of one team over the other? In most cases the answer is, and was always rightly, no.

I really believe all these rule changes are assinine attempts to rig the game to suit the sensibilities of people who don't watch it, don't like it, and won't support it no matter what you do.

Roll back the rules to 1990. Promote Bettman laterally to be the chief counsel of the league and please put an old school hockey guy in charge of on ice policy before he does any more dammage!
-HckyFght!

 

[Montrealer]

The last time I saw so much whining, I was in the Napa Valley.