NYRGoalieGlut*
Guest
BTW, not that I'm a big fan and it's probably PR and a spin but Milbury said that "the fans want it", that might not mean anything, but maybe they know this stuff from some places like surveys.
Crazy_Ike said:The best solution would be to tell the coaches in no uncertain terms not to coach that way (or the GMs, who pass it along to the coaches).
It took the players trying the proposal only 8 minutes to figure this out after there were 8 penalties in 8 minutes. After that, the penalties were back to a normal level.Chock Full Of Booger said: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.
Youre talking total bollocks, they are very frequent in competitions that allow them, ie knockout cups only and not in the league.Patman said:ONLY in single elimination cup rounds. I'd figure there is 1 shootout for every 2000 professional matches in the world.
Real frequent.
Hey, guess how many players are involved in a shootout? 5 skaters and a goalie. Now how many are on the ice normally?PepNCheese said: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.
NYRGoalieGlut said:Can you elaborate on how that line means that I'm a newbie?
Bring Back Bucky said:cause the experienced posters don't call each other "drama queens" my love...
Steve L said:Hey, guess how many players are involved in a shootout? 5 skaters and a goalie. Now how many are on the ice normally?
4 on 4 OT is less of a team game than a shootout.
Crazy_Ike said:But I suspect there'll still be a few dinosaurs among the GMs and coaches *coughQuinncough*, too many for it to work.
Not always. Those with some bit of offensive talent like Niedermayer and Gonchar will probably get involved quite often. James Sanford was the Hamilton Bulldogs' secret shootout weapon this year, he played D. And they tapped Ray Bourque on the shoulder ahead of Wayne to take the shootout in 1998.WC Handy said:Hey, guess how many defensemen are involved in a shootout? None. How many are on the ice normally?
PepNCheese said: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.
Chock Full Of Booger said: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."
Bring Back Bucky said:Great idea, the shootout. Hey, after a full year of a lockout, why not alienate the traditional hockey fan a little more?? I mean, who needs the longtime hockey fan when you're already packing 11,000 people a night into plenty of venues??
Bring Back Bucky said:Do they decide football games with field goal kicking contests?? Baseball games with a home-run derby??
Mothra said:I dont get this mindset.....not that I am in favor of a shootout, but I sure as hell wont feel "alienated" if it comes to be....If any hockey fan stops watching because of shootouts.....I doubt they are a real fan to begin with
gc2005 said:Not always. Those with some bit of offensive talent like Niedermayer and Gonchar will probably get involved quite often. James Sanford was the Hamilton Bulldogs' secret shootout weapon this year, he played D. And they tapped Ray Bourque on the shoulder ahead of Wayne to take the shootout in 1998.
Quite often in 4-on-4 OT or on a regular 5-on-4 PP you only see one defenseman on the ice, I haven't heard them complaining yet.
Mothra said:I dont think thats what he asked.....he asked how will shootouts alienate hockey fans
WVpens said:
Brewleaguer said:Also saw this for proposed rule changes. (not sure if this was posted already)
"Each game will have three, 15-minute periods. Once concluded, there will be an additional five minutes of 4-on-4 followed by five more minutes of 3-on-3, which is then concluded by a five-man shootout"
OK so they jip us out of a season of hockey and now they want to jib us out of 15 minutes per game if it doesn't end in a tie.
AND if it does end in a tie, you still loose 5 minutes of the game.
BOY are they really out of touch with fans!
There are a bunch of forwards who are defensive-minded or have zero offensive talent who will be excluded from the shootout too. Enforcers rarely even touch the ice in the 3rd period, and never in OT, they won't be taking too many shootout shots either.WC Handy said:I would have liked to have thing that most people would have ben smart enough to realize I was referring to actual defeneders, not the position on the backs of these guys hockey cards.
EndBoards said:Shootout: It's coming. I like it. How is a tie a better for the fans than a shootout? If you're such a 'hardcore' fan then why are you talking about leaving the sport over a trivial matter? Relax.. It'll be ok..
Obstruction: The reason obstruction isn't called is because refs don't want to be seen as deciding the game with their whistle. They don't want to call a potentially game-deciding power play late in the game for something that happens away from the puck.
The solution is to have a less severe penalty for obstruction. Take the offender off the ice for two minutes, but remove the change in manpower. This allows refs to make the call without awarding a power play that decides the game. Repeat offenders are taken off the ice, get less ice time, and become less valuable to fans & coaches. This drives their salaries down.
How is that any difference than any other season when a team or two "sneaks" in or is left on the outside looking in because they tied a game or two??Bring Back Bucky said:I doubt that real fans have any interest in the outcome of a hockey game being decided this way. Look how close playoff races are in the 30 team NHL. THe shootout would determine who gets in and who doesn't for the last 2-3 slots, and that just doesn't wash with me...
gc2005 said:There are a bunch of forwards who are defensive-minded or have zero offensive talent who will be excluded from the shootout too. Enforcers rarely even touch the ice in the 3rd period, and never in OT, they won't be taking too many shootout shots either.
I'm not a huge fan of the shootout, but I really won't object if it happens. The lack of defensive-minded players involved is not a decent enough excuse to not do it. If teams start replacing a goon on their 4th line with a talented but smallish or defensively-suspect forward just for the PP and shootouts, that's one of the best things that could happen to hockey, IMO.