Toggle sidebar

OT: Yes PLEASE!

lazycop

lazycop

Dave's not here.
Mar 25, 2006
1,576
464
I'd love to see 4 on 4 for 5 minutes and then 3 on 3 until someone scores.
I hate the shootout.
2 pts for a regulation win, and 3 if you win in OT. Nothing for the loser. Teams shouldn't be rewarded for losing a game, OT or no.

Or, scrap points altogether and just go by won/lost, like every other sport.
 
Doshell Propivo

Doshell Propivo

Registered User
Dec 5, 2005
13,276
7,291
two points for a win
one point for a tie
5 min, 5 on 5 OT if tied after 3 periods.

What exactly was the problem with this?
 
Renbarg

Renbarg

Registered User
Feb 24, 2007
9,945
23
NY
Doshell Propivo said:
two points for a win
one point for a tie
5 min, 5 on 5 OT if tied after 3 periods.

What exactly was the problem with this?
Click to expand...

It was boring. You hardly had shots late, let alone in ot. Teams were perfectly fine calling a truce with both grabbing a point.

3-2-1 is the way to go, each game will be worth the same amount of points and it rewards teams for taking initiatives in regulation.
 
Doshell Propivo

Doshell Propivo

Registered User
Dec 5, 2005
13,276
7,291
Renbarg said:
It was boring. You hardly had shots late, let alone in ot. Teams were perfectly fine calling a truce with both grabbing a point.
Click to expand...

I see. So the first 90 years of the NHL were "boring." Silly me.

The motivation behind implementing the shootout was that American audiences do not have the appetite for ties. It had nothing to do with "boring" games. In fact, I would say that most ties I saw in the NHL were very entertaining. Way more so than the regular season garbage we see today.

Maybe we can award 10 points for a win, have more t shirt cannons, and more contrived crowd noise during games. That'll amp up the "excitement."

Moar gimmicks!
 
Renbarg

Renbarg

Registered User
Feb 24, 2007
9,945
23
NY
Doshell Propivo said:
I see. So the first 90 years of the NHL were "boring." Silly me.

The motivation behind implementing the shootout was that American audiences do not have the appetite for ties. It had nothing to do with "boring" games. In fact, I would say that most ties I saw in the NHL were very entertaining. Way more so than the regular season garbage we see today.

Maybe we can award 10 points for a win, have more t shirt cannons, and more contrived crowd noise during games. That'll amp up the "excitement."

Moar gimmicks!
Click to expand...

It was boring in the past two decades or so when goalies and defense strategies were both advanced enough to stifle offense. It wasn't a problem in the 80s because you weren't capable of shutting teams down at will because the goalies were terrible, defensemen were filled with guys who were too slow to play forward (no I'm not talking about Orr and Potvin), and defensive strategies were primative at best.

Do you not remember 90s hockey?
 
19 in a row

19 in a row

Registered User
Jul 19, 2011
9,481
3,324
Long Island
SLAPSHOT723 said:
They're not going to make it 3 points for a win, that would make all of hockey history very messy.
Click to expand...

If you are referring to comparing standings from now to older years, they already made a mess by making some games worth 3 points. Before '99 all games were worth 2 points and before 83-84 there was no regular season OT at all. So you can't compare regular season points in the standings now to back then anyway since they are somewhat inflated now by OT wins.

I think it makes sense to right a wrong. IMHO, no regular season game should be worth more points than any other.
 
Renbarg

Renbarg

Registered User
Feb 24, 2007
9,945
23
NY
SLAPSHOT723 said:
They're not going to make it 3 points for a win, that would make all of hockey history very messy.
Click to expand...

It's already messy with 3 point games. Besides, regular season standings are not that highly regarded (it's not held in the same esteem as a goal scoring record). Sometimes you just gotta bite the bullet if something doesn't make sense.
 
RMimagery

RMimagery

Registered User
Jul 22, 2006
3,622
948
3-2-1 makes perfect sense.

Besides cleaning up a flawed point system -it will also make the end of games much more exciting as both teams in a 2-2 game will go for the extra point instead of dumping the puck and having 4/5 players back.

Long overdue...
 
periferal

periferal

Registered User
Jul 5, 2007
28,850
16,191
19 in a row said:
If you are referring to comparing standings from now to older years, they already made a mess by making some games worth 3 points. Before '99 all games were worth 2 points and before 83-84 there was no regular season OT at all. So you can't compare regular season points in the standings now to back then anyway since they are somewhat inflated now by OT wins.

I think it makes sense to right a wrong. IMHO, no regular season game should be worth more points than any other.
Click to expand...

Well said. Once Bettman lifted the top on handing out potential 3-point games, all bets are off. I wish they would just go back to the NHL scoring system for the first 100 years, but if they want to change it 3 points for a win would be better than the carnival show they have going on now. 3 on 3? A joke. Feels like a pickup game at your local rink rather than the best players in the world working in a TEAM environment...Which they do for the rest of the game.
 
OlTimeHockey

OlTimeHockey

Registered User
Dec 5, 2003
16,483
0
home
Doshell Propivo said:
two points for a win
one point for a tie
5 min, 5 on 5 OT if tied after 3 periods.

What exactly was the problem with this?
Click to expand...
It apparently worked, like the old ASG did, and we can't have that.

The NHL simply must cater to the lowest common denominator....like reality TV programming.
 
OlTimeHockey

OlTimeHockey

Registered User
Dec 5, 2003
16,483
0
home
periferal said:
Well said. Once Bettman lifted the top on handing out potential 3-point games, all bets are off. I wish they would just go back to the NHL scoring system for the first 100 years, but if they want to change it 3 points for a win would be better than the carnival show they have going on now. 3 on 3? A joke. Feels like a pickup game at your local rink rather than the best players in the world working in a TEAM environment...Which they do for the rest of the game.
Click to expand...
They removed hockey from the ASG....and that worked so well, they removed it from overtime. Have the point system, institute "psyche outs" like in Baseketball and leave the game for the lowest IQ rungs out there.
 
OlTimeHockey

OlTimeHockey

Registered User
Dec 5, 2003
16,483
0
home
Doshell Propivo said:
I see. So the first 90 years of the NHL were "boring." Silly me.

The motivation behind implementing the shootout was that American audiences do not have the appetite for ties. It had nothing to do with "boring" games. In fact, I would say that most ties I saw in the NHL were very entertaining. Way more so than the regular season garbage we see today.

Maybe we can award 10 points for a win, have more t shirt cannons, and more contrived crowd noise during games. That'll amp up the "excitement."

Moar gimmicks!
Click to expand...
Some people want cheerleaders at a chess match.
 
LeapOnOver

LeapOnOver

Mackenzie is a hack!
Jan 23, 2011
12,476
3,678
Iksan, S. Korea
www.leaponover.com
Doshell Propivo said:
I see. So the first 90 years of the NHL were "boring." Silly me.

The motivation behind implementing the shootout was that American audiences do not have the appetite for ties. It had nothing to do with "boring" games. In fact, I would say that most ties I saw in the NHL were very entertaining. Way more so than the regular season garbage we see today.

Maybe we can award 10 points for a win, have more t shirt cannons, and more contrived crowd noise during games. That'll amp up the "excitement."

Moar gimmicks!
Click to expand...

Cmon now. I am a big football fan (soccer) and don't consider myself to have an "americanized" sports fandom. However (since hockey was actually born in North America) it would be dishonest for you to not recognize that in the 90's the OT got incredibly stale. Many would walk out when the final buzzer sounded. Not because OT is "exciting" but purely it was an obligatory 5 minutes of going through the motions and keeping things status quo. The fans only became disinterested because the players did. Not vice versa. To think things to change as time goes on is a bit naive isn't it? And most European leagues have three points for a win....why is this about American's and amping up the excitement, lol.
 

4inarow

Registered User
Jun 18, 2016
4
0
Yes something most definitely needs to be done about the point system in the NHL, making all games worth the same amount of points makes the most sense. Even though games are played to a conclusion now, simply just using wins and losses would go against the league's history and the fact that they've used a point system for so long.

The current system still (over a year later) has me scratching my head on how we finished third and lost a game seven on the road at the end of the 2015 season. We had more wins and were tied in ROWs with the Capitals, and basically split the season series 2-2 with them. But just because one of our losses happened in less than 60 minutes and both of their losses came after 60 minutes they ended up winning the head-to-head tiebreaker. And to be fair, if the 3-2-1 point system was in place we would still have lost that tiebreaker based on the head-to-head games, but with the extra 2 wins and 4 less OT losses we probably wouldn't have been tied to begin with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom