Consider this alternative to shootouts

[KCC]

something inspired from this maybe

Sad that this is probably the highlight of his stay with the Habs so far. lol. I'm fine with the shoot out, but I'd rather 3 on 3 go for 10 minutes instead. An extra 5 would have to boost games ending more in OT I would think.

 

[bzur]

I would love an old school Minor Hockey Week style hybrid overtime. Something like :
-up to 4 3 minute overtime periods
-1st period 4 on 4
-2nd period 3 on 3
-3rd period 2 on 2
-4th period 1 on 1

Always an option to pull a goalie and get the extra man.

Minor hockey week overtime was the most exciting thing ever as a kid.

 

[Mickey Marner]

W-L-T > W-L-OTL-SOL. There has been, I believe, 54 penalty shot goals in NHL playoff history and 0 3v3 goals since 1987-88, possibly ever.

Time to stop deciding who makes the playoffs based on nigh-irrelevant criteria.

 

[Roomtemperature]

Personally I hate more this need the NHL has to reward failure. Can't win in regulation, no problem you get a point and another chance. Still cannot win in OT, here is anther chance.

Teams should not be rewarded if they cannot win. Let the game end after the OT, and punish the teams for a tie:

3 points regulation win
2 points OT win
1 point OT loss or tie
0 points regulation loss

No ties. There is a reason its called kissing your sister. Its an unsatisfying ending. Yes even more so then the shootout. The only people who want ties back are a small minority and they mostly post here.

 

[Curufinwe]

Start with 7 minutes for OT.

 

[StevenB]

This thread has been amazing

 

[Butch 19]

Personally I hate more this need the NHL has to reward failure. Can't win in regulation, no problem you get a point and another chance. Still cannot win in OT, here is anther chance.

Teams should not be rewarded if they cannot win. Let the game end after the OT, and punish the teams for a tie:

3 points regulation win
2 points OT win
1 point OT loss or tie
0 points regulation loss

No team ever is rewarded for losing. Both teams get 1 pt for a tie score after regulation. (you know this)

And that's as much as a tie should ever be used.

 

[LakeLivin]

I think, after overtime, the head coaches should fight for the extra point at centre ice.

to keep it fair, against Winnipeg, the opposing coach has to have an eye poked out.

unless he is also one-eyed.

As a Canes fan I heartily endorse this suggestion!

 

[maacoshark]

Get rid of the shootout and bring back ties.

 

[Roomtemperature]

Get rid of the shootout and bring back ties.

Never

 

[maacoshark]

Never

Why not? Deciding a winner by means of a shootout is a joke. This is supposed to be a team sport. A shootout is a one on one competition. It isn't hockey.

 

[Roomtemperature]

Why not? Deciding a winner by means of a shootout is a joke. This is supposed to be a team sport. A shootout is a one on one competition. It isn't hockey.

A penalty shot is a one on one thing and its in the game. This is entertainment. Ties are boring. Shootouts are a reasonable way to bring a more satisfying conclusion for a vast majority of hockey fans compared to ties.

 

[EdmFlyersfan]

How about "Rock, Paper or Scissor" contest? Best of 5.

 

[Kamiccolo]

Personally I hate more this need the NHL has to reward failure. Can't win in regulation, no problem you get a point and another chance. Still cannot win in OT, here is anther chance.

Teams should not be rewarded if they cannot win. Let the game end after the OT, and punish the teams for a tie:

3 points regulation win
2 points OT win
1 point OT loss or tie
0 points regulation loss

It's been done before but if you rank the teams based on your criteria the standings barely change. The same teams make the playoffs and maybe you see one or two teams switch places with each other.

 

[Demon Wolf]

Teams have to send one player at a time to center ice for an interview, and they get replaced whenever they use cliché terms like "We gotta keep skating", "gotta get the pucks in deep" and "go into the dirty areas". First team to run out of players lose.

 

[LakeLivin]

What if, instead of penalty shots after overtime there were 2v1 rushes inthe same manner until a winner was decided?

Unless I missed it, I think I'm the first to agree with the OP that a 2-on-1 shootout would be a better alternative than the current penalty shot shootout, lol. A penalty shot incorporates the skills of a goalie and a scorer. Why shouldn't defensemen also factor into the result? Similar rules to current shoot outs, can't reverse the puck and can't send a player out twice until all other players have had a turn. Let the home team have the first "last change" option and then alternate.

It could take more rounds to get a winner, but is that a negative? Longer it goes, the more the drama builds. As far as wear and tear on the players, it's not like you're extending 3-on-3 playing time. Maybe a bit more work for the goalie, but there might be plays where his defender prevents a shot from even getting through, so maybe not.

While still a bit "gimicky", who can argue that a 2-on-1 rush isn't closer to "real hockey" than penalty shots? Plus, seems like it could add some interesting strategy to the process. Do you send out your scoring challenged, but great defensive 2-way center as a scorer or a defender? Same with your high scoring but defensively challenged defensman.

When compared to a penalty shot shootout, is there a down side to this that I'm overlooking?

 

[nturn06]

No team ever is rewarded for losing. Both teams get 1 pt for a tie score after regulation. (you know this)

And that's as much as a tie should ever be used.

Failing to win is not the same as losing. The goal of the game is to win, plain and simple. Being tied after 3 periods is a failure, good job take some free points.

The thing which annoys me most is that, with the game tied and couple minutes left, there is no incentive to really risk it and go all in for the win...It is better to play it safe and not gamble, maybe you get lucky otherwise get a point.

And giving a free point for the SO gimmick is the biggest joke of the NHL, but hey I guess it is better to give free points than punishing teams for not being able to win. WHY???

I really don't understand why teams should get points even if they fail to win in regulation, and they fail a second time in OT... And worse of all, winning in SO= winning in regulation=2 points.

 

[nturn06]

It's been done before but if you rank the teams based on your criteria the standings barely change. The same teams make the playoffs and maybe you see one or two teams switch places with each other.

The issue is more subtle than you think. It is more complex than "lets redo the standings".

With 3 points for regulation wins, down the stretch, the teams fighting for PO will start going for the 3 points instead of banking 1 point and try to get the second in OT/SO. With the game tied, and the team desperate for 3 points, they are going to pull the goalie. And this will create some really exciting hockey, and make a big difference in the playoff race, and teams will make the PO not because they got the loser point or won in regulation but because they gambled and went for the 3 points.

 

[pabst blue ribbon]

This thread has already been hijacked but I agree that a 3-2-1 point system is ideal when regular season OT is a gimmick. Currently there is far more upside in having games decided by gimmicks than there is downside, 3-2-1 equalizes the downside/upside of OT games

 

[BrockLobster]

I dont get why they just dont play 3v3 with no clock until it ends. It would rarely last more than 10 min

 

[LakeLivin]

I dont get why they just dont play 3v3 with no clock until it ends. It would rarely last more than 10 min

CBA? I'm guessing that's something the players would have a hard time agreeing to without some type of major concession from the owners in return.

 

[maacoshark]

A penalty shot is a one on one thing and its in the game. This is entertainment. Ties are boring. Shootouts are a reasonable way to bring a more satisfying conclusion for a vast majority of hockey fans compared to ties.

Shootouts are boring. Ties are not. Thank they aren't using shootouts in the playoffs.
We dont need rule changes. This is what Americanizing the game is. Changing the rules to cater to new fans that dont know or understand the history of the game.

 

[BruinsFan37]

Ties are still used in the NCAAs

It's not the end of the world, nor do I find it "unsatisfying" in comparison to the shootout.

But that's just me

 

[Machinehead]

3v3 until there's a winner

 

[insaini]

5 minutes of 3 on 3 followed by 2 minutes of 2 on 2.