Is It Time For the CHL to Change Ovetime??

[AttackSound]

Always debated the rule of 3-3 overtime. Heard through another poster that Owen Sound local media and longtime play-by-play radio personality Fred Wallace had an adaption to what the CHL has already tweaked.

In his discussion he had pointed his adaption of what would be a very interesting change similar to what other sports league use like the NBA. Where possession of the puck in overtime would not be allowed to be intentionally backed out of the offensive zone when a team has clear and unpressured possession of the puck, this type of ruling would be interesting to see as it would force team to make plays in the offensive zone without back-peddling the puck out of the zone and back in.

It would certainly make for a more high-tempo game that most CHL teams play these days, with the way the rules have changed speed has become a big factor in the past few seasons and with the way the players train these days it would surprise me to see the CHL increase the overtime from 5 minutes to 8 or 10 minutes and eliminate the shootout entirely. This would certainly allow the league to showcase the skills the players have these days and force teams to use there depth on there bench during the extra frames.

What do other posters think if the league was to make these types of adjustments and how they see what the league could possibly look at doing in the coming future.

Click to read more...

 

[Frank the Skank]

I'm all for changing overtime... but not to this extent... you are making it a completely different game. This is a major shift from simply removing one player from each team.. it's a full on rule change.

I would sooner go to 10 minutes of overtime with no shootout.. keep the ties. Keep it at 3 on 3 if you want...

 

[OHLTG]

I'm fine with the 3-on-3 as it allows for real creativity and the fans seem to love it. Instead of a shootout, though, make OT 10 minutes. If team's can't score, both get a point and that's the game.

 

[AttackSound]

I'm fine with the 3-on-3 as it allows for real creativity and the fans seem to love it. Instead of a shootout, though, make OT 10 minutes. If team's can't score, both get a point and that's the game.

That's really my point cause if we flash forward to the playoffs teams play 20 minute overtimes in the post-season, and everyone is fine with teams playing an extra potentially 20+ minutes to see teams win a series, why wouldn't the league prepare these kids early on in the season to get used to playing longer overtime frames like many teams do at playoff time.

If the teams were to play 10 minute overtimes and scrap the shootouts instead of 5 minute ones with a shootout it would benefit more especially for 1st year guys who come to the league to give them and their teams a chance to better prepare themselves for playoff games. Even if the league were to leave it a 3 on 3 overtime, I believe it wouldn't hurt teams abilities to throw out 3-3 lines.

You'd still get some great plays and end to end action in extra time with a scenario like a 10 minute overtime and give teams depth chart players a chance to show what they can do in an overtime situation, instead of what they have now where teams top guys will pretty much play the whole 5 minute overtime and then shoot in the shootout. You'd get more entertaining finishes in tight games and then losing it in a 1 on 1 skills competition especially in a re-build situation and as every team dose every 3 or so seasons.

I do agree the the old way of awarding one point was more fair and could be used in a similar situation, however like I stated a 10 minute overtime should eliminate the real need for a shootout and give a fair chance to show the talent in this league without prolonging the game and energy in the crowds that the shootout creates.

 

[ohloutsider]

I'm fine with the 3-on-3 as it allows for real creativity and the fans seem to love it. Instead of a shootout, though, make OT 10 minutes. If team's can't score, both get a point and that's the game.

Yes as discussed before no shoot outs at all. If they really want to give out that 3rd point then play 3 on 3 until somebody wins. They will never change this until the NHL does so we should be whining at that level for change.

 

[EvenSteven]

At the end of regulation, set the clock to 20:00. One team goes on a four on three power play (or five on three. That part can be tinkered with). Home team decides which team. That team is on the power play until they score. If they score at, say, the 4:31 mark of overtime, then the clock is set to 4:30. The other team now has to score before time expires or they lose. If they score, they win because they will have scored a goal quicker than the first team.

No loser point.

 

[ohloutsider]

At the end of regulation, set the clock to 20:00. One team goes on a four on three power play (or five on three. That part can be tinkered with). Home team decides which team. That team is on the power play until they score. If they score at, say, the 4:31 mark of overtime, then the clock is set to 4:30. The other team now has to score before time expires or they lose. If they score, they win because they will have scored a goal quicker than the first team.

No loser point.

You really want the refs to do math?

 

[EvenSteven]

You really want the refs to do math?

Nope! Keep them away from that! Leave it to the timekeepers.

 

[OSAttackFan88]

At the end of regulation, set the clock to 20:00. One team goes on a four on three power play (or five on three. That part can be tinkered with). Home team decides which team. That team is on the power play until they score. If they score at, say, the 4:31 mark of overtime, then the clock is set to 4:30. The other team now has to score before time expires or they lose. If they score, they win because they will have scored a goal quicker than the first team.

No loser point.

some things should never be posted and this is one of them...

 

[EvenSteven]

some things should never be posted and this is one of them...

Maybe so. But the same was likely said a long time ago about shootouts.

If it were up to me? 5 min OT then a tie. No loser point.

 

[Firebrd828]

I just want to see the elimination of the 3-point hockey game...at all levels. I hate the way it skews the standings. Makes no sense at all to have some games that are worth 2 points and others worth 3 points.

 

[moose311]

I just want to see the elimination of the 3-point hockey game...at all levels. I hate the way it skews the standings. Makes no sense at all to have some games that are worth 2 points and others worth 3 points.

Or make every game worth 3 points. Just be consistent.

 

[Firebrd828]

Or make every game worth 3 points. Just be consistent.

I actually like this plan better. I just don’t think it would ever happen because it would cause the record books to be re-written.

 

[Frank the Skank]

I actually like this plan better. I just don’t think it would ever happen because it would cause the record books to be re-written.

It's already happened because of overtime... and the loser point...

 

[Finster8]

At the end of the 3rd period and it is tied then 5 min of 4 on 4 and if it is still tied 1 pt each. Winner obviously gets 2pt the loser gets what they deserve nothing. Or 3 on 3 but the game is over when the buzzer goes. 1 pt tied or 2 for the winner.
Never liked the shootout 1 shot deciding the game this is hockey not soccer.

 

[Ferda11]

3 on 3 til someone scores. Can't get any more entertaining then that.

 

[MatthewsMoustache]

I’ll go with 3 on 3 for 10 minutes. if no one can score in 3 on 3 in 10 minutes, they don’t deserve the win so it’s a tie

 

[Buttsy]

Existing format is fine (3 skaters aside) BUT make it a 10 minute period instead of the current 5 minutes. If a Team scores they get 2 points loser gets nothing. If tied at the end of 10 minutes each team gets a point like the old days. NO SHOOTOUT I have hated the shootout since it’s inception into the North American game a long time ago.