I don't mind the shootout too much but I do think that the OT period should be longer whether its 5x5, 4x4, 3x3 or some combination. 5 minutes seems to go by with 2-3 rushes each way very quickly. stretch it to 10 minutes and fatigue will be a factor. If you then go to a shootout, I'd be ok with it. Hockey purists will stick around either way. For this game to continue to thrive it has to attract new viewers. Like it or not, the public wants to see a definitive resolution to the game and not a tie. We like winners or losers as a society.
Also agree that no games should have bonus points awarded either way. a game should be worth 2 or 3 points with none being worth more if they go into OT in totality. i like the idea of 3 point regulation win, 2 point OT win and 1 point for getting to OT. That should incentivize teams to get it done in regulation without penalizing a team for a 60 minute effort.
I'm with you there. There should only be a "consolation point" for losing in what amounts to a skills competition after 65-70 minutes (depending on how long the OT period is) of stalemate hockey
IF a regulation win is worth 3 points. That way the point means less in the overall scheme of things.
I also don't really mind the shootout as much as some others posting on this forum, and that doesn't mean i'm not some brand new teenaged fan.
I've been watching the Bruins since i started playing hockey in Kindergarten... when Neely-Oates-Juneau-Bourque-Sweeney wore black/gold (supported by the likes of Ted Donato, Steve Heinz, Dave Reid, Brent Hughes over the years) and when Andy Moog was the B's goaltender. I was quite young but i still remember Ulf Samuelsson's cheap-shot on Neely.
Bottom line, whatever the NHL is doing -- and it is not perfect, it could use some tweaking like the proposed 3-2-1 point system (which would give the "loser point" less impact on standings) -- the league is bringing in more revenue today than it was a decade ago. And no it is not just inflation.
At the risk of repeating myself i'll point out that the bottom line is: More fans = more revenue = higher salary cap = higher quality teams and more talented rosters. The smaller the cap figure is, the more it hurts the quality of the NHL's product.
I understand the purist's point of view, but i am on the fence about certain initiatives. I am happy they allow 2-line-passes now, hybrid icing is not perfect but it's a safer alternative to touch-icing and is still superior to automatic icing... hybrid has grown on me a bit.
I'm not in love with the shootout, but i'm somewhat ambivalent about it. I do wish the OT period was 10 minutes in any case... right now practically all but a few regulation ties are decided by shootouts. THAT i do not like.
In short, i don't mind the shootout... but i want to minimize its impact on the standings. A 10-minute, 4-on-4 OT period and a 3 [regulation win] - 2 [shootout win] - 1 [shootout loss] point system addresses this rather well
without eliminating the shootout altogether.
I believe less people would hate the shootout if that 3/2/1 point system and an extra 5 minutes of 4-on-4 OT were adopted into NHL's standings determination.