Time to get rid of shootout

[three dog night]

i wonder if the OHL should scrap the shootouts and do overtime like the GOHL and Ontario Junior Hockey Leauge five min four on four and if still tied three on three for five minutes.

Click to read more...

 

[LR8]

Shoot out should go, along with the point for a loss. Last season North Bay finished ahead of Miss. yet Missy won 3 more games. North Bay generated 15% of their total points (10 of 70 from L) for the year in games that they lost. Teams should play to win the game and promote skill.

 

[Tarantula]

Shoot out should go, along with the point for a loss

Absolutely, it used to be teams could really climb the standings, but now with so many games giving the loser a point it is almost impossible for a team to make up race track with a few games left the way it was possible years ago.

 

[AttackSound]

Shootouts are a complete waste of a team's energy.

It's made the standings watered down and promotes teams to take there foot of the gas late in games against teams that are miles ahead of them in the standings.

I'd rather see the league scrap the shootout and play a 10 minute sudden death overtime instead.

Considering that the playoff format is a full 20 minute overtime already, it would make better sense to make the regular season a 10 minute 2 points for a win and 1 point for a loss format similar to the old days of the league where they had 5 minute overtime that way the teams don't have to majorly adjust their lines.

The time of the shootout has seen better days in the league and considering that the way the physicality has been going in the league. By the time teams get to the shootout they're so burned out for trying to win in the 3 on 3 overtime lots of teams do t have anything left to show in the shootout.

 

[EvenSteven]

A few weeks ago Sarnia was in town in Kitchener and the game went to overtime. With about 30 seconds left in the overtime, Sarnia got possession of the puck and just stayed in their end and refused to advance the park thus killing off the clock. The Rangers had the back up in net and I guess they figured at that point, they would kill the clock and take their chances in the shoot out against the Rangers back up.

You're right. Time to get rid of the shoot out. Most three on three hockey is the best hockey we see all game. It's a shame to end it to go to a shootout.

Extending the 3 on 3 overtime from 5 to 10 minutes should ensure every game ends before getting to a shootout.

 

[NOA]

I don’t love the shootout either but having 3 on 3 for 10 mins is exhausting for the players. The energy used in that type of overtime is way more than a 5 on 5 situation.
By going 5 mins of 3 on 3, the shootouts are greatly reduced. What happens if you go 10 mins and still no goal? You end in a tie? Because that’s ridiculous too.

I don’t love it but when it happens only about 4-5 times a year for most teams, what’s the big deal?
Call it a skills competition but isn’t that basically 3 on 3 overtime at this point too? Who has the most skill/speed can usually get the better chances and win? I personally don’t mind seeing 4/5 shootouts a year. But I’m curious what players think. I would guess most like it but not sure

I do agree that the losing team should not be awarded an extra point.

 

[BigHitter67]

I don’t love the shootout either but having 3 on 3 for 10 mins is exhausting for the players. The energy used in that type of overtime is way more than a 5 on 5 situation.
By going 5 mins of 3 on 3, the shootouts are greatly reduced. What happens if you go 10 mins and still no goal? You end in a tie? Because that’s ridiculous too.

I don’t love it but when it happens only about 4-5 times a year for most teams, what’s the big deal?
Call it a skills competition but isn’t that basically 3 on 3 overtime at this point too? Who has the most skill/speed can usually get the better chances and win? I personally don’t mind seeing 4/5 shootouts a year. But I’m curious what players think. I would guess most like it but not sure

I do agree that the losing team should not be awarded an extra point.

It’s exhausting only because most teams are shortening the bench. Use the whole roster ... with 1 min shifts ...and its fine

 

[EON]

I've mentioned this before in a main board thread but I would like to see a European football style points system. I'm not sure how much of an appetite NA sports fans have for draws but I like them. 3 points for a regulation win, 1 point each for a draw. Or if you're going to keep the shootout, just make regulation wins 3 points so all games are worth 3 points. This would help prevent artificial parity in the standings.

 

[GEO1050101]

Three points for a regulation win, two points for an OT win no points for an OT lose and one point for a draw after OT and the score is still tied. NOOOOO SHOOTOUT.

 

[jamemcca]

Shoot out should go, along with the point for a loss..

I concur 100 per cent.

 

[jamemcca]

Three points for a regulation win, two points for an OT win no points for an OT lose and one point for a draw after OT and the score is still tied. NOOOOO SHOOTOUT.

Pass

 

[OMG67]

Play 60 minutes. Winner gets 3 points. Loser gets nothing. Tie gives each team one point.

Teams will play for the win more often than not, especially late in the season.

I never understood the value of changing the game for the purpose of having a fan go home with a winner and a loser. The teams never cared that a tie was a tie.

 

[Fischhaber]

I don't disagree with anything in this thread, but the league is going to follow the NHL's lead on anything like this. Shootout skills are important for NHL players so that's what our players need to practice.

 

[WaW]

I like the 3-2-1-0 points system used in the world juniors

 

[ohloutsider]

I don't disagree with anything in this thread, but the league is going to follow the NHL's lead on anything like this. Shootout skills are important for NHL players so that's what our players need to practice.

Yes and hopefully the NHL will fix this.
I like the idea of the 3 point game. Overtime played for 10 minutes of 3 on 3 and if no winner only 1 point issued for the tie. Regulation play will not go into the protect mode with 10 minutes left in the 3rd. Teams are basically fighting it out for 3 points if they win outright. If it is tied again teams are playing the 3 on 3 to win to ensure they get the 2nd point as nobody gets the extra point if it ends in a draw. They have to play to win.

 

[jamemcca]

I never understood the value of changing the game for the purpose of having a fan go home with a winner and a loser. The teams never cared that a tie was a tie.

The game considered to be the greatest ever played by many (Soviet Red Army vs Montreal Canadiens) ended a tie. Not one person complained about needing a shootout or anything else.

Time to leave the game alone. Point system worked for the longest time until loser points came in. 2 for a win one for a tie and nothing’s if you lose period. Pretty simple and effective

 

[AttackSound]

A few weeks ago Sarnia was in town in Kitchener and the game went to overtime. With about 30 seconds left in the overtime, Sarnia got possession of the puck and just stayed in their end and refused to advance the park thus killing off the clock. The Rangers had the back up in net and I guess they figured at that point, they would kill the clock and take their chances in the shoot out against the Rangers back up.

You're right. Time to get rid of the shoot out. Most three on three hockey is the best hockey we see all game. It's a shame to end it to go to a shootout.

Extending the 3 on 3 overtime from 5 to 10 minutes should ensure every game ends before getting to a shootout.

The point I was trying to make is simple why should the league use a a method of determining who wins and loses in the regular season that is never used in the playoffs.

The idea of having an extra 5 minutes added to overtime would still ensure so great hockey games that were close but alo even the playing field for all the teams in the league.

Take for example the scenario that your team is in an evenly matched game with a divisional opponent.
Why would you spend 5 minutes in overtime in a 3 on 3 format to miss the net in a skills competition or lose control of the puck before you get a chance to shoot in a penalty shot.

This also holds truth in the postseason scenario which last checked the league dosen't use anyway.

So beyond the NHL using it and the lower levels adapting it, what benefit does the league gain from a format of success and failure doesn't even play into during the time of the season that really matters in the post-season.

If the league has the desire to have this way to make the game more entertaining then I ask posters this simple question.

What do you think the most exciting time of the season is winning banners in a hard battled 7 game series 5 on 5 overtime or a 1 on 1 penalty shot ?

IMO I'd take the 5 on 5 any day

 

[Millpond]

Shoot out should go, along with the point for a loss. Last season North Bay finished ahead of Miss. yet Missy won 3 more games. North Bay generated 15% of their total points (10 of 70 from L) for the year in games that they lost. Teams should play to win the game and promote skill.

How about this concept::

2 pts for reg win

1pt for ot win

0 pt for ot loss, or tie


5 min ot, 5 on 5
No shootout..

 

[Millpond]

How about this concept::

2 pts for reg win

1pt for ot win

0 pt for ot loss, or tie


5 min ot, 5 on 5
No shootout..

And while they're at it, one player from each team is picked as a game 'star'.

 

[swoopster]

60 minutes of hockey and that's it,but as stated above by OMG67, there needs to be an incentive for winning a tie game ... save overtime for playoffs only, whatever format you choose.

 

[EvenSteven]

I'd get rid of the shootout and go with 3 on 3 for 10min.

Make each game worth a total of 4 points. If you win in regulation you get the 4 points. If you win in overtime you get 3 points and the loser gets 1.

On the rare occasion nobody scores after 10 minutes of overtime, the game ends in a tie with each team getting 2 points.


Or, since we are deciding every game and we've removed the gimmick of a shoot out, maybe we just do the standings just like baseball. You just have wins and losses. No matter if you win in overtime or not, a win is a win, and a loss is a loss. Then you set up standings just like baseball. You have your division leader at the top and then the rest of the division is x amount of games behind the leader.

Baseball doesn't reward a team with some sort of loser point because they were able to get through nine innings without losing the game. Why should we be rewarding a team because they survived three periods without losing?

 

[EvenSteven]

Another pretty good way to end tie games rather quickly after 60 minutes is be something that I heard Bob McCown on the fan 590 suggest.

If the game is tied after 60 minutes, The game is decided by special teams. Each team gets a shot to score on the power play. He sort of compared it to tie-breaking in NCAA and now NFL football where each team gets an opportunity with the ball.

As is the case now with shootouts, the home team decides whether they go first on the power play or allows the visiting team to go on the power play first. One team goes on a five on three power-play continuously. Once they score a goal, The other team gets their opportunity to go on the power play. So for example, if the first team scored their goal in two minutes and 15 seconds. They put two minutes and 15 seconds on the clock and the other team has that amount of time to score, if they do they win the game if they don't the other team wins the game. End of story.

 

[Otto]

4 on 4 overtime for 10 minutes. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie 0 for a loss... no shootout.

 

[Hammer9001]

Play 60 minutes. Winner gets 3 points. Loser gets nothing. Tie gives each team one point.

Teams will play for the win more often than not, especially late in the season.

I never understood the value of changing the game for the purpose of having a fan go home with a winner and a loser. The teams never cared that a tie was a tie.

I'd be behind this, save I'm a fan of 3 on 3 OT. Keep it, if it's still a tie, then after OT then call it a draw.

 

[OMG67]

I don't disagree with anything in this thread, but the league is going to follow the NHL's lead on anything like this. Shootout skills are important for NHL players so that's what our players need to practice.

Like many other topics, this is just a light convo. We all know the NHL will never not have a winner. Their audience demands it. Too many people they are trying to convert to hockey fans in the United States don’t understand the concept of a tie. Many young Canadian hockey fans also don’t understand that concept becuase they are too young to remember when that used to be the case.