Time to Go Back to Ties

[The Red Helmet]

The current overtime system is a joke. Three on three is fun to watch but it kills the integrity of each individual game that is decided by it.

Distributing 2 points in some games and 3 points in other games is just silly. When you have an extra point being given out in some games it devalues the importance of a win. You should either have a 3-0, 2-1 point system or go back to ties. From a fan perspective, an overtime win is not as satisfying as it used to be or should be, and an overtime loss is not as devastating.

I am 35 and I remember as a teenager watching the Sabres in the 90's, and it was so exciting to get an overtime win. Jeanneret would go nuts, you would pump for fist and maybe scream a wooo and go to bed happy. Winning a regular season overtime win is cheapened today and emotional up isn't as good.

You need the emotional ups and downs of sports to keep it interesting. The "well at least we got a point" is hurting the game. Stop giving away those points and let me feel elated with a win, or hurt with a loss.

What the NHL should do is go to a 7 or 8 minute 4 on 4 overtime. Four on Four still keeps the game open and three on three is fun, but come on, how can anyone take that seriously.

If there is no score in overtime then you have a time. There will be a lot less ties than there were in the old days and you now have a situation where there are no loser points. Much more fun to watch.

Click to read more...

 

[Territory]

3 on 3 is fun and the losing team still gets a point.

Shootouts need to go.

Make 3 on 3 10 minutes long and if its still tied after 10, each team gets 1 point.

I would expect very few games to end in a tie with a 10 min 3 on 3 when there is no benefit to stalling. No chance for an extra point in a coinflip if you go the distance.

 

[The Red Helmet]

3 on 3 is fun and the losing team still gets a point.

Shootouts need to go.

Make 3 on 3 10 minutes long and if its still tied after 10, each team gets 1 point.

I would expect very few games to end in a tie with a 10 min 3 on 3 when there is no benefit to stalling.

It is fun to watch but for me, it devalues the game. It makes me less interested in watching the NHL overall. Also the whole point of my post was that giving the loser a point makes a win less valuable and less satisfying for a fan. There is a lot of parity in the league and a lot of games go to overtime. Having shootouts, 3 on 3 hockey and loser points decide who makes the playoffs, hurts the game in my opinion.

 

[OverTheLine]

I think ties would be a welcome addition. The shootout is stupid.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Game goes to OT
Both teams get a point.
10 minute 3-on-3 for the additional point
If neither team scores, no more points are awarded in that game.

Then they go to a shootout, which doesn't award points, but the winning team gets a shootout win in the standings, which will act as the first tiebreaker when determining playoff position.

Everybody wins. A teams point totals aren't artificially inflated by the shootout, spectators to the game still get a winner and a loser, and the shootout still has some impact (albeit decreased) on the standings.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

**** ties.

 

[mostunderratedposter*]

3 on 3 is fun. Do 10 mins of 3 on 3 and if that doesn't score do 2 on 2 and if that doesn't work after 10 mins do 1 v 1 and if that doesn't work do just the goalies one on one.

 

[The Red Helmet]

No no no no. No loser points. I may be in the minority and I am certainly not as die hard a fan as most of the people on this board but this wins less important. Getting an overtime win is much more fun when you know you didn't have a loser point to fall back on.

 

[Rebels57]

I think we can all agree that the shootout needs to go, but ties are not the answer.

 

[EON]

I agree. Either go back to ties, or go to a 3-2-1 point system. I'm tired of the artificial parity three point games create now.

 

[The Red Helmet]

**** ties.

A loser point is worse than a tie.

 

[The Red Helmet]

I agree. Either go back to ties, or go to a 3-2-1 point system. I'm tired of the artificial parity three point games create now.

Correct, how do you even judge what a .500 team is now? I see commentators and fans talk about a 20-20-8 team being .500 and I think no. That team does not have half the possible points they have played for. But some games are two points and some are three, it is so stupid.

 

[volcom92886]

Game goes to OT
Both teams get a point.
10 minute 3-on-3 for the additional point
If neither team scores, no more points are awarded in that game.

Then they go to a shootout, which doesn't award points, but the winning team gets a shootout win in the standings, which will act as the first tiebreaker when determining playoff position.

Everybody wins. A teams point totals aren't artificially inflated by the shootout, spectators to the game still get a winner and a loser, and the shootout still has some impact (albeit decreased) on the standings.

I actually really like this idea.

 

[Rick74*]

I absolutely DETEST that a losing team can get a point. [MOD]

Game goes into overtime 3v3 for ten minutes winner gets two points loser gets nothing.

In the event of a tie...nobody gets any points.

Call it tuff love.

(just realized we don't need to have 2 points awarded for victory if this were the case which I'm 100 percent ok with) But if you want keep with the 2 points win method, then I suggest that 2 points awarded if you win in regulation, and in OT 1 point is awarded.

NO POINTS FOR LOSING. PERIOD. You LOST. You get NOTHING.

 

[The Red Helmet]

I actually really like this idea.

I disagree. Still have the problem of some games being worth more than others.

 

[Narow]

How about a 3 point system.
3 for a regular win
2 points to the winner in overtime 1 for the loser as i think that a team who managed to survive the full 3 periods deserve to snatch a point form the other team.
Tie 1 point each

Shootouts should only be played in the games where there must be a winner. (standings point ties, finals etc)
Would perhaps make the league a bit more uneven top to bottom in points but we'd have an better look at what teams that have played great (winning mostly in the 3 periods).
Im just thinking loud here.

 

[blue425]

Game goes to OT
Both teams get a point.
10 minute 3-on-3 for the additional point
If neither team scores, no more points are awarded in that game.

Then they go to a shootout, which doesn't award points, but the winning team gets a shootout win in the standings, which will act as the first tiebreaker when determining playoff position.

Everybody wins. A teams point totals aren't artificially inflated by the shootout, spectators to the game still get a winner and a loser, and the shootout still has some impact (albeit decreased) on the standings.

This is a great idea. Even if they kept ot at five minutes and did everything else you suggested it would still be great.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

A loser point is worse than a tie.

I'm a vocal proponent of a 3-2-1-0 point system, but the system as is does exactly what the NHL wants it to do - create false parity keeping more teams in the playoff race longer, thus keeping more eyes on the product for longer. Any personal preference is going to lose to the one that creates more revenue.

That and **** ties.

 

[Butch 19]

I think we can all agree that the shootout needs to go, but ties are not the answer.

No, we don't all agree. The shoot out is awesome

 

[Butch 19]

Correct, how do you even judge what a .500 team is now? I see commentators and fans talk about a 20-20-8 team being .500 and I think no. That team does not have half the possible points they have played for. But some games are two points and some are three, it is so stupid.

Who cares what does or doesn't define a .500 team? Just look at the point totals - done!

 

[Channelcat]

A loser point is worse than a tie.

Totally agree. Bring back the tie!!!

 

[NotWendell]

I want 10 minutes of 3 on 3 and keep the shootout. More importantly, EVERY game should be worth 3 points.
Regulation win=3 pts, Overtime win=2, Overtime loss=1, Regulation loss=0

 

[Big McLargehuge]

I want 10 minutes of 3 on 3 and keep the shootout. More importantly, EVERY game should be worth 3 points.
Regulation win=3 pts, Overtime win=2, Overtime loss=1, Regulation loss=0

This would be the ideal solution in my eyes. Unfortunately the NHLPA doesn't want those extra 5 minutes of OT and the NHL wants the false parity so...I'm not expecting it any time soon.

 

[ClydeLee]

I don't see how ties showcase more integrity... it's all a random subjective choice to whatever ail you want to end regular season games.

After watching that bonehead of final play by the Edmonton forwards last night, it also makes me just dislike 3 on 3 even more. It's sure fine if you want dumb defensive decisions made every few seconds leading to chances because that's all I keep seeing in a lot of 3 on 3 and I guess of a coach type mentality it's more frustrating than fun even watching it for random teams across the league.

 

[Apotheosis]

The loser point is an artificial way for the NHL to create more parity. It blurs the line between bubble teams and rebuilding teams. I personally despise it.