Time to Go Back to Ties
- Thread starter The Red Helmet
- Start date
- Oct 31, 2007
- 39,377
- 41,809
It is the NHL's business so that can do whatever they want. The problem for the NHL is that if the teams get too far apart in the standings some teams take don't play very hard "saving it for the playoffs".... sounds like "this game don't matter" not a good way to hype people up.
That and star players would take games off for rest. another way to say don't bother tuning in untill the playoffs.
1 point 2 point, Who cares? It seems to me most people have fun at shootouts, until they lose
Baseball as well, technically... although they are exceedingly rare.
And hell, soccer too. Let's not forget about MLS either.
Ties are incredibly stupid imo.
A sporting event is a competition. Competition is all about wining or losing - ties are just dumb.
A sporting event is a competition. Competition is all about wining or losing - ties are just dumb.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 39,377
- 41,809
A competition is about a competitive atmosphere. If two teams played to a tie after 70 minutes of play, something about that game made it a competitive one. One where the two teams were evenly matched that game.
So why force a winner?
FuriousSenator
Registered User
This. Parity has the nasty side effect of killing meaningfulness.
Winning 5 games in a row is great, but not when you lose 5 straight right after... Or if you lose a bunch of OT games and somehow still go up in the standings. It creates a constant, almost random, yo yo effect which personally I find tiring and uninteresting.
As mentioned in the other thread, the possibility of a Leicester city type historical sports event in the NHL has been literally eliminated by parity measures.
FuriousSenator
Registered User
KingsFan7824
Registered User
If you want ties, you got 'em. Turn the game off at the end of regulation if both teams are tied. That's when both team get a point. That's how it was for decades, when hockey was played by real men, and the league was full of integrity run by real men. If you love a tie for a hard days work, they still exist.
The 3v3 and SO, that's something extra today. The winning team in that situation gets an extra point. If that's not real hockey, and it's the brainchild of Bettman, just don't watch it. Teams that rely on that extra OT/SO point, over 82 games, they won't do well anyway. So you don't really have to watch it.
The way things are now, it covers all bases. Ties in regulation if neither team can best the other in a 60 minute sample size. A little fun pond hockey in OT, with a winner point being handed out to the winning team. And, as a last resort, if you need a "winner" and "loser" for the night, you get yourself a breakaway contest to get it done, and those wins don't count in terms of tie breakers.
But, oh no, there's some artificial parity! It barely does anything, but it's a problem. As if anyone following the league doesn't know who the good and bad teams are.
http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...62017&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=pointPctg
There's the league standings. Half way down, that's average. Problem solved.
The 3v3 and SO, that's something extra today. The winning team in that situation gets an extra point. If that's not real hockey, and it's the brainchild of Bettman, just don't watch it. Teams that rely on that extra OT/SO point, over 82 games, they won't do well anyway. So you don't really have to watch it.
The way things are now, it covers all bases. Ties in regulation if neither team can best the other in a 60 minute sample size. A little fun pond hockey in OT, with a winner point being handed out to the winning team. And, as a last resort, if you need a "winner" and "loser" for the night, you get yourself a breakaway contest to get it done, and those wins don't count in terms of tie breakers.
But, oh no, there's some artificial parity! It barely does anything, but it's a problem. As if anyone following the league doesn't know who the good and bad teams are.
http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...62017&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=pointPctg
There's the league standings. Half way down, that's average. Problem solved.
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
You say gimmick, others say competition, skill and fun.
And until fans start leaving games after OT, the shootout will remain. But that's not happening is it - every fan is on their feet living and dying with each shot. (and the tie game will never return to the NHL - which is a no-brainer!)
Watching shootouts must pain anti-fun fans like you, and watching fans enjoy it must make it even harder!
Good luck!
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
KrisLetAngry
MrJukeBoy
I agree. We should have ties in the playoffs too. Maybe two teams can share the Stanley Cup. It will be great. All about the competition.
BackToTheBrierePatch
Justice for Cricket
deciding a team game in a 1 on 1 skills competition is worse.
I really dont know the NHL survived for 80 years without ties
VainGretzky
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2015
- 13,253
- 10,989
Ties might have been dull for casual fans of the game but at least, it didn't change the game.
3-on-3 and shootouts change the game. They're exciting because they're relatively novel and casual fans couldn't care less about the (history of the) game so they like seeing gimmicky pond hockey.
Yes, it actually is exciting since there's two less players on both teams but it's not (pure) hockey. At least, it gets a win/loss most of the time and if there's no score as a result, they can screw the goalie with constant breakaways until someone scores.
Having a shootout be a 'tiebreaker' for a playoff position is pathetic in my book. A skills competition to decide who is in or out of the playoffs? That's lame.
3-on-3 and shootouts change the game. They're exciting because they're relatively novel and casual fans couldn't care less about the (history of the) game so they like seeing gimmicky pond hockey.
Yes, it actually is exciting since there's two less players on both teams but it's not (pure) hockey. At least, it gets a win/loss most of the time and if there's no score as a result, they can screw the goalie with constant breakaways until someone scores.
Having a shootout be a 'tiebreaker' for a playoff position is pathetic in my book. A skills competition to decide who is in or out of the playoffs? That's lame.
Maybe, they should have 5-on-5 with no goalie in either net....bound to have a winner before the OT is up. No need for a shootout then.
KingsFan7824
Registered User
You know what fixes that? Winning your games, especially in regulation. If you do that, you don't have to worry about anything any other team does. If your season comes down to a skills competition, then you haven't done enough during the season, and you've earned your season coming down to a coin flip.
Nhl $4 billion in revenue in 2015.
MLS, $400 million in revenue in 2015.
Yup, they catching up fast lol
.
Mandar
The Real Maven
Why is a regulation time win more valuable than an OT win? Most ideas have this same thing, but why should a team get rewarded with an extra point to win in 60 minutes rather than 65? OT exists to try to determine a winner....so why is an OT win deemed to be less valuable?
Your tool brings you to the right neighbourhood (between .559 and .556), but not to the average.
I use this:
http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/2017.html
Under "Team Statistics", you have the league average (.565).
I used Montréal, but you can use any team.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Biggest Chokers Showdown: Toronto Maple Leafs VS San Jose Sharks- Latest: Frank Drebin
-
WCSF | Vancouver Canucks vs. Edmonton Oilers | Round 2 - FIGHT!- Latest: Reverend Mayhem
-
Rumor: Rumours & Proposals Thread | Previous Poll Punted, Pristine Prospect Procurement Poll Pinned
- Latest: Whoshattenkirkshoes
-
F Ivan Demidov - SKA-1946 St.Petersburg, MHL (2024 draft)- Latest: WeThreeKings
