Why can't we have a longer 3v3 and no shootout???

[Naruto*]

3v3 is way better than shootouts. Shootouts suck! Why not play 3v3 for longer like 20 minutes and then have a shootout if needed. 5 minutes is not enough!

Click to read more...

 

[Jerzey Devil]

Most people are ready to go home when it gets too late. On your average regular season game at least.

 

[SladeWilson23]

Longer OT was shot down by the players association.

 

[Harry22]

I would go 3 on 3 for 10 minutes instead of 5.

 

[Sheppy]

I would go 3 on 3 for 10 minutes instead of 5.

I agree with this too. If you cant pot a goal 3-3 for 10 minutes, end 'er in a tie.

 

[Channelcat]

I agree with this too. If you cant pot a goal 3-3 for 10 minutes, end 'er in a tie.

Yup, thats the way to do it.

 

[JA]

The NHLPA refused to have its players play more than five minutes of overtime. "Wear and tear" concerns are the reason.

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/nhlpa-gets-stubborn-and-illogical-about-nhl-overtime-changes-160330191.html

NHLPA gets stubborn and illogical about NHL overtime changes
By Greg Wyshynski
24 June, 2015 12:03 PM
Puck Daddy


...

So rather than seven minutes of overtime like the AHL had, we have five minutes of 3-on-3 and no 4-on-4.

The NHLPA balked at the extra two minutes of play, which breaks down to roughly two extra shifts (if that) for players, albeit in an end-of-game track meet. The PA has been steadfast in guarding against “wear and tear” for its players, despite having marathon overtimes in the playoffs and agreeing to participate in a preseason international tournament in 2016.

...

https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/nhlpa-whining-about-potential-3-on-3-ot-format-203305581.html

NHLPA whining about potential 3-on-3 OT format
Greg Wyshynski
Puck Daddy
February 2, 2015

...

The 3-on-3 overtime format in the American Hockey League has dramatically reduced the number of godforsaken shootouts we have to watch, which is obviously great news for lovers of actual hockey.

Are there concerns about that format – 4-on-4 for three minutes, followed by 3-on-3 following the first whistle after that, for a total of seven minutes – successfully transferring to the NHL? Absolutely. It could be an ultra-conservative snooze, as teams cut down on any odd-man chances by playing methodically. It hasn’t necessarily been like that in the AHL, but who knows?

The NHLPA has a different concern, which is the health of the players.

"My real concern is that top guys are going to be put in these situations, and there will be more wear and tear on them," NHL Players' Association executive Mathieu Schneider told USA TODAY Sports.

"We've seen over the years that rules that are implemented in leagues below and they don't always have the intended effect when we bring them to the NHL because the players are more consistent and more talented," Schneider said. "I'm not sure we would see the same results at the NHL level."

Schneider went as far to say that he assumed that the NHLPA would oppose any increase in the number of minutes for overtime – a whole two more minutes! – because of that wear and tear.

...

 

[Cawz]

3v3 is way better than shootouts. Shootouts suck! Why not play 3v3 for longer like 20 minutes and then have a shootout if needed. 5 minutes is not enough!

Beacsue its too taxing on the star players, especially if they have to hop on a plane after the game and play the next night in another city. The players have to agree to any changes made, so why would they agree to soemthing that makes their job harder and increases the chance of them getting injured?

Edit: Yeah, see above. This isnt a video game. These are real humans. They may be athletes, but there are limitation as to how much they can be pushed, especially when its the star players that are affected the most.

 

[Channelcat]

The NHLPA refused to have its players play more than five minutes of overtime. "Wear and tear" concerns are the reason.
]

Which is silly. Theres been plenty of goalies injured in shootouts, probably more than players getting injured in 5 minutes of OT.

 

[JetsHomer]

Which is silly. Theres been plenty of goalies injured in shootouts, probably more than players getting injured in 5 minutes of OT.

Can you name some examples?

 

[Mad Brills*]

the 10 min of 3 3 ending in a tie is a good start, but again nhl won't like games ending tied

 

[KingsFan7824]

The PA has been steadfast in guarding against “wear and tear†for its players, despite having marathon overtimes in the playoffs and agreeing to participate in a preseason international tournament in 2016.

Give them more money, and they might play more 3v3. Playoff OT is a different ballgame. That's the kind of thing players play for. International tournaments, or pre-season games in Europe, again, that's either some money, or basically a free trip overseas with your teammates. Nobody wants to play more in early December, when you have a game the next night in a different city.

10 minutes of 3v3 probably would be fun, and games would probably not last the full 10 minutes, but the PA would have to get something out of that.

 

[BruinDust]

In my world every regular season game would be continuous 3 on 3 OT until there is a winner. I would imagine the vast majority of them would be over before the 2nd OT.

But the players, flat out, would never go for it, at least not without some major, major concession from the league. They took issue with it for the all-star game, it is exhausting I'll give them that.

And TV networks would likely take issue with it as well.

So it would never happen.

But if it did, it would be great.

 

[Cawz]

Give them more money, and they might play more 3v3.

And where that more money going to come from? The owners?

Can you name some examples?

John McStoppuck, Nick Goalieman and Nikolai Saveitov, just to name three off the top of my head. So yeah, plenty. It seems like every shootout, they are stretchering a goalie off at the end...

 

[StoneHands]

Most people are ready to go home when it gets too late. On your average regular season game at least.

I would bet most games would end earlier if they continued 3v3 rather than stop play, clear/shovel the ice, go to commercial break and then have a shootout that could last 3 rounds or 15 rounds.

 

[Dog]

3v3 has to be exhausting on the players, making it longer could lead to more injuries

 

[StoneHands]

Can you name some examples?

John McStoppuck, Nick Goalieman and Nikolai Saveitov, just to name three off the top of my head. So yeah, plenty. It seems like every shootout, they are stretchering a goalie off at the end...

I specifically remember Viktor Fasth when Wheeler deked him and after a quick search, Ryan Miller against Florida last year.

 

[StoneHands]

3v3 has to be exhausting on the players, making it longer could lead to more injuries

But the entire game is increasingly more exhausting for the players as it goes on already. Is there any data that points to more injuries happening in the final few minutes of a game or in OT as compared to earlier in the game? I don't know why adding another 5 minutes to 3v3 would automatically result in more injuries if there's nothing to suggest is already happens late in games. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I've just never heard of that being true.

 

[Dog]

But the entire game is increasingly more exhausting for the players as it goes on already. Is there any data that points to more injuries happening in the final few minutes of a game or in OT as compared to earlier in the game? I don't know why adding another 5 minutes to 3v3 would automatically result in more injuries if there's nothing to suggest is already happens late in games. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I've just never heard of that being true.

More fatigue = more possibility for injury.

Its that simple.

 

[StoneHands]

More fatigue = more possibility for injury.

Its that simple.

That's a great theory and all but it sounds like just that, a theory. My question is, are there more injuries in the last 5 minutes of the 3rd period than say the first 5 minutes of the 2nd period? If that's the case then you have a point.

I would bet that injures happen at a higher rate during regulation than in OT. It's more physical, more players on the ice so less space, more shots are taken so more shots are attempted to be blocked. 3v3 seems pretty safe for the players.

 

[TMLife*]

more fatigue also means the whole ice will be moving slower too...

I’m for continuous 3v3 OT until it’s decided. You’re honestly telling me that the players are like, well we’re done 5 minutes, I don’t really care for the extra point, lets get off the ice now... what a load of ****! They are pro athletes out there wanting to WIN IT every shift! I guarantee them winning it in a shootout is a lot less fulfilling then a player winning it in OT.

I’m done, SO’s are a joke to the integrity of the game. They will be gone by next year, book it.

 

[Caeldan]

3v3 is way better than shootouts. Shootouts suck! Why not play 3v3 for longer like 20 minutes and then have a shootout if needed. 5 minutes is not enough!

I'd eliminate 3on3 entirely and just do a best of 5 shootout and call it a night.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

7 minutes of 3 on 3

if no teams score...tie game

simple

 

[Dog]

That's a great theory and all but it sounds like just that, a theory. My question is, are there more injuries in the last 5 minutes of the 3rd period than say the first 5 minutes of the 2nd period? If that's the case then you have a point.

I would bet that injures happen at a higher rate during regulation than in OT. It's more physical, more players on the ice so less space, more shots are taken so more shots are attempted to be blocked. 3v3 seems pretty safe for the players.

Science has proven many times that fatiguing muscles increases the risk of injury. Heres a quote from a journal article "As mentioned previously, Dorman(9) reported hamstring injuries were more common early or late in game or practice situations." This study looked at warm up (reason for early injury) and fatigue (late injury) of the hamstrings (http://www.jospt.org/doi/abs/10.2519/jospt.1992.16.1.12?code=jospt-site). I'd find more but I don't have the time right now.

Plus, any added extra time also creates a bigger risk for injury.

 

[RandV]

more fatigue also means the whole ice will be moving slower too...

I’m for continuous 3v3 OT until it’s decided. You’re honestly telling me that the players are like, well we’re done 5 minutes, I don’t really care for the extra point, lets get off the ice now... what a load of ****! They are pro athletes out there wanting to WIN IT every shift! I guarantee them winning it in a shootout is a lot less fulfilling then a player winning it in OT.

I’m done, SO’s are a joke to the integrity of the game. They will be gone by next year, book it.

Yes that's about quite literally what they've said, through the NHLPA. They'll do OT in the regular season but have always been against going more then 5 minutes.

Also have fun when the SO is still here next year, and a year later, and another year later... and so on.