| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
CaliforniaSeal
Top Prospect
Canada
99 Posts |
 Posted - 03/13/2011 : 22:52:12
|
AS many of you know, I detest games being decided by a shootout and i don't like 3 pts awared in a game. Here is my proposal when a game ends in a tie in regulation during the regular season.
-Game ends in a tie, the two teams play the 4 on 4 overtime, if a goal is scored the winning team gets 2 points, the losing team gets zero.
- If both teams fail to score in overtime they both get one point.
- There is still a shootout but there is no extra point awarded. The shootout victor gets a point counted towards a new tiebreaker system.
- The new tiebreaker system works on how many tiebreaker points you have (shootout wins). At the end of the season teams that are tied will now be placed by how many tiebraker points they have instead of wins. Wins would be the next tiebreaker decider.
-I know this will make shootouts unimportant for most teams but I don't like a game being decided by one shooter and the goalie. This way the shootout still stays in the game. Any thoughts.
No cup for Dino, what a shame
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 04:58:46
|
Even though that would be a HUGE improvement over what is happening now, I still don't see why the shootout is there, really. Tiebreakers can easily go by wins (best way to determine a better team, IMHO), then head to head record, then goals. All of those stats reflect things from actual games, as opposed to a "specialty play" - a circus act.
To me, the shootout is just as arbitrary as having two guys throw a slapshot at the net and see whih one is clocked as the fastest. Or race two guys around the rink, see who makes it around first. Or stand at the end of the rink with 5 pucks, and see how many you can get in the opoosite net. It's sort of a ridiculous thing, to me, and always has been.
Anything that is not part of playoff hockey, should not be in the game of hockey (besides the tie, which you need for time/energy saving). How simple is that?
2 points for a win. 1 point for a tie in reg., O/T lasts 5 min 5 on 5.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
 |
|
|
spade632
Rookie
Canada
247 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 08:29:19
|
I like the idea of getting rid of the "3 point" game.
Incidentally, the NHL's own tie-breaking procedure minimizes the importance of shootouts. The new tie-breaker only counts regulation and overtime wins in a tiebreaker, not shootout wins.
Rules as follows:
quote:
* - Division leaders are seeded 1, 2, and 3 in Conference standings. If two or more clubs are tied in points during the regular season, the standing of the clubs is determined in the following order:
1) The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage).
2) The greater number of games won, excluding games won in the Shootout (NEW for 2010-11). This figure is reflected in the ROW column.
3) The greater number of points earned in games between the tied clubs. If two clubs are tied, and have not played an equal number of home games against each other, points earned in the first game played in the city that had the extra game shall not be included. If more than two clubs are tied, the higher percentage of available points earned in games among those clubs, and not including any "odd" games, shall be used to determine the standing.
4) The greater differential between goals for and against for the entire regular season
Of course, it's continuous OT in the playoffs and should always remain so.
Really, they should use continuous OT in Medal games in the IIHF / OIympics etc instead of a shootout. I can see only playing a shootout in the prelims and medal round as players are playing many games in a short time, but for the "Final" (i.e. gold medal and bronze medal games at least) they should just play until a team wins instead of going to the shootout. |
|
|
|
Statman
Rookie
Canada
125 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 10:52:09
|
Well you've got my vote CS. I actually don't mind the shootout as much as others, at least they're exciting, but the three point game is just ridiculous. The league only shoved it down our throat to lessen the pain for teams that lose in the shootout, but it wreaks havoc on the standings.
Of course, I actually happen to feel that a tie is still an acceptable outcome and I would prefer to increase the 4 on 4 to ten minutes and just do away with the shootout altogether.
Just my two cents. |
|
|
|
Guest7100
( )
|
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 12:09:05
|
| Get rid of overtime all together in the regular season, 3 points for a win and 1 point for a tie at the end of regulation. Would make fore some more entertaining thrid periods. |
|
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 15:20:43
|
| I can't see them changing the rules, and personally I like the shootouts. A tie game is a pretty dull ending. |
|
|
|
Statman
Rookie
Canada
125 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 15:43:54
|
| But if you make the 4 on 4 ten minutes, you would get much fewer ties. And if they're still tied after that, then it probably deserves to be a tie, dull or not. |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 16:28:41
|
It is clearly illogical that only 2pts are awarded during regulation, and suddenly an extra point is found. Was there a giant cloud, with a caption saying "magic happens here" when they refashioned the points system after the lockout?
I really don't get it! WHY do people want to "get rid of" the 3pt game?
The simplest solution would be to actually make it a 3pt game in the first place!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why not just make a regulation win worth 3pts?
We know the NHL won't go back to a win-loss-draw system, and they love their shootout because it supposedly draws more fans to the game??(NHL, give me proof!!)
|
Edited by - polishexpress on 03/14/2011 16:35:51 |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2011 : 19:36:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Statman
But if you make the 4 on 4 ten minutes, you would get much fewer ties. And if they're still tied after that, then it probably deserves to be a tie, dull or not.
I've heard this suggestion before and it would be cool to see. It would prob force teams to play more than just two sets of forwards, which we often see and basically extend their benches! One problem i could see though is that without cleaning the ice after the 3rd, it could get pretty slow out there. 5 Extra mins already, then throw in another 5? Might have to "resurface" the ice before OT in that case? I'm guessing time would be an issue as this would add a considerable amount!
Are you suggesting no shootout if still tied or are you saying it'd still go to one? I guess they could do away with another zamboni session if they did a full job after the 3rd? Dunno, still think time would be an issue, even with most/all rinks having 2 Z's working the ice. |
|
|
|
Guest4434
( )
|
Posted - 03/15/2011 : 00:46:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by polishexpress
Why not just make a regulation win worth 3pts?
Yeah, that's the one!
Regulation win = 3 points
OT/SO Win = 2 points
OT/SO Loss = 1 point
This is the way! It solves all the problems. The only thing that people will not like about it is that it's a change... people don't generally like change, but it would undoubtedly work really well.
Further, a team is more deserving of getting full points for a regulation win.
I do like the novelty of the shootout, but no it isn't a great way to solve things, but a lot of petty disputes are solved with nothing more than rockpaperscissors. You must admit, though, that it is fun and exciting to watch. With the 3 point system, you keep the shootout (although the first post was a good suggestion, it leaves the shootout rather redundant). |
|
|
|
Guest2622
( )
|
Posted - 03/15/2011 : 07:39:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by just1n
I can't see them changing the rules, and personally I like the shootouts. A tie game is a pretty dull ending.
I couldn't disagree with this more. I think that ties actually help add intensity to rivalries. When you don't settle things in one game because two teams are evenly matched, it makes the anticipation for the next game that much more exciting.
I miss ties and yes 3 point games stink. I like the 4-4 and wouldn't mind seeing that extended but I have little use for the shootout.
2 point for the win and splitting those in the event of a tie was just fine and made sense. They fixed something that wasn't broke.
The problem was that they were trying to fix overtime to make it more exciting so that teams didn't sit on their 1 point, but I think the 4-4 addresses that with more open ice. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2011 : 20:40:07
|
Ahhh yes, the advent of the 3 point game....
At first I was adamantly in favour of the 3-2-1 points set-up for game outcomes. However there are 2 good reasons why I, personally, thought better of it.
First, there is the standings. The number of points that teams would have would be staggering. For example, let's say a team had a W-L-OT/SOL record of 40-30-10. They have 30 regulation wins (90 pts), 10 OT/SO wins (20 pts), 30 regulation losses (0 pts) and 10 OT/SO losses (10 pts). That's 120 friggin' points for a .500 club! If you apply it to this season's final standings, it's staggering to see the teams having all those points. Hard to swallow...
Secondly, I would prefer there to be some form of historical continuity and comparison. You can better compare teams over ages when there are the same number of total points available in any contest. This is not the case any longer, of course.
There is a solution that satisfies both of these issues: Half-Points.
Yep, you read that right...2 pts for a regulation Win, 1.5 pts for an OT win, 0.5 pts for an OT loss and of course, bupkiss for a regulation loss.
Now you can still more readily compare teams historically, and the standings are more palatable and believable.
More importantly, all games should have the same number of points given out upon conclusion, this just makes sense. But here's an example of why it is more important than "just making sense".
Let's say there is a team that has 96 points and is 8th place in their conference going into the final night of the regular season . They have played all 82 of their games and are done and waiting. The team in 9th place has 95 points, and the team in tenth has 94 points and they are playing against eachother. The way it is now, if that game goes to OT and tenth place wins it, both of the 9th and 10th place teams can make the playoffs when factoring in tiebreakers!!
This seams inconceivable that if you were coach of a team that was in this 8th place scenario, that it is in any way acceptable that both teams that are behind you in the standings could surpass you even though they are playing against eachother of all things!!!
The NHL says it doesn't want ties, well then there definitely has to be a WInner and a Loser, methinks!! And in this scenario, two teams facing eachother will end up winning.
I dislike the shootout for deciding games as well. And I have a solution for that too: have one in every game!!
What???
Yep: have one at the end of the second period in EVERY SINGLE GAME so that both teams already know who will win the game if OT ends in a tie!!
Voila!! |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2011 : 22:11:50
|
@99Pickles: The half-points solution is very similar to the approach of 3pts for a regulation win solution.
One problem, half points would be a deterrent to new hockey fans. People watch hockey and pay attention to the NHL as a pastime, recreation, and relaxation. They wouldn't want math and fractions put in there, it would only serve to confuse.
Remember, the NHL is a business, and they will only change the point system if it will guarantee more revenue. That's why shootouts were introduced. No one can deny the gimmick gets more people to pay attention. Even ESPN & TSN have more reason to put NHL highlights on their nightly reel thanks to shootouts.(ie, would we have had the Omark & Stamkos debacle this year?) |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2011 : 08:52:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by polishexpress
@99Pickles: The half-points solution is very similar to the approach of 3pts for a regulation win solution.
One problem, half points would be a deterrent to new hockey fans. People watch hockey and pay attention to the NHL as a pastime, recreation, and relaxation. They wouldn't want math and fractions put in there, it would only serve to confuse.
Remember, the NHL is a business, and they will only change the point system if it will guarantee more revenue. That's why shootouts were introduced. No one can deny the gimmick gets more people to pay attention. Even ESPN & TSN have more reason to put NHL highlights on their nightly reel thanks to shootouts.(ie, would we have had the Omark & Stamkos debacle this year?)
Yes, that suggested half-points system is, in fact, identical to the 3 point system...except for the fact that with the 50% more points given out in the 3 point system the standings will look absurd with the massive number of points all the teams will have. That will be just as deterring as "fractions"....except that baseball and basketball haven't deterred any fans with their fractions ( 1/2 game back...2 1/2 games back....3 1/2 games back....).
I don't believe seeing a few teams with a ".5" in their points is being too troublesome. It isn't great to see it either, but we are talking about honouring the sport (new fans have to accept it for what it is), maintaining accuracy (all games dole out the same number of points), historical continuity (2 total points has always been the number of points given out in a contest).
If it is going to be viewed as 3 different ways for a team to have performed in a game, then there has to be 3 different amounts of points awarded in accordance to these 3 different performances.
Subsequently, there definitely must be the same total amount of points given out for every game as well.
I believe the .5 system is the lesser of two evils.
Maybe the solution is really this: there are only 2 ways for a team to have performed in a contest, Win and Lose. |
|
|
|
Guest6572
( )
|
Posted - 04/13/2011 : 10:08:40
|
- 3 points for a regulation win
- 2 points for an overtime win
- 1 point is awarded to the overtime loser
- Both teams awarded 1 point in the event of a tie
- NO shootout
This system is flawless. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
My propsal for ties / overtime / shootouts 
