Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 36

Thread: Overtime in the NHL: the Idea, the Format, the Circus Sideshow

  1. #1
    Currently in the Quinn-Bin Bantam Division
    Ozzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Suffolk County, NY
    Posts
    1,629
    Rep Power
    48

    Overtime in the NHL: the Idea, the Format, the Circus Sideshow

    I admit it, I'm an old school traditionalist when it come to hockey. I go back to all those days of yesteryear, when if a player like Scott MacGregor wore a helmet, he and Bobby Rousseau were the rarities. That being said, I simply had to see whether I'm the only one out here who totally cannot stand the current NHL OT system and how they handle ties and whatnot.

    First off I still feel as though Overtime should be in the playoffs only.

    If the 2 teams are tied after 3 periods, fuck it...1 point apiece and see you next time!

    OT was a novelty back then, and it was very exciting part of the game. You knew it was the playoffs and "sudden death" always was a nail-biter!

    These teams travel way more than they used to back in the 70's, and there are now 82 games instead of 80. Why is it necessary to play a 3v3 for 5 minutes, only to be followed by a shootout? We need a decisive winner??? In the regular season??

    Why? This is supposed to boost the NHL viewership?? Ratings?? Gimme a break! Yeah, the shootouts are cool to watch, but it's a skills competition, for fuck sake! Why are we taking 60 minutes of hard fought hockey, and settling the outcome in a 3 ring circus of back to back skills events?

    I think it's a big pile of horse shit, and all it does is drain these guys even more, and open up the chance to injury in a 3v3, which is NOT normal hockey. It's a side show attraction in my eyes.

    There are a lot of people say to change the 3v3 to 4v4 or 5v5, but you know what, I don't think it serves any purpose at all. If a road team gets a tie after 60 minutes in a tough building, so be it. I know there's no chance the NHL will ever go back to the original SUCCESSFUL format, but I'm curious to see if you guys think this puke is actually working, and/or serves any purpose at all.

    Have at it boys!

  2. #2
    ContraQuinndicated BSBH Prospect
    G1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    17,649
    Rep Power
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozzy View Post
    I admit it, I'm an old school traditionalist when it come to hockey. I go back to all those days of yesteryear, when if a player like Scott MacGregor wore a helmet, he and Bobby Rousseau were the rarities. That being said, I simply had to see whether I'm the only one out here who totally cannot stand the current NHL OT system and how they handle ties and whatnot.

    First off I still feel as though Overtime should be in the playoffs only.

    If the 2 teams are tied after 3 periods, fuck it...1 point apiece and see you next time!

    OT was a novelty back then, and it was very exciting part of the game. You knew it was the playoffs and "sudden death" always was a nail-biter!

    These teams travel way more than they used to back in the 70's, and there are now 82 games instead of 80. Why is it necessary to play a 3v3 for 5 minutes, only to be followed by a shootout? We need a decisive winner??? In the regular season??

    Why? This is supposed to boost the NHL viewership?? Ratings?? Gimme a break! Yeah, the shootouts are cool to watch, but it's a skills competition, for fuck sake! Why are we taking 60 minutes of hard fought hockey, and settling the outcome in a 3 ring circus of back to back skills events?

    I think it's a big pile of horse shit, and all it does is drain these guys even more, and open up the chance to injury in a 3v3, which is NOT normal hockey. It's a side show attraction in my eyes.

    There are a lot of people say to change the 3v3 to 4v4 or 5v5, but you know what, I don't think it serves any purpose at all. If a road team gets a tie after 60 minutes in a tough building, so be it. I know there's no chance the NHL will ever go back to the original SUCCESSFUL format, but I'm curious to see if you guys think this puke is actually working, and/or serves any purpose at all.

    Have at it boys!
    Oh, have at it we will.

    I HATED ties. It's basically "well, times up, let's split the points and go home", and it encouraged conservative play (because if you gave up the goal in OT, you went from 1 point to zero).

    Further, 3v3 is without a doubt the most exciting thing we see in any game. It's non-stop, skillful, fast-paced, and fun.

    My bigger issue is that there's no greater reward for getting it done in 60 minutes, and that we still do the shootout. More 3v3, please.
    Hidden Content
    Blueshirts Brotherhood. We do what we must because we can - for the good of all Rangerkind

  3. #3
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,963
    Rep Power
    583
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozzy View Post
    I admit it, I'm an old school traditionalist when it come to hockey. I go back to all those days of yesteryear, when if a player like Scott MacGregor wore a helmet, he and Bobby Rousseau were the rarities. That being said, I simply had to see whether I'm the only one out here who totally cannot stand the current NHL OT system and how they handle ties and whatnot.

    First off I still feel as though Overtime should be in the playoffs only.

    If the 2 teams are tied after 3 periods, fuck it...1 point apiece and see you next time!

    OT was a novelty back then, and it was very exciting part of the game. You knew it was the playoffs and "sudden death" always was a nail-biter!

    These teams travel way more than they used to back in the 70's, and there are now 82 games instead of 80. Why is it necessary to play a 3v3 for 5 minutes, only to be followed by a shootout? We need a decisive winner??? In the regular season??

    Why? This is supposed to boost the NHL viewership?? Ratings?? Gimme a break! Yeah, the shootouts are cool to watch, but it's a skills competition, for fuck sake! Why are we taking 60 minutes of hard fought hockey, and settling the outcome in a 3 ring circus of back to back skills events?

    I think it's a big pile of horse shit, and all it does is drain these guys even more, and open up the chance to injury in a 3v3, which is NOT normal hockey. It's a side show attraction in my eyes.

    There are a lot of people say to change the 3v3 to 4v4 or 5v5, but you know what, I don't think it serves any purpose at all. If a road team gets a tie after 60 minutes in a tough building, so be it. I know there's no chance the NHL will ever go back to the original SUCCESSFUL format, but I'm curious to see if you guys think this puke is actually working, and/or serves any purpose at all.

    Have at it boys!
    You're an old school traditionalist? Ya don't say? I thought I'd open this thread and read a suggestion for tie games to end with a check-off, or just a center ice tilt between he goalies

    3v3 is the best thing to happen to hockey since takin gout the red line, but I'd love to hear the reasoning on "exposing players to injury".

    That said, if you want to go back to ties, I'd suggest giving a tie 0 points, since neither team "won the points". Don't split the points, no one plays for ties. everyone would go for it, no one can afford to leave points on the table.

  4. #4
    Senior Member BSBH Prospect
    Blue Heaven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Queens
    Posts
    10,539
    Rep Power
    104
    3v3 OT is the best thing that happened to hockey the last few years.
    I was at the game yesterday and with about 3:00 left in the game I was like I hope the Rangers go to OT b/c I want to see what their skill players can do 3v3. I was on the edge of my seat the entire OT, especially that one stretch where it was back and forth with like 3 odd man rushes.
    I agree that their isnt an incentive if a team wins in regulation and their should be. When the NHL first introduced a loser's point in OT, the NHL said that they didnt want to do 3-2-1-0 points system b/c it would be too confusing for the average fan with all the columns in the standings, but then they added a 4th column for ROW anyway. Time to revisit 3 points for a regulation win.

  5. #5
    Currently in the Quinn-Bin Bantam Division
    Ozzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Suffolk County, NY
    Posts
    1,629
    Rep Power
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    You're an old school traditionalist? Ya don't say? I thought I'd open this thread and read a suggestion for tie games to end with a check-off, or just a center ice tilt between he goalies

    3v3 is the best thing to happen to hockey since takin gout the red line, but I'd love to hear the reasoning on "exposing players to injury".

    That said, if you want to go back to ties, I'd suggest giving a tie 0 points, since neither team "won the points". Don't split the points, no one plays for ties. everyone would go for it, no one can afford to leave points on the table.
    I knew you'd get a kick outta that one!!

    Maybe "exposing players to injury" is a little bit of a reach. I'm basically saying that making guys play an extra 5 min on however many OT occasions, is more of a chance to open up the possibility of maybe pulling a hammy or taking one to the knee. Probably a little bit of a stretch but a possibility nonetheless.

    Either way, I'm just not really for it. to me, Pete...it's a side show. It displays talent, sure...but I don't think it's the right way to settle a 60 minute battle of teams.

    Gimme that old time rock and roll, baby!! =)

    I do like the "center ice tilt between the goalies". That would be perfect!!!

  6. #6
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,977
    Rep Power
    107
    I hate the shootout, but it could be worse. Soccer uses shootouts to determine championships. How shitty would that be?

  7. #7
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,963
    Rep Power
    583
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    I hate the shootout, but it could be worse. Soccer uses shootouts to determine championships. How shitty would that be?
    Ask Peter Forsberg

    But seriously, soccer is a fucked up sport but I kind of admire their commitment to "These are our shitty rules, and we'll live and die by them."

  8. #8
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3,504
    Rep Power
    49
    I actually like the shootout, but I would like to see OT changed to 3v3 for 4 minutes, then 2v2 for 1 minute, then the shootout if needed.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,977
    Rep Power
    107
    How about continued 5v5 and after every minute of no goal the goalies shed a piece of equipment? Run it until someone scores.

  10. #10
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,963
    Rep Power
    583
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    How about continued 5v5 and after every minute of no goal the goalies shed a piece of equipment? Run it until someone scores.
    Only if you start with their masks.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    CBrowningPI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Clearwater, FL
    Posts
    931
    Rep Power
    25
    Keep the 3 vs. 3, but you can only play your 4th line players for the full 5 minutes.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    789
    Rep Power
    24
    Fix how the 2 point game “magically” becomes a 3 point game first.

  13. #13
    Russian Meddling BSBH Rookie
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    29,311
    Rep Power
    365
    Shootout and 3v3 are practically the same. One is 1 on 0, the other is 2 or 3 on 0, usually the result of some random bounce.

    Wait a few seasons and the 3 on 3 will lose its luster. Just like "no ties!", and 4v4, and the shootout all did previously.


    I would like to see more coincidental minors called, with the potential of 4v4 and 3v3 during regulation. That "fight" yesterday should have been 4 on 4 for 2 (or 4) minutes.
    Lias Andersson for #AJT2019

  14. #14
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Sod16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    853
    Rep Power
    27
    The number of regulation ties increased substantially with the initial introduction of OT and then especially with the advent of the loser point. There are a ridiculous number of regulation ties now. FLA has 8 and we are in the second week of November. Before all this started, 8 would be a fairly typical number for a whole season. Whatever "excitement" is generated by OT is offset by the lack of excitement in arranged truces in tie games during the third period. It used to be that the home team or favorite was gunning like mad for the win in a game tied in the third period. No more.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Bugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,447
    Rep Power
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersIn7 View Post
    Fix how the 2 point game “magically” becomes a 3 point game first.
    This.

    Plus play 3 on 3 for 10 minutes. It's fun. Wouldn't want the playoffs to be that, but regular season it's fine.

  16. #16
    Currently in the Quinn-Bin Bantam Division
    Ozzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Suffolk County, NY
    Posts
    1,629
    Rep Power
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Sod16 View Post
    The number of regulation ties increased substantially with the initial introduction of OT and then especially with the advent of the loser point. There are a ridiculous number of regulation ties now. FLA has 8 and we are in the second week of November. Before all this started, 8 would be a fairly typical number for a whole season. Whatever "excitement" is generated by OT is offset by the lack of excitement in arranged truces in tie games during the third period. It used to be that the home team or favorite was gunning like mad for the win in a game tied in the third period. No more.
    That's kinda where I was going with this thing. The sideshow bullshit I think takes away from the game itself. 2 teams fight it out for 60 minutes and it gets decided by a fucking metamorphosis of what we know to be hockey...a 3v3. Now don't get me wrong I love seeing breakaway's as much as anyone, but the shootout has watered that feeling down as well. You see it so often, it's not even exciting.

    I remember when a penalty shot used to make me leave a little shit ball in my PJ's with excitement...and now it's like. "Fuck it!, I can see this pretty much any game I watch".

    I can totally see your guys' points of view, but I just don't like it...never did. I love the NHL playoff hockey format with the full OT, and continuous play until sudden death. I hope to god they don't change that too one day.

  17. #17
    day-to-day Junior Division
    fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Too far from MSG
    Posts
    5,014
    Rep Power
    106
    NHL has gotten so confusing with standings. It used to be just points. Now we have regulation wins and regulation plus overtime wins. Shootout gives fans an opportunity to see offensive players against goalies.

    For standings, I'm in favor of regulation and five minute overtime. If tied after overtime, but teams get 1 point for tie in standings. If you want 'exhibition' shootout so fans get a winner/loser, fine.

    But it would be nice to just see standings go back to W-L-T... 2 points for win, 1 point for tie. Teams with the most points make the playoffs.

    Tiebreaker (for teams with same point totals) is number of wins, followed by goal differential.
    "We're all f*cked. It helps to remember that." - George Carlin

    "How many Cups you've got?" - Esa Tikkanen

    "Hatred can keep you warm when you run out of liquor" - Ray Ratto, Dan Patrick show 1/20/2017

  18. #18
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,977
    Rep Power
    107
    No ties. Just get rid of the loser point and do away with the shootout. These guys can skate 3 on 3 until someone scores. It wouldn't take that long before someone scores. Less than a full period's worth of hockey in probably 99% of games.

  19. #19
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3,504
    Rep Power
    49
    ..

  20. #20
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,963
    Rep Power
    583
    Yea I'll take 3v3.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •