nucci Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 They've already got a gimmick in place called the shoot out. I agree...this isn't much better.
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 I agree...this isn't much better. At least it still involves multiple people actually having to play some sort of positional game. I personally can't wait to see it. Regular season overtime is pretty much a sham as is, so they might as well open it up a bit. I still think less players on the ice is where the game will eventually go to in the distant future.
nucci Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 At least it still involves multiple people actually having to play some sort of positional game. I personally can't wait to see it. Regular season overtime is pretty much a sham as is, so they might as well open it up a bit. I still think less players on the ice is where the game will eventually go to in the distant future. It will be difficult to get the players to agree to cut the rosters. They would not agree to more than 5 minutes of OT.
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 It will be difficult to get the players to agree to cut the rosters. They would not agree to more than 5 minutes of OT. That's why I said distant future. It might be something like 20+ years, but I think they go there some day.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 A better idea is to get rid of OT's all together and reward zero points for ties. That way teams will be going all out at the end of games knowing that it is win or nothing. Put the emphasis on winning and nothing else.
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 A better idea is to get rid of OT's all together and reward zero points for ties. That way teams will be going all out at the end of games knowing that it is win or nothing. Put the emphasis on winning and nothing else. Ties are still going to happen. Now just try to picture yourself as the fan who just sat through a game that in the end means absolutely nothing. That system would anger a lot of people.
Brawndo Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 (edited) Schedule released at 10 AM today per White and Harrington. Edited June 25, 2015 by BRAWNDO
X. Benedict Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 A better idea is to get rid of OT's all together and reward zero points for ties. That way teams will be going all out at the end of games knowing that it is win or nothing. Put the emphasis on winning and nothing else. Or you can do that scoring thing the MISL used to use. Scoring by quarter, or whatever that was.
TrueBlueGED Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Ties are still going to happen. Now just try to picture yourself as the fan who just sat through a game that in the end means absolutely nothing. That system would anger a lot of people. Not that I'm in favor of this proposal, but is there a system which won't anger a lot of people?
Brawndo Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Not that I'm in favor of this proposal, but is there a system which won't anger a lot of people? Cage Match between HCs at the end of OT? @frank_seravalli: #Sens agree on deals with RFAs Mark Stone (3 years, $3.5M AAV) and Mika Zibanejad (2 years, $2.625M).
Brawndo Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Sabres at Oilers Dec 6 Oilers at Buffalo March 1
Brawndo Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 @TSNBobMcKenzie: Pending UFA Michael Frolik hasn't been able to reach an agreement with WPG so he's in FLA today to meet with other interested clubs.
Taro T Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Randy Carlyle? You mean the guy who received a third place vote for the Jack Adams Trophy? That would be the one.
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 That would be the one. I can't wait until it leaks out who voted for him. These award voting systems always seem dumb to me, but this one takes it to a new level.
LabattBlue Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 3-3 will be exciting! I love all the hockey purists labeling it a gimmick. Adding something that will be exciting to end the game? How dare they do this.
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 3-3 will be exciting! I love all the hockey purists labeling it a gimmick. Adding something that will be exciting to end the game? How dare they do this. I've never quite understood how people call themselves purists when trying to shoot down things like bigger nets. Look at all the changes we've seen over the years, whether its no touch icing or moving the nets closer to the end boards (and then further away again). Did those same purists have issues with those changes too? The game is constantly changing, so the purist defense just seems lazy to me.
Trettioåtta Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 I've never quite understood how people call themselves purists when trying to shoot down things like bigger nets. Look at all the changes we've seen over the years, whether its no touch icing or moving the nets closer to the end boards (and then further away again). Did those same purists have issues with those changes too? The game is constantly changing, so the purist defense just seems lazy to me. I wonder how much they complained when the sticks changed to carbon fibre
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 I wonder how much they complained when the sticks changed to carbon fibre That's a great one, along with all the other equipment updates.
Taro T Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 I wonder how much they complained when the sticks changed to carbon fibre IIRC, not as much as when aluminum hit the stage.
LTS Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Or you can do that scoring thing the MISL used to use. Scoring by quarter, or whatever that was. We'll do it like they do in youth hockey tournaments. 1 pt for winning a period, .5 points for tying. 2 pts for winning the game, 1 pt. for tying. So if you win all 3 periods you get 5 points. Now each period has value. :)
X. Benedict Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 We'll do it like they do in youth hockey tournaments. 1 pt for winning a period, .5 points for tying. 2 pts for winning the game, 1 pt. for tying. So if you win all 3 periods you get 5 points. Now each period has value. :) I enjoy your fragrance. :)
Samson's Flow Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 3-3 will be exciting! I love all the hockey purists labeling it a gimmick. Adding something that will be exciting to end the game? How dare they do this. So when there is a penalty in 3-3 overtime, the rules posted online state that the team then moves to 4 on 3 for the duration of the penalty. I assume when the penalty is over the penalized player then comes back on the ice making it 4 on 4 for a while until there is a stoppage in play. Then it goes back to 3 on 3? That's the only way it could work, but it seems very confusing. So you could actually have 5 on 4 or 4 on 4 for a pretty long duration in overtime if there are multiple penalties.
shrader Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 So when there is a penalty in 3-3 overtime, the rules posted online state that the team then moves to 4 on 3 for the duration of the penalty. I assume when the penalty is over the penalized player then comes back on the ice making it 4 on 4 for a while until there is a stoppage in play. Then it goes back to 3 on 3? That's the only way it could work, but it seems very confusing. So you could actually have 5 on 4 or 4 on 4 for a pretty long duration in overtime if there are multiple penalties. That's the way it currently works right now in the rare case where you get a two man advantage in OT. It really shouldn't disrupt much since it will be fairly rare.
Samson's Flow Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 That's the way it currently works right now in the rare case where you get a two man advantage in OT. It really shouldn't disrupt much since it will be fairly rare. That's what I figured it just seemed kind of strange that you can have more than the allotted number of players based on the rules for OT. It's just not sitting right with me for some reason. :unsure:
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Ties are still going to happen. Now just try to picture yourself as the fan who just sat through a game that in the end means absolutely nothing. That system would anger a lot of people. Doesn't that happen all the time under the current system? Or you can do that scoring thing the MISL used to use. Scoring by quarter, or whatever that was. What's wrong with a simple wins/loses system. Why do we need anything else?
Recommended Posts