NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) Going to a one-minute penalty in overtime instead of traditional two minutes: The GMs agreed it's too soon to try this in the NHL next season but perhaps can be tried out in rookie tournaments next fall and/or possibly in the AHL. How much more are they going to screw with the game. IMO, there is no reason to make a penalty worth only half the time in OT, simply because they are skating 4 a side. They'd be better off going to a 10 minute, 5-on-5 OT, with regular 2 minute penalties. Thoughts on the league switching to 1 minute minors in Regular Season OT........... Edited February 21, 2007 by Never Forget Mac #25 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeta Power 40 1 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 if this happens next year, im going to kill myself. That is seriously the dumbest thing i've ever heard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aussie_Wing 354 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 Oh man, that is a terrible, terrible idea. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheLegend19 1 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) How much more are they going to screw with the game. IMO, there is no reason to make a penalty worth only half the time in OT, simply because they are skating 4 a side. They'd be better off going to a 10 minute, 5-on-5 OT, with regular 2 minute penalties. Thoughts on the league switching to 1 minute minors in Regular Season OT........... No. Still a penalty. Edit: Will a rule change like this actually be good for the game? Owners may realize that Bettman has done nothing but completely change the game and force him out. That would be good for the game. Edited February 21, 2007 by Manny4Prez Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elriqo28 2 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 How much more are they going to screw with the game. IMO, there is no reason to make a penalty worth only half the time in OT, simply because they are skating 4 a side. They'd be better off going to a 10 minute, 5-on-5 OT, with regular 2 minute penalties. Thoughts on the league switching to 1 minute minors in Regular Season OT........... i dont think going to one minute penalies will be anything extreme, but it sounds kinda dumb....5-5 ot bad i dea....the 4 on 4 in overtime has made it more exciting and face paced, it opens the rink up so that someone could score at any moment Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) Here's another thought. What happens if a player draws blood on a high sticking penalty? Do they award the team a 1-minute double minor, making the penalty worth 2 minutes total? Or do they give them the extra 2 minutes for drawing blood, bringing it to a 3 minute total penalty? Stupid.... i dont think going to one minute penalies will be anything extreme, but it sounds kinda dumb....5-5 ot bad i dea....the 4 on 4 in overtime has made it more exciting and face paced, it opens the rink up so that someone could score at any moment And that's what you're looking for when you watch hockey? Easier scoring? Since when does easier scoring automatically = exciting hockey? Truthfully, some of the best games I've seen this season have ended up 1-0 with a ton of flow to the game. That's just as exciting (if not more) than a 6-5 game with up and down action. Edited February 21, 2007 by Never Forget Mac #25 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 No. Still a penalty. Edit: Will a rule change like this actually be good for the game? Owners may realize that Bettman has done nothing but completely change the game and force him out. That would be good for the game. What does Bettman have to do with this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Learn2LuvIt 245 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 I'll file this idea in with the "Playing OT Blindfolded" idea. Or ...the releasing of hungry lions on the ice during OT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 I'll file this idea in with the "Playing OT Blindfolded" idea. Or ...the releasing of hungry lions on the ice during OT. I was always in favor of a Bubble Hockey game between the two captains to decide the extra point rather than a shootout. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteLightning91 105 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 Of all the problems with publicizing the game, marketing it to the youth in this country, problems with the national TV station, piss-poor attendence in many markets, 1 MINUTE OT PENALTIES IS WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT!!! HOW ******* STUPID CAN THE NHL BE??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
auxlepli 17 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 It's a crazy idea. IMO they need to get rid of OT and go straight to SO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brutus 0 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 HOW ******* STUPID CAN THE NHL BE??? Apparently pretty stupid. but who in their right mind would expect anything different? Next thing they will be making the goals larger getting rid of the sticks turning the ice into grass or turf and changing the puck into a ball and requiring players to only use their feet. that way poor slobs all over the world will be able to appreciate the game and be drawn to it like flies to s*** brutus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted February 21, 2007 Bad idea. Why would the owners want to screw with this? I thought the idea of overtime was trying to decide an eventual winner. Shortening a power play isn't going to help that. Unless they're trying to create more shootouts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheLegend19 1 Report post Posted February 22, 2007 Here's another thought. What happens if a player draws blood on a high sticking penalty? Do they award the team a 1-minute double minor, making the penalty worth 2 minutes total? Or do they give them the extra 2 minutes for drawing blood, bringing it to a 3 minute total penalty? Stupid.... And that's what you're looking for when you watch hockey? Easier scoring? Since when does easier scoring automatically = exciting hockey? Truthfully, some of the best games I've seen this season have ended up 1-0 with a ton of flow to the game. That's just as exciting (if not more) than a 6-5 game with up and down action. Unfortunately, the casual hockey fan doesn't think the same way. They'd probably prefer we count by 2s, unless you score from past the blue line. Then it's 3. An empty net goal is basically a free throw, so we'll only give 1 What does Bettman have to do with this? Is he not the commissioner anymore? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zata40 3 Report post Posted February 22, 2007 that just makes is easier to do something that would cause a penalty, because they wont be punished as much. very bad idea Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevie for president 42 Report post Posted February 22, 2007 Well, penalties are rare in the new NHL, so they should make the penalty less severe and hopefully more players will slash and trip and hook and even high stick. how does this not make sense to anyone else? oh, and to the guy that said some 1-0 games are more exciting, i forgot to quote and im too lazy to hit the back button. i have never agreed more with a statement on this website. look at today's game vs. the hawks. it was basically 3-2 without the empty net but it was one of the best games ive watched all season. sometimes too much scoring is just as dull as not enough scoring. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agalloch Report post Posted February 22, 2007 What a dumb idea. What the hell would happen if someone got a penalty 19:59 into the third period? The opposing team would still get two minutes then. How stupid. If you don't do anything stupid in OT anyway, you don't have to worry about being shorthanded. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
