• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Guest CaliWingsNut

I hate shootouts

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

To clarify, teams don't intentionally "not win" in OT so they can go to a shootout. But I wouldn't be surprised if a coach instructed his team to avoid getting scored on at all costs in order to make it through 5 minutes and get to a shootout, if that team has skilled shooters and a capable netminder.

That seemed to happen for a decent stretch with Pittsburgh and Anaheim last season; seemed as though both teams were always going to shootouts. Whether that's definitive strategy or not, who knows (seems more likely with Pittsburgh than Anaheim)? I'm not a big fan of the shootout though. It's like turning the end of an NBA game into a free-throw contest or a MLB game into a home run derby. It ruins the whole "team sport" concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shootouts are great for entertainment. Who doesn't like to see sick moves? However, sports should not be about entertainment. Sports should be about passion for the game. Do any of us consider pro wrestling a sport?

I disagree about sports not being entertainment... thats really the sole purpose of them... Not to mention they are trying to tack on a Luxuary/Entertainment tax to all sporting events.

You go drink booze, eat food, watch people on a stage... sounds to me like any other form of entertainment you pay to get into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ZetterbergFourty   
Guest ZetterbergFourty

Shootouts are garbage.

The thing I dont like the most about them is that they f*** with records, i.e. Martin Broduer wins.

They need to go back to the 2 point system.

In no other sport that I'm aware of whether professional or otherwise, provides the LOSER of the game any points. With the possible exception of 5-YEAR-OLDS SOCCER!!! It's insane.

One thing I've never taken into consideration is the thing about teams purposely tying a game because they figure they'd have a better shot at winning in the SO, I've gotta say this makes me a bit sick to my stomach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest CaliWingsNut   
Guest CaliWingsNut
I've never liked the shootout either. I understand why there is a shootout, and I appreciate that games don't go on forever when there are potential back-to-backs, but they might as well just flip a coin as far as I'm concerned.

Its not nearly as exciting as the penalty shot its meant to mimic. Every shootout I leave feeling like someone came in when the game was going overtime and shut off the lights. Its made even worse by only having 3 shooters each, with really the possibility to win it after 2.

I never get the feeling something big is on the line in a shootout, every round is like a total crap-shoot. The goaltender and shooter might as well roll dice to see who wins each round: "Man! Great 6 by Ozzy! Pwn'd Toews with his 4! w00t!"

:thumbup:

I disagree about sports not being entertainment... thats really the sole purpose of them... Not to mention they are trying to tack on a Luxuary/Entertainment tax to all sporting events.

You go drink booze, eat food, watch people on a stage... sounds to me like any other form of entertainment you pay to get into.

I agree... I'm sure hockey players play for their hate of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although i am a fan of the Shootouts i also was watching the Leafs Caps game on CBC and Jim Hughson and the other analyst were talking about this minor league team that after the first overtime they play a second overtime which becomes a 3 on 3. To me that doesnt sound like a bad idea it will eliminate the shootouts and more likely may be more exciting then the shootouts. Do you guys agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although i am a fan of the Shootouts i also was watching the Leafs Caps game on CBC and Jim Hughson and the other analyst were talking about this minor league team that after the first overtime they play a second overtime which becomes a 3 on 3. To me that doesnt sound like a bad idea it will eliminate the shootouts and more likely may be more exciting then the shootouts. Do you guys agree?

OT and shootouts are fine the way they are, although I wouldn't mind best-of-5 instead of just best-of-3. It's the points/standings for losing in OT or shootout that's the problem and silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It turns the game into surviving 60 minutes for 1 point, then buying the second.

The thing is... that was what the shoot out was added to erase.

It used to be teams would defend until OT, and just take the point.

Now they defend until the shoot out and get the point.

I like 3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for SO win, 0 for ANY loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's basically an all-star skill event that should in no way decide the outcome of a game. And because the league knows it's not a legit way to decide a game, they award the loser point.

I can't remember the stat, but this season a lot of games are going to a shootout. One of the goals was to make overtime actually relevant so teams would try and decide the game there. It's apparently not happening.

I say go to 10 minutes 4 on 4 overtime, no shootout. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, and zero for losing. no pro sport should ever award points for losing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is... that was what the shoot out was added to erase.

It used to be teams would defend until OT, and just take the point.

Now they defend until the shoot out and get the point.

I like 3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for SO win, 0 for ANY loss.

Yeah, but it's even more arbitrary for that. They only need to defend until OT starts to get the point. I thought 4 on 4 was great before they had shootouts...they should've made it longer or even looked at 3 on 3. People may laugh at that idea, but how is playing 3 on 3 hockey LESS representative of the actual sport than a shootout?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's basically an all-star skill event that should in no way decide the outcome of a game. And because the league knows it's not a legit way to decide a game, they award the loser point.

I can't remember the stat, but this season a lot of games are going to a shootout. One of the goals was to make overtime actually relevant so teams would try and decide the game there. It's apparently not happening.

I say go to 10 minutes 4 on 4 overtime, no shootout. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, and zero for losing. no pro sport should ever award points for losing.

Couldn't agree with this post more. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's basically an all-star skill event that should in no way decide the outcome of a game. And because the league knows it's not a legit way to decide a game, they award the loser point.

I can't remember the stat, but this season a lot of games are going to a shootout. One of the goals was to make overtime actually relevant so teams would try and decide the game there. It's apparently not happening.

I say go to 10 minutes 4 on 4 overtime, no shootout. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, and zero for losing. no pro sport should ever award points for losing.

And it will turn overtime into a boring event because teams will not want to take any chances and lose that extra point.

Not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And it will turn overtime into a boring event because teams will not want to take any chances and lose that extra point.

Not good.

Except that's what's happening right now.

They've never given it a chance with 4 on 4 under the new rules, and for 10 minutes. I thought about no points for ties but that wouldn't be fair and would probably wreak too much havoc with the standings.

Obviously ties aren't the most exciting outcome, but it would preserve the integrity of the game and keep from inflating standings from the loser point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best way would be "endless" overtime until goal or overtime periods (like 10min or something) which end in the goal.

The biggest reason why shootout suck, is that too often you see teams playing great in the OT and you just see that if that continues they're gonna win it, but then the time runs out and the other team takes the victory in a shootout. Something just isn't right when that happens. The one team plays better hockey, but the other can still win it in this shootout gambling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest CaliWingsNut   
Guest CaliWingsNut

New idea...

Best of 5 - 5v5, no goalies, skate from bluelines for the puck resting @ center faceoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now