T-Ruff 47 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 (edited) On HNIC's Hotstove intermission feature last night, Pierre Lebrun mentioned that the GMs are meeting next month and will discuss a new overtime format for next year. OT would be 8 minutes in total, 4 minutes of 4 on 4 followed by 4 minutes of 3 on 3, followed by a shootout if necessary. This would significantly reduce the number of shootouts, and Lebrun claims that most GMs favour the idea and it will most likely be implemented. I love it, there's no downside, IMO. After reading about the experimental camp in August, I believed it was inevitable. Edited October 18, 2010 by T-Ruff Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShanahanMan 473 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Awesome! I've always said OT should be extended by another five minutes, but 4 extra minutes of of 3 on 3 sounds wicked. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miller76 463 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 So is it 3 on 2 then, if a team takes a penalty? No minimum players on ice per team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Octopus's Garden 147 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 So is it 3 on 2 then, if a team takes a penalty? No minimum players on ice per team. Probably would then go to 4-on-3. Like it does if a team takes 2 penalties in 4-on-4, it doesn't go to 4-on-2, it goes to 5-on-3. That was a lot of numbers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hooon 1,089 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Probably would then go to 4-on-3. Like it does if a team takes 2 penalties in 4-on-4, it doesn't go to 4-on-2, it goes to 5-on-3. That was a lot of numbers. So they have to blow the whistle after 4 minutes? The only part I don't like about it is the fact that they have to stop OT only to restart it again moments later. What if a team is about to score? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Third Man In 2,091 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Shootout wins don't count to break ties this year, and then they want to expand overtime to further reduce shootouts next year. The proposed changes sound even more absurd than the current system. We can't the league just admit the shootout was a gimmick whose time has past and get rid of it all together? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
atodaso 279 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 they should change it to one minute of 5-on-5 followed by one minute of 4-on-4, then 3-on-3, 2-on-2, 1-on-1... then if no one scores the players have to use their wrong shooting hand for 3 minutes of 3-on-3.... then, if still tied, the winner would be decided by making the goalies wrestle and seeing who pins who first. bring back the W-L-T system already!!! 2 lookalive07 and troubadour reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MacK_Attack 108 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 So they have to blow the whistle after 4 minutes? The only part I don't like about it is the fact that they have to stop OT only to restart it again moments later. What if a team is about to score? I would assume it would be 4:00 on the clock, then another 4:00 if still tied. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T-Ruff 47 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Shootout wins don't count to break ties this year, and then they want to expand overtime to further reduce shootouts next year. The proposed changes sound even more absurd than the current system. We can't the league just admit the shootout was a gimmick whose time has past and get rid of it all together? No because that would be taking a step backwards by bringing ties back into the game. They're slowly finding the balance, once they make all games worth 3 points and increase the shootout shooters to 5 (less important), it will be quite satisfactory. I'm surprised people can complain about this and would even prefer to go back to the pre-lockout system, I for one can't wait to watch me some 3 on 3 OT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barrie 900 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 I got an idea, how 'bout we just go regular 5 on 5 for 5 minutes for OT, and if no one scores in the 5 minutes it's a tie and each team gets a point? Also, shootouts sucks! They're such a letdown after a great game. Seriously I HATE 4 on 4. There's a number of times each overtime a puck leaves the zone when it's 4 on 4, when if there was a fifth guy on the ice, the puck would have been stopped at the blue line and fired back on net, dumped behind the net for a fore-check, or passed to a teammate. Personally I don't think 4 on 4 creates any more offense than 5 on 5, in fact I think it takes it away when the puck goes out of the zone more often, and teams need to get back onside. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dat's sick 1,002 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 I think I'd rather have 4 minutes of 5-on-5 and then 4 minutes of 4-on-4. 3-on-3 is a bit extreme, but on the other hand could be fun simply to see what players like Datsyuk would do with all that ice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barrie 900 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 So they have to blow the whistle after 4 minutes? The only part I don't like about it is the fact that they have to stop OT only to restart it again moments later. What if a team is about to score? Yea I don't like the sound of that either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotty99 302 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Anything that reduces the chances for a shootout is a win in my book Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barrie 900 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 I think all 3 on 3 will do is create more line changes and shorter shifts because guys will tire out fast. Also just like 4 on 4, the puck will be leaving the zone more often, and teams will have to get back on side more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Heaten Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Why not just have 20 minutes 5 on 5 and if nobody continue on 5 on 5 for 20 minutes and keep doing that until someone scores. But no intermission and no TV time outs!!! Why not? Screw regular TV. I'm all for the hockey factor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 So they have to blow the whistle after 4 minutes? The only part I don't like about it is the fact that they have to stop OT only to restart it again moments later. What if a team is about to score? I think a good addendum to that would be that after the 4 minutes, it changes to 3 on 3 after the next stoppage in play. 4 Z Winged Dangler, Echolalia, Dano33 and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 (edited) 4 minutes of 5 on 5 then 4 minutes of 4 on 4 is about perfect, without a shootout. It still works to decrease the chance of a tie (but also making ties more meaningful in a hard fought game - there is no question the intensity in over-time is what it was, as now they know it's not -really- over yet.), and more importantly does not resort to some all-star skills competition gimmick to decide games (3 on 3 and the shootout). The problem before was that there were *too many* ties prior to the lockout, not the ties itself. It seems you could at least come up with a way to make a dent in them, without completely eradicating them from the season and decide close games with the equivalent of a slam dunk competition. Edited October 18, 2010 by egroen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
55fan 5,133 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Not sure if this has been suggested (probably has) but I was thinking the other night. How about 5 on 5 for 5 minutes, followed by 4 on 4 for 5 minutes. The winner gets 2 points, the loser gets 0. Just like a regular game. Then take it to the shootout. Winner gets one point; loser gets 0. There's plenty of time to win the thing for real, but if not, then the winner doesn't get full credit for winning in a skill show. The game is only worth one point, but I'd rather see that than the 3 point games going on now. Instead of saying "hey! You made it out of regulation! Everyone's a winner!" we are now saying, "hey! You had over an hour to make it happen and you didn't. Someone's a loser and someone else is a bigger loser." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Third Man In 2,091 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 No because that would be taking a step backwards by bringing ties back into the game. They're slowly finding the balance, once they make all games worth 3 points and increase the shootout shooters to 5 (less important), it will be quite satisfactory. I'm surprised people can complain about this and would even prefer to go back to the pre-lockout system, I for one can't wait to watch me some 3 on 3 OT. I've never understood how introducing increasingly arbitrary ways to decide games was a step forward from calling games a tie. 4-on-4 and especially 3-on-3 overtimes try to decide games in scenarios that are uncommon during regulation play, and a shootout makes about as much sense as deciding a game by having players shoot from center ice through a hole in a cardboard cutout in front of the net. Do we really need 8 minutes of overtime and then scrape the ice and have a shootout? The current system already adds half an hour to the end of games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 I think a good addendum to that would be that after the 4 minutes, it changes to 3 on 3 after the next stoppage in play. This is what i came in to say. I do like the new format for OT they're considering, though. I expect it'll greatly reduce the amount of shootouts that occur and thus the amount of games that are won and lost on individual talent and not team play. It'll also make what shootouts that do occur that much more exciting because there won't be five of them every night. My biggest concern is that once it gets to 3v3, teams will play very passive and not take any chances in the other team's zone due to the severity that a turnover will cause. It may end up being four minutes of one pressuring and two at the blue line, which I don't suspect will generate a whole lot of opportunities. Sustained pressure might go out the window, because it'd be so difficult to keep the puck in with only three guys to patrol the zone and blue line. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 I've always thought they could borrow from the football overtime playstyle, where teams get back and forth opportunities until someone comes up short. In the case of hockey, one team gets a 2 minute PP, and then the other team gets a 2 minute PP. This goes back and forth until one team converts and the other doesn't. Switches to 5 on 3 PPs after 2 or 3 exchanges. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SouthernWingsFan 854 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 They are overthinking this. While I get it, why complicate it some more? Personally, I like the shootout, even though the Wings have struggled with it for whatever reason(s) recently. The problem isn't overtime format, IT'S THE POINT SYSTEM. You get a point for losing, that's just silly. 0 points for losing at any point in the game, no questions asked. 1 point for a shootout victory 2 points for a win in regulation/overtime 2 martyrme19 and ltgator333 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kook_10 1,705 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 I think all this tinkering hurts the integrity and credibility of the game - especially changes having to do with wins and losses. Any change they make should be agreed to be in effect for a long period of time, like 10 years or something like that. Otherwise it just seems like they're ******* around with the game. 1 martyrme19 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 Better quality on the ice puts people in the seats, not gimmicks. The "Bettman Legacy Tour" rolls on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Travis 576 Report post Posted October 18, 2010 4:00 of 3-on-3 is some Roller Hockey League s***. 3 HadThomasVokounOnFortSt, ltgator333 and martyrme19 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites