Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

New Overtime Format Coming?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#21 Datsyerberger

Datsyerberger

    "Dat's yer burger, Hank."

  • HoF Booster
  • 3,097 posts
  • Location:Pueblo, CO

Posted 18 October 2010 - 05:01 AM

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.
If some bored artist wants to make me a signature, feel free to cut loose and do so.

Of course, I could get off my lame rear and do something.

#22 SouthernWingsFan

SouthernWingsFan

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 24,609 posts
  • Location:Mandeville, Louisiana (Greater New Orleans area)

Posted 18 October 2010 - 05:45 AM

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

#23 kook_10

kook_10

    I Like Our Team

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,238 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 18 October 2010 - 06:18 AM

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'ref****** around with the game.

works every time


#24 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,615 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 18 October 2010 - 07:16 AM

Better quality on the ice puts people in the seats, not gimmicks. The "Bettman Legacy Tour" rolls on.

"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#25 Travis

Travis

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,460 posts
  • Location:Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 18 October 2010 - 07:39 AM

4:00 of 3-on-3 is some Roller Hockey League s***.

cc_champs-5_zps34057ff0.png


#26 kook_10

kook_10

    I Like Our Team

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,238 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 18 October 2010 - 07:41 AM

4:00 of 3-on-3 is some Roller Hockey League s***.

:lol:

Right? Why don't they kick field goals?

works every time


#27 edicius

edicius

    Professional drinker.

  • HoF Booster
  • 25,212 posts
  • Location:Budd Lake, NJ

Posted 18 October 2010 - 08:56 AM

I'd be fine with allowing ties again, but make it so neither team gets a point if OT ends in a tie. Makes for a little more urgency then. Get rid of the garbage shootout.

ABV_sig.png

                     Can't listen live? Check out MoreLikeRadio.org for show archives!


#28 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 18 October 2010 - 09:01 AM

About time! Now all they need to do, is fix the point format connected to it and we have gold

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#29 Hatethedrake!

Hatethedrake!

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,496 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 18 October 2010 - 09:19 AM

I'd like to see the league go back to its original roots. After 60 minutes and the game is tied then it ends with both teams getting a point. If each team gets 20 ties then so be it. Save the overtimes for the playoffs. Shootouts suck. Its a garbage way to win a game.
Jordan Tootoo will wreck shop.

We need someone like Parise that can penetrate the box.-blueadams

#30 martyrme19

martyrme19

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL

Posted 18 October 2010 - 09:25 AM

I thought it was funny that no one mentioned that this is our very own Ken Holland trying to push this through:
Ken Holland OT


Anyways - I think a lot of you have it all wrong when it comes to OT. First off - what we need to concentrate on is the allocation of points. Having 4 columns of points in the sports section of the sunday paper looks stupid, is harder to understand for non-hockey enthusiasts (and yes, if you care about your sport, you need to learn to incorporate these types of fans. Honestly, it makes it look like the NHL can't get its s*** together.



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



SPOT ON.

For those of you who were wondering, shootouts are NOT stupid - so quit saying it is. Your stupid if you don't realize that a whole pub can be completely ignoring a hockey game as it plays in the background but as soon as the first person sees that the game is headed to a shootout, people stop what they are doing AND THEY WATCH. My own league just converted to an OT shootout format because of the excitement (fans and players). Dont try to argue by saying, "well we dont care about those fans!"
There are many many reasons why you should care about those "casual" fans - and I guess i'll get into those points if someone is actually stupid enough to tell me otherwise.

I don't want to hear that we need to give a team a point for making it through regulation. No we dont. It isnt in the constitution. The system treats every team fairly so no one can *****.

I also don't understand how people can say they think the shootout is lame and corny, but then think 3on3 hockey is a brilliant idea. 3on3 hockey is WAY more gimmicky than a shootout and though gimmicks do but asses in the seat, if you cross a certain threshold, people don't respect your sport (see the XFL).


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'ref****** around with the game.


agreed
Just for the record, the weather today is slightly sarcastic with a good chance of rain.

#31 Hatethedrake!

Hatethedrake!

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,496 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 18 October 2010 - 09:31 AM

Nope, you don't get it. Shootouts ARE stupid. Nuff said.

Edited by Hatethedrake!, 18 October 2010 - 09:31 AM.

Jordan Tootoo will wreck shop.

We need someone like Parise that can penetrate the box.-blueadams

#32 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,852 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 18 October 2010 - 11:54 AM

Go back to the same format the league had 10 years ago. The OT will be 5 minutes of 4 on 4 like it is now.

2 points for a regulation win
0 points for a regulation/OT loss
1 point for a tie.


This new proposal is just a silly format. 3 on 3 hockey? It's fun to watch, but it's not much more legitimate than having a shootout. I mean, how often do you see 3 on 3 during an actual game? Just another way to give out hokey points for entertainment value.

What's so bad about having a tie? Just means neither team was good enough to win the game in actual play, hence neither team deserves the extra point.
According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#33 edicius

edicius

    Professional drinker.

  • HoF Booster
  • 25,212 posts
  • Location:Budd Lake, NJ

Posted 18 October 2010 - 12:03 PM

What's so bad about having a tie? Just means neither team was good enough to win the game in actual play, hence neither team deserves the extra point.


The one problem we'd see (and I know we used to see it in the past) is that teams will take fewer risks in OT, knowing they could lose the tie point. Fewer risks mean a lessened chance of that tie being broken.

Of course, we have a similar problem with the shootouts now - teams that are highly skilled in the shootout will play for the tie in OT, simply waiting for the almost-guaranteed win in the shootout.

Given the choice between the two, however, I'd prefer to go back to the former. At least that doesn't award loser points.

ABV_sig.png

                     Can't listen live? Check out MoreLikeRadio.org for show archives!


#34 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 18 October 2010 - 12:07 PM

I feel as though we've discussed this a million times on this board... I do agree with many others that they need to keep the changes to a minimum and they should not be changing them ever couple years, it DOES affect credibility AND makes it hard for new fans to catch on, when things are constantly changing... with that said, in a perfect world, they would have got it right, right out of the lockout, but they didn't and it needs adjustment... the problem is... it needs one last adjustment and then they need to leave it as is for at least 10 years... I've been very adamant about my stance on this and I still think the 3pt system is the single best solution - Reward teams who win as a team and make all games worth the same cumulative point total.

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#35 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,852 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 18 October 2010 - 12:11 PM

The one problem we'd see (and I know we used to see it in the past) is that teams will take fewer risks in OT, knowing they could lose the tie point. Fewer risks mean a lessened chance of that tie being broken.

Of course, we have a similar problem with the shootouts now - teams that are highly skilled in the shootout will play for the tie in OT, simply waiting for the almost-guaranteed win in the shootout.

Given the choice between the two, however, I'd prefer to go back to the former. At least that doesn't award loser points.


I don't remember teams being any less aggressive in the past than they are now when it comes to OT play. You sort of said so yourself.

Win/loss records and points are so inflated nowadays because of this blasted shootout.
According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#36 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 18 October 2010 - 12:11 PM

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

I'm still not crazy about this one, as it makes some games worth a different cumulative point total than others, but I can get on board with this one a LOT more than going back to stupid ties, or the current jacked up point system, which makes SO games worth MORE (grand total points awarded on the night)

I don't have a problem with the consolation point for teams that lose in a SO, because you're not losing as a team and it's essentially a tie+
Reg/OT Win - 3pts
SO Win - 2pts
SO Loss - 1pt
Loss in Reg/OT - 0pts

ALL GAMES WORTH 3 TOTAL POINTS. It seems maddeningly obvious to me...

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#37 Konnan511

Konnan511

    #FreePulkkinen

  • HoF Booster
  • 10,339 posts
  • Location:Traverse City, Mi

Posted 18 October 2010 - 05:40 PM

SO would it be 2, 4 minute periods where the first one is 4v4 and the second OT period 3v3? Or would teams have to switch on the fly at the 4 minute mark?

I'm still not crazy about this one, as it makes some games worth a different cumulative point total than others, but I can get on board with this one a LOT more than going back to stupid ties, or the current jacked up point system, which makes SO games worth MORE (grand total points awarded on the night)

I don't have a problem with the consolation point for teams that lose in a SO, because you're not losing as a team and it's essentially a tie+
Reg/OT Win - 3pts
SO Win - 2pts
SO Loss - 1pt
Loss in Reg/OT - 0pts


ALL GAMES WORTH 3 TOTAL POINTS. It seems maddeningly obvious to me...

I've always thought this was obvious as well. Hell, even only 2 pts for OT win and 1 pt OT loss. Three point system just season easier and more efficient.
The Best Of BC
HankthaTank
- Squirrels, they hate to be thrown. / Why is the magical unicorn named Brian... Jedi - I just downloaded the "kids" book, "Go the F--k to Sleep" as narrated by Samuel L. Jackson on my kindle. I am now ready to be a daddy. / *Checks Router* No, I'm positive I didn't hit the "Wings Defense Sucks" button. Electrophile - I'm just glad the Wings were able to win despite the Curse of Brian. ACallToArms - I think Trey needs to put something about payroll tax and deferred income in his sig... Edicius - I'd rather [have] a soundbite of me saying "I like (man sausage)" rather than "I like Crosby".

#38 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,852 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 18 October 2010 - 05:56 PM

If you give 3 points out for regulation wins, then teams will have even more inflated records and point totals.

No reason to award more points. We need to award less.
According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#39 Heroes of Hockeytown

Heroes of Hockeytown

    Big Goal Bob

  • Bronze Booster
  • 13,729 posts

Posted 18 October 2010 - 06:02 PM

If you give 3 points out for regulation wins, then teams will have even more inflated records and point totals.

No reason to award more points. We need to award less.

No points for winning or losing. Welcome to the new NHL: the Nihilism Hockey League.
"We've been in the same spot all year long. We won 50 games for the fourth year in a row. People think we're just hum-drum and boring.
No, you know what we are, we're good. You can't do what we do every single day and not be good." - Mike Babcock

#40 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 18 October 2010 - 07:10 PM

If you give 3 points out for regulation wins, then teams will have even more inflated records and point totals.

No reason to award more points. We need to award less.

Ok
1pt - Reg/OT win
.66pts - SO win
.33pts - SO loss

There, does that make you happier, since you're so hung up on a ridiculous point total in total amount, instead of the value of the total and what it represents....

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users