Adam Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 And so du casual fans- Shootouts are for TV dinner hockey fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipers Hair Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 And so du casual fans- Shootouts are for TV dinner hockey fans. 545410[/snapback] Right - if the sport were left in the hands of purists like you, the league would be dead. The likes of Barry Melrose and Wayne Gretsky think it's good...but your right, Sabres lose one and the shootout now sucks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 30, 2005 Author Share Posted December 30, 2005 Right - if the sport were left in the hands of purists like you, the league would be dead. The likes of Barry Melrose and Wayne Gretsky think it's good...but your right, Sabres lose one and the shootout now sucks... 545425[/snapback] I never liked shootouts- let em keep playing till its done. Why not just play quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipers Hair Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 I never liked shootouts- let em keep playing till its done. Why not just play quarters. 545427[/snapback] I'd take that - the OT was awesome... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 30, 2005 Author Share Posted December 30, 2005 I'd take that - the OT was awesome... 545429[/snapback] Yes it was- good hockey sells itself. The best change they could possibly make is to make the rinks bigger- that would fix all the problems that exist.....it would be VERY expensive though. Even if they don't play to a decision in the regular season, it wouldn't matter- they keep telling fans that ties are not good. TO this, I ask why not? People go to see an entertaining game- they don't go to see a tie- or a win or loss. As long as its exciting hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 does anyone actually watch that crap...........with bowl season, the NBA, and the NFL? before the strike they were getting beat by firgure skating in the Nielsons...doubt the strike did them any good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 30, 2005 Author Share Posted December 30, 2005 does anyone actually watch that crap...........with bowl season, the NBA, and the NFL? before the strike they were getting beat by firgure skating in the Nielsons...doubt the strike did them any good. 545436[/snapback] The NBA is boring- all 1-on-1 garbage...college hoops is much better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 The NBA is boring- all 1-on-1 garbage...college hoops is much better 545441[/snapback] definitely not my first choice, unless an NHL game was the only other option Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 The NBA is boring- all 1-on-1 garbage...college hoops is much better 545441[/snapback] Damn right.....the NBA sucks...I was a die hard Knicks fan up until like '97 when they had the "goon squad" but then it became a league of no defense and I have not watched a game since......JUNK.....I'd rather watch an Atlanta vs. Phoenix NHL game over the two best NBA teams anyday!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 i dislike the shootouts, but it helped bring back hockey. i personally never found a hockey game boring, well depending on who was playing but i found nothing wrong with playing a defensive style with a young team. it helped the wild. the casual fan wants to see excitement while the die hard fan will watch it no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 Being a hockey "purist", I am morally opposed to the shootout. I'm not thrilled with going to 4-on-4 for OT either. There are several reasons for my opposition. 1. A shootout takes a team game and reduces it to an individual skills competition. I understand the reason they went to a shootout, TV doesn't sell advertising for OT. I would prefer the advertising model were changed - sell contingent advertising for OT rather than shorten the time OT takes to reach a winner. No other major professional team sport in NA changes the rules to settle a tie game. The NFL doesn't resort to a field goal contest, MLB doesn't resort to a home run contest, and the NBA doesn't resort to a 3 point shot contest, why should the NHL be the only one to decide ties by a skills contest? 2. With the current system where a team is guaranteed a single point for making it to OT, there is an incentive for a team to lay back and not try for the win in regulation. Now that the league is calling obstruction penalties more frequently, this is a more dangerous strategy than in the past, but it still occurs on occasion. 3. It is foolish, IMHO, to have some games worth 3 points and others worth only 2. None of the other major team sports allows this and they are correct in not giving partial points for getting to OT. 4. The biggest reason I am opposed to the shootout. It is stupid to have one set of rules for the regular season and another for the post season. There is NOTHING as exciting in ALL of sports as playoff OT hockey. Eventually, I see the NHL abandoning unlimited playoff OT and going to a shootout (probably after 1 - 20 minute OT period) due to pressure from advertisers and TV networks. I would much rather see the NHL go to a system where all games are worth 3 points. If you win in regulation, you get 3 points. You then play a 10 or 20 minute OT (length of OT depends on whether you scrape the ice before OT or do a full resurfacing). If someone wins in OT, they get 2 points and the loser gets 1. If at the end of 80 minutes no one has scored, then each team gets 1.5 points. The NFL allows for ties after a 5th quarter, I don't see where you would have an abundance of ties at the end of 80 minutes of hockey (especially with the new obstruction penalty enforcement). If you have to keep the ridiculous OT/shootout format, at least make the games worth 3 points across the board. A regulation win or an OT win is worth 3 points to the victor and 0 to the loser. If you go to a shootout, the winner gets 2 and the loser gets 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBill Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 The NFL doesn't resort to a field goal contest....... many good points in your post,but one could argue that NFL overtimes haven't become "de-facto" field goal contests, except you juts have to make one to win. Its really just a coin flipping contest for the most part. Better idea would be a college style OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spun Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 The shootouts have worked well in international play. I am not so sure of it's worth in the NHL as I have only seen one. I do not like teams receiving a point for a loss. This feature makes it more likely that teams with losing records get into the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 I do not like teams receiving a point for a loss. This feature makes it more likely that teams with losing records get into the playoffs. 545585[/snapback] I highly doubt that a team with a losing record will be in the playoffs because of the point from a shootout loss.......There is more of a chance that an NBA team or NFL team will make it it in with a losing record! (Hell even the Padres last year in MLB were barely above .500) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 The NFL doesn't resort to a field goal contest....... many good points in your post,but one could argue that NFL overtimes haven't become "de-facto" field goal contests, except you juts have to make one to win. Its really just a coin flipping contest for the most part. Better idea would be a college style OT. 545559[/snapback] One thing the NFL could do to keep the current OT format and leave its rules essentially unchanged is move the kickoff in OT to the 35 yard line. Before they moved the kickoff to the 30, IIRC the kicking team won in OT slightly more than 50% of the time. Since, its more like the receiving team winning ~75% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 Damn right.....the NBA sucks...I was a die hard Knicks fan up until like '97 when they had the "goon squad" but then it became a league of no defense and I have not watched a game since......JUNK.....I'd rather watch an Atlanta vs. Phoenix NHL game over the two best NBA teams anyday!!!!! 545462[/snapback] So you haven't watched a game in eight years but you know it's junk? The only reason people in Buffalo or from Buffalo don't watch the NBA is because there is no team in Buffalo anyone. A lot of the NBA does indeed suck, but a lot of Baseball sucks and a lot of hockey teams and players suck. A lot of the NBA is very fun to watch, if you happen to have a vested interest in a team. And getting back to the original post, you simply cannot ask a hockey player or team to play overtime for period upon period, or ask a fan to sit there for 4-5 hours in a meaningless game on a weeknight. Especially if the team has the travel or play the next night. It's too taxing on their bodies. They would play overtime if they could but they can't. This is the best system that they have had in a long time, for the players and for the fans. If you don't like shootouts, don't watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGTEleven Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 So you haven't watched a game in eight years but you know it's junk? The only reason people in Buffalo or from Buffalo don't watch the NBA is because there is no team in Buffalo anyone. A lot of the NBA does indeed suck, but a lot of Baseball sucks and a lot of hockey teams and players suck. A lot of the NBA is very fun to watch, if you happen to have a vested interest in a team. And getting back to the original post, you simply cannot ask a hockey player or team to play overtime for period upon period, or ask a fan to sit there for 4-5 hours in a meaningless game on a weeknight. Especially if the team has the travel or play the next night. It's too taxing on their bodies. They would play overtime if they could but they can't. This is the best system that they have had in a long time, for the players and for the fans. If you don't like shootouts, don't watch it. 545599[/snapback] I've tried to watch a few NBA games. I can't do it. There is one player that I think is worth the price of admission: Iverson. That's it. That's all I've seen. I agree with your assessment of hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 Being a hockey "purist", I am morally opposed to the shootout. I'm not thrilled with going to 4-on-4 for OT either. There are several reasons for my opposition. 1. A shootout takes a team game and reduces it to an individual skills competition. I understand the reason they went to a shootout, TV doesn't sell advertising for OT. I would prefer the advertising model were changed - sell contingent advertising for OT rather than shorten the time OT takes to reach a winner. No other major professional team sport in NA changes the rules to settle a tie game. The NFL doesn't resort to a field goal contest, MLB doesn't resort to a home run contest, and the NBA doesn't resort to a 3 point shot contest, why should the NHL be the only one to decide ties by a skills contest? 2. With the current system where a team is guaranteed a single point for making it to OT, there is an incentive for a team to lay back and not try for the win in regulation. Now that the league is calling obstruction penalties more frequently, this is a more dangerous strategy than in the past, but it still occurs on occasion. 3. It is foolish, IMHO, to have some games worth 3 points and others worth only 2. None of the other major team sports allows this and they are correct in not giving partial points for getting to OT. 4. The biggest reason I am opposed to the shootout. It is stupid to have one set of rules for the regular season and another for the post season. There is NOTHING as exciting in ALL of sports as playoff OT hockey. Eventually, I see the NHL abandoning unlimited playoff OT and going to a shootout (probably after 1 - 20 minute OT period) due to pressure from advertisers and TV networks. I would much rather see the NHL go to a system where all games are worth 3 points. If you win in regulation, you get 3 points. You then play a 10 or 20 minute OT (length of OT depends on whether you scrape the ice before OT or do a full resurfacing). If someone wins in OT, they get 2 points and the loser gets 1. If at the end of 80 minutes no one has scored, then each team gets 1.5 points. The NFL allows for ties after a 5th quarter, I don't see where you would have an abundance of ties at the end of 80 minutes of hockey (especially with the new obstruction penalty enforcement). If you have to keep the ridiculous OT/shootout format, at least make the games worth 3 points across the board. A regulation win or an OT win is worth 3 points to the victor and 0 to the loser. If you go to a shootout, the winner gets 2 and the loser gets 1. 545480[/snapback] You make a lot of good points. However, personally I think it is unfair to compare the major sports like you do. First, the only reason there is a shootout is because points (goals) are scored at a far less frequency than in the other sports. Even though this is obvious, it's the only reason hockey does what it does. If goals were as frequent as scoring plays in football or baskets in hoops there would be no discussion. Soccer, the biggest and most popular sport in the world, doesn't even tell the teams or fans when the game is going to end in overtime. I also believe that soccer awards points for ties. Second, hockey is the only team (in North America) that uses a point system for wins, so it's hard to say fairly that they are the only league that awards more points than they others. They are the only league that allows points at all. All others are based on percentages. Third, your complaint that they are the only league to change the rules in the OT session is valid, but only to some degree. They are also the only league to change the rules in the middle of the game. One could counter-argue that no other league takes players off the field of play and changes the number of participants. No other league makes it unfair for one team to play with five and another with four or three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 I've tried to watch a few NBA games. I can't do it. There is one player that I think is worth the price of admission: Iverson. That's it. That's all I've seen. I agree with your assessment of hockey. 545603[/snapback] If you don't like watching Steve Nash play, you don't like sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spun Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 I highly doubt that a team with a losing record will be in the playoffs because of the point from a shootout loss.......There is more of a chance that an NBA team or NFL team will make it it in with a losing record! (Hell even the Padres last year in MLB were barely above .500) 545588[/snapback] It was possible for teams with losing records to get into the NHL playoffs even before the system of giving a point to the loser of overtime games. In 2002-3 the Islanders got in with a 35-34-11-2 record. The current race for the eighth and final playoff spot in the Eastern Conference between Tampa Bay and Atlanta, has both teams flirting dangerously with the .500 mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts