Mike Brown Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 It was a lame explanation. They're the exact same thing. The choice of who goes is not important at all. But shootouts are completely separate from the actual gameplay. They happen when the game is over. Penalty shots are within the context of a game. If anything, penalty shots are like field goals and free throws. Both of which can determine the outcomes of games in their respective sport, but are within the boundaries of the start of the game and end of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 But shootouts are completely separate from the actual gameplay. They happen when the game is over. Penalty shots are within the context of a game. If anything, penalty shots are like field goals and free throws. Both of which can determine the outcomes of games in their respective sport, but are within the boundaries of the start of the game and end of the game. The issue is that it's forced. The shoot out, 3 on 3, whatever. It all happens just like it can during a game basically, but I don't want scripted situations in a game. Play the game until someone wins or let it end in a tie. Don't change the game to force a winner to appear. I just don't see how 3 on 3 isn't a gimick, but the SO is. Equally gimicky and lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie McKraut Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 6 on 6, 5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3, it is all the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Brown Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 6 on 6, 5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3, it is all the same. I kind of agree. Basically, there needs to be more games decided in regulation, fewer games in OT, and even fewer games in the shootout. In my ideal type of season, 70 game would be decided in regulation, 8 games in the OT period, and 4 games in the shootout per team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 They do have 5 on 3 PP's in OT. I've seen it done before. To me anything that happens in playoff games is real hockey. To me it's that simple. So you can disagree with me all you want, but it's just the way I feel. Regardless, I am not for 3 on 3 hockey. What I am for is 10 minute OT. I won't have any issues if they do go to a 3 on 3 format though. I know 5 on 3 happens in overtime, that's not what I'm saying. My point is that you are saying 3 on 3 is real hockey because it COULD happen in a playoff game depending on penalties, well you COULD also have teams exchange 5 on 3 powerplays every two minutes depending on penalties until somebody scores in the playoffs, so why is that not an acceptable form of overtime for you? 6 on 6, 5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3, it is all the same. Not at all, they are all played very differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Brown Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I know 5 on 3 happens in overtime, that's not what I'm saying. My point is that you are saying 3 on 3 is real hockey because it COULD happen in a playoff game depending on penalties, well you COULD also have teams exchange 5 on 3 powerplays every two minutes depending on penalties until somebody scores in the playoffs, so why is that not an acceptable form of overtime for you? Not at all, they are all played very differently. Alright. You got me. However, I still don't mind 3 on 3, and would prefer 3 on 3 to the shootout regardless. If anything it's still more "real" than the shootout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.