Did you even read my post? I don't know what you are responding to. My post explained why we can't have continuous OT during the regular season.
yes I read your post, trust me I donot need your explaination, its not rocket science, but your stmt about " It shows that they weren't *that* inferior to the eventual winner that they were playing." is just assinine!!" are we 8? You want to give participation awards for trying hard?? thats what the OT pt. is a PARTICIPATION AWARD!! Maybe after each game we should give the teams ribbons for a job well done??
I never understood this argument (wanting 3 points for regulation wins so that "all games are the same") The point is making all WINS the same, which it is today. The winning team receives two points, whether it's regulation or an OT win. Seems fair and just to me. The losing team, if in regulation, gets zero, BUT, if they manage to remain tied and hang on past regulation, but still lose in the extra 5 minutes, they get one point as a consolation for at least being able to take it to the point of needing extra time to decide a winner. It shows that they weren't *that* inferior to the eventual winner that they were playing.
1st off, Losing is losing, whether you lose by 1 goal in OT or 5 goals in reguilation you lost you should get squat!! ZEro!! ZILch!! NADA!! NOTHING!!!
My theory on on 3 points for a win in regulation is more about teams fioghting for playoff spots, a +3 point is much better than +1, I think it could really make some of the playoff races more interesting, I would think teams on the outside looking in would really push for regulation wins late in 3rd period of tied games if they knew it was worth 3 points, rather than playing it safe, and playing for OT.