Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bonginator11

Would this new rule give the Devils a chance?

Recommended Posts

I like it. Anything that cuts down on shootouts is good with me.

Edited by MadDog2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the shootout is the equivalent of syphilis, then 3 mins of 4-on-4 and 4 mins of 3-on-3 followed by a shootout is more like crabs...still kind of ickey, but not as much. At least it could mean less shootouts, which I'm all for...never liked them and never will.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sick of the NHL letting the goddamn Red Wings make all the rules already :P

 

just do a 4 on 4 Overtime for ten minutes and play damned hockey!!

 

Not to mention ties never hurt anyone....ask the Bengals and Panthers!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd eliminate the shootout and just use the playoff format. Play until someone wins. If you want to do it 4 on 4, I'd be ok with that.

Or do like we used to do on NHL 94 back in the day, pull the goalies and whoever scores the most wins.

Edited to add, for our less than perceptive members, the NHL 94 part was a joke.

Edited by mfitz804

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd eliminate the shootout and just use the playoff format. Play until someone wins. If you want to do it 4 on 4, I'd be ok with that.

Or do like we used to do on NHL 94 back in the day, pull the goalies and whoever scores the most wins.

Edited to add, for our less than perceptive members, the NHL 94 part was a joke.

I am so happy to see that someone else played NHL 94 like that haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did the same a couple of times re: NHL 94, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breakaway, Forehand to backhand to forehand, shoot. 100% effective.

Our boys should try it in the shootout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the shootout is the equivalent of syphilis, then 3 mins of 4-on-4 and 4 mins of 3-on-3 followed by a shootout is more like crabs...still kind of ickey, but not as much. At least it could mean less shootouts, which I'm all for...never liked them and never will.

This is basically how I feel. While 3 on 3 isn't really hockey, it much more closely resembles it than a shootout does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering our team now, full of old and slow and unskilled players, NO, an extended 4-on-4 or 3-on-3 won't help us against much of the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great idea and would be very exciting but I don't see it helping us since talent and creativity would be on display and we have neither. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

either 10 mins of 4v4 or OT till there is a winner.

 

Also I HATE the fact the OTgame are worht 3 pts while regulation games are worth 2, it seems assiinine!.  Make regulation wins worth 3 pts!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a novel idea....  How about a freaking tie after 60 mins or 5 minute 5 on 5 OT.  This gimmicky sh!t is all stupid and not real hockey.  It's not like they're going to do it in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with everything except keeping the shootout. All it is, is a soccer-style gimmick for the casual fans who want a thrill. Outside of a true penalty shot, it's just not hockey-like to decide a close game based on who can beat a goalie one on one. I'll just be happy if one day, they come to their senses, get rid of the shootout, and if you still can't get a winner after dropping down to 3 on 3 then just call it a tie already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Continuous OT is impossible in a sport like hockey for the regular season. Too physical a game to do it for a sport where you can conceivably go multiple periods scoreless. Plus with the way the schedule is and 82 games a season no way the PA would allow it, TV would hate it, and I could live without watching a November game against the Jets or some other team I don't care about going multiple OTs.

 

2)Ties will never ever ever come back. There is a reason its compared to kissing your sister its really unsatisfying as a result. Many punchlines are made about how ties suck see Lisa on Ice episode of the Simpsons for example. With 1 in mind the only way to end a game is with the shootout. And don't give me the its not hockey crap. The penalty shot has been around for 80 years. Its hockey in its purest form.

 

3) Now this one is me speculating but I don't see 3 on 3 being this offensive Xanadu where coaches will not be defensive minded and play 2 forwards and one d-man and end to end rushes galore. It will be one player skating around not wanting to give up the puck but having no options to pass because there is one less forward out there. I'd be more in favor of 10 min 4 on 4 compared to splitting that 10 min between 4 on 4 and 3 on 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 min continuous 4v4 OT, keep it simple.  Or 5-10min of 4v4, followed by 5-10min of 3v3; 2pts for regulation win, 1pt for overtime win or tie, 0pts for overtime loss.  Gives way more incentive for overtime scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with everything except keeping the shootout. All it is, is a soccer-style gimmick for the casual fans who want a thrill. 

 

To soccer's credit, ending a game in a tie is actually the staple of soccer (and something that's proven to confuse/piss off the American viewership). Soccer penalty kicks/shootouts ironically only come in the Finals or as a result of other strange circumstances (aggregate ties, etc.). The shootout is more of a hockey staple than the penalty kick has ever been in soccer.

 

Accepting the concept of a tie game (even a scoreless tie game) would be truly emulating soccer.

Edited by DJ Eco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To soccer's credit, ending a game in a tie is actually the staple of soccer (and something that's proven to confuse/piss off the American viewership). Soccer penalty kicks/shootouts ironically only come in the Finals or as a result of other strange circumstances (aggregate ties, etc.). The shootout is more of a hockey staple than the penalty kick has ever been in soccer.

 

Accepting the concept of a tie game (even a scoreless tie game) would be truly emulating soccer.

 

And soccer is not popular in North America so why bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see how continuous overtime over an 82 game season would be too exhausting. But shootouts are stupid, they decide the result of a hockey game by not playing hockey. Might as well wheel out a basketball hoop and play a quick game of HORSE to decide the winner. Letting a skills competition decide who gets the extra point is dumb.

And I thought that before we ever started sucking donkey balls in the shootout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always liked the idea of 3v3 OT before a SO, even when NJ was winning in the SO years back. It is the best mix between entertainment and keeping the team sport mentality. I simply don't like seeing one of the most team oriented games out there decided on individual talent. 3v3 and 4v4 forces players to still make plays. While talent helps, in the end, it's still hockey as opposed to just a 1 on 1 situation. Penalty shots should be brought back as the exciting rarity they should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see how continuous overtime over an 82 game season would be too exhausting. But shootouts are stupid, they decide the result of a hockey game by not playing hockey. Might as well wheel out a basketball hoop and play a quick game of HORSE to decide the winner. Letting a skills competition decide who gets the extra point is dumb.

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shot_%28ice_hockey%29

 

Been around for 80 years so how much longer does it have to be before its considered hockey? 3 on 3 never happens in the course of a 5 on 5 game so why is it okay to go to that version of the game but a shootout is an afront to the hockey god

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.