'7' Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 expanding the questions 1. Points should be awared fairly, only gimmick free hockey is necessary. There must be uniformity in the regular season OT and playoff OT. The NHL must do what is right, not necessarily what is controversial or perceived to be exciting if it doesn't belong in the game. 2. Hockey is more entertainment now than sport. Radical changes should be embraced if they make the game more exciting, even if those changes subtract from the credibility of the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I voted choice 1, but I don't think the regular season and postseason need to have the same OT. Those triple-OT marathon gaves are up there with my favorite things in all of sports, but it would be stupid if those existed before April. It would take away from the excitement that they possess when they happen in the playoffs, and a regular season game just isn't important enough for the game to be dragged on a few extra hours. The NHL needs to attract fans with good marketing, not with some bogus artificial excitement-maker at the end of games. Not only is it a crappy way of deciding such a team-oriented sport, it was put into the game for the sole purpose of attracting fans. The credibility of the sport is more important. They should find other ways of attracting fans. I say a 10-minute period of 4 on 4 would be the most ideal OT format. They can try that for a year and if there are still too many ties, they should have 10 minutes of 4 on 4 and then 5 minutes of 3 on 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted November 28, 2005 Author Share Posted November 28, 2005 I voted choice 1, but I don't think the regular season and postseason need to have the same OT. Those triple-OT marathon gaves are up there with my favorite things in all of sports, but it would be stupid if those existed before April. It would take away from the excitement that they possess when they happen in the playoffs, and a regular season game just isn't important enough for the game to be dragged on a few extra hours.The NHL needs to attract fans with good marketing, not with some bogus artificial excitement-maker at the end of games. Not only is it a crappy way of deciding such a team-oriented sport, it was put into the game for the sole purpose of attracting fans. The credibility of the sport is more important. They should find other ways of attracting fans. I say a 10-minute period of 4 on 4 would be the most ideal OT format. They can try that for a year and if there are still too many ties, they should have 10 minutes of 4 on 4 and then 5 minutes of 3 on 3. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't mean continuous OT in the regular season. Continuous OT is only played in baseball and basketball. And in basketball the game is geared to end quickly, and baseball you can play 19 innings without killing yourself like hockey. Football has ties after 15 minutes of OT. With hockey I meant the exact same game after regulation, but not a continuous OT. It could mean 5 minutes, 10, 12, whatever you want. Just set an OT time frame and if we don't have a result, the game ends in a tie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJD Jester Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I think you all know where I stand on this one. <JESTER> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I don't mean continuous OT in the regular season. Continuous OT is only played in baseball and basketball. And in basketball the game is geared to end quickly, and baseball you can play 19 innings without killing yourself like hockey. Football has ties after 15 minutes of OT.With hockey I meant the exact same game after regulation, but not a continuous OT. It could mean 5 minutes, 10, 12, whatever you want. Just set an OT time frame and if we don't have a result, the game ends in a tie. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh I guess I read it wrong. I thought when you said "uniformity in the regular season OT and playoff OT" you meant that the regular season and playoffs should have the same kind of OT. So what you meant was regulation and OT should be the same, as opposed to regulation hockey and a shootout, which are different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnderDogX Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I voted choice 2 just based on the fact that this is a biased poll. I mean to say blatantly say that the shootout makes hockey more entertainment than sport is just like calling the (at the time was controversial) coach's challenge rule in the NFL a rule that devalues the referee's opinion in calling a fair game....if it were worded differently such as choice 1: you prefer the shootout, choice 2: you don't. then I might even put choice 1 but come on you're basically trying to start a poll that will obviously get everyone who is against the shootout to vote...not everyone...in fact I can almost completely say no one who likes the shootout thinks that hockey is now more entertainment than sport...leave that to bowling........or Nascar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnie Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I don't really mind the shootout, as long as the NHL fixes the bloody point system. Our 8-2 drubbing of the Lightning should not be considered equal to a shootout win. 3 wins for regulation or OT win, 2-1 points for shootout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevil26 Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 i dont want to answer because a penalty shot is the most exciting play in hockey... and a shootout reiterates that and makes the end of the game better... i know i was always pissed walking out of the arena after a tie. this is a biased poll... the poll should read SHOOTOUT: 1. like it 2. dislike it... post why! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevils_info Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I think its funny how 7 has made this poll 1: Good person 2: Burn in hell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I can't answer this poll because of what the gear is. A big part of me agrees with the first choice. But there's a small part that is enjoying the shootout and realizes that kind of entertainment can attract more fans to the game. I heard it on the radio Saturday night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Masked Fan Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 ... Those triple-OT marathon games are up there with my favorite things in all of sports... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hell yeah! Remember the 94 playoffs? the Devs - ButtRanglers series had OT out the wazoo! And turned out to be Waaaaay better than the Stanley cup finals the Ranglers lost to The Killer Whales. I went with the shootouts, I'd just like to see the refs CALL the goalie interference penalties that ARE happening , and let defensemen clear the crease... ..but I digress... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Poll altenative: 1. No, hockey is not for winners so we don't need to have a winner in the games. 2. Yes, after a great game of hockey where no winner can be decided it is excellent to have the best players face the goalies on exiting one on one battles to decide a winner. well--- it's as biased :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I think its funny how 7 has made this poll 1: Good person 2: Burn in hell <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah... I voted #2 but not for his reasoning at all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteyvegas Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Hell, I dont even like OT. Watching these guys bust their asses 3-4 times a week for 60 minutes is plenty of hockey. A tie is a tie. Hockey happens to ba a tie sport. So what!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevils783 Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 The shootouts suck I dont care if they go 100 rounds ITS NOT HOCKEY it makes me really hate the NHL when do pitchers and catchers report for spring training :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I'm happy with how close the poll is given how incredibly biased the question was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCroMag Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Hell yeah!Remember the 94 playoffs? the Devs - ButtRanglers series had OT out the wazoo! And turned out to be Waaaaay better than the Stanley cup finals the Ranglers lost to The Killer Whales. Didn't the Rangers win that series with Vancouver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted November 28, 2005 Author Share Posted November 28, 2005 it's not biased. It's just asking how you view the sport aren't you anti shootout Don? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z-Man Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 If the anti-shoout people bitch loud enough, will the NHL change the rule after the Olympic break? Shootouts are here. Deal with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 it's not biased. It's just asking how you view the sportaren't you anti shootout Don? I don't like them, but I don't see any appealing alternative. I lived a long time just leaving the games as ties, but that no more appealing than the shoot-outs. I can see why people would want them. Personally, I think they should just flip a coin like they do in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted November 29, 2005 Author Share Posted November 29, 2005 (edited) I don't like them, but I don't see any appealing alternative. I lived a long time just leaving the games as ties, but that no more appealing than the shoot-outs. I can see why people would want them.Personally, I think they should just flip a coin like they do in the NFL. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Flip a coin for what, instead of the shootout you want a coin flip to determine who gets the point? we shouldn't be looking for an appealing alternative, just the proper alternative. That's my opinion anyway. Edited November 29, 2005 by '7' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Flip a coin for what, instead of the shootout you want a coin flip to determine who gets the point? Yeah. Exactly. Kinda like when I go to a card tournament (ie Euchre) and the score is tied, we draw a card from the deck. High card wins. 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.