Here's a new idea that I'm sure will go over big with almost everyone. But what the hell, I'll give it a shot.
We've seen the many threads that complain about the Points System, and I've posted in virtually all of them. But the thing is that there is no agreement of any kind about what a prefered system should be: Many hate the Shootout or the value awarded to a Shootout win, many hate the Tie/Loser Point, many hate the idea of all games awarding 3 Points, etc, etc.
What about an idea that could eliminate all but a very few rare Ties (similar to the NFL), an idea that eliminates the Shootout and 4 on 4 OT so that all games at all stages are played regulation format hockey, and an idea that keeps all games worth 2 Points?
The system could be that games in which a Tie was established in the 3rd Period ultimately award the WIN to the last team that had a lead in the 3rd Period. Yes, it sounds unfair to the team that tied it up, but as I've seen said many times before, 'every team would know the rule so it would be fair in its application.'
However, the idea is not simply 'the last team to lead in the 3rd wins'. There's more. OT still exists in the format that I'm putting forward. The "time remaining" when the last Tie is established in the 3rd then would be exact amount of time that OT would be played in order for the "tying team" to have a shot at the Win. If neither team can score a goal within that amount of OT it would be THEN that the Win would be awarded to the last team to lead in the 3rd. So for example, if a team tied the game up with 11 minutes, 38 seconds left in the 3rd, and then the game goes to OT, the OT would then be 11m-38s. If there is a score within that time then the scoring team wins, otherwise at the end of 11m-38s of OT the Win is awarded to the last team that had a lead in the 3rd.
If the Tie had been established before the 3rd Period, then a maximum of one OT Period would be played. If the game still remained Tied then no team is awarded the Win. The rule outlined above only applies to teams that held the lead in the 3rd. So Ties results could potentially happen, but it would mean that the two teams would have to have maintained the Tie for more than two Periods, all of the 3rd and all of one complete OT Period.
Yes, it's does seem convoluted at first glance, and Yes it flies against a lot especially taking away the Tie Point from a team that fought back to achieve a Tie in the 3rd, and Yes (I think the biggest negative) it involves the potential of some extended OT but never more than one complete Period (but only one complete Period if the Tie had been established prior to the 3rd Period, and only if no one scores in OT).
EDIT: Add in this... How about giving the Tying team a minimum of at least 5 minutes to achieve the Win. So, if a team ties the game with less than 5 minutes left in Regulation then enough OT is added on to allow 5 minutes for the Tying team to get the Win, the win goes to the other team.
I don't like it. It gets rid of the whole concept of hockey being a 60 minute game. Who cares who scores first? At the end of the day the score is still 1-1 2-2 3-3 etc etc.
Basically, There shouldn't be style points for scoring first.
Edit: Honestly, Why does everyone hate OT/SO? It is by far the most fast paced part of hockey and it helps get new people in the seats...
Edit: Honestly, Why does everyone hate OT/SO? It is by far the most fast paced part of hockey and it helps get new people in the seats...
Sounds as if all of hockey should be 4 on 4, with a Shootout every game.
And what are you suggesting, that people now actually go to games just to hopefully see an OT/SO at the end, or that people are paying to come in off the streets at the end of Regulation so that they can what the OT/SO?
Every minute for the first 30 minutes the point bank goes down by one. If you score 1 minute in you get 29 points, 16 in you get 14 points. After 30 minutes the point bank goes up. So if you score 40 minutes into the game you get 10 points.
If there is a tie, there will be a swimsuit competition, best 3 out of 5. The point allocation will be 5 for style, 7.5 for grace and 2.395 for swimsuit selection.
If there is a tie, which we obviously don't want, the players will flip a giant coin at centre ice. Team captains will be given magnets to deflect the coin to their desired outcome.
60 minute game. if tied, 10 minute OT. If somebody wins, 2 points, loser gets nothing. If still tied, 1 point each team, goes into the tie column.
Eliminate shootout.
Sounds as if all of hockey should be 4 on 4, with a Shootout every game.
And what are you suggesting, that people now actually go to games just to hopefully see an OT/SO at the end, or that people are paying to come in off the streets at the end of Regulation so that they can what the OT/SO?
Lets not be to overdramatic...
You are kidding yourself if you think Overtime and shootouts are not appealing to the normal fan(Whether its the hardcore fan, average fan, family, friends). As much as you over reacted to my previous statement, I never said nor ever will say that people come to hockey games just for OT/SO.
Overtime is just appealing. Shootouts are a unique way to end a game (I don't support 3 point games, but I don't see a problem with SO's. Loser should get nothing).
Can anyone here honestly say shootouts/overtime is boring?
60 minute game. if tied, 10 minute OT. If somebody wins, 2 points, loser gets nothing. If still tied, 1 point each team, goes into the tie column.
Eliminate shootout.
W-L-T
2-0-1 pts
That's what I'd like to see. There would be some pretty bad ice in a ten minute OT though.
Every minute for the first 30 minutes the point bank goes down by one. If you score 1 minute in you get 29 points, 16 in you get 14 points. After 30 minutes the point bank goes up. So if you score 40 minutes into the game you get 10 points.
If there is a tie, there will be a swimsuit competition, best 3 out of 5. The point allocation will be 5 for style, 7.5 for grace and 2.395 for swimsuit selection.
If there is a tie, which we obviously don't want, the players will flip a giant coin at centre ice. Team captains will be given magnets to deflect the coin to their desired outcome.
I could totally see what this would lead to...
Annoying Pens fan: Crosby clearly looked better in the speedo
Annoying Caps fan: No! Ovechkin was by far the best! Look at how well the color compliments his eyes! Plus look at that bulge! His bulge is MUCH bigger than Crosby's!
Annoying Pens fan: Blah blah blah. All that matters is that Crosby has a Stanley Cup ring around his bulge.
You are kidding yourself if you think Overtime and shootouts are not appealing to the normal fan(Whether its the hardcore fan, average fan, family, friends). As much as you over reacted to my previous statement, I never said nor ever will say that people come to hockey games just for OT/SO.
Overtime is just appealing. Shootouts are a unique way to end a game (I don't support 3 point games, but I don't see a problem with SO's. Loser should get nothing).
Can anyone here honestly say shootouts/overtime is boring?
I don't like shootouts and I'm a pretty normal fan. In fact, shootouts have been in place since I started seriously following hockey.
Shootouts completely changed the game, as did 4 on 4 OT. The current system is just an attention grabbing spectacle. It also altered player worth and what teams look for in a player. With the shootout in place goalies (particularly goalies who are good on the breakaway) become worth more, agile players who are adept dekers become worth more, and, in general, defenseman (who tend to be less skilled at these facets of the game) become worth less.
In addition to this the shootout is a focus on the individual, as opposed to the team, which I consider a shortcoming, considering hockey is a team sport.
I just wish they'd give me the option of making games worth 3 points in NHL '10. The NHL will do what it needs to do to market the game and I can't change that
Yeah, I think this is too complicated as well, Orr. There's no real precedent for micromanagement of the clock in hockey, and while I understand the reasoning for something like this...
...it ultimately kills the goalie-pull - you have to score twice in a timespan.
I might have a better idea, Orr:
After the second period ends, first team to score and lead wins. No time limit, the team trailing always has a chance to come back, and a winner is always decided.
(I don't like it for hockey though - I have a better plan for this sort of system).
Add in this... How about giving the Tying team a minimum of at least 5 minutes to achieve the Win. So, if a team ties the game with less than 5 minutes left in Regulation then enough OT is added on to allow 5 minutes for the Tying team to get the Win, the win goes to the other team.
This idea is just too stupid for words. Far too complicated.
By the way, I jut saw my first overtime/shootout on Tuesday night and I loved it, along with 17994 other people. It was my friends first NHL game and she loved it, screaming the whole time. There is nothing wrong with the way the points system is now.
Add in this... How about giving the Tying team a minimum of at least 5 minutes to achieve the Win. So, if a team ties the game with less than 5 minutes left in Regulation then enough OT is added on to allow 5 minutes for the Tying team to get the Win, the win goes to the other team.
So your solution to improving the popularity of hockey is to make it as complicated as cricket?
"Yes!!! The Coyotes tie it with 1 minute remaining in regulation! Now we go into the super-secret 5 minute GAMEBREAKER mode but if they don't score again they lose anyway!"
Every minute for the first 30 minutes the point bank goes down by one. If you score 1 minute in you get 29 points, 16 in you get 14 points. After 30 minutes the point bank goes up. So if you score 40 minutes into the game you get 10 points.
If there is a tie, there will be a swimsuit competition, best 3 out of 5. The point allocation will be 5 for style, 7.5 for grace and 2.395 for swimsuit selection.
If there is a tie, which we obviously don't want, the players will flip a giant coin at centre ice. Team captains will be given magnets to deflect the coin to their desired outcome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlundqvist30
I could totally see what this would lead to...
Annoying Pens fan: Crosby clearly looked better in the speedo
Annoying Caps fan: No! Ovechkin was by far the best! Look at how well the color compliments his eyes! Plus look at that bulge! His bulge is MUCH bigger than Crosby's!
Annoying Pens fan: Blah blah blah. All that matters is that Crosby has a Stanley Cup ring around his bulge.
But what the hell, I'll give it a shot.
