T1B

I just want to ask those that are in favour of them to weigh in on these ideas...

Since you think that they're such an exciting way to decide a game...
How about having...

A home run hitting contest to decide a baseball game if it goes more than 2 extra innings.

A slam dunk contest to decide a basketball game if it's still tied after one period of overtime.

A field goal kickoff to decide the outcome of a football game starting at the 30 yard line and moving 5 yards back until one team misses their kick.


Or would that be lame.

Do any of those sports award points for ties or wins? I'm pretty sure they all base the standings on win percentage.

Sports that award points have been known to do shootouts. ie. Soccer, Nascar, Lacrosse

Wow, this thread is a real flashback to 6 months ago.

Write your MP. Tell him that you think it's a shame that Canada would allow 5-10% of its games to be decided in a shootout. Demand a redo with the Czeckies.

Ties suck. Simple as that.

Besides, is a shootout really that much of a stretch in the context of a game? It's not like penalty shots aren't part of the game... breakaways are still in the game, last I checked. Sure, they're not the same as the shootout, but like I say, it's not nearly as far from the context of hockey as a home run derby or kicking duel would be from their respective sports.

Besides, it's not that big a deal to lose a shootout. So every team might gain 5-10 points over the year from the shootouts they've won. Come back at the end of the year and see what a difference it makes: subtract the number of points gained by the least successful shootout team and the number of points gained by the most successful shootout team. Bet ya it won't be more than 5 points. Not a big deal.

It's exciting to watch and it eliminates the thing which I hated 2nd most about hockey: TIES.

(the thing I hate most in hockey will always be the Edmonton Oilers ;) )

I hate ties as well, and if it were feasible to have all games go into multiple overtime periods until they're decided they'd have my support. But it isn't feasible, so the shootout is the next best thing in my opinion. Have you seen the shootout in person, Otis? It is an exciting way to end the game.

And the fact that the Leafs have already lost two shootouts just makes me like them that much more.

Donovan wrote:I hate ties as well, and if it were feasible to have all games go into multiple overtime periods until they're decided they'd have my support. But it isn't feasible, so the shootout is the next best thing in my opinion. Have you seen the shootout in person, Otis? It is an exciting way to end the game.

And the fact that the Leafs have already lost two shootouts just makes me like them that much more.

See I have no problem with two teams battling through 3 periods playing to a tie.
I grew up watching and playing the game with ties being the norm and the only time overtime was even used was in the playoffs (as it should be).
There was nothing wrong with the game back then.
Shootouts are a joke... it's a cheap pop for the TV networks to declare a winner and showcase the hi-lites on their 11pm news.

No Donovon, I haven't seen the shootout in person.. but even if I had.. it wouldn't change my opinion of them.
I thought the idea sucked when it was displayed in Nagano... nothing since then has changed my opinion of them. It's a European gimick..

Personally... I still think these shootouts should have been kept for the 2nd intermission entertainment as they were 30 years ago.
Taped prior to the start of the season as the skills competetion Showdown

The fact that the Leafs have lost 2 games because of them means nothing.. even a win thanks to a shootout is nothing more than a hollow victory.

Fair enough. I doubt I'd be able to change your mind. I can tell you one thing, if they tried adding the shootout to playoff games I'd be fighting them right beside you.

Would you rather shootouts or ties?

shootout!

Leaf fans are just bitter their coach has no clue on who to put out there in the so, big and slow is not the way to go.

Shoalzie wrote:Would you rather shootouts or ties?

Neither. Play OT until someone scores a goal. Pretty novel concept.

MLB and the NBA play until someone wins regardless of the length of time for the game to be played. The NHL should use the same method as they do in the playoffs.

The problem is the shootout didn't solve a damn thing in regard in a team not getting a point for losing the game.

It's a gimmick way to end the game.

MuchoBulls wrote:

Shoalzie wrote:Would you rather shootouts or ties?

Neither. Play OT until someone scores a goal. Pretty novel concept.

Of course it's a novel idea, but would the league do it? The only problem would be if a game goes three OTs and then a team has to be in another town for a game the next night.

The shootout is the quick answer to solve the problem. If I was in charge, I would go with a full 20 minute OT period 5-on-5 and then go to a 5-on-5 shootout.

Shoalzie wrote:Of course it's a novel idea, but would the league do it? The only problem would be if a game goes three OTs and then a team has to be in another town for a game the next night.

The shootout is the quick answer to solve the problem. If I was in charge, I would go with a full 20 minute OT period 5-on-5 and then go to a 5-on-5 shootout.

I see where you are coming from with the travel aspect of things, but they do that in MLB and the NBA. If the new rules are going to be enforced throughout the season, then a team shouldn't have trouble scoring in a 20 minute OT.

MuchoBulls wrote:

Shoalzie wrote:Would you rather shootouts or ties?

Neither. Play OT until someone scores a goal. Pretty novel concept.

MLB and the NBA play until someone wins regardless of the length of time for the game to be played. The NHL should use the same method as they do in the playoffs.

The problem is the shootout didn't solve a damn thing in regard in a team not getting a point for losing the game.

It's a gimmick way to end the game.

RACK!

My first preference would still be to have no overtime except for the playoffs but ANYTHING is better than this fucking Euro soccer gimmick.

And no CrossTraffic... the Leafs record in the shootouts for far has fuck all to do with it. Like I said to Donovon, winning a game because you won a shootout is a hollow victory. The game itself ended up a tie.
Shootouts to decide a TEAM game are lame.

My only take on the shootouts is "what took so damn long???"

I like the idea. I'm glad it'll finally eliminate ties and I'm sure 99% of everyone not only watching on TV but in the arena are there to see a team, namely their home team, win. Not "skate" to a tie when even those can be as disappointing as losses.

d-townmike wrote:I like the idea. I'm glad it'll finally eliminate ties and I'm sure 99% of everyone not only watching on TV but in the arena are there to see a team, namely their home team, win. Not "skate" to a tie when even those can be as disappointing as losses.

The team losing in OT or in the shootout still gets a point, so the NHL has still not addressed this problem.

How fair is it to a team who wins a couple of more regular season games being shut out of the playoffs because they didn't get a point for going to OT as much as a team who has a plethora of OTL and SOL points?

Eliminate the point for the losing team in OT and SOL and you are half way to solving the problem.

Otis wrote: Shootouts to decide a TEAM game are lame.

RACK!

The Leafs will never win a shootout because Belfour has never been a great one-on-one type of goalie. He's lasted this long because he stays in shape and prides himself on being an expert goalie on playing the angles.

Hapday wrote:

Otis wrote: Shootouts to decide a TEAM game are lame.

RACK!

The Leafs will never win a shootout because Belfour has never been a great one-on-one type of goalie. He's lasted this long because he stays in shape and prides himself on being an expert goalie on playing the angles.

What if the Leafs were 2-0 in SO so far and Belfour the best one on one goalie in the league, would you still rack Otis?

Smoked Meat wrote:

Hapday wrote:

Otis wrote: Shootouts to decide a TEAM game are lame.

RACK!

The Leafs will never win a shootout because Belfour has never been a great one-on-one type of goalie. He's lasted this long because he stays in shape and prides himself on being an expert goalie on playing the angles.

What if the Leafs were 2-0 in SO so far and Belfour the best one on one goalie in the league, would you still rack Otis?

Yes. Having shootouts makes the league look like a complete joke. Hockey, like footbal, is a TEAM sport not an individual one. If you are going to have overtime, either play until you win, or don't have overtime.

Witnessed the shootout firsthand for the first time last night and it hasn't swayed my opinion.

I am glad to see the refs calling penalties in OT. Hope that continues throughout every minute of the game for the entire season.

MuchoBulls wrote:I am glad to see the refs calling penalties in OT.

They definitely put the whistles away in the OT of the Calgary/Dallas game. I would have killed to have been able to see the shootout.

Donovan wrote:They definitely put the whistles away in the OT of the Calgary/Dallas game. I would have killed to have been able to see the shootout.

They certainly didn't last night in the TB-Buf game. The Lightning had 3 penalties called on them in the last 2 minutes, all of which were good calls.

There was a bit of a disparity in penalty minutes in that game. I think Buffalo had over 18 minutes in power play time and the Lightning had 4.

fuck shootouts. didn't need them for the previous 100 years the game had been played, don't need them now. purely a gimmick to draw extra "fans" who aren't true hockey fans.

NHL players are the toughest sons of bitches in sports, they can play OTs until someone wins.

but it's only a matter of time before college leagues start going to shootouts. fuck that shit.

Screw_Michigan wrote: NHL players are the toughest sons of bitches in sports, they can play OTs until someone wins.

They only did that during the playoffs, I thought. Regular season was one short period and the game ended in a tie if nobody scored.

But, I'm not familiar with the new rules. Will PLAYOFF OT be determined by a shootout ?

Tom In VA wrote:

Screw_Michigan wrote: NHL players are the toughest sons of bitches in sports, they can play OTs until someone wins.

They only did that during the playoffs, I thought. Regular season was one short period and the game ended in a tie if nobody scored.

But, I'm not familiar with the new rules. Will PLAYOFF OT be determined by a shootout ?

Those were the rules Tom.

Now, during the regular season they play a 5 minute OT after which if the score is still tied, they go the shootout to decide the winner.

Playoffs won't change... not yet (until some other ignorant jackass thinks it would help the TV ratings in markets that don't give a fuck) anyways :roll:

Thanks Otis.

Yeah, altering the playoffs, which gathers in even the fair weather fans, wouldn't be too wise.

To me the long games, and the resulting win adds to the excitement and flavor that can't be witnessed in any other sport. Now maybe the players don't like it, but ... hell ... I think the Caps have been in several 3+ OVERTIME PERIODS during the playoffs that ..... well if you want REAL LIFE DRAMA and REAL EMOTION ....

There's nothing like playoff hockey in sports.

I'm fuzzy on the whole new rules anyway, don't know how much good they've done. I see scoring is up around the league. Except in D.C.

Anyway RACK THE NHL and RACK MY CAPS

Let's Go Caps.