Results 1 to 10 of 27
-
03-09-2011, 05:06 PM #1
Do you like the shootout?
I was going to make a poll, but I'm actually just interested in your comments.
Personally, I hate it at any level. Speaking specifically to the NHL, it seems ridiculous that some games are essentially awarding three points while others award two. Either play until a goal is scored, or just give each time one point.
Other thoughts?
-
-
03-09-2011, 06:27 PM #2
Im a fan of them actually, adds intensity to the game a superstar shooter Vs the goalie. always was found of it and gets me on the edge of my seat.
-
03-09-2011, 06:34 PM #3Hockey Advisor
No, but I've accepted the fact that it's here to stay.
The 2 points for some games, and 3 points for others is what drives me nuts though - and what I think has to go.
So long as the Reg / OT / SO format remains unchanged, my preference would be to switch to an "All Games are worth 5 points" system:
https://www.sportscardforum.com/artic...-5-point-game/
-
-
03-09-2011, 06:43 PM #4
The 5-point game concept is interesting. My only problem with it is that the disparity between an overtime win vs. an overtime loss (4 points vs. 1 point) would cause too many teams to play for the shootout since both are at least guaranteed 2 points.
Still, I think you're on the right track with that approach. However you work it out, all games should be worth the same number of points.
-
03-09-2011, 08:05 PM #5
It's like ending a baseball game with a homerun derby, a basketball game with a free throw competition or a football game with a field goal challenge. I also agree with the 3-point game. If you lose in the shootout, you lose. Why do you get points for losing? It should be as simple as 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss, No matter how it ends.
-
-
03-09-2011, 09:22 PM #6
The shootout is only useful for deciding games at local rinks for beer league/high schools where the ice time schedule is tight in my opinion. Sure the shootout can be exciting at times, but overtime tends to prove who is the better team.
-
03-09-2011, 09:42 PM #7
I agree, I think the shoot-out is garbage and for that matter so is the four on four overtime. You don't see baseball pulling the right fielder for the tenth inning and you don't see the point guard being pulled for overtime in basketball. Leave the game alone and let the team that got to overtime win or lose in overtime. If the game goes to triple overtime so be it.
-
-
03-09-2011, 10:10 PM #8
well, i seem to be in the minority here, but i like the shootout. for me, it's fun. after a tough regulation game, 4 on 4 for 5 min right away seems good (with the excitement of a 'golden goal') and then if that doesn't happen, a shoot out to quickly end the game puts everything to an exciting end.
a couple of benefits:
- this can potentially avoid injury and fatigue of players
- there are no tie games (that's what i really don't like and to me are a big turn off)
- ends the game at a reasonable time. one thing i like about hockey is that it doesn't have the potential to go to the 15th inning or 5th overtime.
i do agree with most that having the losing team get a point is kind of bogus. i'd like winner get 2 points, loser gets none.
-
03-09-2011, 11:04 PM #9
I personally like the shoot out, it's lots of fun to see at an all-star game. Using it to decide a game on the other hand makes as much sense to me as skating around the rink to see who's the fastest to determine the outcome of a game.
Collecting:Leafs Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Conacher, Horner, Broda, Bower, Clark, Gilmour and others.
-
03-09-2011, 11:21 PM #10
I like the shootout because it adds excitement to the game, but on the other hand, I think the long overtimes are more "professional like" than the shootout and its also just a "cheap" way for the games to become shorter. I like it back in the days when there would be 2 or even 3 overtimes.
-
Originally Posted by 30ranfordfan 
