The problem there is that the reason the NHL brought shootouts in to begin with is because they wanted to get rid of ties.no name wrote:I could live with this. 10 minutes seems long though. A few OT games in a row and your star players will need rested and they have more chance at injury.Beveridge wrote:Win Regulation/OT = 2 points
Tie = 1 point
Loss Regulation/OT = 0 points
OT is 10 minutes 4 v 4
If you wanted to get real creative have alternating 5 on 3 power plays until one socres and the other doesn't
2 or 3 point system for standings
-
- AHL Hall of Famer
- Posts: 9298
- Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
- Location: Freddy Beach
Re: 2 or 3 point system for standings
-
- AHL Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8323
- Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:19 pm
Re: 2 or 3 point system for standings
No the NHL brought in the shootout mostly because the NHL wanted to find a way to keep fans in their seats til the end of regulation. Befor shootouts people would leave with 5 minutes left in regualtion since the game was guarenteed to end in a tie. It was a way to generate excitment and keep fans in their seats. Not so much that the tie ruined hockey.tfrizz wrote:The problem there is that the reason the NHL brought shootouts in to begin with is because they wanted to get rid of ties.no name wrote:I could live with this. 10 minutes seems long though. A few OT games in a row and your star players will need rested and they have more chance at injury.Beveridge wrote:Win Regulation/OT = 2 points
Tie = 1 point
Loss Regulation/OT = 0 points
OT is 10 minutes 4 v 4
If you wanted to get real creative have alternating 5 on 3 power plays until one socres and the other doesn't
The 3 on 3 for 5 minutes i think would result in a goal 75% of the time. Unless you want thoes shootouts to determin those 25% of remaining games i see no problem keeping the tie. Allowing both teams to walk away with a point and bringing back the 0-0 tie woo hoo!