AHL rule changes include 7 min. OT

[champeen]

anything that reduces shootouts is good in my book...
http://theahl.com/ahl-rules-changes-p192792" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mikey287]

Agree.

[pcm]

Disagree.

Shootouts are fun. Change the point system to make them less impactful, not less frequent.

[ffemtreed]

Instead of shoot outs make OT 4 Min of 3 on 3 and then 1 on 1, where each team gets to put 1 person in each zone. This was create some awesome matchups of a forward going 1 on 1 with a D man. Actually make the D person stay in their own zone (not allowed past blue line) and have the forward be able to be in the neutral zone and their offensive zone. Penalties in OT or 1 on 1 would result in a penalty shot to win the game.

[mikey287]

Just make sure you switch sides after the third...that's such an easy fix for the excessive amount of shootouts we have...

[no name]

I love this, if this is sucessful we might see it in the NHL next season. I think the 3 on 3 will produce alot of goals. I just fear with them changing sides the coaches will instruct players to dump the puck in to make the change, making OT a dump and change then chase.

Like the helmet rule but don't you feel they should of put in a clause that is a player purposely takes off another players helmet they get a minor penalty. Seems to me you are just going to try and pull off a star players helmet in a scuffle to force him to leave.

[meow]

I have some radical ideas to limit the number of shootouts we see. I'm not sure the world is ready for them, however.

[DelPen]

60 minutes. Win and get 3 points. if tied go directly to shootout, win get 2 points, lose get 1. IHL had it right.

[Jim]

60 minutes. You win you get a point. You tie or lose you go home with nothing. No OT, no nothing. Get it done in regulation or zilch!

[mikey287]

Heavy dislike for those...

[interstorm]

am i the only one who thinks this is as much a gimmick as a shootout?

the NHL keeps treating the symptom with complete disregard to the problem. we need more (even strength) goal scoring. instead of fixing that, year after year we get odd little tweaks to the rules that NHL diehards hate and NHL newbies don't understand. do we really expect someone watching their first NHL game to comprehend what is going on when they've watched 5-on-5 hockey, then suddenly it goes to 4-on-4 and then arbitrarily going to 3-on-3?

sometimes the easiest solution is the best.

* increase goal scoring (larger goals) and suddenly bad officiating don't matter as much -- 1 bad call may decide a game these days because play is too close.
* increase goal scoring and you don't have to worry about goalies playing the puck -- let them leave the trapezoid (another confounding rule for first-time watchers) and play the puck wherever they want.
* increase goal scoring and (based on other sports) you have a more entertaining game that should draw more fans. i'm tired seeing TV ratings showing weekly professional (fake) wresting getting more viewers than playoff NHL hockey.
* increase goal scoring and you can disallow any goal that goes off of a skate -- we don't need these type of 'bad' goals and we can make replay very black and white. no 'is that a kicking motion' or 'intent to kick' guesses. average fans will see the replay and understand the call.

just take the average goaltender today and determine the square inches available to shoot at and run through the same exercise for the average goalie from the 80's. i am sure there was more room then - goalies were smaller, equipment smaller - and increase the net size until you have that value the same. big mathematical exercise but not something that cannot be done. after that is in place, strip away any rule that was made either directly or indirectly to increase goal scoring at the cost of understanding the game.

[Idoit40fans]

If they were going to change the point structure, I always liked 2 win, 1 ot win, none for a loss. Or you could go 3 win, 2 ot win, 1 ot loss. Give encouragement for teams to score.

[mikey287]

Or...just shrink the goalie equipment down again. Because it's only really been like this for 20 years. Art Ross' net has been around for 100. Instead of a gimmicky thing like making the nets bigger, just return the humans back to human size.

Goal scoring isn't exciting in and of itself. That's why no one lost their mind in 05-06 when a bunch of power play goals were thrown into the net...it's quality play that's exciting. People might get a little spark out of an 8-6 game, even if it is sloppy, because they're used to 3-2 games. But if 7-5 games became the norm, the goal itself would be quickly unexciting and goaltender duels would be exciting (as they are now, but not to most I suppose).

The gimmick is making the net bigger. The real solution is just improving the quality of play. Everything else is just treating symptoms.

[Idoit40fans]

Well i was operating under the "changing the point structure" idea. But i think that would improve the product more than changing the equipment size. It would open the game up more rather than just allowing a greater number of goals to go past a smaller obstruction. Shrinkin the goalie equipment seems te same as increasing the goal size to me.

[interstorm]

Or...just shrink the goalie equipment down again. Because it's only really been like this for 20 years. Art Ross' net has been around for 100. Instead of a gimmicky thing like making the nets bigger, just return the humans back to human size.

Goal scoring isn't exciting in and of itself. That's why no one lost their mind in 05-06 when a bunch of power play goals were thrown into the net...it's quality play that's exciting. People might get a little spark out of an 8-6 game, even if it is sloppy, because they're used to 3-2 games. But if 7-5 games became the norm, the goal itself would be quickly unexciting and goaltender duels would be exciting (as they are now, but not to most I suppose).

The gimmick is making the net bigger. The real solution is just improving the quality of play. Everything else is just treating symptoms.

i feel like downsizing the goalie equipment has been talked about forever -- yet nothing much has materialized (i assume due to the NHLPA having to sign off on player safety). i'd imagine the same hurdles would not have to be cleared on a rule change to the goal size. taken as a recalibration on 'available' shooting area circa 80's level of play and i really don't see anything gimmicky about it. as for quality of play -- yeah...we want good play over anything -- but just as low scoring games can have good play, so can high scoring ones -- just my point is with high scoring you (in theory) lessen the need to figure out how to prevent tie games and can remove goofy rules that are a barrier to newcomers.

the objective is to make the product better -- and in my mind these AHL overtime rules make it worse (and i believe making the goals bigger while removing some other rules will make the product better).

[shafnutz05]

60 minutes. You win you get a point. You tie or lose you go home with nothing. No OT, no nothing. Get it done in regulation or zilch!

lol, that sounds like a winner. Hey fans, tonight's game is completely meaningless!!

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

I never understood way people hate shootouts so much. I mean, OK, they're very gimmicky, but I think they're fun and a good way to end regular season games (note I said REGULAR SEASON FIFA, not the World Cup final) instead of a too-long amount of overtime.

[mikey287]

There just needs to be less of them in exchange for actual hockey.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

There just needs to be less of them in exchange for actual hockey.

How much OT do you think there should be before it?

I would go with 10 minutes but no more. Maybe 5 minutes 4v4 and then 5 3v3.

[mikey287]

10 minutes. Switch sides.

[Beveridge]

I'd like to see a 10 minute 4v4 and any penalty is a penalty shot and then shootout (*if we're going to keep shootouts)

I'd still like to see 3 points for regulation win to make games all worth the same.

[bhaw]

Keep the shootout but force teams to use their shooters in reverse order of ice time during the game.

[meow]

If you punch the puck in, it counts as two goals. Street hockey '95 style.

[TheHammer24]

3-3 is just as gimmicky as a shootout.

[columbia]

Keep the shootout but force teams to use their shooters in reverse order of ice time during the game.

Are you a mole from the NFL offices?