What would you do with Overtime in the NHL and the Point System

[Propheta Messias]

This has been a hot topic going around for awhile. All the haters of the shootout and the current point system that they think isn't working. They've made changes to the Tie Breaker rule that are making people question the value of the Shootout with those changes. If they take away its value, what's the point in having it there? I'm in favour of a change to the point system to keep its value and create more competition and the urge to win because of the extra value spent on the regulation win or the value lowered of an overtime win and/or loss. The shootout can be given it's true value to balance its value to make it fair and enjoyable to everyone. I created a facebook page so people can have a place to discuss the ideas. You'll have a place to come voice your thoughts, opinions and suggestions in a place where the NHL will be able to see what people think about the topic.

Right here is where we can keep a local Neowinian opinion. So what do you think? Let me and everyone else know.

So come, become a fan, and let the NHL know what you think.

Petition: 3-Point System for NHL

I'm always open for change too. If valid views are point out and agreed upon, I'll easily support it. So if you're passionate enough about your view, I dare you to change mine.

[rajputwarrior]

it' ****ing stupid, that's what i think. Shootout is ****ing stupid too. Bring ties back with 10 minute OT's 4-4. 3 points? what is this soccer?

[Propheta Messias]

it' ****ing stupid, that's what i think. Shootout is ****ing stupid too. Bring ties back with 10 minute OT's 4-4. 3 points? what is this soccer?

You bring ties back and we'll have the same old boring hockey we had before. No one cares once they get into OT when there's ties. They're just glad to have the point and then save the fight for another game. The only time they fight for that win in OT is when they really need the point. It's slow boring hockey until the end of the season. We want them fighting for those points the whole season. 5 minutes isn't enough though. I'm not the biggest fan of shootouts but it gets them a winner. I agree to increase the OT to 10 minutes but definitely no ties unless at a cost which could be implemented by going to a 3-Point system.

[mikebiacsi]

Shootouts are awesome, don't get rid of them. I'd like to see a 10 minute 4v4 followed by a shootout.

If there were no shootouts then we wouldn't have such gems as this.

[Propheta Messias]

Come vote and tell us what you think!

[R-Flex]

I'm not a fan of the shootouts. They bore me.

[Sandor]

In rugby they have a system where if you score 4 or more tries in a game you get a bonus point on top of the 4(i think) for winning the game. Likewise if you lose the game but finish within 7 points of the winning team you get a consolation single bonus.

So win: 4 points

Lose: 0 points

Score more than 4 tries: 1 point extra

Lose by 7 or less points: 1 bonus point.

Conceivably you could score 4 tries and still lose the game 40-39 or something. In which case you lost but still get 2 points.

I'm wondering if there would be a way to do it in hockey...say scoring 5 goals or more gets you another point or if you lose the game in regular time by just 1 goal you get a point (but obviously if you lose in OT you still just get the 1 point, not 2). Obviously it might be a dumb idea and i'd need to think it over more. I'm guessing if a team is 4-2 up with like 5 minutes left there is still incentive for both teams in this case. The winning team to get the 5th goal, the losing team to get their 3rd and thereby only lose by 1 goal thus getting a point. At the moment games like that tend to fizzle out and the clock is run down. Could make games a lot more interesting.

So:

Loss = 0 points

Win = 2 points

Then:

Score 5 goals = credit a bonus point

Lose the game by 1 goal = credit a bonus point (but you must actually score. Losing 1-0 equals no points for the loser)

Example:

Team A 5 - 0 Team B (Team A gets 2+1=3, Team B gets 0)

Team A 5 - 4 Team B (Team A again 2+1=3, Team B gets 1)

Team A 6 - 5 Team B (Team A again =3, Team B however gets 1 for goals scored and 1 for narrow loss = 2)

Team A 3 - 1 Team B (just like now. A gets 2 points, B gets none)

Team A 2 - 1 Team B after OT. (As it went to overtime its just 2 points for win, 1 point for loss)

Team A 5 - 4 Team B after OT (As its overtime, no extra point credited for the 5th goal)

Make sense? The effect this has is that it credits you for really destroying the opposition but likewise if you lose really unluckily, as in the 6-5 example, there is a reflection in the points gained.