Casual fans love the shootout.

And I love the 1 point for a tie, 3 points for a win, games end on time idea (forces teams to try to win the game) but the owners love the current system. It keeps crap teams in the playoff hunt longer.

Bang your head against the wall all you like, but the league isn't changing the current set up. They love it.
- Atomic Wedgie

Yeah, this is the exact reason. It is the only real explanation as to why the system has not been changed.

Awarding points for losing teams is ridiculous. Or giving fewer points for a regulation win than an OT win.

Each game is worth 2 points. If you win it, you get all the points. If you tie it, you split the points. You can't have points appearing or disappearing all over the place.
- JohnFergusonJr

Don't mind fewer points for an OT win. Win the (frank)ing game in regulation like you're supposed to.

I dislike it, but I'll admit it's exciting.

Team sports shouldn't be decided on an entirely individual effort though.
- Feeling Glucky?

It's exciting at an All-Star game where it belongs.

Even as it stands, the shootout isn't even done properly. If they want to squeeze the excitement out of the shootouts, they need more shooters. At least 5 per team.

But again, another NHL paranoid thought; what if the games go an extra 5 minutes. The horror.

Awarding points for losing teams is ridiculous. Or giving fewer points for a regulation win than an OT win.

Each game is worth 2 points. If you win it, you get all the points. If you tie it, you split the points. You can't have points appearing or disappearing all over the place.
- JohnFergusonJr

agree, it's like handing out participation points, so stupid

i'd like to see how many tie games there would be after ot if they got rid of the loser point

Yeah, this is the exact reason. It is the only real explanation as to why the system has not been changed.
- Aetherial

I think the other reason is that if you're trying to reel in new fans, you don't want to be making such major changes to the format multiple times/decade.

small tweaks? Whatever. Fans will figure it out quickly, newcomers won't notice.

Don't mind fewer points for an OT win. Win the (frank)ing game in regulation like you're supposed to.
- Feeling Glucky?

You can sense that on a regular Tuesday night game, if the teams are tied with about 6-7 minutes left, both teams stop playing to win, and start ensuring the game gets to OT so everyone gets at least one point.

It's boring as crap, to be honest.

Don't mind fewer points for an OT win. Win the (frank)ing game in regulation like you're supposed to.
- Feeling Glucky?

Teams don't get half a win or less points in any other sport for winning in OT.

It's exciting at an All-Star game where it belongs.

Even as it stands, the shootout isn't even done properly. If they want to squeeze the excitement out of the shootouts, they need more shooters. At least 5 per team.

But again, another NHL paranoid thought; what if the games go an extra 5 minutes. The horror.
- JohnFergusonJr

I think it's far more exciting in regular games than in the all-star game, because something is actually riding on it.

But again. Don't like it.

agree, it's like handing out participation points, so stupid

i'd like to see how many tie games there would be after ot if they got rid of the loser point
- Flyfreaky

That's exactly what it is.

Teams don't get half a win or less points in any other sport for winning in OT.
- JohnFergusonJr

They also don't take a man off for each team in OT, or switch to the shootout(minus world cup soccer).

If we're going to be different, may as well make it have some sense.

I think it's far more exciting in regular games than in the all-star game, because something is actually riding on it.

But again. Don't like it.
- Feeling Glucky?

But it absolutely killed what a penalty shot use to mean. The penalty shot use to be the most exciting play in hockey. Now you see it eight times a night if a couple teams go to a SO.

That's exactly what it is.
- JohnFergusonJr

get rid of the loser point, and teams start playing for the tie, unless they're really desperate.

That's exactly what it is.
- JohnFergusonJr

getting rid of that loser point would also make teams load up on shootout specialists

get rid of the loser point, and teams start playing for the tie, unless they're really desperate.
- Feeling Glucky?

someone will still lose during the sh*tout

They also don't take a man off for each team in OT, or switch to the shootout(minus world cup soccer).

If we're going to be different, may as well make it have some sense.
- Feeling Glucky?

How about they do neither? Keep the same number of guys on the ice and keep the points the same. You win, you get two points, you tie, you split one point each, you lose, you get nothing.

Hockey already suffers from being too different as it is. They have a puck, on a sheet of ice, with steel blades on their feet and almost everything is Canadian. That's different enough.

Dear god I'm sweating my tinkle berries off.
- Yeti1181

well your man boobs will shrink a bit.


water loss


similar to a kamal, once you drink beer they'll fill up again.

well your man boobs with shrink a bit.


water loss


similar to a kamal, once you drink beer they'll fill up again.
- zazzle

get rid of the loser point, and teams start playing for the tie, unless they're really desperate.
- Feeling Glucky?

That only worked when there wasn't a shootout. Now teams play for the shootout. It's always something because they're constantly trying to compromise so nobody actually loses anything.

But it absolutely killed what a penalty shot use to mean. The penalty shot use to be the most exciting play in hockey. Now you see it eight times a night if a couple teams go to a SO.
- JohnFergusonJr

I'm not disagreeing that it should go.

Should be 60 minutes + 1 OT 20 minute, 5-on-5 period.

Regulation win is 3 points, OT win is 2 points, OT loss/tie is 1 point, regulation loss is 0.

You encourage teams to win in regulation, or to at least go for the win in OT, while still leaving a bit of reward for a hard-fought tie.

That only worked when there wasn't a shootout. Now teams play for the shootout. It's always something because they're constantly trying to compromise so nobody actually loses anything.
- JohnFergusonJr

i'm telling you, get rid of the loser point and it's a whole new game of excitement

It's exciting at an All-Star game where it belongs.

Even as it stands, the shootout isn't even done properly. If they want to squeeze the excitement out of the shootouts, they need more shooters. At least 5 per team.

But again, another NHL paranoid thought; what if the games go an extra 5 minutes. The horror.
- JohnFergusonJr

This is so stupid too. Basketball plays until a winner. No worries about extra time there. Baseball plays extra inning until a winner also. Still no worries there either.


Why is it only an issue with nhl? (frank) sakes they're cutting away from playoff games in 3rd round so as not to miss 3hours of pre-(horse)race chit-chat

someone will still lose during the sh*tout
- Flyfreaky

(frank) the shootout.

But soccer does it the opposite. They allow ties except in elimination games. Does that mean shootouts in the playoffs too eventually?

Hockey needs to stop trying to change the rules every three years and just come up with one system that works and leave it alone. The system that works the best is really simple. 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie. OT is 5 on 5 for 20 minutes. Eventually, somebody will get a match-up and win the game. If the players complain about playing too much hockey, tough luck, end the game sooner. Maybe those 3rd and 4th line players have to get better so teams can roll four lines.

Football has ties but they rarely happen because the make the teams play an entire extra quarter to break the tie. Basketball keeps going. Baseball keeps going. But hockey has to end with a skills competition or a reduced version of the game? Nobody else pulls players off the field for OT, why should hockey for another knee jerk rule change?
- JohnFergusonJr

im not crazy about the shootout but given that there are 82 games in the season, i just don't think it makes a difference. i guess i don't dislike it enough to want it changed. i see your point though.

getting rid of that loser point would also make teams load up on shootout specialists
- Flyfreaky

Which is why you force them to play 5 on 5 for 20 minutes. Teams will be forced to make sure their 3rd and 4th lines have better players (this solution gets rid of some goons too). Somebody is going to get a good match-up eventually.

This is so stupid too. Basketball plays until a winner. No worries about extra time there. Baseball plays extra inning until a winner also. Still no worries there either.


Why is it only an issue with nhl? (frank) sakes they're cutting away from playoff games in 3rd round so as not to miss 3hours of pre-(horse)race chit-chat
- burn

once again it makes the nhl a bush league operation