That makes sense too. I don't like the shootout, but the current point system is even worse. I hate when teams are awarded a point for losing the game.

If a team loses in OT, they should get zero points, I can see a team being awarded a point for losing a shootout, because in that scenario, they didn't actually lose a game.
- PLindbergh31

stop making sense dammit lol, hows the hoof doin

The problem I have is, it decides the game without playing the game. To me, regardless of it's excitement level or anything else, you're choosing a winner and loser based on something other than playing the sport.

If I want to watch shootouts, I'll go on youtube and find old episodes of NHL Showdown.
- Jsaquella

I think the NHL should just eliminate the one point if you loss in shootout or OT. If you win you get two points and if you lose you get absolutely nothing. It would force teams to have to play for the win. I would also like to see the 4 on 4 for 10mins before shootout.

The problem I have is, it decides the game without playing the game. To me, regardless of it's excitement level or anything else, you're choosing a winner and loser based on something other than playing the sport.

If I want to watch shootouts, I'll go on youtube and find old episodes of NHL Showdown.
- Jsaquella

Do you ever lose an argument? Every post i have ever seen from you has been rational amd well thought out. It makes me warm inside

That's my other issue. When you win a shootout, you didn't win a hockey game. You won a skills competition that takes 99% of the sport out of the equation
- Jsaquella

Exactly. I think the fact the Flyers struggle in shootouts adds to the dislike, but I still don't enjoy shootouts when it involves other teams.

Not to mention it often renders a teams best player useless. How often do guys like Shea Weber, or Zdeno Chara get to participate in a shootout? Having a teams best player sitting on the bench when the game is being decided makes zero sense, and would never happen in any other sport.

There isn't ever going to be anything other then to keep playing OT 5 on 5 until someone scores a goal, that won't have any negatives to it. For obvious reasons that just can't happen over an 82 game Season. Does anyone turn off the game and not watch when it goes to a shootout? I watch with excitement. Seeing moves like the one Giroux made recently is exciting.
- MJL

What, exactly, is the negative with a tie? Ties were around for 100 years in the NHL and it's predecessor leagues, and never were an issue. Hell there's still ties, but now teams that tie have a chance to earn a bogus bonus point for winning a skills competition.

Yes, there can be exciting moments in a shootout. It's not the shootout that is the issue. It's that they use it to decide the outcome of games with something that eliminates 99% of the game.

That makes sense too. I don't like the shootout, but the current point system is even worse. I hate when teams are awarded a point for losing the game.

If a team loses in OT, they should get zero points, I can see a team being awarded a point for losing a shootout, because in that scenario, they didn't actually lose a game.
- PLindbergh31

Agreed. Only award points to the team that wins.

Do you ever lose an argument? Every post i have ever seen from you has been rational amd well thought out. It makes me warm inside
- fecondo

Yes. I'm married. I lose a LOT of arguments

Exactly. I think the fact the Flyers struggle in shootouts adds to the dislike, but I still don't enjoy shootouts when it involves other teams.

Not to mention it often renders a teams best player useless. How often do guys like Shea Weber, or Zdeno Chara get to participate in a shootout? Having a teams best player sitting on the bench when the game is being decided makes zero sense, and would never happen in any other sport.
- PLindbergh31

The second part I especially hate. A guy like Pronger is hugely important to a team. But the only time he sees the ice in a shootout is if the first 12 guys miss.

Do you ever lose an argument? Every post i have ever seen from you has been rational amd well thought out. It makes me warm inside
- fecondo

You need to experience a Jsaq post-game drunken parking lot rant.

While still somewhat rational and well thought out, it's more disturbing than 'warm fuzzy' material.

stop making sense dammit lol, hows the hoof doin
- bigmookalookie

Mookie! What's up buddy? I''m hanging in there. It sucks being half a cripple for the time being. I'm managing though. Thanks for asking.

You need to experience a Jsaq post-game drunken parking lot rant.

While still somewhat rational and well thought out, it's more disturbing than 'warm fuzzy' material.
- tangent_man

Since I don't get invited to places, the rants have been limited

The second part I especially hate. A guy like Pronger is hugely important to a team. But the only time he sees the ice in a shootout is if the first 12 guys miss.
- Jsaquella

Yup. At least shootouts aren't a part of playoff hockey, and here is to hoping it never is.

Since I don't get invited to places, the rants have been limited
- Jsaquella

Wonder if there's a correlation there...

What, exactly, is the negative with a tie? Ties were around for 100 years in the NHL and it's predecessor leagues, and never were an issue. Hell there's still ties, but now teams that tie have a chance to earn a bogus bonus point for winning a skills competition.

Yes, there can be exciting moments in a shootout. It's not the shootout that is the issue. It's that they use it to decide the outcome of games with something that eliminates 99% of the game.
- Jsaquella

I think ties were considered "boring" for the fans. So the NHL decided to gain more interest coming out of the lockout with the shootout. I guess if the Olympics uses that system it wouldnt hurt to use it in the NHL. My problem is the Olympics comes around every four years so the excitement is highly anticpated compared to the NHL were the shootout happens a lot during the course of a season.

What, exactly, is the negative with a tie? Ties were around for 100 years in the NHL and it's predecessor leagues, and never were an issue. Hell there's still ties, but now teams that tie have a chance to earn a bogus bonus point for winning a skills competition.

Yes, there can be exciting moments in a shootout. It's not the shootout that is the issue. It's that they use it to decide the outcome of games with something that eliminates 99% of the game.
- Jsaquella

The only negative thing i can think of is from the business side of things. The nhl has been trying for years to get more a fanbase and its hard to do with the casual fan and having games end in ties. I mean say you never really watched hockey but you paid for tickets to a game. And its great goin back and forth close the whole time. And then the game ends in a tie. Its kind of anticlimatic. From a casual fan's pov

Yup. At least shootouts aren't a part of playoff hockey, and here is to hoping it never is.
- PLindbergh31

If it ever happens, I stop watching the NHL.

Wonder if there's a correlation there...
- tangent_man

I guess if I gave a rat's left testicle about being invited places, it would matter to me.

You need to experience a Jsaq post-game drunken parking lot rant.

While still somewhat rational and well thought out, it's more disturbing than 'warm fuzzy' material.
- tangent_man

well hopefully one day im lucky enough to witness that

I think ties were considered "boring" for the fans. So the NHL decided to gain more interest coming out of the lockout with the shootout. I guess if the Olympics uses that system it wouldnt hurt to use it in the NHL. My problem is the Olympics comes around every four years so the excitement is highly anticpated compared to the NHL were the shootout happens a lot during the course of a season.
- stveshdy

True, but then again, I hate when a sports league panders to the casual fan.

If it ever happens, I stop watching the NHL.
- Jsaquella

Never happen.

I guess if I gave a rat's left testicle about being invited places, it would matter to me.
- Jsaquella

I hear ya.

The only negative thing i can think of is from the business side of things. The nhl has been trying for years to get more a fanbase and its hard to do with the casual fan and having games end in ties. I mean say you never really watched hockey but you paid for tickets to a game. And its great goin back and forth close the whole time. And then the game ends in a tie. Its kind of anticlimatic. From a casual fan's pov
- fecondo

The NFL has tie games. Granted there's far fewer ties in the NFL than in hockey, but I think that going to a 10 minute 4 on 4 OT and eliminating points except for wins would go a long way to limiting ties.

Teams wouldn't be sitting back and playing for a tie or shootout if there was no reward for them.

That makes sense too. I don't like the shootout, but the current point system is even worse. I hate when teams are awarded a point for losing the game.

If a team loses in OT, they should get zero points, I can see a team being awarded a point for losing a shootout, because in that scenario, they didn't actually lose a game.
- PLindbergh31

Ding ding ding!

Exactly. I think the fact the Flyers struggle in shootouts adds to the dislike, but I still don't enjoy shootouts when it involves other teams.

Not to mention it often renders a teams best player useless. How often do guys like Shea Weber, or Zdeno Chara get to participate in a shootout? Having a teams best player sitting on the bench when the game is being decided makes zero sense, and would never happen in any other sport.
- PLindbergh31

Ending a hockey game in a shootout is like ending a baseball game with a home run derby. It just doesnt make sense to me. Every other sport plays the game until someone wins, or in footballs case the rare tie.

True, but then again, I hate when a sports league panders to the casual fan.
- Jsaquella

Well I think that has more to do with getting the fanbase that currently doesnt watch hockey games. If your a "true" hockey fan your going to watch if their is a tie or shootout.