If you wanna get rid of the loser point you need to alter the overtime system. Can't be sudden death IMO, make it 10 minute period, keep going after goals. Then call it a tie after that. Idk maybe that'd fly.
- dragonslade

It wouldn't work with TV networks.

Whether we like it or not, they have big control over the situation. Can't have games lasting forever. Not to mention that some rinks have more than one event per day.

Keep it as is or;
Regulation win 3 points loss 1 point
Overtime win 2 points loss 0 points
Shutout win 1 point loss 0 points

Change OT to 8 mins of 4 on 4 and 4 min of 3 on 3.

Or keep it as is but make shootout win 1 point and no point for an OT loss.

Or just keep it as is.
- Chipd

I wish they would do a tie-breaker game for teams tied with points trying to make the playoffs. Like if the Sabs and the jets were tied in points. Have a wild-card game to see who gets in. Screw the tie breaker system

counter offer:
3 points for a reg or ot win
2 points for a shootout win
1 point for an overtime or shootout loss

No 3 points...

Win in regulation = 2 points
Win in OT/Shootout = 1 Point
Loss in regulation/OT/Shooout = 0 points

See Winners are awarded in this system. No more teams playing for the 1 point and taking games into overtime.

I wish they would do a tie-breaker game for teams tied with points trying to make the playoffs. Like if the Sabs and the jets were tied in points. Have a wild-card game to see who gets in. Screw the tie breaker system
- sbroads24

I agree baseball does it and its very popular. 1 game, your best vs ours.

7. SJS 66GP26WR1WO6WS33L86PTS
8. PHX 68GP25WR3WO5WS35L86PTS
9. CGY 68GP27WR1WO3WS37L86PTS
10.COL 69GP23WR5WO7WS34L86PTS

I think it looks just like it does now.

This exact system was proposed by respected Canadian hockey journalist and regular panelist on TSN - Pierre LeBrun AND it was reported again a week or 2 ago.

This editorial piece and idea is a complete ripoff. This idea was also proposed to the NHL BOG several years back in Nevada and was rejected.

Eklund, if you are going to propose something then at least put the effort into proposing something original and not something that has been pitched and talked about on CBC and TSN here in Canada.

Get rid of the skills competition and go back to the way it was before... 2 pts win, 1 pt for a draw, 0 for losing as it should be.
- flyers20032002

Ties suck and are the worst possible idea.

Why are we awarding 3 point games only some of the time?

How bout making all games worth 3 points?
3 = regulation win
2 = OT/SO win
1= OT/SO loss

Thay way, all games are worth THE SAME AMOUNT OF POINTS!

If not let`s go back to the good old days
2 = win
0 = loss

For gawd sakes NO.
2 pts if you win
0 pts if you FREAKIN LOSE!!!

These standings are damn near identicle to what it is now, except Florida isn't in and there are more points to each team.

During the Olympics, every game was three points in the preliminaries.
3 points for W in regulation
2 points for W in overtime or shootout
1 point for L in overtime or shootout
0 points for L in regulation.

It might inflate the points a bit, but historians can go back and recalculate points for teams past. Hell, across the pond, they play football with 3 points for a W, 1 point for a draw, and 0 points for a loss, which is great over there, why not make every point a 3 point game? That way, teams are less likely to play "not to lose"

Ties suck and are the worst possible idea.
- mvp0207

No they do not.
what are you 16?

Why not just go with no ot or shoot out point for a lose after the trade deadline no 3point games

counter offer:
3 points for a reg or ot win
2 points for a shootout win
1 point for an overtime or shootout loss
- flyerscup2011

This except remove the loser point. (frank) that loser point seriously. Some teams in the west with 12 fN points they shouldn't even have. Because they LOST!

Also extend the OT to a full 10 minutes. 5 minutes of 5v5 and 5 minutes of 4v4. That creates a bottle neck effect on the energy. You would see the tail end of the 5v5 play be pretty crazy and then the 4v4 would be absolutely insane.

(Also adds another major commercial break for the networks in between the 5v5 OT and 4v4 OT)

During the Olympics, every game was three points in the preliminaries.
3 points for W in regulation
2 points for W in overtime or shootout
1 point for L in overtime or shootout
0 points for L in regulation.

It might inflate the points a bit, but historians can go back and recalculate points for teams past. Hell, across the pond, they play football with 3 points for a W, 1 point for a draw, and 0 points for a loss, which is great over there, why not make every point a 3 point game? That way, teams are less likely to play "not to lose"
- DagetAwayMaN421

I just think that there should be the same amount of points awarded for each game, regardless of the amount awarded.

IMO 3 points awarded some of the time is asinine.

I`m ok with a winning percentage like the NBA, as opposed to the 2 or 3 point system.

This way, teams will play to win, and not to tie.

I see close games in the NBA all the time, but I don`t see whining from the teams. They just say "we lost" and go on to the next game.

That system would suck.


If possible points gained declined from 3 down to 1 as the night wore on, the game would lose intensity instead of gain it. Fans would get up and leave their seats and those at home would stop watching once 3 points were off the table.

It would be stupid that winning in regulation is 3 times as good as winning in a shootout.

I posted a comment like this last time this discussion came up but here it is again... the math in your system does not work. You need the total to come up to 3 points no matter what. This is why the system now looks so weird is because you have some games award 2 points and others 3. If you make it so every game is worth 3 points you will see a better system.

3 points for a regulation win
2 for an OT/Shootout win
1 for an OT/Shootout loss

This way you lose a point for not winning in regulation (or gain a point for losing in OT) This is the biggest thing, being "punished" for winning in OT is something that needs to be done...

I posted a comment like this last time this discussion came up but here it is again... the math in your system does not work. You need the total to come up to 3 points no matter what. This is why the system now looks so weird is because you have some games award 2 points and others 3. If you make it so every game is worth 3 points you will see a better system.

3 points for a regulation win
2 for an OT/Shootout win
1 for an OT/Shootout loss

This way you lose a point for not winning in regulation (or gain a point for losing in OT) This is the biggest thing, being "punished" for winning in OT is something that needs to be done...
- Sirfunkyton

Thats how it should be. IMO.

I posted a comment like this last time this discussion came up but here it is again... the math in your system does not work. You need the total to come up to 3 points no matter what. This is why the system now looks so weird is because you have some games award 2 points and others 3. If you make it so every game is worth 3 points you will see a better system.

3 points for a regulation win
2 for an OT/Shootout win
1 for an OT/Shootout loss

This way you lose a point for not winning in regulation (or gain a point for losing in OT) This is the biggest thing, being "punished" for winning in OT is something that needs to be done...
- Sirfunkyton

Right!

That way, teams essentially steal a point from the other team ( who would otherwise earn 3 points) by sending the game to OT.

I posted a comment like this last time this discussion came up but here it is again... the math in your system does not work. You need the total to come up to 3 points no matter what. This is why the system now looks so weird is because you have some games award 2 points and others 3. If you make it so every game is worth 3 points you will see a better system.

3 points for a regulation win
2 for an OT/Shootout win
1 for an OT/Shootout loss

This way you lose a point for not winning in regulation (or gain a point for losing in OT) This is the biggest thing, being "punished" for winning in OT is something that needs to be done...
- Sirfunkyton

Nah if you punished teams for winning in OT you would see teams already out of gas go completely flat. The loser point just needs to be removed. I like what I posted 3 Points for a win in regulation or OT. Extend the OT and Nothing if you lose, but 2 points for S/O win.

I think this would bring back the boring old hockey like we had in the years before the lockout that led to today's current scoring system. Teams would all adopt a trap system in close games in the third period because no one would want to give their opponent 3 points if they lose while getting zero for themselves. That is WAY too huge of a point swing to take even one risk and open the game up. There would be zero offense and nothing but boring defensive hockey. It blows my mind how soon people forget why the current points system was brought in in the first place. Or did everyone just start watching hockey within the last 5 years?

agreed

how hard is it to understand
2 = win
1 = shootout win
0 = loss
- Crimsoninja

Your system is dumb and over complicated.

2.75 = win on home ice
2.875 = road win
2.567 = home win wearing alternate jersey
2.38 = road win wearing alternate jersey
0 = loss on home ice
0.35 = loss on home ice with Crosby in the lineup
.25 = loss on road
1.98 = OT win if announcers do not mention "how exciting 4 on 4 hockey is."
.576 = OT loss
3.234 = Shootout win with 3 consecutive goals scored
2.98 = Shootout where goalie makes winning save

Its neat, its clean. Its fair.

2 points for a win in regulation or overtime
1 point too both teams if it goes to a shootout (so its a tie)
use the shootout as a tie breaker later in the season?

I think this would bring back the boring old hockey like we had in the years before the lockout that led to today's current scoring system. Teams would all adopt a trap system in close games in the third period because no one would want to give their opponent 3 points if they lose while getting zero for themselves. That is WAY too huge of a point swing to take even one risk and open the game up. There would be zero offense and nothing but boring defensive hockey. It blows my mind how soon people forget why the current points system was brought in in the first place. Or did everyone just start watching hockey within the last 5 years?
- tantrum4

So you feel that the point system has opened the game up?

It was all rule changes that did this.

If I remember correctly, the game was DRASTICALLY changed 5 years ago, when they implemented the trapezoid, got rid of the 2 line pass, and redefined obstruction penalties.

The trap never went away, my friend.

Teams play this boring style now.

Tampa almost got to the finals using the trap (1-3-1), and Philly was reviled for exposing it blatantly in that one game.