Jump to content

3 on 3 OT? Like it or not?


BluPuk

3 on 3 OT. Like it or not?  

28 members have voted

  1. 1. 3 on 3 OT. Like it or not?

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      3
    • Not a huge fan, but anything to avoid a shootout!
      11
    • Not sure Yet
      3


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Don't take this the wrong way, but you're an idiot :ph34r:

Nobody wants to see Hal Gill or Luke Schenn on a breakaway...

What a cruel bastard you are

What wrong way could I possibly take that? LOL!

I agree with you about Gill, etc., but I highly doubt I would be more bored with the shootout than I already am now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather abolish the shootout entirely and bring back ties after a 5 minute OT, but since that's never happening, I'm okay with 3-on-3 to avoid shootouts. Even though I know my team is probably going to suck at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that no one really wants to see anyone in a shootout.

Fans are on their feet watching, yes, because they are about to go home.

I'm one of those you are describing, but someone somewhere watches Two Broke Girls and Brooklyn 999. And we know someone actually likes the shootout.

I don't know why any of that is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really not sure yet if I"m a fan of 3 on 3 OT.   I might be though as I think it may help improve certain aspects of a team just like I believe that the shootout has helped goalies be more prepared vs their opponents best players.   Just like the shootout, teams that practice 3 on 3 regularly will likely have a better success rate than teams who don't make the necessary changes towards their practice schedule.

 

Teams that are built and can put together 3 lines with speed - passing - scoring skills will probably have the greatest success.  Defensive skills - again with speed will have a significant impact also.  

 

So imo, 3 on 3 will basically be all about NO CHECKING as players won't commit to a check that will take them out of the play.  With that in mind teams who are composed of skilled skaters will likely do well with 3 on 3 but then that all changes in the playoffs as teams need a roster more balanced w / r to checking.

 

So will that be a good for the league?  I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would pay cash money to see goalies go against each other in the shootout.

 

Yea, yea, but then you would get good puck handler types like Marty Brodeur or even a Ben Bishop, teams would start crying "unfair", and then the NHL rules commission has to concoct ways to hamper those guys, and the NHL gets sidetracked yet AGAIN, trying to come up with rules to handicap players who got very good at beating the rules the NHL had the FIRST time up........

 

And round and round it goes.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently there will be 45 preseason scheduled games this fall testing 3 on 3 OT.  This will give everyone the chance to see what this will all be like before the puck really drops on October 7.

 

Preseason games tied at the end of regulation will use a five-minute, sudden-death overtime period using the new 3-on-3 format, followed, if still tied, by a shootout.

 
During any of the 45 scheduled games to test 3 on 3 will not have a shootout following 3-on-3.
 
For record-keeping purposes, the team ahead at the end of regulation will have been deemed the winner, eliminating the need for a shootout even if 3-on-3 concludes without a goal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen 3-on-3 yet, but I already thought 4-on-4 was a gimmick. The fact that the NHL changes the rules for overtime is akin to baseball removing fielders during extra innings. It would be unheard of.

 

As @ruxpin mentioned, the NHL is basically taking the most exciting plays (that almost never happen in the game), and forcing them to happen regularly in the hopes of creating interest. To me, there's nothing wrong with 5-on-5 OT, and a tie after 5 minutes is also just fine. The fact that the game can end at any moment provides the excitement for OT. And with real points at stake, it means more too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'd rather just go back to two points for win, one point each for a tie, and loser goes home with no participation trophy. :ph34r:

 

But that would be too easy and too logical.  ;) The problem with your idea is that the losing team isn't getting any points!  Now if we change it to this, it might fly with the NHL:

 

  • 2 points for a win in regulation
  • 2 points for a loss in regulation
  • 3 points for a win in OT (to showcase the 3-on-3 and get extra ad revenue)
  • 3 points for a loss in OT
  • 1 extra point for the home team
  • 1 extra point if the arena is sold out
  • 1 extra point to both teams if Bettman is in attendance

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that would be too easy and too logical.  ;) The problem with your idea is that the losing team isn't getting any points!  Now if we change it to this, it might fly with the NHL:

 

  • 2 points for a win in regulation
  • 2 points for a loss in regulation
  • 3 points for a win in OT (to showcase the 3-on-3 and get extra ad revenue)
  • 3 points for a loss in OT
  • 1 extra point for the home team
  • 1 extra point if the arena is sold out
  • 1 extra point to both teams if Bettman is in attendance

 

:P

3 points for a loss in OT ??

 

why?  

 

one extra point for the home team?  again why?  Every team plays 41 home games.

 

Giving an extra point for sellouts is kinda comical - Are you suggesting that this is the only way the Leafs make it to the playoffs?   :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand why they tried the shootout for the excitement and everything, but it did not work. Not the proper way to end a game after  going at it for 3 periods like these guys do.

 

They did play 5 minutes of 4 on 4 prior to a shootout prior to the changes this year.

 

Some teams ( like the Caps) have suggested they will just sit back waiting for the shootout.  ;)

 

I don't  think the shootout failed, because if it did the league would have removed it.  Instead theywanted less shootouts, thus probably making them even more exciting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did play 5 minutes of 4 on 4 prior to a shootout prior to the changes this year.

 

Some teams ( like the Caps) have suggested they will just sit back waiting for the shootout.  ;)

 

I don't  think the shootout failed, because if it did the league would have removed it.  Instead theywanted less shootouts, thus probably making them even more exciting. 

I jut think 3 on 3 opens up the ice which means for some quick moving on the ice and some exciting plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 points for a loss in OT ??

 

why?  

 

one extra point for the home team?  again why?  Every team plays 41 home games.

 

Giving an extra point for sellouts is kinda comical - Are you suggesting that this is the only way the Leafs make it to the playoffs?   :lol:

 

Pretty much.  :P;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...