OT: Recommended rules changes.

[CaptHowdy00]

NHL video replay doubtful on goalie interference

Interesting read. But one that stands out is the Apin-O-Rama during shoot outs. I think they need to get rid of shoot outs all together. To back to the old system. But if the league is so hard up for a winner, than let them play until someone wins.

 

[davnlaguna]

Players would never agree to sudden death OT, nor would any broadcast stations. Can't get sponsors to pay for commercials.

 

[oxnardkingsfan]

Not only that but it could make travel requirements to the next scheduled game almost impossible. Kings as well as most teams play a lot of back-to-backs in 2 different cities. If you have to go a couple of OTs it could mean you arriving at your next game site late and very tired with maybe the next opponent sitting at home resting with the day before the game an off day. Not a very fair deal to either team in the OT game.

Ox

 

[Kings4OT]

I don't like shoot outs but if they want them for regular season I guess I really don't care but they shouldn't make them even more worthless by taking away "moves" if they in fact put shoot outs in as a way to win the point. Otherwise eventually it could take a long time for 1 team to get the extra goal

 

[PuckinUgly57]

The shoot out sucks. Have said since day 1 in 2005 and still say it today 9 years later.

It's gimmicky, it cheapened the penalty shot and belongs in the minors. I had no problem with two teams slugging it out and ending in a tie.

 

[Stunner_At_Staples_Kings]

I hate ties. They are the worst thing of all time.

Abolish the shoot out if you must, but ties cannot return. I think simply prorating the scoring system will put urgency into teams and will result in fewer ties. I think that less the shoot out and more the points system cheapens the game. The teams have already had an entire 65 minutes to decide the game, so it's hard for me to feel like teams were cheated.

3 points should always be on the line. You win in regulation, you get the 3. You win in OT/Shoot out, you get 2 and the loser gets 1. No more of this BS where some games are worth more net than others (some games result in 2 total points while others result in 3 total).

 

[oxnardkingsfan]

What is the adversity to a tie game? I don't understand it. Why does there have to be a winner and a loser? If two teams battle each other evenly over 60+ minutes (they've talked about making the OT 10 minutes) what is wrong with awarding both teams by giving each a point? The shootout is exciting yes but it is an absolutely stupid way to decide the outcome of the best "team sport" in the world. Very soccerish.

Ox

 

[Stunner_At_Staples_Kings]

What is the adversity to a tie game? I don't understand it. Why does there have to be a winner and a loser? If two teams battle each other evenly over 60+ minutes (they've talked about making the OT 10 minutes) what is wrong with awarding both teams by giving each a point? The shootout is exciting yes but it is an absolutely stupid way to decide the outcome of the best "team sport" in the world. Very soccerish.

Ox

The adversity towards a tie for me is that it is really boring and unsatisfying. I realize that this is probably a generational disagreement on some level, but I would personally rather lose than tie. We discussed this at length back on the ESPN boards so I'm not going to try to convince you out of your sentiments towards having a tie, and I feel like we should just agree to disagree on the subject of ties. To me it feels like a pointless venture to have two opposing entities enter into a competition and have nothing resolved at the end of it. That is my take.

I'm not really 100% either way on shoot outs, and feel like they are a good regular season resolution. I haven't heard any real solutions from anyone (Other than just having a tie) on what a better system would include for determining a regular season winner. At the GMs meetings they were even throwing around a little 3 v 3 OT which I see as almost as gimmicky as shoot out.

Not sure I can fully agree with the shot you take at the world's most popular sport in soccer, but at the end of the day, they already play 90+ minutes, and then another 30 in the extra session, so you have to decide a winner at some point (Injuries go through the roof the longer you play). They do have ties in the earlier rounds, but that is all based on the point system I was mentioning above (1 point for a tie and 3 points for a win).

In hockey, the Playoffs go indefinitely, so I don't feel like the shoot out really effects the true champ. The only teams complaining are the bubble teams, and their argument seems pretty weak.

 

[oxnardkingsfan]

Yes we can agree to disagree. The jab at soccer was their penchant for deciding games with penalty kicks. One-on-one competitions to decide the outcome in team sports are dumb. JMO. Oh and several soccer leagues around the world have tie matches.

Ox

 

[Stunner_At_Staples_Kings]

Yes we can agree to disagree. The jab at soccer was their penchant for deciding games with penalty kicks. One-on-one competitions to decide the outcome in team sports are dumb. JMO. Oh and several soccer leagues around the world have tie matches.

Ox

You are correct. I thought you were referring to the World Cup that starts tomorrow.

All good.