Not sure if this normal or not. Also, trying to get some opinions/thoughts as to how much overtime is too just ch.
So far, 190 games played, 45 have gone to overtime (I think my math is right). About 25% seems like a lot of loser points being obtained.
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
2You’re going to get me fired up early in the morning ranting about the complete absurdity that is rewarding a team for losing just a bit later.
Just a Russian propaganda account
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
3Everyone bitches about the "loser point" but think of it this way... before this 3-on-3/shootout format, when both teams were tied after 60 mins, each team got a point and it was called a tie. Now it is still the same, but one team gets an extra point for winning the circus that is the 3-on-3/shootout. I almost have a bigger problem with the way the "winner point" is awarded than the losing team getting a point for battling to a tie after 60 minutes.
KA-KAW!
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
4Does your employer know you drink at work, Matty?MattyIce wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 7:26 amEveryone bitches about the "loser point" but think of it this way... before this 3-on-3/shootout format, when both teams were tied after 60 mins, each team got a point and it was called a tie. Now it is still the same, but one team gets an extra point for winning the circus that is the 3-on-3/shootout. I almost have a bigger problem with the way the "winner point" is awarded than the losing team getting a point for battling to a tie after 60 minutes.
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
5Not sure why it even matters that much? The rules have been the rules for a while; all fans, teams, coaches, and managers/ownership know the rules. Just seems like some folks like to bitch about something that isn't even an issue. Because once/if it is changed, again, then someone will have a problem with the 'new format'. an endless loop of whining.
/rhetorical whine
/rhetorical whine
"Do Only Good Everyday"
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
6And what the hell is/are "Too many ch?" - Does the OP work & drink with you, Matty?
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
7That has me stumped as well. I’m guzzling coffee like crazy to try and get the brain firing, but “ch” might just be a “bridge too far” for me this morning!JMC-STL wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:18 am And what the hell is/are "Too many ch?" - Does the OP work & drink with you, Matty?
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
8They should award a regulation win 3 points and have a 3-2-1 point system, but then that would widen the gap between teams and ruin wild card hopes. So it is what it is. But in fairness, people pay a lot of money to go to these games, so seeing some wide open hockey in OT and a possible shootout is good for the paying customers. So in that regard, I think what they got going is fine.MattyIce wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 7:26 am Everyone bitches about the "loser point" but think of it this way... before this 3-on-3/shootout format, when both teams were tied after 60 mins, each team got a point and it was called a tie. Now it is still the same, but one team gets an extra point for winning the circus that is the 3-on-3/shootout. I almost have a bigger problem with the way the "winner point" is awarded than the losing team getting a point for battling to a tie after 60 minutes.
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
9The current system is dumb, and only in place to give a false sense of parity by inflating overall point totals. In reality in just makes it harder for teams to make up ground since the teams ahead of them are still getting points for losses half the time. I like a 3-2-1 system because every game is worth the same amount of points. It wouldn't make it any harder to make up ground, just would cause teams to recalibrate what being X points back in the standings really means. Right now teams are being artificially propped up by loser points. With a 3-2-1 system it you get exactly what you earn. You can still keep your 3 on 3 OT, I doubt that ever changes.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
10So because something won't be 100% received we should never look at improving, adjusting, or just flat out changing it? Doesn't seem like very progressive thinking.bradleygt89 wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:17 am Not sure why it even matters that much? The rules have been the rules for a while; all fans, teams, coaches, and managers/ownership know the rules. Just seems like some folks like to bitch about something that isn't even an issue. Because once/if it is changed, again, then someone will have a problem with the 'new format'. an endless loop of whining.
/rhetorical whine
Just a Russian propaganda account
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
11There ain’t nothing good about a shootout...it’s the dumbest thing the NHL has ever done. How many sports change their rules between the regular season and the post season?
3 on 3 which is just as stupid and then a dumb shootout but in the playoffs ....no we can’t have that so let’s make it 5 on 5 til somebody scores.
Ridiculous bullshit....:by the way I’ve already had two Starbucks Triple Shots today so I’m a tad bit fired up.
3 on 3 which is just as stupid and then a dumb shootout but in the playoffs ....no we can’t have that so let’s make it 5 on 5 til somebody scores.
Ridiculous bullshit....:by the way I’ve already had two Starbucks Triple Shots today so I’m a tad bit fired up.
Official "Bitch Ass" Fan and proud of it"
"Suck a dick Johansen"
"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"
"Suck a dick Johansen"
"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
12The reason the loser point was put in place originally was to give teams the incentive to "go for it" in OT so that games wouldn't end in a tie. Well games can't end in a tie anymore so the original point of the point is a moot point.
Just a Russian propaganda account
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
13That's exactly my thinking... the problem isn't the "loser point." If anything, that point is the one that was earned. The way the "winner's point" is awarded is the problem.NHLTIM wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 9:35 am There ain’t nothing good about a shootout...it’s the dumbest thing the NHL has ever done. How many sports change their rules between the regular season and the post season?
3 on 3 which is just as stupid and then a dumb shootout but in the playoffs ....no we can’t have that so let’s make it 5 on 5 til somebody scores.
Ridiculous bullshit....:by the way I’ve already had two Starbucks Triple Shots today so I’m a tad bit fired up.
KA-KAW!
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
14CH is the abbreviation for switzerland. overtime is indeed too many switzerland.Matangama wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:26 amThat has me stumped as well. I’m guzzling coffee like crazy to try and get the brain firing, but “ch” might just be a “bridge too far” for me this morning!JMC-STL wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:18 am And what the hell is/are "Too many ch?" - Does the OP work & drink with you, Matty?
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
16OP hates watching Roman Josi play 3 on 3 I guess. Sure, I don't like it when Nashville earns at least a point, but Josi's a pretty smooth skater, so I don't mind.T.C. wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:07 amCH is the abbreviation for switzerland. overtime is indeed too many switzerland.Matangama wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:26 amThat has me stumped as well. I’m guzzling coffee like crazy to try and get the brain firing, but “ch” might just be a “bridge too far” for me this morning!JMC-STL wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:18 am And what the hell is/are "Too many ch?" - Does the OP work & drink with you, Matty?
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
17I just felt like being opposite today. But honestly, it doesn't bother me and I actually like the current setup, but I also like it as 5 vs 5 in the playoffs. It means something more then. I already told you all that I was weirdDread_Pirate_Westley wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 9:33 amSo because something won't be 100% received we should never look at improving, adjusting, or just flat out changing it? Doesn't seem like very progressive thinking.bradleygt89 wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:17 am Not sure why it even matters that much? The rules have been the rules for a while; all fans, teams, coaches, and managers/ownership know the rules. Just seems like some folks like to bitch about something that isn't even an issue. Because once/if it is changed, again, then someone will have a problem with the 'new format'. an endless loop of whining.
/rhetorical whine
And for the record, if and when the NHL does change it up again, because that is the thing to do in professional sports, I'll be a fan of that too. I just don't care that much personally one way or the other except I like to watch OT.
"Do Only Good Everyday"
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
18The shootout was a great idea when we had Oshie and Boyes as our first two shooters. Its a lousy idea now.
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
19Funny how Federko says he likes how Wideman walks in too before the shot
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
20Play the 3 on 3...fine......but if nobody wins then just let it end in a tie with both teams get a point.
I hate that shootout...it has nothing to do with NHL hockey . You shouldn’t get an extra point in a skills competition.
I hate that shootout...it has nothing to do with NHL hockey . You shouldn’t get an extra point in a skills competition.
Official "Bitch Ass" Fan and proud of it"
"Suck a dick Johansen"
"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"
"Suck a dick Johansen"
"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
21Could just play 3 on 3 till someone scores period. That has to give at some point. Going past the 10 minute mark would be a rarity IMO
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
22Well, I'm glad we got THAT one sorted out, boys. NEXT ...Dave's a mess wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:37 amOP hates watching Roman Josi play 3 on 3 I guess. Sure, I don't like it when Nashville earns at least a point, but Josi's a pretty smooth skater, so I don't mind.T.C. wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:07 amCH is the abbreviation for switzerland. overtime is indeed too many switzerland.Matangama wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:26 amThat has me stumped as well. I’m guzzling coffee like crazy to try and get the brain firing, but “ch” might just be a “bridge too far” for me this morning!
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
23True but that format just takes away from the game itself. The bigger issue is the way the 3 on 3 is played....they need to make some changes . The first thing should be that if you have the puck in the offensive zone....you need to keep it in their until the defending team gets the puck or clears it. I absolutely hate when a player skates back out of the zone to regroup. That should be an automatic penalty for delay of game.BillP. wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:58 pm Could just play 3 on 3 till someone scores period. That has to give at some point. Going past the 10 minute mark would be a rarity IMO
Official "Bitch Ass" Fan and proud of it"
"Suck a dick Johansen"
"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"
"Suck a dick Johansen"
"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
24Yes. I absolutely agree with this.NHLTIM wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:20 pmTrue but that format just takes away from the game itself. The bigger issue is the way the 3 on 3 is played....they need to make some changes . The first thing should be that if you have the puck in the offensive zone....you need to keep it in their until the defending team gets the puck or clears it. I absolutely hate when a player skates back out of the zone to regroup. That should be an automatic penalty for delay of game.BillP. wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:58 pm Could just play 3 on 3 till someone scores period. That has to give at some point. Going past the 10 minute mark would be a rarity IMO
Re: NHL Overtime. Too many ch?
25I could agree with this, but just imagine how many delays we’d have for all the ‘close call’ reviews of that reverse offside call. I get what your saying though, but I’d rather make it like basketball and you only get say ten seconds to bring the puck into the offensive zone.
"Do Only Good Everyday"