first of all. i think that they should NEVer have shootouts int he post season. it will screw up the system
and 3 shooters is good enough
2007-01-09 12:50:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by Meh 2
·
5⤊
1⤋
I actually think the 3 shooters is a good idea because it makes EVERY shot crucial if you hit the post and it costs your team that's added pressure. However I think the shootout sets teams up for failure come playoff time just look at Dallas last year and I know the whiny Sabre fans will yell at me but I think they have the same fate this year in becoming to dependent upon it.
I don't think they will ever move the shootout into the playoffs one of the great things about hockey is the grueling 3OT games up until 2am and then some 4th line scrapper is the hero for the night. No other sport really has that appeal.
2007-01-10 05:31:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by needingajob 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i might want to somewhat lose in a shootout, because on the end of the 12 months tie breakers for communities with the same type of issues are determined with information from who has the most non-shootout wins, so the less non-shootout wins the different communities have the better. also, an OT loss is better of a real loss than a shootout loss, because there aren't any shootouts contained in the playoffs so a concepts as 10 minute time previous regulation, i have continually suggested the same element, yet i'm particular after a 60 minute recreation of extreme regulation, it is demanding adequate for the gamers to flow for 5 better minutes, now to not indicate 10. nonetheless, it type of sounds like 5 minutes is truly too short often times.
2016-12-02 01:47:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by abigail 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I like the shootout and the 4 on 4 overtime in the regular season. It beats all the ties you used to see in hockey. But as far as the postseason, no way. I like the fact that they play until someone scores.
2007-01-10 16:08:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tom C 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Shootouts in both soccer and hockey stink!! Especially in soccer when the run for 90 minutes plus stoppages and OT then all of sudden they don't want to run any more. Lame. Run until someone drops.
As for hockey. If they don't have shootouts in playoffs then they should not have it in the regular season either. Play until someone scores, it's that simple.
Gary Bettman has wussified this sport of hockey to a whole new level. Why be a defenseman? You can't hit anybody or it's in the sin bin you go. The NHL needs a new commissioner so bad.
2007-01-09 13:09:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Shoot outs have existed in the post season for quite some time now.
I think the shootout is very exciting and a much better ending to a game than a tie. I think the three shooters thing works fine.
2007-01-12 03:36:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Gina 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i hate it it doesn't belong in the NHL its a team sport. and if they ever put shootout in the playoffs that would be the END of hockey for ever, Gary Bettman is already ruined it enough we need that *** out of the league he doesn't know **** about the game and its history. they should take it out of the regular season and have the same old 10 minutes overtime as in the day and if someone wins they get 2 points and the other team gets 0 points. WIN 3 PTS, LOSE 0 PTS, OTW 2PTS, OTL 0 POINT FINISH IN A TIE 1 POINT EACH TEAM. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD CHANGE IF THE LEAGUE WANTS THAT BIG DIFFERENCE IN THE STANDINGS. AND TO THE ONES THAT LOVE IT YOU MUST BE NEW TO THE GAME CAUSE ITS KILLING THIS GAME, BETTMAN IS PUTTING IN RULES THAT MAKE NO SENSE A FEW YEARS AGO YOU WEREN'T ALLOWED IN THE CREASE TO PROTECT THE GOALIE NOW WITH THE NEW RULES THE DEFENCE CANT EVEN TOUCH A FORWARD OR HE WILL BE PENALIZED AND THE GOALIES AREN'T PROTECTED ANYMORE.
GO HABS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
2007-01-09 23:21:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The shootout is exciting and is a great way to break a tie. I think that 5 shooters is better than 3. Don't try to compare this to a Home Run Derby, because the only way to score in hockey is to put the puck in the net, same with soccer. Why not pit the Offense v. Goalie and see who prevails?
2007-01-09 13:17:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I can't see fans being super supportive of carrying the shootout into the post season. It's one thing when two points are on the line, but another thing entirely when The Stanley Cup all of a sudden comes down to what amounts to a competition to see who has the better forwards or goalie. The playoffs should be about all around ability, not shootouts (penalty shots not withstanding). I love, love, LOVE it in the regular season, though, and for a coupe reasons. First of all, I don't think there's another widely popular sport in America that comes close to generating that kind of suspense in its tie breaking procedures. Second, I love to see an entire arena full of people dead silent and glued to their seats when before most fans wouldn't stick around for overtime. Lastly, I think that during the regular season, testing shooters and goaltenders is a good thing to do; it can help teams build confidence, goalies to realize what they need to work on, and it can swing momentum if a team does well in a shootout situation during a slump.
2007-01-09 13:28:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Cat Loves Her Sabres 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I hate it. It is totally a concession to the American market. I'd prefer if they took it out of the regular season, but it doesn't really matter. However, if they were to institute it in the playoffs I would loose all respect for the game that I love. It's not hockey. That's not how hockey is meant to be played. It would be like having a homerun contest decide a baseball instead of extra innings. A free thro shooting contest to decide Baseketball, a field goal contest in football, longest drive golf.... you get the point. hockey is a game of flow, shootouts are things of the moment.
2007-01-09 15:05:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Meh. I like it in the regular season, but now they're saying that they should implement it for the playoffs. I really don't think they should do that as they lose thousands in consession revenues if they leave the unlimited overtime format. There are also people who say that playoff games should be won or lost by the TEAM and not one player, which I agree. Plus, it's much more exciting with unlimited overtime in the playoffs than a shootout!
2007-01-09 14:49:19
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋