all right...alot of goalies have been protesting to the new rule about a game going into a shootout if it's still tied after 5 mins of overtime...i mean it takes away the attention to how well a team plays together and puts all the attention on who has better skills...it puts alot of pressure on the goalies and the players...alot more than there should be...also the rules regarding the shootout are a litte ****** up....but then again it's entertaining...i think they're shouldn't be shooutouts...you?
2007-01-20 01:46:06 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Hockey
I am against Shootouts, go back to the tie. Go back to the OLD system. 2 pts for a win and ONE for a tie, get rid of the point for the OT loss as well. Anyway how is it unfair on a goalie? They KNOW it is one on one. They have faced that IN GAMES as well. Heck better then 2 on 1. Oh and my biased to eliminate shootouts ISN'T just because the Penguins suck in them. I am all for the old system for points as well.
2007-01-20 05:51:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Personally I like sudden death overtime better as they have in the playoffs but now that I have a family and have to go to work the next day I don't think I would be able to stay up to watch the end of many games that go well into the night. Also the fans watching the game live may not be able to stay until 1 or 2 in the morning for the same reason. Can you imagine how it would be to take my 7 year old daughter to a game that ended at 2 am. Then fight the traffic to get out of there and then drive 2 hours home. I don't think that would work out very well. I have been at 2 NHL games this year. 1 in Pittsburgh and in Detroit and I was hoping both of them would go into shootout. I am not alone in hockey fans that have never seen a shootout live(although I have seen one in pre-season) and I am sure many fans feel the same way. If the shootout is another way to draw fans to the arena and become hockey fans then I am all for it. By the way when I was at the Detroit game I was sitting beside a guy that was "blah-blahing" to his buddy that this was his first NHL game as he was a NFL fan. I could not help but listen to his banter but it seemed as if he liked what he saw. He did say something about hoping it went to a shootout so I guess if this can draw some fans over the shootout most be doing what is supposed to.
2007-01-20 02:06:29 · answer #2 · answered by mapleleafskickass 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i don't like the shootout period. both teams play as a team till the end of overtime and both teams should just get that tie or 0 points at the end of overtime and take the tie as a team. its a team sport. yes some players are great at 1 on 1 but with the pressure of a defencemen on your back makes it harder, and with the puck going tape to tape makes the job harder for the goalies at there position, meaning this is a team sport and they should win or lose as a team. look at the Stars last year great in shootout got lots of wins in shootouts, but come playoffs no shootouts and they lost in the p[layoffs bad. it looks like the Sabres are going to follow the Stars foot steps. yes i know allot of people think its interesting and fun to watch but its not part of the game and it should be out. once Gary Bettman the Comish is out of the NHL I'm 90% sure the shootouts will be taken out, cause the simple facts that this is a TEAM sport.
they cant have the same format as they do in the playoffs cause if the game goes in to 3 overtimes and the team has to play in another city the next day. have the same old 10 minutes overtime they had back in the 80's and if nobody scores then its a tie, there nothing wrong with a tie.
GO HABS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
2007-01-20 03:20:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm okay with the shootout the losing team still gets a point so even if a team loses in the shootout its not as though the entire night was a waste. I do however think becoming dependent on the shootout screws a team come playoff time. Look at the Dallas Stars last year 14 wins in the shootout and then first round of the playoffs 3 OT loses. A tie is like kissing your sister so I guess it at least gives you a winner and it is exciting for the fans to watch.
2007-01-20 05:18:41 · answer #4 · answered by needingajob 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think they need to stop whining. The whole premise of any goal scoring opportunity comes down to shooter versus goalie, anyway. Teams can't be expected to play overtime periods until someone scores a goal during the regular season; games are too close together for a team to play the equivalent of two games in one night then go play again the day afterward. It stops games from dragging on and on, plus it keeps us fans in and on the edge of our seats until the very last, something traditional overtime didn't do. The best part of it in my opinion is there are no more ties, although I would modify things so a straight out win was worth three points, an overtime win was worth two, and a loss was a loss was a loss and was still not worth anything no matter what.
2007-01-20 09:17:04 · answer #5 · answered by Cat Loves Her Sabres 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Which goalies are you talking about? All the goalies have kept their mouths shut for the sake of the game. And to answer your question, a lot of hockey analysts now are saying that it is an unfair way to decide a game because you lose because of the player, not the team. I think that's why shootouts will never happen in the playoffs. That, and the arenas will lose thousands of dollars in concession revenues from unlimited overtime.
2007-01-20 05:28:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
they are definitely entertaining... but not very fair. i think the reason they have shootouts is so they don't take all the energy out of the players. sometimes people just can't get the puck in to the net and that would probably lead to super long overtimes. plus, everyone wants to watch a shootout and that turns in to more people watching the game : ]
i think the way they handle shootouts are good. shootouts in the regular season but overtimes during the playoffs when it really counts.
2007-01-20 08:52:36 · answer #7 · answered by skijunkie1124 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Shootouts should be taken right out of the game. It turns a team sport into an individual sport. They are exciting to watch but here is my solution. 5 minutes overtime of 4 on 4. If still tied 5 minutes of 3 on 3. If still tied 2 on 2 untill a goal is scored. You are still utilizing a "TEAM" effort to win. The best senario however is to give the fans the ultimate. 5 on 5 overtime 20 minute periods untill there is a winner. If it takes 3 full periods of overtime to determine a winner then so be it.
2007-01-20 03:11:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I wouldn't say shootouts are unfair, but it takes the team aspect out of the game. My analogy would be if baseball only had one or two extra innings and if the game was still tied, having a home run hitting contest to decide the winner of a game. I don't know what the best answer is, but right now shootouts are the best solution.
2007-01-20 04:05:57 · answer #9 · answered by CSUFGrad2006 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
All hockey fans know the reason for shootouts; non hockey fans. They wanted to inject fast paced scoring in a short amount of time in a tension rich environment, and basically that's the elements of a shootout.
Are they unfair? I'd say no, but obviously if you have a team with snipers (Atlanta for one) they'll tear you apart with their speed and shooting ability in the shootout. But, then are 4-on-4s not unfair then because it caters to speed and scoring as well? I think it comes down to the team being lucky enough to be scorers when it enters overtime.
2007-01-20 01:55:58 · answer #10 · answered by silvermaverick7 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋