An Alternate to the Shootout? (instead of the 1 on 1 right now)?

Question

Okay i thought of a mix to what the shootout is right now, wanted to see what ya'll opinion of it is.

Instead of a 1 on 1 with the goalie, we instead see a line of 3 forwards with 2 defence and the goalie. The forwards would have like twenty seconds to shoot the puck. If the puck is frozen by the goalie or knocked back over the blue line the play is dead.

Each team would have 3 chances (just like the current shootout) and the best out of 3 wins.

I don't mind the shootout there kinda fun when it happens. I was just thinking this new way would give a better chance to making it the best team to win. Because it's more then just on the goalies shoulder it becomes a team effort to get the puck in the net.

Also it would have to be a different line on each subsequent run on both the forwards and defence.

What ya think?

Answer 1

I think pistols at 10 paces would be a great shootout.

This horse has been beaten beyond dead all season. Accept the game as it is and try and enjoy it.

_

Answer 2

Well I'm really old skool and believe a regular season game should just end in a tie if the score is equal after 60 minutes... then sudden death no matter how long it takes in the playoffs only. Playoff games are the ones that really count and where you NEED a winner.

If each regular season game HAS to be decided then shootouts are as good a way as any I suppose considering we can't have sudden death in the regular season due to time constraints and scheduling of flights etc.

Shootouts do seem a bit too trivial as a way to decide a game... I mean how often do players get to skate in 1 on 1 on a goalie with no defense in a regular game... then to actually decide the game we see it over and over sometimes 10+ times in succession.

Your idea of adding a bit of defense into the mix would make it more realistic at least as having defensemen as well as forwards and goalies on the ice makes more theoretical sense at least.

The method would be interesting to watch... just to see how it would work out. It would be an interesting alternative to the somewhat arbitrary 1-on-1 situations that fans do find fun now but are far removed from the way the game of hockey is actually played. Having 16 players on each team and actual lines involved in the shootout would make the final outcomes more of a team result... so yes I agree your idea is a step in the right direction.

The only problem might be that it could take a lot longer for a goal to actually be scored... as soon as you introduce actual defense into the shootout... that will likely make some shootouts last a long time as defensemen can be very effective at breaking up plays and helping defend their end of the ice :).

Answer 3

I prefer the shootout, it's quicker and more decisive. After 3 periods and overtime, most people just want an exciting (but fast) finish. Also, why shouldn't the goalies have the games on their shoulders? The team had 65 minutes to get a winner.

Answer 4

I have a hard time with the fact that the game can eventually be decided in a format that is totally different than the first 65 minutes of the game.

Play a five minute five on five. Then play a five minute four on four. Then play a five minute three on three. If you are still tied. call it a freakin' tie and give each team a point.

With the current format, you might just as well have the teams shoot free throws to decide a winner. It is just as far removed from the regulation game.

Answer 5

I dont really like that buts its cool you put some thought into it. I always thought what about a 1on1 with 2 forwards and 2 open nets or 2 on 2 with 2 open nets but i kinda like the shootout so im cool with it the way it is just thinkin about a lil pond hockey style

Answer 6

FOR the average fan it is great but for us old hockey nuts the game has changed to fast ,you should not get a point for an overtime loss or a loss in a shoot out,and then compare the records to the old way;look at buffalo how many of there points came in ot and shootouts,and i am from buffalo,thanks

Answer 7

After the 5 min. O.T. and no winner, the game should end a tie. 1 point each. the shoot out is no way to decide a game. It is for people who have no concept of the game. I would rather go for a root canal than watch a shoot out. I fall asleep at both.

Answer 8

Not a terrible idea, i personally though think we should have a 10 minute 4on4 OT, and then a 5 man shootout.

Answer 9

You know I don't think that's a bad idea !! I'm not a big fan of the shootout myself because ,in my opinion,it basically comes down to luck .Hockey is about skill ,not chance.Great imagination ! :)

Answer 10

I prefer the shootout