The infamous "loser point"
View Single Post
09-24-2003, 02:38 PM
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Time to pop in my idea again.
The problem with OT now is this perceived "lessening" of the value of a win, a tie etc, as can be seen by "loser point" etc.
So, here's the deal. OT is not an extension of the game anymore. It's a completely separate competition for an extra bonus point. It has no connection with the real game 60 minutes before. It's two teams with an opportunity to earn a bonus point, to let the fans go home happy. Once you get your head around that, it's not so bad.
So, what we need to do to show that in the standings:
At the end of regulation, a tie has occurred. Each team should at that point GET A TIE in their T column. Regardless of any future overtime results to come.
If one team wins in overtime, they earn the extra bonus point, which goes in their BP column.
That's it. There is no W recorded, because they didn't really win the game. There is no L recorded, because nobody lost the game. Each starting goalie gets a T, as they deserve.
With this system, teams that win in regulation will naturally get higher standings than teams that don't. Say after two games, with one specific result being Colorado "beating" Minny in overtime:
Team W L T BP Pts Van 2 0 0 0 4 Col 1 0 1 1 4 Edm 1 0 1 0 3 Min 0 1 1 0 1
Vancouver, with two wins in regulation is on top, because one of Colorado's "wins" was in overtime. The first tie breaker is Wins. Colorado still gets credit for going for it in overtime, and thus pull ahead of Edmonton, but the main benefit is that regulation wins are valued the most.
A win in regulation is technically worth more than a win in overtime with this system, and teams would be going for it right until the ending buzzer.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by PecaFan