HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Your thoughts on this system

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-11-2008, 11:11 AM
  #51
Grouchy
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Canal Winchester, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 170
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Grouchy
I don't have a problem with the current system but if asked on my thoughts for changing it:

Three points for a win, one for a tie, zero for a loss. No overtime through regular season.

Yeah we want to see a winner but the 3 points for the win instead of 2 should be the incentive for the home team (typically the team pushing to break a tie and go for the win) to get the extra 2 points or the 3 point swing against a division foe.

There are a lot of games in each season so that would make a lot of points available but the idea is to reward a win, accept a good tie with a smaller reward and make the loser sit idle without points.

I will say, though, that the 2 win, 1 tie or loser in tie, 0 for regulation loss fits more with the NHL philosophy of griding out the season in some cases right to the very end; much like the best of seven to the Stanley Cup.

Grouchy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2008, 11:18 AM
  #52
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 12,004
vCash: 500
I like the concept of all games having the same worth, no matter how they are won or lost. There are two ways to do that, I think:

1) three points per game, with a regulation win worth the full points and overtime and shootout wins being worth two to the winner and one to the loser. If the loser is given a point for getting to overtime, then it makes sense to me that the winner should be docked one point for allowing that to happen;

2) the other way to do it that seems fair to me is as baseball does it: wins are wins, nothing extra for going past nine innings - winner take all. Forget about points, altogether, and base everything on winning percentage.

Both go against tradition and make historical perspective more difficult, but that's the way I 'd like to see it changed, anyway.

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2008, 04:51 PM
  #53
Aging Goalie
 
Aging Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Lima, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,625
vCash: 500
Yeah I understand the whole historical value part to it. I was just trying to get a sense for how to lessen the amount of "coasting" at the end of a tied game. If we can make it more of a push for a win clear to the horn I think that the game as a whole will be better for it.

Aging Goalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2008, 06:28 PM
  #54
Timeless Winter
Oceans of Grey
 
Timeless Winter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 16,062
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Timeless Winter
I like the 3-2-1 system, it puts more emphasis on the regulation win.

Timeless Winter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2008, 09:39 PM
  #55
Lainey
Registered User
 
Lainey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
I want the shootout to die a quick painless death and be quickly forgotten. It is a bastardization of the game and completely disregards the TEAM element of hockey. Hockey is a team sport and the best team should be awarded the points, not the team with the three best breakaway shooters and 1-on-1 goalie.

However, I realize that for whatever reason a large portion of "casual-fan" Americans are seemingly incapable of acccepting an honorable tie as a result, so I wouldn't mind a 5min of 4-on-4 then 5min of 3-on-3 then, if necessary, the shootout. This would make the shootout harder to get to, and as we saw in the 2008 young stars game, 3-on- results in lots of goals and the goalies (Manny Legace's live comments during the game) feel it is a better representation of team play.

Lainey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2008, 08:52 AM
  #56
Aging Goalie
 
Aging Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Lima, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lainey View Post
I want the shootout to die a quick painless death and be quickly forgotten. It is a bastardization of the game and completely disregards the TEAM element of hockey. Hockey is a team sport and the best team should be awarded the points, not the team with the three best breakaway shooters and 1-on-1 goalie.

However, I realize that for whatever reason a large portion of "casual-fan" Americans are seemingly incapable of acccepting an honorable tie as a result, so I wouldn't mind a 5min of 4-on-4 then 5min of 3-on-3 then, if necessary, the shootout. This would make the shootout harder to get to, and as we saw in the 2008 young stars game, 3-on- results in lots of goals and the goalies (Manny Legace's live comments during the game) feel it is a better representation of team play.
You like some are still missing what having the higher points for a regulation win will accomplish. Giving them more motivation to go for it in regulation will assuredly mean less OT games which will mean less shootouts. It is simple logic. All fans would be more pleased while still having a compromise to make sure the game is more marketable in the US.

Aging Goalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.