-who cares about sports center shoot out number 1200 highlights?
For all the complaining about how hard it is for Hockey as a sport to present itself to new viewers, this would almost seem like a no-brainer for me. What better way to get more people to watch hockey than to provide great highlights?
I'm still up in the air over the shootout issue, but I think you're being a bit hasty with this particular reason. Bottom line is that the NHL needs more viewers. Make it easier for Sportscenter to show hockey highlights and they will put more hockey on Sportscenter. Pique the interest of a few people and, next thing you know, more people are watching the games themselves.
I agree with posters who have said that the shootouts themselves would get old after a short time. On the other hand, there's bound to be some players in the league that can generate some amazing stuff if given the chance multiple times during the season.
Exiciting for the fans... annoying to the players... Shootouts are good once and a while (ie: olympics etc).. so lets just keep them there. You can't tell me you guys don't find 4 on 4 OT exciting...
i agree 100% with 4 on 4 being exciting. i watch games on center ice i might normally turn off if its close just to watch 4 on 4. i saw some crazy overtimes this season, which kept my interest up long after my team was no longer involved in the playoff hunt. i agree with traditionalists against shootouts - but i think it may be inevitable. there is no doubt it would attract fans, the only people turned off would be more die hard fans who are going to keep watching anyway. its not like teams really sit on the tie during 4 on 4 - the more they get used to it the more games will end prior to shootout. i also think the players will go more all out in an effort to avoid the shootout.
Shootouts would most definitely excite the game and it would get rid of the ties which are just worthless. Neither have a shootout or make the overtime period another 20 minute period. If there is no score by then, a tie would be granted.
What about ''Football'' (soccer) , they have a shoot-out at the end if the game is tie.
Soccer is THE TEAMSPORT
1. Soccer has always been this way. They tried the golden goal (FIFA term for sudden death) in their extra time...fans were outraged. They hated it. Then FIFA went to a "Silver Goal", meaning if a team scores in the first extra half and holds it until the end of the half, the game is over.....now there are rumours that FIFA will go back to the traditional playing of 30 minutes of extra time no matter what..........and with this all, there has still been a penalty shootout after 30 minutes of extra time.
2. A soccer field is huge. We're lucky enough as it is to see three goals in a match. If soccer were to go continuous sudden death, games could realistically last all night (literally). That would put the players at risk for injury due to extreme exhaustion as they are moving the whole game, and unlike hockey, they get no breaks. There is no changing on the fly, teams are allowed three subs all game long.
Long story short, continuous OT would be too hard on soccer players, and shootouts are their tradition. Shootouts have never been part of hockey tradition.
Like others have said, I never want to see a shoot-out in the playoffs.
But I'm not sure if the NHL should adopt them in the regular season. I think they should first try it in the AHL, like they did with the red line thing this year. If people like it and it works, then consider bringing it up to the NHL.
I think shoot-outs should be optional on interference penalties. There are some dumb plays made to take away fair scoring chances and I think this would not only add excitement to the game, but take crap like players sitting in the net out of the game.