Commandant Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 You guys like that horseshit? I'm sorry but 3 in 3 is just stupid. Even if we won. Garbage Better than a shootout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 About the same for me. Not hockey. Should not be scored like a win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 You guys like that horseshit? I'm sorry but 3 in 3 is just stupid. Even if we won. Garbage Have not liked three on three. Gimmick. Looks like something out of the all star game , meant for joking around. Karlsson and Buff spoke up calling it "not hockey" "a joke" . Word is most of the players agree them. NHL put it in to cut down gimmick shoot outs. In a few years they will put something else in to get rid of gimmick three on three's. Tough loss for Habs, but I watched a tie hockey game....with a goofy little show after 60. I Better than a shootout. What isn't ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Agree that its goofy, but its regular season hockey, and tv audiences (in the US) want a winner/loser and not ties. Can't play 5 on 5 sudden death ot for 82 games or we'll kill the players.... so meh... 3 on 3 is at least better than shootout.As long as they donèt change the playoffs its all good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Dumb play by Patches on the OT goal, and silly from Subban on the Pageau shorty, but overall another good effort. Too bad Chucky didn't get a chance out there 3-on-3, he was strong all game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Agree that its goofy, but its regular season hockey, and tv audiences (in the US) want a winner/loser and not ties. Can't play 5 on 5 sudden death ot for 82 games or we'll kill the players.... so meh... 3 on 3 is at least better than shootout. As long as they donèt change the playoffs its all good. Dont care what the reason is........... its stupid. Degrades the game. If tv audiences wanted to see a monkey in net after 60 minutes would we do that too? Hey it would entertain and its only regular season. , Why not two on two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 The boys weren't BAD...but...it just seemed they played down to Ottawa's level a little bit. That relentless attack we've seen lately wasn't there...that extra gear of energy wasn't present tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I still think taking away the loser point and devaluing gimmick wins would reduce the number of OT games. 2 point regulation. 1 point gimmick. 0 points loss. Not one point loss. I've hated the scoring system ever since the shootout came out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Dont care what the reason is........... its stupid. Degrades the game. If tv audiences wanted to see a monkey in net after 60 minutes would we do that too? Hey it would entertain and its only regular season. , Why not two on two? If it made the league money... yes the owners would likely do it. Degrading the game? You think the board of governors cares???? This is business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Price (no relation) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I still think taking away the loser point and devaluing gimmick wins would reduce the number of OT games. 2 point regulation. 1 point gimmick. 0 points loss. Not one point loss. I've hated the scoring system ever since the shootout came out. Sure. Just if you do that, let the games finish in a tie. Like it used to be, and like it should be. (Of course, then, you might as well not play overtime. Nobody ever scored in overtime back when games ended in ties... they were too busy trying not to lose.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 If it made the league money... yes the owners would likely do it. Degrading the game? You think the board of governors cares???? This is business. No kidding. So is wrestling and reality shows....and they get ridiculed too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I seriously doubt having shoot outs and three on threes have increased ticket sales or the amount of tv viewers. Especially when most fans are heard cutting them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Price (no relation) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 My preference: 4-on-4 for 7 minutes. If the game is still tied after 7 minutes, it ends in a tie. Keep the "loser point." (this encourages end-to-end, all-out attempts to win. Overtime prior to the "loser point" rarely decided anything because teams were more concerned with keeping their point than getting the winning point.) Optional - Switch to a soccer-like scoring method - 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win, 1 point for an overtime loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 My preference: 4-on-4 for 7 minutes. If the game is still tied after 7 minutes, it ends in a tie. Keep the "loser point." (this encourages end-to-end, all-out attempts to win. Overtime prior to the "loser point" rarely decided anything because teams were more concerned with keeping their point than getting the winning point.) Optional - Switch to a soccer-like scoring method - 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win, 1 point for an overtime loss. :thumbs_up: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Good entertaining game, Habs had 37 shots and Sens blocked 23 others. Sweet PPG for Weise. Pacioretty & Plekanec managed to be -2, but that line also had 15 shots on Anderson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Not a fan of 3 vs. 3 (or 4 vs. 4) and I like the shootout. I'm not a fan of how we act like defence is this terrible thing in sports. A good defence takes talent, just as much talent as a good offence. It also looks so amateur, like I'm no longer watching the highest level of hockey in the world and instead watching pond hockey in my town. Shootout many try to argue is unnatural but penalty shots happen a heck of a lot more than 3 vs. 3 hockey. Also, it's a pretty pure situation: skater vs. goalie. It's the first line of offence versus the last line of defence. Anyway, I guess it's a compromise. The NHL has said shootouts are popular, and I'm guessing it's popular with new fans. The backlash against shootouts has created 3 vs. 3. Everyone is happy and unhappy at the same time. That's the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Not a fan of 3 vs. 3 (or 4 vs. 4) and I like the shootout. I'm not a fan of how we act like defence is this terrible thing in sports. A good defence takes talent, just as much talent as a good offence. It also looks so amateur, like I'm no longer watching the highest level of hockey in the world and instead watching pond hockey in my town. Shootout many try to argue is unnatural but penalty shots happen a heck of a lot more than 3 vs. 3 hockey. Also, it's a pretty pure situation: skater vs. goalie. It's the first line of offence versus the last line of defence. Anyway, I guess it's a compromise. The NHL has said shootouts are popular, and I'm guessing it's popular with new fans. The backlash against shootouts has created 3 vs. 3. Everyone is happy and unhappy at the same time. That's the NHL. I'd rather have a shootout. It has a degree of anticipation and I can enjoy a shoot out for what it is. This 3 on 3 is painful on the eyes, I enjoy winning and losing in shootouts more. 3 on 3 is so anti climatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I'll take shootout or 3 in 3 over time any day. I'm not a new fan, but have always hated ties. There should be a winner and a loser. I also hate the loser point. 2 points for a win- regardless of its earned, zero for a loss. Not a fan of 3 vs. 3 (or 4 vs. 4) and I like the shootout. I'm not a fan of how we act like defence is this terrible thing in sports. A good defence takes talent, just as much talent as a good offence. It also looks so amateur, like I'm no longer watching the highest level of hockey in the world and instead watching pond hockey in my town. Shootout many try to argue is unnatural but penalty shots happen a heck of a lot more than 3 vs. 3 hockey. Also, it's a pretty pure situation: skater vs. goalie. It's the first line of offence versus the last line of defence. Anyway, I guess it's a compromise. The NHL has said shootouts are popular, and I'm guessing it's popular with new fans. The backlash against shootouts has created 3 vs. 3. Everyone is happy and unhappy at the same time. That's the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 3 on 3 is fine. It's usually first mistake loses. I'm fine with either, ideal would be sudden death regular OT. Baseball goes 18 innings if they have to. I think if they had regular OT, you probably wouldn't have so many coaches playing safe for the loser point. Same thing if you eliminate the loser point. I'd rather have a shootout. It has a degree of anticipation and I can enjoy a shoot out for what it is. This 3 on 3 is painful on the eyes, I enjoy winning and losing in shootouts more. 3 on 3 is so anti climatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 My preference: 4-on-4 for 7 minutes. If the game is still tied after 7 minutes, it ends in a tie. Keep the "loser point." (this encourages end-to-end, all-out attempts to win. Overtime prior to the "loser point" rarely decided anything because teams were more concerned with keeping their point than getting the winning point.) Optional - Switch to a soccer-like scoring method - 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win, 1 point for an overtime loss. i like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Optional - Switch to a soccer-like scoring method - 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win, 1 point for an overtime loss. We talked (and I've talked for years) about this in the past. This is actually what International hockey does. The Swedish Hockey League does this as well as promotion and relegation (two worst teams play each other. Winner stays in SHL. Loser gets dropped to the lesser league.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 But which beer-league would be forced to take the Leafs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Dumb play by Patches on the OT goal, and silly from Subban on the Pageau shorty, but overall another good effort. Too bad Chucky didn't get a chance out there 3-on-3, he was strong all game. Agreed. Patches doesn't seem right to me! He's slower than usual out there and his dumb play caused us to lose the game! No need to panic, he'll get better, i just hope it doesn't take him too much time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 No kidding. So is wrestling and reality shows....and they get ridiculed too. I'm not saying i disagree with you that the thing is hokey, i just am pointing out that you are fighting an uphill battle as the money is too lucrative in the US. They will never let their games end in ties again. Won't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I seriously doubt having shoot outs and three on threes have increased ticket sales or the amount of tv viewers. Especially when most fans are heard cutting them up. Undeniable that tv money (especially US TV money) is way up from what it was pre 2004 lockout and pre shootout. There are a number of reasons for that, and it isn't all about shootout obviously... but ties were a huge complaint, especially when the NHL was the only league in the big 4 that had them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.