RobRock Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Moncton at Baie-Comeau In a QMJHL game on Wednesday, the Moncton Wildcats and Baie-Comeau Drakkar set a Quebec league record by taking 30 shots in order to settle a 6-6 tie. The shootout was won when Wildcats' Nick Emmanuelle scored on Drakkar goalie Marco Cousineau for a 2-1 victory in the shootout. 30 free chances and only 3 goals. They scored 12 between them during sixty minutes and only managed 3 in 30 shots? Jeez, Shaq has a better percentage from the charity stripe. And this is supposed to be entertaining to the fans? The boxscore only says whether the shots were stopped or not, whereas the NHL uses a goal/save/missed system for its shootouts, so if the goalies actually stopped 27 of those shots officially, then my hat's off to them both. But after all that, I still gotta say that… I WILL DESPISE THIS GIMMICK WITH EVERY OUNCE OF HATRED I CAN MUSTER IN MY BODY FOR ETERNITY AND A DAY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 If it makes more money for the NHL I am all for it. I hate the shootout and as long as the Habs do not miss the playoffs ever because of it, it will never really bother me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shu Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 wow......................thats alot of shots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Shootouts are cool. I love them. Makes the game have an ending, hated going home on a tie. After the game you feel I dunno down. Like the game was missing an ending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
option+ Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 (edited) I personally hate shootouts, but it dawned on me Saturday night that they are probably a good idea for the general health of the league: I was watching the game, and my Dad came into the room and watched the last five minutes and OT with me. My Dad doesn't really care about hockey - he didn't even see a game he was 30 or so (he is an immigrant), and even then didn't really take to it. He briefly was interested during the Oilers runs in the 1980s, but stopped watching after that Oilers team was broken up. Anyway... so here comes the shootout Saturday night... and he was absolutely enthralled. He LOVED it, he thought it was so much fun. I'm assuming that there are thousands more people out there like my Dad who are kind of/sort of fans, but really like the shootout. And ultimately, these are the people the NHL needs to please. People like us will watch anyway. Edited October 31, 2006 by option+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 my dad is one of those fans as well. Exciting. Especially in a packed house with crowds going crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalhabs Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I dont like the idea that 3 points is handed out if the game is a tie. Sweden had a better idea when we had shootouts since a regular time win gave 3 points to the winning team while a OT or shootout win only gave 2 points to the winner and 1 to the loser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 yup each game should have the same number of points up for grabs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I dont like the idea that 3 points is handed out if the game is a tie. Sweden had a better idea when we had shootouts since a regular time win gave 3 points to the winning team while a OT or shootout win only gave 2 points to the winner and 1 to the loser. I like this idea. Makes mathematical sense. Go :hlogo: Go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riker Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I like this idea. Makes mathematical sense. Go :hlogo: Go! I'll second that motion... all these shootouts are a new version of the Trap in someway... Hold on until O.T/Shootout to ensure you get at least a point... SUCKS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I'll second that motion... all these shootouts are a new version of the Trap in someway... Hold on until O.T/Shootout to ensure you get at least a point... SUCKS! How is this any different from the past? If it was a tie game in the 3rd, teams wouldn't do anything the rest of the game OR overtime to ensure they got the tie. The extra point for an OTL (before the shootout ) was to make sure that teams didn't just go through the motions in OT and walk away with their guaranteed point. Then, teams would take a chance in OT to get that extra point. So, even before the shootout was implemented, games could be worth 3 points if it went to overtime, and someone won. The shootout hasn't changed that, now, it's just a definite. Someone is going to win. Are you telling me that during the shootout, you aren't on the edge of your seat, or are you so disgusted by the shootout that you turn off the TV? Call it a gimmick if you want, but this is a game, hockey is about entertainment. I find the shootout entertaining. I think a lot of hardcore hockey fans are way too traditionalist because it's cool to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtoVuoti Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 During the 2nd division World championship (France plays at this level for several seasons now), a game starts 1st with the shootout session. Then you have the usual stuff. If the game is tied, you already know who has won ... I think it makes much sense this way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
option+ Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 That's really interesting. I guess that would make one team go on the attack more from the beginning, because a tie isn't good enough for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 That's really interesting. I guess that would make one team go on the attack more from the beginning, because a tie isn't good enough for them. Yeah but the other one relies much more on D. I think you get a real onesided match (OT) I think the situation as its now is better. Both teams have 1 point and can go all the way for the second one in OT! Have to see it in real life, who knows whats better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riker Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 How is this any different from the past? If it was a tie game in the 3rd, teams wouldn't do anything the rest of the game OR overtime to ensure they got the tie. The extra point for an OTL (before the shootout ) was to make sure that teams didn't just go through the motions in OT and walk away with their guaranteed point. Then, teams would take a chance in OT to get that extra point. So, even before the shootout was implemented, games could be worth 3 points if it went to overtime, and someone won. The shootout hasn't changed that, now, it's just a definite. Someone is going to win. Are you telling me that during the shootout, you aren't on the edge of your seat, or are you so disgusted by the shootout that you turn off the TV? Call it a gimmick if you want, but this is a game, hockey is about entertainment. I find the shootout entertaining. I think a lot of hardcore hockey fans are way too traditionalist because it's cool to be. Fine... lets just have a homerun derby if a game goes beyond 9 innings of play while we are at it... Or Dunk Championship for BBall or a Quaterback Sack Challenge... The point I am trying to make is it is a team game and not a one on one for all the marbles match that would never happen in the playoffs... Sure the fans are entertained and I know it will never change, but its not really hockey in the pure sense of the word that we know it as... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Fine... lets just have a homerun derby if a game goes beyond 9 innings of play while we are at it... Ooh, that sounds fun! Haha. Ties are still allowed to occur in football (rare, rare, rare), but there was never a provision for ties in any of the other sports. Hockey, there was, and I would say by far that more hockey games go into OT than the other major US sports. Leaving a game as a tie is very anticlimactic...heck, why even play at that point? Ha. Doesn't soccer go into shootouts as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I agree 100% with the shootout haters here. If the game is going to be decided by individuals, why even play the game? Why not just go straight to the shootout. There is nothing wrong with a tie when two teams play hard and match each other evenly. I despise the shootout, and can't stand that the NHL had to put it in the game in order to attract more casual fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I HATE TIES!!!!!!!!!! It's not normal. In life, there are always winners and losers. Why should sports be different? A family of four pays 120$ for noseblead seats and goes home after watching a 2-2 tie. That's pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted November 1, 2006 Author Share Posted November 1, 2006 (edited) I HATE TIES!!!!!!!!!! It's not normal. In life, there are always winners and losers. Why should sports be different? A family of four pays 120$ for noseblead seats and goes home after watching a 2-2 tie. That's pathetic. What about the lottery? When there's more than one winning ticket sold, they don't hold another draw to see who gets the prize. The split the pot evenly. That's a tie. If you don't want ties, then that's fine. Play until someone wins. That's how all the other sports in North America do it, except the NFL. Edited November 1, 2006 by RobRock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riker Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 The real question is why doesn't any of the indivdual points count (saves, goals, etc)? Just the winner and loser? Give me a break! :puke: Ooh, that sounds fun! Haha. Ties are still allowed to occur in football (rare, rare, rare), but there was never a provision for ties in any of the other sports. Hockey, there was, and I would say by far that more hockey games go into OT than the other major US sports. Leaving a game as a tie is very anticlimactic...heck, why even play at that point? Ha. Doesn't soccer go into shootouts as well? Not all games in Europe go to a shootout... they still allow ties unless it is in a tournament (if I am not mistaken). :?- I HATE TIES!!!!!!!!!! It's not normal. In life, there are always winners and losers. Why should sports be different? A family of four pays 120$ for noseblead seats and goes home after watching a 2-2 tie. That's pathetic. 120$ for four?! Damn I wish I still lived in Montreal... In Toronto, you'd be lucky for one of those tickets... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 A family of four pays 120$ for noseblead seats and goes home after watching a 2-2 tie. That's pathetic. Interesting, given that I see $25 dollar tickets, heck even $10 tickets in the "Fun Zone." 120$ for four?! Damn I wish I still lived in Montreal... In Toronto, you'd be lucky for one of those tickets... Right, one nosebleed seat in Toronto cost 120 bucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Interesting, given that I see $25 dollar tickets, heck even $10 tickets in the "Fun Zone." Right, one nosebleed seat in Toronto cost 120 bucks. Cheapest seats here, very top row, are $21. Trust me, I've bought them before. Every once in a while, they have a family promotion, family of 4, tix for $99, still nosebleeds. And the Avs wonder where their sellout streak went. Back to the topic, I'm way more than a casual fan and I enjoy the shootouts. I don't think it's the perfect solution on eliminating ties, but it's a decent one. When it just used to be win/loss/tie, the NHL might as well have done away with OT all together. No team wanted to lose that extra valuable point. Everyone cried foul when pts were guaranteed in OT and it went to a 4-4 situation. Given the volume of NHL games that go into OT< playing until someone wins isn't an option. With an 82 game schedule...sheesh, could you imagine playing a double OT game, and you had another game the following night? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riker Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Cheapest seats here, very top row, are $21. Trust me, I've bought them before. Every once in a while, they have a family promotion, family of 4, tix for $99, still nosebleeds. And the Avs wonder where their sellout streak went. Back to the topic, I'm way more than a casual fan and I enjoy the shootouts. I don't think it's the perfect solution on eliminating ties, but it's a decent one. When it just used to be win/loss/tie, the NHL might as well have done away with OT all together. No team wanted to lose that extra valuable point. Everyone cried foul when pts were guaranteed in OT and it went to a 4-4 situation. Given the volume of NHL games that go into OT< playing until someone wins isn't an option. With an 82 game schedule...sheesh, could you imagine playing a double OT game, and you had another game the following night? I can agree that it was a bit of a joke that coaches would play for the tie in order to help keep their jobs when the 4 on 4 first came out, but when someone plays extra innings, the full squads play until it is over. In basketball, they keep going until the last buzzer, etc... And although a tie can exist in NFL, it is rare and again the full squads get in the game. The fact that the NHL has come up with a gimmic to interest new fans scares me in that what if the fan hopes that this should carry over to Playoffs as well, never mind my earlier point that not only player gets any points during this video game moment for the shootout! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Yeah but the other one relies much more on D. I think you get a real onesided match (OT) I think the situation as its now is better. Both teams have 1 point and can go all the way for the second one in OT! Have to see it in real life, who knows whats better My hockey game I saw Canucks-Blues almost was a shootout but my Canucks scored at the 4:59 mark so I didn't see it, but WOW what a game that was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Interesting, given that I see $25 dollar tickets, heck even $10 tickets in the "Fun Zone." Right, one nosebleed seat in Toronto cost 120 bucks. Isn't that stupid? I was looking at going to Toronto to watch a Canadiens/Leafs game but as soon as I saw the prices for the tickets... forget that noise... not worth it! Go :hlogo: Go! 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.