The way it is, flat out sucks!

1) I’d go with the 3pt regulation win to keep more teams with a chance after the All Star break.
2) Eliminate the shootout! Keep it a TEAM game! The game is over after OT!
3) Elimate the Instigator rule. Make the cheap shot artists pay for their misdeeds. If the refs miss a cheap shot, the players won’t.
4) Go back to the 1-8, 2-7, 3-6, 4-5 format of old.
5) Go back to 6 divisional games per year! Reducing out of conference games is easy. Just play once in rotating years. Fans of their respective teams would much rather see them play their rivals a lot more than a team from across the country. Tickets for those games would be valuable as well. That is good for the game on both the league and ticket holder levels.

These changes will make the game more exciting, increase the intensity, and bring back the rivalries that existed 15-20 years ago. I would give up my Saturday to watch the Flyers play Rangers, or Avs versus Red Wings. Sadly, not today.

So when do I become the Commish?
- Hokeeguy9

After careful consideration, I amnend my suggestions to eliminate Number 1. Just play 3on3 til someone scores. It won’t take that long when each team has only three skaters and knows they get no points for the tie.

I can also get behind eliminating the trapezoid as well. Make that rule change Number 6.

I agree that all games should be worth the same amount of points. The season is way too long including the playoffs to play continuous OT. They won't get rid of the shootout, it's way too popular.
- MJL

Yeah but this way more teams are "in it" for longer.

Ek had that explained to him when he was in touch with "the league". This was important because no one else had ever figured it out or mentioned it thousands of times on these boards over the past 10 years.

Thank God for EK.

Thank God.

The game ends after regulation.

A tie is 1 point each.

Problem solved.

Why wouldn't the team who won the shootout just sit back and play cautiously and just defend in OT, or skate around with the open ice in 3 on 3 in a keep away action and not even try to score? They know if they run out the clock, they win the game?
- MJL

Nailed it.

Get rid of the loser point. We don't need to add extra points for a win, this isn't (frank)ing soccer. Crush the teams that play to not lose until they smarten up and change strategy. It's bad for the game.

Just let ties stand after 60 minutes of regulation hockey.

The most popular sport in the world, and every major league of that sport, has ties. What is the North American obsession with determining a winner every freaking game? Is it because of something Don Cherry said?

3 on 3 isn’t hockey. Shootouts are not hockey.

Ties during the regular season. Sudden death until someone scores in the playoffs.
- scottak

First thing is first, baseball doesn't have ties. Second, soccer is the most popular sport because the poorest countries in the world can play it. It doesn't make it a great game.

You're right about the ties and the sudden death, though.

The game ends after regulation.

A tie is 1 point each.

Problem solved.
- Aetherial

It worked for many, many decades.

Having said that, I kinda like the 3v3 for 5 mins. I could do without* the shootout though.

* Burn it with hellfire and send it into the abyss.

No more shootout 3 vs 3 for 10 minutes no winner each team gets 1 point if there is a winner 2 points to them 0 points to the looser

I agree the 3 point system is the way to go (3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss).

For other adjustments, yes to no shootouts. 3-on-3 is too fast to go on for long so I don't see the point of a shootout. Since OT is worth less points, if it's the first game of a back to back and OT is going long, start putting fresh 3rd and 4th liners on the ice.

It'd never happen but I wish we had a relegation system. Talk about not tanking, take the worst team from each conference and the best team from each AHL conference and swap them yearly. Unsure how you'd handle draft picks though. Can't give them to AHL teams. :p

I agree the 3 point system is the way to go (3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss).

For other adjustments, yes to no shootouts. 3-on-3 is too fast to go on for long so I don't see the point of a shootout. Since OT is worth less points, if it's the first game of a back to back and OT is going long, start putting fresh 3rd and 4th liners on the ice.

It'd never happen but I wish we had a relegation system. Talk about not tanking, take the worst team from each conference and the best team from each AHL conference and swap them yearly. Unsure how you'd handle draft picks though. Can't give them to AHL teams. :p
- coohill

For me its 2-2-1 format that no one seems to get the just of that i like. It keeps things traditional but gets things done. Two points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win(10 min 3on3), but only one point for a win if it goes to a shoot out. Zero points for a loss across the board. This will even get teams needing the 2 points at seasons end to go for it and pull the goalie in overtime. Just my thoughts thou but who listens

2 points for a win zero for a loss OT loss or not. I’d prefer OT played until there is a winner with no shootout.

For me its 2-2-1 format that no one seems to get the just of that i like. It keeps things traditional but gets things done. Two points for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win(10 min 3on3), but only one point for a win if it goes to a shoot out. Zero points for a loss across the board. This will even get teams needing the 2 points at seasons end to go for it and pull the goalie in overtime. Just my thoughts thou but who listens

- Buck Norris

In my opinion any points system that does not result in every game being worth the same amount of points, is not a good system.

2 points for a win zero for a loss OT loss or not. I’d prefer OT played until there is a winner with no shootout.
- bird_dog_pa

Just can't do that. Can't have regular season games going forever until someone scores. The NHL will never do that. Doesn't make sense.

WTF? I couldn't finish. This was Garth-level shoddy writing

I agree the 3 point system is the way to go (3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss).

For other adjustments, yes to no shootouts. 3-on-3 is too fast to go on for long so I don't see the point of a shootout. Since OT is worth less points, if it's the first game of a back to back and OT is going long, start putting fresh 3rd and 4th liners on the ice.

It'd never happen but I wish we had a relegation system. Talk about not tanking, take the worst team from each conference and the best team from each AHL conference and swap them yearly. Unsure how you'd handle draft picks though. Can't give them to AHL teams. :p
- coohill

So Chicago Blackhawks and their AHL affiliate both in the same division? I'm sure that would never be a problem

It’s a simple fix:

3 points for Regulation Win
2 Points for OT win with a 5 on 5 OT with 0 points if you lost.
1 point each if tied after OT and bonus 2 Nd point if you win shoot out .

#All2EZ

WTF? I couldn't finish. This was Garth-level shoddy writing
- muffin_man

So, it's getting better?

Drop points all together and go to winning percentage

Everyone's acting like 3v3 is a legitimate way to determine the winner of a game. It's not. Hockey is played 5v5. 3v3 is a tie game, 1 point each, 1 bonus point to the team who wins the bonus game.

Drop points all together and go to winning percentage
- BuzzKiller

What difference does that make? Do teams get partial wins for tie games? Otherwise you're just saying 2 for a win, 0 for any loss.

It's already been researched, and rehashed every year on this site. Usually wont make a difference. Go back to ties, the shootout novelty has long passed.

It's already been researched, and rehashed every year on this site. Usually wont make a difference. Go back to ties, the shootout novelty has long passed.
- Mentalorgasm5

I'll admit I still enjoy watching the shootout, but don't think it should be impacting standings the way it does. I'd be happy with it continuing in a diminished capacity. Maybe shootout wins are just for tie breakers (standings), maybe make it worth 0.2 points.

I'll admit I still enjoy watching the shootout, but don't think it should be impacting standings the way it does. I'd be happy with it continuing in a diminished capacity. Maybe shootout wins are just for tie breakers (standings), maybe make it worth 0.2 points.
- Blue Clam

I've never liked the shootout, and I'm only 33. So I'm not some guy tied down with hockey tradition. Seemed like a marketing gimmick that never panned out.

It's very simple; follow what soccer has been doing.

3 points for a win
1 point for a tie
0 for a loss

Teams will battle hard to get that extra 2 points...

The game ends after regulation.

A tie is 1 point each.

Problem solved.
- Aetherial

Yes.