They’ve sucked for so long that I’ve developed a soft spot for ANY amount of success for them. Even though I despise the owner.
- Brownsoldier

My thoughts exactly. I despise that as5hole. Worst con man in sports. Won't give him a dime. I still appreciate baseball.

They’ve sucked for so long that I’ve developed a soft spot for ANY amount of success for them. Even though I despise the owner.
- Brownsoldier

They're still just a .500 team. The Pirates do have some nice pitchers though. Skenes is a phenom. Jones and Keller are almost as good, especially Jones.

Just my preference. Saw a lot of ties over the years. Paid for a lot of tie games. Personally, I like the 3v3. They've gotten over-coached (sans our dope coach) over the years, but it's still two teams putting their top skill on the ice. I agree, the shootout is a gimmick.
- madmike71

A shootout win shouldn't hold the exact same value as a regulation win. Or even an overtime win, for that matter.

How about going to each team getting a 2:00 power play? You still get the skill players, just more passing instead of one guy skating around the rink playing keep away.

A shootout win shouldn't hold the exact same value as a regulation win. Or even an overtime win, for that matter.

How about going to each team getting a 2:00 power play? You still get the skill players, just more passing instead of one guy skating around the rink playing keep away.
- Thunderbolt

Nah. Just do 4-4 or for 10 minutes and end in a tie after that. Stop (frank)ing with hockey.

Nah. Just do 4-4 or for 10 minutes and end in a tie after that. Stop (frank)ing with hockey.
- Grinder47

That's the simplest and most logical answer. Unfortunately, television and the majority of fans don't want ties.

Nah. Just do 4-4 or for 10 minutes and end in a tie after that. Stop (frank)ing with hockey.
- Grinder47

This.

That's the simplest and most logical answer. Unfortunately, television and the majority of fans don't want ties.
- Thunderbolt

Where do you get "....the majority of fans don't want this" from?

Where do you get "....the majority of fans don't want this" from?
- MattStrat

I sure as poop don't want to see ties.

I sure as poop don't want to see ties.
- j.boyd919

Why not?

Perhaps anicdotal, but I know an awful lot of people who are really into hockey and most of which play a lot too.... I can't think of a single one thats against two teams tying... Like the way it always ways for the vast majority of of the NHL's existence haha. Other sports have ties. Id rather an extended OT and if it doesn't get done each team goes home with a point... Evenly... Because neither won, neither lost.

Why not?

Perhaps anicdotal, but I know an awful lot of people who are really into hockey and most of which play a lot too.... I can't think of a single one thats against two teams tying... Like the way it always ways for the vast majority of of the NHL's existence haha. Other sports have ties. Id rather an extended OT and if it doesn't get done each team goes home with a point... Evenly... Because neither won, neither lost.
- MattStrat

Because ties suck. I don't know a single guy in our beer league that's for ties lol everyone would rather do a shootout or extended OT.

Ties were the worst when we were growing up to. I hated watching 20 minutes of overtime only for it to end up in a tie. I'd rather see 10 minutes of 4v4 then 10 minutes of 3v3 as OT or something like that. I have no problem with a penalty on teams who pull the puck back over. Keep the play moving forward, I'd rather see a goal or attempt than see teams circle back to look for the perfect rush opportunity.

Because ties suck. I don't know a single guy in our beer league that's for ties lol everyone would rather do a shootout or extended OT.

Ties were the worst when we were growing up to. I hated watching 20 minutes of overtime only for it to end up in a tie. I'd rather see 10 minutes of 4v4 then 10 minutes of 3v3 as OT or something like that. I have no problem with a penalty on teams who pull the puck back over. Keep the play moving forward, I'd rather see a goal or attempt than see teams circle back to look for the perfect rush opportunity.
- j.boyd919

I’m against 3v3 and shootouts solely because the pens suck at them.

Where do you get "....the majority of fans don't want this" from?
- MattStrat

Ties, the majority of fans don't want ties.

https://forums.hfboards.c...ed-after-60-mins.2913563/

The first example I found has fans overwhelmingly against ties, 4-1 or 80%. I bet it's pretty close to that ratio here.

I can't find the actual study the NHL did in deciding to implement the shootout as a tie breaker. I apologize for that.

I can't fathom the NHL Board of Directors would eliminate ties without conducting a survey first. And even then, only if the vast majority of fans were in favor of eliminating ties. My guess would be a 2-1 count,

Ties, the majority of fans don't want ties.

https://forums.hfboards.c...ed-after-60-mins.2913563/

The first example I found has fans overwhelmingly against ties, 4-1 or 80%. I bet it's pretty close to that ratio here.

I can't find the actual study the NHL did in deciding to implement the shootout as a tie breaker. I apologize for that.

I can't fathom the NHL Board of Directors would eliminate ties without conducting a survey first. And even then, only if the vast majority of fans were in favor of eliminating ties. My guess would be a 2-1 count,
- Thunderbolt

According to this link 37.6% of these voters voted in favor of ending in a tie..... 32% ending with a shootout, 23.3% voted for continueous 3 on 3 until a goal is scored and 7% voted other....

Because ties suck. I don't know a single guy in our beer league that's for ties lol everyone would rather do a shootout or extended OT.

Ties were the worst when we were growing up to. I hated watching 20 minutes of overtime only for it to end up in a tie. I'd rather see 10 minutes of 4v4 then 10 minutes of 3v3 as OT or something like that. I have no problem with a penalty on teams who pull the puck back over. Keep the play moving forward, I'd rather see a goal or attempt than see teams circle back to look for the perfect rush opportunity.
- j.boyd919

American beer leaguers, not surprised... hahaha just kidding, truly

If it must continue with 3 on 3 OT I am all about that penalty. 3 on 3 wasn't like that at first, it evolved into that sh!t.

I'd rather 4 on 4.

I really dont like loser points. Big part of why I like a point each in tie. I'd prefer only 2 points up for grabs in a game... Even if 3 on 3 and SO, only the winner gets 2 points. A lot of games suffer late game as teams try and just play to get at least a point...

American beer leaguers, not surprised... hahaha just kidding, truly

If it must continue with 3 on 3 OT I am all about that penalty. 3 on 3 wasn't like that at first, it evolved into that sh!t.

I'd rather 4 on 4.

I really dont like loser points. Big part of why I like a point each in tie. I'd prefer only 2 points up for grabs in a game... Even if 3 on 3 and SO, only the winner gets 2 points. A lot of games suffer late game as teams try and just play to get at least a point...
- MattStrat

3 point games changes a lot of that. Give them 3 for regulation win and 2 for OT win and teams will actually try and win in regulation instead of trying not to lose. Because I agree, the last half of a tied third period can be pretty dull hockey.

But NHL likes the system they have because it keeps teams in the race longer. So I doubt they do any overhaul that doesn't keep that. Fairness of deciding with a skills comp or gimmicked OT aside.

3 point games changes a lot of that. Give them 3 for regulation win and 2 for OT win and teams will actually try and win in regulation instead of trying not to lose. Because I agree, the last half of a tied third period can be pretty dull hockey.

But NHL likes the system they have because it keeps teams in the race longer. So I doubt they do any overhaul that doesn't keep that. Fairness of deciding with a skills comp or gimmicked OT aside.
- Tojo.

3 points for a regulation W, like in soccer, I could probably digest. Then 2 points for OT win along with either no points or 1 loser point for OT/SO loss.

I think I'm down with that... Some teams would have like 150ish point seasons though hahah

3 point games changes a lot of that. Give them 3 for regulation win and 2 for OT win and teams will actually try and win in regulation instead of trying not to lose. Because I agree, the last half of a tied third period can be pretty dull hockey.

But NHL likes the system they have because it keeps teams in the race longer. So I doubt they do any overhaul that doesn't keep that. Fairness of deciding with a skills comp or gimmicked OT aside.
- Tojo.

Was going to write the same thing. 3-2-1 is the right system, but the NHL wants tight standings and races down to the wire. Keep the fans of marginal teams buying tickets. Honestly, I don't think that's wrong either. It's a sport that greatly relies on ticket sales and fan engagement. Keep the league as strong as possible. The Pens were as marginal as it gets this season, but fan interest really never waned because of the loser point. Would be nice to have a coach that stresses practicing important parts of the game however.

If I could make one change to the NHL it would be to change the playoff seeding back to 1-8. That a real reward for strong regular seasons.

I sure as poop don't want to see ties.
- j.boyd919

A tie is way better than whatever the hell you want to call 3-3 or a shootout.

According to this link 37.6% of these voters voted in favor of ending in a tie..... 32% ending with a shootout, 23.3% voted for continueous 3 on 3 until a goal is scored and 7% voted other....
- MattStrat

Looks like I failed goesinta's. No idea what I did.

Still, the percentage of people who voted against ties is at minimum 55%. That's still a big difference, 11 points. (What other is, I have no idea)

On a lighter note, I used to supervise in the Postal Service. Half of Western PA should be happy they got their mail.

Looks like I failed goesinta's. No idea what I did.

Still, the percentage of people who voted against ties is at minimum 55%. That's still a big difference, 11 points. (What other is, I have no idea)

On a lighter note, I used to supervise in the Postal Service. Half of Western PA should be happy they got their mail.
- Thunderbolt

Hahahah no biggie... I really botched some math in here not long ago... Vic pointed it out while also finding an opportunity to get a shot in on me about marijuana consumption 🤷

Because ties suck. I don't know a single guy in our beer league that's for ties lol everyone would rather do a shootout or extended OT.

Ties were the worst when we were growing up to. I hated watching 20 minutes of overtime only for it to end up in a tie. I'd rather see 10 minutes of 4v4 then 10 minutes of 3v3 as OT or something like that. I have no problem with a penalty on teams who pull the puck back over. Keep the play moving forward, I'd rather see a goal or attempt than see teams circle back to look for the perfect rush opportunity.
- j.boyd919

Nope. Stop (frank)ing with the rules because some people just aren’t hockey fans. 3-3 is and abomination and shootouts are lame. This isn’t some goofy league like the NFL.

A tie is way better than whatever the hell you want to call 3-3 or a shootout.
- Grinder47

Nah

If college hockey can do continuous OT then so can the NHL

Because ties suck. I don't know a single guy in our beer league that's for ties lol everyone would rather do a shootout or extended OT.

Ties were the worst when we were growing up to. I hated watching 20 minutes of overtime only for it to end up in a tie. I'd rather see 10 minutes of 4v4 then 10 minutes of 3v3 as OT or something like that. I have no problem with a penalty on teams who pull the puck back over. Keep the play moving forward, I'd rather see a goal or attempt than see teams circle back to look for the perfect rush opportunity.
- j.boyd919

I don't think the NHL regular-season OT has ever been longer than 5 minutes (in my lifetime at least).

[WARNING: Personal opinion here]

A first rule of changing the NHL scoring system should be the understanding there will be no points awarded to any team that loses and that there will be a winner and a loser. Having zero loser points would establish a totally new mind set.

Give 4 points for a regulation win. The increased value would provide a much larger incentive to win the game, in regulation, and thus should reduce the number of ties at the end of regulation.

Giving 3 points for an OT win would eliminate even more ties.

Give 2 points for a shootout win – there will be a lot less of them too.

Give 0 points to the team that loses. Possibly a participation ribbon. This is the biggest key to making regulation wins so much more important.

An argument could be made to have a first half and second half season - but the point system today promotes an incentive to lose – and that’s just not right.