Fans of the Loser Point?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_3957105. Show user_3957105's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]Just saw that Florida has 15 points from losing in OT.
    Posted by BsLegion[/QUOTE]

    HEH! I was just looking at that too!! I kid you not.

    And they are first in their division because of it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point? : HEH! I was just looking at that too!! I kid you not. And they are first in their division because of it.
    Posted by jaywall[/QUOTE]

    and the Leafs have 9,  if they had 15 like the Panthers it would mean they'de be still in the playoff race.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_3957105. Show user_3957105's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point? : and the Leafs have 9,  if they had 15 like the Panthers it would mean they'de be still in the playoff race.
    Posted by BsLegion[/QUOTE]

    Yep. Very stupid in my opinion. It makes me respect the 1980 Flyer team that went 35 games without a loss even more. Hard to see that being repeated with the current system.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    Ties are similar to dating a beautiful girl and anticipating an outcome that would make you remember that night for the rest of your life...........only to see her give you a peck on the cheek and walk away. 

    Disappointing !

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    My thought would be to have the OT winner gets two points, loser gets none.
    If it is still tied after OT you go to the shootout, with the winner getting one point and the loser getting nothing. That should be enough impetus to have them desperate in the OT frame.

    Either way the loser getting nothing is the key.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    I feel like everyone has forgotten what it was like to watch the last 10 minutes and overtime of a tie game in the last few years leading up to 2005. Both teams played for a tie, neither trying to win because losing meant losing a precious point. I'm a fan of the loser point because at least in the OT you get two teams running and gunning to get that extra point, with the other one already in the bag. For those groaning about Florida winning it's division through OT loss points, that is based on nothing. In the old system they would be winning their division based on ties. The only difference is, there wouldn't be 15 points out there given to the teams that actually tried to win the games and beat the Panthers and won in OT or shootout. The Panthers would, in fact, be higher in the standings relative to everyone else in the old system.  People complain that 3-point games reward mediocre teams. It's actually the opposite. Tie games were rewarding teams that bogged the game down and played to tie. Having the third point rewards the more skilled team that gets the win. I can take or leave the shootout, a 3on3 period would be fine too... but really that's pretty gimmicky too and not true hockey.  But you need that loser point for regulation ties in order to encourage teams to play for wins in the extra session. It really isn't the loser point... it's the winner point, because in the old system almost all games ended in ties.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from bgrif008. Show bgrif008's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    I hated the old overtime rule. No points on a loss. I like that if you are tied going into OT, you get a point. I hated seeing Ties. Nothing worse than seeing two teams tie. So for that, Im fine with the shootout. Also, the new system give teams fighting to get in more of a chance, which makes the game more entertaining. The old system not so much. Im not saying the shoot out is awesome, but it keeps from ties happening, which I ultimately hated and still do.
    The playoffs are great the way they are now. You play until someone scores in regulation, extra periods, 5 on 5. You just cant do that in the regular season. And if they did go to that format in the regular season then they would need to cut the amount of games back. Ive always been for shortening the season by 6-10 games. I also feel they should get rid of seeding the leader of each division as the 123 seed. They should seed as determined by the amount of points you accumulated over the season. The rivalries will still be there, but I dont think a team with less points should be seeded higher than another team, just because you won your division.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    JJ doesn't make any extra $$$ for a shootout, they shut off beer with 10 minutes to go in the 3rd.

    Lots of pink hats love the shootout. Woman behind me last night - "I just hope we see a shootout". Why? I'd rather see a 5-2 win any night over a skills competition (which the Bs are good at I might add).

    The casual fans like the shootout and like fighting.

    They're here to stay sadly.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]If they ever move to a longer 4-on-4 session or even 3-on-3, that's when it would make sense to eliminate the loser point. In order to have winner take all points, it has to be some semblance of team play until the end. DO NOT change any rules for playoffs. That's absurd. Play until a goal is scored. I would stick with 4-on-4 for 10 minutes. Winner gets 2 points. Loser gets none. If tied after 10 extra minutes, end in a tie with both teams getting 1 point. I understand teams locked it down in the old 5-on-5 five minute to protect the one point in the past, but extending the time and going 4-on-4 will help that problem. No shootout.
    Posted by asmaha[/QUOTE]
    exactly what i think should be done. 10 minute 4v4. no goal no extra point. one point each for a tie. gotta think 10 minutes of 4v4 would settle more than 1/2 the games right? shootout is entertaining but stupid. in the end this is entertainment, so i'm guessing it goes nowhere.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from LoveRealHockey. Show LoveRealHockey's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    I've always been an advocate of
    - Regulation win - 3 points
    - Overtime  or shoot-out win - 2 points
    - Overtime or shoot-lose - 1 point

    Reward teams for winning in regulation time.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_3957105. Show user_3957105's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]I feel like everyone has forgotten what it was like to watch the last 10 minutes and overtime of a tie game in the last few years leading up to 2005. Both teams played for a tie, neither trying to win because losing meant losing a precious point. I'm a fan of the loser point because at least in the OT you get two teams running and gunning to get that extra point, with the other one already in the bag. For those groaning about Florida winning it's division through OT loss points, that is based on nothing. In the old system they would be winning their division based on ties. The only difference is, there wouldn't be 15 points out there given to the teams that actually tried to win the games and beat the Panthers and won in OT or shootout. The Panthers would, in fact, be higher in the standings relative to everyone else in the old system.  People complain that 3-point games reward mediocre teams. It's actually the opposite. Tie games were rewarding teams that bogged the game down and played to tie. Having the third point rewards the more skilled team that gets the win. I can take or leave the shootout, a 3on3 period would be fine too... but really that's pretty gimmicky too and not true hockey.  But you need that loser point for regulation ties in order to encourage teams to play for wins in the extra session. It really isn't the loser point... it's the winner point, because in the old system almost all games ended in ties.
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    Some very good points OC but I feel you may be overstating the whole teams playing to tie thing. Truth is that the teams still do that and perhaps even more so today because if they hang on until the shootout they just may be rewarded another point in the end. No incentive to win it in OT at all. In fact, the only true way to make sure teams actually try is to do the playoff format in the regular season. That is, the game keeps going until someone eventually scores. I would hazard to bet that most players would like to end their games sooner rather than later.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    There is some merit to this concept.

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]I've always been an advocate of - Regulation win - 3 points - Overtime  or shoot-out win - 2 points - Overtime or shoot-lose - 1 point Reward teams for winning in regulation time.
    Posted by LoveRealHockey[/QUOTE]
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RickyHussle. Show RickyHussle's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]I would prefer to see games decided by open play, rather than a shootout.  I would recommend the current 5 min OT extended with 3-on-3 play for an additional 5 minutes, and if the game is still tied, then it ends that way, with each team getting a point.  The team losing in OT does not receive a point. I would recommend the same for playoff games, with the "5 min" replaced by "20-minute period";  i.e. 1st OT period 4-on-4, then 3-on-3 thereafter.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    I would like this system, with the 3 on 3 play, and I would still follow with a shootout if the game were stilll undecided.  I would change the point distributioin system; all games would be worth three points, 3 points to the winner of a regulation winner 2 pts to the winner and 1 to the loser of an OT game; or better yet lose the point for an OT loss altogether.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point? : Some very good points OC but I feel you may be overstating the whole teams playing to tie thing. Truth is that the teams still do that and perhaps even more so today because if they hang on until the shootout they just may be rewarded another point in the end. No incentive to win it in OT at all. In fact, the only true way to make sure teams actually try is to do the playoff format in the regular season. That is, the game keeps going until someone eventually scores. I would hazard to bet that most players would like to end their games sooner rather than later.
    Posted by jaywall[/QUOTE]


    I also think that, by eliminating the loser point, you bring another strategy into play.  Currently, teams that are close in the standings, and battling for a playoff spot (look at slots #3, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11 in the West now), can play to a shootout, and the winning team only gains a 1-pt advantage on the losing team in the standings.  Without the loser point, there is more incentive to win those games, because it stays as a "4-pt" game (i.e. 2 pts that you get, but more importantly, 2 pts that the other team DOESN'T GET).  Thus, these late-season conference games take on much greater importance than they do now.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    OatesCam,  I'm not saying to bring back ties but eliminating the loser point in the OT.  The OT no matter the format (4 on 4 , 3 on 3 , SO etc..) there has to be a clear winner and a clear loser with NO points. No tie there.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    Nope, not overstating it at all. Some beef jerky to chew on:

    Before the 3rd point was introduced, the % of regulation tie games that had a winner in OT was 27%

    After the 3rd point was introduced, the % of regulation tie games won in OT (not a shootout) is consistently, year-to-year, around 45%.

    This is a dramatic affect.  Bringing in 4-on-4 had little effect on changing how many games were won in OT, and I can take or leave the shootout. But the loser point has made OT way more effective.

    Again, I feel like no one remembers OT games in 1998. It was basically like watching that Philly vs Tampa game when both teams played the 1-3-1.

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point? : Some very good points OC but I feel you may be overstating the whole teams playing to tie thing. Truth is that the teams still do that and perhaps even more so today because if they hang on until the shootout they just may be rewarded another point in the end. No incentive to win it in OT at all. In fact, the only true way to make sure teams actually try is to do the playoff format in the regular season. That is, the game keeps going until someone eventually scores. I would hazard to bet that most players would like to end their games sooner rather than later.
    Posted by jaywall[/QUOTE]
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    I think it would be pretty lousy to lose a game in a shootout because of a Lars Eller spin move pushing Thomas into the net and not even get a point.

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]OatesCam,  I'm not saying to bring back ties but eliminating the loser point in the OT.  The OT no matter the format (4 on 4 , 3 on 3 , SO etc..) there has to be a clear winner and a clear loser with NO points. No tie there.
    Posted by BsLegion[/QUOTE]
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Fans of the Loser Point?

    In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point?:
    [QUOTE]I think it would be pretty lousy to lose a game in a shootout because of a Lars Eller spin move pushing Thomas into the net and not even get a point. In Response to Re: Fans of the Loser Point? :
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    Not a fan either of the shoot out and I think they can have a format before OT where a team that wins in regulation gets 3 points and in OT by making it longer and play with the formats they can have a clear winner but get only 2 points.
     

Share