Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    College hockey has always had overtime, although on occasion the overtime period was not played or multiple overtimes were played through the 1920s. However, starting around 1930 through the 1936-37 season overtime consisted of a 10-minute overtime and if still tied a second 10-minute overtime. Starting in 1937-38 overtime was reduced to a single 10-minute overtime and starting with the 1949-50 season a single 10-minute sudden death overtime period was played. Failure to played overtime was to result in a forfeit. These are NCAA Ice Hockey Rules and I have no idea what the NHL or other leagues used.

    Sean
    Ah yes the good old days! How I miss them! Using magazines for shin pads, thick wool sweaters for jerseys, and so on. Now that was hockey! Lol.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

      I think I've said this before, but in cricket, it's considered perfectly valid to play for a draw. (A draw and a tie are not the same thing in cricket*, and there's functionally no way to play for a tie except in extremely limited circumstances.) A pitch can be criticized as making it too easy to do so, by making it too hard to take wickets, but not the strategy itself. In many tests, there is a point where the team that bats first in the second innings has to decide whether they want to play for a win, and declare their innings over with enough overs left to take ten wickets, or keep batting and play for the draw. It's an interesting strategic question.

      *A tie is when both sides complete their innings and have scored an identical number of runs; this is very rare. A draw, which can only happen in tests rather than one day cricket, is when the team that is ahead fails to take all ten wickets in its opponent's second innings. I was lucky enough to be following live the Edgbaston test of the 2005 Ashes series, when, after five full days of cricket, all four possible results (England victory; Australian victory; draw; and tie) were very real possibilities all the way to the final over. England won by 2 runs, 589-587, with three balls remaining, making it the second closest international test in history.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

        Originally posted by shelfit View Post
        For teams that have only 2 goalies dressed for games that 19th skater becomes the other door opener instead of wasting an assistant coach to do it. Very valuable role to fill. Great rule change. Lol.
        It was pointed out on eLynah that the 19th player will put a premium on having a player who can play both F and D because when a team loses a player due to a match penalty, a DQ, or injury during a game, they will still be able to skate 4 lines and 3 defense pairs.
        sigpic

        Let's Go 'Tute!

        Maxed out at 2,147,483,647 at 10:00 AM EDT 9/17/07.

        2012 Poser Of The Year

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

          Originally posted by Ralph Baer View Post
          It was pointed out on eLynah that the 19th player will put a premium on having a player who can play both F and D because when a team loses a player due to a match penalty, a DQ, or injury during a game, they will still be able to skate 4 lines and 3 defense pairs.
          In men's hockey, this is true. On the women's side, most teams aren't skating four lines or six defensemen to begin with.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

            Originally posted by pgb-ohio View Post
            The idea is that teams are given the opportunity to break the tie, not a guarantee of that result.
            Don't the teams have 60 minutes already to do this?

            I know you all don't care about my opinion, but you're going to get it anyway. I agree with the comments that if there is going to be an OT, it should be something that will "help" get a different result. Otherwise, why have OT? I don't particularly care for the 3-on-3 format, and neither do the players (the majority that I have spoken with). It's fun for the fans because of all of the opportunities that get created, but it's essentially a bag skate at the end of a game.

            Maybe do something different with the points... If the game ends in a tie at the end of OT, neither team gets a point, instead of both teams getting a point. And, only the winner gets the points at the end of OT. Maybe that would push some more offensive play during the game, especially at the end and in OT.

            Just one man's opinion!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

              Originally posted by Still Eeyore View Post
              In men's hockey, this is true. On the women's side, most teams aren't skating four lines or six defensemen to begin with.
              Oops! I posted this on the wrong thread.
              sigpic

              Let's Go 'Tute!

              Maxed out at 2,147,483,647 at 10:00 AM EDT 9/17/07.

              2012 Poser Of The Year

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                Originally posted by DDad16 View Post
                Don't the teams have 60 minutes already to do this?

                I know you all don't care about my opinion, but you're going to get it anyway. I agree with the comments that if there is going to be an OT, it should be something that will "help" get a different result. Otherwise, why have OT? I don't particularly care for the 3-on-3 format, and neither do the players (the majority that I have spoken with). It's fun for the fans because of all of the opportunities that get created, but it's essentially a bag skate at the end of a game.

                Maybe do something different with the points... If the game ends in a tie at the end of OT, neither team gets a point, instead of both teams getting a point. And, only the winner gets the points at the end of OT. Maybe that would push some more offensive play during the game, especially at the end and in OT.

                Just one man's opinion!
                You could do what they do in soccer (futbol). Award 3 points for a win, but only give each team 1 point for a tie. That would make a tie less attractive.
                2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
                2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
                2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
                2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                  Originally posted by NUProf View Post
                  You could do what they do in soccer (futbol). Award 3 points for a win, but only give each team 1 point for a tie. That would make a tie less attractive.
                  Essentially, that's what happens here in flyover country with the caveat of a shootout to determine who gets 2 pts instead of 1.
                  At the outset, we could hang with the dude...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by FiveHoleFrenzy View Post
                    Essentially, that's what happens here in flyover country with the caveat of a shootout to determine who gets 2 pts instead of 1.
                    Too few games in college. A shootout would skew the standings too much. Go to a 10 minute OT. Done

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                      Originally posted by DDad16 View Post
                      Don't the teams have 60 minutes already to do this?
                      Indeed. That's one reason I conceded that simply stopping after 60 minutes was tempting.

                      I know you all don't care about my opinion, but you're going to get it anyway.


                      If you're directing this to me, you're going to have to refresh my memory as to what went wrong. Have we ever traded messages before? Regardless, I was perfectly happy to read your opinion -- even though I disagree in part.

                      I agree with the comments that if there is going to be an OT, it should be something that will "help" get a different result. Otherwise, why have OT?
                      Completely agree with "help." That's exactly why I favor the 10 Minute OT over the 5 Minute option. If you're saying 10 Minutes wouldn't help, or wouldn't help enough, I can respect that. My expectation is different; but this part of the conversation is mostly speculation. Predictions will inevitably differ.

                      I don't particularly care for the 3-on-3 format, and neither do the players (the majority that I have spoken with). It's fun for the fans because of all of the opportunities that get created, but it's essentially a bag skate at the end of a game...
                      Again, I'm scratching my head as to who this is directed to. Maybe I'd buy into 3x3 if it was the lesser of two evils. But in a yes/no decision, I'd reject 3x3 as an unwanted gimmick. Among other things, I appreciate the comment from the players; and it's pretty much what I'd expect the majority of players to say. Where's the disagreement?

                      The Fun Factor? I'd say observing 3x3 is "fun" for everyone -- from the rookie fan all the way to the head coaches. At the NHL level, I haven't noticed anyone on the benches turning away in disgust. But that isn't a sufficient reason to adopt the rule.


                      Standings points? Whole 'nother topic. Gotta leave something for other posters to respond to.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                        I’m not fussy. Anything is acceptable with the exception of the dreaded shootout.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                          Originally posted by pgb-ohio View Post
                          Indeed. That's one reason I conceded that simply stopping after 60 minutes was tempting.



                          If you're directing this to me, you're going to have to refresh my memory as to what went wrong. Have we ever traded messages before?
                          This wasn't directed at anyone in particular. My comments typically are just addressed to the broader group. Just me trying to be humble.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                            Originally posted by TonyTheTiger20 View Post
                            I mean, this is easy to figure out. The teams combined played 250 overtime games. So there were 125 overtime games and 54 winners. 43.2%.**

                            However this includes games with unlimited overtime like the Beanpot final and any tournament games which should be excluded. How many of those were there?

                            EDIT: The teams played 16 conference/NCAA tournament OT games combined, so there were 8 games. Add the Beanpot final, 9 games with unlimited OT. So 116 games, 45 winners, 38.79%.**

                            **I added these up manually because I'm on my phone and the website didn't have totals at the bottom so it's possible I added wrong but I should only be off by a couple if I did.
                            I have been working on compiling composite season results for men's and women's teams for a a while now (I have more men's seasons) and for last season I come up with 120 women's regular season overtime games, 45 wins and 75 ties (counting the Beanpot championship game as a tie) for 37.5% of games having a winner. I have uploaded a workbook with men's overtime games for 1975-76, 1984-85, 1986-89 (all 10-minute overtimes except for CCHA league games in 88-89), 1998-99, 2008-09 and 2012-18 and women's overtime games for 2015-18. As the overtime rules are for both men and women I have also combined the 2015-18 numbers for overall NCAA totals. For the past three seasons the combined win rate for overtime games has been 35% and if you go back to the 1988-89 CCHA games the average win rate for men's overtime games for the season's I have is 35.78%, with individual seasons fluctuating between a high of 41.38% (1988-89 CCHA) and a low of 31.18% (2016-17 - the women had a low of 30.53%). I still have to compile more seasons, especially for women's games, but it appears that only about 1/3 of overtime games have a winner with the 5 minute overtime. Compare that to the average win rate for men's overtime games through the 1988-89 season (excluding CCHA games) of 66.1%, or 2/3 of overtime games having a winner.

                            Sean
                            Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
                            Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

                            BU Hockey Games
                            BU Hockey highlights and extras
                            NCAA Hockey Financials
                            Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games
                            I need a kidney; looking for a donor

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                              Originally posted by Sean Pickett View Post
                              I have been working on compiling composite season results for men's and women's teams for a a while now (I have more men's seasons) and for last season I come up with 120 women's regular season overtime games, 45 wins and 75 ties (counting the Beanpot championship game as a tie) for 37.5% of games having a winner. I have uploaded a workbook with men's overtime games for 1975-76, 1984-85, 1986-89 (all 10-minute overtimes except for CCHA league games in 88-89), 1998-99, 2008-09 and 2012-18 and women's overtime games for 2015-18. As the overtime rules are for both men and women I have also combined the 2015-18 numbers for overall NCAA totals. For the past three seasons the combined win rate for overtime games has been 35% and if you go back to the 1988-89 CCHA games the average win rate for men's overtime games for the season's I have is 35.78%, with individual seasons fluctuating between a high of 41.38% (1988-89 CCHA) and a low of 31.18% (2016-17 - the women had a low of 30.53%). I still have to compile more seasons, especially for women's games, but it appears that only about 1/3 of overtime games have a winner with the 5 minute overtime. Compare that to the average win rate for men's overtime games through the 1988-89 season (excluding CCHA games) of 66.1%, or 2/3 of overtime games having a winner.

                              Sean
                              Aren't these percentages pretty much in line with average total goals over 60 minutes?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

                                Originally posted by DDad16 View Post
                                This wasn't directed at anyone in particular. My comments typically are just addressed to the broader group. Just me trying to be humble.
                                Was wondering 'cuz I was the one quoted. But I get it now; all is well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X