Originally posted by Sean Pickett
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Collapse
X
-
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
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by shelfit View PostFor 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.
Comment
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by Ralph Baer View PostIt 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.
Comment
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by pgb-ohio View PostThe idea is that teams are given the opportunity to break the tie, not a guarantee of that result.
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
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by Still Eeyore View PostIn 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
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by DDad16 View PostDon'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!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
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by NUProf View PostYou 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.At the outset, we could hang with the dude...
Comment
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by DDad16 View PostDon'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.
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?
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...
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
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by pgb-ohio View PostIndeed. 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?
Comment
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by TonyTheTiger20 View PostI 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.
SeanWomen'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
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by Sean Pickett View PostI 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
Comment
-
Re: NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19
Originally posted by DDad16 View PostThis wasn't directed at anyone in particular. My comments typically are just addressed to the broader group. Just me trying to be humble.
Comment
Comment