I guess I may be in the minority but for the regular season I like shootouts. You play the game to win. I hate ties. And
Yes you play to win, but a tie is often a result that should be the outcome of a particular game, and that's ok. The SO just destroys that feeling, not everyone needs a "trophy" every game.
It's crap!
Originally posted by CavalryNate
Disrespecting the Gophers is like disowning your mother the first time you get a girlfriend.
Shootouts are like participation trophies: things that exist so that we can reward people for not accomplishing anything.
"Did you win the game? No? Well, how about after this shootout?"
If you want to be aBADGER, just come along with me
BRING BACK PAT RICHTER!!!
At his graduation ceremony from the U of Minnesota, my cousin got a keychain. When asked what UW gave her for graduation, my sister said, "A degree from a University that matters."
Yes you play to win, but a tie is often a result that should be the outcome of a particular game, and that's ok. The SO just destroys that feeling, not everyone needs a "trophy" every game.
It's crap!
When David plays Goliath to a tie, it's a travesty that the tie is taken away from them by Goliath's snipers. David deserves that tie.
Shootouts suck. At least Pairwise (as crazy as it is) doesn't recognize them. I absolutely can't stand records with 4 numbers to them. Reads like a lotto number! 12-5-3-2! Cheezy. Makes the conference look gimmicky. Start up the polls and the petitions against.
The USHL has shooutouts. The USHL does not have records with 4 numbers - it's three: W-L-OTL. You get 2 points for a win, none for a loss, and one for a loss in overtime or shootout. Shootouts do not have to equal 4-number record lines.
St. Norbert College Green Knights
NCHA regular season champs: 97-99, 02-08, 10-12, 14, 16, 19
NCHA playoff champs: 98-99, 03-05, 07-08, 10-14, 17-19, 24
NCAA Champions: 2008, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2018
---
SNC women: 2013 O'Brien Cup Champions
Yes you play to win, but a tie is often a result that should be the outcome of a particular game, and that's ok. The SO just destroys that feeling, not everyone needs a "trophy" every game.
It's crap!
Football, tennis, baseball, basketball don't have ties. Wouldn't some of their games deserve to end in a tie, too? Or did I miss the rant on that? As I said, you could play 5-on-5 hockey all night long, even during the regular season, and it would be fine by me. (In response to unsaid-as-of-yet-here argument that a basketball games doesn't end in a free-throw shooting contest.) For travel and other reasons, this doesn't happen, but I guess it doesn't rile me up as this topic does others.
It's hard to deny the fact of the excitement in a building during a shootout. I suppose the hockey purists must get up and leave at that point - but I never seen anyone head for the aisles. If it creates excitement among the casual fans, I don't know that that's a bad thing.
St. Norbert College Green Knights
NCHA regular season champs: 97-99, 02-08, 10-12, 14, 16, 19
NCHA playoff champs: 98-99, 03-05, 07-08, 10-14, 17-19, 24
NCAA Champions: 2008, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2018
---
SNC women: 2013 O'Brien Cup Champions
Shootouts suck. At least Pairwise (as crazy as it is) doesn't recognize them. I absolutely can't stand records with 4 numbers to them. Reads like a lotto number! 12-5-3-2! Cheezy. Makes the conference look gimmicky. Start up the polls and the petitions against.
While I can understand your hating records with interminable numbers, the only way I can accept shootouts is with a 5 point system for points (regulation win = 5, OT win = 4, SO win = 3, SO loss = 2, OT loss = 1, regulation loss = 0). This effectively reduces the overall difference of a shootout win/loss in significance, but allows for the sideshow that it seems some people like. I hate systems that make some games worth more points than others, this way the total value of any one game is a consistant 5 points.
The USHL has shooutouts. The USHL does not have records with 4 numbers - it's three: W-L-OTL. You get 2 points for a win, none for a loss, and one for a loss in overtime or shootout. Shootouts do not have to equal 4-number record lines.
That's even more nonsensical. A SO/OT game is then worth three points where a normal game is worth 2. That system rewards teams for not trying to win until OT.
Football, tennis, baseball, basketball don't have ties. Wouldn't some of their games deserve to end in a tie, too? Or did I miss the rant on that? As I said, you could play 5-on-5 hockey all night long, even during the regular season, and it would be fine by me. (In response to unsaid-as-of-yet-here argument that a basketball games doesn't end in a free-throw shooting contest.) For travel and other reasons, this doesn't happen, but I guess it doesn't rile me up as this topic does others.
In football it isn't true that they don't have ties, only in lower levels of play is that true. It's merely exceedingly rare in the NFL. As for tennis, baseball and basketball, they do the only other logical thing besides having ties: they keep playing until someone bothers to win. They don't resort to cheesy crap (other than tennis' tie breaker, and even that gets thrown out in a fifth set).
It's hard to deny the fact of the excitement in a building during a shootout. I suppose the hockey purists must get up and leave at that point - but I never seen anyone head for the aisles. If it creates excitement among the casual fans, I don't know that that's a bad thing.
Excitement =/= integrity. Plus, you don't gain fans long term from a gimmick just because it is interesting, otherwise the XFL would still be in business. The kind of person that interesting in an exciting gimmick is just going to move on to the next gimmick (or shiny object on the ground) when it comes along.
If you want to be aBADGER, just come along with me
BRING BACK PAT RICHTER!!!
At his graduation ceremony from the U of Minnesota, my cousin got a keychain. When asked what UW gave her for graduation, my sister said, "A degree from a University that matters."
That's even more nonsensical. A SO/OT game is then worth three points where a normal game is worth 2. That system rewards teams for not trying to win until OT.
I didn't say I agreed with it. Just being the messenger responding to the post suggesting that a shootout means a four-column standings chart. And while sometimes teams may play for that point, there are other times team play to avoid getting to OT/SO for a variety of reasons. I think that can cut both ways.
In football it isn't true that they don't have ties, only in lower levels of play is that true. It's merely exceedingly rare in the NFL. As for tennis, baseball and basketball, they do the only other logical thing besides having ties: they keep playing until someone bothers to win. They don't resort to cheesy crap (other than tennis' tie breaker, and even that gets thrown out in a fifth set).
And that's why I said playing 5-on-5 overtime ad infinitum even during the regular season is fine with me. I don't sense disagreement here, just pointing out that many (most?) other sports don't seem to value a tie as some here do. You could end a baseball game with a tie after the 10th inning if no one scores, and that would be akin to 5:00 more of hockey and the game just ending - that would be hockey's "logical thing" applied to baseball. Although other sports don't change the sport by reducing the number players in OT as some hockey leagues do, but that's a different discussion, I suppose.
Excitement =/= integrity. Plus, you don't gain fans long term from a gimmick just because it is interesting, otherwise the XFL would still be in business. The kind of person that interesting in an exciting gimmick is just going to move on to the next gimmick (or shiny object on the ground) when it comes along.
I think most die-hard hockey fans probably started as casual fans. If a casual fan has a more enjoyable experience because of the shootout - as opposed to going home 'flat' because of a tie - I think they are more likely to come back. Perhaps NBA fans said the same thing (it's gimmicky) about the ABA and the three-point shot.
Look, I get that many people don't like it. As I said in my first post, I realize I may be in the minority. And I can accept the issues people have with the point value of games - which could be addressed in some fashion. But I don't think the shootout the devil's work, as some clearly do.
St. Norbert College Green Knights
NCHA regular season champs: 97-99, 02-08, 10-12, 14, 16, 19
NCHA playoff champs: 98-99, 03-05, 07-08, 10-14, 17-19, 24
NCAA Champions: 2008, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2018
---
SNC women: 2013 O'Brien Cup Champions
If we're having shootouts, I'd definitely prefer the standings to be the 4 column variety seen in the CCHA women's WCHA - Regulation and overtime are treated as the same game. 3 points for a win, 0 for a loss. If it's a tie after overtime, this counts as a tie and both teams get one point. Then you get a bonus point for the shootout win. Keep in mind that for national rankings, shootouts are thrown out and those games are ties, while overtime wins and losses are the same as in regulation, which makes sense to me.
Originally posted by Back2BackU-MnPride2002View Post
Michigan, MSU and OSU will be able to go up against 2 of the better teams in the WCHA and we'll get to see who ends up at the top on a regular basis. I believe that Minnesota and Wisconsin will regularly finish among the Top 3 teams in the conf. But I guess we'll just have to see over time what happens?
As most of us know, Michigan and Michigan State left the WCHA after the 1980-81 season. Regular matchups among those schools, Minnesota, and Wisconsin began again in the College Hockey Showcase, which ran from 1993-2010 (18 seasons). Records during the era 1993-present were:
Michigan v. Minnesota 9-9-0 showcase, 3-3-0 outside the showcase
Michigan v. Wisconsin 11-5-2 showcase, 2-1-0 outside the showcase
Michigan State v. Minnesota 4-9-5 showcase, 0-1-0 outside the showcase
Michigan State v. Wisconsin 10-7-1 showcase, 2-1-0 outside the showcase
Whether the WCHA was a better conference than the CCHA during that era is outside the scope of this thread. But even if the bottom of the CCHA has been consistently weaker, Michigan and Michigan State have generally been the top of the CCHA, and the history suggests that they aren't going to have any trouble matching up against Wisconsin or Minnesota. Arguably Wisconsin has more to worry about.
Given how evenly matched Michigan and Minnesota have been in recent times, that could become the conference's big rivalry (think Michigan-Ohio State in football). In fact, the all time record is fairly even, also (Michigan 117, Minnesota 128, 15 ties), despite Michigan's general incompetence through most of the 70's. It was apparently a good rivalry back in the 50's and 60's. Given that Minnesota and Michigan are the two biggest hockey states in the country, and have radically different hockey cultures, there's some fuel for the fire beyond the schools, too.
Last edited by MichFan; 03-26-2013, 05:18 PM.
Reason: Clarified one sentence
I tried to do a little search on this...where are the majority of the officials coming from? I hope ZERO from the WCHA. If most are coming from the CCHA, how do you CCHA guys feel about that?
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." Vince Lombardi
"License to kill gophers by the government of the United Nations. Man; free to kill gophers at will. To kill, you must know your enemy, and in this case, my enemy is a varmint....and a varmint will never quit...ever. They're like Viet Cong...Varmint Cong, so you have to fall back on superior intelligence and superior firepower...and that's all she wrote. Au revoir, gopher."Karl Spackler 1980
Comment