NCAA Hockey Rules Committee Announces Changes For 2018-19

[ZedLeppelin]

Standardized overtime, among other changes:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-...sed-ice-hockey

[D2D]

Standardized overtime, among other changes:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-...sed-ice-hockey

Yeah, no more shootouts!

[ARM]

Yeah, no more shootouts!

That is good news for the Gopher forwards. OTOH, I'll have to find something else to discuss with my friends at OSU, now that I can no longer argue that a shootout win isn't really a win.

[Timothy A]

Standardized overtime, among other changes:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-...sed-ice-hockey

Straight up hockey, no gimmicks, love it. I'm shocked they got this right.

[Puckdrop14]

Straight up hockey, no gimmicks, love it. I'm shocked they got this right.

I despise the shootout however do like the excitement of 4 on 4 or 3 on 3 OT. I would have liked to see a 4 on 4 OT period however this is a clear improvement and consistent across Division 1 hockey. Nice.

[Rightnut]

Straight up hockey, no gimmicks, love it. I'm shocked they got this right.

I understand this argument but really you have just played 60 minutes of mostly 5 on 5 Hockey and it’s tied. What’s the point of more of the same? Change it up and go to 4 on 4. It’s still “real hockey”. It happens all the time in regulation. Teams prepare for it. For overtime it’s exciting for fans and it’s more likely to get a winner. No one likes a tie.

[ZedLeppelin]

No one likes a tie.

No one (Penn State) wants to pile them up (Penn State) again next season (Penn State)...ugh.

[ARM]

I understand this argument but really you have just played 60 minutes of mostly 5 on 5 Hockey and it’s tied. What’s the point of more of the same?

You make it sound like a 5-minute OT is unlikely to produce a winner. Minnesota went to 5-min OT eight times last season and three games ended in ties. Even a team like Bemidji State that plays more low-scoring games played seven OT games with three ties. Perhaps Maine with nine OT games and five ties or Northeastern with six OTs and three ties are more typical, but I think Penn St with 14 OT games and 11 ties is an outlier.

I like 5-on-5 hockey and don't like any system that tries to arbitrarily force a winner, and then lumps those results together with results derived by regular rules.

[pgb-ohio]

I understand this argument but really you have just played 60 minutes of mostly 5 on 5 Hockey and it’s tied. What’s the point of more of the same? Change it up and go to 4 on 4. It’s still “real hockey”. It happens all the time in regulation. Teams prepare for it. For overtime it’s exciting for fans and it’s more likely to get a winner. No one likes a tie.

Youngster, eh?

I'm going to line up with my fellow ancients. There are many times when a tie is a just and likable result. When a gimmick is used to break such a tie, that's the unlikable outcome.

Yes, ARM -- you too are an ancient. And we can keep talking about the old days for just as long as you want.


But fear not, Rightnut. In the long run, I have no doubt that the next generation will prevail. The pro leagues, along with international play, will serve as a constant reminder that more "exciting" formats are available. Eventually College Hockey will once again succumb to the temptation.

Timeline? Obviously the new "retro" rule will be with us for at least two years, until another rulebook is released. At that point, an abrupt about face would still seem to be unlikely. But my guess is that within 10 years, one of the more exciting rules will be adopted. The only real trick will be getting all of the various conferences to agree on which tiebreaker to adopt. I do believe that the era of letting individual conferences experiment with tiebreakers is over.

Patience, Young Jedi. For better or worse, generational replacement is inevitable. You will have your day.

[Rightnut]

Youngster, eh?

I'm going to line up with my fellow ancients. There are many times when a tie is a just and likable result. When a gimmick is used to break such a tie, that's the unlikable outcome.

Yes, ARM -- you too are an ancient. And we can keep talking about the old days for just as long as you want.


But fear not, Rightnut. In the long run, I have no doubt that the next generation will prevail. The pro leagues, along with international play, will serve as a constant reminder that more "exciting" formats are available. Eventually College Hockey will once again succumb to the temptation.

Timeline? Obviously the new "retro" rule will be with us for at least two years, until another rulebook is released. At that point, an abrupt about face would still seem to be unlikely. But my guess is that within 10 years, one of the more exciting rules will be adopted. The only real trick will be getting all of the various conferences to agree on which tiebreaker to adopt. I do believe that the era of letting individual conferences experiment with tiebreakers is over.

Patience, Young Jedi. For better or worse, generational replacement is inevitable. You will have your day.

I guess young is a matter of perspective. I can apply for AARP but I’ll take being considered young. I get your points. I just feel that the point of overtime is to get a winner. If that is the case, try something different than what was going on for the first 60 minutes that ended up in a tie.

[shelfit]

I guess young is a matter of perspective. I can apply for AARP but I’ll take being considered young. I get your points. I just feel that the point of overtime is to get a winner. If that is the case, try something different than what was going on for the first 60 minutes that ended up in a tie.

I'd rather see them extend the overtime from 5 minutes to 10 minutes and leave it 5 on 5 compared to making it four on four or 3 on 3 for 5 minutes. Or split the difference and make overtime 7 or 8 minutes.

[joecct]

I'd rather see them extend the overtime from 5 minutes to 10 minutes and leave it 5 on 5 compared to making it four on four or 3 on 3 for 5 minutes. Or split the difference and make overtime 7 or 8 minutes.

When I was at Clarkson, it was 10 minutes 5 skaters a side. Of course we also had all minor penalties were on the penalty clock and no facemasks.

And 2 referees and no linesmen.

[D2D]

I'd rather see them extend the overtime from 5 minutes to 10 minutes and leave it 5 on 5 compared to making it four on four or 3 on 3 for 5 minutes. Or split the difference and make overtime 7 or 8 minutes.

Minnesota high schools (boys and girls) play one 8 minute sudden death overtime, and if neither team scores the game is deemed a tie. Seems about right to me.

[pgb-ohio]

I'd rather see them extend the overtime from 5 minutes to 10 minutes and leave it 5 on 5 compared to making it four on four or 3 on 3 for 5 minutes. Or split the difference and make overtime 7 or 8 minutes.

Agreed. I would go with 10 minutes to maximize the chances of breaking the tie. 5 minutes leaves the option of playing "defense only" fully on the table. Kill off the equivalent of a major, and you've got your tie.

Beyond that, half of a period just feels right. And I highly doubt it would take more time than the 5 minutes + shootout format.

When I was at Clarkson, it was 10 minutes 5 skaters a side. Of course we also had all minor penalties were on the penalty clock and no facemasks.

And 2 referees and no linesmen.

We must be around the same age. I also have first hand memories of the 10 minute O.T. Late 70's & Early 80's, IIRC. In any event, there's precedent for both 5 and 10 minutes. 10 minutes would be a retro rule, as opposed to an arbitrary experiment.

Minnesota high schools (boys and girls) play one 8 minute sudden death overtime, and if neither team scores the game is deemed a tie. Seems about right to me.

Minnesota High School games have 15 minute periods, correct? If yes, the 8 minutes would be just over half a period, and thus would be compatible with 10 minutes at the college level.

[joecct]

pgb-ohio

Minnesota plays 17 minute periods. In the sectionals and state tournament the overtime is a hybrid.
8 minutes
resurface
17 minutes
brief break
and repeat the 8/17 until somebody scores.

Most states do not play unlimited overtime. After X OT periods, they use a shootout to determine a winner.

Up until a few years ago, Rhode Island was weird. They play a 2 out of 3 final, but if a game was tied after 2 OTs, it was declared "no result" and you played another game in the series. The champion could end up 2 wins, 1 loss, and 2 ties.

New Jersey was weirder. Play a single 15 minute OT and, if tied, declare co champions. I think that changes for 18-19.

[TonyTheTiger20]

You make it sound like a 5-minute OT is unlikely to produce a winner. Minnesota went to 5-min OT eight times last season and three games ended in ties. Even a team like Bemidji State that plays more low-scoring games played seven OT games with three ties. Perhaps Maine with nine OT games and five ties or Northeastern with six OTs and three ties are more typical, but I think Penn St with 14 OT games and 11 ties is an outlier.

I like 5-on-5 hockey and don't like any system that tries to arbitrarily force a winner, and then lumps those results together with results derived by regular rules.

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.

[pgb-ohio]

I guess young is a matter of perspective. I can apply for AARP but I’ll take being considered young. I get your points. I just feel that the point of overtime is to get a winner. If that is the case, try something different than what was going on for the first 60 minutes that ended up in a tie.

Oops; missed my guess on your age. Thanks for putting a positive spin on it.

I still say there's a correlation between age & tiebreaker opinion. But of course there's going to be variation of opinion within each age group.

pgb-ohio

Minnesota plays 17 minute periods. In the sectionals and state tournament the overtime is a hybrid.
8 minutes
resurface
17 minutes
brief break
and repeat the 8/17 until somebody scores.

Most states do not play unlimited overtime. After X OT periods, they use a shootout to determine a winner.

Up until a few years ago, Rhode Island was weird. They play a 2 out of 3 final, but if a game was tied after 2 OTs, it was declared "no result" and you played another game in the series. The champion could end up 2 wins, 1 loss, and 2 ties.

New Jersey was weirder. Play a single 15 minute OT and, if tied, declare co champions. I think that changes for 18-19.

Really interesting stuff. Who says hockey people aren't creative?

Most of your comment concerns the post-season, of course. But if I'm understanding you correctly, MSHSL plays 17 minute periods in regulation time, both regular season & post-season. That would still fit my suggestion that roughly half of a period should be used to break regular season ties. 8 minutes is obviously slightly less than half of 17. But that's just rounding off to an even minute.

[D2D]

A couple of other pending rule changes:

*For a substitution to be legal, the player coming off the ice must be within 5 feet of their bench before the substitute may contact the ice.
Expect a few penalties to be called, especially early in the season, until players learn just how short 5 feet is. And what will they call this? Illegal substitution? Delay of game? Kind of like in football where the substituted player doesn't reach the sideline before the ball is snapped.

*The number of skaters allowed to each team will be increased to 19 (current rule allows up to 18).
Four forward lines plus three sets of D = 18 skaters. As it is in women's hockey the 4th forward line and the 3rd set of D typically do not see a lot of ice time. That 19th skater will see even less. I suppose for the player(s) who would otherwise be watching from the stands getting to dress and watch from the bench will be an improvement.

[shelfit]

A couple of other pending rule changes:

*For a substitution to be legal, the player coming off the ice must be within 5 feet of their bench before the substitute may contact the ice.
Expect a few penalties to be called, especially early in the season, until players learn just how short 5 feet is. And what will they call this? Illegal substitution? Delay of game? Kind of like in football where the substituted player doesn't reach the sideline before the ball is snapped.

*The number of skaters allowed to each team will be increased to 19 (current rule allows up to 18).
Four forward lines plus three sets of D = 18 skaters. As it is in women's hockey the 4th forward line and the 3rd set of D typically do not see a lot of ice time. That 19th skater will see even less. I suppose for the player(s) who would otherwise be watching from the stands getting to dress and watch from the bench will be an improvement.

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.

[shelfit]

When I was at Clarkson, it was 10 minutes 5 skaters a side. Of course we also had all minor penalties were on the penalty clock and no facemasks.

And 2 referees and no linesmen.

And the infamous 10-minute mini-game when a series was tied at the end of game 2 in the playoffs!