GMs discussing rule changes to 3-on-3 OT

[Rrodja]

There was an old Budweiser advert in the U.K about making football (soccer) more entertaining for a North American audience. I can always remember the narrator shouting "multiball" and more and more balls being thrown on. Maybe multipuck is the answer. If noone has scored within a minute... add another puck on to the ice. Then after another minute - another puck and so on.

[IBatch]

On 11/14/2023 at 5:36 PM, Goalie29 said:

 

3 on 3 OT used to be fun.  Now it's turning into an endless series of teams looping around waiting for the opposition to make a mistake.  That's where I think a red line rule could help.

So redline this redline that.  Can't we just all agree the shoot-out has had its day and never should have been added to the NHL and that 3 x 3, which was created so there would be less shoot-outs, is goofy as fuck, and that's why the game was never designed to be played 3 x 3 in the first place?  

 

Maybe, just maybe, 100 years of game play evolved into what it was meant to be?   Does football widen their goalposts just because their players kind of suck for a decade plus compared to the ones before them?  Should basketball add a man or maybe an extra ball?   Why doesn't baseball, just do a home run "shootout " pitcher versus batter to decide games instead of extra innings.   The latter is exactly what the NHL did to make sure " fans came back".  Like we wouldn't have anyways.   Like when the Canucks changed their logo and made a big campaign to make sure we liked it ... when we all knew it was just fine as is, and ate up the Messier cake.   Well maybe not that, but it all FEELs the same.   Wasn't needed. 

 

So instead of that maybe they should load the bases and see who can hit a grand slam.   That's kind of what 3 x 3 is.  Sure they put a runner on base (also goofy).   But you see the point.   The game was already peaked  and they turned it into a mistake.    Every single team has AHLers on it now.   At least they've finally caught up to expansion though (aside from a Mario/Orr/Gretzky coming back).  It's a total disgrace.    And fans ate it up.     End Rant.   I detest the shoot-out.   It denegrates the penalty shot, one of the most exciting things in hockey.   And 3 x 3 was only played after teams used to get into a donny-brock of epic proportions.    Which is also a slight to how the game used to be.   Not a fan of either.   Don't understand why a Tie Game.  Is so bad.   So far the alternatives, have been a joke.  

Edited November 17, 2023 by IBatch

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

1 hour ago, Rrodja said:

There was an old Budweiser advert in the U.K about making football (soccer) more entertaining for a North American audience. I can always remember the narrator shouting "multiball" and more and more balls being thrown on. Maybe multipuck is the answer. If noone has scored within a minute... add another puck on to the ice. Then after another minute - another puck and so on.

 

Or maybe throw a samurai on the ice who is given license to attack at will, complete with katana and armour - then aside from protecting the puck, the players would have to protect themselves too!  

[Kevin Biestra]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

So redline this redline that.  Can't we just all agree the shoot-out has had its day and never should have been added to the NHL and that 3 x 3, which was created so there would be less shoot-outs, is goofy as fuck, and that's why the game was never designed to be played 3 x 3 in the first place?  

 

Maybe, just maybe, 100 years of game play evolved into what it was meant to be?   Does football widen their goalposts just because their players kind of suck for a decade plus compared to the ones before them?  Should basketball add a man or maybe an extra ball?   Why doesn't baseball, just do a home run "shootout " pitcher versus batter to decide games instead of extra innings.   The latter is exactly what the NHL did to make sure " fans came back".  Like we wouldn't have anyways.   Like when the Canucks changed their logo and made a big campaign to make sure we liked it ... when we all knew it was just fine as is, and ate up the Messier cake.   Well maybe not that, but it all FEELs the same.   Wasn't needed. 

 

So instead of that maybe they should load the bases and see who can hit a grand slam.   That's kind of what 3 x 3 is.  Sure they put a runner on base (also goofy).   But you see the point.   The game was already peaked  and they turned it into a mistake.    Every single team has AHLers on it now.   At least they've finally caught up to expansion though (aside from a Mario/Orr/Gretzky coming back).  It's a total disgrace.    And fans ate it up.     End Rant.   I detest the shoot-out.   It denegrates the penalty shot, one of the most exciting things in hockey.   And 3 x 3 was only played after teams used to get into a donny-brock of epic proportions.    Which is also a slight to how the game used to be.   Not a fan of either.   Don't understand why a Tie Game.  Is so bad.   So far the alternatives, have been a joke.  

 

NHL has been one gimmick after another since the Mighty Ducks and the glowing puck.  Bettman would have the players get dressed up as clowns before the game to be dropped into a dunk tank if he thought it would make a scratch in the market for NFL and NBA viewers.

[Goalie29]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

So redline this redline that.  Can't we just all agree the shoot-out has had its day and never should have been added to the NHL and that 3 x 3, which was created so there would be less shoot-outs, is goofy as fuck, and that's why the game was never designed to be played 3 x 3 in the first place?  

 

Maybe, just maybe, 100 years of game play evolved into what it was meant to be?   Does football widen their goalposts just because their players kind of suck for a decade plus compared to the ones before them?  Should basketball add a man or maybe an extra ball?   Why doesn't baseball, just do a home run "shootout " pitcher versus batter to decide games instead of extra innings.   The latter is exactly what the NHL did to make sure " fans came back".  Like we wouldn't have anyways.   Like when the Canucks changed their logo and made a big campaign to make sure we liked it ... when we all knew it was just fine as is, and ate up the Messier cake.   Well maybe not that, but it all FEELs the same.   Wasn't needed. 

 

So instead of that maybe they should load the bases and see who can hit a grand slam.   That's kind of what 3 x 3 is.  Sure they put a runner on base (also goofy).   But you see the point.   The game was already peaked  and they turned it into a mistake.    Every single team has AHLers on it now.   At least they've finally caught up to expansion though (aside from a Mario/Orr/Gretzky coming back).  It's a total disgrace.    And fans ate it up.     End Rant.   I detest the shoot-out.   It denegrates the penalty shot, one of the most exciting things in hockey.   And 3 x 3 was only played after teams used to get into a donny-brock of epic proportions.    Which is also a slight to how the game used to be.   Not a fan of either.   Don't understand why a Tie Game.  Is so bad.   So far the alternatives, have been a joke.  

 

That's quite the rant.  You covered a wide variety of topics there.

 

Once upon a time it was 6 on 6, plus goalies.  Forward passes used to be illegal.  Goalies were fined for leaving the stand up position.  Rules evolve.  Sometimes for the better (eliminating the two line pass), and sometimes not (toe in crease, no delayed offsides).  While I am not a fan of the shoot-out, I'm less of a fan of ties.

[IBatch]

14 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

NHL has been one gimmick after another since the Mighty Ducks and the glowing puck.  Bettman would have the players get dressed up as clowns before the game to be dropped into a dunk tank if he thought it would make a scratch in the market for NFL and NBA viewers.

Yep.   That was the round of expansion, that created the dead puck era.   Don't have a lot of compassion for them, but do respect that their coaches knew how to copy and made the most of it.    ANA was the laughing stock of the league though, back then no hockey player wanted to associated with a princess, let alone a duck. 

Edited November 17, 2023 by IBatch

[Coconuts]

Ties won't come back, they won't. I'm not keen on shootouts either but the NHL sells entertainment and both OT (in any form) and the shootouts are a more entertaining ways to end games than a tie. 

 

How often do we see OT/shootout highlights? It's a way to market excitement.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Coconuts

[IBatch]

14 minutes ago, Goalie29 said:

 

That's quite the rant.  You covered a wide variety of topics there.

 

Once upon a time it was 6 on 6, plus goalies.  Forward passes used to be illegal.  Goalies were fined for leaving the stand up position.  Rules evolve.  Sometimes for the better (eliminating the two line pass), and sometimes not (toe in crease, no delayed offsides).  While I am not a fan of the shoot-out, I'm less of a fan of ties.

What is the difference, between a tie game, and a shoot-out win?  A skills competition.

 

As far as hockey goes, i've watched five decades now and been part of 6.  Maybe just maybe, they didn't need to do it?  Expansion.    That's created an appetite.    For gimmicks, and new things.   Also I get the history of the game.   Don't mind evolving, but the game isn't doing that.  It's de-volving.   The redline was a great adjustment.   Love that.  The rest is is just goofy.   Wasn't a fan of Tie games either.   But am less of a fan of the fix.

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by IBatch

[Goalie29]

6 minutes ago, IBatch said:

What is the difference, between a tie game, and a shoot-out win?  A skills competition.

 

The difference?  Somebody wins.

 

By the sounds of it, you and I are of a similar vintage, so I remember the days of ties.  A gimmicky as it is, I prefer that at the end of the game there is a winner and a loser.

[IBatch]

9 minutes ago, Goalie29 said:

 

The difference?  Somebody wins.

 

By the sounds of it, you and I are of a similar vintage, so I remember the days of ties.  A gimmicky as it is, I prefer that at the end of the game there is a winner and a loser.

Gotcha.   I just don't think tie is as a dirty word as the NHL decided to make it, and that all the things back then that they weren't happy about just morphed into the same exact thing.    Why I think maybe they had it right all along - as in the first 80 or so years.    Not a traditionalist, well maybe but I want to see added value, only see some added value with 3 x 3 and no added value, plus 60 years of goalie stats scrubbed and some cheesy entertainment with a shoot-out which I truly still can't believe is still going on.  

Edited November 17, 2023 by IBatch

[Hairy Kneel]

I like the 3 on 3. Extend it.

 

[Dumb Nuck]

If they want stupid ideas then for OT the coaching staff has to suit up and play, the only change I’d like to see is no time limit, no shootout.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

42 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

If they want stupid ideas then for OT the coaching staff has to suit up and play, the only change I’d like to see is no time limit, no shootout.

 

How about having them play puck jenga or pick-up sticks (with all of the hockey sticks behind the bench in play)?