Good or Bad? Shootouts determine playoff berths?
When it comes to the end of a hockey game in the regular season, we have all asked ourselves if the shootout was the most sensible thing we can do to allow a winner and a loser in every game. Some agree, some disagree and call it the "charity point" to go along with the point system argument. I think for now, if a winner and a loser must be determined, the shootout is alright. But in the back of my mind, although I can come up with plenty of counter arguments, a shootout should not determine any winner when playoff implications are at stake. This leaves me to my question for all of you: Is it a good thing or a bad thing that a shootout can determine what team gets into the playoffs?
As I watched the Rangers play the Flyers Sunday, I wanted the game to end sensibly. I wanted there to be no bad calls, no gimmicks, just a hard fought game, and a winner. it just pains me to see the Rangers miss the opportunity to play in the playoffs because they lost a shootout. I am not talking as a Rangers fan, but as a hockey fan. Should a team's season be decided by a shootout?
As I said, I have many counter arguments. A team could've clinched a playoff birth before season's end by winning a shootout. So does every game that could decide a playoff contender have to end differently than every other game? No. A team that reaches the playoffs could've won plenty of shootouts in the regular season. Likewise, a team that reaches the playoffs could've lost plenty of shootouts in the regular season. The shootout is here to end games before the playoffs begin, and it did just that on Sunday. No harm, no foul.
But is it really no harm, no foul? Did the shootout that ended Sunday's game really determine who the better team was? A game such as the one played on Sunday should have ended differently, just because of the special circumstance the winner goes into the playoffs. In my opinion, the shootout Sunday was the worst way possible to end the game. A "special" game like the one on Sunday, if the game is tied through regulation, should go to overtime. Sudden death. Golden goal. Whatever you may want to call it. It should not be decided through a skills competition. A gimmick. A show.
If the Rangers won, would I still have these feelings towards the way the game Sunday was decided? Yes. Would I be happy the Rangers won? Of course. However the Flyers shouldn't have their season be decided by a shootout. Neither should the Rangers, nor should any team. Watching the shootout on Sunday was like watching a shootout decide who wins the Stanley Cup. There was just too much on the line for a shootout to take place. Something has to be done to prevent an appalling finish such as the one witnessed Sunday. The NHL's "show for the fans" just determined who has the privilege of playing for the Stanley Cup. That is downright awful.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As a flyers fan I wholeheartedly agree with you. The NHL continues to infuriate me. I don’t think any game should end in a shootout ever. I was estatic with the result of yesterday’s game, but I could not have imagined walking out of that building for the final time this year with the outcome being decided by basically a coin flip.
I’m fine with the shootout during the regular season. It beats games ending in a tie and I really wouldn’t care to watch a 3 OT game in the regular season just to decide who gets the extra point. Now every once in a while, a regular season game will serve as a de facto playoff game, and of course we all want playoff games to be determined properly, but it is what it is. The Rangers had 4,920 minutes of real hockey to secure a playoff spot and they didn’t, so a shootout determined their fate.
The Rangers had 4,920 minutes of real hockey to secure a playoff spot and they didn’t, so a shootout determined their fate.
a shootout determined the fate of the Flyers too.
Now every once in a while, a regular season game will serve as a de facto playoff game, and of course we all want playoff games to be determined properly, but it is what it is.
that is why I used the term “special game” in my post. This way, any game in the future such as the one on Sunday would be determined differently. In a “special” game such as this, why not keep playing continuous OT? It only decided who plays for the Cup, and actual playoff games wont start the next day or two.
"Jaromir Jagr.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
- Sam Rosen
"Marian Gaborik.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
-Sam Rosen
You could say the same thing for any game this season that went to a shootout. Points are points. The Rangers lot 11 games in OT/Shootout this year.
I hate the charity point, but it does create more interesting playoff races in the bottom half of the top 8. That’s one of the main reasons for it.
I think there should be 0 loser points. Give them 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for OT, and 1 point to the winner of a shootout. I think this would give teams a bigger incentive to try to win games in regulation, then in OT, which would be much more exciting IMO.
It’s the regular season – so regular season rules apply. Just because it was the only “meaningful” 82nd game of the season is actually a testament to the ineptitude of both PHI and NYR.
The NHL should change the value of EVERY game to 3 points from 2 points. Today only OT/SO games are worth a total of 3 points.
A regulation win nets the winner 3 points.
A regulation tie nets both teams 1 point.
The OT/SO winner gets the remaining 1 point.
By those measures, the Rangers would have been eliminated last week at the latest – because the best they could have done was tie the Flyers in points, where they would have lost the 1st tie-breaker (total wins).
I am in favor of a points system change as well, but not in the way you make it. The proposed 3, 2, 1 system sounds good in my opinion.
"Jaromir Jagr.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
- Sam Rosen
"Marian Gaborik.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
-Sam Rosen
Huh?? The “proposed 3,2,1 system” is exactly what I described.
3 points regulation win (3)
1 point for the regulation “tie” to both teams (1)
+1 point to the OT/SO winner (2)
And if that had been in place – the Rangers not only were comfortably “in” – but the 7th seed, and Montreal went home as discussed at this link
shootouts always cheapen the game.
Shootouts Suck. That is it. It ruins the game of hockey.
The only thing it did last night was save the rangers time. The rangers let the flyers skate all over them yesterday. If they had kept going in overtime, we would have seen the same outcome. Flyers, good luck in the playoffs. The rangers couldn’t even score on their 4th string goalie.
The ONLY winner is NBC for not playing this as a game of the week.
First it's "berth" not "birth"
Next, I LOVE the shoot-out. I think the NHL should have one every game, regardless of ties or not. What better way to keep the fans in their seats for the end of an 11-3 sleeper than knowing there will be a 1-point skills competition at the end of the game.
why stop there
Have a mini-skills competition at the end of every game. What better way to get these over-priced pseudo-stars’ blood going then after playing for 60 minutes have some wind-sprints to see who’s fastest, and make every one take a shoot-out shot.
Now there’s some fun for ya!

by 




















