I'm not opposed to the shootout as I realy hate tied games. I can't explain it, I just hate them. Maybe the NHL needs to go the stick route instead of the carrot route on this and if a game has to go to a shoot out to decide a winner then neither teams gets points. You get a W or an L but no points what-so-ever, therefore putting A LOT of emphasis on winning early and often. lol
I'm half joking about it but seriously could you imagine games 70-82 for any team trying to make the playoffs and they have 5 mins of overtime to salvage points from a tie game or it's as good as a loss? God I bet we'd see some of the craziest hockey in the world during those games.]]>
If a team gives up the go-ahead goal at 59:45, then they lose; but if a team gives it up at 60:15, then they get a point – in those thirty seconds they half-won the game? Ridiculous.
The NHL doesn't want ties because baseball/basketball/football don't have them, that's why they feel the need for the shootout. I just don't think a win in the shootout should be worth as much as a win in regulation or it OT. The shootout is a little game – like mini-putt – at the end of a hockey game.
This year Boston won 25 games in regulation but had 10 shootout wins. The Rangers won 34 regulation games with 3 shootout wins. You're telling me Boston deserved to be in the playoffs over the Rangers who played a better team game all year?
How about 2pts for the win but only 1pt for a win in the shootout? No points for losing.
GMs don't want to vote against keeping the 1 point for the loss because they worry that they're team might lose out on the playoffs as a result. They will always be self-serving; not for the betterment of the game.]]>