3 on 3: the future of hockey

[Boxman]

3 on 3 is so much better to watch than 5 on 5. I think it will become a format in its own right, similar to rugby sevens or indoor soccer. The NHL-sized rink has simply been outgrown by the players.

What are your thoughts on the matter? Can 5v5 survive over the long term? In 10 years, I expect 5v5 to be competing with 3v3 for players and audiences. In 20 years I think 5v5 will be largely superceded by the wholly superior 3v3 format.

If Bettman is serious about growing the reach and appeal of the NHL to the mainstream audience, 3v3 can only grow.

[DJones]

Always be a gimmick.

No way will it ever replace 5 on 5.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

My thoughts are that you seem very excited after the All-Star Game, and you'll probably make more sense after you have a nap or something.

[codynw]

It'll never happen. It would cut lots of jobs, and the NHLPA wouldn't allow it. On top of the fact that it's a dumb idea anyways.

[Coach]

I love 3 on 3 as the OT format and the All Star format.

But no.

[Kickazzflames]

I think it's a great efficient way to end a regular season game, and even a great All-Star game format but 5 on 5 is the way hockey should always be played. Even sudden death 5 on 5 playoff overtime.

[GirlySports]

they would have to go 4-on-4 first which i like better than 3-on-3. I think they should have gone 4-on-4 for 10 minutes in overtime instead of 3-on-3.

[Resolute 14]

Nope.

[Caged Great]

The players were absolutely gassed in the final 20 minutes, which is why it was 1-0.

I wouldn't want to watch 3 on 3 every game. It's basically basketball, too much end to end action with no real complexity.

[FlamesAddiction]

Scoring would be out of control. Back-and-forth scoring just isn't exciting to me. I'd watch basketball if I wanted to see that.

[Alberta_Beef]

oh hell no, that is a terrible idea

[saillias]

As someone who has watched less than 5 football games ever, I say football should go 3 on 3. These O and D lines seem like roster bloat just designed to run into each other. QB, two receivers. On the defense, one guy who tries to take out the QB and two more guys who try to stop the receivers.

[Itse]

I think the provocative header is bringing out kneejerk reactions that don't actually go with OP.

I think the comparison to indoor soccer works. Another comparison would be street basketball. I could see 3 on 3 hockey becoming it's own sport much in the same way. Neither basketball or soccer have suffered in any way from those variation sports.

I can't see 3 on 3 becoming more popular than 5 on 5 hockey, but sometimes gimmicky is what you want. Some outdoor event could for example have a one-day tournament with 10 minute games and smaller ice. Could be a lot of fun.

[locsofblu]

Never will happen. I love seeing it in OT though.

[CaptainCrunch]

This was 4 teams stocked with something like the top 40 players in the league, of course it was exciting. Wait until you see 3 on 3 hockey where its stocked by about 300 players, and coaches working full time to stop it.

all you'll see is two teams lining up players on the blueline to force dump ins.

Quit trying to gimmick the structure of the game.

The NHLPA would never go for a 40% work force reduction.

This isn't the NBA where its all about individual plays and slam dunks. Scoring in hockey is a battle and it should be hard.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by saillias

As someone who has watched less than 5 football games ever, I say football should go 3 on 3. These O and D lines seem like roster bloat just designed to run into each other. QB, two receivers. On the defense, one guy who tries to take out the QB and two more guys who try to stop the receivers.

That's Arena Football

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

This isn't the NBA where its all about individual plays and slam dunks. Scoring in hockey is a battle and it should be hard.

Exactly. More scoring just devalues what a goal is worth. It makes each goal less important and meaningful, and therefore less exciting.

I don't mind it as an alternative for the shoot out in overtime though.

[Igottago]

LOL. This was the same thing I (jokingly) suggested when 3 on 3 was originally being discussed. If its so exciting why not do it all game?

Horrible idea but it wouldn't surprise me at all if the NHL eventually starts considering getting away from 5 on 5. They seem to be unable to let the game exist as it should.

[CroFlames]

I'll just leave this piece of gold here. This would make hockey soooooo much better!

Randy: [becoming sarcastic] Oh yeah, we don't want our kids getting hurt playing football! But I think I have a way to make it even better! Why don't we have the players just wear bras?!

Mr. Adler: Bras?

Randy: Yeah, the players should all wear bras! And instead of helmets, they should wear little tinfoil hats, 'cause, you know, it's the future and we shouldn't be so barbaric! [other parents look at each other and whisper amongst themselves]

Linda: How would the bras and tinfoil hats make it safer? Randy: Oh, you're all not getting it! See, while we're at it, we'll have a balloon instead of a ball, and whoever catches the balloon tries to run while all the other players hug!

Mr. Mackey: Huh. You you think the students would like that?

Randy: Oh they'd love it! A sport where safety is all that matters? How about we call it "sarcastaball"?! Mr. Mackey: Hnkay, would, would you mind being the coach of the South Park sarcastaball team?

Randy: [angry that no one is with him on this - that is, that no one has caught on to his sarcasm] Jesus Christ! Yes, I would love to be the coach of the sarcastaball team!

[Northendzone]

think of the children playing minor hockey for crying out loud