QOTD: Thoughts on 3 on 3?

[Jaybo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yep. I'm okay with the shootout seeing it's used in international hockey to decide games but 3 on 3 is a gimmick and a joke IMO.

I'm the opposite.

Although rare, 3-on-3 is not a gimmick or a joke. It's an actual situation you could encounter in a real game so it makes sense to have it used in OT as it still makes the end of the game based on something that's connected to how the game is played during the first 60 minutes.

The shoot-out, although it evokes the breakaways you see in real game situations, is a poor copy of what an actual breakaway is since it doesn't have the same pressure, no one chasing you down, etc.

I don't mind the shoot-out but I do see it as more of a luck/skills competition thing than anything related to what happens during an actual hockey game.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yep. I'm okay with the shootout seeing it's used in international hockey to decide games but 3 on 3 is a gimmick and a joke IMO.

That is precisely the problem. international hockey lifted their rules from soccer.

That's why international hockey sucks.

[ForeverFlameFan]

I'd rather have a 4 on 4 10 minute OT, then a shootout.

[nfotiu]

You want less shoot outs, then stop providing incentive teams to play for OT. Do whatever they want in OT, 3v3, 4v4, 1 on 1 between the captains with no goalies, ties, I don't care, just don't have a ridiculous point system that makes teams play for OT. Making teams play for ties is why so many games go for shootouts. There is no other sport in the world that I know of in major leagues, pros or minor leagues that provides incentive to play for a damn tie! It drives me crazy that the powers that be can't recognize they have ruined third periods.

[CroFlames]

3 on 3 is stupid. But its miles ahead of the shootout. The shootout is not hockey. It's a skills competition that settles a hockey game. Grinds my gears.

At least 3 on 3 is still hockey, albeit not real 5 on 5 hockey.

What is so wrong with WIN-LOSS-TIE?

Then in the playoffs, obviously 5 on 5 OT until someone wins. Sometimes I feel like I need to be the commissioner.

[mrkajz44]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yep. I'm okay with the shootout seeing it's used in international hockey to decide games but 3 on 3 is a gimmick and a joke IMO.

I don't understand how you can think 3 on 3 is a gimmick but the shoot-out is not.

The shoot-out is no longer exciting, when the guy comes in at a walking speed and stick handles 13 times before shooting. It's too slow. Having 3 on 3 OT solves that problem - it will be end to end, bringing a ton of excitement.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yes for the love of God yes please can we just do it now please?

The shootout needs to die. It should never have been born in the first place. I don't care what teams it favours or doesn't; you don't change the game based on the makeup of your current roster that will look totally different in a few years. You do it because it's the best thing for the game league-wide and going forward.

3 on 3 is so, so much better than the shootout.

Changing the points system so that it incentivizes regulation wins is also a major issue and something that needs to happen, but it's a separate discussion.

[transplant99]

Love the idea of 3 on 3 as VASTLY superior to the shoot out. The SO is the gimmick not 3 on 3...As I have seen the 3 on 3 in a game but I have never seen a breakaway by a player skating at 10% speed while turning sideways/backwards to try and fool the goalie.

I was a huge proponent of the SO when it was introduced as it's better than a tie...every time. But this is even better of an idea as it will drastically reduce the SO.

I suspect this is in place for next year.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Love it. I hate the shootout and watched a lot of 3:3 overtime in the AJHL. It is fantastic. Fans will love it.

I've seen it at NHL All Star Weekends, and thought it was terrible. Absolute shinny.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

^Was that sarcasm? All NHL all star weekend hockey is terrible... there's nothing at stake, no one wants to get hurt or look like they're trying too hard, and everyone's hung over.

[jg13]

I couldn't vote D because I do hate the idea of a team getting an extra point for winning the shootout, however I enjoy watching the shoot out. So I went with C.

[Zevo]

None of the above. 3 on 3 is even more gimmicky than the shoot out. I don't think I've ever seen teams play 3 on 3. I don't like the shoot out but it's more like a real game situation than 3 on 3 pond hockey since I've seen way more penalty shots in a game than 3 on 3.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

^Was that sarcasm? All NHL all star weekend hockey is terrible... there's nothing at stake, no one wants to get hurt or look like they're trying too hard, and everyone's hung over.

No saracasm. With 3-on-3, you create so much space, you remove all physical play from the game (all-star weekend or not). The bench will be shortened to about 6 players, but hockey is a team game employing players with different sets of skills.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

The shootout has always been a joke IMO. Some 4-on-4 then 3-on-3 until a winner is decided would be great. Do away with the SO altogether.

[Coach]

I dont HATE the shootout. I just don't like that so many games are decided that way. So I welcome the 3 on 3.

And I do think it benefits the Flames. The less players, the more space, means that speed and fitness are big factors, both of which the Flames excel at.

[Meers]

It's just another stupid, pathetic gimmick. It demeans the game.

If you want shootouts and 3-on-3, why not have glowing pucks and force the players to wear clown paint too?

The world's most popular game is futbol, and you may notice that its propensity for tie games hasn't dulled its popularity.

The NHL should focus on selling what hockey is - a fast, tough, physical sport - not on selling what hockey isn't.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by troutman

I've seen it at NHL All Star Weekends, and thought it was terrible. Absolute shinny.

Everything at the all-star weekend is a joke. When a win is on the line you won't see that type of hockey. Guys will be going for it.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Meers

It's just another stupid, pathetic gimmick. It demeans the game.

If you want shootouts and 3-on-3, why not have glowing pucks and force the players to wear clown paint too?

The world's most popular game is futbol, and you may notice that its propensity for tie games hasn't dulled its popularity.

The NHL should focus on selling what hockey is - a fast, tough, physical sport - not on selling what hockey isn't.

Thank you for this. I been saying this forever.

More often than not I've walked away from a game saying Wow that shootout sure cheapened a great game between two clubs that should have ended in a tie.

There is nothing wrong with W-L-T.

[Yamer]

I'm for it, but there isn't an option that describes my sentiment.

Basically, it's entertaining as hell and really resolves a game before a shootout (if it remains).

[UKflames]

I voted to add 3 on 3 but only to get rid of the shootout, 3v3 OT is the lesser of two evils.

I am surprised by the amount of people that have suggested a tie if not settled after OT, I thought a tied game was completely frowned upon as a Soccer thing and you always had to have a winner, or is that just to satisfy the US fans? Going off topics but as someone else mentioned, maybe only giving a point for a tie and 3 for a win would make teams push for the win, not that I have anything to prove that.