Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Question

What do all of you think of the overtime format? Do you enjoy games that go into the 4 OT's? What do you think should be done or should be anything be done? I'm just curious what you guys think?

8 comments:

Shan said...

This would upset people, but I am not averse to a shootout after triple overtime. At that point, a lot of people are just watching to see if it'll break a record for longest game, and then a lot of other people are asleep. Plus, as people get more tired, we're not really seeing the players at their best and playing more than a double-game will leave them exhausted for their next game possibly against a fresh opponent. More overtimes than that is still entertaining, but I think we could do without Quadruple OT.

KMS2 said...

I love it!!!

If a TV network is going to broadcast an NHL playoff game, then the NHL should include in the contract that the game will be shown in its entirety with no exceptions. No switching networks, no picture in picture (FSN did this with a Ducks game that overlapped with a baseball game), no cutting it off to show infomercials, etc. Given the current state of US sports, Versus is the only US(sports) network that I see capable of fulfilling the needs of the NHL. Versus just needs to be included in a lot more cable packages so that more viewers have the opportunity to see these games.

Meg said...

Going to a shootout in the playoffs would make me a very unhappy camper. I just think it's an awful, awful, awful idea. They're not great in the regular season, but to use them in playoff games is just unacceptable as far as I'm concerned.

I think that the current format is the best option. If they absolutely need to change it, it would be acceptable to go to 4-on-4 hockey after a couple of overtimes.

kms2: I agree with you re: Versus. The channel is slowly being included on more cable packages (as far as I can tell anyway) and I think eventually it could be a good thing indeed for the NHL in the US.

Jocelynn said...

I love it when the Eastern Conference games go to OT! 'Cause I can watch and still go to bed at a reasonable hour.

Now for the Western Conference, I end up falling asleep on the couch but I still have that TV on so I can get woken by the win.

I like the way it is. I would rather it not change but it wouldn't make me angry if it went 4 on 4. A shootout, on the other hand, would make me livid. I'd probably turn the TV off.

Objectionable Conduct said...

I am a purist. I've talked to the boys... and they all agree. OT until it ends. I don't care of its dry as toast (see Canucks vs. Stars) I want the game to keep going until SOMEONE wins.

This year in the WJHC, Jonnie Toews kept scoring in the shootout and nearly gave me a heart attack. I hate this. OT it is.

McPhizzle said...

I'm a WRECK during OT. Edge of my seat, tearing tickets into confetti, and I LOVE every heart-pounding minute. Case in point: I got hit with a puck at a WHL playoff game in 2004 and against the advice of the paramedics, I stayed 'til the end, going to the ER after the game.

My vote is OT.

Jordi said...

I'm all OT. Call me a sadist but I love it when they get tired and make stupid mistakes like they're on a slip n slide. Of course there's the "do or die" element of it which makes you go "OMGZ" every moment.

Schnookie said...

I remember well watching my first OT marathon as a fan -- it was that 4OT Caps/Pens game that Mario got tossed out of in '96. And I was like, "This is the coolest thing I HAVE EVER SEEN." Unlimited 5-on-5 OT is what separates us from the animals. I just don't even want to think about what it would do to the quality of the sport if the NHL looked to get away from it... And shootouts? I hate them so much in the regular season, I don't think I'd be able to handle it if they decided anything actually important. Anyone who watches the World Cup can tell you it's the cheapest, emptiest way to pick a champion. Just... no.