Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

[Sean Pickett]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

I actually tried to find old rule books at the library once to pin this down, but the years in question weren't available. Just too old. I've even spoken to on-ice refs who worked during those years, and they're foggy on the details! Regardless, the additional info you guys provided tells enough of the story.

I don't have all the rules books, but based on the ones I do have the change happened between 1988 and 1990. In the 1987 rules book it was a 10 minute overtime and in the 1991 rules book it was a 5 minute overtime (and not a new change).

Sean

[pgb-ohio]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Call me a traditionalist but no 3 on 3 hockey for this fan of the game. There is nothing wrong, and sometimes can be quite admirable when two teams battle it out for a tie. I like full strength 5 on 5 overtime but not a fan of three on three at all. Interestingly enough I do enjoy the shootout as it is like a skills comp for the kids, and keeping the kids hooked is positive for the game and strikes a good balance.

I'm also a traditionalist, and fully agree that at tie can be an admirable result. With regard to the Shootout vs. 3x3 comparison, though, I respectfully dissent.

No matter how exciting for kids and novice fans, the shootout is a skills contest, very different from real hockey. 3x3, while also a gimmick, is a lot closer to the real thing IMHO. I'm fine with describing the 3x3 OT as the lesser of two evils, fully intending that to be a backhanded compliment. But I also believe that it would be an improvement over the status quo, and would like to see the shootout leagues give it a try.

NHL people advocating the change say that 3x3 has the potential to reduce shootouts by 75%. I'll believe it when I see it, but that sounds like a significant improvement to me. If it were my decision, I sit back and watch how the rule plays out in the NHL for a season or two. Then, if it produces anything close to the claimed benefit, I'd go with it.

No 3x3...No Shoot-outs...and just a thought, games played out of Conference that end in a tie...then leave it at that as a tie and in Conference/League Play if tied after regulation...play a 10 minute overtime,5x5...just like in regulation play. if tied then so be it till the Playoffs.

A poster after my own heart. Gotta say that a consistent national rule on OT should be doable. But if OT rules are going to vary from conference to conference, this would be the ideal approach.

Unfortunately, it appears pretty clear that this train has left the station, meaning we're stuck in a world that insists on tiebreakers. If that's indeed a given, 3x3 is an incremental improvement.

[pgb-ohio]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Actually well into the 1980s. My favorite regular season Notre Dame game was an 8-7 OT win against Western Michigan played in 1983. Notre Dame was down 3 goals three separate times, including with fewer than 5 minutes remaining and won in OT. The article I saved from the following day refers to the OT as a ten-minute sudden death period. Additionally, Frozen Fours in 1984 and 1985 had OT games and the OTs were 10 minute periods. Without really digging up the rule books I cannot recall when the NCAA made the change to a 5 minute OT.

I was wondering if the post referred to the CCHA reviving shootouts and how that has sort of taken hold in the NCAA with the two newer conferences using the gimmick, although joecct may be talking about something entirely different.

The CCHA pioneered the 5 minute overtime in the mid/late 80's. Everybody then bought in.

Similarly, blame the ECAC for facemasks.

Appreciate the follow-up from both of you. By sheer coincidence, it was right about then I relocated a couple of times, and had some other non-hockey distractions going on as well. Wound up missing most of three seasons. After getting settled here, the five minute OT was in place. Never knew how the change came about.

I actually tried to find old rule books at the library once to pin this down, but the years in question weren't available. Just too old. I've even spoken to on-ice refs who worked during those years, and they're foggy on the details! Regardless, the additional info you guys provided tells enough of the story.

[Ma#1ne Hky]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

No 3x3...No Shoot-outs...and just a thought, games played out of Conference that end in a tie...then leave it at that as a tie and in Conference/League Play if tied after regulation...play a 10 minute overtime,5x5...just like in regulation play. if tied then so be it till the Playoffs.

[joecct]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

The CCHA pioneered the 5 minute overtime in the mid/late 80's. Everybody then bought in.

Similarly, blame the ECAC for facemasks.

[Ballroomblitz]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Call me a traditionalist but no 3 on 3 hockey for this fan of the game. There is nothing wrong, and sometimes can be quite admirable when two teams battle it out for a tie. I like full strength 5 on 5 overtime but not a fan of three on three at all. Interestingly enough I do enjoy the shootout as it is like a skills comp for the kids, and keeping the kids hooked is positive for the game and strikes a good balance.

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Yup, in the 1970's IIRC.

Actually well into the 1980s. My favorite regular season Notre Dame game was an 8-7 OT win against Western Michigan played in 1983. Notre Dame was down 3 goals three separate times, including with fewer than 5 minutes remaining and won in OT. The article I saved from the following day refers to the OT as a ten-minute sudden death period. Additionally, Frozen Fours in 1984 and 1985 had OT games and the OTs were 10 minute periods. Without really digging up the rule books I cannot recall when the NCAA made the change to a 5 minute OT.

If I may be so bold as to impose, would you mind telling that story? While I have my CCHA loyalties, no offense will be taken; I'm just not catching your reference. I settled in Ohio in the late '80s and had no connection to the CCHA prior to that time. Presumably the event in question occurred earlier...

I was wondering if the post referred to the CCHA reviving shootouts and how that has sort of taken hold in the NCAA with the two newer conferences using the gimmick, although joecct may be talking about something entirely different.

[pgb-ohio]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

There are a number of us on this board who remember when college hockey played 10 minute overtimes.

Yup, in the 1970's IIRC.

Add a full intermission and up to 10 minutes of hockey to regular season games and today's TV people would probably be quite unhappy. But from a purely competitive point of view, it's a great format. My feeling was that if a game was still tied after 10 minutes of OT, both teams could walk away with heads held high; that a tie was a truly legitimate result. Conversely, by limiting OT to 5 minutes, one team can basically go on the PK and try to kill off a Major. At even strength. Even pre-shootout, five minutes felt dissatisfying.

Blame the CCHA for the change.

If I may be so bold as to impose, would you mind telling that story? While I have my CCHA loyalties, no offense will be taken; I'm just not catching your reference. I settled in Ohio in the late '80s and had no connection to the CCHA prior to that time. Presumably the event in question occurred earlier...

[satking]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Anything but a shoot out is fine by me.....a shoot out is like settling a basketball game with a foul shooting contest the team part is left out....I do like 4X4 for 5 then 3X3 for the next 5 then its a tie

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Soccer at one time had the "Golden Goal" as well. FiFA nuff said

Yes, but they did two overtimes, then two sudden death overtimes, then PKs. So they condensed it down. Hockey is straight sudden death.

[LtPowers]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

They used to clear the ice before the 10 minute OT. Sometimes you would wait 15 minutes before the OT and then the game winner would come less than a minute into OT.
It was worth the wait if your team got the game winner.

That's the only thing that bugs me about sudden death OT in the playoffs. =)


Powers &8^]

[gochiefs]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

There are a number of us on this board who remember when college hockey played 10 minute overtimes. Blame the CCHA for the change.

They used to clear the ice before the 10 minute OT. Sometimes you would wait 15 minutes before the OT and then the game winner would come less than a minute into OT.
It was worth the wait if your team got the game winner.

[Hammer]

There are a number of us on this board who remember when college hockey played 10 minute overtimes. Blame the CCHA for the change.

I think you might have part of the answer here. 10 minute OT, 5 of which is 4x4, and the last 5 of which is 3x3. If you can't decide a winner after 70 minutes, it's a tie.

[Kepler]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

There are a number of us on this board who remember when college hockey played 10 minute overtimes.

One of my enduring memories is Dave Shippel beating Harvard at Bright in overtime, and the numbers "5:55" on the score board.

[Kepler]

Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT

Heck, let's just get rid of OT until the playoffs. After 60 minutes, it's a tie.

I approve this message.