Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

    Well.

    My own preference, stated right up front in my initial post, is to try one OT and leave it a tie. However, I recognize that things change and we need to adapt, which is why I had a few kind words for 3x3 and 4x4 OT, in the same way that you might point out that your daughter's boyfriend sure drives a nice car.

    I guess you would have to be reading between the lines of my post to extend my comments to starting games with shootouts and throwing out 5x5 play completely. But, I guess I need to be clearer in my writing.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

      Originally posted by Leather helmet View Post
      Well.

      My own preference, stated right up front in my initial post, is to try one OT and leave it a tie. However, I recognize that things change and we need to adapt, which is why I had a few kind words for 3x3 and 4x4 OT, in the same way that you might point out that your daughter's boyfriend sure drives a nice car.

      I guess you would have to be reading between the lines of my post to extend my comments to starting games with shootouts and throwing out 5x5 play completely. But, I guess I need to be clearer in my writing.
      I do not think the error was yours, or that there really was an error. People just had different takes on what you said.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

        Originally posted by Leather helmet View Post
        4x4 and 3x3 almost always produce a winner
        Not quite:

        NHL 2015-16 Season (3x3 overtime)
        1230 games played
        275 overtime games (23.6 %)
        107 shootouts (8.7 % of all games; 38.9 % of overtime games)

        NHL 2014-15 Season (4x4 overtime)
        1230 games played
        306 overtime games (24.9 %)
        170 shootouts (13.8 % of all games; 55.6 % of overtime games)

        Over the past two seasons the average is just 47.7% of overtime games were decided playing 4x4 or 3x3 with the remaining 52.3% tied after 5 minutes of overtime.

        Sean
        Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
        Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

        BU Hockey Games
        BU Hockey highlights and extras
        NCAA Hockey Financials
        Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games
        I need a kidney; looking for a donor

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

          what cracks me up is many of these shootouts take longer than another OT
          it seems to me there was one for UM where they went thru nearly the entire lineup before someone broke the deadlock
          and a couple more that required a good number of players

          they could have easily played another 5 minute OT in those 3

          if you want to change the rules to have a winner, how about playing 5 on 5 but rescinding offside and or icing?
          maybe the puck could be replaced with a tennis ball and put up hoops at each end and the first to make a basket wins

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

            I will never understand why a tie, in regular season play, should not remain as a tie. If the purpose of regular season points is to determine eligibility for playoffs, a split in points in a tie game is a better reflection of regular season success/failure than a toss of the dice in overtime / shootout. A tie is an honourable outcome for a game...an indication that two teams fought hard and neither proved to be dominant on that evening. It is only when you get to playoffs, where one team, and only one team must advance that it is necessary to break a tie game. It is only the commercialization of the game at the pro level that has led to this insane need to always send one team home as winner and another as loser. The NHL used to have no overtime in regular season...but that was before it became an entertainment industry first, and a sport second.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

              Originally posted by hab View Post
              The NHL used to have no overtime in regular season...but that was before it became an entertainment industry first, and a sport second.
              I see conflicting information, but it appears that the NHL did have full ten-minute overtime periods until Nov 1942, when it was eliminated due to wartime travel restrictions. It was not reintroduced until the 1983-84 season, when it was a 5 minute sudden death overtime period. On the other hand, the NCAA has always had overtime: through the 1936-37 season overtime consisted of a 10-minute overtime and if still tied a second 10-minute overtime. Starting in 1937-38 overtime was reduced to a single 10-minute overtime and starting with the 1949-50 season a single 10-minute sudden death overtime period was played. It was changed to a 5 minute overtime starting with the 1989-90 season, falling in line with the NHL's 5 minute overtime. Also, if I recall correctly it was stated that 70% of all overtime games that had a winner were decided in the first 5 minutes, so shortening of the period would not change the outcome of many games.

              Sean
              Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
              Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

              BU Hockey Games
              BU Hockey highlights and extras
              NCAA Hockey Financials
              Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games
              I need a kidney; looking for a donor

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                NESCAC has played 4x4 OT for several seasons. There was a regular season game on 1/27/13 between Conn College and Amherst that was settled 3x3. There were coincidental minors at 19:56 of the 3rd for hitting after the whistle. It then took Geneva Lloyd, Tori Salmon and Ashley Salerno :56 to determine the outcome (Salmon from Lloyd). Sure was a lot of ice out there.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                  My hot take on this is 3x3 overtime is the $#!+ and I'm all for it during the regular season. 4x4 first and then 3x3 is fine too. End in a tie after that; no shootouts.

                  5x5 unlimited OT for the playoffs is a must, though, but that's probably never going to go away.
                  Grant Salzano, Boston College '10
                  Writer Emeritus, BC Interruption
                  Twitter: @Salzano14


                  Click here for the BC Interruption Pairwise, KRACH, and GRaNT Calculators

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                    Originally posted by TonyTheTiger20 View Post
                    My hot take on this is 3x3 overtime is the $#!+ and I'm all for it during the regular season. 4x4 first and then 3x3 is fine too. End in a tie after that; no shootouts.

                    5x5 unlimited OT for the playoffs is a must, though, but that's probably never going to go away.
                    I'm with Grant on this one. Regular season play 4x4 for 5 minutes, then 3x3 for 5 minutes, then if still no score it's a tie. No shootouts!
                    Minnesota Golden Gopher Hockey

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                      Originally posted by D2D View Post
                      Regular season play 4x4 for 5 minutes, then 3x3 for 5 minutes, then if still no score it's a tie.
                      If everyone agrees that 5x5 is the best hockey, then just stick with that. No gimmicks at all. If after 65 minutes the teams are equal, then just leave it that way. There isn't some pressing need to declare someone was "better".

                      Minnesota lost the WCHA title to Wisconsin on the basis of the Badgers doing better in a shootout versus UND. Would you want your team getting knocked out of the NCAA Tournament because they lost a game in a 3x3 OT? I wouldnt' want anyone's season to end because of such nonsense. Stupid as shootouts are, at least those outcomes are ignored by the selection committee.
                      "... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
                      And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                        Originally posted by ARM View Post
                        If everyone agrees that 5x5 is the best hockey, then just stick with that. No gimmicks at all. If after 65 minutes the teams are equal, then just leave it that way. There isn't some pressing need to declare someone was "better".

                        Minnesota lost the WCHA title to Wisconsin on the basis of the Badgers doing better in a shootout versus UND...Stupid as shootouts are, at least those outcomes are ignored by the selection committee.
                        I should have clarified that the suggested 4x4 and 3x3 five minute OT sessions would only be worth an extra point in the league standings, regular season only. As is the case currently with shootouts, the outcomes would be ignored by the selection committee. This will probably never happen; just stating my preference.
                        Minnesota Golden Gopher Hockey

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                          Originally posted by hab View Post
                          I will never understand why a tie, in regular season play, should not remain as a tie. If the purpose of regular season points is to determine eligibility for playoffs, a split in points in a tie game is a better reflection of regular season success/failure than a toss of the dice in overtime / shootout. A tie is an honourable outcome for a game...an indication that two teams fought hard and neither proved to be dominant on that evening. It is only when you get to playoffs, where one team, and only one team must advance that it is necessary to break a tie game. It is only the commercialization of the game at the pro level that has led to this insane need to always send one team home as winner and another as loser. The NHL used to have no overtime in regular season...but that was before it became an entertainment industry first, and a sport second.
                          I agree with your points with some reservations. The Harvard men a few years ago played 13 ties. While it may have helped them get into the playoffs, the games were not all that interesting after a while. It can get tedious. Then you have the Harvard-UMD series at Bright Landry in the 09'-10' season where they played a 0-0 tie that was one of the best women's games I've seen in a long time. I'm not intentionally fence sitting here; just pointing out that you can look at this from both sides.

                          I'm in favor of 3 on 3 OT. Let your best face their best and see who wins. Can't stand shootouts so I hope they never adopt that in the ECAC.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                            Interesting article about what the D-1 coaches in CT think of the proposal, I did not know that the coaches nationwide were pretty much universally against the changes. Some very valid points in the article.

                            State college hockey coaches oppose new overtime proposal
                            By Chip Malafronte, New Haven Register
                            POSTED: 07/06/16, 9:35 PM EDT | UPDATED: 7 HRS AGO 0 COMMENTS
                            NEW HAVEN >> When the NCAA ice hockey rules committee last month recommended that overtime games during the regular season be played with four skaters to each side, it went against the overwhelming opinion of its coaching body.

                            At the annual convention in April, the 60 Division I hockey coaches were nearly unanimous in voting against a proposal to change the current regular season overtime format: 5-on-5 for five minutes.

                            The rules committee ignored that vote and moved forward with its proposal anyway. It’s now up to the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which could make the change official on July 20. If passed, the new rule would be implemented for the coming season.

                            Coaches may lobby against the proposal for the next two weeks in hopes of persuading a veto from the panel. Three of the state’s four Division I men’s coaches — Yale’s Keith Allain, Quinnipiac’s Rand Pecknold and UConn’s Mike Cavanaugh — said this week they believe 4-on-4 overtime sessions are a mistake.

                            Sacred Heart’s C.J. Marottolo is one of the few coaches in the country who favors a switch.

                            Allain believes it’s an unnecessary change and is troubled that the rules committee ignored the consensus opinion to pass a rule coaches have been opposed to for several years.

                            “I think it’s outrageous,” Allain said. “They’ve been trying to jam this down our throat for the last four or five years. I don’t know who has this agenda. People in college hockey are fine with the way it’s being played right now. There are some people on the committee who decided they know what’s best for the rest of us and kind of ran this through. It’s really disappointing.”

                            Michigan State coach Tom Anastos, chairman of the rules committee, released a statement last month explaining reasons for the proposition.

                            “It is clear that goal scoring is continuing to trend down,” Anastos said. “After a thorough discussion of the overtime process, and seeing the success experienced by the National Hockey League and others using four-on-four, we believe this change will be a positive step for NCAA hockey.”

                            There are inconsistencies in Anastos’ reasoning. The new rule would only affect scoring overtime games, but 76 percent of regular season games played in 2015-16 were decided in regulation.

                            The numbers also show scoring has remained relatively unchanged over the past 10 years. Mike McMahon, writing for College Hockey News, reported Division I scoring hasn’t dipped significantly. Teams averaged 2.92 goals-per game in 2005-06 and 2.94 in 2010-11. Over the past five seasons, according to McMahon, that average has fluctuated between 2.71 and 2.80. There were slightly more goals scored in 2015-16 than the previous season.

                            More importantly, the proposed change still doesn’t get college hockey in line with the NHL, which no longer accepts ties and uses 3-on-3 for five minutes followed by shootouts in every regular season overtime game. College games, under the new rule, can still end in a tie.

                            College hockey differs from the NHL in several other areas, most notably that its 34-game regular season is roughly 60 percent shorter. College hockey also relies on an algorithm, not league standings, to determine its playoff field. It would tweak the system so that overtime wins won’t carry as much value while a team that loses in OT gets partial credit. One loss in a vastly shorter season could have far greater impact on a college team than an NHL team.

                            “Right now, if you lose in OT it’s a loss, if you win in OT it’s a win,” Allain said. “Because they realize this is a gimmick, if you lose in overtime you get 25 percent of a win. If win in OT you get 75 percent of a win. They know it’s not hockey. From a competitive standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to award points in the standings toward a national championship berth based on a gimmick.”

                            Cavanaugh believes there should be consistency between overtime rules in the regular season and the postseason.

                            “I think the five-on-five overtime is a skill you have to learn to play; it’s different than five-on-five in regulation in that one turnover can cost you a game,” Cavanaugh said. “If you’re going to go a long way in the national tournament, your team has to be comfortable playing an overtime game. If we do away with the 5-on-5 overtime, the first time any of us will be playing it is in the national tournament. That’s something I really don’t like.”

                            Alterations to the overtime format have been discussed by the coaches in the past, though any perceived proliferation of ties hasn’t been viewed as problematic enough to enact change.

                            Last season, 35 percent of Quinnipiac’s games went to overtime (12-of-34), well above the national average of 24 percent. The Bobcats won four of those games, lost one and tied seven. Pecknold isn’t opposed to a change of overtime format, but believes there’s a better solution than the 4-on-4 proposal.

                            “I think the NCAA should make the overtime longer,” Pecknold said. “Extend it to 10 minutes or at least eight minutes. With the new rule of having the teams with the long change, similar to the second period, I think you would get more goals and avoid ties. I feel strongly that would be a better option that what we currently use or 4-on-4.”

                            Allain worries that the rules committee is angling to eventually mirror the NHL’s current 3-on-3 overtime format.

                            “That’s probably their end game,” Allain said. “To me it’s like these people don’t like the game of hockey, so they’re trying to recreate it. After 60, 65 minutes of a hard-fought game, a tie sometimes is the right result. They believe there are too many ties in college hockey. Well, says who? They say people complain scoring’s down. Says who? I like to score goals but sometimes a 1-0 game is just as exciting as a 6-5 game. Anyone that understands our sport knows that.”
                            YALE HOCKEY
                            2013 National Champions

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                              Originally posted by LTsatch View Post
                              Allain said. “To me it’s like these people don’t like the game of hockey, so they’re trying to recreate it. After 60, 65 minutes of a hard-fought game, a tie sometimes is the right result. They believe there are too many ties in college hockey. Well, says who? They say people complain scoring’s down. Says who? I like to score goals but sometimes a 1-0 game is just as exciting as a 6-5 game. Anyone that understands our sport knows that.”
                              lots of good things said in the above, especially this

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: NCAA Committee Recommends Change To Overtime In 2016-17

                                College hockey differs from the NHL in several other areas, most notably that its 34-game regular season is roughly 60 percent shorter. College hockey also relies on an algorithm, not league standings, to determine its playoff field. It would tweak the system so that overtime wins won’t carry as much value while a team that loses in OT gets partial credit. One loss in a vastly shorter season could have far greater impact on a college team than an NHL team.
                                So are we now grading on a curve so that if you manage to keep the OT scoreless until the last minute, you get some kind of 'partial' credit even if you lose? This is beginning to resemble the 'give a trophy to the sixth place finisher' mentality that is becoming the norm in youth sports. While we are at it, why don't we reward teams where the third pairing D scores the OT winner and punish the loser. That'll show 'em.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X