Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rule Changes?

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

  • Rule Changes?

    I believe this is a rule change year and so I thought it might be nice to see what types of changes the fans would like to see.

    Personally I'd like the pairwise to be tweaked so that the QWB only applies to OOC games, but if you have a rule you'd like to see implemented or changed, now's your chance.
    MTU: Three time NCAA champions.

    It never get's easier, you just go faster. -Greg Lemond

  • #2
    Re: Rule Changes?

    Originally posted by manurespreader View Post
    I believe this is a rule change year and so I thought it might be nice to see what types of changes the fans would like to see.

    Personally I'd like the pairwise to be tweaked so that the QWB only applies to OOC games, but if you have a rule you'd like to see implemented or changed, now's your chance.
    You are referring to two different things. This is indeed a rules change year for playing rules. I believe that the pairwise rules can be changed every year.

    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


    • #3
      Re: Rule Changes?

      They need to institute the minor penalty for coaches challenges that aren’t confirmed. Certain Coaches are using these challenges as a free timeout at strategic moments in games. I wouldn’t mind seeing three on three OT as well, with no shoot out.
      YALE HOCKEY
      2013 National Champions

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Rule Changes?

        Originally posted by LTsatch View Post
        They need to institute the minor penalty for coaches challenges that aren’t confirmed. Certain Coaches are using these challenges as a free timeout at strategic moments in games. I wouldn’t mind seeing three on three OT as well, with no shoot out.
        Yes a 2 minute minor for delay of game and lost of timeout...as for Overtime, a take from the BIG1o...but 2 out of the 3 they do...5x5/5minute OT...if still tied, 3x3/5 minute OT...if still tied...goes in the books as a tie...in the BIG1o...they do the the first 2...plus then a shoot out...3 rounds...if still tied continue till there's a goal scored. BUT I am with you NO SHOOT-OUT's.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Rule Changes?

          I would be in favor of a couple of changes. First a 2-minute delay of game penalty for hitting the puck out of play from your defensive zone like in the NHL. Next, as they do in International Rules for face-offs, a player isn’t thrown out of the faceoff for a violation but receives a warning and results in a delay penalty should it happen a second time.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Rule Changes?

            While we're on the topic of rule changes, I noticed in this year's Beanpot both games involving BU went to double overtime, but the 1st OT was 5 minutes and the 2nd OT 20 minutes. Even more weird, there was an intermission between the first and second OTs, with the zamboni coming out to resurface the ice, but no intermission between the 3rd period and OT1.

            The NESN commentators mentioned this was "because of the Pairwise". I'm guessing these 2 games are ties for NCAA selection purposes, and in each case, the 2nd OT was simply to "extrapolate a winner"?
            Colgate '09

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by manurespreader View Post
              I believe this is a rule change year and so I thought it might be nice to see what types of changes the fans would like to see.

              Personally I'd like the pairwise to be tweaked so that the QWB only applies to OOC games, but if you have a rule you'd like to see implemented or changed, now's your chance.
              The new OT rules for 19-20 permit this format. Apparently the NCAA wants to standardize the tie (and it sure looked like they played for the tie in the 5 min OT) and then you can go, for conference play or in season tournaments, 3x3 then SO, or, just for in season tournaments, zam and then do unlimited 20s.

              Post season is always zam and unlimited 20s.

              What I wish
              win 5x5-> 3 points winner, 0 points loser
              win 4x4,3x3 or SO -> 2 points winner, 1 point loser.

              Other than that, one change would be aggressive fouls (i.e. the non restraining or technical fouls) must be served in their entirety.
              CCT '77 & '78
              4 kids
              5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
              1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

              ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
              - Benjamin Franklin

              Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

              I want to live forever. So far, so good.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Rule Changes?

                Originally posted by joecct View Post
                Other than that, one change would be aggressive fouls (i.e. the non restraining or technical fouls) must be served in their entirety.
                I'd settle for them actually being called.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Rule Changes?

                  Originally posted by Pucknut View Post
                  First a 2-minute delay of game penalty for hitting the puck out of play from your defensive zone like in the NHL.
                  No. This is one of the dumbest rules in hockey. This is one where the NCAA has it right. You treat it like icing, faceoff in the defensive zone, and you can't change players.
                  Charter Member of darin's "UML Seven"

                  "I just hate Boston College to be perfectly honest'' -Ken Dorsey
                  "It's time for my favorite NCAA tradition ... that's right, rooting against BC!" -Bill Simmons

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Rule Changes?

                    Originally posted by joecct View Post
                    ...win 4x4,3x3 or SO -> 2 points winner, 1 point loser....
                    Loser points are for LOSERS #NotHockey
                    "Through the years, we ever will acclaim........"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ScottK View Post
                      No. This is one of the dumbest rules in hockey. This is one where the NCAA has it right. You treat it like icing, faceoff in the defensive zone, and you can't change players.
                      Agreed

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Split-N View Post
                        Loser points are for LOSERS #NotHockey
                        What
                        If you want to be a BADGER, just come along with me

                        BRING BACK PAT RICHTER!!!


                        At his graduation ceremony from the U of Minnesota, my cousin got a keychain. When asked what UW gave her for graduation, my sister said, "A degree from a University that matters."

                        Canned music is a pathetic waste of your time.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Rule Changes?

                          Originally posted by LTsatch View Post
                          They need to institute the minor penalty for coaches challenges that aren’t confirmed. Certain Coaches are using these challenges as a free timeout at strategic moments in games. I wouldn’t mind seeing three on three OT as well, with no shoot out.
                          There is not a separate coach's challenge. A coach must use their timeout to initiate a review so it is not a free timeout. If their timeout was used, they can't challenge.

                          I'm not sure it would make sense to penalize them even more when they already have to use a timeout (regular season only).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Rule Changes?

                            I would like to see them go to the NHL-style overtime where each team gets a point after 60 minutes.

                            The 5v5 sudden death OT is old and outdated and ties do nothing to keep casual fans involved. Give each team the point they earned and let some exciting 3v3 hockey decide the winner...no shootout is necessary if they want to skip that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Rule Changes?

                              Originally posted by CKrouth View Post
                              I would like to see them go to the NHL-style overtime where each team gets a point after 60 minutes.

                              The 5v5 sudden death OT is old and outdated and ties do nothing to keep casual fans involved. Give each team the point they earned and let some exciting 3v3 hockey decide the winner...no shootout is necessary if they want to skip that.
                              I do think the NCAA has even dumber rules than the NHL on this. "OK, we're going to play some overtime, but just a little bit, and if that doesn't resolve it, then we'll call it a tie."
                              Either play it all the way out with no point for the team that loses, call it after 60 minutes and split the points, or do some sort of a hybrid where you produce a winner through other means (3 on 3 or shootout) and both teams get points. But the current setup is inconsistent in design.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X