USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
- Thread starter FlagDUDE08
- Start date
cF[Authentic]
southpaw
Nope, I've never seen any away non-conference games despite having worked for a D1 hockey team for the last 9 years...
UncleRay
M-A-I-N-E, GooOOO, Blue!
Considering there’s only one rep from a program west of Pennsylvania, there might be something to that.
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
I’m frankly annoyed af the clap back coming from a lot of college hockey media over this.
They are full of all the childish “I hate ties because I hate ties” circular logic and the way they talk about how awful it is to watch 5x5 hockey you’d think that they must genuinely hate the sport entirely. What’s really sad is the contingent who say this puts college hockey “back in the Stone Age”.
Let’s be honest: 3x3 OT and shootouts (and to a lesser extent: the 4x4 OT that preceded it) has nothing to advancing the game or making it better. It’s an attempt to cater to a very low common denominator that frankly is aimed at people who don’t even care about hockey.
It’s also a bad attempt to address a conservative and dull element of game theory (“hanging on for the tie”). All short handed OT accomplishes is moving the goalposts. Instead of hanging on for a tie, dull coaches hang on for their guaranteed point and pray for coin flip to go their way in a shootout. If people gave a **** about actually fixing bad game theory from dullard coaches, they’d make regulation wins 3 points to provide an incentive to go for the win.
I’m frankly annoyed af the clap back coming from a lot of college hockey media over this.
They are full of all the childish “I hate ties because I hate ties” circular logic and the way they talk about how awful it is to watch 5x5 hockey you’d think that they must genuinely hate the sport entirely. What’s really sad is the contingent who say this puts college hockey “back in the Stone Age”.
Let’s be honest: 3x3 OT and shootouts (and to a lesser extent: the 4x4 OT that preceded it) has nothing to advancing the game or making it better. It’s an attempt to cater to a very low common denominator that frankly is aimed at people who don’t even care about hockey.
It’s also a bad attempt to address a conservative and dull element of game theory (“hanging on for the tie”). All short handed OT accomplishes is moving the goalposts. Instead of hanging on for a tie, dull coaches hang on for their guaranteed point and pray for coin flip to go their way in a shootout. If people gave a **** about actually fixing bad game theory from dullard coaches, they’d make regulation wins 3 points to provide an incentive to go for the win.
Last edited:
The Zlax45
Registered User
Every 3 on 3 OT I watch in the NHL is one team holding possession until the other team tires out and gets a grade A chance. It is pretty much a coin flip in it.
I am all for ties...
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
And not only that, but the "brain children" also think the game would be more marketable if there's more scoring. Dopamine treatment, effectively. And then they have to remove fighting to anger the viewer since that's what they expect, and to make the dopamine more powerful. We have an easier time looking past fighting since it's been out of the game for a while, but at least there is still the honor of physical enforcement in preventing cheap shots.
When you look at the game purely, you can even find excitement in a hard fought 0-0 tie, all for the same reasons four and five overtimes get exciting in the playoffs. And sure, they've used terminology like sibling affection to try to turn the brainwashed away from ties, but there's nothing wrong with no ground being gained on either side.
And not only that, but the "brain children" also think the game would be more marketable if there's more scoring. Dopamine treatment, effectively. And then they have to remove fighting to anger the viewer since that's what they expect, and to make the dopamine more powerful. We have an easier time looking past fighting since it's been out of the game for a while, but at least there is still the honor of physical enforcement in preventing cheap shots.
When you look at the game purely, you can even find excitement in a hard fought 0-0 tie, all for the same reasons four and five overtimes get exciting in the playoffs. And sure, they've used terminology like sibling affection to try to turn the brainwashed away from ties, but there's nothing wrong with no ground being gained on either side.
beaverhockeyfan
Well-known member
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
That is the way the WCHA handled it. A regulation win or a win in the 5 on 5 OT was worth three points. Tied after the OT period, each team got a point and then 3 on 3 and, if needed, the sudden death shootout, determined who got the third point.
What I don't like is the mandate dictating on how all leagues handle their games/standings. If the WCHA wants to make their games worth three points and have a structure in place for determining the points and abiding by the 5 on 5 OT rule, why should any other league care if they want to play 3 on 3 or go to a shootout? In the eyes of the NCAA, it is a tie after the 5 on 5 OT and they abide by the rules by playing a 5 minute OT period, so be it. I know it makes the standings at the end of the year a lot more interesting when three points on the line and a team could end up getting 0, 1, 2 or 3 in a game.
That is the way the WCHA handled it. A regulation win or a win in the 5 on 5 OT was worth three points. Tied after the OT period, each team got a point and then 3 on 3 and, if needed, the sudden death shootout, determined who got the third point.
What I don't like is the mandate dictating on how all leagues handle their games/standings. If the WCHA wants to make their games worth three points and have a structure in place for determining the points and abiding by the 5 on 5 OT rule, why should any other league care if they want to play 3 on 3 or go to a shootout? In the eyes of the NCAA, it is a tie after the 5 on 5 OT and they abide by the rules by playing a 5 minute OT period, so be it. I know it makes the standings at the end of the year a lot more interesting when three points on the line and a team could end up getting 0, 1, 2 or 3 in a game.
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
Outside of the Beanpot, does any D1 tournament use unlimited 20 min OT?
IIRC, some D3 tournaments had a single 5 < OT < 20, but counted an NCAA tie if nobody scored after 5 and a shootout after the OT ended.
IF everyone played 5 then there is a common standard for determining NCAA wins and losses. What you do after that is your business.
Outside of the Beanpot, does any D1 tournament use unlimited 20 min OT?
IIRC, some D3 tournaments had a single 5 < OT < 20, but counted an NCAA tie if nobody scored after 5 and a shootout after the OT ended.
IF everyone played 5 then there is a common standard for determining NCAA wins and losses. What you do after that is your business.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
The national tournament, as well as league playoffs.
The national tournament, as well as league playoffs.
The national tournament, as well as league playoffs.
Ha ha. REGULAR season tournament.
Sean Pickett
2009 NCAA Champions
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
I have been working on compiling composite season results for men's and women's teams for a a while now (I have more men's seasons) and I have uploaded a workbook with men's overtime games for 1975-76, 1984-85, 1986-89 (all 10-minute overtimes except for CCHA league games in 88-89), 1998-99, 2008-09 and 2012-18 and women's overtime games for 2015-18. As the overtime rules are for both men and women I have also combined the 2015-18 numbers for overall NCAA totals. For the past three seasons the combined win rate for overtime games has been 35% and if you go back to the 1988-89 CCHA games the average win rate for men's overtime games for the season's I have is 35.78%, with individual seasons fluctuating between a high of 41.38% (1988-89 CCHA) and a low of 31.18% (2016-17 - the women had a low of 30.53%). I still have to compile more seasons, especially for women's games, but it appears that only about 1/3 of overtime games have a winner with the 5 minute overtime. Compare that to the average win rate for men's overtime games through the 1988-89 season (excluding CCHA games) of 66.1%, or 2/3 of overtime games having a winner.
Sean
I have been working on compiling composite season results for men's and women's teams for a a while now (I have more men's seasons) and I have uploaded a workbook with men's overtime games for 1975-76, 1984-85, 1986-89 (all 10-minute overtimes except for CCHA league games in 88-89), 1998-99, 2008-09 and 2012-18 and women's overtime games for 2015-18. As the overtime rules are for both men and women I have also combined the 2015-18 numbers for overall NCAA totals. For the past three seasons the combined win rate for overtime games has been 35% and if you go back to the 1988-89 CCHA games the average win rate for men's overtime games for the season's I have is 35.78%, with individual seasons fluctuating between a high of 41.38% (1988-89 CCHA) and a low of 31.18% (2016-17 - the women had a low of 30.53%). I still have to compile more seasons, especially for women's games, but it appears that only about 1/3 of overtime games have a winner with the 5 minute overtime. Compare that to the average win rate for men's overtime games through the 1988-89 season (excluding CCHA games) of 66.1%, or 2/3 of overtime games having a winner.
Sean
Sean Pickett
2009 NCAA Champions
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
Sean
For good or bad the NCAA has wanted conformity across the board going back to at least 1988-89 when the CCHA adopted the 5-minute overtime and it was accepted as the new standard the following season. In 1994-95 and 1995-96 Hockey East used a shootout after the overtime period, but after 2 years it was not accepted and Hockey East had to stop using it.
Sean
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
I have a spreadsheet with results back to pre-1900 for men’s. Would love to compare results with you to see if I’m missing any info or if there are any inconsistencies.
I have a spreadsheet with results back to pre-1900 for men’s. Would love to compare results with you to see if I’m missing any info or if there are any inconsistencies.
bumpreader
New member
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
I'm guessing this is from my old database, in which case I'd expect there are lots of inconsistencies
For sure, nothing prior to 1986-87 is complete.
It's now here (searchable! - this was the intent all along and one of the reasons I moved it): http://chdb.host-ed.me/cgi-bin/hockey.pl
This was a fun project but I've had no time to work on it for years. The last three seasons aren't even in it.
The seasons from 1986-87 to present are from composite score lists (Hockey-L, USCHO, collegehockeystats.net). Prior to that it's almost all from scraping various teams' media guides or web pages. I did some amount of checking inconsistencies and filling in other stuff using Google News back when it didn't suck. I tried to mark when media guides didn't agree in reddish (or yellowish if I figured out who was right) but I can't be sure anymore that I was 100% consistent on that either.
At this point I just hope this is helpful. I've always though something like this should exist, but I don't trust my data or my ability to spend time on it enough to say this is it
I'd still like to know if you or anyone else find any errors in it.
I'm guessing this is from my old database, in which case I'd expect there are lots of inconsistencies
For sure, nothing prior to 1986-87 is complete.It's now here (searchable! - this was the intent all along and one of the reasons I moved it): http://chdb.host-ed.me/cgi-bin/hockey.pl
This was a fun project but I've had no time to work on it for years. The last three seasons aren't even in it.
The seasons from 1986-87 to present are from composite score lists (Hockey-L, USCHO, collegehockeystats.net). Prior to that it's almost all from scraping various teams' media guides or web pages. I did some amount of checking inconsistencies and filling in other stuff using Google News back when it didn't suck. I tried to mark when media guides didn't agree in reddish (or yellowish if I figured out who was right) but I can't be sure anymore that I was 100% consistent on that either.
At this point I just hope this is helpful. I've always though something like this should exist, but I don't trust my data or my ability to spend time on it enough to say this is it
I'd still like to know if you or anyone else find any errors in it.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
Oh my god I’ve been waiting for you to come back and resurrect that link. I had the old .mx link I’d check once every two or three months to see if it was live again.
I have found a bunch of other games from media guides.
Oh my god I’ve been waiting for you to come back and resurrect that link. I had the old .mx link I’d check once every two or three months to see if it was live again.
I have found a bunch of other games from media guides.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
Looks like the DB is down...
I'm guessing this is from my old database, in which case I'd expect there are lots of inconsistencies
It's now here (searchable! - this was the intent all along and one of the reasons I moved it): http://chdb.host-ed.me/cgi-bin/hockey.pl
This was a fun project but I've had no time to work on it for years. The last three seasons aren't even in it.
The seasons from 1986-87 to present are from composite score lists (Hockey-L, USCHO, collegehockeystats.net). Prior to that it's almost all from scraping various teams' media guides or web pages. I did some amount of checking inconsistencies and filling in other stuff using Google News back when it didn't suck. I tried to mark when media guides didn't agree in reddish (or yellowish if I figured out who was right) but I can't be sure anymore that I was 100% consistent on that either.
At this point I just hope this is helpful. I've always though something like this should exist, but I don't trust my data or my ability to spend time on it enough to say this is it
I'd still like to know if you or anyone else find any errors in it.
Looks like the DB is down...
cetihcra
New member
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Rule Changes: Who got screwed and wants a fix?
However good to see that, non-conference wise unless it is a tournament, teams aren't forced into the skills competition because the binary mind can't comprehend a tie.
However good to see that, non-conference wise unless it is a tournament, teams aren't forced into the skills competition because the binary mind can't comprehend a tie.