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.
Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
- Thread starter Goon
- Start date
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
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.
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.
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...
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
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.
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.
Ballroomblitz
New member
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.
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.
Ma#1ne Hky
New member
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.
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.
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.
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.
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sean Pickett
2009 NCAA Champions
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
Sean
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
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
The AHL saw a significant reduction in the number of shootouts with their hybrid system. I don't know if it was 75%.
Powers &8^]
The AHL saw a significant reduction in the number of shootouts with their hybrid system. I don't know if it was 75%.
Powers &8^]
uaafanblog
AKA - "Drop The Puck"
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
Frigging circus sideshows aren't hockey. In the regular season a 5 minute overtime between two TEAMS (5 on 5) is fine. No winner after OT and put it in the books as a tie. If you're concerned about breaking ties in the standings then have a circus shootout BEFORE EVERY GAME. That way the insipid mob who don't know what the game is really about can get their jollies regardless of the result. At the end of the season use the pregame shootout results to break ties in the standings.
The NCHC is for rubes. What a crap league with idiots in charge.
EDIT: Also, the NCAA is categorically NOT a development league for the friggin NHL; right now there's 305 players from the NCAA in the NHL for 31 percent. If you average that over 10 years then you're talking about 31 players a year out of about 1550 players in the NCAA. I'd tend to think that 31 player number is a little high ... some of those 305 players have been in the show for more than 10 years but even if I'm being generous 31 sure as heck doesn't make the NCAA a development league.
It's certainly a path where some players will develop into NHL caliber players. But the NCAA is there for the 1520 players who want to continue their education by trading their athletic talent and hard work for an education. That's what college hockey is about.
Frigging circus sideshows aren't hockey. In the regular season a 5 minute overtime between two TEAMS (5 on 5) is fine. No winner after OT and put it in the books as a tie. If you're concerned about breaking ties in the standings then have a circus shootout BEFORE EVERY GAME. That way the insipid mob who don't know what the game is really about can get their jollies regardless of the result. At the end of the season use the pregame shootout results to break ties in the standings.
The NCHC is for rubes. What a crap league with idiots in charge.
EDIT: Also, the NCAA is categorically NOT a development league for the friggin NHL; right now there's 305 players from the NCAA in the NHL for 31 percent. If you average that over 10 years then you're talking about 31 players a year out of about 1550 players in the NCAA. I'd tend to think that 31 player number is a little high ... some of those 305 players have been in the show for more than 10 years but even if I'm being generous 31 sure as heck doesn't make the NCAA a development league.
It's certainly a path where some players will develop into NHL caliber players. But the NCAA is there for the 1520 players who want to continue their education by trading their athletic talent and hard work for an education. That's what college hockey is about.
Last edited:
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
So much the better; thanks for the additional facts. With that info in hand, my guess would be the change came in 1988.
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
Dude, if you're going to rant, make sure you at least get your math right.
1550 players in the NCAA, sure, but that includes four classes worth of student-athletes. Whereas your 31 players number is per one year. So of those 1550 players, 124 can be expected to make it to the NHL (assuming your 31 players a year number is correct), not 31.
Now, yes, the 31 players a year number is probably generous, and we also have to consider that not all NCAA players (especially the future NHLers) play four years. But I think my numbers are closer than yours.
Powers &8^]
Dude, if you're going to rant, make sure you at least get your math right.
1550 players in the NCAA, sure, but that includes four classes worth of student-athletes. Whereas your 31 players number is per one year. So of those 1550 players, 124 can be expected to make it to the NHL (assuming your 31 players a year number is correct), not 31.
Now, yes, the 31 players a year number is probably generous, and we also have to consider that not all NCAA players (especially the future NHLers) play four years. But I think my numbers are closer than yours.
Powers &8^]
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
3-on-3 > shootout, if that is the only option.
Problem with 10 min OT is ice gets pretty hacked so the thought that re-surfacing is needed. That makes the game too long for some, like TV. I would like to see 8 min with no re-surface, just a break for some shortskirted co-eds to clear the ice from around the boards. Even after 8, call it a tie. Bad ice could be an issue in game once in awhile, but better than full break. I don't like getting rid of OT all together, as it is very exciting and is still real hockey, has been around a long time and will never happen. Here is how I see it.
So: Shootout (with any combo) < no OT < 3 v. 3 < 4v4 < 5 min OT < 10 min OT < 8 min OT
3-on-3 > shootout, if that is the only option.
Problem with 10 min OT is ice gets pretty hacked so the thought that re-surfacing is needed. That makes the game too long for some, like TV. I would like to see 8 min with no re-surface, just a break for some shortskirted co-eds to clear the ice from around the boards. Even after 8, call it a tie. Bad ice could be an issue in game once in awhile, but better than full break. I don't like getting rid of OT all together, as it is very exciting and is still real hockey, has been around a long time and will never happen. Here is how I see it.
So: Shootout (with any combo) < no OT < 3 v. 3 < 4v4 < 5 min OT < 10 min OT < 8 min OT
uaafanblog
AKA - "Drop The Puck"
uaafanblog
AKA - "Drop The Puck"
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
Cos every college hockey player that goes to the NHL in any given year played for four years? Get your logic right before criticizing my math ... dude. Freshman leave for the NHL, sophomores leave for the NHL, juniors leave for the NHL, seniors leave for the NHL.
Cos every college hockey player that goes to the NHL in any given year played for four years? Get your logic right before criticizing my math ... dude. Freshman leave for the NHL, sophomores leave for the NHL, juniors leave for the NHL, seniors leave for the NHL.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
Want critique on math: How did a percentage suddenly become a flat number?
Want critique on math: How did a percentage suddenly become a flat number?
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
Try reading my final paragraph again.
Powers &8^]
Try reading my final paragraph again.
Powers &8^]
St. Clown
Ideas Posted are Likely Not My Own
Re: Should College Hockey Should Adopt 3-on-3 OT
What do you guys think the conversations were like when the game went from 6x6 to 5x5 as the standard format during regulation play all those years ago? I'd have to think the conversations would've sounded something like what we've read in a few posts here.
Players get bigger and faster as the population gets bigger and the technology for training athletes better. The game adapts. This one seems like a pretty big change, but the players are pretty big and fast these days, well, except for Jimmy Murray; he's still short.
I don't like how they're implementing the change in the NHL, but I can't say that I'm entirely against it because we've yet to witness it. If this proves to be a change to the rules that the NCAA needs to make, that change should extend to both the regular season and post season play.
What do you guys think the conversations were like when the game went from 6x6 to 5x5 as the standard format during regulation play all those years ago? I'd have to think the conversations would've sounded something like what we've read in a few posts here.
Players get bigger and faster as the population gets bigger and the technology for training athletes better. The game adapts. This one seems like a pretty big change, but the players are pretty big and fast these days, well, except for Jimmy Murray; he's still short.
I don't like how they're implementing the change in the NHL, but I can't say that I'm entirely against it because we've yet to witness it. If this proves to be a change to the rules that the NCAA needs to make, that change should extend to both the regular season and post season play.