Toggle sidebar

Do Shootout Wins Feel Satisfying to You?

DitchMarner said:
I've never found them that satisfying. They just don't feel the same as regulation or OT wins. I know some consider three on three OT kind of gimmicky, but I'll take an OT win every day of the week over a SO win.

Also, shootout losses don't really sting that much. They leave somewhat of a bitter taste in my mouth, but I basically say, "meh... f*** shootouts" and shrug them off.

TOR hasn't had a SO this season, and I hope that doesn't change. :)

I was excited for the introduction of the shootout back in 2005, but it didn't take me long to develop a dislike for shootouts.
Click to expand...
Bring back ties, it is never satisfying OTW or SO win. Playoff OT is different, they are playing with full strength on the full roster with strength and weakness 5 on 5. In 3 on 3 OT, you are basically playing with your best player all the time showcasing the strength and zero weakness in OT is not reflective of the whole 23-man roster. It boils down to how much better you really are with 2 on 1's if there's a mistake the other way?
 
My team all-time is by far the worst at shootouts(other than first-year Utah), but even on the rare occasions we win, it does feel cheap. Only satisfying one was Game 82 in 2010, but we deserved that game, we outshot the Rangers 46-23. I hated ties, but shootout losses are worse even though it's still a point. Shootout wins are better than ties, but again, it feels cheap.
 
coolboarder said:
Bring back ties, it is never satisfying OTW or SO win. Playoff OT is different, they are playing with full strength on the full roster with strength and weakness 5 on 5. In 3 on 3 OT, you are basically playing with your best player all the time showcasing the strength and zero weakness in OT is not reflective of the whole 23-man roster. It boils down to how much better you really are with 2 on 1's if there's a mistake the other way?
Click to expand...

I can't fathom feeling more satisfied with a tie than a shootout win. It doesn't compute in my brain. Feels devoid of logic. No offense.

But, to me a tie means everyone lost. Fans included.
 
Blueline Bomber said:
In almost every game that ends in a shootout, either

A. Both teams have played well enough that giving either one a loss based off a shootout seems wrong

Or

B. Both teams have played poorly enough that giving either one a win based off a shootout seems wrong

The need to declare a winner in either of those scenarios is the problem.
Click to expand...

What if one team played great, the other played poorly but goalied the first team resulting in them going into OT but they good team won?
 
As with OT I’m happy to get the extra point but neither is satisfying whatsoever; I also don’t get upset about losing in OT or shootout, basically consider those games ties even though the standings don’t reflect it.

3v3 and shootouts are both flukes that should not hold nearly as much significance as they do in the standings, and the situations pretty much never arise in the playoffs. Yes occasional penalty shots and maybe there have been like 16 seconds of 3 on 3 a few times, but generally just not part of the games that matter.

I know the league will never go back to ties but man they really should implement a 3-2-1 points system
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reality Czech
EdJovanovski said:
Yes
Even the FIFA World Cup can be decided by penalty kicks, why not a regular season hockey game
Click to expand...

...tackling should be allowed during Penalty kicks... :thumbu:

bigtimeheadbutt.gif


:biglaugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose
tarheelhockey said:
I feel like a lot of the people who want to see ties must not be old enough to really remember ties.

They ****ing suck. For every one dramatic tie there are like 20 which are just a wet fart of an ending as teams lock it down to protect the one point.
Click to expand...

I'm old enough to remember quite a few seasons with ties, but not old enough to remember 5 on 5 OT in the regular season (when I first started watching in earnest, which was during the 01-02 season, they played 4 on 4 OT with a tie declared if nobody scored). One of the most entertaining games I ever watched ended with a final score of 0-0. Both goalies stood on their head to earn the double shutout, and the game was also entertaining as it was Tony Amonte's first game back in Chicago after signing as a free agent for the Coyotes. The crowd spent the entire game booing him every time he touched the puck. Of course, I have two general attitudes when it comes to judging how enjoyable a game is to watch. The first is that the entertainment value of a game to me is largely independent of what the result is, and tied games never felt like an anticlimax to me. They were just a result that could happen, and I took that possibility simply for what it was. The other is that prior to shootouts being implemented, teams were given up to 65 minutes to win the game, and if the game ended in a tie, then both teams failed and didn't deserve to be rewarded with the possibility of an extra standings point.

Regarding the first general attitude I have, it applies to other sports as well. Come to think of it, the NHL is the only sports league I regularly watch where every regular season game is guaranteed to end with a win for one team. Rugby doesn't even play extra time at all unless it's the knockout stage at the World Cup, NFL games can end in a tie (although that's rare), and cricket has both draws and ties - two distinct results; draws are relatively common and can be boring, but also dramatic; ties are extremely rare but matches that are "at risk" of ending in a tie are pretty much always extremely exciting finishes because of how close they are.
 
Shark Finn said:
Yeah, I can't wait for that 7OT game thriller on the first night of a back-to-back and other problems associated with it, say, related to the arena.
Click to expand...
Like I said, put the responsibilities on the back of players and coaches. Games won't go to 7OT because teams will adjust play accordingly.
 
Toby91ca said:
I’m assuming you aren’t serious, but in case you are, it simply isn’t possible to make that work. If games are decided within 5-10 min of OT it would be fine, but you can’t have games going to multiple OT and it really doesn’t matter how little it might happen, once is too much
Click to expand...
If two teams decide to play a marathon the world won't end.

For the most part, games would end earlier because teams would adjust their strategies and force games to end earlier.
 
SheldonJPlankton said:
If two teams decide to play a marathon the world won't end.

For the most part, games would end earlier because teams would adjust their strategies and force games to end earlier.
Click to expand...
The only way a team can force a game to end earlier would be to let the other team win
 
I turn them off when my team goes to a shootout. I actively dislike watching them and it just feels like a coin flip. So I check the the outcome ~10 minutes later to see who got the extra point.
 
Spawn said:
I turn them off when my team goes to a shootout. I actively dislike watching them and it just feels like a coin flip. So I check the the outcome ~10 minutes later to see who got the extra point.
Click to expand...
Tend to agree, it was fun when first started…still annoying to decide a game that way, but a bit of fun to watch. I don’t find it fun anymore
 
Do I care for shootouts?
No.
Since shootouts have been around for almost 2 decades I'm not going to complain about spoiled, expired dry crusted milk.
At the games, I'm not sitting there thinking, "bummer, a shootout win". The fans, including myself go crazy when the team scores/wins.
 
They are fun but nothing that serious. It's cool to see what some of the most talented players can come up with. Seeing Patty Kane do his classic shift the puck around 30 times before shooting the other day was satisfying af 😤
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom