- Sep 17, 2007
- 24,909
- 22,785
8 of 10 teams make the playoffs, and there are 3 rounds of playoffs. That means they would be adding anywhere from 3 to 6 extra days to the tournament, and probably more since they will need to have at least 1 or 2 off days in there. How many teams might balk at potentially losing their players for an extra week and a half? How many of those teams might hold players back rather than let them play in the tournament?I think the play offs should a best of 3.
Even with Russia added back into the mix, there aren't 8 teams that can realistically compete for the gold. Canada beat Slovakia 11-1 in the prelims. Do we really need to see them do it twice more in the playoffs? Slovakia has little chance in any case, but they'd have a better chance of winning 1 game against Canada rather than 2 out of 3.
There's no reason to have the entire playoffs be best of 3, beyond a money grab. More games doesn't automatically make the tournament better. Single elimination is best IMO. It makes every game that much more important. The only change I would make is to not allow the final game to be decided by a shootout. Make them play overtime (4 on 4 or 5 on 5) until there is a winner.