Toggle sidebar

Ville Husso suggest a change to 3 on 3 overtime

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates

ijuka

Registered User
May 14, 2016
23,487
16,977
Ville Husso suggests a change to overtime where the team that's on the offense couldn't bring the puck back past the red line anymore.

The reason is, current 3 on 3 overtime's very boring and overcoached. Whenever there's not a clear scoring opportunity, the team will just bring the puck out of the zone. As a result, even though the 3 on 3 overtime was supposed to add excitement, minutes can pass by without a single scoring chance or even a single shot on goal, as losing possession is such a big deal. This is completely different from intended, and the fun has been coached out of 3 on 3 hockey.

Husso's suggestion would fix that issue and force the team on the offense to commit, similar to basketball.



Source: Finnish news Ilta-Sanomat Suomen NHL-tähti ehdottaa merkittävää sääntömuutosta – ”Nyt se on vähän sellaista odottelua”
Click to read more...
 
  • Like
Reactions: obZen, jfhabs, SquidNasty and 17 others
That's a good solution but I think there would be issues -- say you don't have a good scoring chance, you have to then either dump it and quickly run back or take a bad shot and quickly run back. Seems like it only further breaks the game.

If you want to get rid of OT, implement 3pt games and 1pt draws and 0pt losses. If you want to keep OT (either 4v4 or 3v3) then give 2pts for an OT win. It'll encourage offence, that's for sure and get rid of the loser point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joel Ward, Tom ServoMST3K, Steerpike and 11 others
ExpatHabs said:
That's a good solution but I think there would be issues -- say you don't have a good scoring chance, you have to then either dump it and quickly run back or take a bad shot and quickly run back. Seems like it only further breaks the game.
Click to expand...
Or you can play for a good opportunity. I mean, you're 3 on 3. Just make some passes or shoot, or challenge the defender.

A situation where you don't have a scoring opportunity just doesn't exist. It's just that it oftentimes is riskier than simply taking the puck back and hanging out with it for 3 minutes without a shot on goal.

dirtydanglez said:
3v3 is a farce just get rid of it.
Click to expand...
Sure, but if we assume that's not an option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pierre Larouche, Raccoon Jesus and Dirty Dog
Not a bad idea, however, I could see even that being out coached to hell. Team may not want to cross the red line if opponents clog up their side of the red line from the blue line causing further delay. It becomes more like a back and forth tennis match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulD
Pavels Dog said:
It basically needs what handball has, the ref give warnings for passive play and eventually the attacking team is forced to surrender possession.
I don't think teams bringing the puck back over the red line is the main issue, the "passive" possession is.
Click to expand...

5 minutes of overtime is probably way too short for a warning system like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulD and ReHabs
dirtydanglez said:
3v3 is a farce just get rid of it.
Click to expand...
It's sure as heck better than the shoot out. I'd be fine with both teams getting an extra point come OT and then have 10 minutes of 3 on 3. If nothing is settled call it a tie. But teams would (I assume anyways) want the extra point up for grabs. At the end of the day anything is better than the shoot out, that's for sure. lol

ExpatHabs said:
That's a good solution but I think there would be issues -- say you don't have a good scoring chance, you have to then either dump it and quickly run back or take a bad shot and quickly run back. Seems like it only further breaks the game.

If you want to get rid of OT, implement 3pt games and 1pt draws and 0pt losses. If you want to keep OT (either 4v4 or 3v3) then give 2pts for an OT win. It'll encourage offence, that's for sure and get rid of the loser point.
Click to expand...

Hard pass. would create too much separation in the standings. That would work in a lower scheduled season like 56 games maybe but 82 games would be a death sentence. Part of the fun is teams battling it out as the season winds down. This would eliminate much of that.
 
Last edited:
That’s a pretty good idea but I would change it slightly with a discretionary but strictly enforced delay of game penalty, instead of a black and white penalty for going back over the red line. On top of that each player can only play a maximum of one shift with the power play being an exception. If a team gets called for this penalty they would have to adhere to the one shift limit but for any other penalty you can still put any player you want.

The discretion being that if the ref feels like a team is holding the puck too long or circling back into their side of the red line unless they’re changing lines. If the opposing team is forechecking aggressively and a player has to cross the red line that should be fine. If a player slightly crosses the line but then goes back in to offense that should be fine as well. But a player crossing the red line without being checked by an opposing player or changing lines, that should be a delay of game penalty.

I don’t like putting the power in the hands of the refs but I feel like teams wouldn’t take that chance with giving up a 4 on 3 OT, letting the opponents best players on again and with you possibly already having your best PKers/players play in a shift. Just a general idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelhockey
or they could simply put 3 points win in regular time win
and 2 points OT win and 0 for the losing team.
So teams would actually try in OT

Giving a point to the losing team is just horrendous. Some teams are okay with this because they are not trying to catchup.

Imagine its 2-2 and one team gotta remove their goalie because they need the regular wins. It would make too much sense for the NHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeune Poulet
ijuka said:
Ville Husso suggests a change to overtime where the team that's on the offense couldn't bring the puck back past the red line anymore.

The reason is, current 3 on 3 overtime's very boring and overcoached. Whenever there's not a clear scoring opportunity, the team will just bring the puck out of the zone. As a result, even though the 3 on 3 overtime was supposed to add excitement, minutes can pass by without a single scoring chance or even a single shot on goal, as losing possession is such a big deal. This is completely different from intended, and the fun has been coached out of 3 on 3 hockey.

Husso's suggestion would fix that issue and force the team on the offense to commit, similar to basketball.



Source: Finnish news Ilta-Sanomat Suomen NHL-tähti ehdottaa merkittävää sääntömuutosta – ”Nyt se on vähän sellaista odottelua”
Click to expand...
I said this last year.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Shark Finn and Esq
HabsWhiteKnightLOL said:
or they could simply put 3 points win in regular time win
and 2 points OT win and 0 for the losing team.
So teams would actually try in OT

Giving a point to the losing team is just horrendous. Some teams are okay with this because they are not trying to catchup.

Imagine its 2-2 and one team gotta remove their goalie because they need the regular wins. It would make too much sense for the NHL.
Click to expand...

But that would also make keeping possession all the more important
 
maroon 6 said:
But that would also make keeping possession all the more important
Click to expand...
It would force the play for teams that need the points like the middle standing teams. Too many teams sits in OT because they got a point. example east vs west matchup. Both side are happy to get a point because there is no direct impact. Make it worth to win in regular and the OTs number will drop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom