why hockey is dumb - Page 6

bravos1 · #51 10-18-2007, 03:02 PM

oh and I like the 3-2-1 points option.

One of my grips though is indeed related to OT. If they are going to have OT, fine... but don't change the rules of OT between the reg season and the post-season.

vin17 · #52 10-18-2007, 03:03 PM

Another one to ponder: On the penalty kill, when the penalized team has puck possession in their end and is relatively free from fore checking pressure, why don't they just skate around their own net a few times, pass it back and forth, etc instead of skating up with it and dumping it in?

I think this would apply more to 5 v 4.

RedRover · #53 10-18-2007, 03:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
thought experiment time!

implications of: No OT, 1 (or 2 or 100) point for a win, no points for a loss OR tie.

stupid? really stupid? really really stupid?

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually love this idea. The only problem that I see is that if the game is tied with a minute left, both teams will pull their golie. I'm not sure if that is really a problem though.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would definitely create some weird situations. Like, the flow of the game when one team is down by one would be totally different. One team is trying to hold onto two points while the other needs to score two goals to get points. Then if they get the equalizer everything would change super fast.

Triumph36 · #54 10-18-2007, 03:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Another one to ponder: On the penalty kill, when the penalized team has puck possession in their end and is relatively free from fore checking pressure, why don't they just skate around their own net a few times, pass it back and forth, etc instead of skating up with it and dumping it in?

I think this would apply more to 5 v 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

the problem with this is positioning. i've heard this one a lot too - but huge mistakes can occur when the puck is traveling in the opposite direction as the players. you will see players try this every so often, but for the most part, teams want to line change as quickly as possible so they throw the puck down the ice.

strunks · #55 10-18-2007, 03:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Another one to ponder: On the penalty kill, when the penalized team has puck possession in their end and is relatively free from fore checking pressure, why don't they just skate around their own net a few times, pass it back and forth, etc instead of skating up with it and dumping it in?

I think this would apply more to 5 v 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is rare, since the team on the pp probably has all 5 guys in your zone when the shorthanded team takes the puck. And when the shorthanded team takes the puck, you can bet the pp team wants it back immediately.

RedRover · #56 10-18-2007, 03:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Another one to ponder: On the penalty kill, when the penalized team has puck possession in their end and is relatively free from fore checking pressure, why don't they just skate around their own net a few times, pass it back and forth, etc instead of skating up with it and dumping it in?

I think this would apply more to 5 v 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too much margin for error. Especially down a man, if you lose control deep in the zone you can be looking at all sorts of 2-on-0 or 3-on-1-one-timer situations. Clearing it allows for a line change and kills at least 20 seconds of the penalty. Passing it around might only kill another extra 5-10 seconds with a huge risk.

prohornblower · #57 10-18-2007, 04:19 PM

Wow you are dumb, Jessica.

DonkeyKongSr · #58 10-18-2007, 04:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The main point is that professional sports are played first and foremost for entertainment of their fans.

[/ QUOTE ]

wishful thinking imo. as fans we would like to think this, but i don't think it's true. it would be hard for a league to get by w/o doing this, but i don't believe this is their primary goal. i imagine most professional athletes would rank the fans third next to playing b/c they enjoy it and playing to support themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not talking about the players. I'm talking about the league and the teams. They are businesses. The employees at many companies don't give a damn about how much their customer enjoys their product, but the owners sure as hell do because that's their revenue source. Same with sports.

stormstarter28 · #59 10-18-2007, 05:08 PM

New title for thread:

Why girls are dumb

jessica1994 · #60 10-18-2007, 07:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There are obviously numerous -EV reasons why OP's idea doesn't work. First off it's a disadvantage to the better team. Second it obviously makes no sense in divisional games (and there are 32 of those). Lastly giving that free point to the other guy can come back to haunt you later in the year, when home ice for the cup is still decided by overall points. Bottom line it'll never make sense to do this, UNLESS both teams need exactly one point to make the playoffs in the final game, and happen to be in opposite conferences. But those games are never scheduled for the end, so it wouldn't make sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

the better team playing the stupid way (the way they play now) would have to average like over 1.5+ points/game vs. the other team to want to play the dumb way. If they just stall until overtime, they will have 1.5 point on average if they are the same skill, but since you said they are better, they will automatically average 1.5+ points per game. Not many games happen where one team has an average points of over 1.5.

Second, how are they giving up free points? They are GUARENTEEING AT LEAST 1 POINT, and AVERAGING 1.5 if both teams are of the same skill.

In 2006, the BEST TEAM averaged only 1.38 points for game. So yeah, if you did this all season, I don't see how you will be "haunted" rofl

also why girls are dumber is answered in this anchorman quote: "You're just a woman with a small brain. With a brain a third the size of us. It's science."