tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post7109957273479438539..comments2024-02-16T02:12:08.305-08:00Comments on Fire Jay Mariotti: The Hockey News Creates Stupid IdeasLarry Bhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16141943214237719821noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-41135611312545508162008-12-03T21:53:00.000-08:002008-12-03T21:53:00.000-08:00I hate the Rangers, but Nikolai Zherdev's shootout...I hate the Rangers, but Nikolai Zherdev's shootout goal against the Penguins tonight was a thing of beauty.<BR/><BR/>Almost as beautiful as Mike Ribeiro's one-handed shootout Goal against LA last month.<BR/><BR/>I like the shootout.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04916998165596698465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-77722074453261859942008-12-02T19:23:00.000-08:002008-12-02T19:23:00.000-08:00Tonus - The year is 1999. People are freaking out...Tonus - The year is 1999. People are freaking out that their computers will revolt in a year. mambo #5 is topping the charts. And the NHL institutes the 4-on-4 overtime loss is a point rules. The intention was definitely to reduce the number of ties and make games more interesting, but subsequent rule changes show us that the NHL believes they haven't done enough.<BR/><BR/>Bgf - I think of all sports, hockey video games are the easiest to pick up and play. I say that, but the last video game I bought was the NHL Hits '03, and that was partially because I always buy video games with my team's athlete on the cover.<BR/><BR/>Also, I really wish JimA would come back. He's a usually commenter, I wonder where he went.Jarretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11590314117863824022noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-55155828181325822962008-12-02T16:12:00.000-08:002008-12-02T16:12:00.000-08:00Though I don't agree with JimA, I do have to give ...Though I don't agree with JimA, I do have to give him credit. Most people who rip writers on blogs go by the name "Anonymous." At least he had the balls to use his real name I guess. <BR/><BR/>I don't see the problem with the shootout after a short OT if the previous way to determine the winner gave points for playing conservatively. I see it as more of a change to make OT more exciting and not necessarily a denigration of traditional hockey. I think that is where JimA may have missed the point. <BR/><BR/>This is from the outside looking in, of course.Bengoodfellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-34172533940861782762008-12-02T16:05:00.000-08:002008-12-02T16:05:00.000-08:00It is ironic I don't know anything about it but I ...It is ironic I don't know anything about it but I used to love hockey and watched the matches on television when I got an opportunity. I had the video games and all that stuff. I latched on to the Philadelphia Flyers when Lindros played for them (when he was not injured) and wore a Flyers hat and all. <BR/><BR/>For some reason, (lack of coverage/some other reason I don't recall) I quit paying attention. Even when the Carolina Hurricanes won the Stanley Cup, I did not really care...though I do check the Flyers record from time to time. I kind of wish I cared more...Bengoodfellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-84245939542159368142008-12-02T15:49:00.000-08:002008-12-02T15:49:00.000-08:00If I remember correctly, OT used to be 5 minutes o...If I remember correctly, OT used to be 5 minutes of 5-on-5. If one team scored, they got two points. If neither team scored, they both got a single point.<BR/><BR/>Thus, in a tie game late in the third period, teams would play more defensively. Playing aggressively might lead to a scoring chance for the other team, after all. And then the overtime period would be more of the same. Why risk a loss when you can play defensively and get a point?<BR/><BR/>I think (am not sure) that they then went to a 4-on-4 format with both teams guaranteed a point for a regulation tie, with an additional point given if one team scored. This made the standings a bit confusing, with the familiar W-L-T replaced with W-L-T-OTL.<BR/><BR/>I think they went with the shootout format because hockey ratings are in the toilet and sinking, and the NHL will do anything that might get a few more people to show up.<BR/><BR/>BTW, that columnist is a moron for bothering to mention winning percentage in a sport that determines playoff seeds via a points system.Tonushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01082528970434639776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-24782575577318159102008-12-02T14:43:00.000-08:002008-12-02T14:43:00.000-08:00Hmmm...I would rather see a 10 minute OT of 5 on 5...Hmmm...I would rather see a 10 minute OT of 5 on 5 (that's what they usually play right?---I am 99% sure it is, but I don't want to sound like an idiot) to decide a game. I guess the hockey match has to end at some point so 4 on 4 for five minutes would work. <BR/><BR/>I still like the shootout knowing how they do OT.Bengoodfellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-37347244491956854632008-12-02T13:56:00.000-08:002008-12-02T13:56:00.000-08:00bring back the neutral zone trap. it's purebring back the neutral zone trap. it's pureChris Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12152452626681072765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-47691275590451445142008-12-02T13:44:00.000-08:002008-12-02T13:44:00.000-08:00Bgf - They play 5 minutes of 4-on-4 overtime befor...Bgf - They play 5 minutes of 4-on-4 overtime before they go to a shootout. Usually each team gets a good scoring chance in, but it's often decided by a team getting a power play.Jarretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11590314117863824022noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-59571022854984726042008-12-02T13:32:00.000-08:002008-12-02T13:32:00.000-08:00This is exactly why I love hockey posts. They brin...This is exactly why I love hockey posts. They bring such anger in the commenters. It is great. <BR/><BR/>As someone who does not watch hockey, I think shootouts are really exciting. They still play an OT period though right? If they do not, then I would prefer they play one OT, because I think that is exciting as well. I reserve the right to change my mind if they don't play one OT before they go to a shootout. <BR/><BR/>I guess the only thing I find not exciting about hockey is the three periods of the match.Bengoodfellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-6261927941302357572008-12-02T11:42:00.000-08:002008-12-02T11:42:00.000-08:00Sam McCaig's heavily medicated son has just discov...Sam McCaig's heavily medicated son has just discovered FireJay.<BR/><BR/>Welcome Sam McCaig's heavily medicated son!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-66262798915854955272008-12-02T10:48:00.000-08:002008-12-02T10:48:00.000-08:00When I played youth hockey (pee wee, as it happens...When I played youth hockey (pee wee, as it happens) I was in some tournament that had shootouts instead of OT. I won the game for our team in a shootout and we finished 3rd in the tourney. Afterward the team complained that my stick's curve was too high and they measured it. I felt like Marty McSorley.<BR/><BR/>The end.<BR/><BR/>Also, another great 3 on 3 game was Wayne Gretzky's 3d hockeyChris Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12152452626681072765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-84094681101778928792008-12-02T08:41:00.000-08:002008-12-02T08:41:00.000-08:00Easy there, JimA. Let's talk this one out.My arti...Easy there, JimA. Let's talk this one out.<BR/><BR/>My artificial excitement/make games end on time statement was made as an example argument that the original author could have made to make his argument against shootouts. My argument is pro shootout and that it hasn't hurt the game. So I'm not answering my argument, I'm giving the original author more ammo.<BR/><BR/>I mention other sports because the original author claimed that the overtime period in hockey is the most exciting thing in the world of sports. You took my argument to another planet. And uh... extra innings are kind of sudden death. If the road team scores, the home team must score or they lose. Just not so suddenly.<BR/><BR/>I made no direct correlation between an increase in attendance and the introduction of the shootout. My stance is that shootouts make games more exciting to watch and introduce more people to the sport, leading them to go to games more. Sarcastically I added the real reasons why the game has improved since the lockout, which is that the talent base can be spread around the league with the salary cap in place. Teams in cheap markets get help with revenue sharing and can afford good players.<BR/><BR/>The idea of getting an extra point for losing in overtime was added in 1999 because coaches were playing for the tie and benching their better players because of the risk of injury. There was fear back then that teams would just play for the tie and go for an overtime win, and every game would not end in regulation. That hasn't happened. This isn't to say that with a minute or so left in a tie game that a few players have phoned it in, but more often than not they play the whole game to win in regulation. I would also contend that the current point system is just fine, as there has never been a team snubbed because they lost fewer games in overtime. While one point may not seem like a lot, it is the culmination of points from the outcome of 82 games that matters.<BR/><BR/>The original author maintains throughout his article that the credibility and integrity of the game is lost with a shootout. I pointed out the Olympics use a shootout to determine who wins the gold medal, which offers credibility and integrity to me. I hope that NHL hockey doesn't turn into Olympic hockey because of the dimensions of the rink and the automatic icing.<BR/><BR/>You are entitled to your own heavily medicated opinion. That's why the comments are up and should you not find my evidence suitable feel free to say so.<BR/><BR/>Angelo - I know, right?Jarretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11590314117863824022noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-3518914638153212742008-12-02T06:39:00.000-08:002008-12-02T06:39:00.000-08:00post about hockey and a fight breaks outpost about hockey and a fight breaks outAngelohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13565602337634280524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-83921874936703004842008-12-02T01:35:00.000-08:002008-12-02T01:35:00.000-08:00Maybe we could run an IQ test on Jarrett and which...Maybe we could run an IQ test on Jarrett and whichever team guesses closest wins. First of all, you said that the NHL is "forcing the shootout to create artificial excitement and make games end on time so that FSN Final Score doesn't get bumped". That is exactly what they are doing. Thank you for answering your own argument. You mention other sports. Baseball doesn't have a clock, so sudden death there is out. Following your thoughts, the Eagles-Bengals tie game should have gone to a field goal contest to break the tie, since fans always stand up in anticipation when last second field goals are attempted. <BR/>You said the shootout has added to attendance. This is unbelievable. Who is stupid enough to put down good money to watch something they don't care about on the off chance there will be a shootout? Do they root for a tie?<BR/>Awarding points the way it is now done screws up the standings. If you lose within the 60 minutes, you get no points, and the winner gets two. If it goes to overtime or a shootout, losers get one point, so three points are awarded for that game, as if it is a more important game. Some teams play for a tie when they're in a close game. Win or lose, they get a point. Last time I checked, the standings aren't computed by percentage, but by points. A team that goes all out and tries to win in regulation may be punished by losing, while a team that lays back is rewarded for not making an effort to win. That doesn't have an effect on the integrity of the sport? <BR/>This means that winning in overtime is only worth one more point. Where is the incentive there?<BR/>I don't care what the Olympics does. They have shootouts. Big fucking deal. You want to turn the NHL into the Olympics? What a stupid argument. <BR/>It's a good thing I am heavily medicated right now and having a hard time concentrating, as this is an asinine posting, and I'd love to put together a comment that runs rings around your shitty article.JimAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15106385969638134118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6300012139741038635.post-33120134822198366272008-12-01T22:15:00.000-08:002008-12-01T22:15:00.000-08:00Jesus Christ, what is this guy talking about? You...Jesus Christ, what is this guy talking about? Your "slippery slopes are for dopes" label doesn't make nearly a strong enough statement.Larry Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16141943214237719821noreply@blogger.com