Of course they are all color.
Is it possible to still buy black and white TVs?
I did read somewhere that the super max prison only has black and white TVs for the inmates.
It was meant to be with Sarcasm to the person that got me started on it.
Of course they are all color.
Is it possible to still buy black and white TVs?
I did read somewhere that the super max prison only has black and white TVs for the inmates.
Heck, why play the game...just have a 60-minute shootout.It was meant to be with Sarcasm to the person that got me started on it.
Heck, why play the game...just have a 60-minute shootout.
Sound like a reasonable solution to resolving the tie versus shootout issue. If I were to venture I guess, I would esimate more than 80% of all games will be decided during OT.I heard on Satellite hot stove last night that the GM of the Red Wings was going to propose that they go to a 5 min 4 on 4 and then go to a 5 min 3 on 3 and then if it is still tied go to the shoot out.
Sound like a reasonable solution to resolving the tie versus shootout issue. If I were to venture I guess, I would esimate more than 80% of all games will be decided during OT.
Bill, it sounds like a great solution: fair to both teams, exciting for fans, decides most games quickly, and I think the players would enjoy a little 4-4 and 3-3 action. I hate the "shoot-out" (no surprise here), but I would have absolutely no problem with games being decided with this proposed format.I agree, that seems like a very good solution. Your 80% estimate also sounds right on.
Judging by what he said last night, as well as his disdain for high-scoring games, I think that for Jimbo, the perfect hockey game would be one where nobody scores.
Newsflash- hockey is becoming a space-age game, yet you sound like a guy stuck in the days of stone age hockey.
You need to get with the times.
Nobody else wants to go back to the days of clutching, grabbing, trapping, boring muckfests that only you guys love.
I love post-lockout hockey- it's FUN, it's EXCITING, it's ENTERTAINING!
Jimbo's comments sounds like a guy who refuses to buy a color TV and won't part ways with a black-and-white one.
Hockey was so boring for so long- it needed a shake up.
If your giving out points like candy 3-4 for a win is ridiculous, how many points do we get for a loss ?Three on three hockey is almost as much of a gimmick as a shootout. You want to eliminate ties? Award three points for a win. Or four points. One point for a tie. Lower the value of a tie.
Sandra
If your giving out points like candy 3-4 for a win is ridiculous, how many points do we get for a loss ?
Make it simple ....
2 points for a win
No points for a Tie or a loss.
Play till there's a winner ..... nothing wrong with a tie... if you MUST have a winner, change to 4 on 4 for a period of hockey. If no one scores in the OT period, NO ONE gets a point
If you give NO points for a Tie or a win, teams will actually PLAY the OT time. Some teams actually compete in the third period and OT, many others just lollygag trying for the tie to get a point.
Hence Sandra's suggestion to increase the value for a win. If they continue with the current rules, it's actually a pretty good idea.
But I agree with you Jimbo, it's either a win or a loss. If that happened there would be no need for the points system.
But
I like the old 2-point for a win, 1-point for a tie, and 0-points for a loss system best. However, since the NHL appears to be somewhat serious about "fixing" the current OT/shoot-out system...well, I wouldn't mind seeing the aforementioned proposal (5-minute 4-4 followed by a 5-minute 3-3 if necessary followed by the shoot-out, if necessary. Regardless, if you lose...well, you lose...period! Get rid of the nonsensical 1-point OTL rubbish. A generous stretch would be to permit a 1-point shoot-out loss (SOL)...because, as angiodan mentioned, almost all of these games are going to be decided after the two shorhanded OT period.Hence Sandra's suggestion to increase the value for a win. If they continue with the current rules, it's actually a pretty good idea.
But I agree with you Jimbo, it's either a win or a loss. If that happened there would be no need for the points system.
But
I like the old 2-point for a win, 1-point for a tie, and 0-points for a loss system best. However, since the NHL appears to be somewhat serious about "fixing" the current OT/shoot-out system...well, I wouldn't mind seeing the aforementioned proposal (5-minute 4-4 followed by a 5-minute 3-3 if necessary followed by the shoot-out, if necessary. Regardless, if you lose...well, you lose...period! Get rid of the nonsensical 1-point OTL rubbish. A generous stretch would be to permit a 1-point shoot-out loss (SOL)...because, as angiodan mentioned, almost all of these games are going to be decided after the two shorhanded OT period.