Which of these should the NHL abolish first?

[The Czech Republic 0]

Things to consider:

 

A tie is like kissing your sister.

Kissing Tie Domi is even worse.

 

Tie games result in no redeeming outcome for the fans.

Tie Domi's games also result in no redeeming outcome for the fans.

 

Ties (and overtime losses) make the standings more confusing than they should be.

Tie Domi makes Toronto kill stupid penalties more than they should be.

 

The alternative to a tie is a shootout.

The alternative to Tie Domi is not having everybody hate your guts.

 

When tell people to watch this big game coming up, and its neither a win NOR a loss, you sorta look dumb.

Tie Domi sorta looks dumb.

 

 

Also consider:

I said "which should the NHL abolish first." That dioesn't mean they can't get around to both.

[nl5xsk1 0]

Hmmm, kissing my sister sounds pretty bad. So does kissing Domi, though. Call that one a push.

 

Tie games aren't necessarily bad in my opinion; anti-climactic but not horrible. Domi games normally include fights, or at least one stupid penalty. Advantage: Domi

 

I'm not terribly confused by the standings, and am actually pleased when TO has to kill off a stupid penalty, so this is another push.

 

I hate, hate, hate the idea of a shootout, so Domi takes this one without a debate. Advantage: Domi

 

I don't feel especially stupid telling people to watch a tie game (it's the game that's exciting, not the final score) but I do have to agree that Domi is really stupid looking. Advantage: tie game

 

Adding up the score, two items favor Domi, one favors the tie game, and 2 are a push. So, mathematically I have to say that the NHL should abolish the tie game first (although I really don't think either should be abolished.)

 

Now, if you'd said the tie game or Donald Brashear, I'd have agreed with you.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Don't hate Domi -- I have some of his hockey cards from the early 90s...

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Ties I don't mind, but the Overtime Win crap has got to go.

[starvenger 0]

Tie Domi sorta looks dumb.

Sorta?

 

I keep waiting for the Leafs to get rid of Domi. Belak can fill the role of "moronic enforcer" a lot better, cheaper, and can play forward or defence, to boot.

[nl5xsk1 0]

Ties I don't mind, but the Overtime Win crap has got to go.

No, the point for the OT loss has to go. They should maintain awarding the extra point for the OT win, but not give any for a loss.

 

If a team wins, regardless if it's in regulation or not, they should be rewarded. If a team doesn't win (as in loses OR ties) regardless if it's in regulation or not, they should not be rewarded. I'd say give them a 2 points for a regular-time win, one point for an OT win, and nothing for a loss or tie.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Overtime loss is stupid, if you lose, in overtime, it's a loss! It discourages playing to win because you're guaranteed the equivalent of a tie.

 

Just go with a freaking shootout after ten minutes of overtime and do something for the fans, for a change.

[Guest Ether]

Overtime loss is stupid, if you lose, in overtime, it's a loss! It discourages playing to win because you're guaranteed the equivalent of a tie.

 

Just go with a freaking shootout after ten minutes of overtime and do something for the fans, for a change.

I disagree with the overtime loss comment. Teams are going to play for the tie, instead of the win, in the third if they get a point for a tie or an overtime loss. The point for the overtime loss actually encourages teams to play for the win once they go to overtime, since they are in no danger of losing that point.

 

Having said that, I think a shootout after a 5-10 minute overtime is the way to go. I used to hate the idea myself, but who wants to watch a tie? A shootout is the only practical way to eliminate ties during the regular season.

[Red Baron 0]

an anagram of Tie Domi name is Me Idiot

[The Czech Republic 0]

I disagree with the overtime loss comment. Teams are going to play for the tie, instead of the win, in the third if they get a point for a tie or an overtime loss. The point for the overtime loss actually encourages teams to play for the win once they go to overtime, since they are in no danger of losing that point.

 

Having said that, I think a shootout after a 5-10 minute overtime is the way to go. I used to hate the idea myself, but who wants to watch a tie? A shootout is the only practical way to eliminate ties during the regular season.

I don't understand how a more conservative system leads to more high-risk play. I'd be more complacent if I was guaranteed a point than if I had to win to get the points.

 

 

And yeah just do the shootout. The NHL is dead, might as well play around with the corpse a little bit before rigor mortis sets in.

[Guest Ether]

I disagree with the overtime loss comment.  Teams are going to play for the tie, instead of the win, in the third if they get a point for a tie or an overtime loss.  The point for the overtime loss actually encourages teams to play for the win once they go to overtime, since they are in no danger of losing that point.

 

Having said that, I think a shootout after a 5-10 minute overtime is the way to go.  I used to hate the idea myself, but who wants to watch a tie?  A shootout is the only practical way to eliminate ties during the regular season.

I don't understand how a more conservative system leads to more high-risk play. I'd be more complacent if I was guaranteed a point than if I had to win to get the points.

 

 

And yeah just do the shootout. The NHL is dead, might as well play around with the corpse a little bit before rigor mortis sets in.

Under either set up, teams generally don't play to win in the third period, unless it is late in the season and they are desparate for points to make the playoffs. They are usually content to go to overtime. Look at how often the visiting team views a road tie as if it were a win. In the point-for-overtime-loss system, teams may still play conservatively until they reach overtime, they are also more willing to open up because even if they lose, they still get that point. In the no-points-for-any-loss system, teams usually still play for a tie in the third period and in overtime; this is what lead to the point-for-overtime-loss system to begin with. This is one reason why there is consideration for making a win worth three points instead of two, to encourage teams to play a more wide-open style to get the win instead of a conservative system that settles for ties.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Okay I'll try again. Having four columns in the standings is too much. As someone mentioned here, only in the NHL can you play 82 games a year, say "Hey cool! We won 38 games this season! We'll get home ice in the playoffs for sure," and be absolutely right.