They can make the 5 minute overtime more intense with, if the game goes to a shoot out, the team losing the shoot out gets no points.
Definitely get rid of the we got one point on the road regardless.
What do you think?

I agree with you 100% Joe.

It really bugs me that a team picks up a point for a tie after regulation. If you win in O/T or a shootout you get 2 pts and the loser should get a big ZERO.

I may be old school but that's the way I feel it should be.

Are there any other sports that follow the 1pt/2pt method??

Just a clarification, you get one point if you lose in the 5 minute OT, but you lose the one point if it goes to shoot out and lose. Gives a little more incentive to score in the 5 minute OT.

I think if you are giving out a guaranteed point just for making it into OT or a shootout, then the added incentive should be given to win in regulation, so make it a three point game regardless, like this...

Regulation win: 3 points
Overtime/Shootout win: 2 points
Overtime/Shootout loss: 1 point
Regulation loss: 0 points

This is how European soccer leagues work. However, failing that system, then I think there should be no extra point for OT or a shootout. Should be 2 for a win, 0 for a loss, period.

If the teams share the goals in 60 minutes of hockey (or 60+5 if you insist), then they share the points.

Scrap the shootout, that is just for inadequate people who have to have a winner even if it's by a lottery.

I agree with you Sharpie.

Another suggestion is to do away with the overtime and shootout all together.

I don't agree with Whateveritis on this.

From a pure marketing perspective, the sport has evolved to the point where the newer generations of fans want to see a winner decided before they leave the building.

Sharpie, your suggestion is the best.

Sharpie,

Great Suggestion

But the european soccer system work 3 points for a win 0 points for a loss and 1 point for each team for a tie.

The point system your referring to i'm pretty sure is european hockey.

This is the sweedish elite league standings as you can see the leaders have 12 points after 4 games so it's 3 points for each win

2009-10 Swedish Elite League [SEL]
Team GP W L T OTL Pts GF GA
HV71 Jonkoping 4 4 0 0 0 12 20 11
Farjestads BK 4 3 1 0 0 9 10 8
Lulea HF 3 2 1 0 0 6 11 5
Skelleftea HC 3 2 1 0 0 6 7 5
Vastra Frolunda 2 2 0 0 0 6 7 3
Linkoping HC 4 1 3 0 0 3 6 12
Sodertalje SK 2 1 1 0 0 3 4 9
Modo Hockey 3 1 2 0 0 2 5 8
Brynas IF Gavle 2 0 1 1 0 1 2 3
Djurgardens IF 2 0 1 0 1 1 7 9
Timra IK 3 0 2 1 0 1 4 7
Rogle Angelholm 2 0 2 0 0 0 3 6

I meant European hockey. I was preparing a resume to the FC at the time I posted and had soccer on the brain.

"Regulation win: 3 points
Overtime/Shootout win: 2 points
Overtime/Shootout loss: 1 point
Regulation loss: 0 points

This is how European hockey leagues work. However, failing that system, then I think there should be no extra point for OT or a shootout. Should be 2 for a win, 0 for a loss, period."

It has been voted on by the forum's contributors.

Why is it that the leagues' back-room deal makers never seem to listen to the fans? After all, the fans don't really know anything do they?

Wayjoy

3 points is alright but I think it should be a greater scale. Bob McCowan made this suggestion is his book & I think it makes a lot of sense. I puts the onus on the team to win the game in regulation & takes away points the longer it takes the team to win the game.

Win = 5 points
OT Win = 4 points
SO Win = 3 points
SO Loss = 2 points
OT Loss = 1 point
Loss = 0 points

Each game is then worth the same number of points and over the course of a season it puts much more emphasis on winning the game early instead of waiting for the shootout.