I know. Let’s have whoever scores first in OT, get a bonus goal to start the next game of the series. That should really open things up.

I find it strange that everyone is saying OT needs changed, but when you ask the players, a resounding number of them say to leave it as is. (I think that article posted today said 40/47 players who were asked)

Posted by Steve J from Columbus, OH on 05/03/07 at 03:02 PM ET

Hasn’t the league gone through enough changes to make the game more marketable? How about some changes that are good for the game of hockey?

The integrity of the Stanley Cup Playoffs would be destroyed if anything but a sudden-death OT format were used. The trophy was not meant to be won in a 4-on-4 format, and especially not in a teamwork-less shootout.

Is anyone here a soccer fan? Think about how great the World Cup was this past year. That is, until it came down to penalty kicks.

Posted by Nathan on 05/03/07 at 03:04 PM ET

I like how this issue is being floated even though no fans actually complain about it.

Posted by Ninja on 05/03/07 at 03:11 PM ET

Agreed Ninja.  It’s becoming a regular echo chamber.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/03/07 at 03:15 PM ET

His proposition is ludicrous, how would you like the Stanley Cup decided in a 3 on 3 situation?  That’s not hockey!  It seem to me that this is about profits in that networks don’t make much because there are no tv timeouts during OT periods.  Can we just leave the game alone for awhile?

Posted by hockeychic from Denver, CO on 05/03/07 at 03:16 PM ET

I also love how everyone is looking out for the interests of “the fan,” yet they don’t see any reason to actually ask “the fan” what they want.  After all, they are smart enough to know what’s best for us, right?

If you are that concerned about the quality of play deteriorating over the course of the series, then eliminate all scheduled back-to-back games so there will always be a day to rest, and no teams will play two overtimes, then hop on a plane and play the next day.

And am I the only one who figures if extra periods go to three on three, instead of players becoming less fatigued the most trustworthy (i.e. most defensively responsible) players will be the only ones who see the ice, so the smaller-minute guys will disappear while the reliable skaters get run into the ground.

And someone get numbers for how the overtimes have supposedly increased over the last several years.  Random assertions tossed out without any evidence are nothing but a big, steaming pile of fresh coprolites.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/03/07 at 03:23 PM ET

Pretty much agree with the sentiments posted here already.  Leave it alone.  Who are all these fans that are clamoring for change?  Our poor broadcasters and players might have to stay up late one or two nights out of the year. Boo hoo.  Suck it up and LEAVE THE GAME ALONE.

Posted by snafu on 05/03/07 at 03:34 PM ET

The only reason anyone wants to shorten overtime is that long games wreak havoc on network programming. Were there really Barbaro fans who called in to complain that NBC didn’t get to show its documentary on Barbaro last Sunday afternoon? Seriously now.

Me, I generally feel that the playoffs really begin with the first game that goes into a fifth period.

Posted by alice on 05/03/07 at 03:52 PM ET

I do know NBC has plans to move their game to Versus if it runs into Kentucky Derby time and I believe there may be a few other instances too.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 05/03/07 at 03:57 PM ET

Bill Clement is a disaster as a Talking Head representing the sport of hockey.  He is at his best calling a game.  Anything other than that and he is woefully unable to seem competent.

I’ve seen Brett Hull and Ray Ferraro each completely disassemble Clement’s odd comments during those NBC intermissions… and when ‘luminaries’ like Hull and Ferraro are swiss cheesing your opinions, maybe you ought to dial back a notch.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/03/07 at 06:55 PM ET