From:                   Jeremy Hall
<[log in to unmask]>>
> Me, I favor 20-minute sudden death OTs until someone scores as an
> alternative to ties.  Shootouts, IMHO, are an abomination.  I thought
> defense was part of the game....
>
> Jeremy Hall
> Clarkson '91
> LET'S GO TECH!

In reality, isn't a regulation game just one big ol' tiebreaker? You
play for 60 minutes, and you hope someone comes out on top.
Sometimes they will, and sometimes they won't. Sometimes there
are instances where you must have a winner, but *somehow*,
hockey has been played for years at every level with regular season
ties being an integral component; only in the last 10 or 15 years or so
has it been a subject of contention. My question is...why?

Does it take a 20-minute sudden-death OT to convince a fan that
enough effort was expended to settle a 60 minute hockey game?
Does one honestly feel much more fulfilled that this "attempt" was
made to determine a winner, even if it doesn't?

Robert