>I have a new suggestion for the shootouts, for those who have been
>following the Hockey East controversy. How about a shootout for any
>game that has less than 5 goals scored? :-)
>
>But take a 0-0 or 1-1 tie. Neither team has shown itself to be
>clearly better. The fans, seeing 0 or 2 goals, want a little more. A
>shootout would bring a little excitement to an otherwise boring game
>(whoops! I should watch myself--not all low scoring games are boring,
>but most are--the 3-2 Mich. St.-Wisc. game last weekend, for example,
>or the 2-1 WMU-LSSU game here).
 
Let me see, BU and Maine playing to a 5-5 tie is O.K. even though "Neither
team has shown itself to be clearly better.", but BU and Maine playing to a
0-0 tie last year was boring?  I was at the 0-0 game at Walter Brown Arena
last year and the game was anything but boring.  It was an excellent and
exciting game and ended the only way it really should have.  That game is
the single reason I am against shootouts!  After playing to a thrilling 0-0
tie, a shootout would have made the game less than it was.
 
As a BU fan wanted BU to win that game and I would have loved the Terriers
winning it in overtime 1-0, but either team winning would have made it just
another game, not something special.
 
If you relly want to insure excitment for every hockey game why not have a
shootout after *every game* for an extra point?  A winning team could get an
extra point for winning the shootout and a losing team could still get a
point for winning the shootout.  It would also keep more fans from leaving
before the end of the game.  It would also insure that every game ended on
an exciting high point.
 
Sean Pickett
Go BU Terriers, 1994 Hockey East Champions!
[log in to unmask]