At 12:12 PM 3/7/97 -0700, Tony Buffa wrote:
>I think someone the other day asked for the RATIONALE behind this 3 pt
>thing.  Is there some logic to it?  Does it add excitement? Am I missing
>something (probably :-)?  Why not just best two out of three with each
>game a play til you drop overtime? (no shootouts, please!).
>
>Maybe I missed the response, if so, I apologize.  But basically I'dlike to
>know why the ECAC uses this somewhat unorthodox method.
>
>Tony Buffa
>RPI '64 hoping for another run like '95!
>
 
I don't think any response was given but I'll put in my two cents worth.
The only reason I can give for this format is that there can be 3
games in three days. With the other leagues' best 2 out of 3 format,
there is a possibility of each game going into multiple overtimes
since there must be a winner each night. In that unlikely circumstance,
the players could get so worn out as to make injuries more likely.
At least in the ECAC, the most each of the first 2 games can go is 65 minutes.
 
Do I agree with this rationale??  Not really. I'd prefer best 2 of 3 with
a winner decided each game.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.