Ok, I've said some of this before, during our last shoot-out thread, but it
appears as if I actually have others who agree with me this time.  I was
feeling lonely last time.
   I am for shoot-outs largely because I despise ties.  To re-use my old
analogy, ties are like going to see a whodunit movie without finding out
whodunit.  I oppose the imbalanced point system, but I doubt that HE can do
anything about it as the NC$$ is unlikely to let them play with the game THAT
much.
   Ten-minute OT's are probably out due to the time for re-surfacing.
   Tony brought up some good points that HE will have to consider.  i.e. goalie
changes and penalties.  I would not support goalie changes and I doubt that a
coach would be real gung-ho to bring in a cold goalie no matter how good he may
be against the next shooter.  As for penalties, I have no concept of what to do
about the late OT penalties, but if someone takes a cheap shot in the SO,  I
would take away a shot.  That oughta help prevent it.
   I would disagree with Tony in that I don't feel that such a rule change is
going to affect recruiting in any way.  Coaches have their own style of team
and recruit accordingly.  Most teams would not play more than 5 or 6 SO's a
season and, if I were a coach, I'd be more concerned about the first 65
minutes.  You recruit a team to win then and worry about the SO if and when it
comes.
   I'm not sure, but I think that, at least in the Olympics, each team was
required to put defensemen into their rotation.  This keeps teams, such as
Michigan who had alot of great forwards, from simply sending up all their big
guns.  I agree that SO's may hurt defensive styled teams, but not all that
significantly.  Nearly anyone on skates at the Div. I level has at least one
move that he can put on a goalie if there are no defenders to harass him.
Besides, it wouldn't be the first factor to work against teams of a certain
style.  The lack of a red line, for 2-line passes, hurts defensive teams.  At
certain arenas, like OSU, offensive teams have a disadvantage (or did when OSU
was good) because of the smaller rinks.  Every rule change that we make will
hurt some teams and help others.
   I say go for it.  As long as the extra points don't give HE teams an
advantage in tourney selection (and ratings don't seem to matter that much,
witness Maine last year ranked #7) I think that it is a good idea to give it a
trial run.  If it is a miserable failure I'll admit I was wrong like I was when
I thought the 2-ref system was a good idea, but I don't think that I am.
   On a side note, since Wayne IS the moderator, shouldn't he be the preacher?
Or is Mike the preacher because of the extremely long speeches he gives at
least once a week? :-) :-) :-)
                                      --Steve Moerland
                                        Michigan State '92
                                        Kentucky '95