Shootouts have been proposed.
 
I have MANY MANY *MANY* problems with this.
 
1st of all, let me agree with Mike Machnik that almost all of the BU fans were
opposed to the shootout idea.  The only thing Shawn seems to have kept/taken
from our concerns is that there is absolutely no way that these things belong
in any play-off game.
 
Boy, there are soooo many ways that I can attack this, I don't know where to
start.
 
 
Complaints and concerns (not in any particular order):
 
#1 - Obviously, defense and depth are non-factors.  What would be the differnce
if the shoutout consisted of slap-shots from the blue-line?  Then you'd have a
bunch of defensemen out there shooting instead of a bunch of forwards.  Why not
have 13 guys shoot instead of just 5.  At least this way each team would have
to dip into thier fourth line and a few defensemen.
 
#2 - IMHO, based on the NHL and Olympics, the US already s*cks at producing
defensive players in comparison to other countries.  The shootout will
encourage coaches to recruit more offensive-minded/skilled forwards in favor
of the good defensive ones.  This will, over time, hurt US hockey.
 
#3 - As Shawn indirectly said at the Final 4, the intellectual fans (like us on
hockey-l or the students at the Final 4) don't really matter since we'll go to
the game anyway.  The average, know-nothing schmuck (my words, not his) will,
however, be instantly turnded on to the game.  "That little kid will beg his
mother to take him to another college hockey game."  Sorry, but I'm selfish.
I like good, pure hockey, not "show-time." (NBA term)
 
#4 - 3 points available if the game goes into a shoot-out, but only 2 if it
ends before that???  Blech!!!  This example would never happen this badly, but
it could make the difference in close races:  Team @ has 5 great shooters, but
not much else.  Because of this, they always play for the shootout, where they
win every single game.  In Hockey East, this team is 1.000 and runs away with
the league yet the NCAA considers them to be .500.  And you thought Colorado
College was upset when they didn't make it!!!  There are other scenarios I can
think of involving one team that never goes to the shoot-out being at a
disadvantage compared to teams that always do (win or lose), etc.
 
#5 - PENALTIES - What happens if someone commits a penalty during the
shoot-out?  What happens if one teams ends the game with three guys in the box?
Do they get to use those three???  If the goalie (ex. Lacher vs. Mich) sticks
someone after they score on him, does one team lose a shooter?  Do they lose
the goalie?  What happens?  What if someone runs the goalie after he makes a
save?  HOW WILL PENALTIES BE HANDLED???
 
#6 - More goalies will be run.  <I will use BU examples to prevent woofing by
anyone.>  15 seconds to go in OT and there's a jam-up in front of the opposing
goaltender.  What is to stop Doug Friedman from taking advantage of the
situation and running into the goalie.  If the penalty is called, who cares?
BU kills off 15 seconds and goes into the shoot-out with either a shaken-up
goaltender to oppose them or even their back-up?  The temptation to give your
team a serious leg-up in the shoot-out will be very strong.  Even if Doug tries
not to injure the player, would anyone want their goalie shaken-up before a
shoot-out???
 
#7 - What's to stop the fans at (Again, I'll use my own school to prevent
flaming) BU from rushing to section N (behind the goal) and not only waving and
other Duke-like things, but taking flash pictures just as the shooter from the
other team is shooting?  The shootout allows for more BS to occur by the home
team when they all get to focus on the guy shooting.
 
#8 - Can a team change goalie?  What if BU this year found that, for instance,
McKersie was better at handling break-aways and penalty shots than Herlofsky
(just speculating), but Herlofsky was the goalie in the game.  Can BU change
goalies?  If so, can they warm-up McKersie?
 
 
 
These are just the few problems I could think of while sitting here (thus the
bad order).  I am against shoot-outs and I am not sure everything has been
thought through yet.
 
If we want excitement with a quick end, why not at least go to 1-on-1 sudden
death.  The players may change-up, but icing and off-sides (if you put yourself
over) are still in effect.  This way, at least a player might want to have
SOME defensive skill.  Just another suggestion.  I also like Mike's 3-on-3
5 minute OT.
 
Bottom line... I do NOT like shootouts, but not as much as I do NOT like
seeding in the tourney based on fan support.  What are we, div 1AA football???
 
 
Just the humble bablings of a crazed hockey fan...
 
Tony  BU'92'93
Former Ogre