Steve Weisfeldt writes from Chaz Scoggins' Lowell Sun column:
>Astonishingly, the Hockey East coaches were the ones who pushed for the
>shootout. They weren't unanimous on the issue, [Lowell AD] Edwards said,
>but there was a clear-cut majority.
If you call 5-4 clear-cut. (That is what an unofficial source told me
the vote was; I do not know for sure that it was 5-4 nor do I know
where this information came from. However, perhaps the person who
told me this will be able to clarify this further since I am sure
he/she is reading.)
I should say that I think some of the evidence Chaz presents is not
valid, although I do tend to agree with his view. For example, he
mentions the Olympics and the WC, and says that none of Team Canada's
players endorsed the shootout, that "the sentiment was to keep playing
until one team scored a genuine goal." But there is no plan to use
shootouts in HE playoff games, nor would a lack of a shootout in the
regular season result in playing forever until someone scores.
And Dave Josselyn mentioned how a number of Merrimack players have
said that they support the plan endorsed by the HE coaches. I would
be interested in hearing from any of the other players on HOCKEY-L
about whether they agree.
>In addition to cheapening the game, the shootout will also be a
>bookkeeping nightmare. Shootout goals and saves, thankfully, will not
>count in the individual stats, but there will be unaccounted-for goals in
>the teams stats. Worse, the NCAA will not accept shootout victories in
>making tournament selections, instead counting all those games as ties.
>So Hockey East teams will have to keep two sets of won-loss records, one
>to determine the league standings and the other for national pools and
>tournament participation.
Chaz would have been better off talking about the fact that some games
will be worth 3 pts and others 2. Bookkeeping won't be such a big
deal. All they have to do is mandate that the GF-GA that go into a
team's record are the ones at the time that the 5 min OT ends. So if
a team wins a shootout 3-1 and the game was tied 2-2, then it gets
printed in the team's record like this:
Merrimack 3, Boston University 2 (SO 3-1)
or whatever, and each team gets +2 added to their GF & GA. When you
see the "SO", you know the loser picked up a point.
And keeping two sets of records is no big deal, everybody already has
three:
1) conference
2) overall
3) overall for NC$$ tourney consideration
Differences that already exist between the latter two are games vs
non-DivI teams like Canadian schools or DivII-III schools.
The confusion that will arise will be if HE teams decide to count SO
wins/losses as such in record #2 but as ties in #3.
>What the shootout will also do is punish the underdog team.
No, it won't, because the underdog that pulls out a tie after 65 mins
still gets its point no matter what happens in the shootout. The only
way it will punish an underdog is if it loses a shootout to a team
that is close to it in the standings - but then, you couldn't call
that team an underdog, could you.
Chaz should have written that a shootout punishes a defensive team.
From my comments above, you might think I had swung the other way
towards supporting a shootout. :-) Nope. But I do think there are
some arguments which hold more water than others in opposing it.
>In my opinion, if the coaches are concerned about the proliferation of tie
>games, then they should re-institute the 10-minute sudden-death overtime.
Gotta agree with Chaz here.
Also, I just saw Brian Morris's mail in which he concluded with:
>Having said all this, I would simply add that after all is said and done, and
>all the Cassandras out on the list have posted their dire predictions,
>shoot-outs aren't going to make that much difference. Except of course to
>Dave's Get-A-Lifers. :-)
I don't think that's necessarily true. Dave seems to be somewhat
supportive of it. I oppose it but I don't think it is the end of the
world if it is passed. (The 50 min game would have been.) I do agree
that if it passes, it probably won't be a huge deal - unless it is
also adopted by the NC$$ and also used in playoff games. That's my
big concern, that it will become a universally accepted way of
deciding a game in all circumstances. And that is probably a big
reason why I am against it.
On the other hand, if it *is* universally accepted, then maybe it
should indeed be a part of the game...
--- ---
Mike Machnik [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc. *HMM* 11/13/93
************ 1994 NC$$ Division II Softball World Series **************
Thur May 19 Game 1 Merrimack 5, Barry, Fla. 1 (Kim Page 19-1)
Fri May 20 Game 3 Merrimack (42-4) vs Humboldt State, Calif. (46-9)
|
