Time to Change OT Rules in the Playoffs?
I woke up this morning and, as usual, began scanning the Web for some interesting hockey headlines to pass along. One of the most discussed topics -- amongst hockey columnists, anyway -- was the NHL's overtime playoff format, and whether it was time to eliminate multiple extra session marathons.
Martin Brodeur and Brendan Shanahan told the New York Post in this column that they would favor one, 20 minute overtime session of five-on-five hockey followed by four-on-four in each subsequent session.
This Sporting News columnist wants shootouts after two overtimes.
(That won't happen. Trust me.)
While this article on NBCSports.com points to "the decaying level of play and the growing numer of empty seats as the OT went along" as reason enough to consider change.
I'm torn on the issue.
I admitted in a previous blog entry that I fell asleep on that four overtime thriller between Dallas and Vancouver. But I should also say that last night's victory by the Rangers in double overtime was a perfect reminder of what makes the current system so great. I didn't notice a huge drop off in intensity. My attention didn't wane. But, then again, it wasn't after midnight, either.
The comments to this entry are closed.