Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Please, Someone Make Bob Sapp Stop Already

But teams have simply stopped scoring tie-breaking goals in the last three minutes of the game: the scoring rate has dropped to roughly 2 goals per 60, less than half what it was over the last four seasons. Scoring rates have dropped in OT, too, perhaps reflecting a preference for the shootout, but the biggest change is simply the number of games that go to OT in the first place. Whether any team will admit it, they've started to take advantage of the extra points available to them if they play for the tie.

about 2 years ago Cimg0036_tiny Freneau 9 comments 0 recs  | 

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Yeah, it's ridiculous.

It’s not that teams are “playing for the tie.” It’s that teams are, if they’re tied, playing the exact same way they would if they were up by a goal because it’s the only sensible strategy.

Allowing the go-ahead goal in the last three minutes costs you two points, but scoring the go-ahead goal late may only gain you a point over what you stand to gain with a regulation tie. I mean, seriously, QED.

If you’re up by a goal, allowing the opponent to score cannot cost you more than a point, and of course scoring an additional goal yourself has no value other than to put the game away. So teams up a goal will also fall into a defensive shell, figuring that even if they blow it they’re still coming away with a point.

The system works differently in soccer, where allowing the go-ahead goal costs you one point, but scoring the go-ahead goal gains you two. You’ve got a 2:1 benefit ratio there. Further, scoring the tying goal is much more critical than in hockey. It’s the difference between getting zero points and allowing the opponent three, or getting one point and depriving the opponent of two points they otherwise had in the bag. It turns falling three points off the pace into maintaining the status quo.

This space for rent.

by jonfmorse on Dec 22, 2009 12:23 AM EST reply actions  

I blame Canada.

No American sport would give points to losers.

by Trey Hillman's Chin on Dec 22, 2009 9:39 AM EST reply actions  

England might.

Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.

by 306008 on Dec 22, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions  

France Would Too

They’d probably give more points to the loser.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 9:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Here's a proposal I heard that sounded weird at first, but

sorta makes sense when you think about it:

Go back to awarding 2 pts for a win, and zero for a loss.

Now, between the 2nd and 3rd periods, hold the tiebreaker/shootout portion of the game, IN CASE it is needed.

The theory being this would cause teams to play the 3rd period and the OT period differently, knowing the potential shootout result. For example, a team ahead by a goal, but knowing that it would lose the shootout if it got that far, would be less inclined to sit on the lead, and much more inclined to press for a 2 goal lead. Also, it would make OT itself more interesting – as the team that would win the shootout would play defensively, while the team that would lose the shootout would presumably pull the goalie sooner, etc. All in all, potentially more excitement.

What do you all think?

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Dec 22, 2009 1:53 PM EST reply actions  

Sounds reasonable

I just hate the concept of a shootout to decide anything. Its like having a baseball game tied after nine innings determined by a home run derby.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 22, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Sort of

I think a more apt analogy would be a free throw shooting contest. Don’t know if there is a good one with baseball there.

I think that sounds great. If a team already knows the outcome if they sit on a tie, at least one of the teams will be aggressive in trying to change that outcome.

by AxDxMx on Dec 22, 2009 6:31 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd make it even simpler.

Home team loses a tie.

This space for rent.

by jonfmorse on Dec 22, 2009 8:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

Managers

Cimg0036_small Freneau

Editors

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

Authors

Royalsretro_small RoyalsRetro

Headshot_small Old Man Duggan