How hockey should really be played

I have a great idea — after 60 minutes of hockey, we’ll go to overtime, four on four hockey for five minutes. Nothing’s settled! Oh no! What do we do? We got to a shootout. Why? What does a shootout have to do with hockey? Nothing.

Believe it or not, some teams play so they can get to the shootout. Why? Because if you get to a shootout, you automatically get a point and if you get the win, you get two more points.

So why try to win a game in overtime when you can defend the tie so we can get a shootout, and a possible three points?

Solution: Well my colleague and Shaw TV, Jim Claggett and I have come up with an entertaining way to eliminate ties.

Overtime with three players aside. And to quote Jim, “If teams can’t score a goal with three on three for five minutes then they don’t deserve to be in the NHL!” Good point.

I don’t know about you but I rather see wide open three on three hockey than some players skating down the ice and trying to score on the goalie — all in the name of entertainment. Pbbt! That’s not entertaining especially when you can break the rules.

What rules? The rule that says you can’t stop forward momentum on a penalty shot. Well the rule says you can’t stop forward momentum of the puck on a penalty shot/shootout breakaway, but it’s okay if the puck has continuous motion. What? Really what the heck is that supposed to mean?

Simply put we’ll allow anything that looks like a cool shinny hockey move, because we think it will be entertaining for fans. Hence, there is still a spin-o-rama move allowed on the shootout — momentum stopped or not.

Having teams play their butts off for a win in our three on three idea means you get continuous hockey and skating and a goal will be scored. We eliminate ties and separate the teams that want to win, from the teams that are trying not to lose.

The shootout is derived from penalty kicks deciding soccer games. Let’s keep it there.

(End rant)