About last night …

What is there to say?

Canadiens didn’t show up in Dallas. Lacking heart and conviction, they were beaten by a superior team and, in the process, allowed their general manager to be embarrassed by a player Bob Gainey had traded away.

The Canadiens had 18 shots on goal. Roman Hamrlik, their best defensive defenceman, was minus-four. Carey Price continued his habit of giving up at least one bad goal per game.

As Christopher Higgins said afterwards, the Canadiens couldn’t complete two passes, lost all the battles on the boards and were consistently second on the puck.

Price said Dallas had taken the Canadiens to school. The Stars, he added, are good with the puck and Canadiens gave them too much time to play with it.

As was the case when Detroit visited the Bell Centre, it was men against boys – timid, feckless boys at that.

Canadiens are young. They are skating up a learning curve, and what’s important is the lessons derived from humiliating losses, the most fundamental of which is "that sucked: what can we do so that it doesn’t happen again?"

For all that, your team is still sitting fifth in the Eastern Conference standings. They took three of a possible six points on the first half of their holiday season odyssey.

Canadiens have two days off before boarding a Boxing Day flight to Florida.


  1. yehaken says:

    Price has not earned the 1A spot. Huet returned, and it’s not like Price pulled a Halak in 06-07 in his absence. Price played like a backup. I’m saying that Halak played amazingly last year when we needed him. Maybe Huet has stolen an OT loss or two, but we haven’t seen a win snatched from the jaws of defeat by goaltending yet.

    Yes, I too have sipped the Price Kool-Aid, he is the future, the children must come first, etc. etc. But I hate seeing losses piling up, and I think Halak might just light a fire under Price, who apparently feels he has vanquished Huet despite the stats.

  2. The Teacher says:

    What the HE** is wrong with a tie?????

    And I think this is more important than any other issue. It directly relates to the integrity of the game.

    but since you brought it up 🙂

    Insitgator should go.

    RFA are open game, GM’s need to use their head. Know their players, etc.

    Salary Cap- Canadian teams getting shafted again. Now that the dollar is high, and they would have had money like the American teams to aggressively pursue UFA’s, there is a cap. Now that there is revenue sharing, we get shafted again, as we make the most money by FAR. The revenue we bring in is completely disporportional to our 6 team representation in a 30 team league.

    Trades will not happen as frequently with a salary cap, just look at the NFL.

    Officiating- do we really want to start talking about it? It is the holidays and I don’t want to get extremely angry, I can feel it building up already.

  3. The Teacher says:

    “you have this when in a game a total of 3 points can be obtained whereas on the same night another game only gives a total of 3 points. Points are all that matters and every team plays the same amount of games under the same system so it is completely fair.”

    What tyhe heck happened to my post??? Only half of it showed up, no way I’m writing it again, was an analogy that dealt with students in a classroom. sheesh

    Anyways, games are not created equal. when one game can be worth 3 points and others 2, it is a joke. Would be the same if I gave 5 students a test worth 100 marks and another 5 a test worth 50 marks without giving those 5 a chance to get another 50. Then marking year end totals on the higher amount of points. Who do you think does better? This is a very simple recap of what I had typed.

    Also, don’t you think that Canadian fans would be more knowledgeable about this and the historical aspect of the game. Seems they are turning off Canadian fans to…not get american fans. This is why the NHL is declining, their priorities are all screwed up.

    Baseball is NOT hockey I agree, but .500 still matters

    A win give you 2 points and 1 game, a loss after that leaves you with 2 points and 2 games!

    ergo .500

    a loss is a loss is a loss. What is this 1 point garbage.

    makes perfect sense to me.

    This new system is a farce.

  4. The Teacher says:

    We are still a building team, Price won the Calder Cup last year, nothing was left for him to learn in the AHL. He has not played bad, he has not played great. He is a young goalie who is learning. I’m glad he is with us, he will be all that much better for it. Patience, patience.

  5. howtathor says:

    Ryder will be in the lineup tonight. Not for the good graces of Guy Carbonneau but for the scouts, namely the Carolina Hurricanes who are salivating at the prospect of getting a 30 goal scorer for nothing after losing Justin Williams for the season. I hope Bob get’s more than a bag of pucks in return.

  6. krob1000 says:

    Before we worry about this let’s get to what matters like the instigating rule, salary cap issues (Anaheim, restricted free agents,trades, consistent officiating).

    Teach, I am not the one who made these changes and I was against them until I got used to them…now I like them. There are still people who have issues with the red line being removed and the goalie grid too. The points thing really doesn’t do anything that wasn’t already happening (teams played for ties before…that is why they changed it). Now at least there is an overtime and a shootout to decide it. Time will not permit a true outcome so unfortunately this is what we get. It could be worse we could base it on a coin flip and a partial score (field goal) could decide our games.

  7. krob1000 says:

    The TSN poll would be based on Canadians who watch any hockey they can. The league cares about the population south of the border and creating parity in those markets where success (or the hope of) is essential for survival (sometimes still isn’t enough). Parity is good for the game and keeps things meaningful for longer for more teams. Both Montreal and Toronto lost out in the final days of last year due in large part to the new system ( I wonder if that impacted anything in tsn’s poll).

    You posted about 26 teams being above .500……who cares. Since when does hockey care about .500 (This is not baseball or basketball). You are a teacher so mark on the Curve. Points are all that matters and every team plays the same amount of games under the same system so it is completely fair. They will not go back to the old system as it makes absolutely no sense to anyone who is not a hockey purist (unfortunately many Canadians are). There will be change but it will not be a return to the old system. It will be the even more complicated version that will again lose popularity polls up here in Hockey world but will again be successful amongst those who matter (television, owners and the US market).

    If you can’t beat em join em.

  8. Ed says:

    I agree. As a long time fan, the standings no longer make sense. Teams have too many points for the number of games played. Either the games end in a tie as they used to, or the OT winner gets 2 & the loser gets none. The latter would be preferable.

    Under the present system, it appears that the HABS play for the tie. They sit back & try to protect leads, & that has back fired way too many times this year. It would be better if they played a puck possession game, & went on the offensive. I find their present system very frustrating & boring.

  9. yehaken says:

    Halak please. Remember last year, when all was lost, and Halak saved the year? And remember when all the Habs needed was a single point from the game against the leafs and Cristobal got the call after a long break?

    Price has sucked (grocery) bag for several games now. Please stop starting him. Huet is better. Neither are the great goaltending we were promised.

    Can you give a brother a chance? Even if you hate Halak, give him a chance to strut his wares for trades or whatever. But come on, we’re not getting good goaltending here folks.

    Halak please! Also, some figgy pudding. Shout out to Mr. White.

  10. The Teacher says:

    Look at the TSN poll for today. Looks like I was ahead of the game on that one!

    Should the NHL get rid of the three-point game?

    Yes – teams should not get points for losing

    No – it helps create parity and an exciting playoff race

  11. The Teacher says:

    I’m completely lost as to where this feud all started?

  12. The Teacher says:

    Solution – get rid of the shootout 🙂 and the overtime point.

  13. The Teacher says:

    Is there a correlation between having a European captain and winning the cup?

    Yes there is…a 100 % negative correlation.

  14. The Teacher says:

    Weren’t they pretty high up last year also? And Stevie was in major decline, so that affects it also 😉

    Guys who are using the Red Wing comment to back yourself up don’t make sense IMO as most of their best players were Canadian at the time they were winning. Strangely enough, The Wings AND team Canada didn’t win it all once Shanahan left or was dumbly cut.

    What our team would look like if Bob was successful in luring him here.

  15. The Teacher says:

    Yeah, even if it helps us, I’m still totally against it..it just sucks. Diminishes the integrity of the game when you have some games worth more than others, makes no sense at all.

  16. showey47 says:

    the guy retired a year and a half ago, they have only gone on one playoff run since his retirement. Don’t they have the best record in the league right now?

  17. The Teacher says:


    , isn’t this pathetic???

    “the Christmas break arrived with 26 of the 30 teams with records of .500 or better”


    Abolish the stupidest rule in all of sports, the free point for getting to O.T.

    and please get rid of the shootout. What a farce!

  18. The Teacher says:

    Ok, New Topic

    Seeing as how the Canadian Junior Team just made it 1-0 and I find that the flow of the game has been excellent, due to the fact that talent is allowed to play with talent.

    How many of you agree with the sentiment that the NHL would be so much better if there were fewer teams?

  19. The Teacher says:

    “where in any of this conversation did I say I didn’t care if the Habs won the cup. Talk about twisting words.”

    Just making sure we were on the same side 😛

    And thanks for the discussion. I just want our team to win, and one of our needs is a Number One forward, a big boy with grit, who skates well, and has passion. (Gui is at least 2 years away from that, but most people don’t seem to have the patience to wait for our team to grow, claiming they’ve already waited 15 years)

    There are more Canadians who meet that criteria than there are Europeans. I can’t honestly think of one European player in the league who would qualify, and/or might be available. Tomas Holmstrom is surely not available, and neither is Samuel Pahlsson.

    Ergo, we result back to the tried and true formula, which are Canadian boys, that’s all I’m saying.

  20. ebk says:

    where in any of this conversation did I say I didn’t care if the Habs won the cup. Talk about twisting words.

    You have a good holiday as well

  21. ZepFan2 says:

    “Please point out where you think I am wrong.”

    That’s just it. I don’t think you’re wrong.

    After hearing Carbo talk about how it was ridiculous to have a team play 3 games in 4 nights and have to travel 3 hours to get to Dallas. Then to turn around and bench Ryder once again to prove some point, when Ryder would have been fresh legs is ludicrous. Would he have made a difference? Maybe not, but we’ll never know will we?!

    I used to be behind Carbo, but now it’s not possible. Somebody pointed out that Jagr has only 7 goals, and is still playing long shifts. Yet Carbonneau chooses to demoralize Ryder even more, sapping any confidence Ryder has left.

    What also gets under my skin. People are lamenting the “bad trade” with Dallas and how could we have traded Ribero (visons of John Leclair still dance in my head…*sigh*), yet here we go again. We’re more than willing to dump Ryder for anything, yet when he comes back and kills us (and he will), the same song and dance about “how could we”, will be sung by Habs fans all over again!

    I hate to say it, but Carbo needs to go and a legitimate N.H.L. coach should apply for the job.

    End of rant…*sigh*

  22. The Teacher says:

    I think we all expected a sub-par performance against Dallas (sad to say expected, I know).

    However, these athletes are supposed to be in TOP shape, what’s the big deal about playing 3 games in 4 nights?

    I remember as a kid playing three games in ONE day, and played well in all of them. Sometimes an excuse is just an excuse.

  23. mjames says:

    I do not hate and I do not atack. I merely comment on what I see. I see a coach who can not get his team up to play on too many occasions such as against Dallas. Why is that? Do you know what the traits of a good coach are? Does you pal Carbo possess those traits. The simple answer is no. Please point out where you think I am wrong.

    I really do not expect an answer to my questions because I really do not think you are able to. I do not think you can really explain why Carbo can not get his team up to play. I respect the team. You friend Carbo has no respect for his team.


  24. The Teacher says:

    I care because I want the Habs to win a Cup again..If you don’t, that’s great also. If a European-led team can win, I’m all for it, but the past results prove that isn’t the case.

    I’m not saying it because I don’t like Europeans. That was my point 😉
    I didn’t want to have a troll attack my words because I’m “against” Europeans.

    We all have seen that in the past, and I for one, would like to avoid that in the future. I prefer to be proactive, rather than reactive.

    Happy holidays to you EBK

  25. ebk says:

    um a vast majority of us are of European descent. So I’m not sure what your point is?

    Again, I could care less where the player comes from, if you do, great.

  26. The Teacher says:

    I agree with your points. too bad he sucks on shootouts tho, but they shouldn’t even be in the game..but we’ve covered that topic already right Krob1000 😉

  27. The Teacher says:

    To add a few,

    Ducks- Pronger, Beauchemin, Getzlaf, Penner, Giguere!!!

    Carolina- Brindy, Ward, Stillman, Stall, Whitney, Williams

    Tampa Bay- Lecavalier, richards, St. Louis, Boyle, nuff said

    Detroit 1997-98-02- Yzerman, McCarty, Osgood, Mike Vernon, Brendan Shanahan, Larry Murphy, Kris Draper, Luc Robitaille, and two americans, Hull and Chelios 😉

    Keep in mind, these are the LEADERS on the team

  28. The Teacher says:

    Well, they haven’t won us anything. A few Canadian boys from the west coast would provide us with the much needed grit, work ethic, and size.

    is what you said earlier, now you are jumping to Canadian leadership, which is a whole different kettle of fish from your earlier statement.

    How do you figure that?

  29. The Teacher says:

    Oh no? when was the last time Detroit won the cup..In my mind, regular season success doesn’t mean much if you can’t follow through on it 🙂

    The CUP is what I’m after.

  30. The Teacher says:

    yeah, Smyth has never won a cup, but he goes into the corners and in front of the net with no regard for his body (and yes, you could say Holmstrom does to, and yes I love Holmstrom, but we have TOO many Europeans on our team, no grinders and bangers…and there ain’t too many Europeans who do so.

    Just to let you guys know, I am of Italian heritage, and thus of European descent. Sometimes a spade IS a spade guys and girls.

  31. The Teacher says:

    As opposed to a Marek Zidlicky or a Rotislav Klesla, yeah I’d take him..You can pick any crappy Canadian player to prove your point.

    My point is I’d take a high end Canadian player over a high end European player any day this century 😉

    and that’s that. We have lacked a high end Canadian player since we…???won our last stanley cup????

  32. ebk says:

    Well, they haven’t won us anything. A few Canadian boys from the west coast would provide us with the much needed grit, work ethic, and size.

    is what you said earlier, now you are jumping to Canadian leadership, which is a whole different kettle of fish from your earlier statement.

    Again I could careless where a hockey player comes from, if it matters to you, more power to you.

    And in the three examples you use. Yzerman is from Ontario and Ryan Smith never won a Stanley Cup, so by your standards, he isn’t a good leader.

    And Europeans have been in the NHL since the early 70’s. So if you got your facts straight, your baseless argument would have had a little more validity.

  33. ZepFan2 says:

    “You are right – it has nothing to do with it.”

    Thanks Scotty.

    Please, do us all a favour and go back to hating/attacking Carbonneau.

  34. mjames says:

    No correlation between a western Canadian who is captain and winning the Cup. As the other poster stated the Euros do not seem to bother Detroit.

    How about an offensive minded Western Canadian hockey coach. Maybe one of those!


  35. mjames says:

    You mean more Kostopoulos’ – great just great another bunch of guys who try hard and are big but can’t score as long as they are Canadiens, eh.


  36. mjames says:

    You are right – it has nothing to do with it.


  37. The Teacher says:

    Hey, they haven’t won a cup since Stevie Y was captain..means something don’t ya think?

  38. The Teacher says:

    No, more guys like Ryan smyth, joe Sakic, Stevie Y, and the like is what i meant dude..don’t twist words 😛

    Fact is..no european captain has ever won a cup…so..proof enough..20 years and counting now europeans have been in the league…results prove Canadian leadership is better 🙂

  39. ebk says:

    you are right, we need more Turner Stevensons, Lindsay Vallis, Brent Bilodeau and Matt Higgins. What was I thinking

  40. The Teacher says:

    Well, they haven’t won us anything. A few Canadian boys from the west coast would provide us with the much needed grit, work ethic, and size.

  41. ZepFan2 says:

    “Canadiens didn’t show up in Dallas. Lacking heart and conviction, they were beaten by a superior team”

    Yeah, I suppose playing 3 games in 4 nights had absolutely nothing to do with their lackluster play against Dallas eh?!

  42. NLhabsfan says:

    Perhaps BOB should rid himsself of a poor coach.Maybe Carbo talks a big game…but to me he has lacked abilities.

  43. showey47 says:

    exactly, how about players who play to win instead of playing not to lose and when they do lose, they absolutly hate it. Winners hate to lose.

  44. ebk says:

    me too, I’m partial to players who can play hockey, could give a damn were they are born.

  45. mcLovin says:

    yah but if u look at the last few cup champs, they all had canadians at the root of their success. ducks: neidermeyer; carolina: brind’more, tampa: andreychuk; jersey: neidermeyer/brodeur; detroit: yzerman

    yah im partial 😉

  46. showey47 says:

    no kidding, look how bad its working out for detroit having so many europeons

  47. ebk says:

    you are correct sir, last thing we need is another Markov, Hamrlik, Plekanec, the Kostitsyn twins. Or god forbid a Kovalev.

  48. howtathor says:

    Please! No more Europeans! I have both Nagy and Handzus in my pool and they both suck!

  49. krob1000 says:

    SOrry, my mistake I meant that teams always were awarded a point for a tie. Teams never even tried for the win in overtime and that is why they implemented the new system (to get a winner…hence the winner point). I agree that it would be great if teams played sudden death for as long as required and that is why the playoffs will never change. In the regular season though it will never work logistically. So you pick your poison I guess and waiuntil the spring to decide who the real winners are.
    Either you have teams play for a tie through regulation andd take their chances in an exciting OT and shootout or…you have teams play for a tie in regulation and waste our time not trying in OT (5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3…doesn’t matter as they will play for the tie.

    I am at home now and when I type I can’t actually see what I am typing (really weird…my computer is screwed ). Anyways I just have to address your home run analogy as this bothers me the most when people try to compare baseball to hockey.

    I played competitve hardball into my twenties and in fact still play mens league. It was the sport I was best at of the four I played..basketball, hockey, baseball and soccer. There is no comparing a home run derby and a shootout. In a home run derby bith the pticher and better are on the same team. The pitcher is helping the batter. In a shootout both teams are represented. Of all of the major sports baseball is the most individual. Almost every play is an individidual. In extra innings or even late in a game a team brings ina closer or relief pitcher. Multiple guys get tehir shot at the pitcher individually…..hmmm sounds a lot like a shootout. In fact the entire game of baseball is a lot like a really long shootout. I love baseball but it is not exactly physically draining (aside from triples or scoring from first on a double). This is not a fiar analogy and oiis the main reason I am trying to yype and I can’t see what I am writing.

    You stand where you stand I stand where I stand ina couple of years a win will be worth three points….etc. I do have to say I prefer this system to the old and really please don’t compare a homerun derby to a shootout unless teams can use their own goalie and shooter at the same time.

  50. yathehabsrule says:

    Happy Holidays all! See you back on the 27th…

    Don’t forget to cheer for the team Canada Jrs on Wed and Thursday too!

  51. yathehabsrule says:

    There are comments on the main page of this site with comments from Carbo (french only).

  52. grrrreg says:

    I know Huet has stated that he’s not very confident in shootouts, but I think replacing him at this point in a game would send the wrong message. He’s the goalie that got the team to the shootout, he should get a chance to shine and get the team an extra point. If you really trust your goalie, you have to show him that you trust him enough to play every aspect of a game.

  53. Ed says:

    Mike Boone, did you hear what Carbonneau had to say after the game last night? It would be interesting to hear if he had any comments.

  54. The Teacher says:

    If anything, the better teams WILL pull ahead, instead of keeping crap American teams in crap markets close in the standing to try and save their crappy franchises.

  55. The Teacher says:

    and btw Krob1000,

    I always enjoy reading your posts and find they make a lot of sense also. not this one though! 😛

  56. Ed says:

    There were 8 NHL games last night. Guess who was the 3rd star overall as chosen by nhl.com


  57. The Teacher says:


    They did NOT always get a point for going to overtime. Please understand this!

  58. The Teacher says:

    Yup, now people play for the guaranteed point. It’s stupid.

  59. The Teacher says:

    If it’s tied in baseball, they go to extra innings, they don’t change the rules of the game, do they?

    Basically it would be like baseball implementing a home-run derby after 9 innings to decide winners. this sucks!

    Haha, I’m sure you all know my point of view by now 😛

  60. The Teacher says:

    Uhh no. How can you justify giving two points to a shootout winner when it’s a complete farce and non-related to the game of hockey. Hockey is a TEAM game, not a 1 on 1 battle. This to me is basically a home-run derby. Which IMO is pathetic.

    For a team to get no points after getting to shootout would turn me off the game completely. What a joke that would be. Why don’t we just end the game with no goalie and having people put the puck in from the other end of the ice to determine it. not much of a difference from the current ritual in my opinion.

  61. The Teacher says:


    tEAMS DID not ALWAYS GET A POINT FOR GOING INTO OVERTIME. bEFORE THIS STUPID RULE WAS IMPLEMENTED, YOU ONLY GOT A POINT IF YOU TIED. If you lost in overtime before the rule change you did NOT get a point!

    and I am totally against giving three points for a win either.

    2 points for a win
    1 point for a tie
    0 points for a loss

    add an extra 5 minutes of 4 on 4. If a team can’t win, then noone deserves to. simple as that.


  62. BigHabsFan says:

    I don’t think that there is a problem with getting a point for going into OT. But the notion that a shootout win is equal to a regulation win or even an OT win is TOTALLY CRAZY. The standings should be a reflection of how well a team plays the standard 5 on 5 game of Hockey relative to the other teams in the league. By including points for shootout wins a gap is created between reality (how well a team plays together against opposing teams) and the standings. (ie. the Oilers are 10-2 in the shootout this year – 10 extra points)

    If I could propose a change, I would get rid of the shootout but keep 4on4 OT and have a point structure like so:

    Regulation Win 3pts
    OT Win 2pts
    Regulation/OT Tie 1pt
    Regulation Loss 0pts

  63. jablonski says:

    Mike, I have to disagree with you that Price has given up at least one bad goal per game. Sure in the past week and half or so ya but the bad goals that he let in had no effect on the outcome of the game except for the game last Tuesday. For example last night on Stu Barnes shot it was 3-0 Stars and they were bombarding the Habs and the shooter shouldn’t have been able to have that scoring chance but the Canadiens turned the puck over in the neutral zone.

    Huet and Price think are both playing decent which is why the Habs need to trade Huet. We can get a good return for him and it would save us salary. Teams like LA, Tampa, Pittsburgh (who i don’t think we would trade him to) all desperately need a goalie and in LA’s case could give us a Ladislav Nagy or Michael Handzus in return.

    Matt J

  64. tleblanc says:

    Oh Santa, please coax Bob into another trade to rid ourselves of another 30 to 40 goal scorer and get lets not get anything for them because we are so incredibly awash in those players. If we’re really lucky you’ll let us trade Mr. Ryder to Boston, or Buffalo or Toronto or Ottawa so it won’t happen once a year but again and again. Jagr has all of 7 goals this season and I guarantee he has at least double the ice time of Michael Ryder. Please lets work another brilliant move so we can all talk about what a lousy player he was.

  65. Ian Cobb says:

    Hey Teach, I’m all in favor of getting rid of the 1 point for a tie. But i hate even more a tie hockey game. The only answer is you have to win to get any points. Over time, shootout, or a scrap but you have to win the contest for 2 points. 0 points if you loose.

  66. HabsInBlood says:

    I say keep the overtime points the way they are. Just give 3 points to a team that wins in regulation. Don’t you think a team should be rewarded for not blowing or preserving a lead? I guarantee you’d have less games going to overtime. I’m not an Ottawa fan, but this kind of point system would point out just how strong a team they are. They hardly ever seem to win in O.T.

  67. krob1000 says:

    I am still fascinated with the idea of bringing Price (in our case) in for shootouts. Why can’t a goalie warm up like a kicker does in football. I understand not coming in cold but why can’t he warm up in the dressing room or something. Shootouts are important and as much as I like Huet he is brutal in shootouts. I wrote this after hearing the RDS gut mention it to Price while he was sitting out a while back and everyone ignored it. I really think the goalie is more important than the shooters and they have supposed “specialist” like Jokinen and Gagner. There isn’t much difference between a gaolie coming in for an injured keeper so I say throw Price in for shootouts. I know it sounds off the wall but in our case it makes sense (I think it does anyway).

  68. krob1000 says:

    You are obviously the statistician not me but I’ll throw in my usual two cents and give a possible explanation. I don’t see how team would want to go into overtime anymore now than before as they always got a point for tying. I would also like to address the parody issue and the fact that there are four points separting 4th and 13th place (maybe not exact but I don’t feel like looking right now). To me it only seems logical that parody would result in slightly more ties.

    In addition (again aI am assuming admittedly) I think the diminished goal scoring may also be a contributing factor (lower scores increase the likelihood of ties). And last and maybe even least as I have even less foundation or knowledge of the validity of this question. How many teams played a trap style at four years ago and how many do now??? I don’t think the EXTRA point can be responsible because teams always got a point.

  69. Edwardo says:

    I agree with your assesment Krob. I often get annoyed when guys like Healy, Kypreos and Cox complain about this on the Fan radio station here in Toronto. I often feel like they are just looking for things to complain about so they have something to talk about. They even complain about parody on many occassions, they simply can’t be satisfied.
    I am pretty sure more people would be upset if they simply awarded 2 points for a shootout win and zero for the loser.

  70. Chris says:

    I think the disappointment with the “Extra” point for me stems from the fact that many teams do not play for a win in regulation anymore. A prof at the univeristy I attend published an analysis of all NHL game results for the 5 seasons immediately before and after the 4 vs. 4 overtime and point for overtime rule was insituted in 1999. As everybody expected, the number of games now decided in overtime went way up (~50% of games are now decided in overtime, as opposed to 25% before the rule changes). The very odd result was that the number of games that actually went into overtime also increased from 20% to 25%, and the average goal differential became narrower. So in effect, it seems that the rule change may have had the undesired of effect of trading 5 minutes of boring hockey before the rule change for 60 minutes of boring hockey after the rule change.

  71. Ian Cobb says:

    Hi everyone, I just got the call! I’m going to the show! as a lot of you know I drive school bus 6 hrs a day to keep me busy in retirment. Well I,ve been asked to leave right away and drive my bus north.

    It apears they don’t have enough room on the sleigh to put all the gifts for the inside out crowd, so I,m heading up north to load my bus.

    The only thing I ask of all of you when i get to your chimney is to be sound asleep and dreaming of the next summit of HAB FRIENDS.



  72. krob1000 says:

    If time were unlimited and travel not so tight then I would be all for a “next goal wins” a la playoffs. Unfortunately we don’t have time and again because of the lack of scoring in comparison to other sports that don’t have tie points the likelihood of a quick finish is diminished. The next move will eventually be 3 points for a win, or overtime win, 2 points for a shootout win and 1 point for a TIE (after regualtion….again…LIKE IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN).

  73. krob1000 says:

    I don’t understand people’s disappointment with the “Extra” point. Teams ALWAYS got a point for going into overtime so to provide fans with more entertainment(which it is) and declare a winner and give teams something to play for. This ‘loser point” stuff is stupid and undfounded. It is a tie point like it always was. The winner gets an extra point and the team that TIED gets the point they deserve. I’s be all for a 3 point system but this is not basketball and ties happen very frequently so to take away the Tie point would make no sense.

    Football and Basketball tie so infrequesntly that it idoesn’t matter to them. Baseball isn’t exactly the most physicall draining sport and soccer is the only comparable sport (and also the worlds most popular). I am surprised you feel that way Teach because I am not often on this site at night but I read the posts the next day and I quite often agree with you.

    Someone please tell me how this is a loser point and not a winner point. Not because a team loses or something stupid like that….with respect to the way things were and they now are. Glenn Healy calls it a loser point…..nuff said.

  74. The Teacher says:


    all i want for Xmas is the abolishment of the stupidest rule in sports.

    A free one point for going to overtime.

    And Santa, if you need more room in your bag, please get rid of the shootout! It sucks rocks

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.