NCAA’s New Overtime Proposal Not the Best Option for League

Moreover, the proposal would also be disadvantageous for the people who gamble on the sport through American bookmakers as well as the ones who use the best online sports betting Canada has to offer. Although the NHL was able to find an optimum solution, the case is not so with NCAA, and in this article we are trying to analyse the proposal to see how the game has been affected.

A Call for Uniformity

As with other college sporting games, the professional league rules of hockey are in stark contrast to the rules of NCAA hockey, which may or may not be profitable, depending on one’s perspective. However, one aspect which particularly strikes as non-profitable on the face of it is the new trend of games ending with draws. The typical rule is that if no team is able to score in the additional five minute 5-on-5, the game ends in a tie.

In the conference games, after the overtime, teams have an option of choosing from three different alternatives. The simplest alternative is of course to end the game with no extra points for any team (a system that is followed by ECAC, Atlantic Hockey and Hockey East). Another alternative is to follow the five minute 3-on-3 overtime with a sudden-death shootout (used in NCHC and WCHA games). And the third alternative is to have a three-person shootout, which may be followed by a sudden-death shootout if the situation so requires (followed by the Big Ten).

Thus evidently, there is a huge disparity between various conferences when it comes to dealing with situations of no points among the teams. This confers teams playing in certain conferences an edge over teams of other conferences.

An Attempt for a Universal Rule

In order to establish a common practice, the NCAA took initiative of co-ordinating with all conferences to arrive at a solution. What was initially being thought of was a single overtime rather than an extra-point option.

Though, the initial proposal suggested a 4-on-4 OT instead of the current 5-on-5 OT, which may be followed by a 3-on-3 OT as well as sudden death shootout. The conferences would also have been given an option to choose to not implement this system.

Implementing the 4-on-4 alternation could have led either of the team ending up in scoring and preventing a draw, something that we also saw in NHL. However, NCAA still chose to go ahead with the 3-on-3 OT.

Finally, when the conferences gave their comments, the rule just got further damaged. The 5-on-5 overtime was once again introduced in place of the 4-on-4 mandatory overtime. Moreover, teams still have an option to bypass the second overtime by directly having shootout or having the shootout after 3-on-3 overtime.

The Problem Still Continues

Though a solution has been arrived on paper, practically, the problem still haunts the game. The NCAA has irrationally considered the options before it and arrived at a comic solution. Neither of the two problems – game ending in ties or unregulated options for OT, have been solved effectively.

A possible solution to this problem may be inspired from how NHL has dealt with the issue or reverting back to the 4-on-4 overtime which would eliminate all glitches. Another change that can be brought is abolishing the option of extra-time all together, which would encourage teams to take risks and fight for the ‘

 

Advanced player search

Tweets by @eurohockey