• Welcome to the FREE TUGBBS forums! The absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 32 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 32 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 32nd anniversary: Happy 32nd Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    All subscribers auto-entered to win all free TUG membership giveaways!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $24,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $24 Million dollars
  • Wish you could meet up with other TUG members? Well look no further as this annual event has been going on for years in Orlando! How to Attend the TUG January Get-Together!
  • Now through the end of the year you can join or renew your TUG membership at the lowest price ever offered! Learn More!
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

USA Men’s Hockey

Question
How will the Winnipeg Jets recognize Hellebuyck's outstanding game in Canada's defeat
 
youppi said:
The best team today didn't win. Team Canada lost the game.
Click to expand...
In the end, the "best team" decides the outcome. There are a lot of things that make up the best team. Perhaps Canada outplayed USA as they had more chances as they clearly out-shot team USA, but Canada had some very big missed opportunities. Two minutes of 5 on 3 and they didn't score once? An open net shot and MacKinnon missed. That wasn't a big save by US goaltending. He flat out missed an open net. What decides best teams is who has the most goals in the end.

MacKinnon also didn't care too much for the flowers and stuffed bear they got after receiving the medals.
 
pedro47 said:
Today Team Canada out played Team USA on the ice. But asked you have stated the difference today was the goalie Connor Hellebuyck.
Click to expand...
That reminds me of the 1996 World Cup of Hockey where US goalie Mike Richter played two outstanding games in their two wins against Canada (it was a best-of-three).
 
3 vs 3 is no way to settle an olympic final. Never liked the shootout either. In soccer I understand it is needed but not hockey.
 
I was quite disappointed to hear that it would be decided 3 on 3.

I suspect one of the reasons is they don't want a 4 OT game that lasts forever.

What about something like 10 minutes 5 on 5.....clock restarts, 10 minutes 4 on 4......then if necessary 3 on 3 ?
 
I guess I am in the minority. I like the three on three.

One way to look at it is that they played five on five for twenty minutes in the third period and no one scored. Five on five would have likely ended with the two teams doing a shoot out. That is a much worse way to decide a game than a three on three. The three on three opens things up and makes towards an exciting finish.
 
am1 said:
3 vs 3 is no way to settle an olympic final. Never liked the shootout either. In soccer I understand it is needed but not hockey.
Click to expand...
Why would it be "needed" for soccer but not for hockey? That's one of the biggest gripes people have about soccer (the world's most popular team sport) is that a huge game can be settled with a shootout.

I also understand many "purists'" gripes about 3-on-3 being used to settle a game if needed but because of logistics, the game has to finish at a reasonable time. In this case, it was the closing ceremonies.
 
#1 Cowboys Fan said:
I was quite disappointed to hear that it would be decided 3 on 3.

I suspect one of the reasons is they don't want a 4 OT game that lasts forever.

What about something like 10 minutes 5 on 5.....clock restarts, 10 minutes 4 on 4......then if necessary 3 on 3 ?
Click to expand...
I could agree with a format like that. Or just start 4 on 4 for 10 minutes then 3 on 3. In the 2010 gold medal game, Crosby scored the golden goal 7:40 into 4 on 4 OT.
 
Last edited:
they already play 3 periods of 6 on 6 before overtime rules come into effect.
 
TUGBrian said:
they already play 3 periods of 6 on 6 before overtime rules come into effect.
Click to expand...
If you use that, OT was technically 4 on 4, not 3 on 3. Regulation hockey is referred to as 5 on 5, they don't count the goalie.
 
#1 Cowboys Fan said:
I was quite disappointed to hear that it would be decided 3 on 3.

I suspect one of the reasons is they don't want a 4 OT game that lasts forever.

What about something like 10 minutes 5 on 5.....clock restarts, 10 minutes 4 on 4......then if necessary 3 on 3 ?n
Click to expand...
I would support something like this for a championship game. But I would even prefer that it remain 5 on 5 for another full twenty minutes before THEN doing something like this.

I think Canada had the superior group of skaters. A significantly higher level of depth. They dominated the game in terms of relative ice time in the opponent's zone.

3 on 3 allowed the US team to pretty much not play its lesser players but to focus instead on its lesser number of superstars. Not fair to the Canadians as 3 on 3 immediately removed their relative depth superiority.

I can understand why you would want to have a rule that shortens the end of the game during NHL regular season. Spectators have to get to sleep because they've got to work the next day. Players may have a back to back game the very next day and would be exhausted (i.e., have no legs) during that next game. But the Olympic season ended with the conclusion of this game! Hence. let it go on and on and become the ultimate endurance test for the championship.
 
LannyPC said:
Why would it be "needed" for soccer but not for hockey? That's one of the biggest gripes people have about soccer (the world's most popular team sport) is that a huge game can be settled with a shootout.

I also understand many "purists'" gripes about 3-on-3 being used to settle a game if needed but because of logistics, the game has to finish at a reasonable time. In this case, it was the closing ceremonies.
Click to expand...
Because soccer one can go hours without a goal. A shootout happy team has an easier of time of killing the clock. Hockey has line changes to quickly sub in players as well as boards, sticks and play behind the net which means more chances for a goal. From skill or a lucky bounce. But I appreciate why people would not like a shootout in soccer either.
 
am1 said:
A lot of times best team does not win but that is why they actually play the games. The best team does not win that makes the win even more special and historic.
Click to expand...
Gee, and I think the best team is who wins the contest. Silly me. I guess you just know so much more about these teams that you can determine who is the best team. And if that is the case, why do we even play these games? If you (or some other self-proclaimed expert) can determine who has the best team by some other means, what's the point of holding the contests? Let's just hand out the medals and skip the games. :ROFLMAO:

I think I've heard it all now. :rolleyes:

Kurt
 
andre10056 said:
Then maybe the championship game can be scheduled a day BEFORE the day of the closing ceremonies.
Click to expand...
Nah. It’s such a popular event, and a way for the games to end with a bang.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top