-Gabriel Dorris-

Throughout the NHL this year, we’ve seen a three-against-three overtime formula that used to be one of the most exciting parts of hockey turn into teams filled with stars cycling the puck between their own zone and the neutral zone for a full five minutes, before a shootout where three or more rounds of nobody really trying leads to disappointment on both sides, one for losing and one for gaining an extra point by such ingenuine methods.

Overtime has become boring, and the shootout isn’t much better- so how can the NHL fix them?

Shot Clock

Picture this- in overtime, a team has 30 seconds after the first touch to either turn over the puck or get a shot on goal. If they don’t, it’s a two-minute penalty for delay of game. This would force teams to shoot, and if they somehow still didn’t, it would lead to more powerplays where teams were actively trying to score. One problem with this is that it may be hard to enforce, and it would lead to lots of very subjective, controversial calls. What if a team gets a shot after 30.1 seconds? What if it’s impossible to tell if another shot was on net? What if a pass goes off the stick of an opposing player on its way to a successful completion? Does that reset the clock? All of those questions could make this a flawed solution.

Remove the Shootout

Five minutes. Three on three. Same rules as now, with one difference. If nobody scores in overtime, both teams lose and are given an OTL in the standings. However, giving up a goal in OT would also be counted as an OTL and count for the same number of points. This would turn OT into a full-on shooting fest (shootout?) with crazy decisions from both sides. Imagine both teams going empty net with 30 seconds left to play, in pure desperation for that chance at an extra point. Even with whatever problems it would cause, it sure would be fun.

3v3, 2v2, 1v1…

What if instead of going to a shootout after overtime, the game went to more overtime? The idea of a longer 3v3 session has been stated many times, but so have the problems with it- messy ice, and people would be out too late. So what if instead of an extra five minutes of 3v3, we had 3 minutes of 2v2? If nobody scores there? 1v1, for 1 minute. Still no goal? Goalie against goalie. Puck dropped in the middle, and both players, with full gear, attempt to score and save at the same time.

Race to the Control Room

I’ve always imagined a room in hockey arenas where there’s just a button to give each team a goal on the jumbotron, play the music, start the lights, and whatever else. What if each team picked their best player to start from center ice and begin a full-on race to this hypothetical room, skating the whole way? Nothing is off-limits. The first guy to press their button wins.

Basketball

A lot of hockey rinks are basketball arenas too, right? So if nobody scores in overtime, the players get off the ice and go home or to their hotel. By the next morning, the ice will have been replaced with a court. The teams begin a full, 60-minute basketball match. The winner of that takes the extra point.

Mascot Shootout

Okay, so the mascot shootout is basically just the shootout, except it’s the same person shooting for each side every time. And the person isn’t really a person. Well, the person actually is a person. A person in a costume. The mascots, of course, would also be their team’s goalie. I do not care that the Rangers do not have a mascot. Make them lose by default. It would make the league so much better.

Prisoner’s Dilemma

If you’ve never heard of the famous thought experiment, here it is summed up for you. Two prisoners have been caught for a crime. They are each taken into separate rooms, where they are both offered the same deal. They can either choose to rat out their partner or stay quiet. If both prisoners stay quiet, they’ll each be locked up for three years. If they both speak up, it’s seven years behind bars for both of them. If one betrays their partner and the other stays silent, it’s ten years for the betrayed and 0 for the traitor. The idea here is to essentially do the same thing but for hockey. If nobody scores in OT, both team captains will be taken into separate rooms. There, they can choose to either compliment or insult the opposing captain. If they both insult each other, they both get 1 point. If they both complement each other, it’s 2 points for both teams. If one captain is insulted and the other complimented, the insulter gets three standings points for their club and the insulted none.

Fan Fight

Two random fans, from the stands. They will be chosen based on jersey, from ages 0-200. They will then both be stood at center ice, given hockey gloves and good luck. The first one to hit the ice is out, and the opposing fan’s team gets the extra point.

Give it to the Sharks

Between this year and the 2016 Stanley Cup Finals, literally everyone feels bad for the San Jose Sharks. People may complain on the surface, but deep down, I think there is not a single person who wouldn’t be happy to see the Sharks given the extra point every time two teams go to a shootout. It’s time we give San Jose a break. They deserve it.

(Or Buffalo, but nobody really likes Buffalo)

Flip a Coin

It would be just as accurate as an indicator of team quality as the shootout, would save time, and would probably save money too. Why not?