OK, those pampered people we can't seem to shake ourselves of watching perform are finding some things problematic again.
In this case, the possibility the National Hockey League might look at 3-on-3 overtime. The players are worried about fatigue, about this, that, whatever other thing.
The league wants to cut down on shootouts.
Well, excuse me but if you, as a league, are looking to cut down on shootouts, aren't you acknowledging that what you have in place is a dumb way to settle a contest? Exciting, sure, but if you, as a league, are so sold on it, then why don't you allow it in playoff games?
Oh, right, playoff games are IMPORTANT. So, what you are then admitting is the regular season is a waste of time. I don't think it is, actually, I thing the regular season is undervalued - in all sports - in terms of how it defines how teams are good, or bad, over a long 82-game (hockey and basketball) and beyond haul but that's another blog post.
Back to overtime, shootouts, and so on.
Here's how - for the billionth time, look it up in Blogovich archives - you fix it. Because otherwise, check the Blogovich archives link, you compromise the integrity of the sport - which people for unknown reasons seem blindly willing to accept.
You do what every other sport does during the regular season, if you want 'overtime' (if not, go back to having tie games which is essentially what you have what with the ridiculous overtime/shootout loser getting a point anyway system which totally distorts the standings and thus playoff seedings and matchups ever since the silly system was adopted) and that is, let me catch my breath. Whew.
And that is, you play the game until you have a winner. Baseball teams play until someone wins, whether it takes the regulation nine innings or 99, during the regular season or playoffs. Basketball teams do the same. Football, as well, and if a winner isn't established after the 15-minute overtime in the NFL, or in CFL games, a tie is the result during the regular season and what's wrong with that?
But if you insist, NHL and hockey in general, on declaring a winner, don't play five-minute overtimes during the regular season and then resort to gimmicks.
Play full 20-minute periods, as in the playoffs, until someone scores/wins. Trust me, you'd see teams going hell bent for leather, so to speak, to score early and end things if they are faced with a cross-continent flight to their next game the next day. And, if they can't finish it, well, that's their problem.
If every other sport can declare a winner, or a tie result, without resorting to gimmicks (can you imagine a home-run hitting contest to settle an extra-inning baseball game, or a free-throw shooting contest in basketball?), then hockey can, too.
But that's likely way too much to expect from this wonderful sport wracked by ridiculous policies.