Comments on: Monday (8 OTs) edition: Wha’ Happened?

By: Polly Wannamaker

Polly Wannamaker — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 02:42:24 +0000

Bubble, I was a Skipper (class of ‘87 rulez and that (insert dashes between every word on your own if you feel so inclined) calling the game just so we could lose the next day on a shot that would never have gone past Naegele the night before game… well, that game sucked.

P.S. Five minute OTs are as lame as shootouts, which are as lame as suspending a game to pickup later, which is as lame as people who never played the game but nowhere near as lame as people who’ve played the game who suggest anything but play full period OTs to sudden death.

By: Paul Walsh

Paul Walsh — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:18:57 +0000

Why not go home and start up again the next day?

By: Michael Rand

Michael Rand — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:39:08 +0000

I stand corrected on the MN OT if what Jason says is true … haven’t seen a 3OT game for a while … maybe ever.

By: Jason

Jason — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:32:59 +0000

As a player i would have been irate, you play 109 minutes and no true winner i put all that effort, heart, and soul into years of outdoor ice, morning practice before school, and that much money to get to a state championship game and we call it a tie, that is BS, i can gaurantee that there is enough adreniline to keep going for whatever it takes. And there is no shout-out in playoffs that is just as cheap to call it a tie. By the way in MN its 8 minutes then 17 all the way intil it is done.

By: Bubble

Bubble — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:29:25 +0000

I recall 1985, Minnetonka/Jefferson. Game went to 4 OT’s, it was actually suspended after the 3rd OT, so the late game could be played, and resumed the next morning. That was a great game, and made for on of my best weekends in high school!

By: Paul Peter Paulos

Paul Peter Paulos — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:18:13 +0000

That means neither team showed up

By: jama

jama — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:16:53 +0000

So if both teams won doesn’t that also mean that both teams lost?

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:55:36 +0000

I don’t like shootouts at all because they decide a hockey contest in a way that doesn’t represent hockey in any way. I think that multiple overtimes are the way to go although there’s a certain sporting honor in acknowledging a hard fought tie at some point.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:55:19 +0000

I can’t believe they ended in a tie. I would be irrate if I was on one of those teams. A shootout is NOT the way to decide the state champion either. They need to play until there is a winner. Period.

By: JGreg

JGreg — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:48:07 +0000

I remember a North Dakota Hockey championship game circa Lundeen’s era (late ’70s) between Grafton and Grand Forks Central (correct me if I have the teams wrong)that went eight OTs only to end with a Grafton player trying to clear a puck from behind his own net only to have it hit one of his own players skate’s and bounce past his own goalie. BOTH teams implored the ref not to count the goal but to no avail. Talk about the agony of defeat. The Grand Forks players afterward indicated they were more than willing to be considered co-champions. Sportsmanship is supposed to be more important than winning, even if some adults seem to forget that from time to time.