Wrapping up our analysis of the GMs’ ideas

Carolina Panthers coach John Fox throws the challenge flag in the first half of the Panthers’ 24-17 loss to the Miami Dolphins in an NFL football game in Charlotte, N.C., Thursday, Nov. 19, 2009. The ruling was upheld. (AP Photo/Nell Redmond)

AP

Bob McKenzie’s story on this week’s GM meetings really stirred my imagination (and probably did the same for other hockey fans). So, today, I’ll break down some of the more interesting ideas that were discussed. Are they realistic? What would be an even better alternative? Are they just dumb? OK, let’s wrap this up by firing off a few quick opinions about the remaining ideas. Some of them aren’t worth more than a tiny blurb, anyway.

Another idea that was brought up and discussed at length was the idea of a “coach’s challenge,” similar to one that the NFL uses. The idea would be that once and only once in a game, a coach would be able to “throw the flag” and challenge a play to be reviewed by video. Unfortunately it appears that may be too much of a slippery slope and could seriously lengthen games.

Ugh, I’d definitely veto that one. There are times when an NFL challenge can make a game that already has a ridiculous action-to-commercial ratio just agonizing. While hockey could possibly find a “quicker” solution, the sport already reviews questionable goals. That’s good enough for me.

One of the best ideas to come out of the meetings - even if it seems fairly obvious - is the proposal to change the league’s tie-breaker from plain-old wins to wins in regulation. This is an obvious reaction to the random, gimmicky nature of shootouts.

Personally, I’d rather the league either: a) get rid of shootouts altogether or b) make them something that teams would rather avoid. Right now, a weak team can simply try to hold on during overtime and then try their luck in the skills competition. The league doesn’t want to mess with a point system that would place a greater reward for a regulation or overtime win, but that would provide the most accurate depiction of the teams who are truly the cream of the crop.

I’ve also heard about some weird OT format in which half the period is 4-on-4 and the other is 3-on-3, but that just made my brain hurt. I can’t stand it when leagues drastically alter their games during overtime. Keep it simple, GMs.