The more shootouts I see, the more I support a 3 point win system.

[WiDeN]

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win

2 points: Overtime/shootout win

1 points: Overtime/shootout loss

0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker

Or just bring back the tie after 20 minutes of overtime.

[WiDeN]

I think if you score a goal to win the game, then you should get all the win points. Conversely, if you let in a goal to lose a game, then it should be 0 points. 1 pt OT losses don't exactly create urgency. If you make it to the shootout, then split the points, but if you lose while playing hockey, then you should lose, and vice versa for a win.

[TheRick]

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win

2 points: Overtime/shootout win

1 points: Overtime/shootout loss

0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker

Or just bring back the tie after 20 minutes of overtime.

[Vansicle]

No to the 3 point win. It should go back to the way it was back in the day, get rid of the circus (shootout), 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss in reg or OT.

[TheRick]

Also having the 3 point win system could easily end up breaking the 1976 - 77 montreal canadiens single season points record of 132!

[brewdog]

I would rather see fewer games go to shootouts by encouraging more action in OT. 3-on-3 or no offsides might help with that.

[-AJ-]

As much as I don't like drastic changes, this one would really be for the better.

Also, I don't like the idea of going back to ties. I like having a winner each game. That said, I'd agree that the amount of shootouts should be reduced to make them more of a rarity and thus more exciting.

[Lychees]

Yeah.... especially with the 48 game season, teams are more and more reluctant to push for the win when it's crunch time, and are satisfied as long as they get the 1 point.

But if we'll see it? Doubt it.