CHN looks at the shootout.

The discussion of the shootout has been an on going topic of heated debate, the discussion seems to be making a come back in the pre-season. Most of us have read the numerous blog articles and message boards posts discussing the shoot out and where they stand in relation to it. Some have even proposed silly petitions drives to send to the NCAA urging them to reject the notion of having a shoot out to decide ties.

I have personally talked to quite a few people about the subject as well, it is an interesting subject. I also liken it to the Rush Limbaugh comparison you either really like him or you despise him, there seems to be little middle ground on the subject. The same emotions are exhibited when it comes to the shootout debate.

Personally; from watching about 500 games the post NHL lock out I can honestly say that I am for the shoot out, put me squarely in the pro column. I think the NHL has done a good job enacting/executing the shootout and marketing it; I don't see why college hockey couldn't do it as well? Frankly the NHL gets it, after the lock out the NHL tried to put offense back into the game of hockey, the same needs to done with the college game. People don't normally watch hockey to see a 0-0, 1-0 trap feast. They watch hockey to see offense and hard hitting.

This season the NCAA and the NCAA division one hockey leagues have said they are going to open up the game and start calling the obstruction more closely. I applaud this action, but I am skeptical because I don't think the WCHA will be able to keep up with the growing trend in college hockey. Personally, I am bored with watching a team that can't barely skate hook, hold and slash a team up and down the ice and try to tell me it is smart defensive hockey, it is boring and about as fun to watch as a rectal exam. Imagine having the game of hockey called more closely to the NHL and then having the ties settled in the same matter. I think it would be an exciting concept.

Special Report ... Shootouts
by Adam Wodon/Managing Editor --- The push to eliminate ties seems to have arisen in recent years over a concern that too many games end up deadlocked. This is certainly true -- to some extent over recent years, and to a large extent when compared to, say, 30 years ago. This is because games are lower scoring and played tighter, which just mathematically makes it more likely to end up tied.

But is this a problem? Some say yes, some say no.

Those who think it's a problem believe that fans get cheated when there's no result. They think people want to see a winner. And some think the shootout is just plain fun.

Last year, 18 percent of games went to OT -- two-thirds of those were not decided.

I think we can put the MTU coach in the not for it column. I actually read somewhere that only one WCHA coach was FOR the shoot out.

"I am very much against removing ties," said Michigan Tech head coach Jamie Russell. "We don't play enough games to reduce ties. In the WCHA, the standings are so tight, points are like gold. Look at the NHL. How many teams have records at or above .500? The shootout, and getting a point for an OT loss, creates parity, it doesn't eliminate it.