In a grand twist of irony, it was Ken Holland, then GM of the Red Wings, that petitioned the rule change to count regulation/overtime wins as first tiebreaker and not include shootouts, and this was modified when they switched to 3 on 3 OT
Dude your killin me. This was a great vid. Thanks. I will sub u for that. Best explanation ive seen and heard. U got this! so Goood! Can't wait to see your playoff takes. Go Wings!...next year
Just wanna say, youre lowkey one of my favorite hockey channels on RUclips. You're a lot like the Schaffrillas of hockey content, especially with your humor. I'd love to see you get more attention for it! 😁
Now here’s the thing Detroit should have made the playoffs this season but can we talk about the fact that the blues got screwed they were 16th in the league and the caps were 17th but since they’re in the west they didn’t make it (I hate being a blues fan)
@@Czestoamas No, the Flyers were only playing with one thing in mind. Beat Washington in regulation. What Detroit wanted didn't factor into their decision in any sense during that game. You want someone to blame, blame Detroit for getting scored on 4 times.
@@Czestoamas Excuse the fact? What are you talking about? They Flyers aren't to blame for Detroit not winning enough games to get into the playoffs. The Flyers got beat. The Red Wings got beat. That's it.
@@allergictostupid2410 what I’m saying is in the grand scheme of things the Red Wings may not have won the games they needed to make the playoffs comfortably, but at the end of the day their faith sat in the hands of the flyers, and they screwed it up for the Red Wings. I don’t really care about that. I’m a Penguins fan, but it still hurts knowing that they also knocked my team out.
I’m a Wings fan. They didn’t deserve to get in, they didn’t even have 30 regulation wins. But neither did the Isles and they’re somehow a 6 seed (and getting exposed). If the NHL had a 3 point system, the Caps are the 6 seed and the final game between the Islanders and Penguins would have decided the 8 seed. Islanders won but PIT had nothing to play for. Awarding 2 points in some games and 3 in others is asinine. If an OT loss is worth more than a regulation loss, it would stand to reason that a regulation win should be worth more than an OT win. 3 points for every game, no exceptions.
I have to assume that's the first empty netter in history to eliminate 3 teams at once. Classic! Then Caps lose 4 straight to the Rangers. They really made the most with that playoff spot. Also classic!
I mean, the tie breaker should be games won, not games won in regulation. But also the tie breaker should have been us not losing to Phoenix twice in three games so...
I think regulation wins as the first tie breaker makes more sense. The way I see it, winning in overtime means you needed extra time to put the other team down, and while you were beating them in overtime, you were still giving them a point. Regulation wins are more efficient in that the winner gets two points, the loser gets no points, and the win was done in less time.
It just seems secondary to me. We got the job done more times than another team. Imagine if there were playoff tiebreakers because one team scored in 5OT instead of who won the games.
But - WHAT A STUPID RULE..... since WHEN isn't the tiebreaker WINS....? There has NEVER been a tiebreaker in ANY League EVER where the first tiebreaker isn't WINS......
Because hockey overtime is gimmicky in the regular season, it’s 3 on 3 and then a shootout. Overtime hockey in the regular season isn’t real hockey. That’s why the tiebreaker is regulation wins, and that’s also why teams that lose in overtime still get a point.
@@beneaton6765 so..... because Washington had more OT LOSSES they should get the advantage over Detroit who had more OT WINS......? still stupid "logic"......
Развлечения
I'm a Wings fan and while it was heartbreaking, Detroit did this to themselves through their last 20 games
Overtime loses allowed Caps to be tied with the Wings, but we can’t count Overtime wins for the tiebreaker, make it make sense
In a grand twist of irony, it was Ken Holland, then GM of the Red Wings, that petitioned the rule change to count regulation/overtime wins as first tiebreaker and not include shootouts, and this was modified when they switched to 3 on 3 OT
you also forgot the flyers should've won 2-1 that first goal in the first is a good goal
I’m so glad I found your channel bro, funny af content 👏
Dude your killin me. This was a great vid. Thanks. I will sub u for that. Best explanation ive seen and heard. U got this! so Goood! Can't wait to see your playoff takes. Go Wings!...next year
Just wanna say, youre lowkey one of my favorite hockey channels on RUclips. You're a lot like the Schaffrillas of hockey content, especially with your humor. I'd love to see you get more attention for it! 😁
I’m a huge wings and cats fan and I’m happy that at least one of my teams did good
Now here’s the thing Detroit should have made the playoffs this season but can we talk about the fact that the blues got screwed they were 16th in the league and the caps were 17th but since they’re in the west they didn’t make it (I hate being a blues fan)
MY GOAT RETURNS
yk here after the playoffs, i think that the real cherry ontop is that the caps also got swept by the rangers lol
Blaming the flyers is crazy
I mean they were responsible for the illumination of the Red Wings, my team and themselves they lost the capital of which they needed to win
@@Czestoamas No, the Flyers were only playing with one thing in mind. Beat Washington in regulation. What Detroit wanted didn't factor into their decision in any sense during that game. You want someone to blame, blame Detroit for getting scored on 4 times.
@@allergictostupid2410 Yes whilethat was what the flyers may be thinking that doent excuse the fact that thats what other teams needed to make it in
@@Czestoamas Excuse the fact? What are you talking about? They Flyers aren't to blame for Detroit not winning enough games to get into the playoffs. The Flyers got beat. The Red Wings got beat. That's it.
@@allergictostupid2410 what I’m saying is in the grand scheme of things the Red Wings may not have won the games they needed to make the playoffs comfortably, but at the end of the day their faith sat in the hands of the flyers, and they screwed it up for the Red Wings. I don’t really care about that. I’m a Penguins fan, but it still hurts knowing that they also knocked my team out.
Love this
I’m a Wings fan. They didn’t deserve to get in, they didn’t even have 30 regulation wins. But neither did the Isles and they’re somehow a 6 seed (and getting exposed). If the NHL had a 3 point system, the Caps are the 6 seed and the final game between the Islanders and Penguins would have decided the 8 seed. Islanders won but PIT had nothing to play for. Awarding 2 points in some games and 3 in others is asinine. If an OT loss is worth more than a regulation loss, it would stand to reason that a regulation win should be worth more than an OT win. 3 points for every game, no exceptions.
I have to assume that's the first empty netter in history to eliminate 3 teams at once. Classic! Then Caps lose 4 straight to the Rangers. They really made the most with that playoff spot. Also classic!
Friendly reminder that Jaden Schwartz and the refs cvcked the Wings out of an extra point with a throw of a stick 4-5 months ago lmao
Friendly reminder that the wings went on a 7 game losing streak. Oh and they blew a 4-0 lead with a powerplay in the second to the San Jose Sharks.
Damn they were so bad they couldn’t get an extra point in 4-5 months probably don’t belong
I knew this was all Arthas's fault...
Uhh, who’s watching after panthers won? He was right abt panthers, but wrong abt the jets the oilers were against the panthers in the finals
I mean, the tie breaker should be games won, not games won in regulation. But also the tie breaker should have been us not losing to Phoenix twice in three games so...
I think regulation wins as the first tie breaker makes more sense. The way I see it, winning in overtime means you needed extra time to put the other team down, and while you were beating them in overtime, you were still giving them a point.
Regulation wins are more efficient in that the winner gets two points, the loser gets no points, and the win was done in less time.
It just seems secondary to me. We got the job done more times than another team. Imagine if there were playoff tiebreakers because one team scored in 5OT instead of who won the games.
Hey tell me who to bet on for the playoffs I’ve gotta make some money buddy.
2:46😂
4:10😂
But - WHAT A STUPID RULE..... since WHEN isn't the tiebreaker WINS....? There has NEVER been a tiebreaker in ANY League EVER where the first tiebreaker isn't WINS......
Because hockey overtime is gimmicky in the regular season, it’s 3 on 3 and then a shootout. Overtime hockey in the regular season isn’t real hockey. That’s why the tiebreaker is regulation wins, and that’s also why teams that lose in overtime still get a point.
@@beneaton6765 so..... because Washington had more OT LOSSES they should get the advantage over Detroit who had more OT WINS......?
still stupid "logic"......
R.W I hope my Dallas Stars kick the Edmonton Oilers ass make a video on that please after
R,w if Detroit made the playoffs they would have ‼️‼️got their asses kicked by Florida
I love how Montreal had nothing to gain from this and just wanted to screw over Detroit😂
They almost lost a lotto placement