Columnist image

Host, TSN The Reporters with Dave Hodge

| Archive

I'd say "thumbs down", but I'd rather shake my head at what has become of this Toronto Maple Leafs' season. Statistically, their worst performance came in 1984-85, when they won 20 of 80 games. This descent into shame can't be measured by numbers.

What remained of the Leafs' season following the firing of coach Randy Carlyle was supposed to contain a response to the words of club president Brendan Shanahan. He addressed the players and told them, "We're watching. We're on it. You're going to tell us who you are." What he has been told by most of them is that they have no business wearing the Toronto uniform beyond April 11, the 82nd game, the merciful end.

There will be a new coach in another season and a fresh start will be advertised, but if Shanahan meant what he said when he promised to judge the Leafs from mid-January to mid-April, he would be wise to give up on many of them the way they've given up on the ice.

You might know me as an avowed supporter of the shootout. Thus, you might not expect my "thumbs up" to the three-on-three overtime idea, but I have no problem with it whatsoever.

The main thrust of that innovation, popular in the AHL and apparently bound for the NHL, was to reduce the number of shootouts, which it has done dramatically. So why would I be in favour of it? Well, it's another layer of overtime excitement - gimmickry if you wish - that entertains the fans while providing a way to determine the winner of a game. If it can't do that, the shootout will. I'm not sure games need to be any longer, so I might propose an entire five-minute overtime of three-on-three hockey, never mind reverting to it after three minutes of four-on-four with a seven-minute overtime the possible result.

Now, if you really want to make a change that would cut down the number of overtimes as well as shootouts, you could consider my most radical idea: playing four-on-four in the final 10 minutes of the third period. I'd play the whole game four-on-four if you must know, so that's the most radical idea, I guess.