I was just curious to how United has fared all-time since OT was included during the 2000 season.. Take the children out of the room... For those of you with weak constitutions, please skip to the next thread.. 4 wins 10 losses 21 draws Ouch... I doubt any team in MLS is even close to that record of futility.. For some reason we simply can't get it done in OT.. 2000 - 2-3-6 2001 - 0-1-2 2002 - 2-2-5 (not too bad actually) 2003 - 0-4-8 (simply atrocious) Blech...........
Which is why I don't like OT. There's no guaranteed winner, it punishes players who played hard in regulation time, and most of the time is simply 10 extra minutes of soccer with no goal(s). The League has tried to follow the AMerican mentality that "there must be a winner", yet this season OT has provided us fans with only 10 wins and 38 ties. The sooner the League decides to follow the rest of the world, the better. A tie needs to be a tie, not a marathon.
Here it is: Overall.....W..D...L.....Pts Diff Chicago....4..23..4.....4 Colorado...5..23..3.....7 Columbus..3..24..6.....0 Dallas.......5..21..2.....8 DC...........4..21..10....-2 Fusion......1..10..1.....1 KC...........2..29..4.....0 LA...........9..24..6....12 Revs........4..23..3.....5 Mutts......7..17..4.....10 SJ...........1..25..1.....1 Tampa.....1..6...2......0 Points differential indicates the change in the standings accomplished by the extra ten minutes--plus two points for a win, minus one point for a loss. So the results are slightly skewed by the fact that a team that wins as many as it loses in OT actually BENEFITS. Take LA a couple of years ago--their 3-3-3 OT record meant they picked up three points in the standings. Basically, the bottom line is that while yes, we are the worst overtime team, most of that is due to the effect of this year--which is far and away the worst overtime performance in history. Four losses against no wins is pretty bad. Without this season, we're bad, but not outrageously so.
Here's my number one gripe with OT: it only rewards the team that plays better in OT, not in regulation. If two teams play evenly (or unevenly, it doesn't matter) and play to a tie, then let it be a tie. Neither team is punished, both walk away with a point. The only time OT should ever be used is in tournament play. I have no problem with any of the playoff games going to OT. Those are games that need a winner. Regular season games don't warrant that same priority.
I have never been a big fan of OT. Maybe because we definitely suck in OT. Bright posted an interesting thread in MLS News and Analysis that showed DCU in second place without OT this year. Just for grins, with all this talk of whether Hudson has done a good job or not, can somebody put up the record and points we would have had last year without OT? Here is where we would have been this year without OT: D.C. United 10-6-12 42 Pts.
I was watching an OLD game on tape the other day and saw the shootout clock in the background. I was harping back to the fond memeories of the DCU guys ducking behind the clock to stop from getting hit by the balled up paper beer cups and such we'd throw at the clock as it was wheeled past The Barra and The Nest ..... I wonder what they ever did with those, I still think I'd pay $20 to take a crack at it with a sledgehammer to raise money for the league.
We were 9-14-5 for 32 points last year. Our OT record was 2-2-5. Without OT, we would have finished 7-12-9 for 30 pts. That's the basic issue here--everytime you WIN in OT, you pick up two points. Every time you lose, you only lose one point. So OT only punishes you if you fail to win--something we do with regularity this year.
Well the shootout was good for at least one thing; Tony Sanneh playing for the Nats against Germany, coming in at the keeper in a 1 v. 1 and me thinking, "now this looks familiar."
I like the idea of OT - for various reasons. What I hate is the pointless (in our case, often literally) way that MLS does it. 5 minute OT periods are useless in most cases ... it is done to minimize extra time for television, and to give both teams equal chance to go at each goal, two things that should be ignored. There is just no time to get a real attack going in 5 minutes, so you get a lucky break, or a boring OT. I would go for one 15-minute OT period, how you choose which team goes which way does not not matter to me; home team, visiting team, coin flip, color of jersey, who cares. That gives a team time to string things together, 5 minutes is just an amount of time that teams can try to waste. And I bet it would take the same amount of time as the 2 5-minute pds and the time between them where the goalies get exercise walking to the other goal.
Can't be done without upsetting FIFA. You've gotta have two equal periods of overtime and switch sides between periods.
So...you are saying that you have a couple of those clocks and we are free to come to your house, sledgehammers in hand? That's nice.
What is the incidence of injury in OT? Heard a football commentator moaning about OT in the NFL Regular Season, and that injuries were far more likely in extra time when players are tired. Is this the case in MLS' OT experience? BTW, I hate OT and am looking for reasons to hate it even more. Please help me in my quest.
Thanks Daniel. With OT we are a slightly better team than last year. 32 pts vs. 38 Without OT we are much better. 30 pts. vs. 42. And we still have games to go. This is another reason why I have enjoyed this season more than last.
The shootout was fun. The players didn't like it, but so what this isn't about what the players want. It's about what the fans want-as for me, it was nice knowing someone would come out w/a win. Teams would play harder just not to go to a shootout. Or would you prefer 100+extra time minutes of a 0-0 game?? The hell w/that!!
I assume that tongue was firmly in cheek when you wrote this, Bud, 'cause man, that's some crazy *#*#*#*#. I think that many of us are fine with a draw. I don't need a winner everytime I go to the stadium or flip on a game. At the end of the season, that's another story altogether, but for regular season matches, it's just not necessary IMO. Oh, and the Shootout was not fun.
Wynalda's career was shortened by an injury he suffered in a shootout. The fans lost the opportunty to see him play for the remainder of that season because of a stupid shootout spectacle. Waldo had maybe one chance in five of affecting the game during the shootout. During regulation his chances of affecting a game were much more significant. Memo to OT/Shootout lovers: If there were no friggin overtime gimmicks (during the reg season) the last several minutes of regulation would see more frenetic action to even the score and/or get ahead. Instead, the players are subjected to more risk from injury, blah, blah, blah. Can you name one or more fans that come to MLS games because of overtime or from the hated shootout? GM
Well FIFA has a problem with the 4th Sub rule too, but that doesn't stop MLS! As for OT, the biggest take away for me is as GM has consistently said - it just doesn't matter that much. Out of 169 OT games - 46 had winners. That means only 27% of games actually changed as a result of OT, which is not a lot. And I would bet that for most fans they experience more negative emotions (anxiety, fear, disgust) regarding OT than they do positive emotions (relief, joy, excitement). This is the reason why I believe that most fans really dislike OT and it does not actually attract anyone to the sport. So, I guess if MLS wants to continue increasing the stress level and anxiety levels of their fans then they should persist in their promotion of OT.
To the shootout haters, 2 questions. What brings fans to the game? A. Exciting stuff B. Lack of exciticing stuff What is the shootout? A. Exciting stuff B. Lack of exciting stuff Exciting stuff, the shootout, brings more fans to the game. Look-most people aren't die-hard fans of soccer and believe the way the rest of the world does things is the way it must be done here. There are fans who could almost care less who wins as long as they have a good time-and very few of them post here, and they're the ones we can ADD to the fanbase. I do NOT like overtime. I can deal w/no shootout. But PLEASE find a way to get rid of these 0-0 games, or the game like United had against the Revs where it's detemined by a penalty. Even MLS Cup last year was 0-0 until double OT because both teams (especially NE) refused to attack. About Waldo, he got injured playing the game, just like players get injured playing the game in regulation. It's too bad, but that's part of the game.
Um, no you wouldn't, you'd see what you see in most European games, players stop playing for anything but a tie at about 80 minutes making the tie even more boring to watch. If the players were worried about injuries in OT, they might try to score in the last 10 minutes of regulation to avoid it. I think the biggest problem that having ties allowed is the mindset that it's more important to not lose than to win, all too popular in England, et. al.
So there is better than a 1 in 4 chance that in that tiny 10 minute span there will be a goal? I'd like to see the numbers for the chances of goals in all the other 10 minute spans of a game before I can really make a decision about this.
Well the numbers look like this: Out of 140 games this season: 1 - 15 - 49 goals 16 - 30 - 51 goals 31 - 45 - 70 goals 46 - 60 - 67 goals 61 - 75 - 58 goals 76 - 90 - 82 goals Overtime - 11 goals Stats on MLSnet.com are in 15 minute intervals. Hard to assess the goals per game and minute senarios because goals do come in bunches. You may have one goal in a 15 period or 4 goals in a single game, which skews the averages. But it would seem that the overtime period is not especially productive for goal scoring or at least not inordinately so...