The NHL’s 3-on-3 overtime format has been a hit with fans since its introduction in the 2015–16 season. The wide-open ice, the creativity, and the pace have delivered some of the most thrilling moments in recent memory. But as entertaining as it can be, a growing issue is starting to take the excitement out of what should be the most dramatic part of the game.
Overtime is meant to be fast and sudden, but instead, it’s becoming a chess match of possession. Teams that gain control of the puck often choose not to attack, instead pulling out of the offensive zone to reset. Skilled players skate in circles, waiting for defenders to tire or make a mistake. In some cases, teams can hold the puck for over a minute without attempting a shot, all while avoiding pressure by regrouping repeatedly in the neutral zone.
This kind of puck possession without purpose runs counter to what overtime is supposed to represent. Rather than pushing for a game-winning goal, teams are playing keep-away. It slows down the action, frustrates fans, and more often than not leads to games being decided by a shootout.
To fix this, the NHL should look to basketball’s shot clock for inspiration. By introducing a rule where teams are required to maintain pressure once they’ve entered the offensive zone—or risk a turnover if they intentionally skate the puck back out—the league could restore the urgency overtime was meant to have. This zone-based possession clock would encourage quicker decisions, create more scoring chances, and make it harder for teams to simply burn time while waiting for the perfect opening.
Once a team gains the blue line in overtime, they must either shoot or maintain puck pressure inside the zone. If they skate the puck back out intentionally, the play is blown dead and possession is turned over.
Here’s a visual representation of NHL overtime outcomes since the 3-on-3 format was introduced in the 2015–16 season.
As you can see, the percentage of overtime games ending before a shootout has gradually increased over time—from around 61% in 2015–16 to approximately 73% in 2023–24. However, roughly one in four games still goes to a shootout each season.
This trend supports the case for further reform: introducing a zone-entry clock and extending overtime could reduce shootouts even more, preserving the integrity of the game and letting more matchups be decided by real hockey plays.
Beyond that, the league needs to seriously reconsider the shootout. It might produce some memorable highlights, but it’s not how a team sport like hockey should be decided. The shootout strips away the teamwork, strategy, and flow that define the game and reduces it to a skills competition. It’s not representative of the 60+ minutes that came before it.
Extending overtime to a full 10 or 15-minute period would make far more sense. Data already shows that most games that reach overtime end during the 3-on-3 portion. With more time and the addition of a possession rule, even fewer games would reach the shootout phase. Fans would get more hockey, not less, and teams would have a better chance of winning through gameplay rather than a coin-flip format.
Since the league introduced 3-on-3 overtime, about a quarter of games still end in shootouts. That’s a large number of outcomes being decided by something that’s arguably disconnected from the team aspect of the sport. Meanwhile, fan sentiment is clear—polls show a majority dislike the shootout and would prefer games end through regular play.
If the NHL wants to modernize and improve the game’s most crucial moments, adopting a possession-based rule similar to a basketball shot clock is the next logical step. Pair that with eliminating the shootout and extending overtime, and hockey’s already exciting format becomes even better. The goal should be to let games end the right way—with a real hockey play.
Tags:
#NHLOvertime #NHLRuleChange #NHLShotClock #EndTheShootout #HockeyAnalysis #OvertimeFix #NHLPossession #3on3Hockey #NHL2025 #HockeyDebate
0 Comments