Do you think extending 4-on-4 overtime to 10 minutes is a good idea?
	No	26 (87 percent)
	Yes	4 (13 percent)

Anaheim: Anonymous - Yes
"Yeah, maybe. It's very exciting hockey, no question. I don't think five minutes is that much longer, but then what's going to happen in a couple years? Should we make it 15 minutes? When's it going to end? But I think overtime, five minutes, is very exciting. Believe it or not, there comes a point where you have to say 'That's enough,' because teams have to catch planes, there are curfews in airports and all that kind of stuff. But 10 minutes, I don't think, is that much of a difference. It's obviously very exciting."

	Subscribe at thehockeynews.com.

Atlanta: Anonymous - No
"No. I think the ice in the end of the game would be bad in most buildings and it's going to hurt the game. So for now I think five minutes is good enough."

Boston: Rob Zamuner - No
"I don't think so. Guys are already playing a lot. Some are playing 30 minutes a game. I think most guys would be opposed to it."

Buffalo: Brian Campbell - No
"No. Ten minutes might be too long for the average fan. On the business side, you have the TV markets. Maybe you could add a couple more minutes onto the five minutes instead of having just five."

Calgary: Chris Clark - Yes
"It's good to have a winner and an extra five minutes definitely could provide a winner. It would get more of the guys involved because you could almost rotate three lines for a 10-minute 4-on-4. I think it would be great for the fans and great for us. It is difficult to come away with a tie. Nobody likes them. I don't like shootouts. It's great to watch and it is great for the fans but it is tough to lose in a shootout because you know you have played really well and it comes down to a little breakaway."

Carolina: Anonymous - No
"Absolutely not. It's too much hockey: 82 games, 10 exhibitions, and if you go anywhere in the playoffs all those games."

Chicago: Anonymous - No

Colorado: Greg de Vries - No
"No, I think I'm pretty happy with the way it is. If that were the way it was for us this year, with all the OT games we've played, we'd be dead tired right now."

	Lachance

Columbus: Scott Lachance - No
"No. No way. We play 82 games and that adds up over the course of a season. They've done a great job shortening games this season. I think adding five minutes to overtime would hurt more than help, especially for the teams out west."

Dallas: Sergei Zubov - No
"No. Five minutes is enough time 4-on-4 to do a lot of stuff."

Detroit: Mathieu Dandenault - No
"The games are long enough already and if you look at it, a lot of the overtime games get settled in the first five minutes."

Edmonton: Anonymous - No
"No. I don't play in overtime now, why would I want it to be any longer."

Florida: Valeri Bure - No
"No. I think five minutes is perfect. There's lots of opportunities to score and nobody's playing defense."

Los Angeles: Anonymous - No

Minnesota: Willie Mitchell - No
"No. It is fine the way it is now."

	Theodore

Montreal: Jose Theodore - No
"I don't think so. It's all out for five minutes and you see a lot of scoring chances. There's nothing wrong with a tie. Goalies don't like overtime because it affects our stats, our wins, everything."

Nashville: David Legwand - Yes
"Yeah. It's fun to be out there in four-on-four. In five minutes you have a ton of chances so if you add another five minutes ... do the math, you'll have twice as many chances. I think a lot more games would be settled in overtime."

New Jersey: Scott Niedermayer - No
"No. I like 4-on-4 hockey, but I wouldn't like to see an extra five minutes. During the course of the season it would get a little long. Especially if you're playing the next day. The more 4-on-4 the better, but if you start stretching out overtimes it will be a lot of extra hockey being played."

N.Y. Islanders: Adrian Aucoin - No
"I like the five because you can really blow it out and go for it. Every single shift is a full-out offensive battle to get that goal. If it was 10 minutes, it would turn into half a period, and you'd see more conservative play. I'd say keep it the way it is."

N.Y. Rangers: Anonymous - No
"Are they going to try and get that in the CBA, too?"

Ottawa: Anonymous - Yes

Philadelphia: Anonymous - No
"No, season is too long as it is, leading to more injuries, fatigue, etc."

	Pellerin

Phoenix: Scott Pellerin - No
"No. I like it the way it is now. Five minutes is enough. It opens things up, it's the perfect amount of time, and if teams want to go for it, they can go for it."

Pittsburgh: J.S. Aubin - No
"I think if you play 65 minutes, that's enough."

San Jose: Patrick Marleau - Yes
"I think if you extend it to 10 minutes there will be more wins and not as many ties. But if it stay five minutes you see more excitement, more energy. There are pluses to both sides. But if I have to pick a side, I think I'd go with 10 minutes because it gives you more time to score."

St. Louis: Dallas Drake - No
"They're trying to shorten games, right? Get them going faster? How can you hope to do that if you extend overtime? There would be more outcomes, more games would be decided. But I'm old school when it comes to this stuff and the way it is now we should stick to it."

Tampa Bay: Anonymous - No

Toronto: Anonymous - No
"No, I think it's good where it is. It gives the fans the excitement they want and I think 10 minutes would make it too gimmicky."

Vancouver: Trevor Letowski - No
"No. Five minutes is plenty. The 4-on-4 as it is pretty wide open and gives teams ample time to be rewarded."

Washington: Anonymous - No

Material from The Hockey News.
To subscribe, visit The Hockey News web site at: http://www.thehockeynews.com