BOCA RATON, Fla. – The biggest news to come out of the NHL general managers’ meetings might turn out to be this: a recommendation to dry-scrape the ice after regulation and switch ends in overtime. The thinking is that decent ice conditions and long line changes will lead to more OT goals and fewer shootouts.

There also might be a recommendation to let the referees review goalie interference on a TV monitor in the penalty box – at least in the preseason as a test.

That’s about it.

Though the GMs are discussing several ideas – including 3-on-3 overtime, expanded video review and a coach’s challenge – they know a change can have unintended consequences. A solution to one problem can cause other problems. They want to make the game better, not worse, and as the New York Rangers’ Glen Sather said: “We’ve had a track record of making it worse in some cases.” So they are cautious.

The GMs split into three groups of 10 on Monday, each focused on a set of issues. They will meet as a group of 30 on Tuesday and Wednesday. If they recommend a rule change, it will have to go through the competition committee and then the board of governors. This was the talk after the breakout sessions:

Overtime

For years, the Detroit Red Wings’ Ken Holland has been trying to deemphasize the shootout. He has proposed a longer overtime – with four or five minutes of four-on-four followed by four or five minutes of three-on-three – so games would be decided by hockey and not skills competitions more often.

The GMs generally agree the shootout is too common. When they met in November, there seemed to be more support than ever before for three-on-three OT. Though 924 games this season, 74.9 percent of games were decided in regulation, 10.8 percent in overtime and 14.3 percent in shootouts.

But coming out of his breakout session, Holland said he wasn’t sure there was enough support for longer overtime or three-on-three OT. Sather called three-on-three OT “a bit of a pipe dream.” Some think it’s too radical. Some wonder whether it would lead to more scoring chances. Some worry about wear and tear.

“When it comes to the extra minutes added, you’re talking about your best players playing more,” said the Washington Capitals’ George McPhee. “They may play enough already. It might be back-to-back games, three games in four nights. How much are you using those guys? We don’t see three-on-three much anyway in hockey, and we think this works pretty well.”

There does seem to be support for dry-scraping the ice after regulation and switching ends for overtime. Dry-scraping the ice would improve the ice conditions enough for another five minutes, but it would take less time than flooding the ice. (There would not be another dry-scrape in the event of a shootout.) Switching ends would create long line changes, as in the second period, and could lead to mistakes and scoring chances. The effect might be greater four-on-four.

“We don’t need major tweaks here,” McPhee said. “This might be one.”

Another idea from this breakout group: The St. Louis Blues’ Doug Armstrong suggested separating the players on face-offs as in international competition, instead of letting them stand side by side. That might lead to less jostling for position, fewer centers kicked out of draws.

“Lots of support for that in our group,” Holland said. “We’ve got to take it to the big group.”

Expanded video review and coach’s challenge

On Jan. 18, the Detroit Red Wings scored when a puck hit the netting above the glass, fell onto the back of Los Angeles Kings goaltender Jonathan Quick and then dropped into the net. The referees missed it. The play wasn’t reviewable. So the Wings tied the game in the final minute of regulation, and they ended up winning in a shootout. They got two points when they should have gotten none, the Kings got one point when they should have gotten two and the standings in both conferences got screwed up.

It seems so simple: Look at the video and get it right. But it isn’t that simple.

“It’s just a lot more complicated than you think,” said the Kings’ Dean Lombardi.

Lombardi was in the same breakout group when the GMs debated the same issue a couple of years ago, and they came to the same conclusion then that they did now. Where do you draw the line?

Story continues