Visor/Half Shield vs Cage/Full Shield

[Stauber1]

It ain't youth hockey, but it's not a group of adults either. In the past 5-10 years its changed in D1, but college freshman typically are experiencing for the first time what it is to be independant and make their own decisions. The institutions they attend help take some of that responsibility; in all areas, not just sport.
Bottom line, full shield is more safe. Are these kids "ready" to move to playing without a cage? Sure, I suppose you could make that argument. But it just doesn't matter, really. I have a hard time believing the NCAA is going to take the time to propose a rules change, debate the rules change, vote on the rules change, and then implement a rules change for something that in long run just really isn't important.

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

It ain't youth hockey, but it's not a group of adults either. In the past 5-10 years its changed in D1, but college freshman typically are experiencing for the first time what it is to be independant and make their own decisions. The institutions they attend help take some of that responsibility; in all areas, not just sport.
Bottom line, full shield is more safe. Are these kids "ready" to move to playing without a cage? Sure, I suppose you could make that argument. But it just doesn't matter, really. I have a hard time believing the NCAA is going to take the time to propose a rules change, debate the rules change, vote on the rules change, and then implement a rules change for something that in long run just really isn't important.

As annoying as the full sheild/cage always have been... as far as playing goes, they ultimately only make a significant difference if two guys want to fight and the amount of high sticking that goes around. The high sticking is kind of a tricky issue, so I'll avoid it for now (hey, I gotta work, you know).

I'm (as most of us are) fully aware of the visual annoyances of being able to look down with an unobstructed view of the puck. But at the end of the day, I really feel like those annoyances are really just annoyances and don't impact the game much. You don't need to see the puck clearly to know that its there, if you need to see it at all.

[Waite21]

What I don't like about cages or full face masks is the increase in carrying sticks up high. Not that I'm concerned about high sticking, but rather that sticks in the air are less apt to score goals on rebounds, etc.

Sorry to be responding belatedly to a post that was made some time ago, but I don't see any of the more recent posts shedding light on the question that came to my mind after reading the above statement.

I never played the game, so I don't have first-hand knowledge of what goes through a player's head when he's pursuing a rebound. However, I do know enough about the rules to believe that there is merit to J_J_f_P's argument about sticks in the air being less apt to score goals on rebounds.

Now, could someone please explain to me why the fact that an opponent is wearing a face shield should make a player more likely to carry his stick at a level from which he is less likely to be able to score a legal goal? :confused:

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Sorry to be responding belatedly to a post that was made some time ago, but I don't see any of the more recent posts shedding light on the question that came to my mind after reading the above statement.

I never played the game, so I don't have first-hand knowledge of what goes through a player's head when he's pursuing a rebound. However, I do know enough about the rules to believe that there is merit to J_J_f_P's argument about sticks in the air being less apt to score goals on rebounds.

Now, could someone please explain to me why the fact that an opponent is wearing a face shield should make a player more likely to carry his stick at a level from which he is less likely to be able to score a legal goal? :confused:

The theory goes that with full face sheilds/cages, the only consequence to high sticking is if you get called for the penalty. Without, you run the risk of causing injuries. Thus, because a) people don't want to get injured, and b) injuries of this sort tend to cause linebrawls, goonery and all sorts of unfortunate (if highly entertaining) mayhem that most on the NCAA level want to avoid, there will be a certain level of self-policing going on by players who want to avoid all the trouble that comes from high-sticking injuries. Therefore, without full face protection, sticks are lower and you can probably take it from here.

I don't know if I buy into this theory entirely. I know that for me personally, a chronic high stick ****es me off regardless of the equipment involved.

[Speed Kills]

I wish every level of hockey up to and including the NHL would make full shields and/or cages mandatory. I don't like seeing all the bloody facial injuries that are prevented by the full shield or cages. To those who say the full shield or cage leads to more high sticks... who cares? The players faces are protected and will not be injured by those high sticks. It is a moot point. Ask Steve Yzerman how he feels about facial protection in hockey.

[pirate]

I wish every level of hockey up to and including the NHL would make full shields and/or cages mandatory. I don't like seeing all the bloody facial injuries that are prevented by the full shield or cages. To those who say the full shield or cage leads to more high sticks... who cares? The players faces are protected and will not be injured by those high sticks. It is a moot point. Ask Steve Yzerman how he feels about facial protection in hockey.


I guess nobody likes the facial injuries but there is a different cost to having the helmets. There is a thought that the game would be far less geared towards 'big hits' if the players weren't covered head to toe in protective gear. When you see NCAA players leaving their feet to launch themselves into somebody near the boards (not called often enough) you can assume they wouldn't have done that if they (and their target to a lesser extent) weren't wearing full cages.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is worth a few lost eyes and a thousand stitches to have skill take back some of the game that hitting has taken over, but that is one reason why there is resistance to the helmet/cage combo (it isn't all high sticking). There may be fewer concussions, separated shoulders, neck injuries if players felt they couldn't hit with reckless abandon.

As for the 'who cares' on high sticks - I'll let recent players answer that one. There is an assumption that if you grew up not being able to carry your stick high you wouldn't do it in the pros as frequently. The pros are really against the required cage, so the combo of reckless players and no face protection may increase the injuries in the pros.

[justinD]

It's a dangerous game...things happen and that's unfortunate, but adults can do as they please (although i think the NCAA mandating it is fine, it's not even a big deal)

for the record, playing without a mask is much, much better.

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

for the record, playing without a mask is much, much better.
No kidding. Especially if you're comparing to a sheild. At least with the cage, you can still get the cool air brushing against your face as you skate.

[Brownie 68]

I think if you took a poll, over 95% of college players would prefer the half or even a 3/4 visor over the full cage or full shield. :cool:

If it's acceptable to usa hockey and all the us junior leagues (USHL, NAHL, EJHL and all jr b and c leagues) that a player over 18 does not have to wear a full cage or full shield, then why does the ncaa mandate it? We are talking about mostly 20-25 yr old players here.

Interesting that the ncaa doesn't also mandate neckguards and ear pieces like youth hockey! :p

I also hear they are thinking about eliminating the one piece composite stick for "safety" reasons. :eek: lol, i'm sure it's a cost saving measure but I'd be surprised if the composite shafts on a two-piece stick don't break as often. Maybe the $20 one piece wood stick might be just around the corner. :rolleyes:

[Larry E. Bloom]

It's not an issue.....no visor-no cage for real hockey. :D

[TA Jen]

Why does it not surprise me that the LEB is posting in a thread about an old, tired out topic?

[No offense to Swami or pgb-ohio]

[leify]

It's not an issue.....no visor-no cage for real hockey. :D

Maybe we should all wear the old plastic yarmulke Jofa helmet? How did that work out for Michel Goulet? Screw it, real hockey players shouldn't wear helmets at all! I mean, what is one Bill Masterton compared to better entertainment? :rolleyes:

[Jon]

The moment the NCAA repeals the full shield/cage rule, 5 Big Ten colleges (especially PSU) will come together and force the Big Ten Hockey Conference into reality. To fight this move, Hockey East will kick out Merrimack and Kikc {PROVICED out of Hockey Rast so they can pick up Harvard. Brom and Darmouth will change their names. Then the college hockey video game will be available, MTU will make a treadmill out of nachos, UNH hill billies will be forced to get their moonshine approved by the FAA, and something like HEAVEN will dawn in the world of college hockey. :rolleyes:

:p

[leify]

The moment the NCAA repeals the full shield/cage rule, 5 Big Ten colleges (especially PSU) will come together and force the Big Ten Hockey Conference into reality. To fight this move, Hockey East will kick out Merrimack and Kikc {PROVICED out of Hockey Rast so they can pick up Harvard. Brom and Darmouth will change their names. Then the college hockey video game will be available, MTU will make a treadmill out of nachos, UNH hill billies will be forced to get their moonshine approved by the FAA, and something like HEAVEN will dawn in the world of college hockey. :rolleyes:

:p

Don't forget about the Big Ten/NCAA/ESPN national TV contract that will bring in the millions of dollars that the idea of expansion promises...

[Larry E. Bloom]

I think the Big-Ten is getting their own sports channel but this is a visor/cage thread and Bill Masterton has passed away for about 30 years now. Sorry he passed but if only 1 player dies from not wearing a helmut after all those games played in the NHL before or after is pretty good. And what does Bill"s death have to do with a visor or cage. By the way Jen I noticed you posted on this thread but not about the topic, you wouldn't be trying to start your usual instigation......like I said non-issue.