PDA

View Full Version : College Hockey Potentially going to 3/4 Sheilds?



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

scsutommyboy
05-09-2012, 11:30 AM
I have been posting on this website for 10 years that they need to make this move. The stuff the coaches are talking about are not new. If you watch a lot of pro/Junior and college hockey you can see the difference between them and the coaches in my opinion are spot on.

FlagDUDE08
05-09-2012, 11:38 AM
It's coddling to be concerned about the number and severity of concussions in hockey?

And you don't think that the players, given this stuff presented to them, would be wise enough to make a smart decision about the protective gear they want to wear?

aparch
05-09-2012, 11:51 AM
It's coddling to be concerned about the number and severity of concussions in hockey?
I'm more concerned with the unforgiving, molded plastic, body armor-esque, shoulder pads that players are using now. Soften up those shoulders, and you'll see less concussions.

KnightsOfTheRound
05-09-2012, 01:53 PM
And you don't think that the players, given this stuff presented to them, would be wise enough to make a smart decision about the protective gear they want to wear?

No, I don't. Young men in the age group we're talking about are notoriously shortsighted and reckless about these kind of things. This is one of those cases where I think they need to look at the actual (non-anecdotal) data, find out which faceguard is safest, and force everybody to wear it. Concussions are serious business. Anybody who is paying attention to the news knows that.

FlagDUDE08
05-09-2012, 01:59 PM
No, I don't. Young men in the age group we're talking about are notoriously shortsighted and reckless about these kind of things. This is one of those cases where I think they need to look at the actual (non-anecdotal) data, find out which faceguard is safest, and force everybody to wear it. Concussions are serious business. Anybody who is paying attention to the news knows that.

Players don't decide to wear neck guards after they see a teammate's throat cut by a skate. Got it.

giwan
05-09-2012, 02:42 PM
Players don't decide to wear neck guards after they see a teammate's throat cut by a skate. Got it.

Neck guards may be over rated.

MavsFan
05-09-2012, 02:47 PM
I'm more concerned with the unforgiving, molded plastic, body armor-esque, shoulder pads that players are using now. Soften up those shoulders, and you'll see less concussions.No disagreement from me.


Players don't decide to wear neck guards after they see a teammate's throat cut by a skate. Got it.There's a difference between an immediate, you might die right now, kind of threat and the long-term consequences of head injuries. Young men in their late teens and early twenties are notorious for not paying much attention to the affect things will have on their life twenty, thirty, forty years down the road. Heck, young people in general. For example, you can tell them until you're blue in the face that tanning beds cause long-term damage, including premature aging and skin cancer, but they do it anyway, because the consequences are far down the road (if at all.)

REDaero91
05-09-2012, 03:38 PM
Players don't decide to wear neck guards after they see a teammate's throat cut by a skate. Got it.

They didn't all adopt it, it was mostly just the player who was injured. And I think he's since dropped it-I remember seeing him playing without one a few times this season.

mnstate0fhockey
05-11-2012, 10:09 AM
I've never been a fan of the "warrior" mentality that Melrose and some others sell re: hockey players in jr...

so my question is this: 3/4 (at least) of these guys will never play in the NHL. what about the guy that's good at the NCAA level but knows his time post-NCAA will be at a lawfirm or some other job...do he want to use a 1/2 shield and get some chicklets knocked out to prove he's a warrior or will the players not put pressure on each other to wear these things?

I think the intent is to protect players by making them feel less invincible. Far too many head injuries in the game right now. I have mixed feelings as to whether or not this will work, but I think their intentions are to protect players.

giwan
05-11-2012, 12:26 PM
I think the intent is to protect players by making them feel less invincible. Far too many head injuries in the game right now. I have mixed feelings as to whether or not this will work, but I think their intentions are to protect players.

Then why not go half shield or no shield or no helmet? The no shield works great for the NHL they really don't get facial or head injuries.

mnstate0fhockey
05-11-2012, 12:28 PM
Then why not go half shield or no shield or no helmet? The no shield works great for the NHL they really don't get facial or head injuries.

Good point.

Yuppie Scum
05-15-2012, 01:29 PM
Does anyone know what the timeframe for a decision and/or implementation would be?

MUhawks628
05-15-2012, 01:32 PM
Does anyone know what the timeframe for a decision and/or implementation would be?

I believe it goes before the rules committee the first week in June. If approved there, it then has to get by the safeguard committee, although I'm not sure when that vote would take place.

RIT Winters
05-15-2012, 01:48 PM
I don't think there is enough evidence/science behind the idea that less protection will lead to less reckless play. What if they get rid of the shields and the recklessness doesn't drop? Injuries will just get more common and more severe.

My main object to this is that, realistically, the vast majority of NCAA hockey players will not go pro. Some will, most won't. Those that don't will have to go out into the real world. I see no reason why the NCAA should implement visors knowing full well that kids across the entire NCAA hockey world will start having noses broken, facial bones fractured, and teeth knocked out. Whose going to pay for some 18 year old kid to get his front teeth replaced because he thought it was cool to wear a visor? And why do those people (who are paying) want anything to do with less protection?

Oh yeah, getting rid of the cages will also increase fighting which is a highly contentious issue in all levels of hockey, but I stand by my guns that it's not worth the greatly increased chance of injury in the college game. Fighting is great, but only if you're getting paid to do it.

FlagDUDE08
05-15-2012, 03:00 PM
I don't think there is enough evidence/science behind the idea that less protection will lead to less reckless play. What if they get rid of the shields and the recklessness doesn't drop? Injuries will just get more common and more severe.

My main object to this is that, realistically, the vast majority of NCAA hockey players will not go pro. Some will, most won't. Those that don't will have to go out into the real world. I see no reason why the NCAA should implement visors knowing full well that kids across the entire NCAA hockey world will start having noses broken, facial bones fractured, and teeth knocked out. Whose going to pay for some 18 year old kid to get his front teeth replaced because he thought it was cool to wear a visor? And why do those people (who are paying) want anything to do with less protection?

Oh yeah, getting rid of the cages will also increase fighting which is a highly contentious issue in all levels of hockey, but I stand by my guns that it's not worth the greatly increased chance of injury in the college game. Fighting is great, but only if you're getting paid to do it.

Get rid of the cages, and you eliminate the face masking major.

RIT Winters
05-15-2012, 09:52 PM
Get rid of the cages, and you eliminate the face masking major.

And replace it with a major for fighting? How is that better for the game? Either way it's a 5 minute penalty on the board, except now some kid might be lying on the ice with a broken nose or a missing tooth.

These kids aren't pros and we owe it to them to protect them.

1fastGRT
05-17-2012, 02:16 PM
Why has no one brought up the fact that 75-80% of the players have played with a visor BEFORE they got to the NCAA. I never understood the whole idea of the cage in college hockey when most of the players come through the USHL, NAHL, or one of the Canadian Tier 2 leagues where visors are the norm. You get to wear a cage in midget, after that a visor is fine.

shiftyjedi
05-26-2012, 03:42 PM
I can't irradiate enough how bad of an idea this is. I've been clamoring for the NHL to go to college hockey not the other way around. With the new sticks that can rocket the puck to the moon and are so weightless at times they become almost uncontrollable. The study they are using is weak. The NFL is about to go to war in the court room over safety of it's players. The game of American Football is about to be put on trial and it is only a matter of time before hockey becomes the next to be under fire. The NCAA having the full face shield and switching to 3/4 will not look good when the NHL lawsuit spills over. It doesn't matter if they the players have a choice or not it won't matter when the players sue the NCAA. I just think the whole idea that you are more confident that a dirty hit won't result in a major injury so your more likely to do is non-sense. It's like these people haven't watched an NHL game in their life.

Lebron23
05-26-2012, 04:59 PM
I can't irradiate enough how bad of an idea this is. I've been clamoring for the NHL to go to college hockey not the other way around. With the new sticks that can rocket the puck to the moon and are so weightless at times they become almost uncontrollable. The study they are using is weak. The NFL is about to go to war in the court room over safety of it's players. The game of American Football is about to be put on trial and it is only a matter of time before hockey becomes the next to be under fire. The NCAA having the full face shield and switching to 3/4 will not look good when the NHL lawsuit spills over. It doesn't matter if they the players have a choice or not it won't matter when the players sue the NCAA. I just think the whole idea that you are more confident that a dirty hit won't result in a major injury so your more likely to do is non-sense. It's like these people haven't watched an NHL game in their life.

If the hits from behind were as rampant in the NHL as they are in college hockey, then you would have a leg to stand on, but they aren't. The respect factor in college hockey is nearly non-existent and that's why coaches have voted to implement the visors. Yes, you do see a "danger" play or two in the average NHL game but i've seen games were you see 2-3 "danger" plays a PERIOD in college hockey. I wouldn't have thought cages would've been a big deal until i had the opportunity to see half a dozen USHL games this season and each player held themselves very accountable on the ice, nobody could hide.

But let's not kid ourselves. This whole visor implementation is college hockey's way to "professionalize" the game and shed the "amateur" stigma--which is fine by me. I think it's a good thing they're trying to do.

4four4
05-26-2012, 05:45 PM
With all the concussions I bet the NCAA decided since they are the only league not using shields this might open them up for a lawsuit.