Ray77 Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 If the players are wearing a full shield/cage they are protected from the sticks/elbows going up. The sticks and elbows become a moot point. The only time they can potentially do any damage is when the faces are left unprotected. That's just plain logic and common sense. This gets my vote for dumbest comment/quote of the thread. And if you ask me to explain why, then you're even dumber than I thought, DaveK. The only time an elbow can do damage is when a player's face is left unprotected? Amazing... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 This gets my vote for dumbest comment/quote of the thread. And if you ask me to explain why, then you're even dumber than I thought, DaveK. The only time an elbow can do damage is when a player's face is left unprotected? Amazing... An elbow to the head can't do damage if you're wearing a full cage and helmet. Just ask Chay Genoway ... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Luckily the NHL uses mostly visors or no facial protection, so nobody ever gets elbowed or hit in the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Luckily the NHL uses mostly visors or no facial protection, so nobody ever gets elbowed or hit in the head. And if they do, they don't cry about it ... unlike some folks in the peanut gallery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 And if they do, they don't cry about it ... unlike some folks in the peanut gallery. Nope, nobody cares about concussions in this day and age. Get with it, old man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Nope, nobody cares about concussions in this day and age. Get with it, old man. Funny how those tully caged/helmeted NFL players have been concussion-free for years now ... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 11, 2012 Author Share Posted June 11, 2012 Funny how those tully caged/helmeted NFL players have been concussion-free for years now ... What I have realized is that not many people truly understand hockey on this site. The fan who know's nothing about hockey would obviously say that everyone should wear a full cage. It's funny how every other junior league, CHL and pro leagues do not wear full cages and 83% of the players would also like to get rid of the full cages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 11, 2012 Author Share Posted June 11, 2012 Elimination of hand passing in college hockey = a joke. This is terrible, all this is going to do is slow down the game. I don;t get why college hockey is swaying further away from the rules of the NHL....just doesn't make sense to me. There is no way this promotes more goal scoring. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Elimination of hand passing in college hockey = a joke. This is terrible, all this is going to do is slow down the game. I don;t get why college hockey is swaying further away from the rules of the NHL....just doesn't make sense to me. There is no way this promotes more goal scoring. That is a horrible idea and makes no sense what-so-ever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 The new rules: No hand passes - http://insidehockey.com/ncaa-rules-all-hand-passes-illegal Net dislodgement - http://insidehockey.com/ncaa-rules-net-dis-lodgement-change I like the change regarding the net coming off. The change to the hand pass rule to make it different from other level? Silly. And to claim it's to increase scoring? Sillier. If more scoring is what they want I can increase scoring tomorrow. I'd shrink the allowable sizes for goalie gloves and blockers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 (edited) The new rules: No hand passes - http://insidehockey....-passes-illegal Net dislodgement - http://insidehockey....odgement-change I like the change regarding the net coming off. The change to the hand pass rule to make it different from other level? Silly. And to claim it's to increase scoring? Sillier. If more scoring is what they want I can increase scoring tomorrow. I'd shrink the allowable sizes for goalie gloves and blockers. if they really want to increase goal scoring they would give the goalies a protective cup, skates, gloves, mask and a stick. Edited June 11, 2012 by Goon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 11, 2012 Author Share Posted June 11, 2012 The new rules: No hand passes - http://insidehockey....-passes-illegal Net dislodgement - http://insidehockey....odgement-change I like the change regarding the net coming off. The change to the hand pass rule to make it different from other level? Silly. And to claim it's to increase scoring? Sillier. If more scoring is what they want I can increase scoring tomorrow. I'd shrink the allowable sizes for goalie gloves and blockers. Agreed with the net dislodging. I also think the amount of scoring in college hockey is just fine....this isn't basketball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Why mandate helmets then? Did you quit watching the NHL to protest the nanny state taking over when helmets were mandated? Why do you watch college hockey when, according to you, players can't make plays while wearing a full cage? I have so many questions. Anyway, I get where people who disagree are coming from. I don't care that much either way, I think visors look badass, but I just hate when the conventional wisdom is so accepted, without anyone ever questioning it. Never said that the players can't make plays. Never said that at all. I said the most entertaining part of the game is watching players make plays. I said nothing about the ability or inability of players to make plays based on the equipment they are wearing. To infer the connection is broken logic. I think elite players could still make plays if they were playing in conquistador outfits. Also on the broken logic train, I would never protest or quit watching the sport I love based on equipment or rules changes. To support one position does not mean that you would protest if your position is not the one ultimately adopted. Just like in politics, right? I might disagree with the philosophy of the party in control, but I don't have to move to Canada as a result. I get where you are coming from too, and I support player safety. The issue is where do you draw the line at player safety vs excessive mandates? You could mandate sticks go back to wood too in order to slow down the shots and protect players that way. Are the safety risks of a half-shield so much greater than a cage that there should be a cage mandate? I haven't seen a fact support that. If they make any difference at all, it is marginal. If it is marginal, why make it a mandate? Seems to me that if the juice isn't worth the squeeze, why make rules? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 What I have realized is that not many people truly understand hockey on this site. The fan who know's nothing about hockey would obviously say that everyone should wear a full cage. It's funny how every other junior league, CHL and pro leagues do not wear full cages and 83% of the players would also like to get rid of the full cages. Dude, you need to quit saying people don't understand hockey, because they disagree with you. There are a lot of people that know a lot about hockey on this site. You're not special. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Chipped paint? haha, come on Dave, you're not even trying anymore. But, oddly, you've never been funnier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breakin face Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Four avoidable facial injuries in tonight's Stanley Cup game. Checked from behind face first into the boards, 4 minute minor high sticking, referee ran over by an opposing player, and a puck to Steven Gionta's face. Coming to an NCAA rink near you....pathetic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Four avoidable facial injuries in tonight's Stanley Cup game. Checked from behind face first into the boards, 4 minute minor high sticking, referee ran over by an opposing player, and a puck to Steven Gionta's face. Coming to an NCAA rink near you....pathetic. And those players wouldn't have it any other way. Just ask them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 So, I guess I don't understand hockey because I'm in favor of having the full cage.... I was a goalie though....so having something protecting my face with pucks flying at me was kind of important.... Either way it doesn't matter. Said it before....will say it again....Would love to hear Nick Fuher's opinion on it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 And those players wouldn't have it any other way. Just ask them. I agree Teeder and it's part of the game of hockey... It's still hurts when you get hit in the face with a cage on... Same with football. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 I also think the amount of scoring in college hockey is just fine....this isn't basketball. Allow me to respectfully disagree and here's why: Twenty years ago the average WCHA game had 9 total goals scored. Today it is roughly half that number with about 5 total goals per game scored. (Brad Schlossman of the Herald has done the analysis in the past.) In a game with 9 goals a fluke goal is 11% of the scoring. In a game with 5 goals a fluke goal is 20% of the scoring. Put another way, in today's game a single fluke goal in a game is twice as likely to decide the outcome as it was 20 years ago. I guess I'd like to see the game be more likely decided by skill and less likely decided by bad ice spots or "funny" spots in the boards or glass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Four avoidable facial injuries in tonight's Stanley Cup game. Checked from behind face first into the boards, 4 minute minor high sticking, referee ran over by an opposing player, and a puck to Steven Gionta's face. Coming to an NCAA rink near you....pathetic. I agree. They could have stayed home with you and Dave and a nice big box of Kleenex. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 12, 2012 Author Share Posted June 12, 2012 Four avoidable facial injuries in tonight's Stanley Cup game. Checked from behind face first into the boards, 4 minute minor high sticking, referee ran over by an opposing player, and a puck to Steven Gionta's face. Coming to an NCAA rink near you....pathetic. Haha, you are a riot. And if you think the NHL will be getting cages....you're crazy. Why don't you just quit watching the game then if a little blood makes you feel so uneasy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 12, 2012 Author Share Posted June 12, 2012 Allow me to respectfully disagree and here's why: Twenty years ago the average WCHA game had 9 total goals scored. Today it is roughly half that number with about 5 total goals per game scored. (Brad Schlossman of the Herald has done the analysis in the past.) In a game with 9 goals a fluke goal is 11% of the scoring. In a game with 5 goals a fluke goal is 20% of the scoring. Put another way, in today's game a single fluke goal in a game is twice as likely to decide the outcome as it was 20 years ago. I guess I'd like to see the game be more likely decided by skill and less likely decided by bad ice spots or "funny" spots in the boards or glass. Well the fact that the goalie pads are so much bigger is the obvious answer....this is already proven. However, I also think defensive schemes have become much better, no longer do guys walk through everyone and deke the goalie for a goal, more often than not, the goal is a garbage goal scored from a rebound off a screened shot. I have no problem watching a 3-1 game. If you want every game to be 7-5, than you truly don't enjoy watching the defensive side of the game, nor have any sympathy for the man who has to play goalie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 If you're wearing a full shield/cage... YOUR FACE IS PROTECTED FROM ANY POSSIBLE STICKS OR ELBOWS THAT COME UP THAT WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!! What's the worst that's going to happen, your shield might get scratched or the paint on your cage might get chipped. The dumbest comment of the thread is you saying my comment was the dumbest. Unless you can show me how a stick or elbow is going to bloody your nose or mouth with the full shield/cage on. If you can find a possible way to make that happen I'll retract my statement. Are you really this dense? Is that all that happened to Chay Genoway was that his paint on his cage got chipped? After all, he was wearing a full cage, right? I must have missed the article in the Herald when it explained that he missed virtually a year of hockey due to chipped paint. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Haha, you are a riot. And if you think the NHL will be getting cages....you're crazy. Why don't you just quit watching the game then if a little blood makes you feel so uneasy. Why don't you watch UFC if you enjoy seeing people get hurt for no real reason? Why do NHLers always turn their heads when they go to block a shot? Are they all pussies now, because "a little blood makes them uneasy" How bout I hit you in the face with a puck or a stick? then you can do your internet tough guy routine. I love all the macho men on this site that like to pretend they are as tough as NHL players, and try to live vicariously through them. You're not out there taking the abuse in the toughest, best hockey league in the world, so quit talking like you know anything about it. Just because you talk a good game of how tough you are, and how you don't care about injuries or whatever, it falls flat coming from some guy on the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.