passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 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. He's trolling. You can't take anything he says at face value. It's all a piece of performance art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breakin face 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. This has nothing to do with the sight of blood for me. I realize the NHL won't get cages, but the reasoning for it has nothing to do with safety. That's my entire argument, that its a gimmick change to pander to the CHL battle rather than this perceived safety benefit they're preaching. it's not safer, show me data that proves otherwise other than peer-pressured tough guy complexes. You all may be singing a different tune when our star player is getting stitched up with 2 minutes left in a national championship game due to an errant stick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegas_Sioux 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. The most serious concern of the LINESMAN'S injury was the possible concussion when his head dribbled off the ice like a basketball. Also had he been wearing a cage the half a foot long whistle would have been entangled in the players equipment, then you get an injury like Buzz Olson got (he's the local officials instructor out of EGF) fight in EGF vs Crookston High School game (go figure) he didn't get his whistle off and it got stuck in a cage causing his left hand's fingers to bend in unnatural positions to this day the best drs have been able to do is uncurve the bend his fourth finger still sticks side ways though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breakin face Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Maybe a better question is will this change produce more goals or injuries? If the answer is injuries (any stoppage in play) is it really a change worth making? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 12, 2012 Author Share Posted June 12, 2012 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. Well I never played in the NHL but I did play a year of juniors...with only a half shield. Never was hurt too bad. I believe you're playing Mr internet tough guy calling me out (through the internet...hahaha). I wasn't trying to say I promote injuries, I was just saying if the sight of blood makes you feel uneasy....quit watching (it's not like every game there is a nasty facial injury....maybe 2-3 a year). Yes you will get cut every blue moon, but I would rather be able to see oncoming traffic more clearly than a little cut on my lip. I have not worn a full cage mask in 10 years and the only injury I ever got was a little cut on my eyebrow (hitting my teamates stick jumping into the bench). Many of you seem to think that the first game with no full cages instantly mean injuries right away. Yes, there will be more little cuts but the gruesome injuries you guys are talking about rarely happen. Also, it looks as though the NCAA would go to a 3/4 shield....not a half shield. Go check out Heatly's visor, thing is almost a full mask. It's just a little thinner and also has good peripheral vision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 In this recently uncovered photo, one of our resident Cassandras goes off to work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 In this recently uncovered photo, one of our resident Cassandras goes off to work. Thanks for proving my point. Feel you don't have a strong argument? Insult and attack the messenger, instead of attacking the idea they are communicating. (funny thing is, even NHLers wear more protection than that kid, so you've proven me right twice with one post) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Thanks for proving my point. Feel you don't have a strong argument? Insult and attack the messenger, instead of attacking the idea they are communicating. (funny thing is, even NHLers wear more protection than that kid, so you've proven me right twice with one post) If you think that pic is an "insult" or "attack", you haven't seen anything yet ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 If you think that pic is an "insult" or "attack", you haven't seen anything yet ... Oooh. scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Oooh. scary. Nah, I was merely pointing out your delicate, hypersensitive nature. Not that there's anything wrong with that ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 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. I think the concern is, if hockey starts becoming like soccer (1-0, 2-0, 2-1 games), people will get frustrated and stop buying tickets and stop watching it on television because it would be much cheaper to sit at home and watch paint dry. The NHL opened up the game after the 2004-05 lockout and it was a big boost to TV ratings and fan interest. I for one do not want to go back to the days of 250 pound slugs on skates who couldn't shoot or pass worth a crap, but thrived in the league because they could clutch, grab, hold, hook and mug guys and not get penalized for it. The 1990's version of the NHL was almost unwatchable and I don't think the league would have survived long-term if they hadn't done what they did to open up the game. The NCAA would be wise to follow the NHL's lead in this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Nah, I was merely pointing out your delicate, hypersensitive nature. Not that there's anything wrong with that ... Is that a veiled gay joke? I guess that's been the counter-argument all along. If you want to wear a full cage or if you think hockey players should wear full cages, you're gay. . . I think you guys just want no cages so you can see the player's faces better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 12, 2012 Author Share Posted June 12, 2012 I think the concern is, if hockey starts becoming like soccer (1-0, 2-0, 2-1 games), people will get frustrated and stop buying tickets and stop watching it on television because it would be much cheaper to sit at home and watch paint dry. The NHL opened up the game after the 2004-05 lockout and it was a big boost to TV ratings and fan interest. I for one do not want to go back to the days of 250 pound slugs on skates who couldn't shoot or pass worth a crap, but thrived in the league because they could clutch, grab, hold, hook and mug guys and not get penalized for it. The 1990's version of the NHL was almost unwatchable and I don't think the league would have survived long-term if they hadn't done what they did to open up the game. The NCAA would be wise to follow the NHL's lead in this. Yes I agree with you on much of what you said, I think the NCAA rules should mimick the NHL's, since that is the ultimate league. Now whether we should follow the shootout rule is up for debate as a shootout win would affect the outcome in NCAA more than the NHL as there is far less games in NCAA hockey. Good points, but I think there may be more scoring per game in the WCHA than the NHL...not sure though. The amount of special teams time in the WCHA is terrible, that leads to the increased scoring. BTW, yes 1-0, 2-0, 2-1 would be pretty low....but I really don't see too many of those games in the WCHA. Sioux goofs had one....but I actually enjoyed watching that Sioux win. All in all, I rarely see a 1-0 game in college hockey. Very rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burd Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 . I think you guys just want no cages so you can see the player's faces better. No, but that is the reason we think breezers should be optional. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Is that a veiled gay joke? I guess that's been the counter-argument all along. If you want to wear a full cage or if you think hockey players should wear full cages, you're gay. .I think you guys just want no cages so you can see the player's faces better. I would never joke about your sexuality. Even I have boundaries. I'm just saddened by your continued insistence on being wrong ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpiehl Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 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. OK, I may be a day late, but a full shield or cage does not make the high sticks and elbows a moot point. An elbow to the cage does just as much damage to a neck, and possible concussion, as without a cage. And a high stick to the neck isn't a moot point even if you have a cage. I never played competitively, it wasn't an option growing up. But my boys do, and one or more of them have been injured in those ways at the youth level. As far as the neck guards, USA hockey mandated them a couple of years back, and have now backed off of it. Their research showed that they did no good, and possibly added harm when a skate blade injury did occur. Nothing like having some Kevlar or carbon fibers that were cut by the skate mixed in to the cut. Skate cuts can be horrific, but neck guards, at least using the current ones, don't do anything to mitigate the damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpiehl Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 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. Goalie pads were already mandated to be smaller a few years back. And guess what? The goalies adapted and got better. At all levels. The only players oversized equipment helps are the less talented players with limited mobility. They are generally flushed out of the system by the time NCAA or NHL comes around. Gloves, blockers, chest pads, leg pads, even breezers were reduced in size by the new rules and it hasn't had much effect. The fact is that the goaltenders of today are much more athletic than even 10 years ago. I have no problem with progress in goalie equipment just like there has been exponential improvement in player equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Goalie pads were already mandated to be smaller a few years back. And guess what? The goalies adapted and got better. At all levels. The only players oversized equipment helps are the less talented players with limited mobility. They are generally flushed out of the system by the time NCAA or NHL comes around. Gloves, blockers, chest pads, leg pads, even breezers were reduced in size by the new rules and it hasn't had much effect. The fact is that the goaltenders of today are much more athletic than even 10 years ago. I have no problem with progress in goalie equipment just like there has been exponential improvement in player equipment. Exactly. It used to be the fat kid would end up in the net at the youth level, but now you're seeing the better athletes at younger ages becoming goaltenders, which leads to better goaltenders at the upper levels as well. I'd say the equipment has a lot to do with it as well. The stuff is so light now, that all of these goaltenders are that much quicker to the point where it doesn't matter that they mandated smaller equipment. I played goalie in the generation where the pads would get wet, suck up water, and you'd have weights stuck to your legs. Now these pads repel water, and stay light on a goaltender the duration of a game or practice. I wasn't good enough for an equipment change to help me, but give these great athletes more of an edge and you'll see why leagues are changing rules to improve scoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'd love to see a few teams in the NHL all wear full cages for a year or two, and see if the full cage teams are able to play better and with more confidence, instead of constantly trying to protect their faces. I would be proved right, of course, but the NHL and its players are as dumb as ScottM, and their fear of being labeled as weak keeps them from seeing the possible benefits. It's funny, it's always the ones that try to constantly put out this aura of toughness that are the most fearful people. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 13, 2012 Author Share Posted June 13, 2012 Goalie pads were already mandated to be smaller a few years back. And guess what? The goalies adapted and got better. At all levels. The only players oversized equipment helps are the less talented players with limited mobility. They are generally flushed out of the system by the time NCAA or NHL comes around. Gloves, blockers, chest pads, leg pads, even breezers were reduced in size by the new rules and it hasn't had much effect. The fact is that the goaltenders of today are much more athletic than even 10 years ago. I have no problem with progress in goalie equipment just like there has been exponential improvement in player equipment. Agreed with everything you just said....when mandates change....teams/players adjust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 13, 2012 Author Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'd love to see a few teams in the NHL all wear full cages for a year or two, and see if the full cage teams are able to play better and with more confidence, instead of constantly trying to protect their faces. I would be proved right, of course, but the NHL and its players are as dumb as ScottM and others around here, and their fear of being labeled as weak keeps them from seeing the possible benefits. It's funny, it's always the ones that try to constantly put out this aura of toughness that are the most fearful people. OK, so what makes hockey players that wear half shields fearful? I am pretty sure you're simply getting upset now. You also don't know much about hockey...as I have said 10 times now (this only goes to this guy...no one else). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 You're getting upset, because you have no argument. Why don't you stick to your story about how players can't see if they wear a full cage. Which makes sooo much sense because goalies have full cages and they don't need to be able to see what's going on , right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 It sure as hell wasn't the full shield/cage that gave him a concussion. He would have gotten the concussion regardless of what was on his helmet. So now you're a doctor as well? How do you know that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'd love to see a few teams in the NHL all wear full cages for a year or two, and see if the full cage teams are able to play better and with more confidence, instead of constantly trying to protect their faces. I would be proved right, of course, but the NHL and its players are as dumb as ScottM, and their fear of being labeled as weak keeps them from seeing the possible benefits. Yeah, I'm quite sure Toews, Parise, Crosby, Ovechkin, etc. are afraid of being labeled "weak" by their peers for wearing visors and "constantly trying to protect their faces". . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Yeah, I'm quite sure Toews, Parise, Crosby, Ovechkin, etc. are afraid of being labeled "weak" by their peers for wearing visors and "constantly trying to protect their faces". . I respect the hell out of them, but just watch, they will turn their heads, or they will hold up in the corners. When your face, the window to your soul, is out in the open with pucks and elbows and sticks flying around, you are going to instinctively try to protect it. You guys have said it before, when you have a full cage you play more recklessly (with high sticks), so you will agree with that, right? So, all the refs would have to do is call the high sticks when they happen, and the players will adjust the high sticks, but they will still play with that recklessness that you play with when you wear a full cage, and the game will be way more intense. Have at it, guys. I'd love to hear how gay I am and how little I know about hockey. 1 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.