yzerman19 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Sure can tell its the off-season here in UND hockey land. I think the divide on this issue is analogous to the global political debate. It is about freedom "from" vs freedom "to"...some people are always going to support things that can potentially protect the masses from negative outcomes, others are in favor of people having the choice and having to live with the consequences. I am in the latter category. It manifests itself in my political ideology as well as my opinion on this matter. Let people who are over 18 make their own choices and live with the consequences. Choose cable TV over health insurance- get sick- well, pay the piper. Choose to go half shield and get your jaw broken and subsequently wired shut for two months- suffer. I don't need someone telling me I have to do anything- give me access to the options and the information to make a good decision, and let me live with my choices. If the risks of playing without a cage were so great, don't you think that NHL owners and GM's would push it? They are the ones making money off the players, and they are the ones paying the medical bills if something goes haywire. They don't push it, because the fight isn't worth it...the juice isn't worth the squeeze. I respect the science out there, but I have questions related to the links that Ive seen posted. Concussions occur no matter what you have on your head. Yes, the risk of a broken nose or jaw or the risk of a facial laceration are higher, but those aren't life altering injuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozen4sioux Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 This is what the NHL should use. Well if they did it would mean they could concentrate more on hockey, cause not even the most eager jersey chaser would be interested in some winger in that BCS. ( birth control shield). In jest, I kid.........but that thing is hideous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 This is what the NHL should use. Still can't see straight down and the puck will get lost in your blind zone too often....you are forced to look down to find the puck, before you know it you are toast. That shield is a lot bigger than mine....take off the bars and it would still be too big for me, however, this may be OK for the players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Still can't see straight down and the puck will get lost in your blind zone too often....you are forced to look down to find the puck, before you know it you are toast. That shield is a lot bigger than mine....take off the bars and it would still be too big for me, however, this may be OK for the players. Are you kidding? He doesn't wear that bucket to play hockey, he uses it to watch TV. Never know if the screen is going to explode or emit dangerous waves of light. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Are you kidding? He doesn't wear that bucket to play hockey, he uses it to watch TV. Never know if the screen is going to explode or emit dangerous waves of light. Nice "dad humor" You even laughed at yourself and everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 Are you kidding? He doesn't wear that bucket to play hockey, he uses it to watch TV. Never know if the screen is going to explode or emit dangerous waves of light. Haha, I like it. But in all seriousness...what was that??? Guys use those to go to the moon I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 I used to love guys who'd wear the glass shield. I'd put a little greasy stuff on the outside edge of my glove and any chance I'd get I'd put a little grease onto the visor of an opponent. It's not easy to play while looking through a dirty, greasy window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Nice "dad humor" You even laughed at yourself and everything. Nah, I don't take myself that seriously. I was really laughing at you, not with you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Nah, I don't take myself that seriously. I was really laughing at you, not with you. Yeah, you were laughing at your own post. Good for you, sweety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 If the only knock on that hybrid visor/cage is that it looks different/funny, then I think it's a pretty good idea. Only an immature buffoon would complain about the looks of them, and miss the fact that they work so much better. People would get used to the look. I think they look kinda sick, already. The NHL didn't used to mandate visors or helmets, but now they do. Eventually, they will mandate full facial protection. I am right. Just give in to it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 If the only knock on that hybrid visor/cage is that it looks different/funny, then I think it's a pretty good idea. Only an immature buffoon would complain about the looks of them, and miss the fact that they work so much better. People would get used to the look. I think they look kinda sick, already. The NHL didn't used to mandate visors or helmets, but now they do. Eventually, they will mandate full facial protection. I am right. Just give in to it. You have now lost it. I could see, at some point, requiring half shields to protect eyes only, however, full facial protection will never be a mandate. You are not right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burd Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 I used to love guys who'd wear the glass shield. I'd put a little greasy stuff on the outside edge of my glove and any chance I'd get I'd put a little grease onto the visor of an opponent. Jerks like you explain why there's so much wrong with the world. You probably pitched too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 If the only knock on that hybrid visor/cage is that it looks different/funny, then I think it's a pretty good idea. Only an immature buffoon would complain about the looks of them, and miss the fact that they work so much better. People would get used to the look. I think they look kinda sick, already. The NHL didn't used to mandate visors or helmets, but now they do. Eventually, they will mandate full facial protection. I am right. Just give in to it. When did the NHL mandate visors? Rules for helmets have been on the books for years, but I've heard nothing about visors beyond your and Dave's wistful dreaming I wonder if Matt Greene will be fined for playing without a visor, or bubble wrap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 When did the NHL mandate visors? Rules for helmets have been on the books for years, but I've heard nothing about visors beyond your and Dave's wistful dreaming I wonder if Matt Greene will be fined for playing without a visor, or bubble wrap. My mistake. The main feeder to the NHL, the AHL, mandates visors for new players. Most NHL players wear them(69.4% according to this poll), and almost all rookies. Eventually everyone will. So, I guess you can cling to the few guys that are grandfathered in to not wearing a visor, but it seems like you're grasping at straws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 When did the NHL mandate visors? Rules for helmets have been on the books for years, but I've heard nothing about visors beyond your and Dave's wistful dreaming I wonder if Matt Greene will be fined for playing without a visor, or bubble wrap. The AHL mandates visors the NHL does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 Never? I bet they said the same thing about helmets back in the '50s. Never is a very long time. It may or may not be within our lifetime, but chances are the NHL will get with the times and evolve in terms of facial protection someday. I bet not....the main difference....head injuries, which are A LOT more serious than superficial cuts. With the increased speed of the game you have to protect your head...not your mouth down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burd Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 A thought. I'm personally in favor of choice when it comes to cages v. halfshields. But knowing myself as I do, and using the picture I have in my mind of most of you, based on what I can draw from your posts here over the years, I wonder if those of us who are less concerned about facial injuries aren't just uglier people. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share Posted June 21, 2012 A thought. I'm personally in favor of choice when it comes to cages v. halfshields. But knowing myself as I do, and using the picture I have in my mind of most of you, based on what I can draw from your posts here over the years, I wonder if those of us who are less concerned about facial injuries aren't just uglier people. Haha, not a chance bro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 A thought. I'm personally in favor of choice when it comes to cages v. halfshields. But knowing myself as I do, and using the picture I have in my mind of most of you, based on what I can draw from your posts here over the years, I wonder if those of us who are less concerned about facial injuries aren't just uglier people. Ask your wife 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFG Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 No problem with legalizing visors in my book. They just need to keep the rule open so that if a player wants to wear a full cage as an option they can, which from some of the stuff I saw a month or so ago they will not allow. It seemed as if they were saying mandatory visors for everyone and no cages allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 No problem with legalizing visors in my book. They just need to keep the rule open so that if a player wants to wear a full cage as an option they can, which from some of the stuff I saw a month or so ago they will not allow. It seemed as if they were saying mandatory visors for everyone and no cages allowed. I read that too, but I just don't see how they could do that. I'm all for half shields, but if a kid wanted to wear a full facemask how could you tell him that he couldn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted July 9, 2012 Author Share Posted July 9, 2012 I read that too, but I just don't see how they could do that. I'm all for half shields, but if a kid wanted to wear a full facemask how could you tell him that he couldn't? The reason for not allowing facemasks (for non-injured players) is that the facemask could injure players wearing half shields. I don't know if it's right or wrong but that is the reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 The reason for not allowing facemasks (for non-injured players) is that the facemask could injure players wearing half shields. I don't know if it's right or wrong but that is the reason. They can wear either a half shield or a full cage in the USHL. Do we know any more where they're at with this possible change? What's the chances it goes through this year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted July 9, 2012 Author Share Posted July 9, 2012 They can wear either a half shield or a full cage in the USHL. Do we know any more where they're at with this possible change? What's the chances it goes through this year? Yup. I was speaking on the NHL rule. I think the USHL says all players under 18 have to wear masks....I could be wrong though. That's how it was when I was younger. I don't think it will go through this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxrunner Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I'm trying to get my head around the premise that taking seatbelts out of cars will make people drive more cautiously which should also make them "safer". As crazy as that sounds, it is the same exact argument that is being made by those of you who are against the full shield/cage. Dave, it is called risk compensation. Check out this article from Smithsonian Magazine on the 50th anniversary of the seatbelt. Excerpt: Peltzman concluded that while the standards had saved the lives of some vehicle occupants, they had also led to the deaths of pedestrians, cyclists and other non-occupants. John Adams of University College London studied the impact of seat belts and reached a similar conclusion, which he published in 1981: there was no overall decrease in highway fatalities. Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Presence-of-Mind-Buckle-Up-And-Behave.html#ixzz209zHgDWL 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.