Goon Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Certainly a step in the right direction, Goon. Stop the flop! I also think that since the ECAC Director of Officials has proposed this rule change, I think there some credibility to it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 That is true and although independent of that fact, my thoughts on the game are irrelevant. FYP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted May 30, 2014 Author Share Posted May 30, 2014 What is the #1 most widely recognized characteristic of professional hockey players? It is missing teeth. Very few players have all of their teeth. Yet why don't they all wear full shields? It is because hockey is a competitive game. And if they believe, true or not, that they cannot see or hear as well with full protection then they will go without. There is always someone willing to go without that protection because if it gives them a competitive edge they will take it. Until it is mandatory for all, none will do it. Unless, of course, they already have a facial injury such as a broken jaw. Which is stupid to me. You're willing to take a risk without the injury, but not with the injury? Why is that? Because opponents will target the injury. So why not prevent the injury in the first place to the extent possible? There is the macho thing as well and associated taunting. Failure to recognize that taunting from teammates and opponents is simply turning a blind eye to the fact. Until there is a uniform rule that all must wear full face protection, none will unless they are already injured. Those of us who have been around long enough to remember when helmets came into the NHL witnessed that event. Only players after a certain deadline had to wear helmets. Some exempted NHLers chose not to wear helmets for the rest of their career. Simply because of macho. The NHL has gone step by step. First they added helmets, to reduce head and brain injuries. Then they added the partial shield. Why? To reduce eye injuries. Did players suddenly start targeting the eye area because everyone wore partial shields? The next logical step is to reduce facial injuries not involving the eyes. It is a different NHL world today than it historically was. In the olden days much more was let go before a penalty was called. Today high sticks are called more frequently. But, there are still numerous accidental sticks to the face. When teams finally begin to realize that losing their star players for a few games due to broken jaws, pucks to the face, etc. is a real detriment to their team success and bottom line, they will be lining up to go to full shields to prevent injuries. I took a puck off the facemask once that deflected off my stick and came straight up parallel with my arm. I never saw it from the point it left my stick, but I would have had ugly injuries without the full facemask. I am interested in the integrity of the game of hockey, to see guys play. I am not interested in guys getting injured, losing teeth. and being carried from the ice. A full shield will not prevent all facial injuries, but it will drastically reduce them. I still think many of the "pro face mask people" think these injuries happen at an alarming rate....they don't. Facial injuries rarely cause a player to miss time. Stepan just broke his jaw and he only missed one game (fyi I broke my jaw on the same type of hit and I was wearing a full mask). I also don't get when people start comparing the implementation of mandatory full cages to that of either helmets or visors for that matter. Two completely differenty things. Regarding helmets, in today's game you have to wear helmets. We would have seen at least one death by now had that rule not gone into place...they also do not affect your vision. That comparison is out. I am also in favor of the visor rule. Although they defintely affect your vision, you can still have much better peripheral vision vs a full mask. Also, you still have your downward vision which you basically don't with cages (you have to tilt your head downward to see the puck). A serious blow to the head (without a helmet) or a significant blow to your eyes (without a visor) will change your quality of life. Cuts to your cheeks and jaw will not. Should basketball players be forced to wear those facemasks? MLB players wear visors like they do in Little League? Boxers/MMA fighters be forced to wear more facial gear? Maybe we should force the game of hockey to only be played on rollarblades because the blades are very dangerous. Obviously some of these ideas are ridiculous but I say let the players make the choice...as they did collectively with the visors. End of rant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 I still think many of the "pro face mask people" think these injuries happen at an alarming rate....they don't. Facial injuries rarely cause a player to miss time. Stepan just broke his jaw and he only missed one game (fyi I broke my jaw on the same type of hit and I was wearing a full mask). I also don't get when people start comparing the implementation of mandatory full cages to that of either helmets or visors for that matter. Two completely differenty things. Regarding helmets, in today's game you have to wear helmets. We would have seen at least one death by now had that rule not gone into place...they also do not affect your vision. That comparison is out. I am also in favor of the visor rule. Although they defintely affect your vision, you can still have much better peripheral vision vs a full mask. Also, you still have your downward vision which you basically don't with cages (you have to tilt your head downward to see the puck). A serious blow to the head (without a helmet) or a significant blow to your eyes (without a visor) will change your quality of life. Cuts to your cheeks and jaw will not. Should basketball players be forced to wear those facemasks? MLB players wear visors like they do in Little League? Boxers/MMA fighters be forced to wear more facial gear? Maybe we should force the game of hockey to only be played on rollarblades because the blades are very dangerous. Obviously some of these ideas are ridiculous but I say let the players make the choice...as they did collectively with the visors. End of rant. Stepan only missed one game. Why? Because he went to full protection on his jaw. If he had worn it before, he probably wouldn't have missed any games. I am talking about more than just facial cuts and bruises. How many NHL players have not lost teeth? I would bet it is very few. Look at the incident rate of facial injuries in college. They are almost non-existent. They occur much more frequently in the NHL. And broken jaws, noses, and facial bones can be life changing events, causing problems for the rest of a person's life. Lacrosse - full cages are worn Boxes/fighters - Padded gloves are worn, and not to protect their pretty knuckles Baseball - There are risks from pitched and batted balls, but the batter is usually not swinging the bat at an opponent and throwing the ball at an opponent frequently results in a game misconduct. Baseball added the helmet, with the flap to protect the side of the head and the face Basketball - Does anyone really care? That game has so many issues they need to start over. In hockey, players are armed with sticks, and they intentionally stand in the path of pucks traveling at 100+ mph. There is no other game that compares. I simply believe that for the protection of the players full facial protection is necessary. There are just too many accidental facial injuries and Darwin award nominee injuries in hockey to ignore it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted May 30, 2014 Author Share Posted May 30, 2014 Stepan only missed one game. Why? Because he went to full protection on his jaw. If he had worn it before, he probably wouldn't have missed any games. I am talking about more than just facial cuts and bruises. How many NHL players have not lost teeth? I would bet it is very few. Look at the incident rate of facial injuries in college. They are almost non-existent. They occur much more frequently in the NHL. And broken jaws, noses, and facial bones can be life changing events, causing problems for the rest of a person's life. Lacrosse - full cages are worn Boxes/fighters - Padded gloves are worn, and not to protect their pretty knuckles Baseball - There are risks from pitched and batted balls, but the batter is usually not swinging the bat at an opponent and throwing the ball at an opponent frequently results in a game misconduct. Baseball added the helmet, with the flap to protect the side of the head and the face Basketball - Does anyone really care? That game has so many issues they need to start over. In hockey, players are armed with sticks, and they intentionally stand in the path of pucks traveling at 100+ mph. There is no other game that compares. I simply believe that for the protection of the players full facial protection is necessary. There are just too many accidental facial injuries and Darwin award nominee injuries in hockey to ignore it. A full cage may not have protected him from that injury, as I noted in my post I broke my jaw in high school on a similar play....wearing a full mask. You do realize the contraption was wearing provides way more jaw protection than a typical full mask don't you? I do see where you are coming from however these guys don't have your typical 8-5 job, I don't think they care if they lose teeth as long as they can produce and extend their careers. I also don't agree that cuts and broken jaws drastically change a players quality of life. I broke mine and I can't even tell i did. Loss of eyesight or significant head trauma would alter ones quality of life. The players have great medical coverage and make good money....they'll be ok. Any alteration of vision can cause problems playing at the speed in which they do....that's how you get concussions, which seem to be the bigger/'more costly issue for the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 A full cage may not have protected him from that injury, as I noted in my post I broke my jaw in high school on a similar play....wearing a full mask. You do realize the contraption was wearing provides way more jaw protection than a typical full mask don't you? I do see where you are coming from however these guys don't have your typical 8-5 job, I don't think they care if they lose teeth as long as they can produce and extend their careers. I also don't agree that cuts and broken jaws drastically change a players quality of life. I broke mine and I can't even tell i did. Loss of eyesight or significant head trauma would alter ones quality of life. The players have great medical coverage and make good money....they'll be ok. Any alteration of vision can cause problems playing at the speed in which they do....that's how you get concussions, which seem to be the bigger/'more costly issue for the NHL. I unfortunately know two who broke jaws (not playing hockey) who have been suffering for years now because their jaws click when chewing which causes significant headaches. In one case the rebroke the jaw to try to get it to heal better and alleviate the problem but it did not work. Of course that doesn't happen to everyone, but broken jaws can cause lifelong issues. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted May 30, 2014 Author Share Posted May 30, 2014 I unfortunately know two who broke jaws (not playing hockey) who have been suffering for years now because their jaws click when chewing which causes significant headaches. In one case the rebroke the jaw to try to get it to heal better and alleviate the problem but it did not work. Of course that doesn't happen to everyone, but broken jaws can cause lifelong issues. Ok you win . Odd my jaw clicks too, both sides. No headaches though. You noted they weren't playing hockey, what were they doing? Maybe a helmet a full cage would have helped them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keikla Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 ECAC Director of Officials proposed an awesome rule change. If that gets passed, it's a good thing Grimaldi signed. He's a good player, but the dude flopped around more than any Sioux I can recall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 If that gets passed, it's a good thing Grimaldi signed. He's a good player, but the dude flopped around more than any Sioux I can recall. I agree, he was light on his skates at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Ok you win . Odd my jaw clicks too, both sides. No headaches though. You noted they weren't playing hockey, what were they doing? Maybe a helmet a full cage would have helped them Actually I don't have a clue what they were doing. One is male and one is female. Neither ever played hockey, but one was on a B17 crew in WWII. His injury came after the war though, maybe farming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 I agree, he was light on his skates at times. And if Lucic gets behind him he will be a lot lighter on his skates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 And if Lucic gets behind him he will be a lot lighter on his skates. Lucic is a whole lot of nasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slap Shot Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 http://host.madison....f47eff79d3.html Looks like minny isn't the only big 10 school not following the gentleman's agreement UM have been following it - they've simply proposed getting rid of the rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux rube Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 And if Lucic gets behind him he will be a lot lighter on his skates. With a lot higher voice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 6, 2014 Author Share Posted June 6, 2014 "I am disappointed that the rules committee didn’t recommend video review for major penalties or recommend allowing players to wear the three-quarter face shield." I'm right there with ya Goon. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozen4sioux Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 And if Lucic gets behind him he will be a lot lighter on his skates........ With a lot higher voice. But why would his voi......ohhhhhh geeez I see what you did there. Uffda ...Lucic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burd Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 also don't agree that cuts and broken jaws drastically change a players quality of life. I broke mine and I can't even tell i did. To be fair, scpa, it's pretty obvious to the rest of us that you've had a head injury of some kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted June 7, 2014 Author Share Posted June 7, 2014 To be fair, scpa, it's pretty obvious to the rest of us that you've had a head injury of some kind. Nice, I could have done without that one today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 How likely is it to see NCAA go to 3/4 shields? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 How likely is it to see NCAA go to 3/4 shields? I wouldn't bet my money on it; I'll bet all of yours that you give me. They like their full masks, for men and women. Mentioning that ... I'm amazed that the NCAA hasn't mandated full helmets for womens lacrosse yet. Heck, the ladies don't even wear decent hand protection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cberkas Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 I wouldn't bet my money on it; I'll bet all of yours that you give me. They like their full masks, for men and women. Mentioning that ... I'm amazed that the NCAA hasn't mandated full helmets for womens lacrosse yet. Heck, the ladies don't even wear decent hand protection. This has been brought up before in lacrosse, by some female players and coaches that it's just as physical on the women's side as the men's. I don't think the NCAA has even looked into the issue. I'm all for women's lacrosse having the same equipment as men's lacrosse has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 So, leaving lax back to siouxfan512's question: I'd expect more face shields in NCAA play and not and reductions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 With how much emphasis is placed on head safety in all sports as of late, I'd guess that the NHL would mandate full shields before the NCAA ever allowed 3/4 shields. Do I agree that full shields are safer? Not necessarily. It's hard to say for sure as there are opinions both ways. But, we all know logic rare prevails in today's society so when lawyers get involved, I wouldn't be shocked to see the NHL go with full shield. At one time players didn't wear helmets at all. Then there were teeny-tiny helmet-like things that likely did next to nothing. Next came something that actually looked like a helmet. Starting last season, the NHL now mandates at least a shield for all new players entering the league. The trend is more equipment, not less, and I don't see the NCAA ever changing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iluvdebbies Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 This is why college hockey should never take the mask off the helmet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 oy, I don't need to see that at a game, that's for sure. yikes 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.