Rule Changes II

[Jim Hyla]

OK, here's the second rule change possibility, half shields or full. It gives you something to do instead of thinking about Harvard. Maybe it'll stop you from forgetting about Dartmouth.:-D

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

"New York abstains...courteously."

If the players and those around them feel a full shield is needed, I'd have no objection.  But if the players and coaches didn't want it, then I would be opposed.

[Rosey]

Coach Schafer is on the record about being in favor of half shields.  His explanation is that full shields make players take more risks, e.g. by blocking shots on one knee.  I know that I prefer having a full set of teeth, so in a league in which head shots are rarely intentional I wear a full cage; but this experience is hardly relevant to NCAA hockey.

[Rita]

Coach Schafer is on the record about being in favor of half shields.  His explanation is that full shields make players take more risks, e.g. by blocking shots on one knee.  I know that I prefer having a full set of teeth, so in a league in which head shots are rarely intentional I wear a full cage; but this experience is hardly relevant to NCAA hockey.

If this rule is passed, would someone who wants to wear a full cage/shield (and protect their dental work) be allowed to wear one?

In the article, they have a quote from former Princeton player Jeff Halpern:
"I don't know if we had staff that could stitch up," said Halpern. "That's a big problem."

I hope the skills of the training staffs have improved since the mid 90's, but that is something to consider. There are bound to be a few more nicks and cuts.

[Towerroad]

Here is what appears to be a respectable study on the subject. It is pretty conclusive that full shields are superior.

Summary:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10612320

Detail:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/282/24/2328.full

With all due respect, I don't think this sort of decision is best left to the coaches who almost inevitably grew up in the "old" system and will be supportive of the status quo.

[Dafatone]

Coach Schafer is on the record about being in favor of half shields.  His explanation is that full shields make players take more risks, e.g. by blocking shots on one knee.  I know that I prefer having a full set of teeth, so in a league in which head shots are rarely intentional I wear a full cage; but this experience is hardly relevant to NCAA hockey.

This is only baaaaaaaarely relevant, but I know from my fencing days that having my whole face covered made me feel MUCH more invincible than any other time.  So I definitely see where Coach Schafer's coming from.

[redice]

Coach Schafer is on the record about being in favor of half shields.  His explanation is that full shields make players take more risks, e.g. by blocking shots on one knee.  I know that I prefer having a full set of teeth, so in a league in which head shots are rarely intentional I wear a full cage; but this experience is hardly relevant to NCAA hockey.

Since we have a team that historically is really good at blocking shots, why would we want to enact a rule change that could (should?) discourage it?   It would seem to put a small ding in our defensive armor...Anything that hurts our defense is bad for the program.

[Trotsky]

"New York abstains...courteously."

For God's sake, Jeff, siddown.

[KeithK]

Last night I saw Doug Murray take a pretty nasty high stick in the mouth.  It didn't look intentional but it still drew blood and looked extremely painful (he went down like he'd been shot).  And that's just a stick, not a puck flying at 100 mph. I can't imagine why anyone playing hockey at a high level wouldn't want to protect their face from this kind of risk. The argument against face shields (obstructing vision, harder to breathe) have never rung true to me, with the caveat (of course) that I've only played hockey at a very low level.

That said, These are adults (with very few exceptions). I don't see why they shouldn't be able to take such risks if they want to.*  An appropriate rule (IMO) would be one that requires NCAA school to provide full or half shields as requested by each student-athlete in question.

(* We also need laws that clearly place responsibility for any resulting injuries on the individual making the choices, not on the school that allowed them to make such choices. Just trying to preempt the potential liability argument.)

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

"New York abstains...courteously."

For God's sake, Jeff, siddown.

Hey!  Somebody got it!  ::banana::

I will never underestimate the knowledge of this board again (not that I ever did, mind you).