Your arguments are all well and good but they are actually counter to the point that the game is too fast(causing concussions). Your enforcement of obstruction would actually speed things up further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubrick
Printable View
Your arguments are all well and good but they are actually counter to the point that the game is too fast(causing concussions). Your enforcement of obstruction would actually speed things up further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubrick
Oh yeah, I should've prefaced that I was primarily commenting on the decline in goal scoring. Although widening the rink would most likely lead to more open space and less contact. I think slowing the game down is a bit futile. As long as grown men are skating around at 20 MPH, big hits are going to happen. I'd really like to see improvements in the helmets used.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseydevilYour arguments are all well and good but they are actually counter to the point that the game is too fast(causing concussions). Your enforcement of obstruction would actually speed things up further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubrick
I say widen the rink or go to 4 on 4 full time. and make shin guards cardboard again, i'm sick of seeing so many blocked shots.
NHL finally makes some good moves now wants to go back? Idiots. This reminds me of when they thought it was a good idea to get rid of the touch up rule. That, more than anything, allowed the trap to slow the game down. The game is fine now why screw with it?
jom
I read an article about that somewhere, and better helmets won't help with concussions. The helmet's function is primarily to prevent skull fractures The concussion usually occurs not as a result of trauma to the head but as a result of the brain slamming against the inside of the skull due to the sudden deceleration of the head. Short of a 4-foot wide helmet which would allow for much more gradual deceleration, a different helmet design won't help.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubrick
And I don't see them widening the rinks any time soon, it would just cost too much money to do in each arena, not to mention the seats in the lower bowl being eliminated.
That's the thing, they wouldn't be. The seats at the top would be eliminated. Sitting at the glass is still sitting at the glass, even if the first row is now row e instead of a. No more $10 seats, they're all $15. It could be done but it won't happen. Not until owners and players really and truly care about this stuff. As of now it's just window dressing. You'll have to wait until a guy like Crosby is done for his career or guys start dying because of brain injuries. Please don't bring up the fighters either. Not the same thing even though you can make a possible case for it. When a guy dies because of trauma from a hit, then you might see something done about it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws
That's interesting. I'd like to read that article if you remember where you found it.Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws
I know it's almost impossible to compare football and hockey directly when it comes to player helmets, but there was a study/rating system done by VA Tech on the concussion resistance of certain football helmets currently on the market. ESPN did a thorough write up on the their findings:
Virginia Tech research provides much-needed data, system for rating sports equipment - ESPN
That article also mentions a study done by University of Pittsburgh that suggests "advanced" football helmets can lower the risk of concussion by about one-third.
I'm not sure how this translates to hockey helmets but it's pretty clear that the equipment players are wearing today can be improved upon.
The first row would still be there, but you would still have to have fewer rows in the lower bowl because of the bigger ice surface, even if the rows you'd be losing would in essence be the back rows. There's usually a concourse separating the lower bowl from the upper, so the upper bowl won't be affected.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmytheKing
Looks like the return of the red line is not getting much traction, but the hybrid icing is.
Hybrid icing finds strong support at NHL GM meetings; red line reinstallation stalls | Puck Daddy - Yahoo! SportsQuote:
Some GMs came to the meeting in favor of the idea, thinking the game had become too fast and too simple, with teams firing the puck through the neutral zone and simply tipping it into the offensive end. Their thinking is that reinstituting the red line would slow down the game or add skill through the neutral zone.
But there wasn't much support among the small group that discussed it, according to the Detroit Red Wings' Ken Holland. The worry is that teams will start trapping in the neutral zone the way they used to or just find another way to adjust.
I have to agree w/ Jom but the hybrid icing rule is a good idea IMO. When I watched hockey abroad years back was what sold me completely on it. On top of everything else I think the officials can lay off their whistle as well. Let these guys play the game. Too many ticky tack penalties called night in and night out...Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws
