Re: Potential rule changes coming
I think half shields need to go one way or the other. To have them legal in the college game would make a lot of sense to me. It does make players more accountable for the use of their stick in the corners and in front of the net, but they'll probably want to implement the double-minor highsticking penalty if they went in that direction. Schools may have to look at increasing their insurance policies as well, although I'm not exactly sure if the athletes are completely on their family's policies for collegiate sport or not. Obviously a head injury can be more serious than a facial injury, but there will be cases (like Ian Laperriere of the Flyers) where a kid will get hit with a puck and have some serious injuries in all areas.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't thin Laperriere was even wear a half shield... he got hit above the eye, which is pretty hard to do with a half shield. Regardless, I absolutely agree that there will be some cases like that. But these cases are indeed few. I would be content with a switch to half shield simply because, as has been said, jaws heal but brains don't. The one issue would be the dental risk. I mean, especially in DIII (and yes, I know that most of the committee couldn't give a flying **** about DIII), the focus is supposed to be on the SA getting a degree and building towards a successful future. Imagine an accounting major looking to become an accountant, showing up to the interview missing 8 teeth... doesn't set the former SA at all. I know this is all out of the realm of discussion within the committee, but it is a valid point. Anyway, as I said, I would be content with Half Shields. I'm not supporting either way.
If they choose not to allow half shields, then they should not allow them throughout junior hockey in the US (except maybe the USHL, since that league is considered as much of a pro development league as it is a college development league). Leagues like the NorPAC, WSHL, CSHL, NAHL, MnJHL, etc should be mandatory full face shields if they want to stay consistent with calling themselves a college development league.
NCAA doesn't control these leagues at all. They are under the supervision of USAHockey. And they call themselves College Development Leagues, but all of the USAHockey junior leagues prefer to think of themselves as professional development leagues. They push the players as much towards the pros (unsuccessfully 99.999% of the time) just as much as they push them towards college. Maybe not so much in a lot the specific leagues you mentioned, but DEFINITELY in USHL, NAHL, EJHL (to an extent), and all of the Canadian Leagues. And most of the junior leagues don't care if a SA goes to NCAA or CIS... it's still good PR for them, either way. So why would they change to match the rules of a league that most of the time they couldn't give a **** about?
Bottom line is, kids at all levels have proven that they can move on to play pro hockey, so why not help them out and give them one less thing to worry about when they do move on. I would think this would help the D1 coaches recruiting against major junior in a way (I hope anyway).
I can't find it, but I know about a year ago I read an article about NCAA kids, who were used to full cages, having exponentially greater occurrence of high-sticking and CTH penalties than their Major-Junior counterparts. The article had quotes from an NHL scout who said that is was a big factor that makes NHL players a bit more hesitant to use NCAA kids. So it could no only benefit recruiting, it could potentially make NCAA a more viable development league for professional leagues (which, in turn, would help recruiting even more)
As for the hybrid icing rule. I don't think it would be a bad thing to try out for a couple years and see what the feedback is in 2012. I watched some games in juniors that used that rule, and it was as effective as touch icing, but seemed to eliminate a lot of potential injury scenarios.
I love hte idea behind the rule... but I think it is a HORRIBLE Idea for DIII. Too much of a grey area... asking referees to make a very subjective decision... that's way too much influence on a game for the officials.
The shorthanded no-icing rule is a joke. Until they start penalizing players for launching the puck out of play deliberately, this is going to cause more injuries to fans in the stands, as well as injuries to tired players. The players will just start launching the puck out of play, into the benches or over the glass in the neutral zone. You can tell rinks to put in netting all around the rink, but that makes for some lousy viewing. This is something that would be detrimental to the game. The rules committee needs to relax and start remembering that it's just as fun to watch a 2-1 game when the goalies are playing well, as it is to watch a game that puts up lacrosse scores.
100% agreed, without a doubt. Idiotic, beyond belief.
. Joking aside, you thinking of Duncan Keith?
