Visors in the NCAA

[lampliter87 8]

http://www.uscho.com/news/college-hockey/i...tbyHowMuch.html

NCAA considering allowing visors in the college game, similar to Major Junior. Let's not turn this into a visor vs. full cage debate, but this is an interesting take.

[hoonking 0]

Pretty cool. Although the cages do not impede vision as much as one would think, if a player wants a visor why shouldn't they be able to use one? I understand they are students and aren't being payed to play but if they want to take the risk then let them in my opinion. They are old enough to make those kinds of decisions.

[Chadd 916]

The medical costs and/or insurance for those programs will likely go up quite a bit if that happens. For that reason alone, I am surprised they are considering it.

[Gummer12 134]

I totally agree with you Chadd..but I just always found it odd that after HS..and those who go to Jr's (A/B/C what have you)..they're allowed to wear visors..but if they are Good enough to get picked up by a University, the cage has to go back on. Perhaps they should make it a PRO Only Rule. And Above (Men's League :P)

[shooter27 116]

Pretty cool. Although the cages do not impede vision as much as one would think, if a player wants a visor why shouldn't they be able to use one? I understand they are students and aren't being payed to play but if they want to take the risk then let them in my opinion. They are old enough to make those kinds of decisions.

I read an article about the change - the visor change isn't about vision as much as its about the theory that players show more respect for one another when they're not wearing full cages and a greater degree of respect should increase the safety of players. Also, the leagues that the NCAA is competing against for players (major junior) and the pro leagues it feeds players into are all non-cage leagues. Either way, doesn't sound like its something that gets decided this year.

[Chadd 916]

I read an article about the change - the visor change isn't about vision as much as its about the theory that players show more respect for one another when they're not wearing full cages and a greater degree of respect should increase the safety of players. Also, the leagues that the NCAA is competing against for players (major junior) and the pro leagues it feeds players into are all non-cage leagues. Either way, doesn't sound like its something that gets decided this year.

If you're trying to teach respect at that age group, you're setting yourself up for failure. You're just going to wind up with more injuries as a result of the high sticks and initiating hits with the hands up.

[LkptTiger 1]

...especially given how emotional the games can get.

[shooter27 116]

You won't get an argument from me - I was just trying to shed some light into the thinking. Having played NCAA hockey I can say, I was definitely saved by the cage many more times then I would have been saved by any "extra" respect from my opponent. Although, so many guys these days play juniors and wear visors before college you would think they would already have learned the lessons about respecting opponents.

[LkptTiger 1]

The healthy tomahawk chop to the ankle and subsequent death-stare from a large 20-year-old was enough to teach me my lesson after my first act of carelessness on my very first day of camp several years ago.

[chippa13 1844]

If you're trying to teach respect at that age group, you're setting yourself up for failure. You're just going to wind up with more injuries as a result of the high sticks and initiating hits with the hands up.

Initially, I think you're correct but in the long run I think it could be a good move. Combine the visors with the automatic penalties for head contact and I think a good portion of the initial spike in injuries will disappear.

[Chadd 916]

Initially, I think you're correct but in the long run I think it could be a good move. Combine the visors with the automatic penalties for head contact and I think a good portion of the initial spike in injuries will disappear.

If you make the penalty 4 minutes, two for a high stick and two more for contacting the head it may have an impact. At that point it's up to the refs to call it and I have little to no faith in that happening.

[tips09 0]

i like the idea. It always seemed weird to me that moving on from junior you would have to put the cage back on. Since for the most part the players playing in the ncaa were most likely wearing a visor before moving up i dont see why they shouldnt change it but that is strictly from a hockey standpoint and nothing to do with the other side (Insurance and such)

[lampliter87 8]

I wouldn't say most, but a significant number, yes. It contributes to the higher percentage of guys playing college in fishbowls than you see in minor hockey.

[BlackIce 1]

The medical costs and/or insurance for those programs will likely go up quite a bit if that happens. For that reason alone, I am surprised they are considering it.

Agreed, I highly doubt the NCAA would go to visors. The costs associated with it would be just too much.

[Kevin 5]

Stitches to the chin, by far the most common increased medical cost of visors, are not expensive.

[Chadd 916]

Stitches to the chin, by far the most common increased medical cost of visors, are not expensive.

Sure, that's the most common, it's going to happen a dozen or more times a season to each team. The cost issue is going to be the one or two times a year each team has to cover major dental work. That can run into the tens of thousands pretty quickly.

[lee92 2]

I'm from the Maritimes, and my NCAA knowledge is limited. What's the main reason they're forced to wear cages anyway? University hockey here (CIS) is all visors, as well as every tier of junior and major junior. Is it mainly for student protection or what?

[shooter27 116]

My guess is it started for for protection reasons. They didn't actually begin wearing cages until the late 70's or early 80's, prior to that they wore no facial protection, and at that time the NCAA did not produce nearly as many high quality, pro-level players as it does today. So, and I'm guessing here, they NCAA probably decided that since they weren't producing pro prospects, safety would be more important than keeping things consistent with the Junior and Pro ranks.

EDIT: Of course, back when they guys first started wearing cages, it lead to incidents like this

. Thankfully, stuff like that doesn't happen any longer

[greech 4]

There is a handful of minors playing NCAA every year, would they be forced to wear cages if this passed through?

[zebra_steve 11]

I would say that anyone under age would be required to wear full face protection just as they would being underage in Juniors. It would be\is a liability thing.

[shooter27 116]

I believe under age kids that play major junior in Canada are not required to wear full cages, I don't know about any of the other junior leagues.

[tips09 0]

I believe under age kids that play major junior in Canada are not required to wear full cages, I don't know about any of the other junior leagues.

Yea most jr leagues in Canada if your in your 16 year old year and you've signed you can wear a visor

[watchgreat 4]

Heard from a kid whose brother plays on Yale that the NCAA is going to the visor for sure.

[Harv 86]

It's time for NCAA to go to visors. Most if not all of these players on NCAA teams have played long enough and at a high enough level to have learned the code and respect with visors. Hell, probably most of these kids came from a visor league into the NCAA cage. And those players who are reckless with the visor on will pay for it one way or another.

Now visors at non-NCAA college leagues (ACHA)? Hell no. That would be the biggest disaster ever.

[shooter27 116]

The rumor that they're going to visors comes up every so often. I'll believe it when I see it.

I understand why it would make sense at d1 but it would make almost no sense in d3 and I doubt the NCAA would have two sets of equipment rules for the different divisions.