No, not true at all. It had a lot to do with goaltending...more specifically poor goaltending. It also had a lot to do with teams having guys who simply werent that good on the bottom lines. In comparison to today there are talented guys who play both ways as well as better (bigger) goaltending.
There is no question that today, top to bottom, there is far more talent than in the 80s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lopey
Yeah that was part of it as well. Goalies are definetly better today. Equipment helps alot
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadLooch
This was my first thought too.
Don't discount the size of the goalies equipment either...added to the fact their weren't many of em over 6 foot.
As a center, I was scared ****less of taking a pass where I had to hold up at the red line. You feel cornered in open ice.
Exactly. Recipe for disaster, especially with all the equipment upgrades. It's like the sand bar at the ocean....right past it is the drop off, and all those hungry sharks :-) .
I'm sure this has been mentioned a thousand times over but concussions are not more common now than in the past, they're just diagnosed now. Changing rules back to the way they were before concussions were diagnosed with regularity to prevent concussions is just hilariously idiotic.
I'm sure this has been mentioned a thousand times over but concussions are not more common now than in the past, they're just diagnosed now. Changing rules back to the way they were before concussions were diagnosed with regularity to prevent concussions is just hilariously idiotic.
Guys didn't go for the KO hit like they started doing a few years ago. People started looking at how Scott Stevens and some others were throwing hits and said, hey, why not me? Watch a game from the 80's early 90's, players are bigger, faster, and generally more skilled.
Were there concussions back then, absolutely, but nothing on the order that we're seeing now, most of it is a combination of the above coupled w/ technique and mentality.
MMB is right....all our puck movers have been cut-rate journeyman guys, which is actually pretty unusual. While I think a puck mover [B]is[B] very restricted in this system, it would be nice to have one for the PP....
IMO, this doesn't really do much of anything to help the game or reduce concussions. If someone could show me a montage of hits that resulted in injury immediately following a 2-line pass then I could be convinced otherwise, but I don't think that the red line really plays a factor in this discussion. Horton and Savard for example weren't flying through the neutral zone when they got hit. Hell, Savard was almost stationary, and Horton didn't exactly have a ton of speed built up.
This was my first reaction when I first saw the thread. I really don't think the speed of the game has much to do with the concussions. When speed does play a major factor in the incident, it's usually the player is caught with his head down. Isn't Sweden or Finland experimenting with some new helmet to help prevent concussions? I know they already have the Messier project, hell I could buy those helmets at my local hockey store. Why isn't the league doing anything to mandate better helmets?
When speed does play a major factor in the incident, it's usually the player is caught with his head down.
Players always play with their heads down unless they are making a pass, waiting for a pass or skating in an open lane. As soon as a player has to begin handling the puck to maneuver through traffic, their head is down. As soon as a pass is made the receiver's head is down to receive it. The concussion due to the "head down" thing is mostly nonsense.
There are basically two primary reasons for concussion in ice hockey: a hit along the boards where the player's head is driven into the boards/dasher/glass, and the blind-side open ice hit. There are also the occasional hits where a player is up-ended and his head hits the ice.
Putting the red line offsides/two-line-pass rule back in place may minimize the occurrence of concussion due to open-ice hits -- maybe -- but blind side hits will continue as will hits along the boards. Reinstating the red line rules won't do anything for that. Only player respect for the other player will truly eliminate or greatly reduce the amount of concussion.
Reinstating the red line is nothing more than a feel good, PC solution (PC is not equal to Peter Chiarelli). That will definitely slow the game down and in my opinion make it boring as hell. But it's not going to do much if anything to reduce concussion.
While they are at it, why don't they go back to the days of no forward passes, since they seem intent on playing retro-rule hockey? Surely that would slow the game down as well.
Exactly. Recipe for disaster, especially with all the equipment upgrades. It's like the sand bar at the ocean....right past it is the drop off, and all those hungry sharks :-) .
Yeah, we'll probably start seeing more dangerous open ice hits because forwards are trapped behind the red line waiting for a suicide pass.
Firmly against it. Hated the 2-line pass forever, loved when they got rid of it. Don't buy that it's causing that many concussion injuries and they should be looking more at equipment and further deterrents instead of going back to that boring-ass rule.
But looking forward to HUB's back-tracking when it proves to not help anything and slow the game down again.
I believe the Bruins would not be harmed by reinstating the red line - they would adapt. And yes, league wide there would be more of a return to the ‘trap.’
I was actually having this discussion with a co-worker the other night (nyr-fan) – about reinstating the red line as *PART* of an effort to reduce concussions. Reinstating the red line by itself it will not work; the league must mandate equipment changes to shoulder and elbow pads removing the hard armor coating from its exterior replacing it with energy absorbing padding (keep the hard armor coating for the breastplate and back) ... That along with helmet modifications, mouth pieces, and allowing goalies to handle the puck anywhere on the ice.
As far as the red line goes – if reinstated – make the game more interesting by removing it for the four on four overtime period. (Maybe even removing it for the last five minutes of the third period).
Additionally, I would be interested in a study on the number of concussions that have occurred during the four on four overtime … as other have alluded to the need for a larger ice surface – less skaters equals more open ice (while retaining seating capacity). (I’m not advocating 4 on 4 hockey.)
Last edited by JAD: 03-10-2012 at 11:36 AM.
Reason: additional thought
There is no room on the ice anymore. The players are huge.
The ice needs to be bigger...and the goal too.
The size of the players has changed...the equipment has changed. The only thing that hasn't changed is the dimensions of the ice.
It would be nice if they could make the ice like maybe 10% bigger to correspond to the increase in the size of the players....more space and less collisions.
I don't think that the passing and receiving of passes is very good. So many times the puck is bouncing over the sticks...although I'm sure the ice conditions are partly the reason. In addition to the increase of players size (and reach) this is why the powerplays are so bad. Players can't seem to make more than 2 passes in a row.
There is no room on the ice anymore. The players are huge.
The ice needs to be bigger...and the goal too.
The size of the players has changed...the equipment has changed. The only thing that hasn't changed is the dimensions of the ice.
It would be nice if they could make the ice like maybe 10% bigger to correspond to the increase in the size of the players....more space and less collisions.
I don't think that the passing and receiving of passes is very good. So many times the puck is bouncing over the sticks...although I'm sure the ice conditions are partly the reason. In addition to the increase of players size (and reach) this is why the powerplays are so bad. Players can't seem to make more than 2 passes in a row.
Right there with you, I raised similar points on the last page. People want to poo-poo the bigger ice surface, but there's a big difference between 90' or 92' width and the IIHF's 98'.
I just heard Mark Spector on Sportsnet Fan 590. He said he spoke with Peter Chiarelli and Chia told him that he'd be willing to talk about bringing the red line back. He also said Shero is an advocate of bringing it back and basically summarized by saying pretty much every GM of a team that has been affected by major concussions are willing to entertain the thought. It's not exactly breaking news but I thought I'd include it here.
Right there with you, I raised similar points on the last page. People want to poo-poo the bigger ice surface, but there's a big difference between 90' or 92' width and the IIHF's 98'.
Agreed. I like the thought of a slightly bigger surface. Something between today's standard and IIHF (closer to the current standard, though). The problem is that I think the NHL missed the boat on bigger ice. They should have done it starting in the mid 90s when everybody was getting new arenas. Now, they'd have to get rid of a row or two of seats. Sure, it might be better for the game but owners, for the most part, are business people and not hockey guys. They don't want to lose any revenue from taking out seats. Especially in cities where you have to give up your first born just to be able to afford a seat.
