zaxx

No thanks. I want the Wings to bring in a goalie from our own development system. Show the other teams why our draft picks are number one over and over again.

That is so sad. He is just a young man with so much potential. He is making good money, is healthy and should have such a great career. I could never imagine the pain he is going through right now and I wonder if he will be able to return to the NHL this year. He may want to as an escape, the poor man. To him I wish him my condolences.

It is good to hear that you saw the humor in my response. I was very worried that you would be insulted by it but I was just trying to have some fun. The women who reach the olympics are not as good as they could have been (stunted as you say) because they did not get the best training growing up. This is my argument. Further they do get less funding, from sponsors, Canadian olympic committee, etc. How do I know this. Well I am having a hard time finding the specific numbers however there is good evidence to support things. The players on the mens team come from the NHL, or prior to that the AHL/international leagues. The men are working hockey players, paid to exercise and continue developing their game. The players in the womens olympic team come from regular jobs like you and me, with the exception of a few. They do not have the luxury of playing all the time, or training all the time. From what I have read Canadian Olympic committee only pays for a few practice sessions, one pre olympics tournament, and a couple of other scattered games. Not a lot compared to what the mens team gets. I am sorry that I cannot find more finite numbers, but I expect that as the olympics draw close some news outlet will publish the information. I know they have in the past, if I could only find it.

Here is an easy and quick example of how women do not get the same training opportunities as men. I cannot believe you are asking me to prove something that is written about in newspapers, magazines, textbooks, government budgets, and more, over and over again but here it comes. Women leagues and sports get a smaller investment from the organizing committees (universities, schools, etc). How can this be true you ask? Well take for example the Universities in Canada, the holy land of hockey. There was no championship (and formally recognized league) in Canadian Universities until 1998. The men have had a championship since 1962. Oh wait you want proof of this: History of men's CIS championships: http://www.universitysport.ca/e/championsh...y/2009/past.cfm History of women's CIS championships: http://www.universitysport.ca/e/championsh...y/2009/past.cfm But wait you say, all this proves is that at the University level things were not right until 1998. After 1998 all things were equal for mens and womens leagues. Wow you are really bending the rules of logic and reason now. Alright lets dig deeper (I did not want to do a dissertation on this subject but perhaps I should now change majors). In 2000 there was a lawsuit filed against the University of Saskatchewan. The claims were that the U of S invested more time and resources into men's hockey then womens. I know this is all destroying your rosy outlook on life. Lets continue. In 2008 (what just last year, that impossible there are no inequalities in today's society!!) they finally reached a settlement. Women's hockey at the University is now investing more funds, hiring real coaches, and providing scholarships to allow the best athletes to attend while developing. They are not 100% equal but they are working with the womens hockey team to improve. This is only at the University level, there is more data out there for every level of women sports. Things are improving (as I have already stated) but a change today is not felt for several years (until the girls who can benefit have a chance to develop). So as I said previously, there have been and are no women today who could compete in the NHL. However as we correct the differences in training, ice time, funding, and developmental programs we will see more elite women hockey players. Surely to goodness there will be a small handful who can compete and have the desire to play in the NHL. This is no small stretch, I am not saying women will account for 90% of the league. I am simply stating that we will see a few women who we can all cheer for, and they will hit as hard or harder then any of the men.

I love this comment!! You not only found a way to compare women to so many other groups in a derogatory and discriminatory fashion, but you did so in a way that it made you seem like the most ignorant fool in history. I seriously cannot stop laughing, and yes I know pointing out the absurdity of your post is only asking for you to get upset and replay but it is just that easy. If ignorance truly is bliss, then you must be the happiest sob I have ever known.

Yes I guess it is not unreasonable to ask me to become an investigative journalist and provide discrete sources and collected evidence to back my statements. All I have is empirical data that I have seen through my time involved with hockey. I am trying to avoid the need for painstaking research and instead debate with the information we do know. The only way I could prove this to you would be to contact Hockey Canada and ask them to provide totals for the ice time dedicated to women leagues vs boys leagues. Then also ask for the credentials of the coaches of those leagues. The boys leagues in my home town require that their coaches have certain levels of certification and training, there is no such rule for the girls leagues. The boys leagues in my hometown offer discounted (and free for the Jr A) gym memberships for the 'AA" teams. These perks conveniently begin the year after girls are not permitted on the boys team (though I did hear they are working to change that) In fact I could not ask hockey canada since many of the girls teams in various communities do not have proper affiliation with an organization. You have just agreed with my reasoning and then ignored that to disagree with my conclusion. They are not equal in training, therefore it proves that women could not compete in the NHL??? Please rephrase to be - They are not equal in training, therefore if they were equal in training there is no reason to ascertain that women could not compete in the NHL. Compared to the mens path, the development leagues for women are new, not easily accessible, not as heavily supported, have lower time on the ice, etc. When they are equal there will be a small number of women capable of competing in the NHL, not enough to overtake the number of men but they will be there. Unfortunately the women's leagues do not offer the best source to develop into an NHL caliber player. A women would need to play on the same teams as the boys (in the CHL, ECHL, WHL, etc). The amount of ice time dedicated to women teams is lower then the boys teams, the amount of funding by local businesses is lower, etc etc etc. For reference I did not originate the training scenario but yes it is a hypothetical, so is the OP's original question. You cannot answer "Could a women compete in the NHL" without entering into hypothetical. It has never been done. Yes I am reaching further into a hypothetical domain by posing the premise that it would be possible if the best were allowed to develop with the best but it is all hypothetical.

Alright you did not like the evidence put forth try this: (feel free to call it anecdotal but I am not going to write a dissertation with cited sources just to prove a point to you) - Girls were not permitted in boys leagues until the last 15 years and even then it is sparse and many places still do not allow it - Many rinks and leagues only recently added or renovated to provide girls a private change room (they join the team after dressing for traditional locker room banter and prep) Most rinks still do not have this, it is uncomfortable for girls to have to change in front of their peers - Many countries outside of Canada / USA do not allow their women to play ice hockey at all (this is changing especially in Europe) - In places where women have been permitted to play the age that they have to stop competing with the boys is very young (some less then 10) , they have to play Rec hockey. Even Haley Wickenheiser only played hockey on boys teams until she was 13 - Many leagues (after the age cut off) have it written into their rules that girls cannot be a member of a team - There is a stigma that has prevented womens hockey teams from receiving elite coaching, & training. This is not at the international level but in the young ranks. How can a girl learn if she is taught by someone who has never laced them up? - Women's hockey (which girls are forced to play after a certain age) does not allow significant body contact and instead focus on other skills. And teams are full of many age groups, you cannot develop your skills when you are training with players 5 years younger - People who believe that girls cannot/should not play with the boys make their voices heard and young girls listen and quit. (It's not lady like to kick the crap out of someone) - Hockey is an expensive game for parents to enroll their kids, yes this affects boys also but it reduces the odds of finding a female phenom Exactly, the entire thread is hypothetical!! For goodness sake why would you bark at someone for following the purpose of a thread and then use those same ideals to prove that you indeed read the first post. I am very happy that you can read a post on a forum, now please educate yourself on the English language and understand that "Can women compete in upper tiers of hockey?" is asking for hypothetical! (like I should talk with my grammar and spelling errors, lol)

I cannot believe you have been debating this topic for this many pages on the forum and you did not read any of the postings that provide evidence to the differences between the training received by women and men. If you are debating and not reading any of the information myself or others have posted then you are just wasting every ones' time. You should debate to try and learn something, not to troll. The entire purpose of this thread was to be hypothetical, did you miss the first post of the thread also?

You claim to have evidence but all you have is a perverted understanding of biology (freaks of nature) and a firm belief that women cannot compete with men. Women can handle more pain and given the right training and development there is zero (repeat ZERO) evidence to suggest that a women could not compete in the NHL. I would agree it would be difficult but find me an athlete in the NHL who would claim that things are easy.

Wow I have no idea how you view my statement about a small percentage of the population as me saying that the women would have to be a freak of nature. If you are making that connection (by some perversion of logic) then every athlete in every league regardless of sex is a freak of nature. I did not say biology is the reason it will not occur, I said it is not possible for an average women, just like an average man to play and survive in the NHL. However there are special people among us who possess the rare combination of talent and toughness that could survive and excel. By referring to the history of hockey as proof that it is impossible for a women to survive you are showing how little you have thought about this. Women could not vote when hockey was first being played, could not be educated (university) and were restricted from playing certain sports. Now things are not perfect but at least they are better. The only thing the history of hockey shows us is that the game is rough and only a small percentage of the population could ever survive. Even some of the best cannot handle the rough play (Shortened careers due to injury: Lindross, Orr, etc). If you took a naturally athletic women, with a strong desire and motivation. Then gave her all the same training and coaching as a male with equal abilities, she would be a dominant force in the NHL. You should read debates about nature vs nurture and then realize you are advocating that people are completely defined by nature (how they are born) and a perversion of even that theory. No two people are born the same with the same abilities and body structure. Stereotypes are created through observations of both nature and nurture, which is influenced by societies standards. Some women are weak and timid by design, others are strong and powerful. The same is true of men. However nurture also plays a big role in the development of people and this is where the training and coaching come into play. If you took a women born with athletic ability, strength, reflexes, and provided her with an environment that enables the growth and development of her abilities she will be a great hockey player. The day will come when a women is given the same training as a man and she will prove that she can handle the physical and emotional pain on the same level as any other hockey player.

Hockey is the most difficult and entertaining sport because you cannot develop one muscle group and expect to survive. In weight lifting the sport exploits one muscle group. Hockey requires everything and more. Your entire body must be in top physical form, your reflexes, senses and brain must be in top shape. The players in the NHL are the upper 1% of athletes, not your normal people. A normal women would not survive in the NHL, no more then a normal man would. Hockey hits hurt and a small number of people can take them. Players in the NHL come in all shapes and sizes, some are strong brutes, some are small and speedy. A women could fit into some of these categories. Not just any women, it would take a very special women, but there is no reason that it will not occur. Also you need to remember as a generalization, women can deal with one hell of a lot more pain then men. Lastly who cares that men do not want to get into womens leagues. What does that prove except that men already get to play in the best leagues, receive the best training and get the biggest breaks. Give the same things to a women and one will succeed and excel. There are psychological differences between men and women, but the differences are not weaknesses in either sex. The differences that do exist would not be enough to prevent both sexes from competing in a highly physical and overly rough game.

I just saw this linked off Kuklas Korner and thought it was a great topic for a thread. The Hockey Hall of Fame has added two entries each year reserved for Women to enter the Hockey Hall of fame. This is great news since there are a lot of great women hockey players who not only do not make the money of the male counterparts, but they also do not receive near the same honors. Which women hockey players past and present would you nominate for the Hockey Hall of Fame? I would take Cassie Campbell and Hayley Wickenheiser right off the bat, but those are the easy selections. Who else is deserving? Source: http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/611286 (Edited to add source article)

I just do not buy the argument that women could not handle the rough play of hockey. Yes your average women could not but neither could your average man. There are some guys in the NHL smaller then the girls on the Womens national team, they do just fine. Injuries will come and players will be hurt but there will be one that succeeds.

Ture enough hits hurt sometimes and any player can (and will) be hurt at some time during their careers. Lindross was more prone to concussions then others but he was in the NHL. Generalizations that are used to define everyone wind up defining nothing. A superior athletic women could (and someday will) compete in the NHL, taking and receiving the massive body checks and likely at some point dropping the gloves. You may not want to see a strong women competing with your male heroes but this is something you will have to deal with someday. Lastly your comment about women's bodies being much more prone to concussions is a perversion of the facts. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/02/...in3321766.shtml Studies found that in girls sports concussions are more likely. However the researchers involved in the study point out that women are more honest about their injuries and do not traditionally have the same level of muscular tone in the neck. This implies that if a women were to exercise her neck muscles more she would be less prone to injury. Then it becomes a nature vs nurture debate (one that should not be on these forums). The fact is that someday a women will rise to the highest levels of the hockey elite and find herself on an NHL squad.

Every player in the NHL (no matter the position) must be in the best shape of their life and have some additional skills. These are the upper 1% of athletes, not your normal people. A normal women would not survive in the NHL, no more then a normal man would. Hockey hits hurt and a small number of people can take them. If I saw a women playing in the NHL and she got her bell rung by Dion, well I would not be upset to see it. (Unless she was on my team, lol). The players on the ice know the risks and any women who made it there would need to be aware of the same risks. Plus women can deal with one hell of a lot more pain then any man. The real question would be how would Dion deal with the pain after having his bell rung by a women.

Gretzky was small, could not work the corners and the physical play was something he was never able to master. However his hockey sense, play making and control allowed him to have a half decent career.

I love this comment, so funny! The rest of your comment I agree with entirely. An NHL team should field the most talented team, if that means some players are female and some are male, so sure why not. Wasn't it just a few years ago that people said Europeans are too soft to play in the NHL, and then Europeans can play but would never have enough heart and determination to captain a team to Lord Stanley. It will happen some day.

Slow down a little. She only played a high level of competitive hockey (with the boys) until she was 13 years old (or something like that). Imagine if she had been given the same chances as the boys. She would have been developing and growing as a player and likely would be playing at an even higher level of hockey. My big question for the forums is how crazy will it be when the NHL has to deal with its first pregnant player. lol

I was making a point for the people who are arguing that women could never handle the rough play of the NHL. Women can take and handle much more pain and abuse then men. On average they do not have the same muscular density as men but they can still dish out their fair share. If you want a comparison against a professional athlete then fine I could say Hayley could beat down on player X but it would be just as foolish. Until the day it happens you will never believe. If a girl came up and could shoot, score, dig in the corners and do so better then others, I would want her on my team.

You are exaggerating, and she has done very well for herself. I will concede that the 2nd and 3rd division levels are not NHL (or even ECHL) caliber but she is the first. She is opening doors to the next star.

The boys have 3 hockey teams for every age group. The women have 1 team and it is composed of several age groups. There are not enough women to create as many teams as the boys. This means the boys have many opportunities to play while the girls can only play in one place. In order to give the girls a chance to train and grow their talents they can try out for the boys teams (the same as the boys do). It is not even fair to call it a boys team. It is a pee-wee, bantam, or whatever team. You are permitted to field girls or boys it does not matter. The womens team does not belong to any league since they have many different aged girls. Since many girls want to play hockey (who doesn't when they are young) but they are not dedicated enough to play competitive, there is a rec team in place for them. I am sure if you were a boy and you wanted to play on the girls team you could, and I think it has even happened.

There will come a day when a women hockey player competes in the NHL. She will have to be better and stronger then most men in the league in order to do it but it will open doors. As a fan I would want my NHL team to field the best team possible. If that means dressing a person with boobs then go for it. I am surprised it has not happened already. Hayley Wickenheiser has been playing professional hockey in Europe for many years now and has been successful. She plays in the mens league. She is one tough cookie and I would bet dollars to dimes that she could kick the crap out of many people on this board. There have been women hockey players who could have competed in the NHL and I think we have missed some exciting hockey by not having it happen already.

I like and do not like this. The reason being that men's leagues provide more competition and room for development. In my local town growing up we never allowed women to play hockey. They had to play ringette. My sister hated that so she tried out for the pee-wee team and held her own. Now they allow girls on the any team in any level. They also have all women teams for the girls who would rather not play with the boys.

I have played against women in Pee-wee, Bantam, and Midget. It is pathetic to admit to but, during pre game preparations we all joked about how crappy it would be to get hit by the girls on the other team and how we better not hit them since you cannot hit a girl. Then we would also joke about how we should hit them harder so they do not come out again next time. Imagine thinking a girl could play a mans game. We all learned something... We went out and in the heat of battle you do not think about who you are about to hit, or their gender. You knock the person off the puck and try to help your team. I nailed several girls, was knocked on my ass by others, and fought some good battles for the puck. Women may be different then men but many could kick your ass on the ice in all aspects.

I should have known that this would turn into a Crosby (or Forsberg) bashing thread. I just did a google search and found an educational link for those folk who choose to equate Crosby with women's hockey. http://www.hhof.com/html/wmspla03.shtml They profile many of the notable women from hockey through the years. It is a great read and it really beings to light some of the amazing talent that does not get a fair deal. I for one would love to see some women playing in the NHL. Don't tell me it is too tough of a league. I have seen women beat the tar out of each other just to get the puck out of the corner. There are some would could replace many NHL players and shine!