Asham KOs Beagle

[Guest Shoreline]

What you are talking about is the risks that players take out there and you basically have to live with them, can't avoid the issue all together.

But what Laich really doesn't like is the protocal about having to go get checked out and cleared before you go back out there if you take some sort of head shot. Beagle was knocked unconcious and had to be helped off the ice. I'm sorry, but why is there a problem with then having to go sit a few minutes and get cleared before heading back out there?

Ingoring the players own stupidity and not caring whether he has a quality of life past the age of 40, ignoring potential impact on his kids, etc, I'll just take the blunt approach. If I'm the owner of the team and I have invested millions in this player and I have him under contract (guaranteed) over the next 5 years, I don't want my investment risk to be beyond what it inherently has to be.

If there was such an investment risk, though, why do owners allow GM's to sign players they know that fight so often? It's not as if they're that oblivious to investment risk. It's because entertainment = revenue -- fighting, hitting, intensity, things that can and do attribute to injuries = entertainment = revenue. Most Red Wings fans that were fans since the 90s and before tend to have the Avalanche rivalry stuck in their head as some of the most intense, entertaining moments, even in light of the recent concussion hysteria (2 seasons going). It seems you have confused investment risk for being too careful, and that isn't what most hockey teams, that don't have an empire of other goods to make money from like the Leafs, Red Wings, Rangers, will make money from. They tailor entertainment factors first -- superstars, fighters, hitters, even cheerleaders (cheerleading is not exactly "safe" either) because it is good for business bottomline, not bad.

I can concede that perhaps Laich embellished a tad (not by much at all) and that it's smart to have doctors look at it (which every team has btw, and they do a great job already) but he's criticizing the quiet room protocol, which I agree, is complete bulls***, and has absolutely nothing to do with doctors or safety, but something for the NHL to wave in front of the media who would grab them by the balls and cry about the NHL not caring about player safety. Why do you think they chose the name "quiet room"? It's a slogan the media can remember and attribute to player safety, as a business major doing marketing for a game jobs I used to work, this is the very thing I would do to get media attention. I'm really surprised people don't see the obvious game in this.

Edited October 17, 2011 by Shoreline

[toby91_ca 620]

If there was such an investment risk, though, why do owners allow GM's to sign players they know that fight so often? It's not as if they're that oblivious to investment risk. It's because entertainment = revenue -- fighting, hitting, intensity, things that can and do attribute to injuries = entertainment = revenue. Most Red Wings fans that were fans since the 90s and before tend to have the Avalanche rivalry stuck in their head as some of the most intense, entertaining moments, even in light of the recent concussion hysteria (2 seasons going). It seems you have confused investment risk for being too careful, and that isn't what most hockey teams, that don't have an empire of other goods to make money from like the Leafs, Red Wings, Rangers, will make money from. They tailor entertainment factors first -- superstars, fighters, hitters, even cheerleaders (cheerleading is not exactly "safe" either) because it is good for business bottomline, not bad.

I can concede that perhaps Laich embellished a tad (not by much at all) and that it's smart to have doctors look at it (which every team has btw, and they do a great job already) but he's criticizing the quiet room protocol, which I agree, is complete bulls***, and has absolutely nothing to do with doctors or safety, but something for the NHL to wave in front of the media who would grab them by the balls and cry about the NHL not caring about player safety. Why do you think they chose the name "quiet room"? It's a slogan the media can remember and attribute to player safety, as a business major doing marketing for a game jobs I used to work, this is the very thing I would do to get media attention. I'm really surprised people don't see the obvious game in this.

What does any of that have anything to do with concussion protocol whereby a player goes off ice for a few minutes and gets checked out before he goes back out?

[sean 19]

While we've learned new stuff about concussions, concussions are nothing new at all. I was warned of what could happen if I were to play football again after sustaining one, as a teenager. I understood just fine. These are adults.

As far as the business perspective goes, remember, "business" bottomline, 1) teams are insured for players, 2) injured reserve doesn't count against the cap in such a way that if it were long term the player could be replaced presuming value is the same or less regardless of cap status.

Fighting, hitting, is part of the entertainment value of hockey, along with core parts of the sport itself.

The politically correct aspect is not criticizing the league for it's excessive nanny-like handling of concussions, because if they didn't take it as such, the media would be all over their ass. It's pretty similar to the PC flipping out over a fan tossing a banana on the ice. If the team doctor, who is there for a reason, says the player is fine, let them play. Whatever happens to the player when they're retired, they knew the risks of playing a physically violent sport, and much like those who fight for the UFC or box or even do fake rasslin' for WWE, there's little logic in blaming others -- they're paid to take those risks, not skate around in such a politically correct safe manner.

Obviously the problem is leaving it up to a league's rules when players understand that a concussion, like any wound, might have other complications beyond that. Laich's attitude comes from the fact that playing in the NHL is certainly a risk as far as physical health goes, and guess what, if you stick your face out there to fight, or play stupidly and keep your head down admiring a pass or following the puck without paying attention, take a random puck to the head, lose one's balance and hitting head in the boards, and one of the many other ways for such an injury to happen, that is part of the inherent risk of playing the game, and one cannot ever guarantee safety in such a fashion given the physicality and speed of this sport. Players aren't that stupid as to not know the possible consequences, just because we're now learning more about the long term effects of concussions. This is getting well out of hand, and I'm glad Laich spoke out about it.

The thing is, players ARE that stupid. They truly DON'T know the long-term effects of concussions. I'd say 90% of players are still stuck in the 1980s mentality with respect to concussions, which includes bits like:

-It's not a concussion if you don't black out

-You are 100% fine as long as you can remember your name!

-I was feeling dizzy back there on the ice, but feel 100% better after returning to the bench (see: Sid Crosby/Dave Steckel).

To be frank, I'm pretty sure doctors are not even certain of the whole story on concussions, and I think this perceived excessiveness has a lot to do with that. It is sort of like this (heads up for bad analogy): If you are digging up a rock, and as you dig, the rock appears to be getting bigger and bigger, what container should you bring to carry away the rock with? The only real logical thing to do is a bring a very large one! I think that is where we are with concussions, we know we don't know the whole story, so we're erring on the side of caution.

Furthermore, you argue that if a player says he can play, he should play. Certainly, that is not in the best interest of the league. Do you know how cool it is to be able to see Wayne Gretzky speak? Hockey is lucky he is still healthy. Who knows what following the NHL lost because they lost 10 years of Lindros' career, who knows what they would lose if Crosby didn't err on the side of caution and played himself out of the league last year. I can tell you it would look very bad for hockey if in ten years you're seeing things like 'Crosby suicide suggested to be due to repeated head injuries'.

Let me ask the board this: If you watch NFL, what is the feeling towards the relationship between the league and its players? I think a lot of people think the NFL is basically whoring its players--that an NFL career is not sustainable, that players are sometimes seriously damaged after a 10 year career. Sometimes to a point where they have a hell of a time representing the game well. The NHL would be wise to avoid this type of image, and keeping players healthy is a good way to do it.

[Guest Shoreline]

To be frank, I'm pretty sure doctors are not even certain of the whole story on concussions, and I think this perceived excessiveness has a lot to do with that. It is sort of like this (heads up for bad analogy): If you are digging up a rock, and as you dig, the rock appears to be getting bigger and bigger, what container should you bring to carry away the rock with? The only real logical thing to do is a bring a very large one! I think that is where we are with concussions, we know we don't know the whole story, so we're erring on the side of caution.

If you really believe that doctors are uncertain of concussions then why would the league be certain enough to pull players off the ice for 15 minutes if they think they got dinged in the head? Even presuming players are stupid (very vague assertion), they still understand there are risks involved playing hockey, including concussions, but certainly including a lot more. They aren't led through pee wee, junior, minors, and into the NHL thinking they're not going to get dinged up. Guaranteed they are aware that in all likelihood they will suffer some type of injuries. That goes with the territory.

Furthermore, you argue that if a player says he can play, he should play. Certainly, that is not in the best interest of the league. Do you know how cool it is to be able to see Wayne Gretzky speak? Hockey is lucky he is still healthy. Who knows what following the NHL lost because they lost 10 years of Lindros' career, who knows what they would lose if Crosby didn't err on the side of caution and played himself out of the league last year. I can tell you it would look very bad for hockey if in ten years you're seeing things like 'Crosby suicide suggested to be due to repeated head injuries'.

Lindros was a dumb player. How many times did we see him take hits with his head down? How many fights did he get in with his head sticking out? How many times did he extend himself too far to deliver a hit. These should be rhetorical questions. When Kariya got blasted by Stevens where was his head looking? How many hits like that has Lidstrom and Yzerman had? You have two Captains back to back who've had 20+ season careers, they played only with as much physicality as they needed, didn't wear themselves down, played smart, and had very long careers. Stevie Y had issues with his knee and still managed to go that long because he played smart. Stevie Y is not a rocket scientist, and it's not required to be to play with an ounce of intelligence needed to know you don't sit there and admire a pass or put your head down. It is also accepted when players dive down to block shots they can get injured, and numerous injuries happen to heads, ankles, legs, feet, due to blocking a 90+ mph shot. Again, players accept the fact that there is an inherent risk to playing hockey. This emphasis on concussions and coddling of players is over the line.

Let me ask the board this: If you watch NFL, what is the feeling towards the relationship between the league and its players? I think a lot of people think the NFL is basically whoring its players--that an NFL career is not sustainable, that players are sometimes seriously damaged after a 10 year career. Sometimes to a point where they have a hell of a time representing the game well. The NHL would be wise to avoid this type of image, and keeping players healthy is a good way to do it.

Okay, I believe it's apples and oranges comparing the physicality of the NFL to hockey, but I will note that football players also accept the possibility of injury, which obviously the helmet and pads don't really prevent, but sometimes mitigate in severity.

But if you want to compare other things to the NHL, where is this hysteria of concussions with boxing? UFC? WWE? These are sports or entertainment where injuries happen fairly often. Again, these athletes and entertainers accept personal responsibility knowing full well the fact that they can and do happen. It's frustrating to say the least the fact that there's this contemporary politically correct attempt at presuming that people are so stupid about it and don't know the risks. Yes, they sure as hell do. Just because they aren't doctors, who themselves don't know much about concussions, does not mean whatsoever that they do not understand the risk involved -- physicality in sports is not a new concept whatsoever, nor is injuries and treating people for them. This safety hysteria bandwagon that people are jumping on is ridiculous.

Edited October 18, 2011 by Shoreline

[sean 19]

You truly believe that the medical community has the concussion thing down-pat? That there is nothing left to learn? That we went from smelling-salts to experts in 10 years? I am no doctor, but based on what I've read, nothing could be further from the truth, especially with respect to long-term impact. If doctors did know everything, I'd doubt they'd be collecting brains.

The 15 minute time-outs are indeed a result of the fact that we are so UNCERTAIN about head-injuries. If you are uncertain about something, the only logical recourse is to take every precaution.

Other than the above, I think you make some good points.

I, too, have thought about boxing, wrestling and the like, where concussions are pretty much the goal. But I think it just goes back to branding. No sane human wants their child to turn out like Mike Tyson. I personally hope that children don't idolize UFC champs. Again, if one day, Crosby does something that the media even suggests is weakly connected with his then-history of head-injuries, that will be a black day for the game of hockey. The NHL's success has much to do with its reputation.

As business entities, I don't think comparing NHL and NFL is apples to oranges. Reputation and 'friendliess' of the game go a long way.

I don't know, I'm personally all for being as cautious as possible with respect to the brain. Other injuries, I agree, part of the game. But, moreso than any other organ, your brain is who you are. That is indeed your essence. You look at players like Igor Grigorenko, who broke his legs, and can't play on the level he wants because of it. But, I would argue he is still Igor Grigorenko. Someone like Savard, who can't even stand to be in the sun, I'd argue he's a changed man to some degree. That's f***ed up.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

If you really believe that doctors are uncertain of concussions then why would the league be certain enough to pull players off the ice for 15 minutes if they think they got dinged in the head? Even presuming players are stupid (very vague assertion), they still understand there are risks involved playing hockey, including concussions, but certainly including a lot more. They aren't led through pee wee, junior, minors, and into the NHL thinking they're not going to get dinged up. Guaranteed they are aware that in all likelihood they will suffer some type of injuries. That goes with the territory.

Lindros was a dumb player. How many times did we see him take hits with his head down? How many fights did he get in with his head sticking out? How many times did he extend himself too far to deliver a hit. These should be rhetorical questions. When Kariya got blasted by Stevens where was his head looking? How many hits like that has Lidstrom and Yzerman had? You have two Captains back to back who've had 20+ season careers, they played only with as much physicality as they needed, didn't wear themselves down, played smart, and had very long careers. Stevie Y had issues with his knee and still managed to go that long because he played smart. Stevie Y is not a rocket scientist, and it's not required to be to play with an ounce of intelligence needed to know you don't sit there and admire a pass or put your head down. It is also accepted when players dive down to block shots they can get injured, and numerous injuries happen to heads, ankles, legs, feet, due to blocking a 90+ mph shot. Again, players accept the fact that there is an inherent risk to playing hockey. This emphasis on concussions and coddling of players is over the line.

Okay, I believe it's apples and oranges comparing the physicality of the NFL to hockey, but I will note that football players also accept the possibility of injury, which obviously the helmet and pads don't really prevent, but sometimes mitigate in severity.

But if you want to compare other things to the NHL, where is this hysteria of concussions with boxing? UFC? WWE? These are sports or entertainment where injuries happen fairly often. Again, these athletes and entertainers accept personal responsibility knowing full well the fact that they can and do happen. It's frustrating to say the least the fact that there's this contemporary politically correct attempt at presuming that people are so stupid about it and don't know the risks. Yes, they sure as hell do. Just because they aren't doctors, who themselves don't know much about concussions, does not mean whatsoever that they do not understand the risk involved -- physicality in sports is not a new concept whatsoever, nor is injuries and treating people for them. This safety hysteria bandwagon that people are jumping on is ridiculous.

The reason they send players to the quiet room for 15 minutes is to try to determine if the player has a concussion or not before allowing him to continue to play. They're still a mystery, but one thing we do know is that getting one greatly increases the chances of getting another one. Especially if you're still suffering the effects of the first one.

And the point you seem to be glossing over is we're not talking about getting "dinged up," like it's a cut to the face or a broken hand or something. We're talking about a player's brain. You don't get dinged up from concussions, you get brain damage with potentially horrible and lifelong effects.

You keep saying "politically correct" and act as if this is come cool new fad that's sweeping the nation. This has nothing to do with politics or even public sentiment. There hasn't been any great outcry from fans to protect players' heads, other than maybe in Pittsburgh after Crosby got hit. But it was an issue well before that. It's coming from the players and management and the league because concussions have become such an issue in the game and has affected so many players careers.

If we were talking about the league requiring players to wear a full cage to minimize face and eye damage, I'd be on your side. It's a potential risk balanced with how it affects the player and ultimately I think should fall to the player's discretion. But they're trying to protect their brains, which means basically the players' lives, without adversely affecting the game. I think that's worth some growing pains as the league tries to find a balance.