Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WIrinkrat
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by CrazedUNHfan View Post
    I understand that players get 5 years to complete their 4 years of eligibility. My question is if Knodel would have had to declare he was redshirting his freshman year? He was on the active roster and conceivably could have played if injuries had forced him into the lineup. Did the coaching staff have to declare that season a redshirt season before or after his freshman year for him to not use his eligibility? I assume that the NCAA would need some sort of declaration of redshirted season in order for proper record keeping. If that never happened it would be too bad if it was too late for Knodel as a 5th year to even be an option. I doubt the coaching staff was worried about trying to keep him for a 5th year the time. If they would want to now could they go back an retroactively give him a redshirt year for never suiting up his freshman year or has the window for doing that expired?
    I don't believe you have to because there is no such thing as a "Redshirt." You can petition the NCAA for extra seasons of eligibility or to recapture a lost season for several things....military, pregnancy, medical hardship, etc...but those things are technically called "hardship waivers" and are only utilized in situations where players have participated in an activity that would otherwise cause them to lose that season of eligibility

    Leave a comment:


  • CrazedUNHfan
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by WIrinkrat View Post
    I can tell you definitively that you have 5 years to use 4 seasons of eligibility in ice hockey. The reason you see a 5th year utilized more frequently with injuries is because people are recapturing a season that would have otherwise been lost because they had participated in competition. The reason you don't see it in a situation like this is because as has been discussed, typically kids that can't crack the lineup in year 1 are a dime a dozen and don't develop into guys that are tough to replace. Or as you mentioned, they are left in juniors to develop further for another year and are not brought to the school until they are ready to contribute. This is certainly a unique situation...but 5 years to play 4 seasons of eligibility is a universal NCAA thing and you can only burn one of those years by participating in competitions, alumni games, or a few other things that you don't ever really see. I'm sure it's not unprecedented by any means, but for a variety of reasons it isn't something that I imagine happens very often under these circumstances.
    I understand that players get 5 years to complete their 4 years of eligibility. My question is if Knodel would have had to declare he was redshirting his freshman year? He was on the active roster and conceivably could have played if injuries had forced him into the lineup. Did the coaching staff have to declare that season a redshirt season before or after his freshman year for him to not use his eligibility? I assume that the NCAA would need some sort of declaration of redshirted season in order for proper record keeping. If that never happened it would be too bad if it was too late for Knodel as a 5th year to even be an option. I doubt the coaching staff was worried about trying to keep him for a 5th year the time. If they would want to now could they go back an retroactively give him a redshirt year for never suiting up his freshman year or has the window for doing that expired?

    Leave a comment:


  • WIrinkrat
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by Chuck Murray View Post
    So here's the disconnect for me. The "injury redshirts" like Nolan and Speelman actually did play - several games apiece, in fact - before they incurred their injuries. It's a bad break for them no doubt, but why does someone like these guys get a "freebie", while another kid who dresses and skates in only a few games (see Harry Quast) gets charged with the full year of eligibility then? I'm not disputing that you are likely 100% correct, I'm just searching for the logic.

    Beyond that, FWIW my recollection is that the NCAA has to sign off on a medical redshirt - presumaby to prevent programs from exploiting this loophole for questionable and/or mystery "injuries". Both Nolan and Speelman had legit, undisputable injuries - Speelman a broken arm/wrist, and Nolan (it's been a long time) blew out a knee or something?
    The logic is it protects players and the teams. There are other rules in place governing hardship waivers due to injury...I believe you have to have played fewer than 25% of your teams games, and you can't have played after the end of the first semester in hockey. But for a player who gets hurt 5 games into the season and otherwise would have played 35 games, it gives them a level of protection. They can get the year they lost back, plus there is less incentive for player or team to try and rush someone back before they are potentially fully healthy just to try to get them to play in a couple games at the end of the year...which probably would happen a lot if there was no way to recapture that season. The teams also get the opportunity to bring back a player that they potentially wanted in the lineup. Win win.

    In the situation with a guy like Quast, there were no outside forces impacting his ability to participate in contests. He was either good enough or he wasn't...and most of the time his coaches deemed he wasn't. I imagine he could have said to the coaches, "look I don't want to dress at all this year so I can keep my year of eligibility in tact" but the coaches also could have said thanks, now go find somewhere else to play.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chuck Murray
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by JB View Post
    It would not make sense in hockey but the 4 in 5 provision for the NCAA even allows you to dress for games just not play. With Hockey all 18 skaters play, maybe a 3rd goalie could use the dress provision. So in Football you can be hanging out in pads on the sideline game day as long as you don't participate in any snaps. One snap and an entire year of eligibility is consumed.
    So here's the disconnect for me. The "injury redshirts" like Nolan and Speelman actually did play - several games apiece, in fact - before they incurred their injuries. It's a bad break for them no doubt, but why does someone like these guys get a "freebie", while another kid who dresses and skates in only a few games (see Harry Quast) gets charged with the full year of eligibility then? I'm not disputing that you are likely 100% correct, I'm just searching for the logic.

    Beyond that, FWIW my recollection is that the NCAA has to sign off on a medical redshirt - presumaby to prevent programs from exploiting this loophole for questionable and/or mystery "injuries". Both Nolan and Speelman had legit, undisputable injuries - Speelman a broken arm/wrist, and Nolan (it's been a long time) blew out a knee or something?

    Leave a comment:


  • JB
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by WIrinkrat View Post
    I can tell you definitively that you have 5 years to use 4 seasons of eligibility in ice hockey. The reason you see a 5th year utilized more frequently with injuries is because people are recapturing a season that would have otherwise been lost because they had participated in competition. The reason you don't see it in a situation like this is because as has been discussed, typically kids that can't crack the lineup in year 1 are a dime a dozen and don't develop into guys that are tough to replace. Or as you mentioned, they are left in juniors to develop further for another year and are not brought to the school until they are ready to contribute. This is certainly a unique situation...but 5 years to play 4 seasons of eligibility is a universal NCAA thing and you can only burn one of those years by participating in competitions, alumni games, or a few other things that you don't ever really see. I'm sure it's not unprecedented by any means, but for a variety of reasons it isn't something that I imagine happens very often under these circumstances.
    It would not make sense in hockey but the 4 in 5 provision for the NCAA even allows you to dress for games just not play. With Hockey all 18 skaters play, maybe a 3rd goalie could use the dress provision. So in Football you can be hanging out in pads on the sideline game day as long as you don't participate in any snaps. One snap and an entire year of eligibility is consumed.

    You have to think big time football is the cause of the “you can even dress” rule. They are looking for depth in the advent of injury because you know you need access to all 85 scholarship players.

    I don’t know how the scholarship rules match up to the 4 in 5 rule. Can you get money all 5 years? I do know that if you complete your degree in 4 years you can play the 5th year while working on a Masters.

    Leave a comment:


  • WIrinkrat
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    I can tell you definitively that you have 5 years to use 4 seasons of eligibility in ice hockey. The reason you see a 5th year utilized more frequently with injuries is because people are recapturing a season that would have otherwise been lost because they had participated in competition. The reason you don't see it in a situation like this is because as has been discussed, typically kids that can't crack the lineup in year 1 are a dime a dozen and don't develop into guys that are tough to replace. Or as you mentioned, they are left in juniors to develop further for another year and are not brought to the school until they are ready to contribute. This is certainly a unique situation...but 5 years to play 4 seasons of eligibility is a universal NCAA thing and you can only burn one of those years by participating in competitions, alumni games, or a few other things that you don't ever really see. I'm sure it's not unprecedented by any means, but for a variety of reasons it isn't something that I imagine happens very often under these circumstances.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chuck Murray
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by WIrinkrat View Post
    If you have a contributing player...one that is say a top 6 forward or a top 3 defenseman that can not be easily replaced...why would you not bring him back for a 5th season if he had the eligibility, assuming the player wanted to come back? Knodel has developed nicely..far better than I ever thought he would the first time he played for UNH. Assuming Knodel is on some kind of scholarship, all they'd have to do is find the money to make it feasible...which can probably be done by holding off on recruiting a player to fill that position if they know a couple seasons in advance that is the plan, or by pushing someone back if they have to.
    I agree 100% ... IF that is an option. I'm just not sure it is. I know it obviously is in NCAA football, but I've never seen it used in D-1 hockey (other than medical/injuries), which leads me to believe it may not be an option? But that's admittedly a WAG, just based on it not being a topic for discussion in the past. Good question.

    Originally posted by WIrinkrat View Post
    Further, to your point...I don't think we've had a situation like Knodel that I can remember in the recent era. You have some players that don't play as frosh...but those guys are typically the recruited walkon who is never going to be a guy that does much more than crack the 4th line or skate a few games as a 6th D. I can't recall another player who sat an entire season at the beginning of their career and then developed within the next 2 seasons into a top 3 (really a top 2) defenseman.
    I can't remember a similar example either? We need one of the vets for this one, and maybe an NCAA rulebook wonk for the first question.

    Josh - you still out there?

    Leave a comment:


  • Saetia22
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    How can one not be happy for Wyer? Regardless of the playing time he may get, he is obviously a positive influence on the team. I think that says a lot about his character. Good for him. If he plays a few more games this year, great! If not, he must be doing something right on that bench.

    Leave a comment:


  • Goldie
    replied
    Originally posted by Ned Braden View Post
    Seems like every year when the next season's captains are announced there's some head scratching.

    First, unless I missed it I haven't seen anyone use the term "assistant captain" - major pet peeve of mine. Well done!

    Second, I HATE giving a goalie a C or A (it's not allowed in professional hockey). Just doesn't look right, would be like seeing a forward wear uni #1. But giving a backup an A?? Just strange. I was thinking Goumas might be a decent choice, but what do I know?
    Captains are elected by their teammates. Apparently these are the players they chose to lead them as a team.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ned Braden
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Seems like every year when the next season's captains are announced there's some head scratching.

    First, unless I missed it I haven't seen anyone use the term "assistant captain" - major pet peeve of mine. Well done!

    Second, I HATE giving a goalie a C or A (it's not allowed in professional hockey). Just doesn't look right, would be like seeing a forward wear uni #1. But giving a backup an A?? Just strange. I was thinking Goumas might be a decent choice, but what do I know?

    Leave a comment:


  • WIrinkrat
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by Chuck Murray View Post
    The only redshirts I've seen at UNH Hockey in the past have been injury-related. Tom Nolan and (more recently I believe) Dalton Speelman are two examples. I'm assuming that's not a UNH thing, and more general a D-1 hockey thing. "Redshirts" as a developmental concept, as used in college football, is well taken care of by other options like prep school and junior hockey.

    If you have a contributing player...one that is say a top 6 forward or a top 3 defenseman that can not be easily replaced...why would you not bring him back for a 5th season if he had the eligibility, assuming the player wanted to come back? Knodel has developed nicely..far better than I ever thought he would the first time he played for UNH. Assuming Knodel is on some kind of scholarship, all they'd have to do is find the money to make it feasible...which can probably be done by holding off on recruiting a player to fill that position if they know a couple seasons in advance that is the plan, or by pushing someone back if they have to.

    Someone like Agosta on the other hand wouldn't surprise me either way. He's been a guy that's constantly in the lineup, but he's not a top 3 guy and probably never will be. What he brings to the table is far more easily replaced by bringing someone else into the mix than it is with Knodel, IMO

    Further, to your point...I don't think we've had a situation like Knodel that I can remember in the recent era. You have some players that don't play as frosh...but those guys are typically the recruited walkon who is never going to be a guy that does much more than crack the 4th line or skate a few games as a 6th D. I can't recall another player who sat an entire season at the beginning of their career and then developed within the next 2 seasons into a top 3 (really a top 2) defenseman.
    Last edited by WIrinkrat; 04-21-2013, 03:50 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chuck Murray
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by New Hampshire 'Cats Fan View Post
    General Question...

    Eric Knodel did not play his freshman year, which would allow him to redshirt that year. So, is Knodel currently a junior or redshirt sophomore? If he is listed as a junior (upcoming senior), does college hockey not do redshirts?
    The only redshirts I've seen at UNH Hockey in the past have been injury-related. Tom Nolan and (more recently I believe) Dalton Speelman are two examples. I'm assuming that's not a UNH thing, and more general a D-1 hockey thing. "Redshirts" as a developmental concept, as used in college football, is well taken care of by other options like prep school and junior hockey.

    Leave a comment:


  • New Hampshire 'Cats Fan
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    General Question...

    Eric Knodel did not play his freshman year, which would allow him to redshirt that year. So, is Knodel currently a junior or redshirt sophomore? If he is listed as a junior (upcoming senior), does college hockey not do redshirts?

    Leave a comment:


  • New Hampshire 'Cats Fan
    replied
    Re: UNH Wildcats 2012-2013 Postseason Thread

    Originally posted by smitre View Post
    And hopefully a good sign that TvR was named one of the alternate captains.
    While I hope TvR does stay at UNH, being an alternate captain doesn't guarantee that the person will stay for the upcoming season. An example of this was with Blake Kessel who was named as an alternate captain going into his senior season. However, as we know, Kessel left prior to his senior season.

    Leave a comment:


  • e.cat
    replied
    Originally posted by smitre View Post
    And hopefully a good sign that TvR was named one of the alternate captains.
    You're right that is a good sign and I didn't realize he was named an A until you mentioned it here. Thanks

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X