What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

So I see the supporters of the "big" college hockey schools continue to complain because they're not winning as much as they used to. Must be tough stacking your teams with NHL draft picks.

Maybe we should bring back DII hockey. Leave about 10 programs in DI (your BC, BU, Minnesota, etc) that can fill up with 18 year olds, and let the schools that are starting to actually upstage them now go to DII. That should make those big schools happy.

BTW, my list of three schools I noted ... all three have had their stacked programs lose to teams that are older, and had their coaches complained about it.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

UMLFan said:
So I see the supporters of the "big" college hockey schools continue to complain because they're not winning as much as they used to. Must be tough stacking your teams with NHL draft picks.
Click to expand...

It's nice to just drop in and say this but I felt the same way even during BCs dominant run. And as I have said it's not the end of the world. Good teams can overcome it just like Providence did against Minnesota State (or anybody against Minn State in a tournament game for that matter).

As for upstaging, you might want to worry more about being upstaged by UMass going forward. That's gotta hurt.

And oh, I can't recall Jerry York ever complaining about older players. He may have offered it as a matter of fact but I think you're talking out of your ***.
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

J.D. said:
It's nice to just drop in and say this but I felt the same way even during BCs dominant run. And as I have said it's not the end of the world. Good teams can overcome it just like Providence did against Minnesota State (or anybody against Minn State in a tournament game for that matter).

As for upstaging, you might want to worry more about being upstaged by UMass going forward. That's gotta hurt.

And oh, I can't recall Jerry York ever complaining about older players. He may have offered it as a matter of fact but I think you're talking out of your ***.
Click to expand...
So much snark ... obviously my comments hit home. I'm not sure what bringing UMass into this has anything to do with the argument about 21 year old freshmen? And yes, York has made comments as "matter of fact" so you're correct on that.
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

J.D. said:
And now if we could just put the clamp down on allowing 21 year old freshmen...
Click to expand...

College sports should be for college age people..thats 18-23. NCAA is not meant to be a minor league for the NHL. There is still not one viable reason why kids should have to spend 2 years playing junior hockey after high school to then move onto college. If the NCAA required players to enroll in schools within 1 year after HS graduation there would still be a level playing field. Players would all be closer in age and the product on the ice would be fantastic. There is no other NCAA sport that has this broken model of NCAA hockey. NCAA football brings in $1.1 Billion in revenue and true freshman show up and play. In fact the QB of the NCAA Champions was a true freshman. NCAA football doesnt say kids need more "development" - the interesting part is that football players may have played in less than 100 games their entire life before entering college while hockey players would on average probably have played about 750 games yet still need development? No issues with physical strength in NCAA football...but in hockey they need get stronger and faster...its all bull. Graduate high school and go to college is how it should be.
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Lemonade said:
College sports should be for college age people..thats 18-23. NCAA is not meant to be a minor league for the NHL. There is still not one viable reason why kids should have to spend 2 years playing junior hockey after high school to then move onto college. If the NCAA required players to enroll in schools within 1 year after HS graduation there would still be a level playing field. Players would all be closer in age and the product on the ice would be fantastic. There is no other NCAA sport that has this broken model of NCAA hockey. NCAA football brings in $1.1 Billion in revenue and true freshman show up and play. In fact the QB of the NCAA Champions was a true freshman. NCAA football doesnt say kids need more "development" - the interesting part is that football players may have played in less than 100 games their entire life before entering college while hockey players would on average probably have played about 750 games yet still need development? No issues with physical strength in NCAA football...but in hockey they need get stronger and faster...its all bull. Graduate high school and go to college is how it should be.
Click to expand...

How many NCAA football players redshirt each year?
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

According to this site, there were 35K students playing high-school level hockey in the US, meaning 9k worth of seniors approximately. I've not had an easy time finding same level numbers for Canada.

In the meantime, there are over 1M high school football players, meaning 1/4 million approximate high-school seniors.

I'm not sure what the point is to try and equate comparing recruiting for these two sports.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

SJHovey said:
How many NCAA football players redshirt each year?
Click to expand...

Excellent question and I am not sure. Implementing an redshirt system for hockey may work. Players gets maybe 10-14 games and still retain 4 years of eligibility makes a lot of sense.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

UMLFan said:
According to this site, there were 35K students playing high-school level hockey in the US, meaning 9k worth of seniors approximately. I've not had an easy time finding same level numbers for Canada.

In the meantime, there are over 1M high school football players, meaning 1/4 million approximate high-school seniors.

I'm not sure what the point is to try and equate comparing recruiting for these two sports.
Click to expand...


Point is what reasoning is there to have hockey players delay college arrival for 2 years and not other sports.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Also In Football you can pull a Brandon Weeden and play College Football, maybe some 6’6 320 linemen that are 28 will get more involved. In hockey as others have said, major junior plays a huge part in all of this. I guess that’s just ignore by people that love to fit their own agenda.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Lemonade said:
Point is what reasoning is there to have hockey players delay college arrival for 2 years and not other sports.
Click to expand...
Because there aren't enough 18 year old kids capable of playing DI hockey ... if you want to actually have competition there.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

chickod said:
Here's an analogy. Age difference MATTERS when you're young. Not so much after that. If a 31 year old man marries a 16 yo girl that is considered "unusual" (well, to the extent that anything is unusual today). If that man is 50 and the girl is 35, not so much. Young people reach physical maturity and different ages and it's dangerous to pit full-grown adults against kids who are still developing physically. IMO it has nothing to do with what team you root for or whether they happen to have won with younger or older players.
Click to expand...

I think that the difference here is maybe whether college athletes are viewed fundamentally as kids who are developing a skill (which would be a pretty legit reason to insulate them within a limited age group, as high school sports governing bodies tend to do) vs being viewed as adults.

I tend to view them as fundamentally adults, which makes me see no reason to protect them from playing against older, potentially more physically developed players. But I also have 2 other reasons why I don't like the idea of imposing a maximum age. One is that some players may have to reach their physical peak in order to be able to compete at a college level. If there is a player whose talent maxes out at NCAA ability level, and he doesn't reach that level until he's 20 or 21 as opposed to 18, I can't imagine having a problem with that. Second, I suspect that there are a handful of players who, while playing in the Juniors have realized that they are not destined for the NHL. If, on the other hand, they can use the talent they do have to get a scholarship to pay for an education, I can't imagine thinking that should be taken away from them just because they aren't 18 years old when they make that decision.

Lemonade said:
college age people..thats 18-23.
Click to expand...

False
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

UMLFan said:
Because there aren't enough 18 year old kids capable of playing DI hockey ... if you want to actually have competition there.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of 18 years old capable of playing D1 hockey if they fixed the rules and banned 21 year old freshman.
 
Lemonade said:
College sports should be for college age people..thats 18-23. NCAA is not meant to be a minor league for the NHL. There is still not one viable reason why kids should have to spend 2 years playing junior hockey after high school to then move onto college. If the NCAA required players to enroll in schools within 1 year after HS graduation there would still be a level playing field. Players would all be closer in age and the product on the ice would be fantastic. There is no other NCAA sport that has this broken model of NCAA hockey. NCAA football brings in $1.1 Billion in revenue and true freshman show up and play. In fact the QB of the NCAA Champions was a true freshman. NCAA football doesnt say kids need more "development" - the interesting part is that football players may have played in less than 100 games their entire life before entering college while hockey players would on average probably have played about 750 games yet still need development? No issues with physical strength in NCAA football...but in hockey they need get stronger and faster...its all bull. Graduate high school and go to college is how it should be.
Click to expand...

I guess when colleges stop admitting people over 19 you'll have a point on your "college age" diatribe.. till then it's not based in fact..
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Lemonade said:
Excellent question and I am not sure. Implementing an redshirt system for hockey may work. Players gets maybe 10-14 games and still retain 4 years of eligibility makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

I think college hockey already has the same redshirt system as the other sports, except it's rarely used because the players spend additional time playing junior hockey instead. The majority of redshirts in hockey are either medical or transfers.
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Lemonade said:
Point is what reasoning is there to have hockey players delay college arrival for 2 years and not other sports.
Click to expand...

Because the coaches can! There is no where for the coaches to put 18 and 19 year old football or basketball players that will further their development. Some of you are picking unusual circumstances to justify your position. The fact is that the majority of the players are much better hockey players after a year or two of junior hockey. The junior hockey system is a unique opportunity for NCAA coaches to improve the product on the ice. NCAA hockey would NOT be as good if it was full of 18 year old freshman that have never played beyond high school hockey. The product is improved by using Junior hockey to develop the players first.
 
Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

lemonade said:
college sports should be for college age people..thats 18-23. Ncaa is not meant to be a minor league for the nhl. There is still not one viable reason why kids should have to spend 2 years playing junior hockey after high school to then move onto college. If the ncaa required players to enroll in schools within 1 year after hs graduation there would still be a level playing field. Players would all be closer in age and the product on the ice would be fantastic. There is no other ncaa sport that has this broken model of ncaa hockey. Ncaa football brings in $1.1 billion in revenue and true freshman show up and play. In fact the qb of the ncaa champions was a true freshman. Ncaa football doesnt say kids need more "development" - the interesting part is that football players may have played in less than 100 games their entire life before entering college while hockey players would on average probably have played about 750 games yet still need development? No issues with physical strength in ncaa football...but in hockey they need get stronger and faster...its all bull. Graduate high school and go to college is how it should be.
Click to expand...

better hockey!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top