New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

[Fishman'81]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Essentially, it seems to me that MN (especially) and the B10 in general are lashing out because they haven't been winning as many hockey games as they'd expected of late. Not exactly a lofty motivation to change any rules, and having nothing whatsoever to do with education. (How many one-and-dones have MN and MI had in recent years, FCS?)

If this proposal gets railroaded-through by the money-schools, shame on them and the NC$$...

Thing is, it really won't change the demographics of college hockey appreciably anyway. It only serves to make the B10 look like a bunch of little crybabies, and the NCAA look like the sycophants that they are. The Quinnipiacs and Unions and Ferris States and whomever will still rise-up from time to time, regardless. Striking (possibly) a couple of 25 YO's from their rosters in any given year is not going to matter.

If any of you Minny fans on this thread (those who defend this farce as some kind of a crusade for virtue) want to talk turkey, then let's discuss graduation rates... (But if this issue is about making the playing field level strictly in terms of winning hockey games, how's about all D-1 programs pooling their resources so nobody has a competitive advantage in terms of recruiting budgets or facilities? Think the B10 would endorse that degree of fairness?)

 

[LTsatch]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

The Quinnipiacs and Unions and Ferris States and whomever will still rise-up from time to time, regardless. Striking (possibly) a couple of 25 YO's from the roster in any given year is not going to matter.

If any of you Minny fans on this thread (those who defend this farce as some kind of a crusade for virtue) want to talk turkey, then let's discuss graduation rates..?

You can add Yale to the list. All you have to do is equate BC to Minnesota, they manage just fine with usually the youngest D-1 team in the country. It is a trade off in D-1, I am actually amazed that schools in the ECAC can even compete with the likes of Minnesota and North Dakota. Between the academics and the training involved, it is a wonder that any hockey player graduates. the proposal would certainly hurt the Ivies as they traditionally have recruits through the New England Prep system although that seems to have been taken over by the USHL and BCHL in the New Haven area. I hope this proposal does not come to pass, it will result in less D-1 caliber programs, and I don't see the NCAA approving it.

 

[joecct]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

You can add Yale to the list. All you have to do is equate BC to Minnesota, they manage just fine with usually the youngest D-1 team in the country. It is a trade off in D-1, I am actually amazed that schools in the ECAC can even compete with the likes of Minnesota and North Dakota. Between the academics and the training involved, it is a wonder that any hockey player graduates. the proposal would certainly hurt the Ivies as they traditionally have recruits through the New England Prep system although that seems to have been taken over by the USHL and BCHL in the New Haven area. I hope this proposal does not come to pass, it will result in less D-1 caliber programs, and I don't see the NCAA approving it.

Hurt the Ivies? They can have 30 kids on full financial aid packages if they wanted while the scholarship schools are limited to 18 full rides. Right now the average Ivy school has about 20 kids committed. I'm sure they'll be crying in their port and portfolios.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Except some schools, really do depend in those 21 yr old freshmen, without them they just won't be as good. If the rule had no perceived effect, no one would have proposed it.

How many schools that are "competitive" really, really rely upon them?

if this proposal is about the B1G schools being at a competitive disadvantage 1) Recruiting didn't change recently so why were the competitive before (they still are but...) 2) Why not just adopt the same supposedly superior method rather than going through all of this?

What we have are the words of those trying to make the change and accusations of butthurt on the other side with brilliant analysis such as this:

Essentially, it seems to me...

Yeah.

 

[Dutchman]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

You can add Yale to the list. All you have to do is equate BC to Minnesota, they manage just fine with usually the youngest D-1 team in the country. It is a trade off in D-1, I am actually amazed that schools in the ECAC can even compete with the likes of Minnesota and North Dakota. Between the academics and the training involved, it is a wonder that any hockey player graduates. the proposal would certainly hurt the Ivies as they traditionally have recruits through the New England Prep system although that seems to have been taken over by the USHL and BCHL in the New Haven area. I hope this proposal does not come to pass, it will result in less D-1 caliber programs, and I don't see the NCAA approving it.

Very good points!!! We also recruit through the New England Prep School System. If you take a "late bloomer", or/and tack on a step-back year when transferring from a public school to a private school, or/and add a PG year or/and a year in the USHL or BCHL ...

On paper, the ECAC should not be on the same ice as Minnesota and North Dakota. IMO the one advantage that we have has been that our kids tend to stick around for 4 years and graduate and because ice hockey is a team sport, "play better than the sum of the parts". IMO this proposal is going to threaten that advantage.

Many of the ECAC teams are returning this year largely intact from last year. The Yale, Harvard and Q teams that show up for the NCAA tournament will be much improved.

 

[Brownfan14]

Hurt the Ivies? They can have 30 kids on full financial aid packages if they wanted while the scholarship schools are limited to 18 full rides. Right now the average Ivy school has about 20 kids committed. I'm sure they'll be crying in their port and portfolios.

PLEASE. You could not find 30 kids who qualified for full aid at an Ivy who has played at that level of elite hockey. Hockey costs too much period. Do you get some sure. The Ivies are chronically faced with the early commitment issue, until the bill comes and parents start counting the cost of the education. They can't be crying in their port and portfolios and getting financial aid. Some of the Ivies lose players when the families find out they really have to pay every dime.

 

[manurespreader]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

How many schools that are "competitive" really, really rely upon them?

if this proposal is about the B1G schools being at a competitive disadvantage 1) Recruiting didn't change recently so why were the competitive before (they still are but...) 2) Why not just adopt the same supposedly superior method rather than going through all of this?

To answer your question, no not many, if any at all, of the competitive programs do much of it,( though I did notice that Michigan played a 21 yr old freshman goalie recently) as we have seen already in the stats. The problem is, especially Atlantic Hockey, has a lot of them. So to me the effect will be felt more in AH and to a lesser extent in the WCHA. So the effect will be to make those less competitive programs even less so. And as I said before, if there were no effect, no one would have proposed it in the first place.

 

[joecct]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Very good points!!! We also recruit through the New England Prep School System. If you take a "late bloomer", or/and tack on a step-back year when transferring from a public school to a private school, or/and add a PG year or/and a year in the USHL or BCHL ...

On paper, the ECAC should not be on the same ice as Minnesota and North Dakota. IMO the one advantage that we have has been that our kids tend to stick around for 4 years and graduate and because ice hockey is a team sport, "play better than the sum of the parts". IMO this proposal is going to threaten that advantage.

Many of the ECAC teams are returning this year largely intact from last year. The Yale, Harvard and Q teams that show up for the NCAA tournament will be much improved.

Doesn't D-II have a rule that you must be in college 2 yrs after you graduate from HS?

The "smart" proposal would be you must be in college 6 years after you enter HS (4 HS + 2 other) to have 4 years of college eligibility. Then there can be no redshirting in HS. The PG year counts against one of the 6, as does repeating a grade at a prep school.

 

[Happy]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Essentially, it seems to me that MN (especially) and the B10 in general are lashing out because they haven't been winning as many hockey games as they'd expected of late. Not exactly a lofty motivation to change any rules, and having nothing whatsoever to do with education. (How many one-and-dones have MN and MI had in recent years, FCS?)

If this proposal gets railroaded-through by the money-schools, shame on them and the NC$$...

Thing is, it really won't change the demographics of college hockey appreciably anyway. It only serves to make the B10 look like a bunch of little crybabies, and the NCAA look like the sycophants that they are. The Quinnipiacs and Unions and Ferris States and whomever will still rise-up from time to time, regardless. Striking (possibly) a couple of 25 YO's from their rosters in any given year is not going to matter.

If any of you Minny fans on this thread (those who defend this farce as some kind of a crusade for virtue) want to talk turkey, then let's discuss graduation rates... (But if this issue is about making the playing field level strictly in terms of winning hockey games, how's about all D-1 programs pooling their resources so nobody has a competitive advantage in terms of recruiting budgets or facilities? Think the B10 would endorse that degree of fairness?)

Do you know what history is? MN and many Minnesota fans have been against the use of overage Canadians for 40 or 50 years, ever since Denver decided it could win a college game by bringing in semi-pro Canadian players that were much older. The original WIHL was broke up over this, and MN refused to play teams made up of this type of players. To compete against an almost endless supply of players who were done with Canadian Juniors, and had nothing else to do, US -players were at a huge age disadvantage, and then came the USHL to up the age. To say that this is recent, shows that you do not a have a clue. There is no good reason to make kids wait around 3 years to go to college, let them go while they are still young.

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Do you know what history is? MN and many Minnesota fans have been against the use of overage Canadians for 40 or 50 years, ever since Denver decided it could win a college game by bringing in semi-pro Canadian players that were much older. The original WIHL was broke up over this, and MN refused to play teams made up of this type of players. To compete against an almost endless supply of players who were done with Canadian Juniors, and had nothing else to do, US -players were at a huge age disadvantage, and then came the USHL to up the age. To say that this is recent, shows that you do not a have a clue. There is no good reason to make kids wait around 3 years to go to college, let them go while they are still young.

I got to say it. How do you explain losing to RPI in 1954? See the ages here. I think that six players were Canadian.

 

[Happy]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

I got to say it. How do you explain losing to RPI in 1954? See the ages here. I think that six players were Canadian.

I have to say I don't know. I wasn't alive, I didn't go to the game, I have never seen it played on TV, it is way more than the 40 or 50 year span I used. You seem to know all about it, why did MN lose?

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

I have to say I don't know. I wasn't alive, I didn't go to the game, I have never seen it played on TV, it is way more than the 40 or 50 year span I used. You seem to know all about it, why did MN lose?

I was alive, but it was before I started to follow RPI hockey or even heard about RPI for that matter. OTOH, it was only a about 4 years before the year when the WIHL disappeared, so it isn't totally irrelevant. Ned Harkness did get oxygen canisters to help his players breath the rarefied air in Colorado Springs -- of course, they actually were empty. I suspect that Minnesota was also overconfident.

 

[Happy]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

I was alive, but it was before I started to follow RPI hockey or even heard about RPI for that matter. OTOH, it was only a about 4 years before the year when the WIHL disappeared, so it isn't totally irrelevant. Ned Harkness did get oxygen canisters to help his players breath the rarefied air in Colorado Springs -- of course, they actually were empty. I suspect that Minnesota was also overconfident.

I am sorry I was such a smart ***. I would love to have the time some winter to do a little study on this era, but, my company would rather work me to death. One area I would like to find out more about, is who gave out scholarships in the 50's. the story is that Mayasich got a football scholarship, because MN just couldn't keep letting all it's talent go to Michigan, who gave out scholarships, and won a bunch of NC's because of it.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

I was alive, but it was before I started to follow RPI hockey or even heard about RPI for that matter. OTOH, it was only a about 4 years before the year when the WIHL disappeared, so it isn't totally irrelevant. Ned Harkness did get oxygen canisters to help his players breath the rarefied air in Colorado Springs -- of course, they actually were empty. I suspect that Minnesota was also overconfident.

Ralph, I'm sorry for whomever from the program wee-weed in your Cheerios back in the day but I suspect none of the parties involved in the program then have had any direct influence on decision making for quite some time. Lucia has even *gasp* regularly recruited players from outside the MN borders. I'm sure you'll still continue to reference events that are 50-60+ years past when discussing the present so I digress.

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Ralph, I'm sorry for whomever from the program wee-weed in your Cheerios back in the day but I suspect none of the parties involved in the program then have had any direct influence on decision making for quite some time. Lucia has even *gasp* regularly recruited players from outside the MN borders. I'm sure you'll still continue to reference events that are 50-60+ years past when discussing the present so I digress.

Happy moved the discussion back to the 1950s in post 569 although it is not the first time it has been mentioned here. (He wrote "40 or 50 years", but it was in the 1950s.)

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -- George Santayana

 

[joecct]

Happy moved the discussion back to the 1950s in post 569 although it is not the first time it has been mentioned here. (He wrote "40 or 50 years", but it was in the 1950s.)

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -- George Santayana

I wish Clarkson would remember its past.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Brad Schlossman's take on some of these doings. http://undhockey.areavoices.com/?p=101803

The link in Brad's blog post to the Herald article is worth reading, both for Lucia's comments and the financial information from the WCHA and NCHC since the realignment a couple of years ago.

 

[gfmorris]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Why in the world is the WCHA losing that much money?

GFM

 

[SJHovey]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Why in the world is the WCHA losing that much money?

GFM

That's really a good question.

My guess is that there was some "built in" corporate infrastructure (i.e. costs) from the old days of the WCHA and they didn't do a great job on getting a handle on expenses in anticipation of a significant drop in income generated by the post-season tournament. Kind of like when your wife gets pregnant and suddenly you go from a two income household to a one income household. Gotta get control of the expenses in a hurry or it will bite you.

 

[joecct]

Why in the world is the WCHA losing that much money?

GFM

I wonder if the WCHA should return to campus sites for all rounds (and make them best of 3!)?