Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

[FreddyFoyle]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Further down in the article Anthony Duclair talks about potentially taking online courses from Boston College while playing for Quebec to "get the best of both worlds".

 

[SanTropez]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Yawn

 

[AVFC]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Once and for all stop whining about other's opinions and start providing tangible reasons why the system should be changed. You're not going to make your argument simply by chastising others.

Plenty of good justifications have been mentioned for changing this rule. Certain folks with hyper-romanticized notions of MN college hockey circa 1976, however, decided to turn this into a thread about Minnesota high school hockey of all things (even though the CHL has ZERO impact on hockey in Minnesota or at the University of Minnesota). It strikes me a bit like the Amish lobbying for child safety seat laws. Apparently if you are good enough to play on the third line at Robbinsdale Armstrong, you deserve to play NCAA D1 hockey at age 18. IMHO it is time to make some reasonable changes to the CHL eligibility rules. The potential benefits of these changes outweigh their downside risk.

 

[jnacc]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Plenty of good justifications have been mentioned for changing this rule. Certain folks with hyper-romanticized notions of MN college hockey circa 1976, however, decided to turn this into a thread about Minnesota high school hockey of all things (even though the CHL has ZERO impact on hockey in Minnesota or at the University of Minnesota). It strikes me a bit like the Amish lobbying for child safety seat laws. Apparently if you are good enough to play on the third line at Robbinsdale Armstrong, you deserve to play NCAA D1 hockey at age 18. IMHO it is time to make some reasonable changes to the CHL eligibility rules. The potential benefits of these changes outweigh their downside risk.

Again, it is simply because some people are frightened to death about the CHL and the "over age Canadian Hordes" pouring over the border. There is no logical sense to keep the ban on CHL players in effect and adding a potential talent pool of up to 400 players (current number of CHLers playing in the CIS) can only help the NCAA.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Plenty of good justifications have been mentioned for changing this rule. Certain folks with hyper-romanticized notions of MN college hockey circa 1976, however, decided to turn this into a thread about Minnesota high school hockey of all things (even though the CHL has ZERO impact on hockey in Minnesota or at the University of Minnesota). It strikes me a bit like the Amish lobbying for child safety seat laws. Apparently if you are good enough to play on the third line at Robbinsdale Armstrong, you deserve to play NCAA D1 hockey at age 18. IMHO it is time to make some reasonable changes to the CHL eligibility rules. The potential benefits of these changes outweigh their downside risk.

Save it. We didn't make this about Minnesota Hockey, Lakerblue did. Try reading back over this thread and deny that. And when someone says Minnesota Hockey is solely responsible for the CHL rule, of course we're going to defend Minnesota Hockey.

I suppose making ridiculous, outlandish comments about our hockey culture without concrete evidence to support them is ok, but using facts to defend our hockey culture is "hyper-sensitive"? Get bent.

And I find it funny that Lakerblue, an LSSU fan, is telling us we need the CHL ban, though we've won before and after it was put in place, and a part from the last four years, we've been consistenly competitive. When was the last time LSSU was relevant? Could it be that LSSU needs the ban lifted far more than Minnesota needs it in place? I think so. Or at least some of you do.

At this point you have two choices. Drop the accusations that Minnesota Hockey is solely responsible for, and in any way needs, the CHL ban, or continue to debate that topic and lose (not having any evidence will quickly do that to you).

Make your arguments based on the merits of the rule, without pointing fingers (like grown-ups do), or people will continue to look past the points you are trying to make because of the childish approach you're choosing to use.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Again, it is simply because some people are frightened to death about the CHL and the "over age Canadian Hordes" pouring over the border. There is no logical sense to keep the ban on CHL players in effect and adding a potential talent pool of up to 400 players (current number of CHLers playing in the CIS) can only help the NCAA.

No, it's because some people think the NCAA is better off taking players who want to play college hockey instead of players who are only playing because they exhausted their CHL eligibility. Any more words you want to put in our mouths? I told you, I have no problem with lifting the ban on kids 18 or under, and it is my opinion that the NCAA would be better served not letting kids who have exhausted their eligibility in. Not because it benefits Minnesota Hockey, but because I think at some point kids should have to make a choice to play NCAA hockey and not play just because their CHL eligibility has expired.

 

[jnacc]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

No, it's because some people think the NCAA is better off taking players who want to play college hockey instead of players who are only playing because they exhausted their CHL eligibility. Any more words you want to put in our mouths? I told you, I have no problem with lifting the ban on kids 18 or under, and it is my opinion that the NCAA would be better served not letting kids who have exhausted their eligibility in. Not because it benefits Minnesota Hockey, but because I think at some point kids should have to make a choice to play NCAA hockey and not play just because their CHL eligibility has expired.

Why can't they make the choice at 20 if they want to play NCAA hockey or not? Many of them are faced with the same choice as to whether to play pro hockey or attend and play college in Canada. Some choose pro hockey but it seems to me that more and more of them are choosing to play in the CIS. Why should the NCAA be excluded from their option?

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Why can't they make the choice at 20 if they want to play NCAA hockey or not? Many of them are faced with the same choice as to whether to play pro hockey or attend and play college in Canada. Some choose pro hockey but it seems to me that more and more of them are choosing to play in the CIS. Why should the NCAA be excluded from their option?

I think I explained my rational. Limiting it to kids 18 or under covers the kids who choose to play in the CHL at an early age and then realize it's a mistake. And if they choose to start playing in the CHL as an 18 year old, they are old enough to understand the consequences of their choice. Anyone who only wants to play in the NCAA ONLY when their CHL eligibility has run out gets no sympathy from me.

 

[jnacc]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

I think I explained my rational. Limiting it to kids 18 or under covers the kids who choose to play in the CHL at an early age and then realize it's a mistake. And if they choose to start playing in the CHL as an 18 year old, they are old enough to understand the consequences of their choice. Anyone who only wants to play in the NCAA ONLY when their CHL eligibility has run out gets no sympathy from me.

I fail to understand why you would treat these players any different from their USHL counter-parts? When and if the rules are relaxed, some of these players may have every intention of playing NCAA hockey but spots/scholarships may not be available to them until they are 19 or 20.

 

[hobeydog]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

I fail to understand why you would treat these players any different from their USHL counter-parts? When and if the rules are relaxed, some of these players may have every intention of playing NCAA hockey but spots/scholarships may not be available to them until they are 19 or 20.

USHL players have already at age 18 made an affirmative decision for NCAA hockey. Coincidentally, MLB 18 year-old draftees are making the decision today to play college ball or go the MLB minor league route. It would be consistent with baseball.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

I fail to understand why you would treat these players any different from their USHL counter-parts? When and if the rules are relaxed, some of these players may have every intention of playing NCAA hockey but spots/scholarships may not be available to them until they are 19 or 20.

A vast majority of USHL players aren't playing hockey in the USHL INSTEAD of playing NCAA hockey. They either don't have an offer from an NCAA team, or the team they are committed to wants them to be there. That's the distinguishing factor for me. Players aren't playing in the USHL instead of the NCAA, by choice, and then when they aren't allowed to play in the USHL, saying "OK, NCAA hockey is good enough for me now". Meanwhile, some kid who wanted to play NCAA hockey all along is without a scholarship.

 

[Almington]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

I fail to understand why you would treat these players any different from their USHL counter-parts? When and if the rules are relaxed, some of these players may have every intention of playing NCAA hockey but spots/scholarships may not be available to them until they are 19 or 20.

Then at 18 they can go and play in the USHL and take the NCAA path or they can stay in the CHL and forfeit the ability to play in the NCAA.

If anything that would encourage teams to not stockpile recruits in the USHL for multiple seasons, teams will know that they have to bring in the player when they are 18 or lose them for good.

 

[jnacc]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Then at 18 they can go and play in the USHL and take the NCAA path or they can stay in the CHL and forfeit the ability to play in the NCAA.

If anything that would encourage teams to not stockpile recruits in the USHL for multiple seasons, teams will know that they have to bring in the player when they are 18 or lose them for good.

Then the same rules ought to apply for any 19 year old player in any domestic league.....I think we established the premise that players in the CHL who have not signed "true" pro contracts are still amature, or why say that 18 and under players should be eligible. If that is then the case, no player in the CHL should be discriminated against if they have not signed a contract.

A vast majority of USHL players aren't playing hockey in the USHL INSTEAD of playing NCAA hockey. They either don't have an offer from an NCAA team, or the team they are committed to wants them to be there.

Again, why would it be any different for any CHL players if the rules were changed.....who is to say what an 18 year old CHLer would do if the NCAA suddenly became an option. He would be no different than your typical USHLer, if the opportunity presented itself, he would take it or he would have to wait another year or two before a scholarship would become available.

USHL players have already at age 18 made an affirmative decision for NCAA hockey. Coincidentally, MLB 18 year-old draftees are making the decision today to play college ball or go the MLB minor league route. It would be consistent with baseball.

The baseball analogy is off base...there are no amature 18-20 year old leagues for the ball players to go, thus they must choose between college or the minor pros where they sign a contract for pay. This is totaly different than the 18 year old CHL player who still has 2 years of junior eligibility remaining before he forced to decide on whether or not to turn pro.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

I see what you're saying, but I think we both know that wouldn't happen a lot. More importantly for me, it wouldn't happen nearly as often as players who play out their CHL eligibility by choice, then when they don't get an NHL contract decide college hockey is only then good enough for them. I'd rather see the college scholarship go to the kid who wanted to play NCAA hockey all along. Maybe you let CHL players over 18 into the NCAA, but they aren't eligible for a scholarship. That would be ok with me.

 

[hobeydog]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Then the same rules ought to apply for any 19 year old player in any domestic league.....I think we established the premise that players in the CHL who have not signed "true" pro contracts are still amature, or why say that 18 and under players should be eligible. If that is then the case, no player in the CHL should be discriminated against if they have not signed a contract.




Again, why would it be any different for any CHL players if the rules were changed.....who is to say what an 18 year old CHLer would do if the NCAA suddenly became an option. He would be no different than your typical USHLer, if the opportunity presented itself, he would take it or he would have to wait another year or two before a scholarship would become available.



The baseball analogy is off base...there are no amature 18-20 year old leagues for the ball players to go, thus they must choose between college or the minor pros where they sign a contract for pay. This is totaly different than the 18 year old CHL player who still has 2 years of junior eligibility remaining before he forced to decide on whether or not to turn pro.

Baseball players have the option of going to community and junior colleges. Cliff Lee, for example, didn't sign when he was drafted and attended community college then the University of Arkansas. In fact, there were ten NJCAA players in this year's MLB all-star game.

 

[Almington]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Then the same rules ought to apply for any 19 year old player in any domestic league.....I think we established the premise that players in the CHL who have not signed "true" pro contracts are still amature, or why say that 18 and under players should be eligible. If that is then the case, no player in the CHL should be discriminated against if they have not signed a contract.

The baseball analogy is off base...there are no amature 18-20 year old leagues for the ball players to go, thus they must choose between college or the minor pros where they sign a contract for pay. This is totaly different than the 18 year old CHL player who still has 2 years of junior eligibility remaining before he forced to decide on whether or not to turn pro.

Not in the eyes of the NCAA, they are still playing in a league where some players are paid to play hockey and may be called up to the NHL this is different from every other junior league. This makes it a pro league according to the NCAA. The NCAA gets to decide on what causes a player to lose amateur status and thus become ineligible, regardless of how you or anyone else wants to define an amateur.

It's not discrimination, these players are choosing to play in the CHL and by doing so they (and their parents/guardians) are knowingly (or should know) that by doing so they are giving up their amateur status in the eyes of the NCAA. This is how it is in every other league and sport. If even ONE player on the team is receiving compensation to play the game, everyone is considered a professional by the NCAA. The CHL would be getting a special dispensation from the NCAA.

The reason that 18 would be the cut off is that is the age at which a player can be drafted and sign an NHL contract. Thus, by compromising on an age of 18, those players who choose to continue to play in the CHL after this point have selected a professional path, regardless if the player has signed a professional contract, they are over 18 and playing in a league with professionals making these professionals in the eyes of the NCAA regardless if they have signed a contract or not.

 

[Lakerblue]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

The reason that 18 would be the cut off is that is the age at which a player can be drafted and sign an NHL contract. Thus, by compromising on an age of 18, those players who choose to continue to play in the CHL after this point have selected a professional path, regardless if the player has signed a professional contract, they are over 18 and playing in a league with professionals making these professionals in the eyes of the NCAA regardless if they have signed a contract or not.

Now that is a compromise I could live with. It makes sense. Its reasoned. I agree with this compromise. I wish I had any power to change to the rule . . .

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Plenty of good justifications have been mentioned for changing this rule. Certain folks with hyper-romanticized notions of MN college hockey circa 1976, however, decided to turn this into a thread about Minnesota high school hockey of all things (even though the CHL has ZERO impact on hockey in Minnesota or at the University of Minnesota).

Revisionism at its finest. I think there's been one fan here that has outright said the case is closed don't change the rules, a few others have found issue with the, "It's all Minnesota's fault" and a few others have simply asked for reasons why the rules should change - a question that has yet to be answered except by a fan (Almington) that doesn't carry the chip of a few others. Que sera sera...

 

[4four4]

Re: Raids on Collge Hockey Programs

Revisionism at its finest. I think there's been one fan here that has outright said the case is closed don't change the rules, a few others have found issue with the, "It's all Minnesota's fault" and a few others have simply asked for reasons why the rules should change - a question that has yet to be answered except by a fan (Almington) that doesn't carry the chip of a few others. Que sera sera...

...what ever will be will be....