Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
don't pick on the cats
jcarter mental midget
no sense of humor
don't pick on the cats
jcarter mental midget
no sense of humor
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.
The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
- Thread starter joegrav
- Start date
- Status
Puck Swami
New member
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Major junior players were eligible then and they would play NCAA hockey after they finished juniors at age 20 - most of them coming down were 20-24 years old and few were older. The NCAA considered these players amateurs up until about 1980, when they declared them to be pros. Pros that had played in AHL, IHL or NHL were never eligible for NCAA play.
For many schools without native local talent pools, these Canadian players were crucial to be at all competitive.
While there were less teams playing in that era, the players were very good for their time, and winning an NCAA title was not easy.
You might want to consider that. I heard something like the rules for eligibility were different during those years when Michigan ran up all those titles, maybe minor league players could play college too or something??? Find some old geezer to clarify that for me, will ya?
Major junior players were eligible then and they would play NCAA hockey after they finished juniors at age 20 - most of them coming down were 20-24 years old and few were older. The NCAA considered these players amateurs up until about 1980, when they declared them to be pros. Pros that had played in AHL, IHL or NHL were never eligible for NCAA play.
For many schools without native local talent pools, these Canadian players were crucial to be at all competitive.
While there were less teams playing in that era, the players were very good for their time, and winning an NCAA title was not easy.
candycanes99
HAVE SOME CLASS
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
I remember seeing the Beanpot logo in Beanpot 2006 (Chris Higgins first round goal vs. Harvard).
Wasn't it '05? And then it'd be because that pesky little NHL started playing again and the Bruins wanted their logo on the ice for their games, the nerve of them
I remember seeing the Beanpot logo in Beanpot 2006 (Chris Higgins first round goal vs. Harvard).
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
My only question with this whole thing is as follows.
Why can't a kid play in the OHL and then come to NCAA, if he does not accept any money or consideration, outside the exact same thing they get in USHL etc
Kids can play in a pro golf event, cover their own expenses, not accept the prize money and then head off to NCAA and play. Many kids do summer golf pro mini tours and play college golf.
Why cant a Canadian kid from Toronto play OHL, not accept anything and go D1? They should be able to live in their region and then come here and play.
Kids in USHL get pretty much the same perks, outside maybe the cash/educational packages
They have to leave major Junior by 20 anyways, seeing that avg freshmen is 20 years and 2 months, no difference there.
My only question with this whole thing is as follows.
Why can't a kid play in the OHL and then come to NCAA, if he does not accept any money or consideration, outside the exact same thing they get in USHL etc
Kids can play in a pro golf event, cover their own expenses, not accept the prize money and then head off to NCAA and play. Many kids do summer golf pro mini tours and play college golf.
Why cant a Canadian kid from Toronto play OHL, not accept anything and go D1? They should be able to live in their region and then come here and play.
Kids in USHL get pretty much the same perks, outside maybe the cash/educational packages
They have to leave major Junior by 20 anyways, seeing that avg freshmen is 20 years and 2 months, no difference there.
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
So it was (who doesn't have that video saved on their comp?
)and the Bruins weren't even on a roadtrip.
So it was (who doesn't have that video saved on their comp?
)and the Bruins weren't even on a roadtrip.
Puck Swami
New member
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
The NCAA has determined that CHL players are 'pros' for three stated reasons:
1) Players under 20 who have signed NHL contracts can be assigned to the CHL Junior team if that player plays less than 10 NHL games. Never mind that college players sometimes play on international teams with signed pros.
2) CHL players get some money (about $300 a month) for incidentals. Never mind that college players get scholarships with hundreds of thousands, as well as road per-diems.
3) Some CHL players get under the table signing bonuses from junior teams.
The real unstated reason, though, is that NCAA schools are afraid of losing their players to major juniors and not getting them back (if they were eligible to play in both).
The NCAA has determined that CHL players are 'pros' for three stated reasons:
1) Players under 20 who have signed NHL contracts can be assigned to the CHL Junior team if that player plays less than 10 NHL games. Never mind that college players sometimes play on international teams with signed pros.
2) CHL players get some money (about $300 a month) for incidentals. Never mind that college players get scholarships with hundreds of thousands, as well as road per-diems.
3) Some CHL players get under the table signing bonuses from junior teams.
The real unstated reason, though, is that NCAA schools are afraid of losing their players to major juniors and not getting them back (if they were eligible to play in both).
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
But that is insane. If they were eligible in both, the NCAA would get skilled players, just a little bit older than typical freshman age. Maybe not the NHL-calibur ones, but the ones who maybe need some more development time and want an education before playing in the AHL.
But that is insane. If they were eligible in both, the NCAA would get skilled players, just a little bit older than typical freshman age. Maybe not the NHL-calibur ones, but the ones who maybe need some more development time and want an education before playing in the AHL.
Federal League
I like hockey.
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
I don't know. I see it working both ways. Certainly, the NCAA would benefit from getting some CHL players who weren't quite ready for the NHL at age 20. But they'd also lose a lot of elite 18- and 19-year-olds to the CHL because those players would have nothing to lose by going there. As Swami said, if those players develop according to plan, the NCAA's never gonna get them back.
Let's use Colin Wilson as an example. It seems that he chose NCAA not because he wanted the education, but because he thought playing for BU would be the best preparation for the NHL. He was ready for the NHL at age 19, arguably even age 18. If CHL players were eligible for the NCAA, though, Wilson would've had nothing to lose by going to the CHL straight out of the USNTDP rather than BU. If the CHL didn't get him ready for the NHL, BU would still be there. But what if the CHL gets him ready for the NHL just as quickly as BU did? Now he goes to the NHL from the CHL at age 19, and BU and the NCAA never get Wilson.
Now replace Wilson with every other elite player who chooses the NCAA over the CHL when they're 18. I think you'd see a lot more elite players go the CHL route, with the NCAA as a backup plan. And if they're ready for the NHL by the time they're 20, the NCAA would lose out on a lot of talented players.
The NCAA has landed more top players in the last decade than it's ever landed before. Look at all the top-10 picks from the NCAA in the 2000s -- DiPietro, Heatley, Komisarek, Whitney, Vanek, Wheeler, Jack Johnson, Erik Johnson, Toews, van Riemsdyk, Turris, Wilson. 12 top-10 picks in the decade. No other decade has had more than five. The NCAA is making headway in terms of getting top players, and I think the inception of College Hockey Inc. will only help that. Why make a major change like accepting CHL players and risk ruining that?
I don't know. I see it working both ways. Certainly, the NCAA would benefit from getting some CHL players who weren't quite ready for the NHL at age 20. But they'd also lose a lot of elite 18- and 19-year-olds to the CHL because those players would have nothing to lose by going there. As Swami said, if those players develop according to plan, the NCAA's never gonna get them back.
Let's use Colin Wilson as an example. It seems that he chose NCAA not because he wanted the education, but because he thought playing for BU would be the best preparation for the NHL. He was ready for the NHL at age 19, arguably even age 18. If CHL players were eligible for the NCAA, though, Wilson would've had nothing to lose by going to the CHL straight out of the USNTDP rather than BU. If the CHL didn't get him ready for the NHL, BU would still be there. But what if the CHL gets him ready for the NHL just as quickly as BU did? Now he goes to the NHL from the CHL at age 19, and BU and the NCAA never get Wilson.
Now replace Wilson with every other elite player who chooses the NCAA over the CHL when they're 18. I think you'd see a lot more elite players go the CHL route, with the NCAA as a backup plan. And if they're ready for the NHL by the time they're 20, the NCAA would lose out on a lot of talented players.
The NCAA has landed more top players in the last decade than it's ever landed before. Look at all the top-10 picks from the NCAA in the 2000s -- DiPietro, Heatley, Komisarek, Whitney, Vanek, Wheeler, Jack Johnson, Erik Johnson, Toews, van Riemsdyk, Turris, Wilson. 12 top-10 picks in the decade. No other decade has had more than five. The NCAA is making headway in terms of getting top players, and I think the inception of College Hockey Inc. will only help that. Why make a major change like accepting CHL players and risk ruining that?
candycanes99
HAVE SOME CLASS
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
I believe that this is true now. At the time NCAA made up the regulation, Major Juniors were slightly different. Now there are a lot of players who have played well at that level but know their future isn't in pro hockey. Those kind of players could come into NCAA hockey and do very well and get an education. However, that would lead to even more overage players, and thus to compete younger players would be discouraged ever moreso from entering as true freshmen, meaning they'd have to play junior hockey. And now they can play major junior without losing eligibility... so the NCAA becomes an afterthought rather than development league.
Edit: FL beat me to it, pretty much the same idea.
I believe that this is true now. At the time NCAA made up the regulation, Major Juniors were slightly different. Now there are a lot of players who have played well at that level but know their future isn't in pro hockey. Those kind of players could come into NCAA hockey and do very well and get an education. However, that would lead to even more overage players, and thus to compete younger players would be discouraged ever moreso from entering as true freshmen, meaning they'd have to play junior hockey. And now they can play major junior without losing eligibility... so the NCAA becomes an afterthought rather than development league.
Edit: FL beat me to it, pretty much the same idea.
jcarter7669
Registered User
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Jay Dee : Jack Daniels drinker
John Deere rider
or just dumb?
Jay Dee : Jack Daniels drinker
John Deere rider
or just dumb?
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Good points. I hadn't thought of that aspect of it.
Good points. I hadn't thought of that aspect of it.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Let's not forget, Canada has universities too. In fact, playing in major juniors gets you a scholarship to a Canadian school, provided you do not immediately go pro.
Let's not forget, Canada has universities too. In fact, playing in major juniors gets you a scholarship to a Canadian school, provided you do not immediately go pro.
theprofromdover
The Original Dope Detector
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
To dumb to understand haiku.
To dumb to understand haiku.
jcarter7669
Registered User
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Thought you had me on "ignore" grandpa.
Thought you had me on "ignore" grandpa.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Ahahahahaha haiku fail!!!
candycanes99
HAVE SOME CLASS
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Counting syllables is hard.
Heck, counting is hard.
Wait, what are sillabowls?
Counting syllables is hard.
Heck, counting is hard.
Wait, what are sillabowls?
jcarter7669
Registered User
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
"In contrast to English verse which is typically characterized by meter, Japanese verse counts sound units (moras), known as "on". The word on is often translated as "syllable", but there are subtle differences between an "on" and an English-language "syllable". Traditional haiku consist of 17 on, in three metrical phrases of 5, 7, and 5 on respectively.
The word onji (音字; "sound symbol") is sometimes used in referring to Japanese sound units in English[5] although this word is archaic and no longer current in Japanese.[6] In Japanese, the on corresponds very closely to the kana character count (closely enough that moji (or "character symbol") is also sometimes used[6] as the count unit).
One on is counted for a short syllable, an additional one for an elongated vowel, diphthong, or doubled consonant, and one for an "n" at the end of a syllable. Thus, the word "haibun", though counted as two syllables in English, is counted as four on in Japanese (ha-i-bu-n).
Most writers of literary haiku in English use about ten to fourteen syllables, with no formal pattern."
You may also note the number of on, but I suspect they don't teach you those technical things apparently at BC or BU.
"In contrast to English verse which is typically characterized by meter, Japanese verse counts sound units (moras), known as "on". The word on is often translated as "syllable", but there are subtle differences between an "on" and an English-language "syllable". Traditional haiku consist of 17 on, in three metrical phrases of 5, 7, and 5 on respectively.
The word onji (音字; "sound symbol") is sometimes used in referring to Japanese sound units in English[5] although this word is archaic and no longer current in Japanese.[6] In Japanese, the on corresponds very closely to the kana character count (closely enough that moji (or "character symbol") is also sometimes used[6] as the count unit).
One on is counted for a short syllable, an additional one for an elongated vowel, diphthong, or doubled consonant, and one for an "n" at the end of a syllable. Thus, the word "haibun", though counted as two syllables in English, is counted as four on in Japanese (ha-i-bu-n).
Most writers of literary haiku in English use about ten to fourteen syllables, with no formal pattern."
You may also note the number of on, but I suspect they don't teach you those technical things apparently at BC or BU.
Last edited:
Federal League
I like hockey.
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Could you please tell me how many "on" are in this "haiku"? I would like to know exactly where they separate, too. Thank you.
Could you please tell me how many "on" are in this "haiku"? I would like to know exactly where they separate, too. Thank you.
jcarter7669
Registered User
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration
Oh I never said it was a haiku, but thanks for recognizing that....you must be tops in your class and as such I expect you know what a long vowel and syllable is. Have a try and I will see if I can't a third grader to check later and make sure you figured it out.
Have a great weekend, good luck to my new "other favorite" team the BC Eagles, and to all their wonderful but sometimes challenged fans.
Oh I never said it was a haiku, but thanks for recognizing that....you must be tops in your class and as such I expect you know what a long vowel and syllable is. Have a try and I will see if I can't a third grader to check later and make sure you figured it out.
Have a great weekend, good luck to my new "other favorite" team the BC Eagles, and to all their wonderful but sometimes challenged fans.
- Status