I think that the rule used to be one season plus one game for each game played but that was changed
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.
Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
- Thread starter Fishman'81
- Start date
I think that the rule used to be one season plus one game for each game played but that was changed
norm1909
Larry Normandin
Fishman'81
Black Bear since D-2
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
I've read about a few (potentially) outstanding recruits from Alaska already, but Utica is loaded for bear whether those guys show-up or not, and the same applies to this young fellow.
UC is very deep up-front, even as we speak... Nothing much needs to be added to the mix. If Nick is Nick again this season, I'm not expecting that anyone outside of PSU Champs will question their credentials.
I've read about a few (potentially) outstanding recruits from Alaska already, but Utica is loaded for bear whether those guys show-up or not, and the same applies to this young fellow.
UC is very deep up-front, even as we speak... Nothing much needs to be added to the mix. If Nick is Nick again this season, I'm not expecting that anyone outside of PSU Champs will question their credentials.
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
Educate was fantastic last year and pretty much carried the team in many games, but past another 3 or 4 guys Utica really loses on depth. And Therrien was good, no doubt, but he would have to improve his performance in order to be the elite goalie you need to be to win in this league. Look at Stephenson, Jacobson, Hare, Broadwater, Cadieux, or Czarnota. Those are the kind of elite goalies that can bring their teams to championships and win championships. I'm not saying Nick can't do that, but he'll have to improve significantly from last year. #20 in GAA or #24 in save pctg doesn't scream Championship goalie to me.
Of course anything can happen when the season starts. Utica has a couple impressive recruits, but overall their incoming class doesn't blow me away anymore than Hobart or Manhattanville or even Neumann.
Educate was fantastic last year and pretty much carried the team in many games, but past another 3 or 4 guys Utica really loses on depth. And Therrien was good, no doubt, but he would have to improve his performance in order to be the elite goalie you need to be to win in this league. Look at Stephenson, Jacobson, Hare, Broadwater, Cadieux, or Czarnota. Those are the kind of elite goalies that can bring their teams to championships and win championships. I'm not saying Nick can't do that, but he'll have to improve significantly from last year. #20 in GAA or #24 in save pctg doesn't scream Championship goalie to me.
Of course anything can happen when the season starts. Utica has a couple impressive recruits, but overall their incoming class doesn't blow me away anymore than Hobart or Manhattanville or even Neumann.
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
The following was released by Utica College to the media this morning:
During the 2009-2010 academic year, Utica College undertook an initiative to
increase its enrollment of Canadian students, as part of a larger effort to
further expand the College's growing geographic footprint. The College was
strongly positioned in regards to its academic and extracurricular programs to
meet particular needs and interests of Canadian students, and allocated
additional financial aid specifically targeting Canadian students in select
degree programs. The College recognized at that time that this initiative, if
not implemented and administered properly, placed the institution at possible
risk of falling out of compliance with NCAA regulations concerning financial aid
for student-athletes. For this reason, the College sought advice from NCAA
compliance officials and other sources when structuring this initiative so to
address this risk and provide safeguards we believed then were sufficient.
Regretfully, these safeguards were not sufficient.
From 2009 to 2011, the College awarded a small number of institutional grants to
Canadian students, a disproportionate number of which were awarded to students
participating in intercollegiate athletics. While this activity was
non-deliberate, we nevertheless take full responsibility, and do not take our
shortcoming lightly.
The College proactively ceased this initiative in 2011, including grants
previously awarded. For the past two years we have been working closely with the
NCAA to re-examine our financial aid award activity during the period in which
the initiative was in effect. Utica College remains committed to expanding
access to Canadian students, a population the College remains uniquely
positioned to serve. However, we will consider resuming this initiative only at
such time that we are confident that our processes have been unequivocally
corrected. The sanctions imposed today by the NCAA and the measures the College
has previously adopted to ensure a more efficient monitoring system are
components of that corrective process.
As an institution that has taken extraordinary pride in fostering and promoting
the values of Division III athletics, we remain unswerving in our dedication to
the highest principles of fair play. As such, we do not challenge these
corrective sanctions; rather, we view them as an opportunity for improvement.
Todd S. Hutton
President
The following was released by Utica College to the media this morning:
During the 2009-2010 academic year, Utica College undertook an initiative to
increase its enrollment of Canadian students, as part of a larger effort to
further expand the College's growing geographic footprint. The College was
strongly positioned in regards to its academic and extracurricular programs to
meet particular needs and interests of Canadian students, and allocated
additional financial aid specifically targeting Canadian students in select
degree programs. The College recognized at that time that this initiative, if
not implemented and administered properly, placed the institution at possible
risk of falling out of compliance with NCAA regulations concerning financial aid
for student-athletes. For this reason, the College sought advice from NCAA
compliance officials and other sources when structuring this initiative so to
address this risk and provide safeguards we believed then were sufficient.
Regretfully, these safeguards were not sufficient.
From 2009 to 2011, the College awarded a small number of institutional grants to
Canadian students, a disproportionate number of which were awarded to students
participating in intercollegiate athletics. While this activity was
non-deliberate, we nevertheless take full responsibility, and do not take our
shortcoming lightly.
The College proactively ceased this initiative in 2011, including grants
previously awarded. For the past two years we have been working closely with the
NCAA to re-examine our financial aid award activity during the period in which
the initiative was in effect. Utica College remains committed to expanding
access to Canadian students, a population the College remains uniquely
positioned to serve. However, we will consider resuming this initiative only at
such time that we are confident that our processes have been unequivocally
corrected. The sanctions imposed today by the NCAA and the measures the College
has previously adopted to ensure a more efficient monitoring system are
components of that corrective process.
As an institution that has taken extraordinary pride in fostering and promoting
the values of Division III athletics, we remain unswerving in our dedication to
the highest principles of fair play. As such, we do not challenge these
corrective sanctions; rather, we view them as an opportunity for improvement.
Todd S. Hutton
President
LakerFan99
New member
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
From the NCAA:
Utica College failed to monitor financial aid program
INDIANAPOLIS – Utica College failed to monitor its Canadian International Student Award program, which led to Canadian student-athletes receiving more financial aid than the general Canadian student body, according to findings by the NCAA Division III Committee on Infractions. Penalties in this case include two years of probation, a postseason ban for any teams with student-athletes receiving the financial aid and increased oversight requirements.
This case was resolved through the summary disposition process, a cooperative effort where the involved parties collectively submit the case to the Committee on Infractions in written form. The NCAA enforcement staff, college and involved individuals must agree to use the summary disposition process instead of having a formal hearing.
In 2010, the college developed the CISA program to attract Canadian students to under-enrolled majors. The goal of the program was to provide enough aid so that the cost of attendance for a Canadian student was roughly equivalent to that of a domestic student. Utica consulted the NCAA to ensure the program was designed to comply with NCAA rules. The NCAA advised the college to make the funds available to all prospective students using the same standard, to carefully monitor the impact of the financial aid and to act proactively if any problems arise.
As the program was administered, the number of Canadian student-athletes who enrolled at the college outnumbered the number of Canadian non-student-athletes. During the 2010-11 academic year, the college awarded the financial aid to five students. All recipients were men’s ice hockey student-athletes. In 2011-12, Utica awarded the financial aid to 11 students. The recipients were comprised of six men’s ice hockey student-athletes, one women’s ice hockey student-athlete and one baseball student-athlete.
When awarding the financial aid, the Office of International Education did not actively track whether the awardees were student-athletes. As a part of its effort to award financial aid without considering athletics participation, the college’s financial aid office did not track which students were members of athletics teams. During an internal review of the CISA program in December 2011, the college found that it was not achieving the proper balance between student-athletes and non-athletes receiving the financial aid. At that point, the college suspended the financial aid for incoming Canadian students for the 2012-13 academic year. It continued awarding the financial aid to continuing students who met the program’s eligibility criteria.
Because the college did not track the financial aid awarded to the Canadian student-athletes, the college failed to monitor the program. The committee notes that the lack of monitoring was intentional because the college did not want athletics participation to be a consideration in the financial aid progress.
The penalties include:
Public reprimand and censure.
Two years of probation, from August 29, 2013 through August 28, 2015.
A postseason ban for any of the college’s teams whose rosters include one or more student-athletes receiving CISA awards.
Request of a Level Two review from the NCAA Committee on Financial Aid. During this review, the committee looks closely at an institution’s policies and procedures for awarding aid, as well as the impact of those factors on aid received by student-athletes.
The members of the Division III Committee on Infractions who reviewed this case include Keith Jacques, attorney at Woodman, Edmands, Danylik, Austin, Smith and Jacques; Dave Cecil, chair and director of financial aid at Transylvania State; Amy Elizabeth Hackett, director of athletics at University of Puget Sound; Nancy Meyer, director of women’s athletics at Calvin College; and Garnett Purnell, director of athletics at Wittenberg University.
From the NCAA:
Utica College failed to monitor financial aid program
INDIANAPOLIS – Utica College failed to monitor its Canadian International Student Award program, which led to Canadian student-athletes receiving more financial aid than the general Canadian student body, according to findings by the NCAA Division III Committee on Infractions. Penalties in this case include two years of probation, a postseason ban for any teams with student-athletes receiving the financial aid and increased oversight requirements.
This case was resolved through the summary disposition process, a cooperative effort where the involved parties collectively submit the case to the Committee on Infractions in written form. The NCAA enforcement staff, college and involved individuals must agree to use the summary disposition process instead of having a formal hearing.
In 2010, the college developed the CISA program to attract Canadian students to under-enrolled majors. The goal of the program was to provide enough aid so that the cost of attendance for a Canadian student was roughly equivalent to that of a domestic student. Utica consulted the NCAA to ensure the program was designed to comply with NCAA rules. The NCAA advised the college to make the funds available to all prospective students using the same standard, to carefully monitor the impact of the financial aid and to act proactively if any problems arise.
As the program was administered, the number of Canadian student-athletes who enrolled at the college outnumbered the number of Canadian non-student-athletes. During the 2010-11 academic year, the college awarded the financial aid to five students. All recipients were men’s ice hockey student-athletes. In 2011-12, Utica awarded the financial aid to 11 students. The recipients were comprised of six men’s ice hockey student-athletes, one women’s ice hockey student-athlete and one baseball student-athlete.
When awarding the financial aid, the Office of International Education did not actively track whether the awardees were student-athletes. As a part of its effort to award financial aid without considering athletics participation, the college’s financial aid office did not track which students were members of athletics teams. During an internal review of the CISA program in December 2011, the college found that it was not achieving the proper balance between student-athletes and non-athletes receiving the financial aid. At that point, the college suspended the financial aid for incoming Canadian students for the 2012-13 academic year. It continued awarding the financial aid to continuing students who met the program’s eligibility criteria.
Because the college did not track the financial aid awarded to the Canadian student-athletes, the college failed to monitor the program. The committee notes that the lack of monitoring was intentional because the college did not want athletics participation to be a consideration in the financial aid progress.
The penalties include:
Public reprimand and censure.
Two years of probation, from August 29, 2013 through August 28, 2015.
A postseason ban for any of the college’s teams whose rosters include one or more student-athletes receiving CISA awards.
Request of a Level Two review from the NCAA Committee on Financial Aid. During this review, the committee looks closely at an institution’s policies and procedures for awarding aid, as well as the impact of those factors on aid received by student-athletes.
The members of the Division III Committee on Infractions who reviewed this case include Keith Jacques, attorney at Woodman, Edmands, Danylik, Austin, Smith and Jacques; Dave Cecil, chair and director of financial aid at Transylvania State; Amy Elizabeth Hackett, director of athletics at University of Puget Sound; Nancy Meyer, director of women’s athletics at Calvin College; and Garnett Purnell, director of athletics at Wittenberg University.
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
I, (hopefully with permission of those who guard the gates of this thread) think this is stupid. The point of DIII athletic aid monitoring is to ensure that athletes and non-athletes are treated in the same fashion. The program was clearly designed for non-athletic purposes. There was no apparent effort to steer athletes towards this program. The program was created in a manner that was blind to athletic status. To me that says everyone was treated in the same way. To require that athletes be discriminated against by an aid program is contrary to the spirit of DIII athletics. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
If there were evidence that the Athletics Department and and recruiters were involved in the creation of the program and steered student-athletes (hockey players) to it as part of the recruitment process, that would be an entirely different issue. The fact that Utica took good faith steps to ensure that there was compliance should mean that they were playing the game the way the NCAA recommend. I think the evidence is that they acted in good faith, and the numbers didn't work out. This is wrong.
I, (hopefully with permission of those who guard the gates of this thread) think this is stupid. The point of DIII athletic aid monitoring is to ensure that athletes and non-athletes are treated in the same fashion. The program was clearly designed for non-athletic purposes. There was no apparent effort to steer athletes towards this program. The program was created in a manner that was blind to athletic status. To me that says everyone was treated in the same way. To require that athletes be discriminated against by an aid program is contrary to the spirit of DIII athletics. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
If there were evidence that the Athletics Department and and recruiters were involved in the creation of the program and steered student-athletes (hockey players) to it as part of the recruitment process, that would be an entirely different issue. The fact that Utica took good faith steps to ensure that there was compliance should mean that they were playing the game the way the NCAA recommend. I think the evidence is that they acted in good faith, and the numbers didn't work out. This is wrong.
CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
Nate LePage, Siena '13
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
I'm confused. The Utica release states that they discontinued the aid, "including grants previously awarded", but the NCAA report says that eligible continuing students continued to receive aid beyond 2011. So who's got their facts wrong? The NCAA or the College?
I'm confused. The Utica release states that they discontinued the aid, "including grants previously awarded", but the NCAA report says that eligible continuing students continued to receive aid beyond 2011. So who's got their facts wrong? The NCAA or the College?
Wicked Slappaahs
I miss Tie Domi
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
O-D Article on the sanctions....
"College officials said they ceased the program after the 2011-12 school year, and that none of their student-athletes are receiving CISA financial aid anymore, meaning all of their teams will be eligible for postseason play for this coming season."
Read more: http://www.uticaod.com/news/x1367235302/Utica-College-athletics-program-sanctioned#ixzz2dODWIdcq
O-D Article on the sanctions....
"College officials said they ceased the program after the 2011-12 school year, and that none of their student-athletes are receiving CISA financial aid anymore, meaning all of their teams will be eligible for postseason play for this coming season."
Read more: http://www.uticaod.com/news/x1367235302/Utica-College-athletics-program-sanctioned#ixzz2dODWIdcq
Fishman'81
Black Bear since D-2
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
As King Richard once said: "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying" .
All kidding aside, this situation smacks of the typically disingenuous college-athletics situation. It's really difficult for me to believe that whomever passes for a compliance officer at UC didn't recognize that there was a disproportionate number of hockey players receiving aid... UC is a very small institution, and hockey players are rock stars there.
Having said all that, I have to wonder how aid to athletes is meted-out at other notable D-3 hockey schools. Perhaps those of you who know such things will explain how it works at your university.
As King Richard once said: "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying" .
All kidding aside, this situation smacks of the typically disingenuous college-athletics situation. It's really difficult for me to believe that whomever passes for a compliance officer at UC didn't recognize that there was a disproportionate number of hockey players receiving aid... UC is a very small institution, and hockey players are rock stars there.
Having said all that, I have to wonder how aid to athletes is meted-out at other notable D-3 hockey schools. Perhaps those of you who know such things will explain how it works at your university.
bakdraft21
Well-known member
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
.many players from the Kania team coming in as well
well u guys seems to have a Alaskian pipeline
.many players from the Kania team coming in as wellPSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
Wow, we agree Fish! Mark it down.
In short here's the issue.
What Utica "intended" to do is a good thing. Creating diversity at college is a good thing. HOWEVER,
1. The handing out of FA packages, grants, whatever you want to call it IS legal IF:
- AT LEAST 51% of those receiving the package are NON ATHLETES (the % may be greater but in general terms we will use this)
- Thus less than half are ATHLETES so it can not be perceived as an "athletic scholarship"
- There is no MAX or MIN of amount $$ or how many, just as long as it meets the ratio of NON ATHLETES to ATHLETES with NON ATHLETES being the higher percentage.
This is where it gets sticky.
If "School A" has 100 Canadian grants in July, 51 go to NON Athletes, 49 go to ATHLETES. Move in day comes for "School A". NON ATHLETES Johny, Suzie, Pete, and Marc decided not to attend "School A" , but all of the 49 ATHLETES show up. You know how a 47 NON ATHLETE to 49 ATHLETE awarded grant/aid which in the NCAA's eyes is illegal.
Then you have the flip side, A LA Neumann, when "School B" has 100 Canadian grants in July, 98 of them go to ATHLETES and only 2 go to NON ATHLETES. (Granted Neumann didn't hand out 100 grants but it was 98% to ATHLETES).
The CORRECT was is to make sure you have MORE NON ATHLETES under the aid/grant program then ATHLETES, its pretty simple.
Hockey is unique as its really the only NCAA sport that is "foreign" meaning in order to be a top competitive team you need to recruit foreign (Canadian) players. No that doesn't mean that there arnt any great American born players, but facts are facts.
It's imperative (as from what it sounds the Utica Admin acknowledges) that they must work on creating a NON ATHLETIC foreign program FIRST.
This is my issue. This has A. Been going on TOO long for people to use the "we didn't know" excuse and B. The FA/Foreign Grant Compliance Officer whoever NOT knowing this, is BULL. Why Coach Heenan wouldn't TRACK or ASK this himself, is beyond me at this point. It's clear as day when teams announce that they have a "Foreign" program. Coaches know which teams/schools give out "more" and which teams don't. Some people will tell you different. It's kind of like the HIPPA laws when it comes to being bitten or thrown on at a Correctional Facility, no you can't know for sure, but the medical staff can strongly suggest you go and receive medical treatment. While the FA Office may not be able to tell them how much a student received, I'd put money on it that they CAN tell you how many in the program are ATHLETES and NON ATHLETES. Even if the coach doesn't (which sorry don't buy it), with this being the 7th? 8th? DIII Hockey team to be found guilty of the SAME darn thing in the past 5? years, ummm HELLO.
Utica had 8 new Canadian players over the past 3 years. They had THREE TOTAL from the start of the PROGRAM till then. As you said, Utica is a smaller school, its pretty easy for a "whos who" type of communication. Inexcusable at this point in time.
Now, having said that SHAME ON THE NCAA. Enough of this "Oh they didn't know so just don't do it again". Now am I saying guys like Santiago, Hertz, Garbutt, and the crew WOULDN'T have come to Utica if the "program" wasn't there? Most of you diehard Utica fans would say "of course, we're Utica" but folks there is a reason why you only had THREE TOTAL in almost 10 years prior to the "program".
Well they came, Utica became a top contender. They were a few games over .500 team before and are well over .600 the past 3 years that the program was there or players that used the program.
Look at Neumanns roster from 2004-2005 compared to 2005-2006. You can look at the reverse and look at Plattsburghs roster and how it changed during the same period from being mostly Canadian to most American.
Here's the issue. Teams like Neumann who "oh we didn't know" used the "program" to attract Canadian players. They hand out 98% of the "program" grants to ATHLETES (mostly Men's Hockey) the team goes from being a .217 winning % team to above .500 and up. They build the team up, even win a National title ( from 2007 to 2010, 118 awards were granted, with 115 going to men’s and women’s ice hockey players). But the school, teams, FA Officer who ever didn't pick up on the fact that of the 115 went to ATHLETES and THREE, YES THREE, went to NON ATHLETES. But no one picked up on it. But when the NCAA investigated they said "oh its okay, they didn't know".....right....
Like I said, Utica was 13 of 16 which is still better then 115 of 118, its still inexcusable.
BUT the NCAA allows teams to do it, and as long as they stop when they get caught, 2 or 3 years AFTER with a "Johny Football" type slap on the wrist. Meanwhile the school has become a decent team, heck might even win a National Title, the hockey world takes notice, Junior programs take notice, recruits take notice, and once the FA stops/slows down they've come out of the cellar. Not that I'm trying to compare this to the PED's of MLB, but players in baseball are becoming juiced up during their contract year, having monster numbers, getting huge deals, and then when they get "busted" for PED's who cares? They sit out 50 games but already have the big contract. It's the same thing, cheat it up, build your program, win some games (or a title), get caught, and stop and the NCAA will just tell you to not do it again.
And yes, if this was Plattsburgh, shame on them too. However, Plattsburgh discontinued their FA/Foreign "grant" program 10 years ago when the budget took a huge hit and you could clearly see the affect it had on the W/L. Plattsburgh has a great international program and just couldn't afford to give that many people a discount on tuition (which is pretty much what it is). They have since scaled "back" on the amounts handed out, and you've seen a turn around in the program.
Sure the American JR systems have become "respectable" compared to 10-15 years ago. I remember Jr teams from NY playing OPJHL teams and getting crushed years ago. Now you can find some good talent in the US (even NY) compared to 10-15 years ago, but you need to have supporting OPJHL, NAHL, and other Canadian based Junior programs. (Maybe some Great Lakes based teams could argue that and in some instances Massachusetts).
For years the SUNYAC was Plattsburgh and the "others" Sure Fredonia had a small run, but pretty much every SUNYAC team played second fiddle to Plattsburgh. Buff State, Brockport, and Morrisville finally started to add the foreign aid programs and have "begun" to at least be competitive. It use to be not only IF Plattsburgh would beat Buff State and Brockport, but by how many touchdowns. Now, for the most part, you get competitive games. Yes Brockport and Buff State might lose 75% of the time, but at least they are competitive now, and all you need to do is look at the roster and then look at the results. Plain as day to see.
Wow, we agree Fish! Mark it down.
In short here's the issue.
What Utica "intended" to do is a good thing. Creating diversity at college is a good thing. HOWEVER,
1. The handing out of FA packages, grants, whatever you want to call it IS legal IF:
- AT LEAST 51% of those receiving the package are NON ATHLETES (the % may be greater but in general terms we will use this)
- Thus less than half are ATHLETES so it can not be perceived as an "athletic scholarship"
- There is no MAX or MIN of amount $$ or how many, just as long as it meets the ratio of NON ATHLETES to ATHLETES with NON ATHLETES being the higher percentage.
This is where it gets sticky.
If "School A" has 100 Canadian grants in July, 51 go to NON Athletes, 49 go to ATHLETES. Move in day comes for "School A". NON ATHLETES Johny, Suzie, Pete, and Marc decided not to attend "School A" , but all of the 49 ATHLETES show up. You know how a 47 NON ATHLETE to 49 ATHLETE awarded grant/aid which in the NCAA's eyes is illegal.
Then you have the flip side, A LA Neumann, when "School B" has 100 Canadian grants in July, 98 of them go to ATHLETES and only 2 go to NON ATHLETES. (Granted Neumann didn't hand out 100 grants but it was 98% to ATHLETES).
The CORRECT was is to make sure you have MORE NON ATHLETES under the aid/grant program then ATHLETES, its pretty simple.
Hockey is unique as its really the only NCAA sport that is "foreign" meaning in order to be a top competitive team you need to recruit foreign (Canadian) players. No that doesn't mean that there arnt any great American born players, but facts are facts.
It's imperative (as from what it sounds the Utica Admin acknowledges) that they must work on creating a NON ATHLETIC foreign program FIRST.
This is my issue. This has A. Been going on TOO long for people to use the "we didn't know" excuse and B. The FA/Foreign Grant Compliance Officer whoever NOT knowing this, is BULL. Why Coach Heenan wouldn't TRACK or ASK this himself, is beyond me at this point. It's clear as day when teams announce that they have a "Foreign" program. Coaches know which teams/schools give out "more" and which teams don't. Some people will tell you different. It's kind of like the HIPPA laws when it comes to being bitten or thrown on at a Correctional Facility, no you can't know for sure, but the medical staff can strongly suggest you go and receive medical treatment. While the FA Office may not be able to tell them how much a student received, I'd put money on it that they CAN tell you how many in the program are ATHLETES and NON ATHLETES. Even if the coach doesn't (which sorry don't buy it), with this being the 7th? 8th? DIII Hockey team to be found guilty of the SAME darn thing in the past 5? years, ummm HELLO.
Utica had 8 new Canadian players over the past 3 years. They had THREE TOTAL from the start of the PROGRAM till then. As you said, Utica is a smaller school, its pretty easy for a "whos who" type of communication. Inexcusable at this point in time.
Now, having said that SHAME ON THE NCAA. Enough of this "Oh they didn't know so just don't do it again". Now am I saying guys like Santiago, Hertz, Garbutt, and the crew WOULDN'T have come to Utica if the "program" wasn't there? Most of you diehard Utica fans would say "of course, we're Utica" but folks there is a reason why you only had THREE TOTAL in almost 10 years prior to the "program".
Well they came, Utica became a top contender. They were a few games over .500 team before and are well over .600 the past 3 years that the program was there or players that used the program.
Look at Neumanns roster from 2004-2005 compared to 2005-2006. You can look at the reverse and look at Plattsburghs roster and how it changed during the same period from being mostly Canadian to most American.
Here's the issue. Teams like Neumann who "oh we didn't know" used the "program" to attract Canadian players. They hand out 98% of the "program" grants to ATHLETES (mostly Men's Hockey) the team goes from being a .217 winning % team to above .500 and up. They build the team up, even win a National title ( from 2007 to 2010, 118 awards were granted, with 115 going to men’s and women’s ice hockey players). But the school, teams, FA Officer who ever didn't pick up on the fact that of the 115 went to ATHLETES and THREE, YES THREE, went to NON ATHLETES. But no one picked up on it. But when the NCAA investigated they said "oh its okay, they didn't know".....right....
Like I said, Utica was 13 of 16 which is still better then 115 of 118, its still inexcusable.
BUT the NCAA allows teams to do it, and as long as they stop when they get caught, 2 or 3 years AFTER with a "Johny Football" type slap on the wrist. Meanwhile the school has become a decent team, heck might even win a National Title, the hockey world takes notice, Junior programs take notice, recruits take notice, and once the FA stops/slows down they've come out of the cellar. Not that I'm trying to compare this to the PED's of MLB, but players in baseball are becoming juiced up during their contract year, having monster numbers, getting huge deals, and then when they get "busted" for PED's who cares? They sit out 50 games but already have the big contract. It's the same thing, cheat it up, build your program, win some games (or a title), get caught, and stop and the NCAA will just tell you to not do it again.
And yes, if this was Plattsburgh, shame on them too. However, Plattsburgh discontinued their FA/Foreign "grant" program 10 years ago when the budget took a huge hit and you could clearly see the affect it had on the W/L. Plattsburgh has a great international program and just couldn't afford to give that many people a discount on tuition (which is pretty much what it is). They have since scaled "back" on the amounts handed out, and you've seen a turn around in the program.
Sure the American JR systems have become "respectable" compared to 10-15 years ago. I remember Jr teams from NY playing OPJHL teams and getting crushed years ago. Now you can find some good talent in the US (even NY) compared to 10-15 years ago, but you need to have supporting OPJHL, NAHL, and other Canadian based Junior programs. (Maybe some Great Lakes based teams could argue that and in some instances Massachusetts).
For years the SUNYAC was Plattsburgh and the "others" Sure Fredonia had a small run, but pretty much every SUNYAC team played second fiddle to Plattsburgh. Buff State, Brockport, and Morrisville finally started to add the foreign aid programs and have "begun" to at least be competitive. It use to be not only IF Plattsburgh would beat Buff State and Brockport, but by how many touchdowns. Now, for the most part, you get competitive games. Yes Brockport and Buff State might lose 75% of the time, but at least they are competitive now, and all you need to do is look at the roster and then look at the results. Plain as day to see.
Fishman'81
Black Bear since D-2
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
FWIW, here are some 2012-13 numbers to mull-over: Oswego's roster was composed of 96% international players, Platty's of 49%, Norwich's of 46% and Utica's of 25%.
Make what you will of that, but kindly note that some other schools are finding a way to load-up with foreign talent whilst ducking the type of censure imposed on UC. (Gosh! Are all those guys paying their own way?)
We are all kidding ourselves if we pretend that the awarding of AS's (even at the level of D-3 hockey) isn't a game of three card Monte... I don't much care who awards free rides for athletes at this level, nor how they care to couch their doing so, but wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense to allow schools to hand-out AS's as they see fit, and to do so aboveboard?
It won't change a thing: Oswego will still be Oswego, Assumption will still be Assumption, and God will still be in His heaven... But there will be much less disingenuous BS to wade through when it comes to recruiting practices. (And fewer Tolstoy-esque posts on here attempting to rationalize the process.)
FWIW, here are some 2012-13 numbers to mull-over: Oswego's roster was composed of 96% international players, Platty's of 49%, Norwich's of 46% and Utica's of 25%.
Make what you will of that, but kindly note that some other schools are finding a way to load-up with foreign talent whilst ducking the type of censure imposed on UC. (Gosh! Are all those guys paying their own way?)
We are all kidding ourselves if we pretend that the awarding of AS's (even at the level of D-3 hockey) isn't a game of three card Monte... I don't much care who awards free rides for athletes at this level, nor how they care to couch their doing so, but wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense to allow schools to hand-out AS's as they see fit, and to do so aboveboard?
It won't change a thing: Oswego will still be Oswego, Assumption will still be Assumption, and God will still be in His heaven... But there will be much less disingenuous BS to wade through when it comes to recruiting practices. (And fewer Tolstoy-esque posts on here attempting to rationalize the process.)
Last edited:
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
To my viewpoint, go back the old days. As long as the package doesn't exceed the FAFSA calculation of need, it should be okay. After all, that is basically what they do in the NESCAC. It works for them because that's the standard package. Nobody would have an advantage over anyone else. The problem is that the rules are confusing, and all the tests just add to the problem.
To my viewpoint, go back the old days. As long as the package doesn't exceed the FAFSA calculation of need, it should be okay. After all, that is basically what they do in the NESCAC. It works for them because that's the standard package. Nobody would have an advantage over anyone else. The problem is that the rules are confusing, and all the tests just add to the problem.
But you have to get past admissions. At a NESCAC that can be an adventure all by itself.
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
Your point? And they all are okay in the NCAA's eyes as they are handing out their FA-Grants to less then 50% for Athletes. (Oswego was questionable).
They are NOT FREE rides. It is just some $$$ off of their bill to lower the cost down to US and or State residence cost. UC would have been fine if they gave 9 of their 16 grants to NON - ATHLETES, they didn't. There is no "ducking" its called following the rules, and Utica did not. Oswego was caught too, but from what I was told was so close to the 50/50 that as long as they agreed to discontinue the program, nothing would be done. This was NOT the 98% Neumann type violation or Utica 81%, sorry no excuse.
No, DIII athletics does not allow AS's and shouldn't. I have no issue with no scholarships. I have no issue with teams offering the FA-Grants. But FOLLOW THE RULES and stop handing out 81% and 98% FA-Grants to Athletes. Keep it at 49% and all is well. Its not a hard concept. You have too many schools who don't pull in the $$$ to hand out AS's. Some schools can not afford to give free rides, so no its not fair. There needs to be some sort of plan in place to LIMIT the amount of $$$ teams are allowed to hand out so EVERY team can afford it.
Actually once again you are wrong. Teams that don't offer FA grants/packages (which there are still some - See Cortland) suffer because they can't expand their recruiting. In a Canadian based sport such as hockey, if you can not attract Canadian players you will not be very good. Lets see how good Utica is with out bringing in Canadian players in a couple years. The stats pretty are pretty clear and show how Utica was a mediocre team until they started adding Canadian players. Neumann even more so. Then you can look at teams like Brockport and Buffalo State. And on the flip side see how dominant Plattsburgh was in the late 90's early 2000's until they cut their FA program in 2004. They quickly became a non top-10 team and has since returned since adding the FA-grants back into place.
There is no rationalizing, its the rules. Follow the rules and you are in the clear, Utica did not and once again another 81% to Athletes goes with a slap on the wrist.
Your point? And they all are okay in the NCAA's eyes as they are handing out their FA-Grants to less then 50% for Athletes. (Oswego was questionable).
They are NOT FREE rides. It is just some $$$ off of their bill to lower the cost down to US and or State residence cost. UC would have been fine if they gave 9 of their 16 grants to NON - ATHLETES, they didn't. There is no "ducking" its called following the rules, and Utica did not. Oswego was caught too, but from what I was told was so close to the 50/50 that as long as they agreed to discontinue the program, nothing would be done. This was NOT the 98% Neumann type violation or Utica 81%, sorry no excuse.
No, DIII athletics does not allow AS's and shouldn't. I have no issue with no scholarships. I have no issue with teams offering the FA-Grants. But FOLLOW THE RULES and stop handing out 81% and 98% FA-Grants to Athletes. Keep it at 49% and all is well. Its not a hard concept. You have too many schools who don't pull in the $$$ to hand out AS's. Some schools can not afford to give free rides, so no its not fair. There needs to be some sort of plan in place to LIMIT the amount of $$$ teams are allowed to hand out so EVERY team can afford it.
Actually once again you are wrong. Teams that don't offer FA grants/packages (which there are still some - See Cortland) suffer because they can't expand their recruiting. In a Canadian based sport such as hockey, if you can not attract Canadian players you will not be very good. Lets see how good Utica is with out bringing in Canadian players in a couple years. The stats pretty are pretty clear and show how Utica was a mediocre team until they started adding Canadian players. Neumann even more so. Then you can look at teams like Brockport and Buffalo State. And on the flip side see how dominant Plattsburgh was in the late 90's early 2000's until they cut their FA program in 2004. They quickly became a non top-10 team and has since returned since adding the FA-grants back into place.
There is no rationalizing, its the rules. Follow the rules and you are in the clear, Utica did not and once again another 81% to Athletes goes with a slap on the wrist.
admiral0417
Registered User
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
Of course you would have to actually WIN something in order to have something taken away (see Platty '87).....Still don't understand how Neumann doesn't get their title vacated or at least *'d !! Their violations seemed more serious that Plattsburgh's, don't they?
Of course you would have to actually WIN something in order to have something taken away (see Platty '87).....Still don't understand how Neumann doesn't get their title vacated or at least *'d !! Their violations seemed more serious that Plattsburgh's, don't they?
LakerEagleLover
New member
Re: Utica College Pioneers 2012-13 Season (Part Two)
In reference to Oswego, the difference is there was active management and transparency across athletics, admissions and administration - it was a drop in overall international student enrollment, despite the school's aggressive recruitment of students from across the globe - not just our neighbors to the North - that caused the administration to eliminate the program as it was written and move all aid to need and performance based awards. Oz managed the program according to NCAA guidelines, but could not sustain International enrollment - the President pulled the plug...the aftermath has been well documented on USCHO...
Utica, according to its own admission, did not have the proper controls in place to properly manage the program and stay in compliance....
In reference to Oswego, the difference is there was active management and transparency across athletics, admissions and administration - it was a drop in overall international student enrollment, despite the school's aggressive recruitment of students from across the globe - not just our neighbors to the North - that caused the administration to eliminate the program as it was written and move all aid to need and performance based awards. Oz managed the program according to NCAA guidelines, but could not sustain International enrollment - the President pulled the plug...the aftermath has been well documented on USCHO...
Utica, according to its own admission, did not have the proper controls in place to properly manage the program and stay in compliance....
Fishman'81
Black Bear since D-2
Last edited: