What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

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

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

Wisconsin Badgers 2026 Offseason

Timothy A said:
Zajac with a hatty against the Krauts today. Listed as a 4th line W, played 17 shifts. They must have been rolling 4 lines all game long. 4 goals so far at the U18 worlds on 8 shots.
Click to expand...
Zajic is by far the freshman I am most intrigued by for next year. Was a top player on the u17 team last year with 24 goals and 38 points, and considered a fringe 1st/2nd rounder in some early draft projections. Down year production wise this year with just 11 goals and 23 points, but seemed to still show some solid flashes - I saw him at a NTDP vs Capitols game and wasn't blown away by any means, but he played pretty responsible defensively, had a few big hits, made crisp passes and some nifty offensive plays. I think he's listed as sub 6 feet but he plays kind of long and lanky. I imagine he'll still get taken as a later round pick in the draft, especially with what seems like a decent U18's so far.

As I mentioned, I'm really curious to see what the production could be like next year. I believe he'll be the youngest on the team by a little bit. I think there's a chance things really click and he could have a big year next year. I also think there's an equally likely chance he is mainly a healthy scratch next year and doesn't produce at all.
 
WiscTJK said:
Sounds more and more like this proposal on age / eligibility is going thru. Clock starts at age 19 or HS Graduation, whichever comes first and you have 5 years of eligibility / 5 years of potential playing (not restricted to 4 years of play with 1 red shirt year anymore).

Edit: Here's a good article on it for hockey: https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2026/04/24_College-Hockey-Bracing-For.php
Click to expand...
Whatever happens, at least the rules are the same for everyone. It is a kick in the teeth to the later developing players.
 
I thought the roster for next year would be set, but apparently 05 forward Talan Blanck from the Minnesota Wilderness of the NAHL has committed, Not sure if this will just be a 27th guy depth move or if there will be a corresponding move for roster space.
 
UW student and hockey fan said:
I thought the roster for next year would be set, but apparently 05 forward Talan Blanck from the Minnesota Wilderness of the NAHL has committed, Not sure if this will just be a 27th guy depth move or if there will be a corresponding move for roster space.
Click to expand...
I think they would be over the allowed roster limits. Plus this guy is 20. He likely only has 2 - 3 years if the 5 years after graduation thing goes forward and what year he graduated.... Maybe someone else isn't coming back....

EDIT 2 years as he looks to have graduated Fond du lac in 2023. that would be 2028 with 5 years, assuming they don't grandfather any of these guys in. Just blows for these late bloomers.
 
UW student and hockey fan said:
Zajic is by far the freshman I am most intrigued by for next year. Was a top player on the u17 team last year with 24 goals and 38 points, and considered a fringe 1st/2nd rounder in some early draft projections. Down year production wise this year with just 11 goals and 23 points, but seemed to still show some solid flashes - I saw him at a NTDP vs Capitols game and wasn't blown away by any means, but he played pretty responsible defensively, had a few big hits, made crisp passes and some nifty offensive plays. I think he's listed as sub 6 feet but he plays kind of long and lanky. I imagine he'll still get taken as a later round pick in the draft, especially with what seems like a decent U18's so far.

As I mentioned, I'm really curious to see what the production could be like next year. I believe he'll be the youngest on the team by a little bit. I think there's a chance things really click and he could have a big year next year. I also think there's an equally likely chance he is mainly a healthy scratch next year and doesn't produce at all.
Click to expand...
He scored again today but USA was eliminated. He picked up a rebound at the goaline and went around the back of the net and stuffed it in.
 
WiscTJK said:
Sounds more and more like this proposal on age / eligibility is going thru. Clock starts at age 19 or HS Graduation, whichever comes first and you have 5 years of eligibility / 5 years of potential playing (not restricted to 4 years of play with 1 red shirt year anymore).

Edit: Here's a good article on it for hockey: https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2026/04/24_College-Hockey-Bracing-For.php
Click to expand...
This is so clearly a football move, and to uniformly apply this without obvious exceptions for sports like hockey that have a completely different system in place (juniors you can play up to age 21) would be devastating to the landscape. Will we adjust, maybe, but I wouldnt be shocked if college hockey lost a few teams as a result of it or the level of competition goes down because suddenly that mid level D3 guy is going to a low level D1 school and guys they used to get were going to mid level D1 schools. This may also have an unintended negative consequence to the juniors system, cause kids will be pulled sooner and the quality of play at that level will also decline. This is really bad business all around for the hockey world, but NC$$ doesnt care because it has no clear negative impact on basketball and football, which is what is driving this. Never mind the making eligibility up to 5 years, which completely changes the balance of how you can distribute schollies.

Also, this could be even worse to the Women's game on two fronts. The extra year of eligibility will create more people staying and less roster spots to fill, or you will be cutting (or "strongly encouraging transfer") players cause you need to make space for a new player. The opposite side is if you wind up taking a year for red shirt which is common or focus on international competition (though that seems to be mostly gone cause of PWHL, so as long as that is around, this is probably fine) and you are taking years of eligibility away from a smaller sport that does not actually benefit the athletes of that sport.
 
con1977 said:
"to uniformly apply this without obvious exceptions for sports like hockey that have a completely different system in place (juniors you can play up to age 21) would be devastating to the landscape.
Click to expand...

People are forgetting the reverse here, I think. Kids are just going to delay their HS graduatiuon. Most of these kids that are in USHL are all home/private schooled anyway. Maybe they age out of their MN or MI high school team without graduating, then they go to USHL and homeschool....as long as they meet the minimum credit requirements and are residents of a state that doesn't mandate graduation when they are 17 or 18, doesn't the playing field stay exactly the same? Not sure of CAN HS requirements.

Yes, it may be a shock to the system, but all these kids and their handlers/families are smart. And the coaches are too. They'll adapt and find the workarounds.

For example, quick AI generated research tells me that there is no specific max age req or penalty for delayed graduation in Minnesote HS but there is a general req to earn 6 credits per year and 21.5 to graduate. What this tells me is you're going to see kids play 2-3 years in HS, go to USHL and finish their GED over the same period in home school while they compete in the USHL...still entering College at 19/20/21.

An educated guess using MN as an example.
 
WiscTJK said:
I think they would be over the allowed roster limits. Plus this guy is 20. He likely only has 2 - 3 years if the 5 years after graduation thing goes forward and what year he graduated.... Maybe someone else isn't coming back....

EDIT 2 years as he looks to have graduated Fond du lac in 2023. that would be 2028 with 5 years, assuming they don't grandfather any of these guys in. Just blows for these late bloomers.
Click to expand...
Pkazbo said:
Is Orpana still committed? His elite prospects indicates otherwise
Click to expand...
Milewski seems to indicate they are going to delay some kids which would allow room for Talan Blanck.
 
WiscTJK said:
Milewski seems to indicate they are going to delay some kids which would allow room for Talan Blanck.
Click to expand...
On Orpana - I don’t know if his EP page ever really updated with his commitment for whatever reason. He had a good season with like 40 ish points, and seems to be a solid two way center.

I would guess that Jette would be delayed if someone were, he only played 16 games this season and basically missed November through March with a leg injury.
 
GoBucky18 said:
People are forgetting the reverse here, I think. Kids are just going to delay their HS graduatiuon. Most of these kids that are in USHL are all home/private schooled anyway. Maybe they age out of their MN or MI high school team without graduating, then they go to USHL and homeschool....as long as they meet the minimum credit requirements and are residents of a state that doesn't mandate graduation when they are 17 or 18, doesn't the playing field stay exactly the same? Not sure of CAN HS requirements.

Yes, it may be a shock to the system, but all these kids and their handlers/families are smart. And the coaches are too. They'll adapt and find the workarounds.

For example, quick AI generated research tells me that there is no specific max age req or penalty for delayed graduation in Minnesote HS but there is a general req to earn 6 credits per year and 21.5 to graduate. What this tells me is you're going to see kids play 2-3 years in HS, go to USHL and finish their GED over the same period in home school while they compete in the USHL...still entering College at 19/20/21.

An educated guess using MN as an example.
Click to expand...
In The College Hockey News article, it says the clock could start 4 years from the beginning of their freshman year of high school. That would eliminate kids from being able to delay graduation.
 
TJ77 said:
In The College Hockey News article, it says the clock could start 4 years from the beginning of their freshman year of high school. That would eliminate kids from being able to delay graduation.
Click to expand...
Well if anything, thats probably what the coaches will fight for the most then.
 
GoBucky18 said:
People are forgetting the reverse here, I think. Kids are just going to delay their HS graduatiuon. Most of these kids that are in USHL are all home/private schooled anyway. Maybe they age out of their MN or MI high school team without graduating, then they go to USHL and homeschool....as long as they meet the minimum credit requirements and are residents of a state that doesn't mandate graduation when they are 17 or 18, doesn't the playing field stay exactly the same? Not sure of CAN HS requirements.

Yes, it may be a shock to the system, but all these kids and their handlers/families are smart. And the coaches are too. They'll adapt and find the workarounds.

For example, quick AI generated research tells me that there is no specific max age req or penalty for delayed graduation in Minnesote HS but there is a general req to earn 6 credits per year and 21.5 to graduate. What this tells me is you're going to see kids play 2-3 years in HS, go to USHL and finish their GED over the same period in home school while they compete in the USHL...still entering College at 19/20/21.

An educated guess using MN as an example.
Click to expand...
19, maybe, but with the proposal, 20, 21 would eat into eligibility. It is clear we will see a lower bar for talent because you can no longer let the late bloomer that is good, but would benefit heavily from another year or two of juniors to become a very good to great player (see Pavelski) because you will lose years of eligibility. On some levels thats fine, cause many of these guys would leave early anyway, so it doesnt matter, but there are enough instances of a guy that comes in at 20 and is a huge contributor that this rule would limit what time they would have.

If what others are saying of maybe you start that clock for HS at the freshman year so you limit people being able to game the system and delay graduation, now you move the delay down the line to middle school, which is a very, very dicey proposition. Outside of the very, very, very rare player, we dont know which kids are going to be top prospects for college vs delaying a kids development because mom and dad think (but are very wrong) he can be a big time player. There are so many things that go into what the path that player takes that it is just impossible to know at that age. Ultimately NC$$ needs to think about more than their two primary revenue sports cause the damage this will do to a number of the other sports is huge. But by all means NC$$, tout at your playoff events how many sports you sponsor championships in, cause we all know you only really care about 2 of them.
 
I think it's going to hurt the developer type programs and help the Michigan's, MSU, Denver, Nodak, even BC / BU versus Wisconsin. Another adjustment Hastings will have to make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top