PDA

View Full Version : New age restrictions for NCAA hockey



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

sm2pk
12-01-2015, 03:55 PM
Just a bunch of big schools whining that small schools are beating them due to older players . Guess what ? The big schools can recruit the older players as well. I knew the Big Ten hockey league would try and ruin college hockey.

camilo
12-01-2015, 04:10 PM
It doesn't cost SCSU 71K though. You can pretend all you want that said player received 71K in scholarships but the actual cost of that scholarship to the university is FAR FAR lower.

And that categorically is not income. Getting paid is having a paycheck/cash put in your hands/deposited in your bank account.

But, this tangent discussion is about the value to the player, not what it costs the institution. It matters not what the "cost" to the institution is. What matters to anyone going to college is what the "price" is. If a student is on full ride (just for the sake of discussion), the value to the student is the difference between what he/she would have paid and what he/she actually pays. That is real value- and if you don't believe it, I'd have to say you've never gone to college (and had to pay for it) or paid for your kids' college education.

The cost certainly has a lot to do with whether the institution can afford to provide the scholarship, I don't deny that. But the only thing that determines the value to the student is what he/she is not having to pay compared to the other students not on scholarship.

As for your statement about income - you're correct. The IRS, I don't believe, would count this as income for tax purposes.

But it surely has very real value that has nothing to do with the cost to the institution. While not taxable, it is certainly an economic benefit to the student.

purpleinnebraska
12-01-2015, 04:26 PM
Not sure what your source for this is but for the sake of discussion I'll assume it's accurate on the academics. How about a junior leaving his high school, moving to another town, and going to a new high school just because a college coach who has given him a worthless commitment tells him he needs to develop in juniors? I'm glad my kid is not an elite player because I know I wouldn't want him to cut his high school experience short. And I only get him for 18 years, so I wouldn't want to miss the senior year for the sake of a potential college hockey experience. But that is the position many kids / parents are forced into with the current system. From families I know, it's a very difficult decision that impacts the family significantly and carries high risk. And, for every kid who gets that chance to play D1 due to his junior experience, know that there are literally hundreds forced out of the D3 experience due to the junior kids who don't make it to the D1 level. My point is this system is not ideal for the participants and their families. But it is profitable for the junior leagues.

While this is a good argument and an issue worth discussing, it doesn't have much to do with the proposal. The 21 year-old freshmen almost universally didn't go to juniors until after high school (They may have tried out for teams prior to that, but they didn't make the team.). The kids you're talking about who have to choose what to do while still in high school almost universally go to the big-time hockey schools, and enroll as 18 and 19 year-olds. They are not entering the USHL at 16 or 17 and still playing there at 21. There are legitimate complaints about the USHL and its effect on high school hockey by taking away the high school superstars, but those are completely separate from 21 year-old freshmen, almost exclusively playing for non-perennial powers.

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 04:36 PM
****, I thought I was ready to upload a googledoc for public consumption of all players currently rostered with:
League...School...Position...Class...DOB...Date of Commitment...Hometown...State/Province...Country...Age as Frosh (based on 8/1 of year started school)...Days committed (based on 10/1 of year started school minus date of commitment)
But because of transfers I found about 50 guys with negative days committed, need to grind through that yet.

camilo
12-01-2015, 05:00 PM
Just want to bump this in case late thread readers missed it. Definitely worth reading:


Here's a blog post that puts a great perspective on this whole thing:

http://www.withoutapeer.com/2015/11/a-rigged-game.html

Wisko McBadgerton
12-01-2015, 05:26 PM
Just want to bump this in case late thread readers missed it. Definitely worth reading:

This article makes a big deal of Union's NC win on the backs of older players and calls it "the great equalizer". Great. Except that as far as I can tell, none of Union's players on that team would have been ineligible under the proposed rule.


It also specifically touts Jesse Root at Yale and Union's Matt Bodie as exactly the kind of players the evil B1G is trying prevent other teams from getting. Root played one year of juniors after HS and Bodie played two. Both just fine eligibility wise.

joecct
12-01-2015, 06:35 PM
Follow the money. The P5 schools want the money and screw the rest of you peons.

UML Puck Hawk
12-01-2015, 07:01 PM
If you're a genius chemical engineer and Dow wanted you to start working for them full time after your sophomore year, would you say no?

Choose grad school over a job with the DOE, so its not as simple as you think ;) .

And that's the thing its not that simple for everyone. The players playing junior want to play professionally. Maybe they acknowledge they will not be going to the NHL, but many of them do believe they can still play overseas and make a living playing the sport.

dxmnkd316
12-01-2015, 07:06 PM
If you're a genius chemical engineer and Dow wanted you to start working for them full time after your sophomore year, would you say no?

Absolutely. The big chemical and oil companies churn through first year workers, regardless of talent, like a wood chipper.

I believe the figure I heard was 50% of the people Exxon hired were canned in the first year after I graduated. This isn't out of the norm.

Sorry for the tangent.

Biddco
12-01-2015, 07:13 PM
https://twitter.com/MikeMcMahonCHN/status/671849463221239808

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 09:41 PM
Alright, here is all the data:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1T8MVml6uzgVqmawHgHjsKYzFF4Y165D2R3igWiuZTo4/edit?usp=sharing

Full list of all players currently on rosters including:
League, Team, Name, Position, Class, Birthdate, Commit Date, Hometown, Height, Weight, Hand, Frosh Year, Senior Year, Age of Frosh Year (as 8/1), Days from commitment to first joining team (either 10/1 or 1/1 of the half-season they joined the team), State/Province, Country, Previous (Jr/Prep/HS) Team and League, Previous College (if applicable), First Name, Last Name

Ralph Baer
12-01-2015, 10:19 PM
Alright, here is all the data:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1T8MVml6uzgVqmawHgHjsKYzFF4Y165D2R3igWiuZTo4/edit?usp=sharing

Full list of all players currently on rosters including:
League, Team, Name, Position, Class, Birthdate, Commit Date, Hometown, Height, Weight, Hand, Frosh Year, Senior Year, Age of Frosh Year (as 8/1), Days from commitment to first joining team (either 10/1 or 1/1 of the half-season they joined the team), State/Province, Country, Previous (Jr/Prep/HS) Team and League, Previous College (if applicable), First Name, Last Name

Shirtless,
You have highlighted RPI's Sam Goodman because of the age when he committed. His date of commitment appears to be the start of his junior year at RPI when he left RPI's ACHA team and joined the varsity as the practice goaltender. He of course "committed" to RPI as a student over two years earlier. I don't think that it makes sense to include him as a late commit,.

Not that it is truly important since RPI always finds walkon 3rd-string goalies, but does anyone know if time on the ACHA affects varsity eligibility? That is, will he be eligible for a third year if he attends RPI as a grad student next year?

One more thing. I have never seen his actual date of birth. I assume that 1/1/94 is just because the year 1994 appears elsewhere without an exact date. (1993 has also appeared as his year of birth.)

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 10:38 PM
Here's a bit more data based on the best available information...

Using an arbitrary date of 9/1 (which should work well enough for our purposes), there are approximately 99 freshmen who started school this season at the age of 21
Thanks to Chris Heisenberg's spreadsheet, I have the approximate commitment date of 94 of them
Approximately 4.3% of them committed while still in high school
19.1% of them committed after the age of 21
73.4% of them committed after the age of 20
95.7% of them committed after high school graduation
70.2% of them committed less than a year before they enrolled
At most, 21.3% came in a season after they expected to come in

Here is what I have for 21-yo frosh by first year date
Year starts of Frosh Year (number of player): <=1 year, <=2 years/>1 year, >2 years
2012 Frosh (61): 70%, 25%, 5%
2013 Frosh (77): 75%, 21%, 4%
2014 Frosh (80): 70%, 24%, 6%
2015 Frosh (95): 66%, 25%, 8%

The worst 21-yo frosh example is Adam Johnson (UMD) committed in April 2011, frosh this year (over 4.5 years)

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 10:41 PM
Shirtless,
You have highlighted RPI's Sam Goodman because of the age when he committed. His date of commitment appears to be the start of his junior year at RPI when he left RPI's ACHA team and joined the varsity as the practice goaltender. He of course "committed" to RPI as a student over two years earlier. I don't think that it makes sense to include him as a late commit,.

Not that it is truly important since RPI always finds walkon 3rd-string goalies, but does anyone know if time on the ACHA affects varsity eligibility? That is, will he be eligible for a third year if he attends RPI as a grad student next year?

One more thing. I have never seen his actual date of birth. I assume that 1/1/94 is just because the year 1994 appears elsewhere without an exact date. (1993 has also appeared as his year of birth.)

Yes sir, the ACHA to D1 team goalies are an interesting case. I randomly chose September 1 of the first year if I couldn't find a commitment date on Heisenberg or Elite Prospects so there certainly are some issues with that.

I believe his was one of the few birthdates that I had no idea.

As for his eligibility, I'm pretty sure the clock starts ticking once you go to college full-time. The reason I listed him as a sophomore was because of when he started, not because of his actual eligibility.

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 10:47 PM
Im working through many of the outlier (committed more than 3 years) and doublechecking they haven't redshirted for any reason.
I will need to update guys like Tim Davison and Connor Reilly because of this.

Ralph Baer
12-01-2015, 10:50 PM
Yes sir, the ACHA to D1 team goalies are an interesting case. I randomly chose September 1 of the first year if I couldn't find a commitment date on Heisenberg or Elite Prospects so there certainly are some issues with that.

I believe his was one of the few birthdates that I had no idea.

Actually Goodman was also on RPI's varsity during the latter part of the 2003-4 season, joining the team as the practice goalie when Jason Kasdorf went down with a season-ending injury. RPI never added him to the on-line roster, but he appeared on the team-picture that year http://www.rpiathletics.com/roster.aspx?roster=215&path=hockey. (second row, immediately to the left of the woman trainer.)

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 10:55 PM
Actually Goodman was also on RPI's varsity during the latter part of the 2003-4 season, joining the team as the practice goalie when Jason Kasdorf went down with a season-ending injury. RPI never added him to the on-line roster, but he appeared on the team-picture that year http://www.rpiathletics.com/roster.aspx?roster=215&path=hockey. (second row, immediately to the left of the woman trainer.)

Thanks for the info, but obviously there is only so much individual information I can invest time into this stuff. I've already compiled data from elite prospects team rosters, USCHO team rosters, Heisenberg commit records 2011-2015, and Elite Prospects player profile info when necessary to fill in holes.

The Exiled One
12-01-2015, 11:07 PM
Here is what I have for 21-yo frosh by first year date
Year starts of Frosh Year (number of player): <=1 year, <=2 years/>1 year, >2 years
2012 Frosh (61): 70%, 25%, 5%
2013 Frosh (77): 75%, 21%, 4%
2014 Frosh (80): 70%, 24%, 6%
2015 Frosh (95): 66%, 25%, 8%

The worst 21-yo frosh example is Adam Johnson (UMD) committed in April 2011, frosh this year (over 4.5 years)
Good work!

Shirtless Guy
12-01-2015, 11:10 PM
I must note that I have completely ignored ASU to this point because their roster is "interesting" with going from club to D1.

Toe Blake
12-01-2015, 11:18 PM
While this is a good argument and an issue worth discussing, it doesn't have much to do with the proposal. The 21 year-old freshmen almost universally didn't go to juniors until after high school (They may have tried out for teams prior to that, but they didn't make the team.). The kids you're talking about who have to choose what to do while still in high school almost universally go to the big-time hockey schools, and enroll as 18 and 19 year-olds. They are not entering the USHL at 16 or 17 and still playing there at 21. There are legitimate complaints about the USHL and its effect on high school hockey by taking away the high school superstars, but those are completely separate from 21 year-old freshmen, almost exclusively playing for non-perennial powers.

Yes, I realize that most kids who play juniors, do so after high school. For the majority who play after high school, I am skeptical that a one or two year gap between high school and college makes for better college students. My main point is that the junior system is not an ideal system for the kids and the families of those aspiring to play college hockey. If it was, other sports would follow the model.