New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

[dxmnkd316]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Frankly, athletics are small potatoes when it comes to the real Big Ten, the CIC.

There are departments at the U that probably bring in more research money than the athletics department.

[LynahFan]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Agreed, it is a serious problem. And that's why it's important that criticism be focused where it is merited rather than on knee-jerk responses that just don't hold up to scrutiny.

So, since you are such a staunch defender of this proposal, care to explain what Lucia meant when he said he was "looking out for his team?" If it's not about trying to gain a competitive advantage for the Gophers in terms of wins and losses, in exactly what way *would* this benefit the Gophers?

Lucia just made it perfectly clear that he's not thinking altruistically about the development of players or the graduation rates or the employment prospects of the overaged players *on other teams* - he believes that this is, in some way, about looking out for *his* team. So what way is that? What benefit do the Gophers get, aside from wins and losses?

[joecct]

So, since you are such a staunch defender of this proposal, care to explain what Lucia meant when he said he was "looking out for his team?" If it's not about trying to gain a competitive advantage for the Gophers in terms of wins and losses, in exactly what way *would* this benefit the Gophers?

Lucia just made it perfectly clear that he's not thinking altruistically about the development of players or the graduation rates or the employment prospects of the overaged players *on other teams* - he believes that this is, in some way, about looking out for *his* team. So what way is that? What benefit do the Gophers get, aside from wins and losses?

Who signs tDon's paycheck? That's his loyalty.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Interesting note, the state or province most effected by this rule change would be Minnesota.
41 current players from Minnesota were 21 yo as freshmen (20.2% of all players from Minnesota)
The rest of the top 8 were
Ontario 40 (20.6%)
Alberta 25 (28.4%)
Michigan 25 (17.9%)
British Columbia 20 (18.2%)
New York 16 (16.7%)
Pennsylvania 15 (28.3%)
Massachusetts 13 (11.9%)

[The Exiled One]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

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

[St. Clown]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Interesting note, the state or province most effected by this rule change would be Minnesota.
41 current players from Minnesota were 21 yo as freshmen (20.2% of all players from Minnesota)
The rest of the top 8 were
Ontario 40 (20.6%)
Alberta 25 (28.4%)
Michigan 25 (17.9%)
British Columbia 20 (18.2%)
New York 16 (16.7%)
Pennsylvania 15 (28.3%)
Massachusetts 13 (11.9%)

That's kind of an irrelevant note rather than an interesting note, isn't it? Lucia et al. don't care about the home states from which the older players originate, only that they're playing for the B1G Mistake's competition.

[Bale]

• 70.2% of them committed less than a year before they enrolled

That, to me, is the most ****ing argument against Lucia's statements. He publicly talked about how coaches were stashing players until they were older other coaches were just recruiting them at that point. This Stat completely takes Lucia reasoning and blows it apart.

[goldy_331]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Lucia will next be introducing legislation making it against the rules for non-Big Five Conference schools to host Big Five Conference teams in non-conference game. Non-Big Five teams will have to go on the road. This includes forcing the Alaska schools to have their tournaments played at Marriucci/Yost/etc. should a BIG team be invited to the tournament.

Great idea. I'll forward that on to Lucia in case he hasn't thought of it yet!

[The Exiled One]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

That, to me, is the most ****ing argument against Lucia's statements. He publicly talked about how coaches were stashing players until they were older other coaches were just recruiting them at that point. This Stat completely takes Lucia reasoning and blows it apart.

Yup. Realistically, 78.7% or more weren't "stashed" as they certainly came in the year they expected to. A kid committing in the spring knows where he'll be playing the following fall. So, he may be committed for more than 365 days, but he knew all along which class he'd be a part of. At most, 21.3% were "stashed". It's almost certainly less than that.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

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

If you'd like to compare lists of players involved, I'd love to share.
I show there are 101 freshman that fit the 21 yo category if you use 9/1 (6 of which were in August so didn't make the cut on my list). I will try and clean up the rest and post to googledocs. Otherwise contact me through the USCHO email feature.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

That's kind of an irrelevant note rather than an interesting note, isn't it? Lucia et al. don't care about the home states from which the older players originate, only that they're playing for the B1G Mistake's competition.

Say whatever you want but Minnesota has always stood on the premise of promoting hockey in Minnesota. It would not reflect well on the flagship do promote something that hurts Minnesotan hockey players.

[The Exiled One]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

If you'd like to compare lists of players involved, I'd love to share.
I show there are 101 freshman that fit the 21 yo category if you use 9/1 (6 of which were in August so didn't make the cut on my list). I will try and clean up the rest and post to googledocs. Otherwise contact me through the USCHO email feature.

Here's the data I'm working from with a few minor edits since my last post.

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Here's the data I'm working from with a few minor edits since my last post.

Thanks for posting. Question. I think only about 13% of these guys play for teams in the current top 20 PWR. A little more than 20% of them play for teams with records of .500 or above. If this practice is what is making smaller market teams so good, and it is what Lucia is afraid of, shouldn't there be a larger representation of these players among teams with a winning record?

[The Exiled One]

Re: New age restrictions for NCAA hockey

Thanks for posting. Question. I think only about 13% of these guys play for teams in the current top 20 PWR. A little more than 20% of them play for teams with records of .500 or above. If this practice is what is making smaller market teams so good, and it is what Lucia is afraid of, shouldn't there be a larger representation of these players among teams with a winning record?

Makes you wonder why Lucia is pushing it at all, right?

I think the premise is just to hurt "the field" in order to benefit those who don't rely on those types of players. In short, it's about reducing parity.

Also, it's important to note that this is just a one season sample. You'd have to go back three more years to see how 21 year-old freshmen truly impact parity.

[Almington]

Here's the data I'm working from with a few minor edits since my last post.

Did all those players play three years of juniors after graduation from high school?

I wonder how many of those players would have still come in if the age limit was 20. After the first year of adjustment, it seems that many players would still be recruited in the year prior to enrollment.

For me, the bigger issue is what will this do to the USHL by shrinking the available player pool by about 25 to 30%. That can have some impact on the quality of play which would impact development of all incoming players (regardless of age).

Doesn't change the fact that the Big Ten is acting like whiny, entitled petulant children with how they are trying to push this change through.