I didn't read every detail but even if this still isn't perfect, standing ovation from me. Let's reign this thing in.
And now if we could just put the clamp down on allowing 21 year old freshmen...
From a pure morality standpoint, these are home-run rule changes that I endorse wholeheartedly.
My fear is this: How are the vultures from the Canadian major junior leagues going to exploit this?
Michigan State University Spartan Hockey66 - 86 - 0759 - 66 - 67 - 84 - 86 - 87 - 89 - 92 - 99 - 01 - 0759 - 66 - 67 - 82 - 83 - 84 - 85 - 86 - 87 - 88 - 89 - 90 - 92 - 94 - 95 - 96 - 97 - 98 - 99 - 00 - 01 - 02 - 04 - 06 - 07 - 08 - 12
Hey, I have this Twitter thing. Follow me here.
Just look at the last few kids that have decided to pass on their Clarkson commitment to make the jump to the CHL (names mentioned below), now obviously these kids aren't the Fabbro/Jost/Makar types but when they were recruited they were seen as difference maker type recruits for our program, the elite talent that is one or two years and done will still pick college if things keep progressing as they are. The Savoie kid who was not granted exceptional status by Hockey Canada recently committed to Denver, he's probably going to be one or two his draft year and yes I know it's a long time from that point but this kid is just that good, if he somehow sticks and continues all these elite Canadian prospects that value education business could be booming in that regard. :
Colton Kehler, now playing Canadian College Hockey, probably would've been a sophomore at CU - https://www.eliteprospects.com/playe.../colton-kehler
Liam Ham, very solid OHL player but soon will be pushed into the pro ranks, probably too early IMO - https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/201669/liam-ham
Isaac Langdon, was actually heavily sought after and has a definite shot of playing pro hockey - https://www.eliteprospects.com/playe.../isaac-langdon
The point I'm trying to make here is there is always going to be a good path, you just need to surround yourself with people you can trust and not get convinced into a situation that's not best for that individual. With the current state of "adviors" I don't really think this new rule will be all that important, yes in theory it's nice but this isn't a cash cow sport for the NCAA and there will be millions of ways to have contact potential recruiters through secondary sources, I just hope they actually follow through and police it.
Last edited by techtodenver; 04-19-2019 at 06:10 PM.
I am sure the the NCAA spent a bunch of time consulting with others and thinking this through before they did it. However, so few players actually go straight from school to college in this sport. The rule changes will have little or no impact. Even the most desirable recruits are "committed" while in high school and then advised to play in a Junior league somewhere for a year or two to develop. In Canada, most hockey players still see the CHL as the fast track to pro hockey for the better players or the early developers. For the late bloomers, most Canadians see the tier 2 route to NCAA as the way to continue their development on the way to an education. I think that it is important to remember that the majority of the kids who go the CJHL/USHL/NAHL route have a realistic view of their talent and skill. Lots of them are looking to continue their hockey to see where it takes them while getting a good education for their future when they stall in hockey. I would guess that most of the kids in ECAC are more focused on the education component than the hockey component. Or at least they are equal. As long as the junior hockey programs continue to develop strong talent, why would the schools take 18 year olds when they can wait for 21 year olds and let someone else develop them. There aren't many 2nd and 3rd line 18 year olds that are better than 2nd and 3rd liners that 21 year olds. 21 year old Freshman are not going away anytime soon.
It would be interesting to know what the overlap is between the NC$$ and the CHL. My impression when I was out west was WHL athletes were very much not academically-oriented.
NCAA Champion 1967, 1970
ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019
Top liners who think they have a good shot at pro hockey often follow the CHL path from the outset. A few top liners will go the NCAA route. However, most of the bottom 6 forwards or bottom 4 D will go to the CHL if they are not academically focused. Those with decent grades that are not top liners generally see the NCAA path as more practical for many reasons. Many of the kids in the W would have a difficult time getting into many of the NCAA schools. But there are some good hockey players that are good students playing CHL. They know that they can play university hockey in Canada if it doesn't work out. Lots of Canadian kids would rather go to a Canadian university. And CIS hockey is probably better hockey than many of the NCAA programs. CIS is full of aged out ex guys from the W and the O and the QM. It is good strong hockey.
Itís pathetic that D3 schools are taking 21 year old freshman. The kids are just being used and abused in the name of parity. MLB has it right, either sign out of high school or we will see how you develop the next 3 years in college. None of these kids want to play junior hockey for more than a year. They all want to get to college ASAP. Give the college game back to the college age kids. Itís better for a less talented kid to graduate at age 21 and then develop in the minor leagues.
Ok you found a school who does it because of some religious aspect involving people doing mormon missions. I think you understood the point.
"Through the years, we ever will acclaim........"
This change is an improvement.
On the other end three years of juniors after graduation is ridiculous. The fact each team can only have a handful of overagers means it should be easy to eliminate. Make it so at any given time we are getting commitments from a four year group of players. Junior in HS through grad +2
40 years ago, the US frosh were 18 (19 if they went to prep school) and Canadians were 19 (Grade 13). I believe the 21 year old loophole was always there, but nobody took advantage of it until the early 90s.
And then there is the ACHA which, at the higher levels, has made great strides on upgrading their product.
Its the junior league age rules, not the NCAA that are causing the older players in college. You're perfectly allowed to start college at 20 as a normal student, why would you be restricted from using your 4 year eligibility in sports?
This isn't a "different rule" in hockey. I know WMU has had players as old as 30 on its football team. An exception, yes, but I fail to see what the NCAA is supposed to do about it or why they should.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)