Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

    I'm glad to see this thread has devolved to one side posting data and one side (not so coincidentally headed by two BC fans and a BU fan) yelling about how wrong it FEELS.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TheRevengeance View Post
      I'm glad to see this thread has devolved to one side posting data and one side (not so coincidentally headed by two BC fans and a BU fan) yelling about how wrong it FEELS.
      Won't someone think of the kids!!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by UMLFan View Post
        Actually yes. It's hilarious on Twitter after they lose games. One season in and "Fire Coach X!"

        BC in football, basketball, baseball et al competes with the same rules as everyone else in their respective sports, and doesn't win. They're also not a legit "elite" program in either sport, some parts due to their own academic constraints, location, etc. In hockey, they're an "elite" program party due to exactly the opposite reasons. And their history.

        Where am I crying? I'm pretty amused when I see the people (and the schools they represent) who want the age limit.

        And just to clarify, I've made it clear on these boards for years that I'd prefer even Lowell not having 21 year old freshmen (they'll have two at puck drop on the season opener this season). But I understand why programs do what they do, and it's not against the rules.
        Complaining about coaching is not complaining about the rules of eligibility. Hockey is the only sport where fans of so called smaller, non elite schools complain that the NCAA must due something to create parity. The NCAA limits the number of scholarships to create parity. It’s coaching that includes recruiting that wins championships. Shawn Walsh proved that any school can recruit top talent. Using kids by delaying their college career more than one year is ridiculous. What makes hockey entertaining is watching skill players create and score goals, not watching 24-25 year olds smash the 18 year old skill players against the boards, it’s boring.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by eaglekeeper View Post
          Complaining about coaching is not complaining about the rules of eligibility. Hockey is the only sport where fans of so called smaller, non elite schools complain that the NCAA must due something to create parity. The NCAA limits the number of scholarships to create parity. It’s coaching that includes recruiting that wins championships. Shawn Walsh proved that any school can recruit top talent. Using kids by delaying their college career more than one year is ridiculous. What makes hockey entertaining is watching skill players create and score goals, not watching 24-25 year olds smash the 18 year old skill players against the boards, it’s boring.
          Coaches aren't paid to entertain you...they are paid to win.
          If having older players helps them win...so be it.
          Limiting the age of freshmen would kill junior hockey in the US and kill D1 opportunities for some kids who flat out aren't ready right out of high school.
          "If you leave ignorance and stupidity alone, ignorance and stupidity will think it's ok."
          -Gallagher

          R.I.P.
          Grandpa G. ~ Feb 11, 1918-Oct. 6, 1999
          Grandma ~ Jan 2004
          Dad ~ Nov. 4, 1958-April 21, 2008
          Grandpa S. ~ June 21, 1932-November 11, 2013

          Comment


          • Originally posted by First Time, Long Time View Post
            Coaches aren't paid to entertain you...they are paid to win.
            If having older players helps them win...so be it.
            Limiting the age of freshmen would kill junior hockey in the US and kill D1 opportunities for some kids who flat out aren't ready right out of high school.
            How? Who would take the place of all those "not ready" kids? Whoever these mystery players are all schools would have access to them. Also wouldn't not having to play against 24, 25, 26 y.o.'s actually increase the readiness for many younger recruits?

            Not directing this at you but are the arguements against these proposed changes really being thoroughly thought out?

            Comment


            • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

              Originally posted by Lemonade View Post
              What planet is that a 26 year old is a normal aged college kid? I get the data is skewed - some 75 year old people go back to school to take classes....if you are 26 and still in an undergraduate program you are not the norm. You either messed around for a 5 years after high school or your should be cast in the next Animal House.

              Lets circle back - THERE IS NO OTHER NCAA SPORT - EVEN WOMENS HOCKEY - that works like NCAA hockey does by essentially requires multiple years of junior level play before going to college.

              Just for debate - say NCAA requires players to enroll within a year after HS graduation...whats the issue? Whats the drawback of having 18-23 year old kids playing against 18-23 old players in college?
              You are really invested in this idea that there's something weird about a 26-year-old undergrad. It's comical at this point.

              But, you asked a question. What's the drawback of changing the rules to make... The drawback is that changing of rules should be done to correct a problem. I don't see a problem. The percentage of NCAA hockey players over the age of 24 is lower than the percentage of undergrads under 24. Even if it wasn't lower, I still don't think there's a problem.

              Here's the funny thing: I don't give a crap about the whole argument. The only reason I commented in this thread at all is because I thought I could get an answer to the question I've always wondered, which is whether there is a legit reason I hadn't thought of why Minnesota refused to play Denver all those years ago. With that in mind, I asked what the reason was for making that rule change. I got more invested in the thread when you came along with your frankly absurd comment about normal college-aged kids. I mean, maybe when you were in college you never noticed that for every 4 or 5 teenagers in your class there was someone in their late 20s. That's fair. I noticed, and I never thought it was weird. I think you claiming it's abnormal is weird. LOL

              Edit: I think the last thing I probably have to say on this subject is that, if the NCAA made a rule change to impose an age limit, it would not bother me at all. I just don't see the point, and making rules in order to solve non-problems is weird.
              Last edited by duper; 04-24-2019, 12:34 AM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by J.D. View Post
                How have I not answered the question? My opinion is easy to understand. I don't think you should have 24 year olds against 18 year olds in college hockey. Emphasis on college. You can disagree but don't be obtuse about it. If you really want it spelled out for you, a 21 year old freshman coming off multiple years in juniors is a lot more physically mature than an 18 year old freshman. As I said you can disagree but this isn't some new complaint that hasn't been brought up before.
                It’s no different than 16 year old boys playing against 20-21 year old men in Junior.
                "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                Comment


                • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                  So some think there’s a problem with 18 vs 24 in college, but not 16 vs 21 in junior or 18 vs 32 in the AHL or NHL. I don’t get it...
                  "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                  Comment


                  • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                    Originally posted by eaglekeeper View Post
                    Hockey is the only sport where fans of so called smaller, non elite schools complain that the NCAA must due something to create parity.
                    Wait, who's complaining?

                    The "smaller, non elite schools" have the rules behind them, and it's been that way for years.
                    Monty

                    2011-2012 NCAA Tournament Participants
                    2012-2013 Hockey East Regular Season Champions, Hockey East Tournament Champions, and Frozen Four Participants
                    2013-2014 Hockey East Tournament Champions and NCAA Tournament Participants
                    2015-2016 NCAA Tournament Participants
                    2016-2017 Hockey East Regular Season Co-Champions, Hockey East Tournament Champions and NCAA Tournament Participants

                    Comment


                    • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                      I disagree that quality of play in college hockey is declining, I think the opposite. It appears that 3 of the top 10 picks in the upcoming NHL Draft will be playing college hockey next year. Just look at what UMD has produced the past few years. There are guys who weren’t super stars and stayed four years that are skating in the NHL. I feel the quality is better than ever and top-tier talent are choosing college hockey.

                      I feel the big change to the landscape is how much better the A- recruits are now. In my opinion, they have really closed the gap between those players and the A rated recruits that chose Minnesota, Boston U, and Boston College in the past. You could argue the same phenomenon has changed the NCAA Basketball landscape too. A team that gets A- recruits that stay 3-4 years can compete with a team built around 1st and 2nd round picks that stay a year or two.

                      Comment


                      • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                        Why is it when the “blue bloods” are winning championships nobody is in a rage saying college hockey should follow other NCAA sport rules in that drafted players should be ineligible to play college hockey, yet when they aren’t winning here they are blaming it on older college players and crying for rule changes? And Slappy says UMD fans are poor sports... take your midol.
                        Just go petition the USHL to disband or change their rules. They have a limit of number of 20 year old players on a roster in the fall, so it’s a fairly small number and those old guys would only be a year older.
                        Other than that, redshirt and transfer rules which apply to all sports is the only other reason you have players who are maybe 25 or 26.
                        At the end of the day since the Big 10 is the only power five conference in college hockey, they have the power to single handedly change the rules when they decide 12+ years is too long to go without a national title. Don’t think we won’t notice if that’s what they do. The question is: does the Big 10 even care enough about hockey to even bother..
                        I wanna go fast!

                        Comment


                        • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                          Jeebus you small schoolers sure are a bunch of hypocrites. Big schools are the only ones pushing agendas? Lol.

                          JD was right. What happens when the big school start to take the older players? The small schools will have nothing to ***** about. Then again, I have faith they'll find something to get up on the cross about. Maybe it’s time to buy some stock in Fastenal.
                          Code:
                          As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
                          College Hockey 6       College Football 0
                          BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
                          Originally posted by SanTropez
                          May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
                          Originally posted by bigblue_dl
                          I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
                          Originally posted by Kepler
                          When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
                          He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

                          Comment


                          • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                            Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
                            So some think there’s a problem with 18 vs 24 in college, but not 16 vs 21 in junior or 18 vs 32 in the AHL or NHL. I don’t get it...
                            Sorry but comparing college hockey to the AHL or NHL is pointless. Those are professional leagues. And I have already said that I find a 16 year old playing against a 21 year old in junior hockey absurd as well.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post
                              How? Who would take the place of all those "not ready" kids? Whoever these mystery players are all schools would have access to them. Also wouldn't not having to play against 24, 25, 26 y.o.'s actually increase the readiness for many younger recruits?

                              Not directing this at you but are the arguements against these proposed changes really being thoroughly thought out?
                              Not if the kid isn't getting D1 offers until after high school. Maybe coaches end up extending offers anyway because they have to fill up rosters...but there are kids who haven't matured either physically or in their gamee to warrant a D1 offer. It's what juniors is for.
                              Conversely there have been kids who got D1 offers early and ended up playing their way out of them in juniors and ended up in D3.
                              "If you leave ignorance and stupidity alone, ignorance and stupidity will think it's ok."
                              -Gallagher

                              R.I.P.
                              Grandpa G. ~ Feb 11, 1918-Oct. 6, 1999
                              Grandma ~ Jan 2004
                              Dad ~ Nov. 4, 1958-April 21, 2008
                              Grandpa S. ~ June 21, 1932-November 11, 2013

                              Comment


                              • Re: NCAA Rule Changes to Slow Recruiting

                                Originally posted by First Time, Long Time View Post
                                Not if the kid isn't getting D1 offers until after high school. Maybe coaches end up extending offers anyway because they have to fill up rosters...but there are kids who haven't matured either physically or in their gamee to warrant a D1 offer. It's what juniors is for.
                                Conversely there have been kids who got D1 offers early and ended up playing their way out of them in juniors and ended up in D3.
                                I still don't understand why some think the current situation is a problem? Each school can determine the composition of their team. Everyone plays by the same rules. There are so many examples of both scenarios. 16 year olds who never "reach their potential" and "kids that come out of nowhere". As a coach for more than 30 years at many levels, I know that all of them develop differently.

                                I think that the schools find that the maturity that the older hockey players bring to the team and to the campus is a welcome addition. Sitting in a class room with a few 'older' freshman is not a detriment to the school. Most teachers feel that a mix of age and experience enhances the class room experience. I don't see a problem. Let the schools determine what is best for their hockey program and their school. Some of these late bloomers are actually pretty good students and good people. Why do we need to exclude them?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X