NCAA Rule Proposition

[cooperj]

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/3 ... y_20100717

[RangerDog]

I think the CHL is clearly winning the battle and the NCAA should stick to being an academics first program. The NCAA is fighting a losing battle trying to make kids believe that they offer the same opportunities to make it to the NHL as the CHL does. I got a kick out of the announcers at the Olympic games talking about the US players who came up through the NCAA. They failed to mention that not 1 US Olympian graduated from University. They all left to play in the NHL. So how important was their education compared to their desire to play hockey? I can't help but think at how many kids were talked into the NCAA and failed to take advantage of playing in the CHL. Where would they be today had they played more games and practices in 1 CHL season as they likely played in a NCAA career. I can use Dan Kelly and Jeff Skinner as good examples. Jeff probably would have been playing Junior A or maybe in the USHL for the past 2 years had he stuck with the NCAA package. I doubt Jeff would have went 7th in the 2010 draft had he not been scoring goals in the OHL. Dan Kelly is also getting a chance to live his dream after developing in the OHL. Dan would have been going into his Freshman year of University had he stayed in the US.

By the same token I wouldn't suggest that the secondary education players in the CHL are getting is a match for the full time academics of an NCAA player. But I think the CHL is much more realistic and upfront about telling their players that they are there to develop as hockey players first with the goal being a professional hockey career. The NCAA trying to sell a 30 game schedule and 1 game elimination playoff format as a comparison to the development in the CHL is laughable. Then you add in the fact that the average NCAA player is 23 years old and it becomes befuddling. I have to ask "if the NCAA is about education why are their hockey players 21 years old as Freshman"? Can't they absorb whats being taught in the classroom at 18, 19 or 20? It's silly, it's not about the education at all for them anymore than it's about education in the CHL. They want to win vs their NCAA competition and using 25 year old players is an advantage.

If the NCAA wasn't intimidated by the development offered in the CHL they would allow any player to play NCAA after testing the waters in the CHL. But the NCAA must know that once kids taste the fun, excitement and life in the CHL they will likely have no interest in playing NCAA. IMO the NCAA clearly admits that they can't compete with the CHL by standing by their silly rule of making players ineligible once they play in the CHL. They know that not one top 3 line player would leave the CHL for the NCAA, not even for the education. These kids got to where they're at by being passionate to play hockey. Can you imagine a 10 year old going to the rink to do homework? Of course not, they got in it to play!

So I guess the article suggests that the NCAA is wising up and making a rule which is more in line with what they preach, education first. Thats a good thing for both sides.

[All the Answers]

. Dan Kelly is also getting a chance to live his dream after developing in the OHL. Dan would have been going into his Freshman year of University had he stayed in the US.

Splitting hairs here but Dan would be starting his Junior year of College by my calculations this fall.

[trentonbasic]

I think maybe the CHL should make a rule much like the NCAA...after a Certain amount of hours in the NCAA, they loose their chance at the OHL, that way they are forced to stick with the collage route. But I do agree with the not until after grade 11. I also think that the student should have to have an average in high school before being talked to by NCAA. Unlike basketball players who may have a Communications scholarship to play in the NCAA. I'm not trying to sound Racist but it shows that the kid must be interested in an education as well.

[JEF]

The OHL is NOT a pro league.

The NCAA should adjust their eligibility rule and allow OHL players who don't make it to the pros to play for them after their OHL career is over just like the CIS Universities do.

[Surly]

By the same token I wouldn't suggest that the secondary education players in the CHL are getting is a match for the full time academics of an NCAA player. But I think the CHL is much more realistic and upfront about telling their players that they are there to develop as hockey players first with the goal being a professional hockey career. The NCAA trying to sell a 30 game schedule and 1 game elimination playoff format as a comparison to the development in the CHL is laughable. Then you add in the fact that the average NCAA player is 23 years old and it becomes befuddling. I have to ask "if the NCAA is about education why are their hockey players 21 years old as Freshman"? Can't they absorb whats being taught in the classroom at 18, 19 or 20? It's silly, it's not about the education at all for them anymore than it's about education in the CHL. They want to win vs their NCAA competition and using 25 year old players is an advantage.

just curious where you get your numbers from. How is the average age of NCAA players 23 years old? Where are there 21 year old freshmen? NCAA athletes go to their universities right after high school. They don't take time off. if the student is 19 entering university they would be 23 as a senior. I'm sure there are but does that really matter? Players can be older if the have eligibility left. For instance, BYU foobtall players actually leave for a mission between their sophomore and junior years, the Mormon ones that is. They come back to University for their last two years older, stronger to play football again. Is that an advantage for BYU? should the rules be changed? BYU doesn't have a hockey team so i guess it doesn't matter.

Like anything else the NCAA is a bureaucracy and they are notoriously inefficient however these players still need to be accepted to their schools. People also don't realize that when you sign a letter of intent it only guarantees you one year of financial aid. Scholarships are renewed at the end of every year. Usually if you get a first year scholarship you continue to receive aid unless you screw up and get booted off the team or don't maintain your grades. You can't get traded, you still get an education. Many players have made the NHL going the NCAA route. if you have the skill it doesn't matter how many games you play. besides, you are playing against older players.

You have to ask your self, does the NCAA care they are losing the perceived battle? I would say they don't care. There's no evidence they care, the individual programs do but they are limited to what they can do to recruit players and the CHL has a two year head start on players.

US born players are still going to probably think NCAA first because that's what they have been raised to think in the same way Canadian kids think CHL first. You can say all the things about development blah blah blah but it is what you have been exposed to.

Players realize they aren't a slave to the priority selection for the OHL and if they get selected to a team they don't want to go to they always have the NCAA route. Don't hate the player, hate the game. Teams like OS, Sudbury, SSM, Kingston will always be at a disadvantage either because of facilities, location, or plain incompetence of the organization. As a fan not something I have to worry about.

Any changes the CHL makes to try and even things up will only hurt the CHL in the process. There's no reason to try and change things because the NCAA has tied their own hands, no sense in the CHL doing the same thing. The CHL doesn't have a union and there are too many options for players so there will always be an imbalance for certain teams and players to exercise options. Location can't change but organization can. In the same vein, I don't want the NCAA changing their rules to open things up and logistically they probably can't. if they open it for hockey then it gets opened up for football, baseball, and third head of the dragon, basketball. Go take a look at what happened to USC this year. If the rules are changed you'd have lawsuits from Universities. Not happening for a sport like hockey. They aren't intimidated by the CHL. Individual programs might be. The bigger ones like Michigan, OSU, Notre Dame, they've lost their share of recruits to the CHL but there are always other players lined up to replace them.

Any change made to disallow players from coming to the CHL after being in the NCAA is even dumber then any rule the NCAA can come up with. All this talk about opting in for the draft...please. Education for example, that is there for players who play CHL, smart ones are getting it written into their contracts. the really smart ones are getting four years written in. What about the marginal players? get traded, released? I would say players are more at the mercy of CHL teams the NCAA teams. At least with NCAA you have more control over where you end up. Certain players do in the CHL as well but those players would probably be drafted no matter where they played.

As far as the "schooling" players get in the NCAA. That's their choice. Players still have to have the grades to get in. Meet and maintain NCAA minimum grade average to play. Some take BS courses, some don't and some schools don't provide the option, every freshman at Notre Dame has to take calculus, even Fowler if he went there. Its still the players choice on what they take, if they don't major in something "real" that's their problem.

Its nice to see "rags to riches" stories like Jeff Skinner. He would have been drafted if he was playing in Cody Wyoming. His stock did rocket up because he was playing in the CHL and scored 50 but there isn't a guarantee he'll have a successful NHL career. He needs to back that 50 goal season with one just as strong, and probably better.

There's no reason for the NCAA to change their rules and there's no reason for the CHL to want them to or to change theirs. The have nots will have to get better to recruit players so when they have a chance at a player who is balking at leaving they can keep them. Universities have their own rules, the NCAA has theirs, The CHL aren't institutions but are club teams. Until they started losing players to the NCAA they never had to really concern themselves with education.

[JEF]

Surly:

Nicely said.

Your post was well thought out and well written.

Any chance you can apply for a sports job at the Record?

[Surly]

nah i'm in a good place.

[jonny three time]

Like Surly mentioned, it all boils down to the NCAA not caring enough about hockey to alters it's rules for it. In the major sports that the NCAA values the most (Football and Basketball especially) the rules are designed with their institution acting as a monopoly over all the talent in each sport. In Football and Basketball there is no other option for young players to make other than the NCAA outside of making it straight to the pro's. Even then both sports make players get 1 year of college in before being eligible for the draft.

Hockey is the one sport where they could massage their rules to admit that they're in a competition with another minor-league (Which both the NCAA and CHL really are) that specializes in developing young players. They choose to not do so and treat the CHL and it's rules in the same way that the treat actual major sports organizations. Because of that, they're losing the battle.

Too bad for them that they don't care enough to design rules that give athletes more freedom with their choices.

[All the Answers]

[quote=" In Football and Basketball there is no other option for young players to make other than the NCAA outside of making it straight to the pro's. Even then both sports make players get 1 year of college in before being eligible for the draft.
[/quote]

In basketball very few players HAVE opted to play in Europe pro leagues right after high school and then come to the NBA right after 1 year. Not sure about the NFL and players going to play arena football in Europe (or if that league even still exists) I don't follow football as much as the other major sports. There are options but they're not utilized much in sports other than hockey where Americans are not the majority of the players playing in the highest league (unlike NBA, NFL, and MLB).

[Surly]

Football players have to be removed from highschool for 3 years in order to be eligible for the NFL draft. Call it the Maurice Clarett rule. The one and out rule in basketball doesn't really help the programs any because the player is only there for, well one year.

In any event its the pro leagues that are changing their rules to effect student athletes and not the NCAA. The CHL isn't effected by this which is good for us.

[RangerDog]

Splitting hairs here but Dan would be starting his Junior year of College by my calculations this fall.

just curious where you get your numbers from. How is the average age of NCAA players 23 years old? Where are there 21 year old freshmen? NCAA athletes go to their universities right after high school. They don't take time off.

Surly & Answers, I went ahead and crushed the numbers to answer your questions. I got my numbers from www.USCHO.com
I went through every Division 1 team in the US and I came up with an average roster age of 22.4 beginning for the 2009-10 season. Whats more surprising is the number of Freshman who are OVER 20 years of age. Contrary to what you may have thought most players play another year or 2 of Junior A before going to American University at 20, 21, and even 22 years of age. There are exceptions but MOST are 20 or older. Thats why I figured Dan Kelly would be a freshman maybe a Sophomore had he gone the US College route. 395 Freshman were rostered in US Division 1 Hockey last season, 238 were 20 years of age or older. Here is the breakdown.

CHA
Alabama- (6 Freshman) 21,21,21,21,20,20
Bemidgi- (7) 21,21,21,20,21,21,21
Niagara- (10) 21,19,21,19,20,20,21,20,20,19
Robert Morris- (7) 21,21,19,20,20,21,19

ATLANTIC
American International- (8) 21,20,19,21,21,21,21,21
Army- (6) 21,20,20,21,21,21
Bentley- (5) 19,19,19,21,19
Canisius- (5) 20,21,19,20,21
Connecticut- (6) 20,21,21,21,21,19
Holy Cross- (7) 19,20,20,21,20,21,20
Mercyhurst- (4) 20,20,20,20
RIT- (6) 21,22,20,20,21,20
Sacred Heart- (8) 21,21,20,21,20,19,21,21

CCHA
Alaska- (7) 21,21,21,19,21,21,21
Bowling Green- (9) 21,21,21,20,21,19,19,21,19
Ferris State- (4) 20,20,21,20
Lake Superior- (5) 21,22,21,19,19
Miami- (7) 20,20,20,21,18,18,19
Michigan- (6) 18,19,20,19,18,18
Michigan State- (9) 20,21,18,19,20,20,21,18,21
Nebraska- (5) 20,21,21,21,21
Northern Michigan- (7) 20,22,19,20,19,21,20
Notre Dame- (6) 20,20, 18, 20,18,18
Ohio State- (6) 21,21,20,21,21,19
Western Michigan- (7) 19,19,21,19,19,20,19

HOCKEY EAST
Boston College- (9) 20,18,19,18,19,19,18,18,18
Boston university- (7) 19,20,19,19,19,20,21
Maine- (9) 18,21,20,20,20,21,20,19,19
Lowell- (6) 21,20,20,18,20,20
Massachussetts- (8) 19,21,20,19,20,19,20,21
Merrimack- (6) 20,21,20,19,20,21
New Hampshire- (7) 20,19,21,18,19,21,19
Northeastern- (10) 20,20,21,20,21,21,21,20,20,20
Providence- (11) 21,19,19,19,20,19,19,19,20,19,22
Vermont- (6) 20,20,18,19,18,21

WCHA
Alaska- (6) 21,21,21,20,20,20
Colorado- (8) 19,20,19,20,19,19,19,19
Denver- (7) 19,18,18,18,19,18,18
Michigan Tech- (8) 20,19,20,21,21,20,19,20
Minnesota State- (7) 21,21,20,19,18,20,21
Duluth- (8) 20,19,19,19,19,19,18,21
North Dakota- (9) 20,19,20,19,21,19,19,19,20
St.Cloud- (4) 20,19,20,19
Wisconsin- (6) 19,20,18,19,20,19
Minnesota- (4) 18,18,19,18

ECAC
Brown-(9) 20,21,18,19,19,19,20,20,21
Clarkson- (6) 19,21,19,19,19,19
Colgate-(8) 19,19,19,21,21,19,19,19
Cornell- (9) 19,20,19,18,18,19,20,21,19
Dartmouth-(6) 20,19,19,20,20,18
Harvard- (7) 18,19,17,18,19,20,18
Princeton- (6) 19,19,20,20,20,20
Quinnipiac- (11) 20,20,19,21,20,21,21,20,21,19,22
RPI- (5) 18,20,21,20,18 (D'Amigo)
St. Lawrence- (6) 21,20,21,19,21,19
Union- (7) 21,21,20,20,20,20,21
Yale- (6) 19,19,21,19,20,19

[Surly]

wow that's alot of numbers. anyone else think is odd Alabama has an D1 NCAA hockey team? they all have freshmen over the age of 20.

what it shows is age doesn't equal eligibility. The CHL is the exact opposite which is why time is a factor. it just makes it harder to compare the NCAA to the CHL.

[All the Answers]

Surly & Answers, I went ahead and crushed the numbers to answer your questions. I got my numbers from http://www.USCHO.com
I went through every Division 1 team in the US and I came up with an average roster age of 22.4 beginning for the 2009-10 season. Whats more surprising is the number of Freshman who are OVER 20 years of age. Contrary to what you may have thought most players play another year or 2 of Junior A before going to American University at 20, 21, and even 22 years of age. There are exceptions but MOST are 20 or older. Thats why I figured Dan Kelly would be a freshman maybe a Sophomore had he gone the US College route. 395 Freshman were rostered in US Division 1 Hockey last season, 238 were 20 years of age or older. Here is the breakdown.

That's fine and dandy, but if the NCAA is serious about being an alternative conduit to the NHL EVERY top prospect who is going to go college has to be playing college hockey at 18 (17 if late birthday) right out of highschool. No prospect with NHL aspirations and the tool-set to make it there is going to be willing to sit out an extra 2 years just so he's as physically mature as the majority in the league. They need to be there as 17 year olds and the schools need to accept them as 1 and done guys just like college hoops is. The problem lies in the fact that these players who do go to college if they are NHL calibre have already missed out on 2 years of playing against the top competition for their age. The NCAA is their own worst enemy when it comes to getting hockey talent. They need to completely open up to taking on OHL players. When guys hit 18 in the OHL it's already really determined what kind of a player they'll blossem into or not. Many guys however are late bloomers and if they NCAA would allow them to keep their eligibility they could pick up decent or good prospects (they'll never get the majority of the top prospects due to # of games, coaching, focus on hockey over school, and the fact that they're gone by 19 anyways) who have played a couple years, and now can spend 4 more playing high level hockey while getting an education. Sorry NCAA, you're never going to win this war because your league starts after guys are done high school, not 2 years before.

[Surly]

But that's the point isn't it? because the sole purpose of the CHL is to play hockey at the highest level for the player's age group and prepare them for a life of professional hockey we expect all hockey leagues to have the same goals. Its pretty obvious the NCAA doesn't view itself as a professional hockey prepatory instituition and nor should it. Their recruiting rules don't allow coaches to even contact players until they've completed grade 11.

The only thing both sides can really agree on is to stop/limit the top prospects from using NCAA schools hostage by threatening to go that route when they fear they are going to get selected by a CHL team they don't want to play for. And that will not change unless the NCAA implodes, or hockey stops being a varsity sport.