It basically means your Cody Croal types are only 3 year contributors if not only 3 year players. That's the problem.
Also, university is 4 years, we should just keep the eligibility rules as is, 5 years of eligibility seems so random & weird, Rules attempted at being rammed through because some basketball & football coaches complained., sad
Keep the eligibility rules as is for hockey. The 5 in 5 is being rammed through for football/basketball purposes and hockey would be negatively altered if this goes through & applied to it
Would hope this doesn't go through, at least for hockey. Hockey's developmental structure is through junior, not HS, in 98% of the world & 90% of North America. Would hate to limit hockey careers by putting a time clock on eligibility
Some will agree, some will disagree, but I'm hoping the NCAA's proposed eligibility changes either don't go through or men's hockey gets an exception to remain as is. The junior hockey development structure (& thus NCAA Hockey structure) would be knocked off its axis if you forced the NCAA eligibility clock to start at age 19. You'd limit careers quite a bit IMHO
Would like to be more than just Western Canadians and Minnesotans/North Dakotans. Would like to dip into the Ontario, Illinois, & California pool. Michigan, New England, Quebec/Maritimes if you can get them as well
Exhibit A being Trevor Connelly who had a statline of 23 GP, 13 PTS and is now over a point per game in the A for Henderson. Providence College just doesn't like unleashing offensive skill
Wisconsin is much more likely to be a consistent National Championship contender than Cornell, plus you're able to get some NIL money at Wisconsin that you wouldn't be able to at Cornell. Makes sense to me