Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

2015-2016 College Hockey (non UND Hockey)


cberkas

Recommended Posts

The B1G deputy commissioner on the B1G proposal.

http://www.uscho.com/2016/03/04/brad-traviolia-modest-proposal-will-improve-college-hockeys-recruiting-environment/

Why does the B1G sound like they are the ambassadors for college hockey when they have admitted not knowing anything about college hockey. 

Quote

As it currently exists, the NCAA delayed enrollment rule creates a situation where 17- and 18-year-olds routinely compete against 24- and 25-year-olds. This occurs because players can maintain four years of eligibility by enrolling as a full-time student at a collegiate institution prior to their 21st birthday and then transferring to a school that sponsors hockey to begin competition as a 21-year-old freshman the following fall.

This sounds utterly false, I have never heard this was going on at any school.

Quote

It would also address the circular argument that many 18- and 19-year-olds are not physically ready to compete in college hockey because other players are so much older. Our proposal would reduce the need for delayed enrollment of incoming students by slightly reducing the age of players overall.

This has Lucia written all over it. But there are 18 and 19 year olds playing in the NHL? How can that be?

Quote

we do not believe that the recruitment and delayed enrollment system that has evolved within college hockey is in the best interest of the game or its participants. It is an unsustainable system and, if left to the natural competitive instincts of hockey-playing institutions, will eventually consist entirely of players between the ages of 21 and 25.

Yet college hockey is thriving, when the B1G is claiming it's not. Last 4 National Champions were first time champions which is showing the non-traditional powerhouses that they can win a National Title.

I wouldn't be surprised if the B1G told the NCAA that they should have an auto bid to the Frozen Four, (like the College Football Playoff) because they are a Power 5 school and everyone else should have to play for the last 3 spots. It may sound dumb but we all know the B1G wants all the benefits and to hinder everyone else. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cberkas said:

The B1G deputy commissioner on the B1G proposal.

http://www.uscho.com/2016/03/04/brad-traviolia-modest-proposal-will-improve-college-hockeys-recruiting-environment/

Why does the B1G sound like they are the ambassadors for college hockey when they have admitted not knowing anything about college hockey. 

This sounds utterly false, I have never heard this was going on at any school.

This has Lucia written all over it. But there are 18 and 19 year olds playing in the NHL? How can that be?

Yet college hockey is thriving, when the B1G is claiming it's not. Last 4 National Champions were first time champions which is showing the non-traditional powerhouses that they can win a National Title.

I wouldn't be surprised if the B1G told the NCAA that they should have an auto bid to the Frozen Four, (like the College Football Playoff) because they are a Power 5 school and everyone else should have to play for the last 3 spots. It may sound dumb but we all know the B1G wants all the benefits and to hinder everyone else. 

 

Just out of curiosity, how does this benefit the B1G more than the NCHC? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GFG said:

Just out of curiosity, how does this benefit the B1G more than the NCHC? 

It probably benefits them the same, but the NCHC didn't need to make a age limit proposal to benefit them. Actually all 8 school are against the proposal because it hurts college hockey as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MafiaMan said:

Michigan is doing its best to absolutely throw away the B10 conference title.  An embarrassing loss at home to an AWFUL Ohio State team.  

Omaha is trying to out do them by going from #2 in the PWR to missing the NCAA Tournament all together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, GFG said:

Just out of curiosity, how does this benefit the B1G more than the NCHC? 

 

30 minutes ago, cberkas said:

It probably benefits them the same, but the NCHC didn't need to make a age limit proposal to benefit them. Actually all 8 school are against the proposal because it hurts college hockey as a whole.

I don't think it helps the B1G more than the NCHC, but it definitely helps the B1G against a lot of other leagues.

The average age of B1G teams (and a lot of the NCHC) is lower.   By chopping some of the older players off the teams they compete against, they expect to gain a competitive advantage.

If you sort the link below by Average Age, you can see which rosters are generally younger and older.

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/stats/?season=20152016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The five youngest teams in college hockey this year are BC, BU, Michigan, UND, and Notre Dame. Going out to the top 10 youngest and you add in Minnesota, Omaha, and Harvard. I think those are some pretty decent teams. And last year BU went from terrible to the national championship game on the back of a player that came in at 17. The teams like BU, BC, UND, Michigan and Minnesota are consistently on the younger end of the spectrum and are nearly always great. The Little 6 has absolutely no clue what they are talking about and are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...