Generic Off Season Thread

[Aaron M. Griffin]

Where did you see that October 6th is the first day that's allowed? That isn't correct. The first date was last week, thus Ken Schott's article and video.

Preseason Practice:
In men's ice hockey, an institution shall not commence practice sessions prior to the Saturday of the 25th full weekend prior to the start of the NCAA Division I Men's Ice Hockey Championship.

The 2013 NCAA Regionals in men's ice hockey are March 29-31. That would make October 6, 2012 the first date on which a formal, coached practice is allowed.

If you don't trust my math, Adam.

The first true practice won't happen until Oct. 6 and the first exhibition game will be the next evening.

From: http://www.gazette.com/sports/first-144466-season-hockey.html

Gadowsky on September 11, 2012 cited that Penn State was "about a month away from [NCAA-allowed, coach-led] practice." From here at 1:00.

The Badgers begin their final season as members of the WCHA with the first official practice on Saturday, Oct. 6.

From: http://www.uwbadgers.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/052312aad.html

Another Wisconsin source:

The first day of sanctioned practice is on October 6.

From: http://www.madtownbadgers.com/articles/hockey/2012-13-mens-hockey-schedule-released.html

Well, if I am not correct, it seems that a lot of other people from different conferences, from different vantage points, and with different interests agree with me. The text of the NCAA Rules does as well. You like to write about NCAA violations, perhaps you should look into this.

[adamw]

I believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

I believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.

Cheating? In sports? Never. I figured that someone else or you might know the specific rule, but until I can be disproven, I am assuming it is a violation to which the NCAA will just turn a blind eye.

A new article with the same conclusion:

The practice will be the team's first official session as NCAA rules stipulate Oct. 6 as the first day for organized team practices.

Source: http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/092112aaf.html

[ugarte]

I believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.

Cheating? In sports? Never. I figured that someone else or you might know the specific rule, but until I can be disproven, I am assuming it is a violation to which the NCAA will just turn a blind eye.

A new article with the same conclusion:

The practice will be the team's first official session as NCAA rules stipulate Oct. 6 as the first day for organized team practices.

Source: http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/092112aaf.html

The question isn't whether teams cheat. The question is "do teams cheat openly and talk about it in the press". I'm with Adam that it is unlikely that they do. I think Adam's point is that "organized team practices" may be defined more loosely than you are defining it with respect to the involvement or attendance of the coaches.

All I'm saying is that Adam's view can be reconciled with your calendar checking.

[Jim Hyla]

I believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.

Cheating? In sports? Never. I figured that someone else or you might know the specific rule, but until I can be disproven, I am assuming it is a violation to which the NCAA will just turn a blind eye.

A new article with the same conclusion:

The practice will be the team's first official session as NCAA rules stipulate Oct. 6 as the first day for organized team practices.

Source: http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/092112aaf.html

The question isn't whether teams cheat. The question is "do teams cheat openly and talk about it in the press". I'm with Adam that it is unlikely that they do. I think Adam's point is that "organized team practices" may be defined more loosely than you are defining it with respect to the involvement or attendance of the coaches.

All I'm saying is that Adam's view can be reconciled with your calendar checking.

I totally agree with your interpretation, but why is it so hard to get the exact rule? It must be defined somewhere. Adam, when you talk to a couple of coaches, can't you resolve this? Does anyone else have contact with a coach?

[adamw]

I will try to pin down the exact definition of what's going on. I can virtually guarantee nobody is openly flaunting the breaking of NCAA rules. I'm sure there's just some leeway to the book definition that allows some semblance of contact in September...I just don't know what it is precisely. Or some second tier type of definition...like, no contact prior to sept. 1, then limited contact until oct. 6. I don't know. I just made that up. But something like that.

[Jim Hyla]

I will try to pin down the exact definition of what's going on. I can virtually guarantee nobody is openly flaunting the breaking of NCAA rules. I'm sure there's just some leeway to the book definition that allows some semblance of contact in September...I just don't know what it is precisely. Or some second tier type of definition...like, no contact prior to sept. 1, then limited contact until oct. 6. I don't know. I just made that up. But something like that.

Thanks.

[Towerroad]

There is ample opportunity for the staff to interact with the players before "offical" practices. Here are the rules that I found (see the last sentence, it is a very large fig leaf. It walks and quacks but is not a duck)

7.02.13 Voluntary Athletically Related Activities. Effective Date: Aug 01, 2004 In order for any athletically related activity to be considered "voluntary," all of the following conditions must be met:  (Adopted:  4/18/01)

(a)   The student-athlete must not be required to report back to a coach or other athletics department staff member (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) any information related to the activity.  In addition, no athletics department staff member who observes the activity (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) may report back to the student-athlete's coach any information related to the activity;

(b)   The activity must be initiated and requested solely by the student-athlete.   Neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may require the student-athlete to participate in the activity at any time.  However, it is permissible for an athletics department staff member to provide information to student-athletes related  to available opportunities for participating in voluntary activities (e.g., times when
the strength and conditioning coach will be on duty in the weight room or on the track).  In addition, for students who have initiated a request to engage in voluntary activities, the institution or an athletics department staff member may assign specific times for student-athletes to use institutional facilities for such purposed and inform the student-athletes of the time in advance;

(c)   The student-athlete's attendance and participation in the activity (or lack thereof) may not be recorded for the purposes of reporting such information to coaching staff members or other student-athletes; and    

(d)   The student-athlete may not be subjected to penalty if he or she elects not to participate in the activity.  In addition, neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may provide recognition or incentives (e.g., awards) to a student-athlete based on his or her attendance or performance in the activity.

[Note:  Coaching staff members may be present during permissible skill-related instruction pursuant to Bylaw 17.1.5.2.1]  (Revised: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04)

[ugarte]

Thanks, Towerroad. That rule pretty much says, in dry statutory form, what Adam assumed.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

There is ample opportunity for the staff to interact with the players before "offical" practices. Here are the rules that I found (see the last sentence, it is a very large fig leaf. It walks and quacks but is not a duck)

7.02.13 Voluntary Athletically Related Activities. Effective Date: Aug 01, 2004 In order for any athletically related activity to be considered "voluntary," all of the following conditions must be met:  (Adopted:  4/18/01)

(a)   The student-athlete must not be required to report back to a coach or other athletics department staff member (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) any information related to the activity.  In addition, no athletics department staff member who observes the activity (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) may report back to the student-athlete's coach any information related to the activity;

(b)   The activity must be initiated and requested solely by the student-athlete.   Neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may require the student-athlete to participate in the activity at any time.  However, it is permissible for an athletics department staff member to provide information to student-athletes related  to available opportunities for participating in voluntary activities (e.g., times when
the strength and conditioning coach will be on duty in the weight room or on the track).  In addition, for students who have initiated a request to engage in voluntary activities, the institution or an athletics department staff member may assign specific times for student-athletes to use institutional facilities for such purposed and inform the student-athletes of the time in advance;

(c)   The student-athlete's attendance and participation in the activity (or lack thereof) may not be recorded for the purposes of reporting such information to coaching staff members or other student-athletes; and    

(d)   The student-athlete may not be subjected to penalty if he or she elects not to participate in the activity.  In addition, neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may provide recognition or incentives (e.g., awards) to a student-athlete based on his or her attendance or performance in the activity.

[Note:  Coaching staff members may be present during permissible skill-related instruction pursuant to Bylaw 17.1.5.2.1]  (Revised: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04)

The highlighted clauses all imply that the head coach is not involved, with the broadest interpretation, and is not initiating the practice, with the narrowest interpretation. Union's players all imply that Bennett mandated, planned, initiated, and conducted these practices. The interpretation of the clauses you cite above that I have heard most often, and which is in accord with what Colorado College, Wisconsin, and Penn State are doing, is that coaches, usually assistant and strength coaches, sometimes coaches from the opposite gender program, are allowed to watch practice for safety reasons to ensure that no players injure themselves. However, the coaches's role are more analogous to those of lifeguards rather than those assumed of coaches. Also, if we assume that the above clauses that you and I have cited must not be read with their plain meaning that the coach cannot mandate and lead practice, Union is in violation still of one more clause regarding skills-based practice.

Participation by student- athletes in skill-related instruction in sports other than baseball and football is permitted outside the institu- tion's declared playing season, from the institution's first day of classes of the academic year or September 15, whichever occurs earlier, to one week prior to the beginning of the institution's final examination period at the conclusion of the academic year [see Bylaw 17.1.6.2-(a)]. More than four student-athletes from the team may be involved in skill-related instruction with their coaches from September 15 through April 15. Prior to September 15 and after April 15, not more than four student-athletes from the same team may be involved in skill-related instruction with their coaches at any one time in any facility. Skill-related instruction shall not be publicized and shall not be conducted in view of a general public audience.

I think posts on twitter and a write-up from Ken Schott indicate both publication and the practice's being in view of the general public. I find the rule monumentally stupid. Logically, I would see why Union would not want to abide by any of this, but the rules are the rules. To abridge them, is to gain a competitive advantage. The only legitimate statutory purview of the NCAA. What if Merrimack does not break them? The Warriors will be headed then into a clash with a team that has been coached for three weeks while they will not have had a single day of coach-led practice.

If there is some definitive and comprehensive interpretations that reconciles what could be internal contradictions of the rules, I am curious to read them. No one on here has proffered one. The clearest interpretations allow coaches on the ice, but not coaches leading practice. Were this program a flashier, more prestigious program, we would probably not be waiving it all off as "they can't be breaking the rules." This is one of the rules taken most seriously in other sports.

[Towerroad]

Arron

I suspect that there is very little real difference between a voluntary practice and a formal practice. Do you really think that players can blow off this practice. Do you really think that the coaches who can be there and can provide skill instruction don't know who is there or not there even if they do now write it down?

When the coaching staff arranges for ice time for "voluntary practice" do you think the expectation is that only a part of the team will show up? When you make a facility available the you might just as well announce a practice schedule.

I suspect that these rules are just NC$$ window dressing particularly for money sports. The difference between a voluntary practice and an official practice is the difference between damn and swearing.

[Robb]

Arron

I suspect that there is very little real difference between a voluntary practice and a formal practice. Do you really think that players can blow off this practice. Do you really think that the coaches who can be there and can provide skill instruction don't know who is there or not there even if they do now write it down?

When the coaching staff arranges for ice time for "voluntary practice" do you think the expectation is that only a part of the team will show up? When you make a facility available the you might just as well announce a practice schedule.

I suspect that these rules are just NC$$ window dressing particularly for money sports. The difference between a voluntary practice and an official practice is the difference between damn and swearing.

This.  Nowhere in the rules does it say that the head coach (or any other coach, for that matter) is not allowed to attend voluntary practices.  Nowhere does it say that the captain or other team members are not allowed to report back to the head coach about the practice (it only bans other staff members from doing so).  The coaches are there, they know who was there, and participation in voluntary practice sessions definitely will affect your standing on the team, despite any contortions the lawyers want to dream up.  I haven't seen or heard anything that leads me to believe that Union is breaking any of the rules.  To convince me, you'd have to provide a copy of the email where the coach tells the players that they have to be at practice, or provide a copy of the attendance log that the coach took at the practices, etc.  The coach's simply being at an organized practice session where the ice was reserved for the varsity team members to use is NOT, in and of itself, a violation.

[Jim Hyla]

Speculation, speculation, speculation...

I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::

[Aaron M. Griffin]

Speculation, speculation, speculation...

I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::

I hope he responds. But, in the meantime...

https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/250295493870096384

[Towerroad]

Speculation, speculation, speculation...

I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::

I hope he responds. But, in the meantime...

https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/250295493870096384

If we are arguing about the arcane corners of the NCAA rules then the Red and White game cannot come quick enough.

LGR!