Opponent and other news and results of interest 2024-2025

[BearLover]

For the NC$$, unless I am misinterpreting, it introduces greater risk for Q'ing players by delaying their freshman season until their first prostate exam.  Younger players are safer from being coaxed away to the pros.

Or am I missing something?

Neither we nor Quinnipiac are getting the truly high-end players who sign pro after one or two college seasons. Cornell/Q get players taken in the third round and beyond who rarely sign until their junior or senior year is complete. This new draft eligibility rule would lead to:
—players going straight to college even if they aren't ready and would benefit from a year of juniors
—players like Ryan Walsh, Xavier Veilleux, Alexis Cournoyer, Colin Greening, many others having a maximum three years at Cornell before their draft teams sign them, assuming they are good enough to sign [I'm using these four players merely as an example; likely the old rule will be grandfathered in for at least Walsh and Veilleux]
—fewer players staying four years and graduating from college in general. Under the new rule, there will be greater desire by NHL teams to sign these players before their senior year, and players will have to choose between completing school and going pro/big payday, whereas under the prior rule it was very possible to do both

I'm not making a normative claim over what's fairer or better for the players; I'm commenting from the perspective of how it will affect college hockey teams.  Since most of our draft picks are long-shots to have a long NHL career, I'd personally prefer a rule that lets them stay in college for longer.

[BearLover]

Another example of the silliness of this rule is Cole Tuminaro: he was ranked by NHL Central Scouting before this season. He missed the entire year to injury and wasn't drafted. If next year he has a strong season and gets drafted in his second year of eligibility, he'll only have three years at Cornell before getting signed.

[stereax]

For the NC$$, unless I am misinterpreting, it introduces greater risk for Q'ing players by delaying their freshman season until their first prostate exam.  Younger players are safer from being coaxed away to the pros.

Or am I missing something?

Neither we nor Quinnipiac are getting the truly high-end players who sign pro after one or two college seasons. Cornell/Q get players taken in the third round and beyond who rarely sign until their junior or senior year is complete. This new draft eligibility rule would lead to:
—players going straight to college even if they aren't ready and would benefit from a year of juniors
—players like Ryan Walsh, Xavier Veilleux, Alexis Cournoyer, Colin Greening, many others having a maximum three years at Cornell before their draft teams sign them, assuming they are good enough to sign [I'm using these four players merely as an example; likely the old rule will be grandfathered in for at least Walsh and Veilleux]
—fewer players staying four years and graduating from college in general. Under the new rule, there will be greater desire by NHL teams to sign these players before their senior year, and players will have to choose between completing school and going pro/big payday, whereas under the prior rule it was very possible to do both

I'm not making a normative claim over what's fairer or better for the players; I'm commenting from the perspective of how it will affect college hockey teams.  Since most of our draft picks are long-shots to have a long NHL career, I'd personally prefer a rule that lets them stay in college for longer.

I think it's still up in the air exactly how it's going to work - I heard that if a player is in the NCAA, the team will retain rights past 22 until I think either 30 days after four years of college or 30 days after the player declares intent to no longer play college. But I might be mistaken.

[marty]

For the NC$$, unless I am misinterpreting, it introduces greater risk for Q'ing players by delaying their freshman season until their first prostate exam.  Younger players are safer from being coaxed away to the pros.

Or am I missing something?

Neither we nor Quinnipiac are getting the truly high-end players who sign pro after one or two college seasons. Cornell/Q get players taken in the third round and beyond who rarely sign until their junior or senior year is complete. This new draft eligibility rule would lead to:
—players going straight to college even if they aren't ready and would benefit from a year of juniors
—players like Ryan Walsh, Xavier Veilleux, Alexis Cournoyer, Colin Greening, many others having a maximum three years at Cornell before their draft teams sign them, assuming they are good enough to sign [I'm using these four players merely as an example; likely the old rule will be grandfathered in for at least Walsh and Veilleux]
—fewer players staying four years and graduating from college in general. Under the new rule, there will be greater desire by NHL teams to sign these players before their senior year, and players will have to choose between completing school and going pro/big payday, whereas under the prior rule it was very possible to do both

I'm not making a normative claim over what's fairer or better for the players; I'm commenting from the perspective of how it will affect college hockey teams.  Since most of our draft picks are long-shots to have a long NHL career, I'd personally prefer a rule that lets them stay in college for longer.

I think it's still up in the air exactly how it's going to work - I heard that if a player is in the NCAA, the team will retain rights past 22 until I think either 30 days after four years of college or 30 days after the player declares intent to no longer play college. But I might be mistaken.

I hope so.  This makes sense and not really akin to suing your orthodontist three years after you reach the age of majority - but what is?

[adamw]

For the NC$$, unless I am misinterpreting, it introduces greater risk for Q'ing players by delaying their freshman season until their first prostate exam.  Younger players are safer from being coaxed away to the pros.

Or am I missing something?

Neither we nor Quinnipiac are getting the truly high-end players who sign pro after one or two college seasons. Cornell/Q get players taken in the third round and beyond who rarely sign until their junior or senior year is complete. This new draft eligibility rule would lead to:
—players going straight to college even if they aren't ready and would benefit from a year of juniors
—players like Ryan Walsh, Xavier Veilleux, Alexis Cournoyer, Colin Greening, many others having a maximum three years at Cornell before their draft teams sign them, assuming they are good enough to sign [I'm using these four players merely as an example; likely the old rule will be grandfathered in for at least Walsh and Veilleux]
—fewer players staying four years and graduating from college in general. Under the new rule, there will be greater desire by NHL teams to sign these players before their senior year, and players will have to choose between completing school and going pro/big payday, whereas under the prior rule it was very possible to do both

I'm not making a normative claim over what's fairer or better for the players; I'm commenting from the perspective of how it will affect college hockey teams.  Since most of our draft picks are long-shots to have a long NHL career, I'd personally prefer a rule that lets them stay in college for longer.

I think it's still up in the air exactly how it's going to work - I heard that if a player is in the NCAA, the team will retain rights past 22 until I think either 30 days after four years of college or 30 days after the player declares intent to no longer play college. But I might be mistaken.

This is what Frank Seravalli reported while we were at the draft. Which basically means nothing would change. Now, Frank Seravalli knows more than any of us put together about what's going on - and like I said, was probably reading directly from the draft CBA. But it would contradict everything I've about what the point of the new CBA is on this point -- which is the make things simpler and uniform for all players. So I've been trying to get clarification.

[stereax]

For the NC$$, unless I am misinterpreting, it introduces greater risk for Q'ing players by delaying their freshman season until their first prostate exam.  Younger players are safer from being coaxed away to the pros.

Or am I missing something?

Neither we nor Quinnipiac are getting the truly high-end players who sign pro after one or two college seasons. Cornell/Q get players taken in the third round and beyond who rarely sign until their junior or senior year is complete. This new draft eligibility rule would lead to:
—players going straight to college even if they aren't ready and would benefit from a year of juniors
—players like Ryan Walsh, Xavier Veilleux, Alexis Cournoyer, Colin Greening, many others having a maximum three years at Cornell before their draft teams sign them, assuming they are good enough to sign [I'm using these four players merely as an example; likely the old rule will be grandfathered in for at least Walsh and Veilleux]
—fewer players staying four years and graduating from college in general. Under the new rule, there will be greater desire by NHL teams to sign these players before their senior year, and players will have to choose between completing school and going pro/big payday, whereas under the prior rule it was very possible to do both

I'm not making a normative claim over what's fairer or better for the players; I'm commenting from the perspective of how it will affect college hockey teams.  Since most of our draft picks are long-shots to have a long NHL career, I'd personally prefer a rule that lets them stay in college for longer.

I think it's still up in the air exactly how it's going to work - I heard that if a player is in the NCAA, the team will retain rights past 22 until I think either 30 days after four years of college or 30 days after the player declares intent to no longer play college. But I might be mistaken.

This is what Frank Seravalli reported while we were at the draft. Which basically means nothing would change. Now, Frank Seravalli knows more than any of us put together about what's going on - and like I said, was probably reading directly from the draft CBA. But it would contradict everything I've about what the point of the new CBA is on this point -- which is the make things simpler and uniform for all players. So I've been trying to get clarification.

Seravalli's a fucking hack... hate the guy since he went to bat for Bowman and Quenneville... but we'll see.

[BearLover]

Quinnipiac's incoming class of ten players consists of:
7 overagers from the CHL
1 transfer from RPI
1 draft pick (Matthew Lansing) from the USHL
1 goalie from the NAHL

The strategy of importing old players continues, now focused on the CHL rather than grad transfers.

Of the 10 players in this year's class, 8 committed since 12/9/24 (i.e. in the last 6.5 months). How many recruits were told not to come, or pushed back a year, to make room for all these new commitments?

[Trotsky]

Quinnipiac's incoming class of ten players consists of:
7 overagers from the CHL
1 transfer from RPI
1 draft pick (Matthew Lansing) from the USHL
1 goalie from the NAHL

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1Sx4lxkV5Y&ab_channel=DennyPratt[/video]

[chimpfood]

Clarkson already managed to lose their star goalie recruit, Jackson Parsons. Has already been mentioned by Adam and Mike McMahon but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of these CHL guys flake on college teams halfway through the year because they aren't getting the playing time or development that they're looking for.

[The Rancor]

Clarkson already managed to lose their star goalie recruit, Jackson Parsons. Has already been mentioned by Adam and Mike McMahon but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of these CHL guys flake on college teams halfway through the year because they aren't getting the playing time or development that they're looking for.

The 29-34 game regular season is pretty short for goalies in particular, or a skater looking for valuable on ice experience. One of many pluses and minuses that hockey players have had to think about before going NCAA. There's so much about the new rules right now have to shake out.

Will NCAA skaters go play for CHL teams over break? Go skate for them after the regular season or playoff runs are over and return next year? What about CHL players that get called up to the NHL and are returned before the 9 game limit? Can they play NCAA hockey?

[stereax]

What about CHL players that get called up to the NHL and are returned before the 9 game limit? Can they play NCAA hockey?

This one I can answer for you: no. NCAA requires that you not have signed a professional sports contract; those players on 9-game tryouts have.

[Trotsky]

Will NCAA skaters go play for CHL teams over break?

No.  Ignoring the dislocating effect, the CHL does not want them.

[marty]

Whether an article references $700,000 or $200,000 these early NIL stories are giving me a very bad feeling about college hockey going forward.

[Trotsky]

"I know how this one ends." --Windows, The Thing

[jts15]

Ben Syer to coach US U18 team.

https://x.com/princetonhockey/status/1945887561081053373