Recruits 2006: The New Thread

[KeithK]

[q]That's discriminatory.[/q]Sure. So what?  Since when did people/schools not have a right to discriminate?  The law makes discriminating on the basis of certain qualities (race, ethnicitY, etc.) illegal and Congress has used the power of the purse to make certain other kinds essentially illegal as well (Title IX).  But Cornell and the Ivy LEague have every right to decide that their student-athletes may only compete in varsity sports for four years.  You may think that this is bad policy, but others may disagree.

[Jerseygirl]

I am pretty sure there is an exception for missionaries to the 5 years to play 4 seasons rule. Brandon Hall '02, a former lax captain, played his freshman year in  1996, went on a two year mission, came back in 1999, missed a season due to injury, then somehow played at least two more seasons. I actually researched this because I didn't want to get it wrong, and he's listed as a senior for both the 2001 and 2002 seasons. Whatever happened in his case, his missionary work didn't seem to take any eligibility away from him, but his injury might have. If anyone with more knowledge of lax websites/databases than I have can find his career stats, this might prove my point better. Or not. But he definitely played his first season in '96 and his last in '02.

Whatever the rule is, there's always ways around it -- I know a few wrestlers have gotten an extra year or two of eligibility because they've gotten hurt and only wrestled a certain percentage of matches that year. And that's not just approved by Noel of course, but the NCAA.

I have a headache now.

[dave hunter]

The high school team I help coach in Mass, just played the Devin brothers team last week. They both played very well, as they crushed our team.  They are going to play for Schafe and CU starting in 2007.

DH '86

[DeltaOne81]

[Q]''They're used to playing hurt," Hanson said. ''They've played with injury. Whereas other kids may not play, Michael is used to being hurt. Joe, he's sucked it up many times."[/Q]

Sounds like they'll fit right in  ::help::

[nr53]

Sounds like another set of twins will have to learn how to play with someone that isn't their brother...

[pfibiger]

[quote nr53]Sounds like another set of twins will have to learn how to play with someone that isn't their brother...[/quote]

nr,

Joe is a forward, Mike is a defenseman. It shouldn't be a problem.

[nr53]

[Q]
''It's much easier playing with him than someone else," Mike added. "On the ice, I'd rather have him out there than someone else. We always know where the other is. We work off each other real well."
[/Q]

I would have put that quote in earlier, but the site wouldn't let me see the 2nd page of the article unless I registered. Guess my cookie timed our or something so I  could get it now.

[billhoward]

[quote Robb][quote billhoward]
That's discriminatory. Why must a student-athlete or anyone else go through in four consecutive years. Doing missionary work, finding yourself, working to earn tuition, all are legitimate reasons to pause during your studies. [/quote]
Hmmm - interesting point.  Not sure how the Ivies would treat a situation where someone actually took a break from school (i.e. was not enrolled as a full-time student).  But I'm pretty sure that while you're enrolled, your Ivy eligibility is ticking away.

Even so, I'd have a hard time characterizing the policy as "discriminatory."  The Ivy league is about academics - don't like it?  You don't have to go here.  There are plenty of Jock U's where you can prioritize athletics over academics.  I think it's a good policy - if you want a red shirt, take it before you enroll.  Once you enroll, we expect to you to focus on studies first, athletics second. If athletics has distracted you enough that you don't finish in 4 years, then it's time to either give up the athletics and finish your degree or leave school so you can focus on athletics.[/quote]

College is not exclusively for 18- to 22-year-olds. Also, wouldn't you think Cornell is about more than just what goes on in academic buildings? If Cornell housing wouldn't allow black women students to live in dorms (early 1900s), were they getting the full Cornell experience? Dick Bertrand wasn't allowed to compete in the NCAA tournament simply because he was Canadian and over 22 or over 25. The rule might have had a legimate purpose, such as not allowing (Canadian) hockey players who'd been in a semi-pro environment (at a time when the pro vs. amateur issue was a big thing) for several years after high school, but that's not the way it was written. It was a blanket prohibition on (I believe) Canadians who were over a certain age, and it had lots of loopholes, such as being American, or being in the service.

Even the pro/amateur issue was a matter of class, some might say. Patricians could afford to train for the Olympics by living off their family wealth. That's why a lot of Harvard, Yale, and Cornell men were Olympians in the early 20th century. Home Depot (um, if it existed) wouldn't pay you to take a year off to train, and if they did pay you, you would have lost amateur status.

[Robb]

[quote billhoward]
College is not exclusively for 18- to 22-year-olds. Also, wouldn't you think Cornell is about more than just what goes on in academic buildings? If Cornell housing wouldn't allow black women students to live in dorms (early 1900s), were they getting the full Cornell experience? Dick Bertrand wasn't allowed to compete in the NCAA tournament simply because he was Canadian and over 22 or over 25. The rule might have had a legimate purpose, such as not allowing (Canadian) hockey players who'd been in a semi-pro environment (at a time when the pro vs. amateur issue was a big thing) for several years after high school, but that's not the way it was written. It was a blanket prohibition on (I believe) Canadians who were over a certain age, and it had lots of loopholes, such as being American, or being in the service.

Even the pro/amateur issue was a matter of class, some might say. Patricians could afford to train for the Olympics by living off their family wealth. That's why a lot of Harvard, Yale, and Cornell men were Olympians in the early 20th century. Home Depot (um, if it existed) wouldn't pay you to take a year off to train, and if they did pay you, you would have lost amateur status.[/quote]
All very interesting historical information.  But none of it seems to have much relevance to the Ivy League practice of strongly encouraging athletes to use their 4 years of NCAA eligibility within their first 4 years of enrollment.

And of course Cornell is about more than academics - but that doesn't mean that its many missions should all have equal priority.  Academics is #1.  Period.

[Omie]

Not that it matters much now but Heisenberg's site just reported Brad Thiessen chose Northeastern ::wtf::

[redredux]

Anyone know anything about the Crimson's new goalie recruit -- Kyle Richter?  He plays in the same league as Scrivens.  With Daigneau graduating and his backups not being too stellar, I'd expect Richter to see playing time next year.  Just wondering if anyone who follows the recruiting scene closely has any scoop on him.

[calgARI '07]

Keith Seabrook committed to Denver for '07.  No clue if he was interested in Cornell but I really had my hopes up for him being that second defenseman for next year.

[redredux]

That second D recruit for next year seems like a necessity unless Schafer knows O'Byrne and Pokulok aren't leaving.  I noticed there's a D from the Notre Dame Hounds (Luke Brisebois) still unaccounted for.

[calgARI '07]

[quote redredux]That second D recruit for next year seems like a necessity unless Schafer knows O'Byrne and Pokulok aren't leaving.  I noticed there's a D from the Notre Dame Hounds (Luke Brisebois) still unaccounted for.[/quote]

Even if he knows they aren't leaving (it'd be shocking if neither were leaving), something tells me they are going to want nine defensemen next year.

[Trotsky]

[quote redredux]Anyone know anything about the Crimson's new goalie recruit -- Kyle Richter?  He plays in the same league as Scrivens.  With Daigneau graduating and his backups not being too stellar, I'd expect Richter to see playing time next year.  Just wondering if anyone who follows the recruiting scene closely has any scoop on him.[/quote]

I think I recall seeing something about him on the USCHO D-1 Forum "Harvard Deserves a Thread" thread.  The gist was that he's solid, not eye-popping, like Scrivens.