Ncrha / Ncaa Eligibility Question

[imasamurai]

I could have sworn that I read somewhere, I don't remember if it was on the NCRHA.Org web site or not, that the NCRHA has adopted the NCAA 5 year eligibilty rule.

Am I correct? If I am, when does the rule go into effect?

Also, if the rule were to go into effect for the 2008-2009 season, when does the clock start ticking? For example, do you count the 2008-2009, 2007-2008, 2006-2007, 2005-2006 & 2004-2005 Seasons? Or, do you start counting in the 2008-2009 season.

The reason I ask is notice some teams that have guys playing for what seems like forever because they are graduate assistants. Sure doesn't seem fair to the younger guys.

[Leaferguy]

I believe it started in 03-04. I know I've used three of my years and this will be my fourth. My first season in ECRHA B Division was in 04-05.

Another guy on our team played eight seasons with our team, and I think last year was his last one eligible, which would mean it was 03-04. Either way, a lot of guys are going to hit that wall this year and next.

[imasamurai]

I think I found what I was looking for http://www.ncrha.org/pps-medias/4262.pdf

C.General Player Eligibility

i. The NCRHA does not discriminate against gender and is an equal-opportunity
organization that permits coed participation.

ii. Effective September 1, 2007: A student-athlete shall not be eligible for
participation in the NCRHA if the individual received pay for participation in the
sport at any point in the past or is contracted to do so in the future.
a) In the context of this rule, pay shall be defined as receiving compensation
(monetary or otherwise) in excess of the sum total of the cost of uniform,
equipment and travel/practice/game expenses.
b) In the event of a challenge upon eligibility under this rule, players who have
participated in professional or semi-professional roller hockey leagues must
submit documentation indicating that pay was not received by said player.
iii. Student athletes appearing on any NCRHA roster must be age seventeen (17) or
older as of September 1st of the current season.
a) Players over age 17 but under age 18 must have written parental consent to
participate in NCRHA activities.
iv. Student athletes shall have five (5) years of NCRHA eligibility.
v. Junior or Community College players participating in Division III shall have three
(3) years of Division III eligibility.
a) Years of eligibility used in Division III shall count towards the five-year total
eligibility provided to all NCRHA student athletes
vi. GRANDFATHER RULE – The current standard for NCRHA student athletes
is five years of eligibility. Eligibility is only charged to seasons sanctioned by the NCRHA
(2003-2004 and later). Players who participated in the Collegiate Roller Hockey
League (CRHL) are not charged against the five-year maximum for seasons prior
to 2003-2004. In addition, Article V Section C shall not apply to players who have
already established eligibility with NCRHA.

[imasamurai]

At a glance, it should affect a team like like the Towson DI team a lot.

I took the following off the NCRHA web site:

Stein: 03-04,04-05,05-06,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left
Pantaleo: 03-04,04-05,05-06,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left
Tamburino: 02-03,03-04,04-05,05-06,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left (02-03 Grandfathered Out)
Harrell: 02-03,03-04,04-05,05-06,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left (02-03 Grandfathered Out)
Pumphrey: 02-03,03-04,04-05,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left
Vensel: 02-03,03-04,04-05,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left
Burke: 02-03,03-04,04-05,05-06,06-07 *1 year of eligibility left (02-03 Grandfathered Out)

Out of the 11 guys on their roster page, 7 will play their last season of eligibility in 07-08. The 08-09 season should see a big change in the Towson roster.

[imasamurai]

Took a look at RIT's DI roster and they'll see some major changes after the 2007-2008 season as well.

[GoRangrHky]

The NCRHA rule is different than the NCAA rule. The NCAA rule states that must complete your 4 years of eligibility within 5 years of starting classes at the University. The NCRHA rule allows you to play 5 years total, with no regard to the time between when you started and when you complete it (meaning you could take 3 years off between undergrad and grad school, and still be able to play for as many years as you have remaining), so long as you are taking the appropriate number of classes/ credits.

The seasons go back, so any seasons already played (in the NCRHA) are counted towards the total. I think the 'Effective Sept. 1 '07' part was designed more for the monetary part of that rule.

[MBurke]

At a glance, it should affect a team like like the Towson DI team a lot.

Sort of. Half those guys graduated and won't even be on the roster this season.

[imasamurai]

I think guys playing for 6 years (with the Grandfather clause) is just plain wrong. It doesn't give the younger guys who started on their B teams a chance to taste D1 because they were boxed out by the older guys who are on the 10 year plan for their Masters. Seems the older guys are only thinking about themselves and not the overall program. I'm sure it causes some resentment among the players and has a negative effect on morale.

[GoRangrHky]

There was a whole thread on this already. Some people say it's good because it allows guys to pass down info and show players the right way to do things, since many teams have a change in leadership (rather than a coach who does everything and will always be there). Others think the way that you do. The number of people playing for 6 years in the league is very minimal, maybe 10-12 total in all of the ECRHA. I can really only think of 5 off the top of my head, and I don't even know if 3 of them will be playing next year. Most of those players are the ones who created their teams or have a strong hand in it's growth, and believe me, do care about it.

At all levels of collegiate hockey (and college sports in general), there's always going to be a kid who plays behind an upperclassman and then doesn't get a spot after that person graduates becasue a stud freshman comes in. Or they come in at the same time as someone else, and never get a chance to make it. So to say that 5 or 6 people (in total) are really holding back the league or completely squashing the chances of someone playing is really pushing it. It's not like there's a team out there who has full lines of players who have been playing for 6-7-8 years, it's a few players scattered over a few teams.

[imasamurai]

GoRangrKky - Thanks for your input. Sorry to be redundant with a similar thread. I didn't do a search to see if this topic was discussed before.

IMO - The NCAA rule works better: 5 years of eligibility to play 4 years. And, the sport would stand a better chance, some day, of possibly becoming an NCAA sport.

[Drexel63]

And, the sport would stand a better chance, some day, of possibly becoming an NCAA sport.

Yep, then we would have a 1.2% chance instead of just 1%...

I hate to be a pessimist about the NCAA affiliation topic, but seriously... take a look through the archives of this forum and you will find enough material on this subject alone to keep you reading for a month without stopping... This has been debated, alluded to, and aspired for since I was a freshman in '99...

[GoRangrHky]

The NCAA will never make something a sport/ not make something a sport because of the eligibility requirements is already has in place. The NCAA would not simply 'absorb' the NCRHA, but would simply make it's own league of teams that are required to conform to it's standards. And at that, everyone who had played in the NCRHA would still have all their NCAA eligibility left, since the only thing that would prevent NCAA eligibility would be professional particiapation, which the NCRHA has no part of.

Anyway, 4 in 5 makes little sense, especially to clubs that have floundering membership as it is. And for that, I would look at the 64% of teams in the ECRHA alone that don't have B teams.

[RustyPipes27]

I think guys playing for 6 years (with the Grandfather clause) is just plain wrong. It doesn't give the younger guys who started on their B teams a chance to taste D1 because they were boxed out by the older guys who are on the 10 year plan for their Masters. Seems the older guys are only thinking about themselves and not the overall program. I'm sure it causes some resentment among the players and has a negative effect on morale.

Are you speaking from experience or are you just throwing out assumptions? I'm a grad student at Towson and we've hardly had any problems with grad students being around. I've been here for a year and there is zero animosity between the young guys and the old guys. If some 18 or 19-year old isn't good enough to beat out a washed up 25-year old like myself, then that's his problem anyways, right?

And one more thing for clarification...while I'm not on your alleged "ten year plan," there are a lot of master's students who have full-time jobs, take a couple of classes a year, and take years to graduate.

I do agree with your stance on the five-year rule though. I think five years is enough -- this year will be my fifth and final year, as I'll be picking up my master's in the fall. I just urge you to not make assumptions about the lives, situations, and intentions of your peers unless you know them firsthand.

[smiller]

I think guys playing for 6 years (with the Grandfather clause) is just plain wrong. It doesn't give the younger guys who started on their B teams a chance to taste D1 because they were boxed out by the older guys who are on the 10 year plan for their Masters. Seems the older guys are only thinking about themselves and not the overall program. I'm sure it causes some resentment among the players and has a negative effect on morale.

As one of the "younger" guys myself, I can say having the more experienced players around actually helped me alot. Now granted I played on Towson's B team my 3 years there but I can tell you my first year when we had 2 players who werent first year players it was rough, especially early in the season. The older guys on the DI team helped us alot by just talking to us and helping us at practice. Now in my second and third years when the team was more experience we had much better seasons. In addition to that we had guys move up from the B team to the DI team.

As for your statement about the older guys not thinking about the program...I can assure you that wasnt the case at Towson. The guys on the DI were more than supportive of us. They did whatever they could to help us. And for that I say thanks to those guys.

The only reason I felt I had to say something is because we were the example used. So I felt I should throw in my $0.02 about having those guys around. So I guess what Im saying is I can see what you mean, but its not always true.

[JLambertUMSL]

The NCAA thing is irrelevant. We don't need the NCAA.

Roller hockey is fortunate that it isn't an NCAA sport, because the NCAA is horribly corrupt. College roller hockey can grow on its own, as long as the NCRHA provides strong leadership and guidance. Forget the NCAA.

But that's another subject.

To be worthy of being called Collegiate, the NCRHA needs rules like the eligibility limit. You have to start somewhere. The five-year rule is a must.

I'll be the first to point out that UMSL has a few guys who played pre-NCRHA and have played five or six years already (my brother Ben is one of them, our captain and best returning player, Adam Clarke, is another, and of course you all know Mr. BigPads, the only DII goaltender ever to post back-to-back shutouts at Nationals).

There are players like them at many different schools. SLU has a couple as well. We might as well concede that these guys, and their teams, are the lucky ones, and move on. We're only a year away from almost all of the six-year players being phased out.

As for the NCRHA rule: five years is enough. I hear lots of strange arguments for changing that rule, usually in the form of a tearjerker scenario that sees some hypothetical player get screwed by the system.

But the expiration of your NCRHA eligibility doesn't mean you have to say goodbye to your organization.

Players whose eligibility has expired can share their experiences by coaching, administrating, advising, donating, and sharing whatever talents they have to publicize, guide, and nurture their club.

It will be impossible for any club to catch up to The Mighty Lion (or to get close enough to compete, at least) without:

- donations
- coaching staffs and "front offices" made up of adults
- donations
- actively building a strong tradition, piece by piece, year round
- donations
- caring about their image as a club -- passion and professionalism
- donations
- recruiting as hard as they can -- pursuing every lead (because there are many good hockey players who don't even know they have the option of playing college roller hockey), branching out to alma mater high schools, being visible at the rinks, on campus, and in the community.
- donations
- a culture of hard work -- not just "workin' hard when I feel like it," but an ingrained work ethic, because it means something to wear this jersey.
- donations
- donations
- donations

Alumni can help with all of the above.

As players' eligibility expires, hopefully that means stronger clubs because of the growing network of alumni.

I think the most successful clubs over the next few years might be the ones whose alumni stay involved. Who has more resources (financial and otherwise) at his disposal: a college student or a college graduate? A 20-year-old or a 28-year-old? Who's more likely to command the respect that allows a leader to set high standards? Who's more likely to have the guts to follow through on those high standards? Who's probably going to have more real-world experience with business, relating with different kinds of people, whatever?

I'm guessing it'll be the adults.

STAY INVOLVED.