Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:38 pm EDT
There was a very interesting collegiate sports article on ESPN.com yesterday about a proposed eligibility rules change by Michael Rogers, chair of the NCAA Division I Amateurism Cabinet, to allow coaches to recruit athletes from professional teams.
Most interesting? That NCAA hockey has "balked at the proposal, which will be amended to exempt that sport."
Basically, the rule change would allow athletes who play alongside a professional teammate in a given sport -- if those athletes do not take what's considered a salary -- from jeopardizing their NCAA eligibility for doing so. The current rules affect plenty of foreign athletes in sports like volleyball and basketball, who play on sponsored club teams with salaried teammates while U.S. athletes are playing high-school sports.
From ESPN:
Of the 490 incoming athletes penalized for amateurism violations last year, 434 were foreign students, according to the NCAA. Punishments range from being forced to sit out games to, more rarely, permanent ineligibility.
Rogers claims the rule change would "reduce the size of our headaches" for the NCAA in investigating an athlete's eligibility by tracking down spotty records or the status of former teammates. The opposition worries that "professionalized" players have an unfair advantage, and that U.S. athletes could be left behind:
"There are a certain number of coaches who say only Americans should get these scholarships," said Bill Walton, head volleyball coach at the University of Houston. "We hear that from some parents, too. They've been paying $6,000 to $10,000 a year for volleyball [training], and feel like their kid should get that scholarship."
At first glance, we figured NCAA hockey coaches and conferences were attempting to quell any influx of European quasi-professionals into their ranks; a bunch of prospects like Tampa Bay Lightning defenseman Victor Hedman(notes), who was playing with the pros as early as 17.
But according to the NCAA, they opted out of this proposal for another reason: Out of concern for Canadian Major Junior hockey.
The men's ice hockey community - including USA Hockey, the coaches association and several conferences - believed that Proposal No. 2009-22 could negatively affect the sport at the NCAA level. They believe that allowing men's ice hockey student-athletes who participate on teams with paid teammates would open the door to participate in Major Junior A hockey, which current rules prohibit. Major Junior A is a competitive league overseen by the Canadian Hockey League, generally recognized as a professional league for players between 16 and 20 years old.
Proposal No. 2009-22 targets what some have called "vicarious professionalism," a circumstance that professionalizes prospects who participate on teams with professional athletes, even if the prospects are not paid more than actual and necessary expenses.
The ice hockey community believes that prospects who wish to participate in NCAA hockey would choose to participate in Major Junior A hockey before coming to college, and the recruit could be influenced to take action that could jeopardize his eligibility at the NCAA level (taking more than actual and necessary expenses, signing with an agent or signing a professional contract that provides more than actual and necessary expenses). Additionally, time demands of participation in the Major Junior A hockey league could hurt a recruit's academic performance.
Yeah, academics. Whatever.
Seriously, though, it sounds like a combination of trying to save potential student-athletes from temptation and, in the end, the NCAA from itself.
Opening up the floodgates for "vicarious professionals" would mean increasing the chances that Major Junior A players could be lured to the NCAA ... but it also would increase the chances that the CHL would unleash the fury on college hockey in the U.S., enticing the NCAA's potential talent to play for the Canadian league instead.
Better to keep the status quo for hockey, we suppose. But we heartily support the recruitment of semi-pro European babes for college volleyball teams ...
Thanks to Ryan Lambert for some insight on this; make sure to read his NCAA column here on Puck Daddy every Friday.
Puck Daddy is an NHL blog edited by Greg Wyshynski. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Montreal 5, Columbus 3 (Nov. 24)
Posted Nov 23 2009
Posted Nov 23 2009
Top Goals of the Week: November 24
Posted Nov 23 2009
Edited by MJD
Edited by 'Duk
Edited by J.E. Skeets
Edited by Greg Wyshynski
Edited by Matt Hinton
Edited by E. Brennan
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Steve Cofield
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Andy Behrens
19 Comments
1 - 19 of 19
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Hockey having an opt-out also makes sense. I'd imagine that most potential foreign hockey players are Canadian. These players have a much better idea that they might be going to study in an American university and their leagues are more serious and likely more competitive. Furthermore, records are much better kept than in places like Serbia and therefore easier to track, taking less NCAA resources.
Probably my longest comment ever, so thanks to those that read it.
Report Abuse
I started reading your something to do with volleyball and family...i got bored and skipped over to the end where you said, "Probably my longest comment ever..." and boy was I glad that I did.
Report Abuse
Neither Harvard nor real Cornell give scholarships for hockey. Couldn't tell you about SUNY-Cornell, but if those students are eligible for athletics, then I suppose the price difference would seem almost as good to a NY resident.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Seems like one of those things that should be looked at more "micro-economic" than "macro-economic" level.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
That is the main reason why most top Canadian kids play in the CHL, showing you can hang with players 18-20 when you are 15 and 16 impresses scouts more so then an 18 year old playing against 20-24 year olds.
Report Abuse
best post i ever read,
Report Abuse
Just my two cents, but I am RIGHT
Report Abuse
The NCAA is a joke anyways. It should be disbanded and each sport should form its own governing body. The needs of student athletes in fencing ARE NOT the same as those in football or basketball and to apply the exact same rules across the board is ridiculous.
I must question how genuine anyone is here who posts how these athletes should go to colleges in the U.S. Most of the time it would seem for the benefit of the schools and NOT the athlete. It kills me when people cry about athletes leaving their schools early to go pro...well, duh. I went to college to learn to make a living. If I was offered a chance to do something where the minimum wage was 10x what I would earn at graduation, you can bet I would have left. You can always go to school and learn. The body of an athlete has a very finite shelf life and if it can be used the the benefit of the that athlete's wallet, good for him/her.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
1 - 19 of 19