Attached is an article discussing the definite possibility of the NCAA adopting a “5 in 5” Rule, i.e. a rule limiting both domestic and international athletes to a maximum of five years to compete beginning upon high-school graduation or when they turn 19 years old. This age-based limitation is aimed at football and basketball, with the goal of preventing a physically mature person in their mid-20’s from competing against still-developing athletes. While this rule may be appropriate in sports where athletes routinely go straight from high school to college, it completely fails to consider hockey’s traditional development path.
It is rare for a high school hockey player to go directly to college hockey upon his or her graduation, particularly in the men’s game. In men’s hockey, the far more likely route for a player to take is to complete their junior eligibility – extending until age 20 (sometimes 21) – prior to enrolling in school (it seems that this proposed rule would impose fewer restrictions upon the women’s game, although it still is not ideal, as their post-high school participation tends to be completed at the 19U level).
In men’s hockey, only very high-end players have the opportunity to forego their final two or three years of junior eligibility and jump directly from high school to college. Almost invariably, they will choose to play for a big-name program (such as, for example, Boston University or Boston College), leaving the lesser-recruited players for smaller schools to choose from. Because of this reduced recruitment, these players tend to exhaust their junior eligibility prior to attending college, meaning they will enter college as 21-year-old freshmen. That currently is college hockey’s great equalizer: highly-regarded teenagers facing off against more lightly-recruited but older and more physically mature players.
In my opinion, college hockey in its current state is good for the development of both types of players, and also improves the college game. Older players face players with elite skill sets, so they get better. Younger players are exposed to a more physical style of play, so they get better. Both player types mean more players from whom to recruit, so the game itself gets better.
The NCAA’s rule change permitting former CHL players to compete in college, adopted just last year, significantly improved the above-detailed effect. It greatly increased the player pool to recruit from, representing an enhancement to the game’s quality by allowing very good players to compete at the college level. This rule change would eliminate that quality by once again shrinking the player recruitment pool, thus impairing the smaller schools’ ability to compete with schools possessing more prominent name recognition. Therefore, this proposal represents a reversal of sorts to that long-overdue rule change.