I think MSU should be very proud. UM has 12-13 NHL draft picks and MSU only one, yet the Mavericks cleaned up. Except for the one goal by MN, they were manhandled. Guess it goes back to who’s better coached and who plays better together as a team. I don’t think Denver can keep up with MSU.
Happy for Mankato. Well coached team and it shows. Bummed the Gophers lost, but they are a much younger team than the Mavs even though they have probably higher end talent, experience and age pays off come tourney time.
Great win by the mavericks, they were clearly the better team.
Happy for Mankato. Well coached team and it shows. Bummed the Gophers lost, but they are a much younger team than the Mavs even though they have probably higher end talent, experience and age pays off come tourney time.
Agree on the age portion as well. I believe they said during the Denver game they had several 24 and even a 25 year old on Denver.
Kudos to the Mavs they were better.
I believe Mots has the Gophs heading in the right direction. Which is good for college hockey and Minnesota hockey overall.
I’m still trying to figure out why that Bump kid and the reigning Mr Hockey from Roseau are going to Vermont.
Strand is most likely going because he is small. Where a lot of the smaller kids go is out east. Bump I am not sure the ties there. If I had to guess most of the MN schools probably want him to play juniors first.
ya the MN schools definitely dropped the ball on letting Bump go out state. He was a lot of fun to watch in the state tourney.
Agree on the age portion as well. I believe they said during the Denver game they had several 24 and even a 25 year old on Denver.
I don’t think a lot of people realize how college hockey has shifted regarding the age of players. Rather than being largely 18-21-year-olds, the ages have shifted and there are many more 21+ year old players coming in as “freshmen” to do their 1-2 years in college as a sort of “finishing school”
The pressure now is to get the top prospects out of high school and into juniors as soon as they are eligible (usually when they turn 17). The idea from what I’ve heard is that players/families are under pressure to do more development either in juniors or private Puck U prep schools where the players can be kept away from all the rules and regulations of either HS leagues or the NCAA and basically function as mini-pros with no rules.
The Gophers and Lucia were very much against this model of using college as a finishing school for older and foreign-born players, but it sounds like that’s the direction the current is running. There will probably always be the 18 year old who played out his HS carreer and joins a college team as an 18 YO freshman, but if this trend of 21+ year olds showing up as freshmen is going to make it tough sledding for those younger kids. Also, how long are programs going to be able to resist shifting to recruiting primarily 21+-year-olds rather than 18-year-olds because I’d think there’s going to be a big advantage to the schools who shift more toward filling their rosters with older, bigger, and more developed players.
ya the MN schools definitely dropped the ball on letting Bump go out state. He was a lot of fun to watch in the state tourney.
We will see…
I don’t think a lot of people realize how college hockey has shifted regarding the age of players. Rather than being largely 18-21-year-olds, the ages have shifted and there are many more 21+ year old players coming in as “freshmen” to do their 1-2 years in college as a sort of “finishing school”
Don Lucia actually tried to make this a rule his last season as Gophers head coach. It would have prohibited any freshman over the age of 20 to play college hockey. Of course a couple other coaches from the Big Ten were on his side like Red Berenson and Tony Granato, but the rest of D1 hockey was against it and ultimately, it did not go through.
That is a big reason why the Big Ten has not been the league they thought it would since formation. They recruit the younger, NHL draft picks. The other schools like Mankatos, Duluths, and many of the NCHC schools recruit older, more developed players. Older players are generally better at playing defense and stick around longer. Plus a 24 year old is probably significantly more physically built than a 19 year old too. Its pretty rare to find a player that can make the jump directly from HS to D1 nowadays. There’s maybe 1 or 2 on a roster whereas years ago half the team was made up that way.
Right now, the route to success is to recruit older, more developed players that will stick around for a few seasons. If it was the other way around, Michigan would not have lost a game all season because they are the all-star version of a college team.
Just an all out beat down by the Mavs.
I love the older players in NCAA, it just makes for a better and more competitive league all around. That leads to more top tier talent coming in from Canada and overseas and the college game getting better and better.
Crazy how as most players are coming in older, there’s also more coming in super young. The big 4 prospects from Michigan all started college as 17 year olds. Luke Hughes was a stud this year and should have been a senior in high school. The other 3 were in the same boat as freshmen last year.
That is a big reason why the Big Ten has not been the league they thought it would since formation.
The big ten (i.e. breaking up the old WCHA) is one of the worst things to happen to college hockey in my lifetime. Part of the reason the Big Ten has not been what they thought it would be is you can’t just scrap rivalries that are 50+ years old and replace them with new opponents and expect it to be anywhere near as exciting for the average fan.
I’m mainly a bulldogs fan, but I’d watch a gophers/UND regular season game in a heartbeat. You couldn’t pay me money to watch a gophers vs ohio state regular season game.
The big ten (i.e. breaking up the old WCHA) is one of the worst things to happen to college hockey in my lifetime. Part of the reason the Big Ten has not been what they thought it would be is you can’t just scrap rivalries that are 50+ years old and replace them with new opponents and expect it to be anywhere near as exciting for the average fan.
I hear ya. Nothing can be done now and it’s stuck how it is. I think that even the most die hard Gopher or Badger fan would agree that they’d still rather be playing North Dakota and Denver instead of Penn State or Sparty. Luckily the geographic proximity of many of these teams allows for non-conference play almost every season. St Cloud played every single other D1 team in the state this season. Mankato regularly schedules Duluth, St Cloud, and Minnesota when they are able to because its easy to play them in terms of geography.
I think that even the most die hard Gopher or Badger fan would agree that they’d still rather be playing North Dakota and Denver instead of Penn State or Sparty.
100%. I hate how people rag on the Big Ten saying they dont have any good teams. 2 of the 4 in the Frozen 4 were from there. The NCHC is probably top to bottom the best right now, but BigTen has some good teams too.
Those old rivalries were so dang fun. Arenas were always packed too. About the only opponent that was boring was Michigan Tech. But their pep band was absolutely fantastic at the X!
About the only opponent that was boring was Michigan Tech.
Anchorage was an annual door mat too. They were just never competitive.
Just an all out beat down by the Mavs.
I love the older players in NCAA, it just makes for a better and more competitive league all around. That leads to more top tier talent coming in from Canada and overseas and the college game getting better and better.
Crazy how as most players are coming in older, there’s also more coming in super young. The big 4 prospects from Michigan all started college as 17 year olds. Luke Hughes was a stud this year and should have been a senior in high school. The other 3 were in the same boat as freshmen last year.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimruis wrote:</div>
That is a big reason why the Big Ten has not been the league they thought it would since formation.The big ten (i.e. breaking up the old WCHA) is one of the worst things to happen to college hockey in my lifetime. Part of the reason the Big Ten has not been what they thought it would be is you can’t just scrap rivalries that are 50+ years old and replace them with new opponents and expect it to be anywhere near as exciting for the average fan.
I’m mainly a bulldogs fan, but I’d watch a gophers/UND regular season game in a heartbeat. You couldn’t pay me money to watch a gophers vs ohio state regular season game.
That was ten years ago. Trust me the big ten teams and the big ten schools are plenty happy to be in the big ten. versus a regional WCHA and the money they make. Ask Michigan how recruiting is going now in the big ten.
Winning the national championship in hockey is the least recruiting tool in all of college sports.
So let me ask this if other college sports were alowing 25-26 year olds would it make the overall sport better. Basketball football etc… More competitive overall maybe but the actual sport better. Doubtful.
Let the roasting begin but you should not be playing college sports at 25-26.
May as well play high school at 21.
Super senior 
Other sports do allow it, or at least they did. Chris weinke won the Heisman at like age 28
So if they don’t allow age 25+ then no young freshman either? Why keep talent out of the league?
That was ten years ago. Trust me the big ten teams and the big ten schools are plenty happy to be in the big ten. versus a regional WCHA and the money they make. Ask Michigan how recruiting is going now in the big ten
I couldn’t care less how much money any of the big ten schools are cashing in. As a hockey fan, I care about watching good hockey with storied rivalries and traditions. Sure, a couple schools are making more money from it, but the hockey fans lost in this one.
Other sports do allow it, or at least they did. Chris weinke won the Heisman at like age 28
So if they don’t allow age 25+ then no young freshman either? Why keep talent out of the league?
So your one example is from 20 years ago.
No disrespect but times have changed.
What did he do again after he won a national chip.
To your second question…is that really the top college talent at that age. Seams like that is a wanna be professional at that age. Why keep them out? Because they are not college age. Go play in the AHL then. Oh wait they can’t because they would be already if they were good enough.
So a good high school player should be denied a scholarship because some 26 year old who won’t graduate college is still living his pipe dream?
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ripjiggen wrote:</div>
That was ten years ago. Trust me the big ten teams and the big ten schools are plenty happy to be in the big ten. versus a regional WCHA and the money they make. Ask Michigan how recruiting is going now in the big tenI couldn’t care less how much money any of the big ten schools are cashing in. As a hockey fan, I care about watching good hockey with storied rivalries and traditions. Sure, a couple schools are making more money from it, but the hockey fans lost in this one.
I get it you could care less as a fan. News for you Big ten and the schools could care less about you when money is involved.
Sorry but the U of M didn’t suffer anything. Either did any of the teams in the big ten. They cashed in are still cashing in.
Why would U of M Wisconsin etc care about making more money for Mankato and Bemidji etc…sorry no there job.
Dryden McKay won the Hobey. He’s only the third goalie to ever win the award.
So a good high school player should be denied a scholarship because some 26 year old who won’t graduate college is still living his pipe dream?
Can’t say I really care how old any college hockey players are. If I could have played D1 hockey, I would have, even if that meant a couple years in juniors first. I have a feeling most high school hockey players would play D1 if they were given the opportunity.
^^^not my point but….
I get it you could care less as a fan. News for you Big ten and the schools could care less about you when money is involved.
Sorry but the U of M didn’t suffer anything. Either did any of the teams in the big ten. They cashed in are still cashing in.
Why would U of M Wisconsin etc care about making more money for Mankato and Bemidji etc…sorry no there job.
All I’m saying is college hockey fans are the ones who lost out when the big 10 formed. Not sure if you agree or disagree with that. Seems like all you care about is the $$$ the big 10 schools are raking in and making sure NCAA players are the “right” age in your eyes.
To your second question…is that really the top college talent at that age. Seams like that is a wanna be professional at that age. Why keep them out? Because they are not college age. Go play in the AHL then. Oh wait they can’t because they would be already if they were good enough.
Last I checked there’s no age limit on attending college. The hockey path leading up to college is completely different than other sports so how do you compare them. The only place high school hockey is a thing for actual good players is Minnesota. Juniors rules everywhere else, not comparable to other sports. At the end of the day I just like seeing better hockey in the college game, even if that means the team I like loses to a bunch of men that are better than them.
As far as the big 10 goes… I was gutted and p!ssed off when they killed the WCHA. Stopped watching college hockey all together for a long time. But that was 10 years ago and I eventually grew up got over it.
All I’m saying is college hockey fans are the ones who lost out when the big 10 formed.
Wouldn’t say that every fan has lost out. Certainly Mankato has benefited from it. Grand Forks still fills their massive arena for every home game too. You could even argue that Duluth has benefited as most of their success in recent memory has come since they joined the NCHC.
Would I prefer that the old WCHA still existed? Sure. I still watch it and I still enjoy it though. The NCHC has proven to be a formidable conference since it was started and it’s entertaining almost every weekend. I would personally like to see Mankato in it too.
You make a valid point, but I miss the rivalries.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ripjiggen wrote:</div>
I get it you could care less as a fan. News for you Big ten and the schools could care less about you when money is involved.
Sorry but the U of M didn’t suffer anything. Either did any of the teams in the big ten. They cashed in are still cashing in.
Why would U of M Wisconsin etc care about making more money for Mankato and Bemidji etc…sorry no there job.All I’m saying is college hockey fans are the ones who lost out when the big 10 formed. Not sure if you agree or disagree with that. Seems like all you care about is the $$$ the big 10 schools are raking in and making sure NCAA players are the “right” age in your eyes.
Casual fan probably, but there is more college hockey on tv now than there ever was.
Don’t get me wrong loved the wcha but it’s long gone and college hockey is more prosperous for many teams because of it.
You make a valid point, but I miss the rivalries.
I think every Minnesota hockey fan misses the WCHA. The bitterness eventually goes away, just faster for some than others.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ripjiggen wrote:</div>
To your second question…is that really the top college talent at that age. Seams like that is a wanna be professional at that age. Why keep them out? Because they are not college age. Go play in the AHL then. Oh wait they can’t because they would be already if they were good enough.Last I checked there’s no age limit on attending college. The hockey path leading up to college is completely different than other sports so how do you compare them. The only place high school hockey is a thing for actual good players is Minnesota. Juniors rules everywhere else, not comparable to other sports. At the end of the day I just like seeing better hockey in the college game, even if that means the team I like loses to a bunch of men that are better than them.
As far as the big 10 goes… I was gutted and p!ssed off when they killed the WCHA. Stopped watching college hockey all together for a long time. But that was 10 years ago and I eventually grew up got over it.
Nope there is not an age but there should be just like junior ranks in Canada. I am not saying kids should not play juniors first but at age 26 you should not be playing college athletics either. Especially when there is no intention in getting a college degree.
Not butt hurt just think it is silly.
Just like I thought I was silly when Weinke won the heisman at 28. Playing against teenagers.
Kind of like and 18 year old winning a trophy in pop warner.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
