Tom Keegan wrote:
 
[. . .]
 
Thank you for the info.
 
>>On a personal note, I find it strange that NCAA Division I Football and
> Basketball seem to be able to produce highly competitive products with a
> preponderance of 18 year old freshmen while NCAA Division I Hockey allows
> for the extra two years of junior competition and 20 year old freshmen at
> the expense of the true student-athlete that has just graduated from high
> school.<<
>
I'll admit that I have no data to back me up, but I disagree with regard to
football.  It seems to me that with so many scholarships to juggle, that
football teams make much more use of "redshirting" than other sports.  I
know quite frequently I hear the term "true freshman" as if it were
something unusual.
 
The point has been made that there is no equivalent of the USHL for
football, but football does make good use of prep schools.  My daughter
attended a prep school in which about 90% of the football team were
postgraduates, and one of the schools they played was for postgraduates
only.  By contrast, most of the hockey players at the prep schools are
traditional four year students.
 
An interesting irony (and of course this is an anecdotal individual case) is
that, but for injury, the Florida State would have started a 26 year old at
quarterback in what amounted to the national championship game
 
 
I also am unclear on what you mean by "true student-athlete."  If by that
you mean someone who goes directly from high school to college, I think it's
a misnomer.  If by that you  mean a student who takes a course load that
more or less resembles that of the majority of the student body, then I'm
not so sure that the 18 year old freshmen in football and basketball are
"true student-athletes."
 
Clay
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.