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.