It's funny for all the back and forth about whether or not this league had a chance to be succesful or not, it never dawned on me that there could be issues with College eligibility. If there is an issue, that will be crushing!!

The amateurism requirements are easy to find but sufficiently vague so the NCAA can interpret how they wish. If the new league wants any chance to succeed it should mirror to a T, the NAHL program in terms of what players recieve (equipment/sticks/meals etc.).

Having said that, there are also a number of local kids committed to hockey east and ECAC schools who were drafted by NCDC clubs this year with the intent of playing some number of games before/after prep season. Can't imagine any will suit up if their advisors and NCAA coaches don't give them the OK.

Discuss away. What does that have to do with false accusations about "shady accounting" by the LCD here? I'll leave the door open for the possibility that there's actual debate about the impact of the league on NCAA eligibility, but considering that I, too, can find nothing about that anywhere, I discount that as being Mr. 5 Incher and a buddy talking about it while they stand at the corner glass lamenting the unfairness of life.

Prove me wrong. Post a link to something credible.

I will step aside as you Lawyers hammer away at this but.... I do hope it works out as a stronger, local, Jr level league is beneficial to us all.

The reason why USA Hockey denied them status was simply their business model and accounting if I am correct? Am I wrong? Its pretty funny the guy who claims to be the internet lawyer calls people names like Mr 5 Incher.

Prove me wrong. Post something positive by someone besides USPHL themselves or their mags they cater to and advertise in.
You would think an NCAA coach would have been quoted in the 9 months since this league became apparent.

I think the colleges coaches remain on the sidelines because they do not want to upset the powers that be. The USPHL to date has always had a good relationship with the College programs. Now it will be interesting to see how things play out.

I wish then well.

What powers that be? This is the National Collegiate Development League and its "Free". Nothing is free.

Never claimed to be an "Internet Lawyer." Who, by the way, would still be a lawyer, whose practice centers on cases involving the internet.

Felling charitable, so let me explain in layperson's terms what "slander" is. It is not a crime. If someone feels they have been slandered, they have to file a civil claim and substantiate that the comment was untrue. To be awarded damages, they would likely also have to prove economic harm.

So, continuing with the metaphor, if Mr. 5 Incher really does have a 5 incher, he can't successfully claim slander, even if he can prove economic harm, because it is the truth. If he does not have a 5 incher, he would have to prove that he suffered damages directly related to the salacious lies. Meaning, he would need to be Dirk Diggler or Julian Kaye, and be able to show conclusively that business dropped off following the remark.

Thank you for the definition counselor and proving my point. You offered no reasoning for the supposed "slander". The facts are that USA Hockey did in fact deny the league status. It was because of their financial business model not level of hockey. If you can offer something besides dick jokes that would be helpful to back up your point.

Sorry you can't absorb information for more than 15 seconds. The accusation of "shady accounting" is completely unfounded. Also, until proven otherwise, I remain convinced that the only people talking about the possibility of players' NCAA eligibility being tainted are the people here with tiny little hardons about the USPHL (for God knows what reason).

But, I know four words that will cause you to forget again.

Oh look, a squirrel!

What was the reason USA Hockey denied status?

Daaaammmmmmmmm!!!!! He just went all legal on you.

Haha. Gotta love lawyers

No disagreement there. To use your words, the "financial business model." They didn't like the idea of the younger teams paying the freight. USA Hockey may not agree with it (even though that, BTW, is EXACTLY how the USNTDP program is funded - are their players ineligible for the NCAA?).

But that doesn't make it "shady" (which is a term that implies they are cooking the books or embezzling).

Or Shady could mean others are footing the bill with unrealistic dreams of being "moved up". Big difference between USA Hockey and the NCDC. How is this league going to be insured because falling under USA Hockey carries a considerable insurance policy. I consider charging youth teams "extra" so Tier 3 players can be supported "shady". Do you think it's broken out in a line item on the invoice? I seriously doubt that.

What is slanderous? That it may or may not be compliant and NCAA will determine the eligibility? What do you think the reason USA Hockey denied NCDC status? They publicly stated it was because of their business model and accounting for the new league. Last time I checked this was a discussion board. Hence, the Hockey D Board. I wish your son the best in NCDC.

Generals are not a good example. They had some money behind it but did not have people with junior hockey experience running it. The Lovells are slowly getting it going.

I don't think anyone here has a problem with theories, conjecture or opinions or anything else as it pertains to a league. The problem around here seems to be the limited tolerance for picking on kids, slandering individuals or posting childish and crud things... debate away!