Ice Hockey DBoard

The Official New England Ice Hockey DBoard 

Visit The DBoard Online Store - https://www.cafepress.com/icehockeydboard

Click Here to Visit Our Facebook Page

email: icehockeydboard@yahoo.com

Return to Website  > Index  > High School & Prep Hockey  > High School & Prep Hockey  > Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey
Recent Posts
 
High School & Prep Hockey
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
a
anon
Jun 29, 2017 - 8:47PM
Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey

Anon
anon
Anon
anon
Anon
anon
Anon
anon
Everyone's an internet lawyer. Guess there are a long list of lawsuits about to happen cause this issue, the strucutre of the leage, and the compliance with USAH/NCAA has been discussed in many online blogs, hockey rags, league meetings etc.


Apparently the first lawsuit this person will file will be with USA Hockey. They didn't like the funding model and denied them status. How dare anyone's have an opinion on a discussion board. Has NCAA said anything about the league? I was looking for a quote from a coach or anyone associated with NCAA but haven't been able to find anything.
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.


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.
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?
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).

a
Anon
Jun 29, 2017 - 9:20PM
Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey

anon
Anon
anon
Anon
anon
Anon
anon
Anon
anon
Everyone's an internet lawyer. Guess there are a long list of lawsuits about to happen cause this issue, the strucutre of the leage, and the compliance with USAH/NCAA has been discussed in many online blogs, hockey rags, league meetings etc.


Apparently the first lawsuit this person will file will be with USA Hockey. They didn't like the funding model and denied them status. How dare anyone's have an opinion on a discussion board. Has NCAA said anything about the league? I was looking for a quote from a coach or anyone associated with NCAA but haven't been able to find anything.
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.


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.
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?
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.

a
Anon
Jun 28, 2017 - 10:30PM
Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey

anon
Anon
anon
Generals were terrible but were NAHL T2 NCAA compliant so what sanctions are you talking about?


NAHL is definitely compliant. Funds itself appropriately. Has USA Hockey blessing. Word us NCDC may or may not be NCAA compliant. USA Hockey raised these questions and denied Tier 2 status based upon shady accounting. NCAA is to be determined.
Better be careful what you fabricate. Posts still are traceable to an IP address, and making this kind of **** up could be judged as slanderous.


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.

a
anon
Jun 29, 2017 - 10:32AM
Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey

ANON
anon
They have no need for it. That's why the General's team was put here. I can see USAH pushing into New England thru NAHL but it will be tough with all expansion teams. What they could do at some point is invite 2 or 3 of the top NCDC programs into the NAHL but that will be on USAH's timing. Right now there seems to be no pressing need.


Look how great the Generals have done. Gonna be interesting if these kids are totally rejected because of worries about NCAA sanctions. That is the real reason USA Hockey didn't allow it as Tier 2.


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.

a
Anon
Jun 29, 2017 - 2:00PM
Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey

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!

Return to Website  > Index  > High School & Prep Hockey  > High School & Prep Hockey  > Re: USPHL vs. USA Hockey