NCAA Division II/III Rosters Will Be Different For Next Couple Seasons

Besides the obvious medical and health issues the Pandemic has certainly caused some odd things to happen around the world.  There are supply chain problems, spikes in home improvement projects, a company like Zoom becomes so popular the word Zoom is now a verb and a noun, etc.

Because this is a hockey site, the most interesting Pandemic-related item involving college-bound hockey is how the glut of college players is affecting Division II/III rosters, which in turn will affect Junior hockey again -- likely for the next two years at least.

Here's how the dominos fall:

• NCAA has allowed a blanket year of extra eligibility for all players in all sports, so there are going to be fifth-year seniors at all levels taking up roster spots.
• At the Division I level, blue chip recruits are still enrolling as freshmen and they will displace older players simply due to their talent level.  This has led to an extremely high number of Division I players transferring to Division II/III, which in turn takes up more Division II/III roster spots.
• Many 19-year-olds, who would have otherwise enrolled in Division II/III schools last year, put off their matriculation so they could keep playing vs. enrolling and having the year off. These players will be freshmen in 2021-22 along with the normal 20-year-old players who usually enroll as freshmen.
• The blanket year of extra eligibility may continue to get utilized for the next few years by student-athletes in all sports and all levels.

These dominos have caused NCAA coaches to really dig in and plan their next couple of seasons from a roster standpoint to maximize their competitiveness, while also guarding against having a potentially empty cupboard in a particular class in the future.

Many freshmen are currently realizing they are one of 30+ student-athletes on campus who all feel like they will be playing college hockey this year. 

If you are a 19- or 20-year-old Junior player this season you at least have the benefit of being able to look at rosters and speak with coaches about how much of a backlog of players each team has. Now more than ever it's time for players to do their homework and communicate effectively with any potential college programs.  As a player you will soon find out how adept your own Junior coaching staff is at college placement.

When We Last Looked At Division II/III Advancement

In hopes that we are emerging to normalcy in the world, at least as far as hockey is concerned (since this is a hockey site), it's a good time to revisit the NCAA Division II/III advancement data from 2019-20 -- when it last mattered.

The Junior Hockey Hub examines NCAA Division II/III advancement data only. That means every December I look at NCAA freshmen on official rosters and determine from what team/program they matriculated.  The Hub does not look at "commitment" information at this level because it is not stable enough to draw solid conclusions.  

Without a National Letter of Intent (NIL) as the ultimate deal-closer, a Division II/III commitment will never turn into a binding agreement.  Not all organizations, and certainly not all players, have the same level of follow-through on these commitments (e.g. the student-athlete actually enrolling in school and showing up on a roster).  Furthermore, many Division II/III teams have old-fashioned tryouts. A player could be recruited and show up at school out of shape and simply not added to the roster, for example.  Some organizations announce a commitment if a player is simply accepted by the school in question.  

Therefore the Junior Hockey Hub only concerns itself with advancement data, which is irrefutable.

During the last full season of Division II/III hockey in 2019-20, the United States Premier Hockey League (USPHL) Premier Division had just secured its first "title" with 120 direct advancements.  The Premier Division knocked off the longtime King of the Hill Eastern Hockey League (EHL) for this title. The EHL came in with 113 that season.

As with all stats, however, they need to be further examined to tell the real picture.  The EHL was the clear leader in overall performance as it averaged 6.28 advancements per team, compared to a only 2.35 per Premier Division team.  The tuition-free National Collegiate Development Conference (NCDC) was actually in second place with 5.58 advancement per team, followed by USA Hockey Tier II North American Hockey League in third with 4.0. The Premier Division was fourth and the NA3HL rounded out the top five with 1.55 advancements per team.

Back in 2015 the EHL was responsible for 140 advancements, which was 28 percent of all incoming NCAA Division II/III freshmen.  That was a pretty stunning number.  It isn't that the EHL has suddenly faltered in its performance or mission, it's that other leagues -- chiefly the USPHL Premier Division -- have stepped up their game in terms of placement.  

The fact the Premier Division has continued to make gains while the USPHL launched the tuition-free NCDC is a testament to the operators who are really working at it.

The perennial leader in advancement is any team that is coached by Chris Cerrella.  He is the head coach of the EHL's New Hampshire Avalanche, and was formerly the head coach of the EHL's now-defunct Hartford Jr. Wolfpack.  In 2019-20 Cerrella's squad advanced 13 players directly to college to lead the country yet again.  

The Northern Cyclones Premier team and the New Hampshire Monarchs NDCD team -- both USPHL-but-former-EHL organizations -- were tied for second with 11 advancements.  Also with 11 and rounding out the four-way tie were the EHL's Philadelphia Revolution and the USPHL Premier's Hampton Roads Whalers.

By comparison, the leading NA3HL teams had five advancements.  There were multiple teams with this number, but five is a far cry from double digits when it comes to college placement. 

A lot of this has to do with living where the food is.  The majority of the NCAA Division II/III teams are within a two-hour drive of Boston, Mass.  Starting about six years ago many Midwestern Division III teams started showing up at Eastern Hockey League showcases in great numbers and recruiting directly from that league.  The players in the East, by nature, are willing to travel and commit to college hockey without prejudice toward geography.  They'll be student-athletes almost anywhere, but most importantly they have the resources to (a) pay Tier III fees for two or three post-high school year and (b) pay out-of-state or private school tuition or qualify for academic scholarships, which makes them open to almost any opportunity.

North American Hockey League Moves To Top Of Division I Commitment Race

Amid a pandemic that drastically affected all youth and Junior hockey in North America last year, the North American Hockey League (NAHL) rose to the top of the NCAA Division I commitment performance rankings.  These rankings are based on data from the time period July 1, 2020-June 30, 2021.

The Junior Hockey Hub is the only organization that pulls and stores NCAA Division I commitment data regularly so where the player is playing when the commitment is made is memorialized.  This is a critical point in comparing leagues and organizations regarding Division I commitments.  As players progress through the "system" toward college hockey, each organization for which a player suits up makes a commitment claim. For example, if a 16U player makes a commitment and then progresses through two Junior leagues, and maybe three Junior teams, his commitment will be claimed by up to four organizations and/or leagues.  What gets lost a couple years down the road is where that player was at the critical point in the recruiting process.

This credits the organization and the league which -- for that player -- provided the ultimate platform and service to acquire a Division I commitment.

The Junior Hockey Hub also tracks advancements, which is from where players advance directly to NCAA Division I, II and III college hockey rosters.  This data is done each fall by scouring NCAA rosters and determining where all freshmen played the prior year.  This data is important as players/parents can look at where they likely need to be playing to have the best chance at cracking a college roster spot.  

The Junior Hockey Hub does not track Division II and III commitment because that data, compared to the actual NCAA roster data on Dec. 1 of each year, is generally not close to matching up.  Given there are no National Letters of Intent for Division III athletics, the system by which players commit to programs means they plan on attending that university and they may try out for the hockey team.  Not to mention the fact they actually have to make the team.  So Division III data is only tracked by actual advancements to cut through enormous amount of "commitment" announcements that never pan out at this level.

Getting back to 2020-21 season, the NAHL toppled the United States Hockey League (USHL) in overall commitment numbers for the second year in a row.  Before you hit the Comment section -- yes I know the USHL has a clear lead in per-team commitments.  There are far fewer USHL teams than North American League teams, and only an eight-commitment difference.  However that does not take away from the fact the NAHL has steadily built its performance in this area.  

I don't believe anyone would make the argument that the USHL isn't the clear leader in overall commitment efficiency for all its players.  I will make the argument that the NAHL, under the leadership of Mark Frankenfield, has positioned itself to capitalize on the USHL's move to become a younger league.  The USHL, NAHL and USA Hockey negotiated a player movement agreement a couple years back that created a partnership between the leagues and set up a situation of apples and oranges in regards to how they attack the commitment/advancement process.  Essentially players can move from NAHL to USHL during the season per the details of the agreement. It's no longer a player-by-player negotiation.  This has -- in my opinion -- created an environment where a player has nothing to lose by joining a NAHL team, which in turn positions the NAHL as a better landing area for the 20-year-old players who fall victim to the USHL's 20-year-old player limit.  In the USHL you could play for a team for two years, for example, and be cut as a 20-year-old because that league limits the number of age-out players its teams can roster.

For many years the British Columbia Hockey League has been pointed to as the second best college placement league in North America, but the data has not supported that for the past three years and the pandemic has caused the river to change paths. If the NAHL plays its cards right, it will continue to strengthen its performance and the border-crossing for Division I-type Junior players will continue to be low even after there is free, non-pandemic movement again.

Some other notes point to the lack of high school hockey last year as the reason for a glaring drop in commitments at that level.  High school hockey commitments are mainly a Minnesota thing.  The U.S. Prep scene has been eroded by the gradual increase in academy-style hockey as some prep schools are now playing 15U-16U-18U AAA hockey instead of prep, even though the education component remains prep. For our data purposes the level of hockey being played is how the commitment is listed. A good example is Shattuck-St. Mary's prep school, which for many years has been playing AAA level hockey.  Some prep schools have followed that model while other clubs are partnering with local prep schools for education, or offering outright virtual education while playing AAA level hockey.

The 2021-22 season will also have some odd data given the number of NCAA players who take their fifth year of eligibility and the number of players who have aged out of Juniors in 2021.  This puts NCAA coaches in a fairly leveraged situation, as teams (in general) won't lose as many players while the pool of potential incoming freshman is large.  There are also a number of Division I players in the Division III transfer portal which will further tie up Division III spots for next year.

It is hoped the chart below and the narrative above has provided a good framework of information for those of you who are trying to chart a path toward college hockey. Please direct any questions via Twitter @juniorhockeyhub or via the Comments section below.

Junior Hockey Coverage With Information That Comes From Junior Hockey People

Editor's Introductory Note:
For more than a few years I've had the thought of combining a writing and reporting background with ownership and management experience in college-bound hockey programs (15U, 16U, 18U and Juniors).  

This domain was reserved seven years ago and I have annually contemplated starting this site -- until today when something was actually done about it.

The Junior Hockey Hub will specialize in presenting VERIFIED commitment and advancement data for college-bound programs as a tool for the hockey-playing public to use.  This information is available to all, but sorting and analyzing takes a little experience in the game.  Knowing what is a legitimate claim about advancement, and what is an embellishment, can save an enormous amount of time and money on behalf of players and parents.

From a content perspective I will speak directly to those involved in college-bound hockey, on the record, and allow all parties to comment.  This site will not be driven by unfounded rumors or hair-brained ideas as the basis for coverage.

We're going to present the facts and provide a format for participants to share their thoughts.  This will be a challenge as many in the hockey world -- for whatever reason -- are reticent about speaking "on the record."  

If an anonymous source is to be cited by the The Junior Hockey Hub the information will be verified with two other sources in order to determine its accuracy.  This will be a two-way street  for all involved in this great sport.

I hope you find this site to be helpful and can be involved in adult conversations regarding the world of college-bound hockey.

Enjoy!

Jeff Nygaard
The Junior Hockey Hub

About The Operator
Jeff Nygaard spent more than 20 years in Junior and youth hockey as an owner/operator, league commissioner and on-ice official.  He also worked in NCAA college athletics from 1990-96 and will use this background, combined with a rusty Mass Communications degree from North Dakota State University.   

It is his intention for this site to become a central news source for all those chasing college or professional hockey spots and a trade association of sorts for the owner/operators who provide these opportunities.

Please allow this to be your main source of 18U, 16U, high school, prep school and Junior hockey information.  Nygaard will work to ensure that every side of every pertinent topic is presented.