UNB Varsity Reds Thread (Part 4)

[RED ARMY EAST]

AUS Cap

It also means that if you are going to recruit a player, let's say to UNB, then that player would most likely have to be an impact player, as per the standards of the V-Red program. Especially with limited spots available and a commitment of 4 years to the program.
With, a team that is carrying more players (CanadaWest), the extra bodies add extra cost to the program. There is also most likely less scholarship dollars left to entice players to a program that is carrying an expanded roster.

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

UNB has been very fortunate injury-wise since the cap came into place. With the exception of a few games here and there where they played with 4 or 5 defencemen, it hasn't really affected them. But remember in the years leading up to the cap when they had a bunch of extra players, there would still be games where they played short. It's just all about luck....SMU, on the other hand, was extremely unlucky with injuries this year.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the AUS plays in the FISU games again in a couple years. The last couple of times they have UNB had 4 players away. If it falls during the regular season that could pose a potential problem in terms of icing a decent roster.

 

[AUS Fan]

I don't know why some people are obsessed with the roster cap, other than the fact that it "hurts" UNB's ability to stock the cupboard with top tier players. The only people who are speaking out on the cap are UNB people. I'm a SMU guy who sees nothing wrong with the cap despite the fact that SMU had a lot of injuries this year.

Maybe UNB can manage to sit top tier guys because these players know they have a chance every year to play for a national title, but other schools don't have that luxury.

 

[rethinking]

I think UNB fans still think about the cap because of the real reasons it was brought in. It will always be an anti-UNB rule but also an anti-AUS rule at the same time, in my mind.

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

I admit, it really hasn't hurt UNB (or the AUS for that matter) as much as I thought when it was introduced. Mind you, I still think it's dumb...just as I think it is dumb the AUS has a 30 game regular season and a cap on exhibition games when no other conference does.

 

[AUS Fan]

I think UNB fans still think about the cap because of the real reasons it was brought in. It will always be an anti-UNB rule but also an anti-AUS rule at the same time, in my mind.

And the "real" reason it was brought in? UNB was "over-recruiting" to prevent some players from going to other schools? Perhaps if UNB doesn't do this the other coaches don't lobby for the cap?

"...just as I think it is dumb the AUS has a 30 game regular season and a cap on exhibition games when no other conference does. "

The AUS has a 30 game schedule because STU left the league. I can understand a cap on exhibition games as well. Teams don't really need a dozen exhibition games. US road trips don't really do much in terms of team bonding now that players are at the school in the summer time working hockey schools and stuff and get to know each other then. It helps that UNB is 4-5 hours closer to Maine then the rest of the AUS so travel is easier.

 

[Prov1X]

And the "real" reason it was brought in? UNB was "over-recruiting" to prevent some players from going to other schools? Perhaps if UNB doesn't do this the other coaches don't lobby for the cap?

"...just as I think it is dumb the AUS has a 30 game regular season and a cap on exhibition games when no other conference does. "

The AUS has a 30 game schedule because STU left the league. I can understand a cap on exhibition games as well. Teams don't really need a dozen exhibition games. US road trips don't really do much in terms of team bonding now that players are at the school in the summer time working hockey schools and stuff and get to know each other then. It helps that UNB is 4-5 hours closer to Maine then the rest of the AUS so travel is easier.

I've complained about the cap since it was brought in, I would have less of a problem with it IF it was the entire CIS that was forced to play by the same rules, but that is not the case. Do you think that the QMJHL would be allowed to bring in a rule that said that QMJHL teams were only allowed to roster 25 kids while the rest of the CHL was allowed to roster unlimited? I just don't see why it can't be the same across the board. If it was, then I wouldn't have any issue.

 

[AUS Fan]

I've complained about the cap since it was brought in, I would have less of a problem with it IF it was the entire CIS that was forced to play by the same rules, but that is not the case. Do you think that the QMJHL would be allowed to bring in a rule that said that QMJHL teams were only allowed to roster 25 kids while the rest of the CHL was allowed to roster unlimited? I just don't see why it can't be the same across the board. If it was, then I wouldn't have any issue.

I know you've complained about the cap because it's against UNB. The entire CIS doesn't have to "play by the same rules"; several years ago the OUA wore full cages because of insurance. Should the OUA be forced to wear half visors because AUS and CW did? The AUS has a 30 game schedule because of only 7 teams. Should CW have played a 30 game schedule when they only had 7 teams? CW plays it's playoff games at the higher seed and doesn't move because of travel. Should the AUS do the same? The AUS has a best-of-3 final and play-in series when they host; the OUA plays one game to determine 3 spots. Should the OUA be forced to adopt the AUS model?

The answer to all these questions is No. These are tweaks that different conferences do for a variety of reasons. The roster cap is one of those tweaks.

To bring in the QMJHL and the CHL to this discussion is a non-starter IMHO.

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

Not that it changes your very valid point any, but the AUS was going to a 30 game schedule even if STU stayed.

 

[Rob]

And the "real" reason it was brought in? UNB was "over-recruiting" to prevent some players from going to other schools? Perhaps if UNB doesn't do this the other coaches don't lobby for the cap?

Evidence?

 

[AUS Fan]

Not that it changes your very valid point any, but the AUS was going to a 30 game schedule even if STU stayed.

Right. I'd forgotten that. Thanks for reminding me.

 

[AUS Fan]

I think UNB fans still think about the cap because of the real reasons it was brought in. It will always be an anti-UNB rule but also an anti-AUS rule at the same time, in my mind.

Perhaps we should ask rethinking what the real reasons are. And I'll ask you, Rob, what you think the reason was?

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

It also means that if you are going to recruit a player, let's say to UNB, then that player would most likely have to be an impact player, as per the standards of the V-Red program. Especially with limited spots available and a commitment of 4 years to the program.
With, a team that is carrying more players (CanadaWest), the extra bodies add extra cost to the program. There is also most likely less scholarship dollars left to entice players to a program that is carrying an expanded roster.

My meaning behind the post, was that UNB for example won't recruit out of "Jr A" ranks like they once did in the past (AJHL,SJHL). Some of those players would have been good depth players. They had success in Campbell,Maclise,Watson etc., but they will go after more impact recruits now, since they have a roster limit. It means UNB recruits harder and the rest of the league hopefully benefits in attracting the odd recruit that the V-Red program can't accommodate
Sounds like a win win situation.
Where it backfires, is if you go to Nationals with 14/15 skaters, let's say due to injury.
That hasn't happened and hopefully it doesn't.

 

[AUS Fan]

Evidence?

C'mon. You're better than that. Do you want me to say I talked to Gardiner and he told me that. Or Stieny or Burnsie told me? That would go over well, wouldn't it?

 

[Rob]

C'mon. You're better than that. Do you want me to say I talked to Gardiner and he told me that. Or Stieny or Burnsie told me? That would go over well, wouldn't it?

It was a legitimate question. You said UNB was recruiting players with the sole purpose of keeping them off of other teams. I asked for evidence? Or at least which players?


As for the reason for the cap it was because UNB was becoming to successful in the AUS.

 

[AUS Fan]

And I answered to the best of my ability.

As far as the cap making UNB less successful, that has not worked out well.

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

It was a legitimate question. You said UNB was recruiting players with the sole purpose of keeping them off of other teams. I asked for evidence? Or at least which players?


As for the reason for the cap it was because UNB was becoming to successful in the AUS.

This is getting a bit on the ridiculous side don't you think?
It hasn't hurt UNB, just can't carry as much depth as they once did.
On a positive side, less bickering over playing time, with less in the nest!

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

I watched saturday's first semi final for a second time on sportsnet.
Darren Burns and Trever Steinburg were both interviewed. They both complimented the Varsity Red program, as well as the job MacDougal has done writing the ship.
Very kind words,coming from both AUS coaches. The compete level is high among the group, this is why the teams excel, it has driven the conference to a higher standard, but they still show class and respect for one another.

 

[rethinking]

When I say I believe it was an anti-UNB rule, I simply saw it was an attempt to weaken UNB's depth and success. UNB wasn't always so lucky injury wise so depth just made a lot of sense. Those players who didn't dress for every game still had a great opportunity to improve their hockey skills because of the example of top players, the level of competition to dress and the coaching at UNB.
I actually thought the cap hurt Acadia one year at Nationals but I could be wrong.

 

[Rob]

This is getting a bit on the ridiculous side don't you think?
It hasn't hurt UNB, just can't carry as much depth as they once did.
On a positive side, less bickering over playing time, with less in the nest!

To go back to how the cap was brought up in the first place was over the future of Peter Trainor. I fail to see why he should be taking up a cap space when another recruit can be brought in?

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

To go back to how the cap was brought up in the first place was over the future of Peter Trainor. I fail to see why he should be taking up a cap space when another recruit can be brought in?

To answer that question, you may have to ask Gard's and Heny yourself..
I don't have the answer.

 

[AUS Fan]

Am I incorrect when I say if Trainor doesn't dress for a regular season or playoff game, he is not part of the roster cap?

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

Yes, that's correct.

 

[AUS Fan]

It is correct that I'm incorrect, or correct that a player who doesn't dress is Not part of the cap?

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

Sorry, I made that confusing. You are correct that he doesn't count against the cap if he doesn't dress for a regular season/playoff game. You can play exhibition games however.