2018-2019 AUS Thread

[Prov1X]

So does this mean when a team is decimated with injuries they can petition the league for more skaters?

A couple issues with this, were they on the list of eligible players submitted to the leagues as per:

Each institution must submit their fall and winter rosters to the AUS office on the dates specified, listing the names of athletes that qualify per the regulations

And second, so a team that participates in a brawl and gets the league on the news nationwide is granted an exception to the rules, but a team that possibly lost 4 or 5 players to season ending injuries would not be?

8.3 There can be no roster moves beyond the 22 who have consumed. No season ending injury exemptions will apply.

Maybe the AUS should reconsider the 22 roster rule, given they are the only ones with this rule in the USports.

 

[AUS Fan]

So people are upset because SFX had a couple of Intramural guys on their roster? I agree that the AUS should have said something about this, but It Is The AUS, right?

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

A couple issues with this, were they on the list of eligible players submitted to the leagues as per:

And second, so a team that participates in a brawl and gets the league on the news nationwide is granted an exception to the rules, but a team that possibly lost 4 or 5 players to season ending injuries would not be?

Maybe the AUS should reconsider the 22 roster rule, given they are the only ones with this rule in the USports.

And it will be a joke on Currie, if some of these suspensions don't carry into the playoffs.
There was no problem suspending Cam Critchlow from the entire U cup in Saskatoon, just an example.

 

[Prov1X]

So people are upset because SFX had a couple of Intramural guys on their roster? I agree that the AUS should have said something about this, but It Is The AUS, right?

Intramural, MJAHL, or QMJHL players, it doesn't matter, the rule makes no mention of the types of players, it just says 22 roster spots. If I recall correctly, St FX was one of the teams that voted for this roster cap, now that it comes back to bite them in the backside, they want an exception to the rule.
Remember, us UNB fans will have minimal sympathy on this issue, as the rule was put in place because of UNB. Also, why would X dress Akeson who didn't even get ice time, when they knew that they had a couple of MJAHL players available?
I know it made little difference, it's just another thing that the AUS has mismanaged in this whole fiasco.

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

Yeah if they were going to do this I wonder why they didn’t try to get those guys in last night? Unless they just got the approval today.

Did SMU petition the AUS for more skaters a couple years ago when they had a pile of injuries?

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

And it will be a joke on Currie, if some of these suspensions don't carry into the playoffs.
There was no problem suspending Cam Critchlow from the entire U cup in Saskatoon, just an example.

His comment on Twitter about that illustrates how backwards the league is on handing out discipline.

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

Yeah if they were going to do this I wonder why they didn’t try to get those guys in last night? Unless they just got the approval today.

Did SMU petition the AUS for more skaters a couple years ago when they had a pile of injuries?

Probably not, didn't they vote in favour of the cap?
Now watch the wolves come to my feet!

 

[AUS Fan]

And it will be a joke on Currie, if some of these suspensions don't carry into the playoffs.
There was no problem suspending Cam Critchlow from the entire U cup in Saskatoon, just an example.

If I recall, at that time Hockey Canada was on a big "hit-to-the-head" campaign and the AUS was also going with that. Phil had just recently did a big promo on that. The hit on Patty O'Keefe of SMU was pretty blatant but I don't think it was worth the suspension issued. Another point was that Critch had a bit of a history of head shots from the Q and the AUS. The combination of all this was certainly a factor.

 

[AUS Fan]

To those who are bringing up the roster cap, again, it has nothing to do with this situation. If SFX asked the league for relief and it was granted, good. They bring in a couple of beer league guys. Big deal. To those who say the cap was against UNB, you are correct. UNB had a habit of "stocking the cupboard" with top-end players so other teams couldn't get them. I recall several times seeing top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen sitting in the stands charting face-offs. On the UNB page here there are comments on why so-and-so is not dressed as he is a better player. Even now with the cap, UNB is pretty top heavy. No other team can sit guys of the caliber that UNB does.

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

To those who are bringing up the roster cap, again, it has nothing to do with this situation. If SFX asked the league for relief and it was granted, good. They bring in a couple of beer league guys. Big deal. To those who say the cap was against UNB, you are correct. UNB had a habit of "stocking the cupboard" with top-end players so other teams couldn't get them. I recall several times seeing top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen sitting in the stands charting face-offs. On the UNB page here there are comments on why so-and-so is not dressed as he is a better player. Even now with the cap, UNB is pretty top heavy. No other team can sit guys of the caliber that UNB does.

Interesting topic, as this is an AUS thread, but elite programs such as Alberta/U Sask must have players on their roster that would be starters on the lesser teams in the CanadaWest? We know that Alberta carries a large following, as they had an army in the stands in Fredericton recently. I am surprised that those teams don't see what the AUS has done to curb the problem and make noise on their roster caps?
IMO, the roster cap hasn't hurt the AUS, as long as teams are healthy. From a UNB perspective, having no more than 3 in the stands is a good thing, as long as your not dressing a short bench. The problem is like the SMU situation a few years ago, that saw them ice a short bench, due to injuries in a playoff that resulted in a quick exit, that's a problem? It happened to UNB, when Nationals were in Edmonton in 2006, when due to injury, they iced a short bench in playoffs that cost them a series. I believe, Gards said that they wouldn't get into a situation like that again.
So do teams ask for relief, if down so many players? As long as they are students? how would that work?
IMO, I would like to see the cap extended to all programs in Sports, not just tailored to one league.
My biggest beef, is the possibility of teams icing a short bench in playoffs, Nationals and being at a disadvantage vs the OUA/CanadaWest at the University Cup.

 

[Prov1X]

To those who are bringing up the roster cap, again, it has nothing to do with this situation. If SFX asked the league for relief and it was granted, good. They bring in a couple of beer league guys. Big deal. To those who say the cap was against UNB, you are correct. UNB had a habit of "stocking the cupboard" with top-end players so other teams couldn't get them. I recall several times seeing top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen sitting in the stands charting face-offs. On the UNB page here there are comments on why so-and-so is not dressed as he is a better player. Even now with the cap, UNB is pretty top heavy. No other team can sit guys of the caliber that UNB does.

The two players that played last night for X are not beer league players, they came from the MJAHL, probably not top tier players, but I suspect that they can be 3rd or 4th line players.
Again, I will say it once more, my issue is with the cap itself, why have the rule in if there are "special" circumstances that allow them to change the rule. Either get rid of the rule, or change it to have "special" circumstances, or the rule should be applied to the entire league.

 

[FreddyFoyle]

The two players that played last night for X are not beer league players, they came from the MJAHL, probably not top tier players, but I suspect that they can be 3rd or 4th line players.
Again, I will say it once more, my issue is with the cap itself, why have the rule in if there are "special" circumstances that allow them to change the rule. Either get rid of the rule, or change it to have "special" circumstances, or the rule should be applied to the entire league.

And on that theme, how about being public about it beforehand and letting at least the media know that the AUS has given StFX special dispensation.

I'm sorry. The other AUS teams ganged up on UNB to create the roster cap. That rule does not allow for any exceptions, even an injured reserve clause for someone hurt in their first week of conference play. It hinders any AUS team advancing to Nationals against fully stocked teams. The teams wanted the rule, they own it. Once again, the AUS has disgraced itself.

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

AUS:
So SMU and UNB get first round bye.
UPEI is listed as third in the AUS standings, but tied with X in pts.
Does this mean UPEI/Acadia and X/U de M.

CanadaWest:
Sask and Alberta get first round bye. Sask will have home ice in a potential conference final with Alberta ( all 3 games in Saskatoon).
Alberta will have home ice in potential series with Calgary, who they just swept this weekend 4-1, in Calgary and 5-4 in overtime last night at Claire Drake arena in Edmonton.

Our East:
Ottawa gains home ice, Carleton second and McGill finishes a surprising 4'th and will not have home ice advantage in second round.
OUE West:
Brock gains home ice, Ryerson finishes second.

 

[Prov1X]

AUS:
So SMU and UNB get first round bye.
UPEI is listed as third in the AUS standings, but tied with X in pts.
Does this mean UPEI/Acadia and X/U de M.

It has been corrected, it is now showing St. FX in third.

*Note: StFX finishes ahead of UPEI based on wins in head-to-head games (3-2).

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

And on that theme, how about being public about it beforehand and letting at least the media know that the AUS has given StFX special dispensation.

I'm sorry. The other AUS teams ganged up on UNB to create the roster cap. That rule does not allow for any exceptions, even an injured reserve clause for someone hurt in their first week of conference play. It hinders any AUS team advancing to Nationals against fully stocked teams. The teams wanted the rule, they own it. Once again, the AUS has disgraced itself.

Unfortunately, I say no to adding anyone under these circumstances. X got themselves into the mess and there is a cap, so noooooooo....... to adding any players period. Phil Currie set the cap rule, it is what it is, he has no right to allow X an exception, especially the bulls...t of a problem that they have helped create.
I think it's time for the AUS to find a new leader and that's not a joke!

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

I probably wouldn’t have minded if a team asks for a special exception if they were that short because of injuries...but if it’s because of your own doing, no.

Did Acadia try to get extra skaters for their games this week? Or did they just suck it up because they put themselves in that position?

I’m curious what the other coaches think about this, especially Moncton as it could have really impacted them.

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

AUS:
So SMU and UNB get first round bye.
UPEI is listed as third in the AUS standings, but tied with X in pts.
Does this mean UPEI/Acadia and X/U de M.

Our East:
Ottawa gains home ice, Carleton second and McGill finishes a surprising 4'th and will not have home ice advantage in second round.
OUE West:
Brock gains home ice, Ryerson finishes second.

The AUS probably wishes UPEI finished 3rd.

The OUA East will be fun...Carleton/UQTR, Queen’s/Concordia, and McGill/UOIT in the 1st round should all be good series.

Ryerson has one more game left - today vs. York - so they can still finish 1st with a win.

 

[RED ARMY EAST]

Interesting topic, as this is an AUS thread, but elite programs such as Alberta/U Sask must have players on their roster that would be starters on the lesser teams in the CanadaWest? We know that Alberta carries a large following, as they had an army in the stands in Fredericton recently. I am surprised that those teams don't see what the AUS has done to curb the problem and make noise on their roster caps?
IMO, the roster cap hasn't hurt the AUS, as long as teams are healthy. From a UNB perspective, having no more than 3 in the stands is a good thing, as long as your not dressing a short bench. The problem is like the SMU situation a few years ago, that saw them ice a short bench, due to injuries in a playoff that resulted in a quick exit, that's a problem? It happened to UNB, when Nationals were in Edmonton in 2006, when due to injury, they iced a short bench in playoffs that cost them a series. I believe, Gards said that they wouldn't get into a situation like that again.
So do teams ask for relief, if down so many players? As long as they are students? how would that work?
IMO, I would like to see the cap extended to all programs in Sports, not just tailored to one league.
My biggest beef, is the possibility of teams icing a short bench in playoffs, Nationals and being at a disadvantage vs the OUA/CanadaWest at the University Cup.

Rosters:
For example, Alberta carries 25 skaters, 3 Goaltenders=28 total

 

[Prov1X]

Rosters:
For example, Alberta carries 25 skaters, 3 Goaltenders=28 total

Goaltenders are unlimited in the AUS, just wondering what the magic number would be for a cap, 24-25 skaters? Or do you go back to no cap, I am not sure what the answer is. I can't see players going to a school that they have zero chance of playing.

 

[Drummer]

Or do you go back to no cap,...

no cap - no one else (no other CIS Conference) has one.

If a player wants to be part of the Taxi Squad and work is way on and it takes 3 years - that's his choice.

OR enforce the rule you have today (especially since the circumstance for being short were self inflected). It's not like they were in accident (heaven forbid) or a FLU/Mumps outbreak - they brought this on themselves.

 

[Prov1X]

I've said it before, I have no problem with a cap system as long as it is for all of the league, not just the AUS.

 

[AdamMcg83]

Awful lot of violin-playing here for these poor AUS teams that have to adhere to a different set of roster rules than the other conferences. Tell you what, the OUA will happily adhere to the roster cap, if the AUS adopts the $4500 annual AFA cap.

For decades, the recruiting playing field has been tilted drastically to the east coast. And, that's no fault of the AUS; more power to those teams for taking advantage of scholarship rules elsewhere. There are loads of different rules between conferences, in an array of sports. But please, save us all the woe-is-us junk about the roster cap. Every year, the AUS has 5-6 of the best dozen teams in the country.

The roster cap is directly related to the scholarship differences. It is definitely the player's choice to be a part of a taxi squad for three years and work his way into the lineup, but the free ride tuition doesn't hurt either.

 

[Prov1X]

Awful lot of violin-playing here for these poor AUS teams that have to adhere to a different set of roster rules than the other conferences. Tell you what, the OUA will happily adhere to the roster cap, if the AUS adopts the $4500 annual AFA cap.

The majority of the players coming from the CHL would be bringing a fairly significant educational grant with them, and also, the AUS has capped how much a student is able to earn for working at camps, I believe that they are maxed out at $5000.
And just to be clear, a lot of us violin-players only have an issue with the cap because it was put in place to hurt one specific team, not to make the league better. I personally believe that ALL leagues should be under the exact same rules nationwide, caps, playing rules, money, etc.

 

[AUS Fan]

Since the Cap came in, to hurt UNB, they have won a dozen or so AUS titles and a bunch of CIS Championships. So, I guess it worked.

 

[UNB Bruins Fan]

Since the Cap came in, to hurt UNB, they have won a dozen or so AUS titles and a bunch of CIS Championships. So, I guess it worked.

I admit, although I don’t like it, it’s hard to complain about the cap too much from UNB’s perspective. Not only has it not hurt their on-ice success, but the last two years (at least) they have left roster spots open anyways so it hasn’t really affected them/been a detriment at all up to this point.