On Nov. 28, 2017, Daniel Russell, then a top forward with Fox Motors 16U squad in Michigan, committed to Michigan State. It was under Michigan State’s new head coach, Danton Cole.
He had just turned 16.
A year later, he moved to the United States Hockey League’s (USHL) Fargo Force, where he notched seven points in 33 games. When that didn’t work out, he moved to the North American Hockey League's (NAHL) Minot Minotauros. He scored 21 goals and posted 34 points in 44 games.
From ages 16 to 18, Russell went from a highly sought-after recruit to struggling in varying levels of junior hockey.
He went back to the USHL, this time with the Sioux Falls Stampede, for his age 19 and 20 seasons. He put up 33 points in 54 games and 44 points in 61 games in each season, better positioning himself for college hockey.
Russell played the majority of his freshman year at Michigan State at 21 years old. He put up point totals of 30, 25, 25 and 39 over his next four seasons. He played on the top line and in all situations.
Here’s the catch: When he arrived at Michigan State in 2022, Cole, the coach who recruited him, was gone. In his place was head coach Adam Nightengale and a new staff, who were convinced to keep Cole because of those two seasons in Sioux Falls.
Under a new potential NCAA rule, however, Russell’s career at Michigan State may never have happened.
The rule, which will be discussed (and potentially voted on) on May 22, would give players five calendar years of collegiate eligibility in Division 1 beginning after whichever comes first — their 19th birthday, their high school graduation date or their expected high school graduation date based on the first year of high school enrollment.
That shouldn’t be an issue for most sports. Take basketball or football. Players graduate from high school and go straight to playing in college.
But in men’s hockey, it’s more complicated. Only the best players go straight to college. The rest play junior hockey until their school deems them ready.
This rule could hinder the path for someone like Russell.
“He probably doesn’t make it to Michigan State,” said Jared DeMichiel, associate head coach at Michigan State.
The rule will likely upend a men’s college hockey landscape that was already changing quite a bit.
It could also upend the levels below it.
How it could impact college
Division 1 coaches gathered at the American Hockey Coaches Association Convention in Bonita Springs, Fla., from April 29 to May 1.
An NCAA lawyer gave a presentation on this rule to the group of coaches.
“We’re in a period of disruption,” the lawyer said. “And there’s going to be more.”
The disruptions have been frequent. Since COVID-19 and the elimination of the requirement that players sit out a year upon transferring, the transfer portal has exploded. The CHL ruling in late 2024 introduced a whole new group of players eligible to play in Division 1. NIL has become a major theme as well.
Now there’s the 5-year eligibility rule.
“I think it’s going to be a good thing for college hockey,” Providence assistant coach Joel Beal said. “I do think it will standardize the age range and the age limits for players in our league.”
READ MORE: 20 takeaways from the USHL Phase 1 and Phase 2 Drafts
Age has become a hot topic in men’s college hockey because it’s become a way for programs that don’t recruit high-end talent to compete. Of the 10 oldest teams by average age in college hockey this past season, seven were from Atlantic Hockey, while Ferris State (CCHA), Stonehill (independent) and Colgate (ECAC) made up the other three.
Some argue, however, that curbing the eligibility of age-out players in junior hockey puts those lower-end teams at a disadvantage.
“I think this is just another nail in the coffin to teams that are in the bottom 30 of college hockey,” UMass head coach Greg Carvel said. “If you’re in the top half of college hockey, a lot of your players don’t last four years anyway. It’s the teams in the bottom half that rely on the older players because it balances out the young skill versus the old size.
“That’s helped keep parity in college hockey.”
The transfer portal helps and hurts parity among those “bottom 30” schools. On one hand, those schools in smaller conferences can take struggling players from higher-end programs looking for more opportunity. But on the other end, players who pop in, say, Atlantic Hockey are sometimes poached by Hockey East, Big Ten and NCHC programs.
Such poaching may become an even greater problem with this new rule.
“For the ‘mid-major’ schools, the transfer portal is going to become even more of an issue,” DeMichiel said. “Because if they get a good 18 or 19-year-old after a year or two, somebody’s just going to take them.
“This rule is going to make the transfer portal even more of a mess.”
To avoid the transfer portal, this rule could also force programs to manage their recruits’ paths more heavily, though DeMichiel said Michigan State won’t change much in terms of bringing in players.
For skaters, that might mean coming in early and being all right with the first of five years being spent mostly on the bench. But a five-year impact skater will likely be rare.
“Because the guys that are going to play five years are going to have to be two things,” Beal said. “One, he’s going to have to be talented enough to play games and make a roster as a true freshman. (Two), He’s also going to have to be not talented enough to start his pro career before five years later.
“That is a very, very, very small subset of players.”
Goalies could get hit hard, too. Much was made about Wisconsin’s Daniel Hauser and Denver’s Johnny Hicks going head-to-head in the national championship game as freshmen. But Hauser turned 22 in January and spent the last four seasons in the WHL, while Hicks was 20 years old and had been in junior hockey since 2021-22.
“Most goalies develop later,” Providence College head coach Nate Leaman said. “The goalie position is so hard that you might see goalies go ahead and play an extra year of junior and go for just three years of eligibility.”
Changes to recruiting
Since the NCAA overhauled its recruiting rules in 2018, Aug. 1 became the big date. That’s when rising juniors can receive offers from Division 1 programs.
The Aug. 1 activity seemed to grow every year. It wasn’t just the blueblood programs committing the top 16-year-olds. Many schools identified rising juniors whom they liked.
USHL DRAFT: 25 New England ’10s taken in Phase 1 | 16 locals selected in Phase 2
That seemed to hit a wall with the CHL ruling. Top schools are still committing the best rising juniors, but those next-tier schools are increasingly opting to recruit CHL players instead. The CHL players looking for collegiate homes are older and more proven. Plus, when a middle-tier college committed a younger player, if that player popped, they would often decommit from that school and choose somewhere better. The CHL ruling provided a better alternative.
Until now.
“I think our recruiting is going to change, where we’re going to watch more younger players,” DeMichiel said. “If this rule change comes, we’re going to watch probably more 15 and 16-year-olds and project in the next year or two where they’re going to be.”
The goal here is to get the best players in as early as possible.
This will likely force colleges to take on fewer recruits. With players having until they’re 21 to age out of junior hockey, schools have become complacent with overcommitting and pushing their start times further back.
“It’s a big problem right now in our game — the overrecruiting,” Beal said. “I think it’s going to force teams to be a little bit more targeted. I think everybody does it to a certain extent, where you have more players on your recruiting list than obviously are available to come in a given year. What happens is you ask those players to play an extra year of junior hockey.”
Unless schools want players to have less time in college, teams will likely be more careful with how many players they recruit.
“At some point, the rubber meets the road, “Beal said. “Kids can only play junior hockey for so long.”
Schools will have to adjust since every recruit’s path will be pushed up a season.
“In a perfect world, we at UMass would like every freshman to be 20 years old unless you’re a first- or second-round draft pick,” Carvel said. “Most of our freshmen coming in this year are 20 years old. But if it changes and we have to have 19 as the ideal year, then I’m guessing that’s what we’ll do.
“The whole landscape is going to shrink back by a year.”
This leaves players with a huge choice on what paths to take before turning 19.
Juniors vs. prep
Before the CHL ruling, players who wanted to suit up for NCAA Division 1 programs chose the USHL as their first option.
If they couldn’t make it there, they opted for the British Columbia Hockey League (BCHL) and then the NAHL. The National Collegiate Development Conference (NCDC) served as an option for late-blooming Division 1 players with several future Division 3 prospects.
That all changed with the CHL ruling. The CHL, comprised of the Quebec Maritimes Junior Hockey League (QMJHL), Ontario Hockey League (OHL) and Western Hockey League (WHL), became an attractive option.
More players have been leaving their prep, high school, U16 and U18 teams for juniors since the ruling took effect.
This 5-year eligibility rule could enhance that even more.
“I think the most monumental impact will be junior hockey,” Beal said. “For major junior and the USHL, they’re going to get younger. If they’re getting younger, there’s going to be a trickle-down effect to prep schools, to high school and to major programs because they’re going to have to fill their rosters somewhere. I think you’re going to see a limited number, especially in the USHL, of 20-year-olds.”
READ MORE: 15 coaching games to watch to replace Ted Donato at Harvard
And why the lack of 20-year-olds (and older) players?
“If you’re a 20-year-old or an age-out, your chances of playing college hockey are not super hot,” DeMichiel said. “Why would you take somebody that’s got two years of eligibility? Or even potentially three years of eligibility? You could do that, but that’s still a challenge.”
While leagues like the USHL and CHL may get younger, this would drastically cut off the supply of players to leagues like the BCHL, NAHL, NCDC and Eastern Hockey League (EHL).
“There are a lot of leagues out here, especially on the East Coast, and I think even the NAHL to some extent, that are full of 20-year-olds,” Beal said. “Those leagues may either get significantly younger or cease to exist altogether. The league of 20-year-old junior hockey players is going to be extinct. You need to be in college.
“Some of these junior leagues have been able to fill their rosters on the basis of ‘hey, come play here, and we’ll see if we can get you a college spot.’ Whether that’s Division 1 or Division 3, that’s the allure, right? Well, now they’re going to have to be doing that for 18 and 19-year-old kids, and that’s a different pitch.”
When players jump to juniors, they go to the places that either drafted them the highest, want them the most or have the most age-out players because, obviously, that means spots.
But this rule could shift that.
“This could potentially help leagues like the USHL and some other different junior leagues, where if you get taken by a certain CHL team, if they have a bunch of 17 and 18 year olds, then you’re probably not going to get much of an opportunity,” DeMichiel said. “But you could get an opportunity a year out.”
These younger players filling junior rosters will have to come from somewhere.
“If I were the prep leagues. I’d be nervous that kids aren’t going to do an extra year there,” Carvel said. “They’re going to get to junior earlier.
“A kid could do less prep school now. We have a sport that was built on making sure you’re fully developed and taking your time to do it. And now the NCAA is fast-tracking everything by a year or two.”
When the 5-year eligibility rule was floated, a prep coach wondered to me whether that meant players would find ways to graduate from high school later. Take, for example, a prep school that would allow a player to finish their junior year at the school and then do their senior year online while playing for a junior team.
But because the clock begins ticking when players start as freshmen in high school, it will likely result in players repeating as eighth-graders instead of repeating one of their high school years.
Leaman has experience with this. He repeated eighth grade. Now, he has a son who is supposed to enter high school this fall, but he has a July birthday. Gaining an extra year might be advantageous for him — both in sports and in academics.
“What do you do? Do you repeat eighth grade? When I was that age, I was immature,” Leaman said. “My mom made an unbelievable decision in making me repeat eighth grade. I was lucky she made that decision. But I think parents are going to be forced into those decisions, and we don’t want that.”
With that comes another big life decision: Leaving home earlier than expected.
“We don’t want kids moving away from home earlier to play junior hockey to make it to Division 1,” Leaman said. “Nobody wants that at 15. Nobody really wants that at 16, with maybe one or two exceptions. They’re just not mature, and for the development of a younger person, it’s not always great.”
There’s an alternate reality, though. The same group of players who were already going to leave early for the USHL or CHL is still going. Those are the high-end juniors and best seniors.
But if New England prep juniors and seniors can’t make a USHL or QMJHL team, are they really going to skip graduating from their school to play in a different junior league?
“Now, [those different junior leagues] are recruiting against high school or prep schools who are probably going to be able to do the same thing,” Beal said.
This 5-year eligibility rule is likely to be approved. The coaches at the convention in Florida aimed for a compromise. One idea is to have players’ eligibility begin when they’re 19, not necessarily when they graduate high school. Whether the NCAA accepts that is unknown.
READ MORE: Which Mass. players made USA Hockey Select Camps?
What is abundantly clear, though, is that things are going to change for college and the path to get there. Adapting to that will be necessary.
“There were very passionate pleas to the NCAA about understanding that this completely throws our ecosystem out of whack,” Carvel said. “And we’re a very good sport for the NCAA. We make money. It’s like everything else — they do everything for football and the rest of us just have to eat it.”
