PDA

View Full Version : College Hockey amps up war on Canadian major junior....



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14

jnacc
01-12-2010, 05:53 PM
.

To those arguing for CHL players being allowed to play for the colleges, my simple question is; Why? Why does it matter if they are allowed to play for colleges once their done with the CHL? Wouldn't allowing the CHL players who can't hack it there, and get dumped back into the NCAA, make the NCAA a feeder system of sorts to the CHL, and drive down the quality of the NCAA even more? These things ebb and flow, right now the CHL appears to be on top, someday it may slide towards the college ranks.

To remain simple, my answer is "Why not?".

It would be very difficult for the NCAA to become a feeder system to the CHL due to the differences in ages.

You know, perhaps if the hockey powers that be at the exalted "U" (Minnesota Gophers) were not so xneophobic (because that is really the heart of the matter here) they would be in a much better predicament this year and would have won far more championships over the years.

The rest of us are fine with that though....nobody will force you to recruit CHL players, other schools will gladly pick them up.

bothman
01-12-2010, 06:39 PM
The CHL education scholarship program exists....over 500 CHL grads are playing in the CIS today....parents no longer fear a "sacrificed for nothing" future when sending their sons off to the CHL. If they want an education, they can have one at a cost that is very comparable to a NCAA scholarship.


Show me some statistics that back up this paragraph. Not only enrollment statistics of players going to Canadian colleges after falling short in the CHL, but also what opportunities exist to these folks upon graduation - what is their average income, what jobs are available to them, can they get a job in the US, etc?

My gut tells me that your opinion of the CIS is inflated.

Almington
01-12-2010, 07:16 PM
Right on the money.....in 1985 that is.

I wonder if the problem the NCAA is currently facing (losing top end U.S. born players and seeing a decreasing Canadian talent pool due to the CHL) stems from their denial of changing realities?

The CHL education scholarship program exists....over 500 CHL grads are playing in the CIS today....parents no longer fear a "sacrificed for nothing" future when sending their sons off to the CHL. If they want an education, they can have one at a cost that is very comparable to a NCAA scholarship.

Why should the NCAA exclude its self from a vast talent pool of players for some purposes that are no longer relevant? Some fear the loss of elite players, but the NCAA is losing them anyway. For those that it does acquire, the vast majority leave their programs early.

Allowing CHL players will be a win-win situation for everyone involved with the exception of the CIS.

Allowing CHL players into the NCAA is a win for ONLY the CHL and the CHL alone. Not only do they get ALL of the very best players, but are totally absolved of need to provide an education package! In no way is it a win for the NCAA, period.

No, the real losers are those players who leave the CHL and play two of three years bouncing around the ECHL and AHL and then are done with their hockey careers at 23 or 24 with no college degree and they are no longer eligible for the CHL education packages. Not only do they still have to go and complete a degree without the support system that they would have had as a student-athlete at an NCAA schools but they also have to find a way to pay for it 100% out of their own pocket.

jnacc
01-12-2010, 07:23 PM
Show me some statistics that back up this paragraph. Not only enrollment statistics of players going to Canadian colleges after falling short in the CHL, but also what opportunities exist to these folks upon graduation - what is their average income, what jobs are available to them, can they get a job in the US, etc?

My gut tells me that your opinion of the CIS is inflated.

Wow, I mean wow...talk about ethnocentric!

Can they get a job in the U.S???? Well if they were born here, why the hell couldn't they?!?!?!? If they are Canadian...they would have to apply for work visas, even if they graduated from a U.S. college.

What are there average incomes????:confused: :confused: Well lets start by you providing me the average income of NCAA hockey grads that do not go on to play pro hockey.

As for CHL scholarship packages, here's some links

http://michiganjuniorhockey.blogspot.com/2009/11/spiritohl-enjoy-league-scholarships.html

http://www.ontariohockeyleague.com/the-ohl-and-cis-relationship-p140079/t-webTV

http://bestofbothworlds.ca/hm/inside.php?sid=6&static_sid=17

http://www.whl.ca/About-p125651

http://www.chl.ca/fullstory.php?id=1324

Almington
01-12-2010, 07:23 PM
Show me some statistics that back up this paragraph. Not only enrollment statistics of players going to Canadian colleges after falling short in the CHL, but also what opportunities exist to these folks upon graduation - what is their average income, what jobs are available to them, can they get a job in the US, etc?

My gut tells me that your opinion of the CIS is inflated.

Their is absolutely nothing wrong with the Canadian colleges and universities as they are absolutely on par with a peer institution in the US.

jnacc
01-12-2010, 07:31 PM
Allowing CHL players into the NCAA is a win for ONLY the CHL and the CHL alone. Not only do they get ALL of the very best players, but are totally absolved of need to provide an education package! In no way is it a win for the NCAA, period.
.

Explain how it would be a loss for the NCAA please?

Almington
01-12-2010, 08:09 PM
Explain how it would be a loss for the NCAA please?

For what seems like the millionth time:

All the best players (particularly all the NHL drafted players) would go to the CHL and only those that the NHL/AHL didn't want to sign would then go to college. The way that the NHL's CBA is set up, once a MJ player reaches 20 either the NHL team has to sign them or they lose the rights to that player. Thus, the talent level would plummet and that would be bad for the NCAA schools.

FreddyFoyle
01-12-2010, 08:11 PM
Show me some statistics that back up this paragraph. Not only enrollment statistics of players going to Canadian colleges after falling short in the CHL, but also what opportunities exist to these folks upon graduation - what is their average income, what jobs are available to them, can they get a job in the US, etc?

My gut tells me that your opinion of the CIS is inflated.

Did you go to the George W. Bush School of Xenophobia?

My goodness, where to start. Let's just say Canadian schools have been working out pretty good for Canadians for a long time. Who cares if they can get jobs in the U.S.?

Now if your concerns are about American-born players attending CIS schools after playing in the CHL, and then getting jobs in the U.S. when they graduate ... well if all American employers are as myopic as you appear to be, then they might really be at a disadvantage against their peers who went the NCAA route. That would be a shame, but I've never heard for instance that Americans who attended the University of New Brunswick (founded in 1785) and played CIS hockey were discriminated against when they went back home and started looking for work ...

But there is one issue that people seem to be glossing over. What percentage of CHL players even have the grades/academics to go to a NCAA or CIS school? Hey, I love Canada and it is a great place to live, but I'm not naive enough to think that every Junior-age hockey player is suited to a university environment. Some of them want to work in mills, or be firemen, or cops, or be plumbers or whatever if they can't be a professional hockey player ... and what's wrong with that?

Hey, I know I'm becoming pedantic, but sheesh, it is getting ridiculous when you start comparing the population of NCAA hockey players and population of CHL players as if they are completely interchangeable!

Larch
01-12-2010, 08:51 PM
For what seems like the millionth time:

All the best players (particularly all the NHL drafted players) would go to the CHL and only those that the NHL/AHL didn't want to sign would then go to college. The way that the NHL's CBA is set up, once a MJ player reaches 20 either the NHL team has to sign them or they lose the rights to that player. Thus, the talent level would plummet and that would be bad for the NCAA schools.

This is exactly what I was getting at. The NCAA then becomes a de facto feeder system (although nobody would move up) or garbage dump, if you will, for the CHL. They would then be on par with the CIS. I guess this alone makes me want the NCAA to stick to their guns on the way they determine an "amateur", and don't get me wrong, I think the NCAA is one of the worst organizations out there for using people for a monetary gain.

Alton
01-12-2010, 09:29 PM
If the Lake Superior fans on this thread are actually confused about why the NCAA hockey community opposes Major Junior eligibility, rather than feigning confusion to make a point, <A HREF="http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/DI_Amateurism_Cab/2009/September/Supplement%20No.%204.pdf">this</A> link, with a letter from USA Hockey and another letter from (jointly) Tom Anastos, representing the Hockey Commissioners' Association, and Joe Bertagna, representing the American Hockey Coaches Association, contains an outline of the reasons for those 3 organizations opposing the change.

Runninwiththedogs
01-12-2010, 09:50 PM
Why should the NCAA exclude its self from a vast talent pool of players for some purposes that are no longer relevant? Some fear the loss of elite players, but the NCAA is losing them anyway. For those that it does acquire, the vast majority leave their programs early.


Ok, I just wrote an exceptionally long post about this and somehow the tab closed. So now I'm angry.

What you mean is a vast talent pool of players who are no longer relevant. Why would kids who are already accelerating their education and moving thousands of miles away from home in order to get to the pros as fast as they can be willing to play in the CHL until they are overage and then go to the NCAA and then go to the pros? They wouldn't. The NCAA would get the leftover kids who couldn't even hack it in the ECHL.

I'm a season ticket holder of an NCAA team. I am hundreds of miles away from the nearest CHL team. Why do I care about a CHL team? I want the best recruits available on the team that I follow. I don't care if the NCAA's rules create a problem for kids choosing between the CHL and the NCAA. The more kids who choose the NCAA, the better for me! That means they'll be more likely to come to my school. I care about what is best for my team. I don't care about 15 year old kids deciding what is best for them. I'm not the mom of some teenager trying to realize his dream of playing in the NHL. I'm a lifelong fan of an NCAA hockey team. The NCAA's ability to prepare and develop players for the NHL is only important to me if it attracts more elite players to come to my team.

Is this a selfish thing to say? Yeah. But anyone who's a fan of an NCAA team should feel the same way, unless they don't care about the level of talent on the ice for their team.

bothman
01-12-2010, 10:33 PM
Did you go to the George W. Bush School of Xenophobia?

My goodness, where to start. Let's just say Canadian schools have been working out pretty good for Canadians for a long time. Who cares if they can get jobs in the U.S.?



Nope. Just calling a spade and spade. I buy my vodka from Poland or Russia, my beer from Germany or Czech Republic, and I want my kids educated in the deepest higher education institution pool with the best job market in the world...you can fill in the blank as to what country I am referring to.

Next you are going to sing the merits of Canada's healthcare system, right? :rolleyes:

Can we get back on the subject? Runninwiththedogs, very well said. Too many kids at too young an age go long hockey by choosing the CHL or MJ, and I'd like to see how many of these kids end up with good paying jobs for those that could have qualified for college hockey.

Hey FrddieFoyle - you are right. The world needs ditch diggers too!

4four4
01-12-2010, 11:56 PM
So what financial advantages are CHL players who have not signed a pro contract gaining? The short answer is none! Their so called "compensation" from their respective CHL club is no more than what many Tier II players are receiving.



Is this some very lame *** joke???? Like do you really think posters like Happy matter and will influence the final decision when the NCAA revises its rules? Get real! I was refering to that old washed up club in Minny that use to dictate USA Hockey policy...their day is over....good riddance!

I highly doubt the NCAA will revise its rules. Never going to happen.

Slap Shot
01-13-2010, 04:55 AM
You know, perhaps if the hockey powers that be at the exalted "U" (Minnesota Gophers) were not so xneophobic (because that is really the heart of the matter here) they would be in a much better predicament this year and would have won far more championships over the years..

This says nothing about the heart of the matter (the thread topic) but it clearly says a lot about you and the clear bias you bring to the table on several levels.

jnacc
01-13-2010, 05:17 AM
What you mean is a vast talent pool of players who are no longer relevant. Why would kids who are already accelerating their education and moving thousands of miles away from home in order to get to the pros as fast as they can be willing to play in the CHL until they are overage and then go to the NCAA and then go to the pros? They wouldn't. The NCAA would get the leftover kids who couldn't even hack it in the ECHL.
.

Those who wish to play pro hockey as soon as possible will no longer be choosing the NCAA route anyway.....something that is starting to happen. The fact that there are hundreds of former CHL players playing University hockey in Canada suggests that not all CHL players are intent on going pro as soon as possible. The number of CHL players utilizing their education packages and foregoing a pro career is rising year after year....it would be nice to be able to tap into that talent.


All the best players (particularly all the NHL drafted players) would go to the CHL and only those that the NHL/AHL didn't want to sign would then go to college. The way that the NHL's CBA is set up, once a MJ player reaches 20 either the NHL team has to sign them or they lose the rights to that player. Thus, the talent level would plummet and that would be bad for the NCAA schools.

In best, do yo mean the elite players? Well that is where its trending to right now anyway. As I said before, those elite sure fire NHL players that do happen to choose the NCAA are not around for any length of time any way.

As for the rest...those that are drafted by NHL teams (in the lower rounds) where the vast majority will never get a whiff of NHL play, the NCAA could provide the neccessary safety blanket that so many of them crave....why should they be going on to play CIS hockey when they could be playing here???

The CIS brand is still inferior to the NCAA as a whole but there are some programs there that have improved by leaps and bounds and they can now challenge any NCAA school. Heck, Alberta and U.N.B. fans probably feel that they have the best college teams in North America including D-1 hockey.

Around 7 or 8 years ago I attended a "blue liner" lunch in at Lake Superior State when the Lakers were playing Western Ontario. Their coach spoke and made reference to the fact that his school did not beat a single NCAA opponent since 1982! ( I think he was also including D-III in there as well!). Luckily they went on to lose that night against us as well but over the past five or so years, Western Ontario has improved so much that wins against NCAA D-1 teams are no longer rare but frequent. Here is a school that offers what amounts to no more than 1/2 scholarships to its best players yet is able to compete with D-1 teams. How do they do it? With CHL players. I would rather have us be able to tap into those players rather than them.

Slap Shot
01-13-2010, 05:32 AM
Those who wish to play pro hockey as soon as possible will no longer be choosing the NCAA route anyway.....something that is starting to happen.

Kids that wanted to get the NHL asap have always done what they could to accomplish that goal - there's nothing to suggest anything has changed.


The fact that there are hundreds of former CHL players playing University hockey in Canada suggests that not all CHL players are intent on going pro as soon as possible.

The fact there are hundreds of former USHL and H.S. players playing University hockey in American suggests not all USHL and H.S. players are intent on going pro as soon as possible. You merely came off as biased before, now we can add 100% disengenuous.

FreddyFoyle
01-13-2010, 08:19 AM
Nope. Just calling a spade and spade. I buy my vodka from Poland or Russia, my beer from Germany or Czech Republic, and I want my kids educated in the deepest higher education institution pool with the best job market in the world...you can fill in the blank as to what country I am referring to.

Next you are going to sing the merits of Canada's healthcare system, right? :rolleyes:

Can we get back on the subject? Runninwiththedogs, very well said. Too many kids at too young an age go long hockey by choosing the CHL or MJ, and I'd like to see how many of these kids end up with good paying jobs for those that could have qualified for college hockey.

Hey FrddieFoyle - you are right. The world needs ditch diggers too!

Gee, you really have your hand in the sand, or believe everything on Fox News. The US has the most expensive health care system in the world. but certainly not the best.
http://dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf
Canada spends half as much money per person on health care as the US, yet Canadians on average are healthier (longer lives, lower infant mortality rate, etc. ... ). While Canada's system has issues, it is ranked 30th by the World Health Organization and the US is ranked 37th.

Best job market in the world? You're talking about the US right now and the foreseeable future? Right now the unemployment rate is the US is around 9.6% and 7.8% in Canada. This is a huge shift considering traditionally the Canadian unemployment rate was half a percentage point worse than the US. Besides, if health care reforms don't pass, what American employer is going to be able to offer decent health benefits to your kids?

But getting away from your obvious flames that I should have avoided, I will repeat my point that not all American and Canadian junior-age hockey players are suited for the university environment, just like their non-hockey playing peers. Even though the OCED rates Canada as the "most educated" country in their rankings for the proportion of citizens with a post-secondary credential, roughly 25% of Canadian attend university after high school and another 25% attend other post-secondary institutions (community colleges, trade schools, polytechs, etc.) so that means roughly half of Canadians don't.

So you could extrapolate then that 3/4 of junior-age hockey players are NOT going to attend a NCAA or CIS school anyways, so remove those players as potential student athletes. The American numbers are probably similar ...

5mn_Major
01-13-2010, 09:17 AM
To remain simple, my answer is "Why not?".

It would be very difficult for the NCAA to become a feeder system to the CHL due to the differences in ages.

You know, perhaps if the hockey powers that be at the exalted "U" (Minnesota Gophers) were not so xneophobic (because that is really the heart of the matter here) they would be in a much better predicament this year and would have won far more championships over the years.

The rest of us are fine with that though....nobody will force you to recruit CHL players, other schools will gladly pick them up.

The why not is because the NCAA has a platform it adheres to. Specifically, this is not about the athlete...but the student athlete. And this is not about hockey...but about tens of sports. The NCAA will never break a core rule for one sport...just to make it more competitive. It has too much at stake...its platform which is a directive from the universities it represents.

I do agree however that US college hockey would be fine if the NCAA let CHL players in. And indeed the NCAA would not lose quality but rather gain it. It is very likely that kids would go to Kitchner for a year...and then head off to Ann Arbor for a year or two. I think its more likely that the CHL would turn into a glorified USHL. Again, it wouldn't happen due to the financial compensation...as well as the fact that kids really would lose on educational opportunities bouncing around.

You do seem to misunderstand Minnesota hockey though. Minnesota really does recruit outside the state...but when it does, it usually wastes time and money as the talent at home is so great. Your position is basically like me saying the CHL is xenophobic because it has so few players from outside of Canada. The reason it does is not because it hates foriegners...but because it has such a wealth of talent at home.

FreddyFoyle
01-13-2010, 09:49 AM
If you define "paid" as getting $30 to $50 a week for expenses, then yes, Junior A and Major Junior are the same. In Canada, all junior hockey is classified as amateur sport. Only the NCAA (and some Toronto columnists ...) define Major Junior as professional hockey ...

Almington
01-13-2010, 10:41 AM
Those who wish to play pro hockey as soon as possible will no longer be choosing the NCAA route anyway.....something that is starting to happen. The fact that there are hundreds of former CHL players playing University hockey in Canada suggests that not all CHL players are intent on going pro as soon as possible. The number of CHL players utilizing their education packages and foregoing a pro career is rising year after year....it would be nice to be able to tap into that talent.

In best, do yo mean the elite players? Well that is where its trending to right now anyway. As I said before, those elite sure fire NHL players that do happen to choose the NCAA are not around for any length of time any way.

As for the rest...those that are drafted by NHL teams (in the lower rounds) where the vast majority will never get a whiff of NHL play, the NCAA could provide the neccessary safety blanket that so many of them crave....why should they be going on to play CIS hockey when they could be playing here???

The CIS brand is still inferior to the NCAA as a whole but there are some programs there that have improved by leaps and bounds and they can now challenge any NCAA school. Heck, Alberta and U.N.B. fans probably feel that they have the best college teams in North America including D-1 hockey.


What advantage does the NCAA get from taking players who are not considered pro prospects anymore? All you talk about is making the player pool bigger, but at the expense of reducing the average talent of the player.

I don't care if their are any one-and-done top 10 picks in the NCAA but their are plenty of cases where 1st and 2nd round picks have stayed for 3 or 4 years before moving on to the NHL/AHL. Those are the players that the NCAA would loses and that would without a doubt hurt the game.

Anyone who thinks that a competitive hockey player isn't interested in making the NHL as quickly as possible is fooling themselves. The fact of the matter is that MOST 18 or 19 year olds are not going to be ready to play in the NHL regardless of what development path they take, they are just not going to be mentally and/or physically mature enough.

For the most part, using a CHL education package and going to the CIS means that a player has abandoned his hope of playing professional hockey (I am sure that their are exceptions, scouts fill find talent where ever it exists). Where as with the NCAA route it is just another developmental pathway to pro hockey, the difference is that the player doesn't have to chose between playing pro hockey and getting an education.

I'm sure that the best CIS teams are better then the bottom end NCAA teams, but no way are they on he same level as the top 10 or 15 teams. Doesn't me they can't win, just that they won't very often. You had better not start spewing results from early season exhibition games to try and prove your statement, because we all know that they team that wins the preseason is always the best team.