USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
- Thread starter D2D
- Start date
Healthyscratch
New member
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
Little too heavy on the Shattuck girls. At some point, USA has to stop looking at some of these girls as highly successful based on he team winning. In end, if I put 10 solid girls (and they are all solid) on one team, I could win a national championship from Alpharetta Georgia.
Little too heavy on the Shattuck girls. At some point, USA has to stop looking at some of these girls as highly successful based on he team winning. In end, if I put 10 solid girls (and they are all solid) on one team, I could win a national championship from Alpharetta Georgia.
ZedLeppelin
Motormouth
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
Good to see a Penn State recruit on the roster (Natalie Heising).
Good to see a Penn State recruit on the roster (Natalie Heising).
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
Just makes scouting really easy and cheap.
Just makes scouting really easy and cheap.
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
While I am sympathetic to your point the reality is that bringing together a group of elite players and pushing them at elite levels will make them much better than your 10 solid players will over the course of 4 years. That is the attraction for these hockey factories. Make no mistake, there are many of these high schools, worse on the boys side, whose primary job it is to elevate the players skills. They do that very well and the results are as expected. Win or lose national championships they will produce more elite players.
Additionally, most of the kids on the national teams have played and developed on elite teams and through CODP so they have displayed how well they play to a wide range of coaches and evaluators. You might win a national championship with 10 solid players but you will not beat Team Canada with them (HB, 1980 being the exception) so the coaches are always going to go with the best of the best of the best, all else being equal.
More of the 10 who came from the elite programs will be stars of their D-I team than the 10 'solid' players, more of them will have success in the national team than the 'solid' players. I don't like it because I think sports should be something a kid does for fun and for the team-work and bonding and growth than being the primary focus of their teens. But that is not the way the rest of the world thinks.
While I am sympathetic to your point the reality is that bringing together a group of elite players and pushing them at elite levels will make them much better than your 10 solid players will over the course of 4 years. That is the attraction for these hockey factories. Make no mistake, there are many of these high schools, worse on the boys side, whose primary job it is to elevate the players skills. They do that very well and the results are as expected. Win or lose national championships they will produce more elite players.
Additionally, most of the kids on the national teams have played and developed on elite teams and through CODP so they have displayed how well they play to a wide range of coaches and evaluators. You might win a national championship with 10 solid players but you will not beat Team Canada with them (HB, 1980 being the exception) so the coaches are always going to go with the best of the best of the best, all else being equal.
More of the 10 who came from the elite programs will be stars of their D-I team than the 10 'solid' players, more of them will have success in the national team than the 'solid' players. I don't like it because I think sports should be something a kid does for fun and for the team-work and bonding and growth than being the primary focus of their teens. But that is not the way the rest of the world thinks.
Blackbeard
Well-known member
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
Not arguing with Ne7minder's response to this post of yours but I agree with you as well...it just also happens to be easy and cheap for them.
But there's a downside to this, at least in the tournament format. I had occasion several years back to attend the Warner High School North American Showcase Tournament which was attended by players from across Canada and the US as well as approximately 17-20 scouts (which the director was disappointed with since he had hoped to have around 25 or so attend). Most of the scouts were either from CIS or D1 schools including Princeton, UNH among other mostly eastern D1 programs from what I recall.
Of course, the tournament was sold as a way for prospective players to be seen by all these scouts in the same building, repeatedly, over the course of 2 or 3 days (in an attempt to get their parents to loosen their purse strings and cough the $300+ entry fee, travel costs and hotel room expense).
There were 16 teams thrown together and the first games everyday started at 7:30 A.M. for the first two days. One team played two 7:30 A.M. games. I was there for most of the games throughout each day including both the 7:30 A.M. games.
The problem?
When the 7:30 A.M. games started each day there were only 2 scouts there ready to watch and take notes, and to their credit, it was the same 2 scouts each day at 7:30 A.M. The rest of the bleary eyed scouts started slowly meandering in near the end of the first game each day or just after the start of the second game...carrying their perfunctory cups of coffee and box full of doughnuts.
Among others, I recall talking to a couple of the mothers who had driven up from Idaho to find their daughters playing in both 7:30 A.M. games and they were not impressed to say the least. If they felt that way after the relatively short drive (plus all other expenses) imagine how other parents felt...and I spoke to some from the eastern US and Canada...many having flown in. These lazy slug scouts couldn't get out of bed to do what they were being paid to do...which is scout. They were looked upon with serious derision that weekend by many of the attendees. And to add insult to injury there was a forum one evening in a lecture hall at the University of Lethbridge where they each got to stand on stage before everyone, (players, parents and well wishers), and pitch their school and program. I recall the lazy slug from Princeton sort of boasting that tuition was US$45K/year seemingly completely oblivious to the extremely negative impression she had left upon many of the attendees. I recall thinking why would any parent want their daughter to go to your school and play for your program if you are the best example of discipline that they can muster...and then pay US$45K/year for the privilege to do so. And I also recall thinking that their employers might be interested to know how their money was being spent.
Now, it can be argued that they knew what they were looking for and who, specifically, that they wanted to scout. But what can't be argued is that they might have been surprised at some of the talent that they would have seen had they shown up to those early games...which happens often enough.
And the tournament organizer felt that he couldn't raise the issue with the scouts for fear that they may not want to show up to any more of his tournaments from that point onward. So, he was like a prostitute. And after all, he was running a business...the business of charging parents for their daughters to go to his high school in the middle of nowhere and to attend their hockey program (which was the only possible attraction) and the carrot on the end of the stick was the prospect that their daughter might get recruited by one of these scouts which would hopefully reduce or eliminate the cost to the parents and their daughters of their daughter's university education. Both sides were essential to his business and many on one side were not impressed at his attempt to play both ends against the middle. He also had to put a somewhat decent product on the ice otherwise the scouts might be lost to the doughnut shop forever and he'd be out of a job.
So, you're both right but there is a downside to the one stop shop for scouting at least in the tournament format.
Not arguing with Ne7minder's response to this post of yours but I agree with you as well...it just also happens to be easy and cheap for them.
But there's a downside to this, at least in the tournament format. I had occasion several years back to attend the Warner High School North American Showcase Tournament which was attended by players from across Canada and the US as well as approximately 17-20 scouts (which the director was disappointed with since he had hoped to have around 25 or so attend). Most of the scouts were either from CIS or D1 schools including Princeton, UNH among other mostly eastern D1 programs from what I recall.
Of course, the tournament was sold as a way for prospective players to be seen by all these scouts in the same building, repeatedly, over the course of 2 or 3 days (in an attempt to get their parents to loosen their purse strings and cough the $300+ entry fee, travel costs and hotel room expense).
There were 16 teams thrown together and the first games everyday started at 7:30 A.M. for the first two days. One team played two 7:30 A.M. games. I was there for most of the games throughout each day including both the 7:30 A.M. games.
The problem?
When the 7:30 A.M. games started each day there were only 2 scouts there ready to watch and take notes, and to their credit, it was the same 2 scouts each day at 7:30 A.M. The rest of the bleary eyed scouts started slowly meandering in near the end of the first game each day or just after the start of the second game...carrying their perfunctory cups of coffee and box full of doughnuts.
Among others, I recall talking to a couple of the mothers who had driven up from Idaho to find their daughters playing in both 7:30 A.M. games and they were not impressed to say the least. If they felt that way after the relatively short drive (plus all other expenses) imagine how other parents felt...and I spoke to some from the eastern US and Canada...many having flown in. These lazy slug scouts couldn't get out of bed to do what they were being paid to do...which is scout. They were looked upon with serious derision that weekend by many of the attendees. And to add insult to injury there was a forum one evening in a lecture hall at the University of Lethbridge where they each got to stand on stage before everyone, (players, parents and well wishers), and pitch their school and program. I recall the lazy slug from Princeton sort of boasting that tuition was US$45K/year seemingly completely oblivious to the extremely negative impression she had left upon many of the attendees. I recall thinking why would any parent want their daughter to go to your school and play for your program if you are the best example of discipline that they can muster...and then pay US$45K/year for the privilege to do so. And I also recall thinking that their employers might be interested to know how their money was being spent.
Now, it can be argued that they knew what they were looking for and who, specifically, that they wanted to scout. But what can't be argued is that they might have been surprised at some of the talent that they would have seen had they shown up to those early games...which happens often enough.
And the tournament organizer felt that he couldn't raise the issue with the scouts for fear that they may not want to show up to any more of his tournaments from that point onward. So, he was like a prostitute. And after all, he was running a business...the business of charging parents for their daughters to go to his high school in the middle of nowhere and to attend their hockey program (which was the only possible attraction) and the carrot on the end of the stick was the prospect that their daughter might get recruited by one of these scouts which would hopefully reduce or eliminate the cost to the parents and their daughters of their daughter's university education. Both sides were essential to his business and many on one side were not impressed at his attempt to play both ends against the middle. He also had to put a somewhat decent product on the ice otherwise the scouts might be lost to the doughnut shop forever and he'd be out of a job.
So, you're both right but there is a downside to the one stop shop for scouting at least in the tournament format.
Hockeysbest
New member
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
Alright so let's see. Forwards that should be there... pretty much should be there. Of note missing: Cara Piazza? ? On Newkirk?? On the D side... well let's just say USA Hockey hasn't figured that side out. Who is Cay'a Barnes and why would she be there before the top D of the WCHA morin? Even Jenny Ryan ahead of Morin is a head scratcher. I think USA Hockey= Boston College+UM+Wisconsin.
Alright so let's see. Forwards that should be there... pretty much should be there. Of note missing: Cara Piazza? ? On Newkirk?? On the D side... well let's just say USA Hockey hasn't figured that side out. Who is Cay'a Barnes and why would she be there before the top D of the WCHA morin? Even Jenny Ryan ahead of Morin is a head scratcher. I think USA Hockey= Boston College+UM+Wisconsin.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
Barnes is very, very good. I was mucho impressed by her when watching the U-18 Worlds last year. USA doesn't win w/o her. I like Morin, but I think if UW lost Ryan, that might hurt the Badgers more than any being w/o any single one of their forwards. She logs a ton of ice for them.
HockeyEast33
New member
Re: 2017 U.S. Women's National Under-18 Team Named
This is a U18 team - the girls you refer to - Piazza, Ryan, Newkirk, Morin - are all well past U-18 age. What am I missing form your post?
This is a U18 team - the girls you refer to - Piazza, Ryan, Newkirk, Morin - are all well past U-18 age. What am I missing form your post?
Hockeysbest
New member
Yes. I meant the USA Women's Winter series roster not U18. Wrong thread. Sorry.