Re: Americans-Canadians
Is there something so wrong with Canadian Universities that the Canadians don't want to attend and play hockey there?
Thoughts?
Yup....but I guess I should declare my bias upfront, as I have a daughter stateside.
1) Canadians typically don't worship athletics and athletes, nor fund or support them, anywhere near the extent Americans do. So athletes in Canadian schools often don't even get the same treatment and resources with their team as they were used to in club hockey...night and day difference in attitudes vs US. In US D1 schools, athletes get star treatment. I've seen hockey facilities used by high profile Canadian universities that look like they should have been condemned 20 years ago. I've heard of players also having to traipse back and forth across campus with all their equipment to practice, and having to buy all their own equipment. Many don't even have their own rinks. Many head coaches are volunteers and of dubious quality. And no one but parents attend the games.
2) The quality of hockey (given the above funding inequities) in most CIS schools outside of the powerhouses is far inferior to even that of top minor league club hockey teams. Therefore, among Ontario players, virtually all the top ones go to the US. Those who don't, generally go to Laurier in Ontario , McGill, or the much smaller schools that exist in the Maritimes such as Dalhousie and St. FX....which are all among the top hockey programs as well as being good schools academically.
3) There are many very good Canadian universities academically with strong international reputations. I actually went to one of the best, and I have no complaints about my experience there...but like the health care system I also believe this has deteriorated significantly in the last 25 years. All Canadian universities are publically funded. The upside to this is that they are affordable <$15,000-$20,000 for tuition incl. board, leading to higher overall post-sec education rates among the Canadian population vs the US. (However, I should also add that the program I graduated from is now also among the deregulated ones with tuition+board fees well >$30,000). The downside to being public is that most of the top schools also tend to be very large, comparable in size to the large US public schools, with ridiculously large class sizes and staff:student ratios to correspond, far less individual attention and lacking in additional assistance/support to help balance heavy athletic demands. Similarly, the range of facilities and amenities in Canadian universities are also more comparatively sparce and austere. For perspective, I recall hearing once that the endowment of Harvard alone was far greater than
all Canadian universities combined. Availability of on-campus housing at most universities here is atypical for non-froshs, negatively impacting campus life and a cohesive atmosphere.
4) The opportunity for athletic scholarship here is very limited. The maximum allowed in Ontario is $3500, there are very few of these available, and many schools do not offer them at all. So, even for those with less-than-a-full-ride scholarship in the US, American schools can be cheaper to attend despite the lower base tuition costs at home (especially for programs such as business and engineering, medical fields, etc for which fees are non-regulated). Further, these Canadian athletic scholarships are limited only to student athletes who enter with and continue to maintain an A average. At some schools, it is also virtually impossible and sometimes even prohibited to be in these non-regulated programs due to the additional pressures and academic inflexibility to participate on the hockey team anyway.
5) Entrance to Canadian schools is based virtually 100% on your marks. Unlike in the US, your athletic ability or other achievements do not help you get into a more prestigious school or program than you would otherwise qualify for based on grades alone. Ironically, a significant proportion of Canadian players attending Ivy League schools would have had much difficulty in gaining admission in the more selective programs at some of the top Canadian schools such as McGill if they had stayed at home. So going to the US can allow you to "upgrade academically" (....although some girls do also end up in inferior US schools just to be able to play D1 hockey).
6) The emphasis in Canadian universities tend to be pre-professional in nature rather than the Liberal Arts approach more typical in the US. This means students are selecting a major before they ever even apply to attend university, and must apply directly for admission to that specific program rather than to the university as a whole. It can be very difficult and sometimes impossible to transfer into some programs later. Simply choosing a school, and not having to decide on a major until sometime in sophomore year at US schools is very appealing to many indecisive students who have no idea what they want to do when they grow up (which is probably most of them).
7) Further, because of the funding formula, Canadian universities tend to accept significantly more students in particular programs than they ever intend to graduate, with intentionally extremely high rates of attrition prior to graduation. In my niece's first year class of ~ 800 as a Biology major at one of the most highly regarded schools, they were told early in the year that <400 would be continuing after Christmas. The numbers dwindled even further in second year. At the same school, the 350 first years in Kinesiology were cut to a class of <100 for year 2. In comparison, the 80%+ graduation rates at most good US schools are appealing.
Here's an idea....how about if the American Colleges stop filling their rosters with Canadian Carpetbaggers...for non-revenue sports like women's hockey in particular? 
....Silly You.....BC's season ended in early march 