Americans-Canadians

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

I see it exactly as you do Trillium. After the 92's I believe the league will be weaker. How is it in the States though? I could see this coming a few years ago, so could a few of the coaches in D1 that I have spoken with. What's going to happen now? Why has it gotten weaker? Could it be a 1 or 2 year blip possibly? More? Could all others get tired of the Toronto and Missy dominance along with their apparent advantages?

From what I have heard, the 93 group might actually be even weaker elsewhere than in the PWHL. It would be great of everyone from other areas would weigh in on this point with their thoughts.

I think the main reason it is weaker is simple demographics. The 90-92 birth years were the height of the echo boom, so the 93 birth year as a whole is smaller.

However, it would seem that hockey registration is also taking a nosedive. This is certainly so in Ontario. Registration numbers by age group in the OWHA suggest it will continue to get worse every year now. There has not been sufficient attention given to promotion of the game among 5-10 year olds in recent years, nor to development in the younger age groups, the lopsided game scores in international competition don't help in the least at this point.

The sport is simply too expensive for most middle income families, and there is also too little prime time ice available, which further drives up costs. The PWHL has also been making noise about 20-20-20 games, which will further drive up costs disproportionately, making other sports especially soccer more appealing.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Re: Americans-Canadians

From what I have heard, the 93 group might actually be even weaker elsewhere than in the PWHL. It would be great of everyone from other areas would weigh in on this point with their thoughts.

I think the main reason it is weaker is simple demographics. The 90-92 birth years were the height of the echo boom, so the 93 birth year as a whole is smaller.

However, it would seem that hockey registration is also taking a nosedive. This is certainly so in Ontario. Registration numbers by age group in the OWHA suggest it will continue to get worse every year now. There has not been sufficient attention given to promotion of the game among 5-10 year olds in recent years, nor to development in the younger age groups, the lopsided game scores in international competition don't help in the least at this point.



The sport is simply too expensive for most middle income families, and there is also too little prime time ice available, which further drives up costs. The PWHL has also been making noise about 20-20-20 games, which will further drive up costs disproportionately, making other sports especially soccer more appealing.

My friend Redneck say`s....

Canada's population growth can be attributed manily to our Open Door immigration policies.

Canada's 1st generation immigrants rarely take up the game of hockey.

Canada's 2nd generation immigrants do take up the game however in disproportionately fewer numbers, due mainly to sports/cultural differences and cost.

Canada: outfit a growing soccer player and pay yearly fee's - $1000.00

Canada: outfit a growing hockey player and pay yearly fee's - Pricle$$.

Canadian's can now play soccer indoors in the winter as well as outdoors in the summer.

Canada's fastest growing sport is soccer.


Canada.... may well be losing it`s hockey edge. Just sayin...

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

From what I have heard, the 93 group might actually be even weaker elsewhere than in the PWHL. It would be great of everyone from other areas would weigh in on this point with their thoughts.

I think the main reason it is weaker is simple demographics. The 90-92 birth years were the height of the echo boom, so the 93 birth year as a whole is smaller.

However, it would seem that hockey registration is also taking a nosedive. This is certainly so in Ontario. Registration numbers by age group in the OWHA suggest it will continue to get worse every year now. There has not been sufficient attention given to promotion of the game among 5-10 year olds in recent years, nor to development in the younger age groups, the lopsided game scores in international competition don't help in the least at this point.

The sport is simply too expensive for most middle income families, and there is also too little prime time ice available, which further drives up costs. The PWHL has also been making noise about 20-20-20 games, which will further drive up costs disproportionately, making other sports especially soccer more appealing.

Wow. I'm feeling more and more appreciative of my kid's situation every second. We have to figure out some way to keep the quality along with the quantity. I have a few ideas but let's see if there are others that can add some input to this problem. ......Lopsided scores... don't get me going again.....I think we're clear on that one finally.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

My friend Redneck say`s....

Canada's population growth can be attributed manily to our Open Door immigration policies.

Canada's 1st generation immigrants rarely take up the game of hockey.

Canada's 2nd generation immigrants do take up the game however in disproportionately fewer numbers, due mainly to sports/cultural differences and cost.

Canada: outfit a growing soccer player and pay yearly fee's - $1000.00

Canada: outfit a growing hockey player and pay yearly fee's - Pricle$$.

Canadian's can now play soccer indoors in the winter as well as outdoors in the summer.

Canada's fastest growing sport is soccer.


Canada.... may well be losing it`s hockey edge. Just sayin...

I here ya 5-4. Rattle that brain of yours and let's figure something out to save it.

 

[bbtt]

Re: Americans-Canadians

The people who would complain about any Canadian receiving a scholarship or having the opportunity to attend a DI school are the same people who would complain about SSM, NAHA or NSA competing in the USA Hockey Nationals. The problem with the trophy generation is that instead of looking at those programs and striving to be like them or more competitive against them "the parents" want to eliminate them all together. I'm not sure what the % is of Canadians in DI but I guess that (in some people's minds) the thinking is if the Canadians aren't allowed to play in DI that would better for my daughter.
Can you even imagine the impact on the women's game if Canadians weren't allowed to compete. Oh yes that would be called high school hockey.

The comments in this thread are so extreme, it is comical. But since I have already been told I live in a cave, I will attempt to respond. Nobody is trying to eliminate SSM, NAHA or NSA (as if we could). But they should be playing in a division with other prep schools. It is implausible and unrealistic to suggest that all the other club teams should convert to the prep school format in order to compete.

But rest assured, it has nothing to do with winning a trophy. Actually, it is more the other way around. I would suggest that it is the need for a trophy that drives teams like SSM (and NAHA) to want to compete at Nationals.

Regarding the Canadian comments, I have never read a single thread that said there should be no Canadians playing in the US for D1 schools. (Again, the extremisn is laughable.) The only issue that I have seen is regarding the number of players.

While UCONN doesn't know the % of Canadians, Trillium supplied the number of approx 40%. For this number to make sense, it would mean that 40% of all Freshmen at these colleges were also Canadian. Since this isn't true, it doesn't seem irrational that posters may question the validity of this practice.

As a matter of fact, there are several teams that are greater than 75% Canadian. In my opinion, this seems excessive for a school located in the U.S.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

The comments in this thread are so extreme, it is comical. But since I have already been told I live in a cave, I will attempt to respond. Nobody is trying to eliminate SSM, NAHA or NSA (as if we could). But they should be playing in a division with other prep schools. It is implausible and unrealistic to suggest that all the other club teams should convert to the prep school format in order to compete.

But rest assured, it has nothing to do with winning a trophy. Actually, it is more the other way around. I would suggest that it is the need for a trophy that drives teams like SSM (and NAHA) to want to compete at Nationals.

Regarding the Canadian comments, I have never read a single thread that said there should be no Canadians playing in the US for D1 schools. (Again, the extremisn is laughable.) The only issue that I have seen is regarding the number of players.

While UCONN doesn't know the % of Canadians, Trillium supplied the number of approx 40%. For this number to make sense, it would mean that 40% of all Freshmen at these colleges were also Canadian. Since this isn't true, it doesn't seem irrational that posters may question the validity of this practice.

As a matter of fact, there are several teams that are greater than 75% Canadian. In my opinion, this seems excessive for a school located in the U.S.

bbtt why? Some are 75, some are close to 0. Read your third paragraph again. It seems laughable, doesn't make sense.....

 

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Regarding the Canadian comments, I have never read a single thread that said there should be no Canadians playing in the US for D1 schools. (Again, the extremisn is laughable.) The only issue that I have seen is regarding the number of players.

While UCONN doesn't know the % of Canadians, Trillium supplied the number of approx 40%. For this number to make sense, it would mean that 40% of all Freshmen at these colleges were also Canadian. Since this isn't true, it doesn't seem irrational that posters may question the validity of this practice.

As a matter of fact, there are several teams that are greater than 75% Canadian. In my opinion, this seems excessive for a school located in the U.S.

Your point, I think, is then that the % of Canadians on a hockey team should be in line with the % of Canadians who would otherwise be Freshmen at the university....irrespective of the fact that they may be disproportionally much better hockey players (as supported by the numbers I shared way back in this thread). Is that it?

Let's use another example to test the validity of your alternative proposal. Judging by the NBA, and March Madness games I watch, most of the top basketball players across the country happen to be African American. Maybe 75% or more on the teams in the most competitive programs. However, at very few schools in the country do African Americans represent 75% of the overall Freshman classes at those schools. To me that does still make sense, since they are the best players. Are you then suggesting that those basketball programs too should be weakened to create better alignment with the profile of their overall school populations?? Would it be "rational to question the validity of such a practice"?

I thought not.

I really don't see the point of not making any college teams as competitive as you possibly can--as long as the student-athletes on those teams meet the academic standards of the student body.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Americans-Canadians

From what I have heard, the 93 group might actually be even weaker elsewhere than in the PWHL. It would be great of everyone from other areas would weigh in on this point with their thoughts.

I think the main reason it is weaker is simple demographics. The 90-92 birth years were the height of the echo boom, so the 93 birth year as a whole is smaller.

However, it would seem that hockey registration is also taking a nosedive. This is certainly so in Ontario. Registration numbers by age group in the OWHA suggest it will continue to get worse every year now. There has not been sufficient attention given to promotion of the game among 5-10 year olds in recent years, nor to development in the younger age groups, the lopsided game scores in international competition don't help in the least at this point.

The sport is simply too expensive for most middle income families, and there is also too little prime time ice available, which further drives up costs. The PWHL has also been making noise about 20-20-20 games, which will further drive up costs disproportionately, making other sports especially soccer more appealing.

It's late and would need a lot of time to respond properly to the excellent postings of Trillium. Agree with most of that info, and bang on on many of the points and details.

A couple of quick added value points, I may expand on it in a few days....

Part of the decline in Ontario is driven by demographics and Birth Rates. 88-92 were the highest birthrates in Ontario/1000 since the 60's, the so called Echo-Boomers. From 93 to 2000 the birthrates steadily declined and bottomed out in early 2000's. Population growth continued as declining birthrates were offset by increasing imigration rates. (Relaxing of certain standards). As 5-4 already indicated very few 1st generation Canadians get involved into hockey. They just keep piling onto the soccer growth heap.

Quebec however will be different. My prediction is that Quebec will win U18 Nats within the next 3 years (For those of you not familiar, Ontario has won (dominated) this event every time except one year in the early 90's). They have a good core of 93 and 94 players, and with the generous child tax credit laws, their birth rates declined a lot less compared to the rest of the country. Growth of female hockey in Quebec came later than in Ontario, and last I checked their numbers were still going up. They will have to do something with the high school vs CEGEP stuff in Quebec, as all the good 15-16 year olds are vanishing into the prep systems at OHA and in the States, with the good 16 year olds stuck in MAA hockey in Quebec. Two of those very good MAA players ended up paying the price by getting cut from HC U18 after being on the team in August. Hopefully that will spur a change to allow those players to play at the right level for them in their home province.

For the last two years Ontario had about 50 D1 recruits each year. My prediction is that this number will be around 25 for next year. Anyone wanna take me up on that one ?.

So 5-4...What does the West Look like. At least you got one of the stellar 94's out there.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Regarding the Canadian comments, I have never read a single thread that said there should be no Canadians playing in the US for D1 schools. (Again, the extremisn is laughable.) The only issue that I have seen is regarding the number of players. .

You may wanna re-read. There was a poster, not that long ago (earlier this month), who suggested that all Canadians were Carpet Baggers, and should stay at home. When challenged on it by others, said poster vehemently argued his/her point and re-iterated his/her position on more than one occasion. This led to a predictable flaming war, until said poster retreated.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

For the last two years Ontario had about 50 D1 recruits each year. My prediction is that this number will be around 25 for next year. Anyone wanna take me up on that one ?.

.

I agree that the trend of 50+ Ontario recruits over the last 2 years cannot continue. But I think 25 is way too low.

My guess is low to mid 30's, returning the number to historical levels prior to the 89 groups. I can already count about 30 in my head who I expect have an excellent chance to be recruited next season (assuming they have the grades and scores), and I don't have full visibility to all of the excellent MAA players moving up into the PWHL. That goes especially for those outside the GTA, and I would assume at least some of them are 93s.

If I had to give an exact number, I will say 34.

(BTW, I think you still owe me for another bet!)

 

[bbtt]

Re: Americans-Canadians

You may wanna re-read. There was a poster, not that long ago (earlier this month), who suggested that all Canadians were Carpet Baggers, and should stay at home. When challenged on it by others, said poster vehemently argued his/her point and re-iterated his/her position on more than one occasion. This led to a predictable flaming war, until said poster retreated.

I did try to, but was continuously thrown by the carpetbagger terminology, and lost my train of concentration. However, it did appear to be quantity related.

I am also not for zero because I agree that having great players on the team is the best for the sport. My argument is more along the lines in that after you get past the first two lines, there are an awful lot of players that could fill in for slots 13-25, but if the team has 20+ Canadians on the team, it makes me think that the coaches aren't really looking.

 

[bbtt]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Your point, I think, is then that the % of Canadians on a hockey team should be in line with the % of Canadians who would otherwise be Freshmen at the university....irrespective of the fact that they may be disproportionally much better hockey players (as supported by the numbers I shared way back in this thread). Is that it?

Let's use another example to test the validity of your alternative proposal. Judging by the NBA, and March Madness games I watch, most of the top basketball players across the country happen to be African American. Maybe 75% or more on the teams in the most competitive programs. However, at very few schools in the country do African Americans represent 75% of the overall Freshman classes at those schools. To me that does still make sense, since they are the best players. Are you then suggesting that those basketball programs too should be weakened to create better alignment with the profile of their overall school populations?? Would it be "rational to question the validity of such a practice"?

Surely you understand the difference between race and nationality? Unless you actually think these players are from South Africa or Uganda?

By the way, my daughter is graduating from her 1st choice school this month so it doesn't really matter to me personally. However, do you expect me to believe that if the tables were turned, and the majority of players making up teams at Canadian Universities were from America no one would care because it was "the best for the sport"?

At least try to see both sides...

 

[ARM]

Re: Americans-Canadians

My argument is more along the lines in that after you get past the first two lines, there are an awful lot of players that could fill in for slots 13-25, but if the team has 20+ Canadians on the team, it makes me think that the coaches aren't really looking.

I'd agree with this. I think that there are some coaches, particularly those who are Canadian born, who have a bias that a Canadian player will be superior to an American player, period. There are a number of programs where the coaches have found that because of tuition differences based on residency, once past a certain point on the depth chart, one can attract a local player of a given ability equivalent to a comparable international player with a smaller percentage of a scholarship.

Surely you understand the difference between race and nationality?

Yes, it's not quite analogous. I do think the men's basketball comparison is useful for the case of the poster who asked what women's college hockey would look like minus international players. Yes, the level of competition would drop, but not all the way down to HS level. The players in D-I would still be a subset of HS/prep/club players, and they'd still be older and stronger. But you would see a situation like in men's college BB compared to 30 years ago where the top players now head to the NBA earlier. The biggest impact is at the elite programs, because teams can't build a core of superstars and keep them for 3 or 4 years. The game would still have great players, but in far lower numbers.

I think in the case of women's hockey, one point is that the game was not introduced to produce great teams, but rather to give students the opportunity to participate in varsity athletics. And yes, I believe that international students should also have that opportunity.

At least try to see both sides...

That is the problem with many debates, where the discussion is carried on for the most part by those with views that are exact polar opposite; they have little desire to see the opposing side.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

I gave this some thought and I truly believe that if the tables were turned I would hope that the coaches pick the best players (in combined categories) for the job. I compared this to my years as a Canadian football player. When I played it was a well known fact that we didn't really even compare to the U.S. at that time (still really don't) and I totally respected that fact. I'm not saying that we are that dominant in hockey, but I can surely see it from a coaching perspective.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Don't get me wrong. I do understand why someone might be concerned if those of American citizenship were considered the minority. I get it absolutely, and I see that it does become a matter of degree.

The basketball analogy is helpful in illustrating two things. One, that using "normal population distributions among the student body" does not make sense in setting standards/limits for varsity sports participation. And two, the degree to which the calibre of competition might be quite negatively affected if such standards were applied across particular sports.

But you also mention 20+ Canadians per team. Name me even one team where this is the case.

The teams with extraordinarily high participation of Canadians also generally also happen to be cases where the pool of available Canadian (Ontario) talent is both much closer geographically as well as in absolute size, to that available on the US side of the border. Clarkson for example is in a remote part of New York state and only about 1/2 hour from the Canadian border. Where large pools of high quality local talent exist (ie. Minn and Mass) that doesn't happen. Again, to me it all makes sense.

I honestly wouldn't have a problem at all if there were lots of Americans on our college teams. As a matter of fact, though it is not college sports, in our local community growing up, we had several American baseball players billeting from places like California to play minor league semi-pro ball...several who lived with my best friend's family in successive seasons and I got to know well.

These American imports made sense to me--that's where the best players were from, and they increased the calibre of our local team significantly. It got me a lot more interested in following baseball as a result.

Similarly, at the Olympics, we typically have many transplanted Jamaicans on our track teams (they are generally far better track athletes!), as well as those from other nationalities competing for our country in other sports. I cheer for them just as loudly as those born here. The reverse is also true.

I figure they all must think of our country fondly to want to live here and represent us. In so doing, they learn more about us, and we learn more about them, and the mutual appreciation grows. The way I see it, in the larger scheme of things, all these "transplants", whether it be for 4 years or a lifetime, can only help bring the world closer together. How can that be a bad thing?

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Re: Americans-Canadians

It's late and would need a lot of time to respond properly to the excellent postings of Trillium. Agree with most of that info, and bang on on many of the points and details.

A couple of quick added value points, I may expand on it in a few days....

Part of the decline in Ontario is driven by demographics and Birth Rates. 88-92 were the highest birthrates in Ontario/1000 since the 60's, the so called Echo-Boomers. From 93 to 2000 the birthrates steadily declined and bottomed out in early 2000's. Population growth continued as declining birthrates were offset by increasing imigration rates. (Relaxing of certain standards). As 5-4 already indicated very few 1st generation Canadians get involved into hockey. They just keep piling onto the soccer growth heap.

Quebec however will be different. My prediction is that Quebec will win U18 Nats within the next 3 years (For those of you not familiar, Ontario has won (dominated) this event every time except one year in the early 90's). They have a good core of 93 and 94 players, and with the generous child tax credit laws, their birth rates declined a lot less compared to the rest of the country. Growth of female hockey in Quebec came later than in Ontario, and last I checked their numbers were still going up. They will have to do something with the high school vs CEGEP stuff in Quebec, as all the good 15-16 year olds are vanishing into the prep systems at OHA and in the States, with the good 16 year olds stuck in MAA hockey in Quebec. Two of those very good MAA players ended up paying the price by getting cut from HC U18 after being on the team in August. Hopefully that will spur a change to allow those players to play at the right level for them in their home province.

For the last two years Ontario had about 50 D1 recruits each year. My prediction is that this number will be around 25 for next year. Anyone wanna take me up on that one ?.

So 5-4...What does the West Look like. At least you got one of the stellar 94's out there.

Good analogy OnMAA, I especially agree with your comments on the Quebec front as they will continue to develop good players due to the points you have mentioned.

The West will continue to flatline with respect to the numbers that are being introduced to the US College scene. To date BTD lists 18 recruits heading to D1 or Ivy from the 4 Western Provinces...eclipsed by the current 52 coming out of Ontario alone.

Western Canada's stumbling block has always been exposure as it is extremley difficult for US College coaches to get a good consistant look at Western born players. The recent expansion of the JWHL should help.

Interesting to note that a number of Western Canadian girls that I had thought were shoe-ins for D1 this year have opted to stay home and play for Canadian Universities. This seems to be a continueing trend and the strong female programs at the U of M Bison's (Manitoba) and the U of A Panda's (Alberta) over the past few years are testiments to that.

Regardless, the strengthening US programs coupled with the waning Canadian programs are windows into the trends we will continue to see at the US College level. As time goes on we will see less and less Canadian girls heading to the US as more and more talented US girls are now able to fill those spots.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Western Canada's stumbling block has always been exposure as it is extremley difficult for US College coaches to get a good consistant look at Western born players. The recent expansion of the JWHL should help.

Interesting to note that a number of Western Canadian girls that I had thought were shoe-ins for D1 this year have opted to stay home and play for Canadian Universities. This seems to be a continueing trend and the strong female programs at the U of M Bison's (Manitoba) and the U of A Panda's (Alberta) over the past few years are testiments to that.

I have always found it interesting that the vast majority of Team Ontario players, both red and blue, end up in D1 programs, while very few players from other provinces do so.

Part of the reason obviously is the depth of talent in Ontario on their teams relative to other provinces, as well as the fact that Ontario players are scouted much more frequently.

However, that doesn't tell the whole story. Virtually every D1 program attends Nationals, so the top players making their provincials teams in other provinces have been seen in an environment where they can be assessed versus the best talent....even before the advent of the JWHL. But it has also surprised me that still relatively few (<50%) of the best players from other provinces teams don't go consistently D1, as virtually all do in Ontario. In Quebec, language issues play a significant role, but elsewhere?

I'd be interested in your thoughts on this. Is it mostly because most girls just don't want to be that far away from home? Is it because they don't usually know they need to prepare early enough academically to be recruitable--(Clearinghouse cores, SAT scores)? Is it because they just don't aspire to it the same way Ontario girls do, maybe because most of the girls ahead of them didn't play D1? Is it because fewer girls even go on to university (I'd say 95%+ of the Ontario PWHL girls do)? Is it because the Canadian universities like Manitoba and Alberta are quite proactive in recruiting out west (the local universities rarely bother here)?...or are there other factors? What do you think is the relative importance of each, and are any of these changing?

 

[live4hockey]

Re: Americans-Canadians

The basketball analogy is flawed. Just because they are African American -- by virtue of the name itself they are Americans, and don't need a Visa to attend college in the US. The argument against having so many foreigners (ie. non US taxpayers) is that the taxpaying public gives BILLIONS of dollars each year to support PUBLIC universities. Then in turn, the universities give out scholarships. And so the taxpayers want there to be more equity. If we (Americans) are paying the taxes, then shouldn't Americans benefit from that?

I am not saying that I necessarily agree, that is just the argument I have heard, particularly about schools like UMD. Minnesotans, who I think everyone would agree, have plenty of good hockey players and so they are especially angered that UMD continues to bring in foreigners from Canada and beyond.

 

[live4hockey]

Re: Americans-Canadians

From what I have heard, the 93 group might actually be even weaker elsewhere than in the PWHL. It would be great of everyone from other areas would weigh in on this point with their thoughts.

I didn't think the 92 group is particularly strong in the US, so comparatively I thought the 93s were stronger. However, there weren't many 93s on the US under-18 team (just a few), so next year will be interesting to see if the 93s dominate the roster or if they pick a lot of 94's. They goto camp together in St. Cloud in June and the combined all-star game is indicative of who is being considered for the under-18 camp (and 3 game series) and then the under-18 world championship team. Will especially be interesting to see who they pick as goalies because all 3 of the goalies Rigsby (Wisco), Moore (Brown) and Sperry (BU) are 92's.

 

[Hux]

Re: Americans-Canadians

The basketball analogy is flawed. Just because they are African American -- by virtue of the name itself they are Americans, and don't need a Visa to attend college in the US. The argument against having so many foreigners (ie. non US taxpayers) is that the taxpaying public gives BILLIONS of dollars each year to support PUBLIC universities. Then in turn, the universities give out scholarships. And so the taxpayers want there to be more equity. If we (Americans) are paying the taxes, then shouldn't Americans benefit from that?

I am not saying that I necessarily agree, that is just the argument I have heard, particularly about schools like UMD. Minnesotans, who I think everyone would agree, have plenty of good hockey players and so they are especially angered that UMD continues to bring in foreigners from Canada and beyond.

Once again NO MINNESOTA TAX DOLLARS go to athletic scholarships. There is also the snob factor;( and this applies to schools across the country and not just Minnesotians and UMD) a great many people look down upon programs/schools like UMD, Mercyhurst, Niagara, Clarkson, Quinnipiac, Maine, UNH, etc because they don't have the "academic reputation" and cache of your finer/higher ranked institutions.