Ice Hockey DBoard
The Official New England Ice Hockey DBoard
Click Here to Visit Our Facebook Page
email: icehockeydboard@yahoo.com
Menu
Return to Website > Index > High School & Prep Hockey > High School & Prep Hockey > State of High School Hockey in MA Recent Posts
Return to Website > Index > High School & Prep Hockey > High School & Prep Hockey > State of High School Hockey in MA
High School & Prep Hockey
Author
Comment
Man, what happened to high school hockey in MA? I went to the second "Super 8" game last night in Chelmsford. Has all the talent gone to Prep teams. It looked like JV quality hockey to me. Then I saw the Minnesota HS hockey highlights on tv this morning. Are these kids even the same age?
Simple. U16/ U18. Watched a tryout last night. U16 team far better than any high school I have seen this year.
Agree. I know my older son's U-16 team a few ago would have killed all but a couple D-I teams and I agree with the Minnesota comment. Watch their high school championship teams and then watch a MA game. Junior teams and preps take all of the kids around here. It is over for H.S. hockey in MA.
I don't know who you (anon) experts are but clearly you know everything about the game by simply watching it live of even better, on TV. I can only hope the two or three of you here jump in and begin coaching high school kids around here so you can save us all.
Blue
I don't know who you (anon) experts are but clearly you know everything about the game by simply watching it live of even better, on TV. I can only hope the two or three of you here jump in and begin coaching high school kids around here so you can save us all.
What are we missing? How do you know about the game besides watching it? You learn through osmosis?
Can't coach if they don't have the talent.
anon
Simple. U16/ U18. Watched a tryout last night. U16 team far better than any high school I have seen this year.
Agreed. My son's very average 16U team would have beaten any high school team I saw this year and even cut a bunch of kids that wound up playing first line on their HS team. Its just a much better option now.
People need to stop comparing Minnesota to Massachusetts- its a totally different setup where New England has prep schools and Minny doesnt (other than Shattuck). Prep hockey is where it is at now followed by U16/U18 then high school. This year its evident with the lack of high end talent playing high school hockey. Even the Malden Catholic and BC powerhouses are no longer keeping players. In fact, the three best BC players from last year all left to play prep this season.
And from what I saw of those three players, they would have a hard time cracking the top two lines / pairings of a good MN high school team.
Anon
And from what I saw of those three players, they would have a hard time cracking the top two lines / pairings of a good MN high school team.
Delusional much? Minnesota hockey isnt that superior - its just cool that players stay and play for their high schools. Its not full of 3 lines of studs. Prep teams would smoke MN high school teams.
So people are opting out of HS hockey to play local U16/U18? All the way through senior year? These are kids at public schools with weak hockey programs exclusively? I'm asking because I don't know. I have a 7th grader coming up and trying to figure things out.
An interesting article appeared last week in the providence journal talking about how 12 RI players appeared on the 3 champion prep schools rosters. That is a lot of players which obviously doesn't include RI players not on championship rosters. Some of the better RI players also appeared on other prep rosters like Moses Brown, Milton, Nobles, and Westminster to name a few schools. Years ago these players would have never thought of these schools and would have attended MSC, Hendricken, and Lasalle. There is some talent left at the RI private schools but there is absolutely no depth. There is no interest from any colleges or juniors as far as I can tell.
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
Anon
An interesting article appeared last week in the providence journal talking about how 12 RI players appeared on the 3 champion prep schools rosters. That is a lot of players which obviously doesn't include RI players not on championship rosters. Some of the better RI players also appeared on other prep rosters like Moses Brown, Milton, Nobles, and Westminster to name a few schools. Years ago these players would have never thought of these schools and would have attended MSC, Hendricken, and Lasalle. There is some talent left at the RI private schools but there is absolutely no depth. There is no interest from any colleges or juniors as far as I can tell.
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
Best post on here in a long, long time. Thank you for putting it into perspective. My son who played in the Catholic conference and now NAHL would not even announce his NAHL commitment after HS at senior night. The AD had no clue what the NAHL even was. That told me he stayed 2 years too long but I was a proponent of HS hockey.
Anon
Anon
An interesting article appeared last week in the providence journal talking about how 12 RI players appeared on the 3 champion prep schools rosters. That is a lot of players which obviously doesn't include RI players not on championship rosters. Some of the better RI players also appeared on other prep rosters like Moses Brown, Milton, Nobles, and Westminster to name a few schools. Years ago these players would have never thought of these schools and would have attended MSC, Hendricken, and Lasalle. There is some talent left at the RI private schools but there is absolutely no depth. There is no interest from any colleges or juniors as far as I can tell.
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
Best post on here in a long, long time. Thank you for putting it into perspective. My son who played in the Catholic conference and now NAHL would not even announce his NAHL commitment after HS at senior night. The AD had no clue what the NAHL even was. That told me he stayed 2 years too long but I was a proponent of HS hockey.
why would someone announce a NAHL commitment? Slow news day?
Aanon
Anon
Anon
An interesting article appeared last week in the providence journal talking about how 12 RI players appeared on the 3 champion prep schools rosters. That is a lot of players which obviously doesn't include RI players not on championship rosters. Some of the better RI players also appeared on other prep rosters like Moses Brown, Milton, Nobles, and Westminster to name a few schools. Years ago these players would have never thought of these schools and would have attended MSC, Hendricken, and Lasalle. There is some talent left at the RI private schools but there is absolutely no depth. There is no interest from any colleges or juniors as far as I can tell.
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
I only mention this because this is not a RI issue it is all over New England. But the RI issue clearly shows what's happening. Look at the kids being sent to the National development camp. The Massachusetts players are all on prep rosters. Years ago these kids would have attended CM, Matignon, Malden Catholic, and BC high.
If high school hockey wants to survive it needs to change its rules and adapt. A few ideas below:
20 minute periods for division 1
High school coaches be more involved with players in off season. Prep school coaches are all over the rinks in the fall
Allow coaches to give more access to junior coaches and college coaches to promote hockey after high school
Allow private schools and catholic schools to recruit and compete with preps
These are just a few thoughts. If nothing is done any quality high school hockey will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly
Best post on here in a long, long time. Thank you for putting it into perspective. My son who played in the Catholic conference and now NAHL would not even announce his NAHL commitment after HS at senior night. The AD had no clue what the NAHL even was. That told me he stayed 2 years too long but I was a proponent of HS hockey.
why would someone announce a NAHL commitment? Slow news day?
From MIAA?
Anon
...I went to the second "Super 8" GAME last night in Chelmsford...Then I saw the Minnesota HS hockey HIGHLIGHTS...
beatcuff
Anon
...I went to the second "Super 8" GAME last night in Chelmsford...Then I saw the Minnesota HS hockey HIGHLIGHTS...
Are you saying MN high school hockey compares to Arlington vs Hingham?
I was at the CC/Pope Francis game a couple of nights ago, it was some of the worst hockey I have seen in years. The next day I read in the Boston Globe the Pope Francis Head Coach blamed his goalies for the loss. You wonder why everyone is running away from MIAA Hockey? These are two private schools, where the parents are paying good money to get nothing in return except public high school sports and a slightly better than public high school education (maybe) and in the case of Central Catholic a daily visit to scenic downtown Lawrence as you drop your kid off at school.
anon
I was at the CC/Pope Francis game a couple of nights ago, it was some of the worst hockey I have seen in years. The next day I read in the Boston Globe the Pope Francis Head Coach blamed his goalies for the loss. You wonder why everyone is running away from MIAA Hockey? These are two private schools, where the parents are paying good money to get nothing in return except public high school sports and a slightly better than public high school education (maybe) and in the case of Central Catholic a daily visit to scenic downtown Lawrence as you drop your kid off at school.
Went to a Bruins game over the weekend and saw what I assume was a town Squirt team do the "3 Minutes of Fame" or whatever they call it now. Kids couldn't even stay on their feet.
There is good hockey being played in this country. In Colorado, New Jersey, Florida, California, Detroit, Chicagoland.
Just not here.
Anon
anon
I was at the CC/Pope Francis game a couple of nights ago, it was some of the worst hockey I have seen in years. The next day I read in the Boston Globe the Pope Francis Head Coach blamed his goalies for the loss. You wonder why everyone is running away from MIAA Hockey? These are two private schools, where the parents are paying good money to get nothing in return except public high school sports and a slightly better than public high school education (maybe) and in the case of Central Catholic a daily visit to scenic downtown Lawrence as you drop your kid off at school.
Went to a Bruins game over the weekend and saw what I assume was a town Squirt team do the "3 Minutes of Fame" or whatever they call it now. Kids couldn't even stay on their feet.
There is good hockey being played in this country. In Colorado, New Jersey, Florida, California, Detroit, Chicagoland.
Just not here.
It is just watered down. Dexter, Rivers, Bel Hill, St Sebs, Nobles are all excellent programs locally. Add in the handfull of decent CC players abdbthe other kids who board or play full season midget and it is easy to see why the playing level has diminished. Does not even count those playing in national team or Jr's
Anon
Anon
anon
I was at the CC/Pope Francis game a couple of nights ago, it was some of the worst hockey I have seen in years. The next day I read in the Boston Globe the Pope Francis Head Coach blamed his goalies for the loss. You wonder why everyone is running away from MIAA Hockey? These are two private schools, where the parents are paying good money to get nothing in return except public high school sports and a slightly better than public high school education (maybe) and in the case of Central Catholic a daily visit to scenic downtown Lawrence as you drop your kid off at school.
Went to a Bruins game over the weekend and saw what I assume was a town Squirt team do the "3 Minutes of Fame" or whatever they call it now. Kids couldn't even stay on their feet.
There is good hockey being played in this country. In Colorado, New Jersey, Florida, California, Detroit, Chicagoland.
Just not here.
It is just watered down. Dexter, Rivers, Bel Hill, St Sebs, Nobles are all excellent programs locally. Add in the handfull of decent CC players abdbthe other kids who board or play full season midget and it is easy to see why the playing level has diminished. Does not even count those playing in national team or Jr's
But, I think we're saying the same thing. "Watered down" means it isn't as good as it used to be, doesn't it?
It all just goes to support that more and more youth hockey 12 months a year isn't translating to better hockey players overall when the kids reach the high school level.
Anon
It all just goes to support that more and more youth hockey 12 months a year isn't translating to better hockey players overall when the kids reach the high school level.
Anon
Anon
Anon
anon
I was at the CC/Pope Francis game a couple of nights ago, it was some of the worst hockey I have seen in years. The next day I read in the Boston Globe the Pope Francis Head Coach blamed his goalies for the loss. You wonder why everyone is running away from MIAA Hockey? These are two private schools, where the parents are paying good money to get nothing in return except public high school sports and a slightly better than public high school education (maybe) and in the case of Central Catholic a daily visit to scenic downtown Lawrence as you drop your kid off at school.
Went to a Bruins game over the weekend and saw what I assume was a town Squirt team do the "3 Minutes of Fame" or whatever they call it now. Kids couldn't even stay on their feet.
There is good hockey being played in this country. In Colorado, New Jersey, Florida, California, Detroit, Chicagoland.
Just not here.
It is just watered down. Dexter, Rivers, Bel Hill, St Sebs, Nobles are all excellent programs locally. Add in the handfull of decent CC players abdbthe other kids who board or play full season midget and it is easy to see why the playing level has diminished. Does not even count those playing in national team or Jr's
But, I think we're saying the same thing. "Watered down" means it isn't as good as it used to be, doesn't it?
Exactly the same. Watered down.
Is it fun for the kids playing U16/U18 in front of 20-40 parents, rather than the larger crowds of student body and locals you get for high school hockey games?
Anon
Is it fun for the kids playing U16/U18 in front of 20-40 parents, rather than the larger crowds of student body and locals you get for high school hockey games?
Anon
Anon
Is it fun for the kids playing U16/U18 in front of 20-40 parents, rather than the larger crowds of student body and locals you get for high school hockey games?
So you didn't ask him. Liar
Anon
Anon
Anon
Is it fun for the kids playing U16/U18 in front of 20-40 parents, rather than the larger crowds of student body and locals you get for high school hockey games?
So you didn't ask him. Liar
Anon
Is it fun for the kids playing U16/U18 in front of 20-40 parents, rather than the larger crowds of student body and locals you get for high school hockey games?
BTW HS hockey has NOT dropped off. we are simply cherry picking our memories. there has always been bad teams. there has always been 'boneheaded' plays/'are you kidding me' moments. its part of HS hockey, what makes it fun/painful to watch.
fine don't believe me then why with all the specialization has the SKILL level dropped. what we lost in the talent pool we increased in skill level --- net sum=zero.
i do agree YOUTH hockey has been watered down. back in my day there was town hockey and ONE regional club/metro team. now i have six club organizations within 30 minutes of my house and each have at least two teams available for an age group. the wizards had FIVE teams for U14 girls.
beatcuff
Anon
Is it fun for the kids playing U16/U18 in front of 20-40 parents, rather than the larger crowds of student body and locals you get for high school hockey games?
BTW HS hockey has NOT dropped off. we are simply cherry picking our memories. there has always been bad teams. there has always been 'boneheaded' plays/'are you kidding me' moments. its part of HS hockey, what makes it fun/painful to watch.
fine don't believe me then why with all the specialization has the SKILL level dropped. what we lost in the talent pool we increased in skill level --- net sum=zero.
i do agree YOUTH hockey has been watered down. back in my day there was town hockey and ONE regional club/metro team. now i have six club organizations within 30 minutes of my house and each have at least two teams available for an age group. the wizards had FIVE teams for U14 girls.
It's decidedly dropped off.
Oh, and puck bunnies make their way to the rink, regardless of whether it's public, prep, or FS, if you have a kid that is dependent on that to hook up. None of the kids on his FS team seem to be having any difficulties. They seem to have these social media thingies.
the crowd size really depends on the town that you live in and the time of the year, meaning now. I've been to two of our towns playoff games (my son plays FS), our stands were packed, people such as myself without kids in the program were there. Atmosphere was great. In both cases the number of fans from the other towns were much smaller, and by much smaller I mean half the size.
If kids want to play college hockey and that is their goal, than they can't go public and it's almost getting to a point where they can't even go Catholic Conference, at least for D1...Is there any D1 commits in the Catholic Conference this year or last? So sad ...Junior hockey and u14/u16/u18 teams have had such a negative impact on our sport here in New England
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
Anon
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
True statement? EVERY college coach would rather have an 18 year old kid that's a first or second round draft pick show up on campus as a freshman than a 20 year old man.
Anon
Anon
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
True statement? EVERY college coach would rather have an 18 year old kid that's a first or second round draft pick show up on campus as a freshman than a 20 year old man.
Yes, every coach would rather have a kid in Jr for 1 or 2 years and pull him in at the right time, which sometimes is mid season. Point is the super studs are ready at 18 and these coaches are eager to get the kid rostered asap. Those 20 year old frosh or21 year old sophs are typically the ones looking playing time. 2 separate " buckets" . Make sense?
Two separate 'buckets' indeed. One is an ocean and the other is a bucket.
The 18 year old wunderkind is only going to be on campus a couple years anyway.
Anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
True statement? EVERY college coach would rather have an 18 year old kid that's a first or second round draft pick show up on campus as a freshman than a 20 year old man.
Yes, every coach would rather have a kid in Jr for 1 or 2 years and pull him in at the right time, which sometimes is mid season. Point is the super studs are ready at 18 and these coaches are eager to get the kid rostered asap. Those 20 year old frosh or21 year old sophs are typically the ones looking playing time. 2 separate " buckets" . Make sense?
You are right, but it doesn't make sense to include these guys in a discussion about my kid who is not NHL draft pick material. Their path works for a tiny percentage, almost not even worth considering for 999 out of 1000 families, so to mention it here adds nothing to the discussion except conflict.
anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
True statement? EVERY college coach would rather have an 18 year old kid that's a first or second round draft pick show up on campus as a freshman than a 20 year old man.
Yes, every coach would rather have a kid in Jr for 1 or 2 years and pull him in at the right time, which sometimes is mid season. Point is the super studs are ready at 18 and these coaches are eager to get the kid rostered asap. Those 20 year old frosh or21 year old sophs are typically the ones looking playing time. 2 separate " buckets" . Make sense?
You are right, but it doesn't make sense to include these guys in a discussion about my kid who is not NHL draft pick material. Their path works for a tiny percentage, almost not even worth considering for 999 out of 1000 families, so to mention it here adds nothing to the discussion except conflict.
Dude. You gotta up your meds.
Guy 1 says coach would rather have 20 he old frosh over 18 he old frosh.
Guy 2 uses Hannafin and White as examples to why the wouldnt.
Guy 3 says, each example is about different types of players and in different buckets.
Back to: " One is an ocean and the other is a bucket. "
anon
Back to: " One is an ocean and the other is a bucket. "
Absolutely correct. One is told to accelerate high school graduation and come in at 17 whereas some of the others are told to go play jrs as a 19 year old and brought in mid year or the following year depending on team needs
Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, never play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
True statement? EVERY college coach would rather have an 18 year old kid that's a first or second round draft pick show up on campus as a freshman than a 20 year old man.
Yes, every coach would rather have a kid in Jr for 1 or 2 years and pull him in at the right time, which sometimes is mid season. Point is the super studs are ready at 18 and these coaches are eager to get the kid rostered asap. Those 20 year old frosh or21 year old sophs are typically the ones looking playing time. 2 separate " buckets" . Make sense?
You are right, but it doesn't make sense to include these guys in a discussion about my kid who is not NHL draft pick material. Their path works for a tiny percentage, almost not even worth considering for 999 out of 1000 families, so to mention it here adds nothing to the discussion except conflict.
Dude. You gotta up your meds.
Guy 1 says coach would rather have 20 he old frosh over 18 he old frosh.
Guy 2 uses Hannafin and White as examples to why the wouldnt.
Guy 3 says, each example is about different types of players and in different buckets.
How does it add conflict? "EVERY," which the poster said several times, means 100%. It is not 100%, it is something less. So, don't say it, since it isn't true.
IMO, the whole "EVERY coach" expecting kids to play Juniors is way overblown. I know lots of kids personally that went straight from HS (granted, mostly Prep) to NCAA. D1 and D3. Do "MOST" kids play Juniors? Yes. Even the elites like Hanifin and White (of course they're 16 when they do).
But the whole thing about hockey being so broken because of there being so many 20 year old Freshmen is overdone. Be glad we HAVE American Junior hockey. Beats being redshirted. Or having to play in the Q.
Anon
Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
anon
There are plenty of kids playing D-1 high school hockey who can or will play college hockey. Just because you aren't a commit at the age of 14 doesn't mean you can't play college hockey.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Everyone knows the program, EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid. EVERY coach would prefer the kid to do at least one year of Junior hockey and almost EVERY kid has to play Junior hockey somewhere. If the kid is a high school hockey prodigy he would get scooped-up and taken to the USHL at the age of 15.
Go watch a D-3 college game and you tell me, does it look like an impossible level to achieve? Finish high school, work part-time, play Junior hockey and if you are any good you will make a college team. If you do real well your first year in Juniors and you grow (a key deciding factor between D-1 and D-3) then move up to a higher league and play another year of Juniors and keep the D-1 dream alive.
Let's see how many kids graduate from a D1 HS program, neveru play prep, and play college hockey. Then let's see how many of them are at D1 colleges or good D3 schools.
And I do know, factually that not "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid." I can give you one example, there are others. Jerry York "encouraged" Noah Hanifin and Colin White to complete HS in 3 years so they could go right into his program. That meant Noah was a 17 year old, Colin an 18 year old, when they arrived on campus. It wasn't by the kids' choice, it wasn't by the parents'. The coach drove their decision.
Why did he do that? Because he knew they weren't going to stay. That's going to be true of any blue chip prospect. You can say "well, those are the exception." Yes, they are exceptional. But they still count towards "EVERY."
Not just exceptional cases but high first round draft picks. Do not belong I this conversation
True statement? EVERY college coach would rather have an 18 year old kid that's a first or second round draft pick show up on campus as a freshman than a 20 year old man.
Yes, every coach would rather have a kid in Jr for 1 or 2 years and pull him in at the right time, which sometimes is mid season. Point is the super studs are ready at 18 and these coaches are eager to get the kid rostered asap. Those 20 year old frosh or21 year old sophs are typically the ones looking playing time. 2 separate " buckets" . Make sense?
You are right, but it doesn't make sense to include these guys in a discussion about my kid who is not NHL draft pick material. Their path works for a tiny percentage, almost not even worth considering for 999 out of 1000 families, so to mention it here adds nothing to the discussion except conflict.
Dude. You gotta up your meds.
Guy 1 says coach would rather have 20 he old frosh over 18 he old frosh.
Guy 2 uses Hannafin and White as examples to why the wouldnt.
Guy 3 says, each example is about different types of players and in different buckets.
How does it add conflict? "EVERY," which the poster said several times, means 100%. It is not 100%, it is something less. So, don't say it, since it isn't true.
IMO, the whole "EVERY coach" expecting kids to play Juniors is way overblown. I know lots of kids personally that went straight from HS (granted, mostly Prep) to NCAA. D1 and D3. Do "MOST" kids play Juniors? Yes. Even the elites like Hanifin and White (of course they're 16 when they do).
But the whole thing about hockey being so broken because of there being so many 20 year old Freshmen is overdone. Be glad we HAVE American Junior hockey. Beats being redshirted. Or having to play in the Q.
Guy 3 here. Conflict guy is guy #1 or yet to be introduced guy #3.
I mostly agree. Kid goes to play in college when he is ready and or has the opportunity. When a kid is committed and the coach says welcome. When the coach says go play juniors, he has a decision to make, like MV Union did when he decimmited from UNH.
I'm any case, you are right. These kids are fortunate and should enjoy these opportunities.
I wish them all well.
What path and where each boy/girl who plays hockey is up to the parents and child as a joint decision. There is no right and wrong. Having been thru this before I can say the high school hockey experience can never be duplicated and playing with your friends and classmates in front of local town crowds is very special. I think everyone should have that for a year or two at least. If your not a top player or dominating at hs level by then playing juniors is a waste of $$$ but they will gladly take it selling you on the D1 dream when the majority of kids will be play D3 at best after 1-2 years of juniors. For many of the players in high school its all over after senior year but they just dont realize it at the time. If your not on the top junior team after highs chool then your looking at playing ACHA club hockey and there is nothing wrong with that as well. Good luck to all and enjoy the ride while it all lasts.
anon
What path and where each boy/girl who plays hockey is up to the parents and child as a joint decision. There is no right and wrong. Having been thru this before I can say the high school hockey experience can never be duplicated and playing with your friends and classmates in front of local town crowds is very special. I think everyone should have that for a year or two at least. If your not a top player or dominating at hs level by then playing juniors is a waste of $$$ but they will gladly take it selling you on the D1 dream when the majority of kids will be play D3 at best after 1-2 years of juniors. For many of the players in high school its all over after senior year but they just dont realize it at the time. If your not on the top junior team after highs chool then your looking at playing ACHA club hockey and there is nothing wrong with that as well. Good luck to all and enjoy the ride while it all lasts.
What I see are kids that chose to play for what would be considered good D1 public programs as Freshmen, get serious minutes as Sophomores, and still not be able to make good half season teams where they had to compete against Prep kids. Why? The level of competition is too low, on their own team and in their league. They are "dumbing" their game down. Whatever trajectory they may have been on gets stunted by their decision to play with their "friends and classmates in front of local town crowds."
My kid was at a skills session this week, U16/U18. Lots of bags of public and Catholic HS kids. When he got in the car he said "these kids can't catch a pass. I had one kid actually ask me to not pass the puck so hard because he couldn't catch it, and it was tape to tape."
You may be right, club hockey may be the highest level of college hockey for most of these kids. But the decision to play for a public HS by a player with promise is going to make that the only pathway for a lot more of them.
"... I see are kids that chose to play for what would be considered good D1 public programs as Freshmen, get serious minutes as Sophomores, and still not be able to make good half season teams where they had to compete against Prep kids. Why? The level of competition is too low"
You are delusional. Go to the summer tournaments and look around. The prep kids are no different. ‘Unable to compete with prep kids,’ good god I'm laughing my a$$ off. The difference is the third line at an Arlington or Hingham would be lost on the ice against many prep teams. The top 3 forward and the top two defensemen would notice the difference but could play without a problem.
Been there. Not only did my public school defensemen play against prep and full season junior players in the summer tournaments and college camps / combines he actually enjoyed it and was one of the better players on the ice. And yes, he is playing in college… at the school of his choice.
anon
"... I see are kids that chose to play for what would be considered good D1 public programs as Freshmen, get serious minutes as Sophomores, and still not be able to make good half season teams where they had to compete against Prep kids. Why? The level of competition is too low"
You are delusional. Go to the summer tournaments and look around. The prep kids are no different. ‘Unable to compete with prep kids,’ good god I'm laughing my a$$ off. The difference is the third line at an Arlington or Hingham would be lost on the ice against many prep teams. The top 3 forward and the top two defensemen would notice the difference but could play without a problem.
Been there. Not only did my public school defensemen play against prep and full season junior players in the summer tournaments and college camps / combines he actually enjoyed it and was one of the better players on the ice. And yes, he is playing in college… at the school of his choice.
Good for your son. What summer tournaments? I don't see many/any public schools kids in top level of Summer Beantown. Plenty of prep kids though.
anon
"... I see are kids that chose to play for what would be considered good D1 public programs as Freshmen, get serious minutes as Sophomores, and still not be able to make good half season teams where they had to compete against Prep kids. Why? The level of competition is too low"
You are delusional. Go to the summer tournaments and look around. The prep kids are no different. ‘Unable to compete with prep kids,’ good god I'm laughing my a$$ off. The difference is the third line at an Arlington or Hingham would be lost on the ice against many prep teams. The top 3 forward and the top two defensemen would notice the difference but could play without a problem.
Been there. Not only did my public school defensemen play against prep and full season junior players in the summer tournaments and college camps / combines he actually enjoyed it and was one of the better players on the ice. And yes, he is playing in college… at the school of his choice.
If you have a kid in college, you have at least a few miles on you. Learn to read before you react.
I never said ALL public HS kids can't compete. I didn't say your son couldn't, or some random kid from Arlington or Hingham or Marshfield for that matter. I just said I know "kids." And since you don't know who I know, you have zero basis to call me delusional.
Grow up, man.
All Catholic coaches should be fired!!! All the kids they have at tryouts.All the recruiting they do. Most Catholic schools are now friends and family!!! A town team wins Division 1 REALLY!! That doesn't say much for the coaches!!!
I'll give the MC and SJP coaches a pass, for one year anyway. CM is on their third coach in 3 years-he gets a pass. X is a football school. The rest of them should be seriously looking at their programs and how the people in charge are running them. BC Highs last championship came in 07, they haven't even been to the finals since 2012.
5-10 years ago they were all really active recruiting kids, now it seems they've given up and let the prep school look for the younger kids. 
They're still out there
Return to Website > Index > High School & Prep Hockey > High School & Prep Hockey > State of High School Hockey in MA