Not sure what teams you've watched recently. Nobles was dreadful this year. St. sebs was just over .500. And the teams I watched were on par with the others, including this year's ISL champion.

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.

That is a hypothesis that supports nothing. It is your opinion. It's a cause-and-effect that isn't backed by anything other than pure conjecture on your part.

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?

Just asked my kid, who plays full season U16. He said crowds are unnecessary to the game. Said he'd rather have scouts watching because he's on a good team than students because he's on a public HS team.

So you didn't ask him. Liar

Which part of my conversation with my kid did you not understand? Happy to break it down into monosyllabic words for you.

been to both and you are correct. and i agree, what 16/17 year old is not thrilled at having --- lots of GIRL classmates cheering them on.

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.

I'm not comparing to my childhood. I'm comparing the local game - at all levels of HS hockey - to what it was five years ago. I'm comparing how many drafted players we had in 2016 and are projected to have in 2017.

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.

Really? You know all this for a fact?

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

Why is that? Don't Jerry York and David Quinn count as college coaches? Of course they do. So, the statement that "EVERY college coach would rather have a 20 year old man show-up on campus as a freshman than an 18 year old kid" is false.

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.

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. "

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

Thank you. Guy 2 here.

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.

You acknowledge there are different paths, "there is no right or wrong" and then you judge the paths that some choose. Which is it? Are you open-minded or closed?

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.

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.

boy, a lot of knee-jerkiness in this thread. Thought I left those days behind on the kiddie boards.

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