Ice Hockey DBoard

The Official New England Ice Hockey DBoard 

Visit The DBoard Online Store - https://www.cafepress.com/icehockeydboard

Click Here to Visit Our Facebook Page

email: icehockeydboard@yahoo.com

High School & Prep Hockey
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
Nepotism has its limits

Neither Amonte or McInnis even close to being drafted. It proves that dad can call in favors after coaching their own kids to USHL and their college alm mater but the NHL exposes them as middle of the pack at best. Sorry dad’s, only so much you can do for your benders.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

I think Amonte is an '00 and McInnis a '98 so I don't know what that means for being drafted but as a '98 I'd think LM's time is over. Amonte (6-3-9 in 36 games) might have other shots at it. People have posted here before that LM has always been overrated and the believers have pretty much been proven wrong. With any rational decision making by coaching staff he wouldn't be on BC (0-5-5 / 28 games 34 PIM), not even close. Biggest question there is why he was never moved to be a forward years ago. Good skater, OK hands but lacks size, decision making and responsible play to be even close to effective as a defensemen. The biggest difference between a D-1 and a D-3 player is often bloodline.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

The Amonte at BU is a 98. You might be confusing him with his younger brother, who just graduated from Thayer.
McInnis has a younger brother, who is an 01 and a soph at Dexter. He committed to Northeastern this past winter.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

So the son of a BC assistant coach committed to Northeastern? Interesting I guess. Someone posted how BC has over recruited and as such I wouldn't be surprised based on play (if all things were equal) if LM got cut. It only goes for so long. BC certainly could use some talent to keep pace in the Beanpot race.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Not sure what the deal is or was there. Saw the kid play D1 h.s. hockey and just got run over. In way over his head then he goes to Dexter and heard he did O.K. in the USHL but then saw the BC games and he still gets run over. Sometimes they peak at 12 or 13.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
So the son of a BC assistant coach committed to Northeastern? Interesting I guess. Someone posted how BC has over recruited and as such I wouldn't be surprised based on play (if all things were equal) if LM got cut. It only goes for so long. BC certainly could use some talent to keep pace in the Beanpot race.
Northeastern has over-recruited, too. They all have. By 2019/20 HE schools would have 30+ players if all currently rostered (non-graduating) players are retained and all the commitments are honored (by both sides).

The explosion started with the 2000 birth year. Those players just graduated or will next year. Yes, some will be sent to Juniors. The numbers are still staggering.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
anon
So the son of a BC assistant coach committed to Northeastern? Interesting I guess. Someone posted how BC has over recruited and as such I wouldn\'t be surprised based on play (if all things were equal) if LM got cut. It only goes for so long. BC certainly could use some talent to keep pace in the Beanpot race.
Northeastern has over-recruited, too. They all have. By 2019/20 HE schools would have 30+ players if all currently rostered (non-graduating) players are retained and all the commitments are honored (by both sides).

The explosion started with the 2000 birth year. Those players just graduated or will next year. Yes, some will be sent to Juniors. The numbers are still staggering.
The over-recruiting is astonishing, especially when you consider the schools only have 18 scholarships to divide among all those players.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

That's great. Kill a kid and his dreams after they've said no to others and have taken a year or two hiatus from real life to play a game and hopefully fill the stands for the $chools pocketbook. The system is screwed-up and hockey is the worse of the worse.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
That's great. Kill a kid and his dreams after they've said no to others and have taken a year or two hiatus from real life to play a game and hopefully fill the stands for the $chools pocketbook. The system is screwed-up and hockey is the worse of the worse.
It's not the schools, or at least not mainly. They have to play the game. Three years earlier, the rules were the same and only the elite of the elite committed by the end of Freshman year, backed by 4 for 4s.

What changed are the parents and their entitled kids. All these kids have a choice, they can remain uncommitted and NOT tell any other schools "no." They all want to announce their commits on Twitter. Their non-binding, no-money-attached commits.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Hold on there Bernie. College athletes have an obligation to come in and perform. If they can’t then they get replaced. End of story. It is a business. Commitment is two-sided. One from the school to the player, and one from the player to the school. If the player can’t hold up their end of the bargain and they get replaced. The subject at hand is a joke. Only there because of daddy. Just like OW, verbals from kids mean nothing. The smart ones develop first then commit when ready vs inflate the kids ego with this verbal commitment crap. And there is no “commitment” ever by a coach that a kid will play or keep their job!

Go cry somewhere else Mr. everyone gets a trophy...

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
anon
So the son of a BC assistant coach committed to Northeastern? Interesting I guess. Someone posted how BC has over recruited and as such I wouldn\'t be surprised based on play (if all things were equal) if LM got cut. It only goes for so long. BC certainly could use some talent to keep pace in the Beanpot race.
Northeastern has over-recruited, too. They all have. By 2019/20 HE schools would have 30+ players if all currently rostered (non-graduating) players are retained and all the commitments are honored (by both sides).

The explosion started with the 2000 birth year. Those players just graduated or will next year. Yes, some will be sent to Juniors. The numbers are still staggering.
verbal player commitments are NOT binding

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Exactly why ' The system is screwed-up and hockey is the worse of the worse.'

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Exactly why ' The system is screwed-up and hockey is the worse of the worse.'
If you think hockey is the worse of the worse, you clearly have no clue.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
anon
Exactly why \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' The system is screwed-up and hockey is the worse of the worse.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'
If you think hockey is the worse of the worse, you clearly have no clue.
Hockey is definitely different than all the other sports in that most kids are asked to either PG, go to juniors for a year maybe two so they can have 20-21 year old freshmen and even after that the school can decide that the kid they just put off for 1-3 years still hasn't developed enough so they don't commit to them. So yeah, I'd say probably the worse of the worst.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

And so share with us all of your direct knowledge of other sports?

Re: Nepotism has its limits

beatcuff
Anon
anon
So the son of a BC assistant coach committed to Northeastern? Interesting I guess. Someone posted how BC has over recruited and as such I wouldn\\\'t be surprised based on play (if all things were equal) if LM got cut. It only goes for so long. BC certainly could use some talent to keep pace in the Beanpot race.
Northeastern has over-recruited, too. They all have. By 2019/20 HE schools would have 30+ players if all currently rostered (non-graduating) players are retained and all the commitments are honored (by both sides).

The explosion started with the 2000 birth year. Those players just graduated or will next year. Yes, some will be sent to Juniors. The numbers are still staggering.
verbal player commitments are NOT binding
Really? Wow, since when?

SMH

Re: Nepotism has its limits

You mean this might be the end of the road for 'The Lil' Superstar'??? I'll never forget standing with a few scouts watching him play a public high school game when he was trying to get noticed for junior hockey. Two walked out mid-way through the game and one from the USHL/WHL said 'he might be the worst defensemen I've had to watch in my 9 years of scouting...no lie.' After I heard that I had to follow his career! It's been a good ride, now hit the books.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
You mean this might be the end of the road for 'The Lil' Superstar'??? I'll never forget standing with a few scouts watching him play a public high school game when he was trying to get noticed for junior hockey. Two walked out mid-way through the game and one from the USHL/WHL said 'he might be the worst defensemen I've had to watch in my 9 years of scouting...no lie.' After I heard that I had to follow his career! It's been a good ride, now hit the books.
Kevin Cullen visits the dboard. Nice story.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Guy knows what he's talking about. I lived through two years of it; couldn't beleive my eyes.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Yes we all know hockey, but to say it's by far the worst of any ncaa sport is ignorant. I know that's shocking for the dboard.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Ok article about this...

http://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc-jacobs-age-of-hockey-players-0410-20160409-story.html

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Yes we all know hockey, but to say it's by far the worst of any ncaa sport is ignorant. I know that's shocking for the dboard.
Ok, so what other sport is even close??? Other than having kids either repeat, PG or do a couple of years of Jr. College most sports don't have a league like the USHL or NAHL that don't affect their years of eligibility and there are no other sports other than maybe tennis that have the percentages of international students to compete with as well.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
anon
Yes we all know hockey, but to say it\'s by far the worst of any ncaa sport is ignorant. I know that\'s shocking for the dboard.
Ok, so what other sport is even close??? Other than having kids either repeat, PG or do a couple of years of Jr. College most sports don't have a league like the USHL or NAHL that don't affect their years of eligibility and there are no other sports other than maybe tennis that have the percentages of international students to compete with as well.
NCAA hockey is ridiculous. There is no reason why a college sport should have guys 24 or 25 playing. Graduate high school and go to college like all the other sports.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Anon
anon
Yes we all know hockey, but to say it\\\'s by far the worst of any ncaa sport is ignorant. I know that\\\'s shocking for the dboard.
Ok, so what other sport is even close??? Other than having kids either repeat, PG or do a couple of years of Jr. College most sports don\'t have a league like the USHL or NAHL that don\'t affect their years of eligibility and there are no other sports other than maybe tennis that have the percentages of international students to compete with as well.
NCAA hockey is ridiculous. There is no reason why a college sport should have guys 24 or 25 playing. Graduate high school and go to college like all the other sports.
On the other end of the spectrum is basketball, where 18 year olds with zero skills beyond the dunk and pick-and-roll alley-oop are NBA stars. There's a happy medium somewhere, but each sport has its warts.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

NCAA Basketball has become a joke. Kids are finishing their high school requirements now a year early so they can do their "one and done" college commitment which is complete opposite of hockey.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
NCAA Basketball has become a joke. Kids are finishing their high school requirements now a year early so they can do their \"one and done\" college commitment which is complete opposite of hockey.
Jerry York had Noah Hanifin do that. That's why he was at BC at 17. He knew he would be "one-and-done" after he was drafted.

Eichel was given a lifetime scholarship to BU in exchange for his one-and-done at 18. He was a late birthday, though.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Why other sports don't do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can't afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren't the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

WAy off topic here boys. Question is do you think MM and TA know their kids simply shouldn’t be playing at the level that they are? Think they feel shame?

Re: Nepotism has its limits

NCAA is about winning and making money. If your kid is good enough, he has leverage and can play at 18 with a 4/4. If he's not, he gets jerked around, pushed out and or cut to make room for next years superstar.

Welcome to life.

Moan and groan all you want about how unfair it is but all your really saying is my kids not good enough.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Why other sports don't do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can't afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren't the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Stupidest comment I've ever read

" There are 1000's of kids good enough to play college hockey, there just is enough spots for them"

Sorry your checkbook has no leverage anymore

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Stupidest comment I've ever read

" There are 1000's of kids good enough to play college hockey, there just is enough spots for them"

Sorry your checkbook has no leverage anymore
That may be your opinion, but the fact you couldn't even accurately type what the person said, let along realize that cutting and pasting it would make even you look less dumb, makes your statement, by default, more stupid.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\\\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\\\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\\\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Stupidest comment I\'ve ever read

\" There are 1000\'s of kids good enough to play college hockey, there just is enough spots for them\"

Sorry your checkbook has no leverage anymore
That may be your opinion, but the fact you couldn't even accurately type what the person said, let along realize that cutting and pasting it would make even you look less dumb, makes your statement, by default, more stupid.
Whats is accurate is that my kid is playing DI hockey, and you don't have a clue in what your talking about.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Stupidest comment I've ever read

" There are 1000's of kids good enough to play college hockey, there just is enough spots for them"

Sorry your checkbook has no leverage anymore
If there were 60 more D-1 teams, there would be 1500+ more players. Teams would have no problem filling the spots. When the Original 6 doubled, the NHL found players. It would be no different.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Why other sports don't do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can't afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren't the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the "system?" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT'S who don't like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I'm a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could't be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the "system?" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT'S who don't like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I'm a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could't be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
So you are fine with your kid taking 2 years off after high school to play Tier I or Tier II Juniors to then possibly play D3 Hockey? Oooof. Why not just have the kid go to school now and play club hockey?

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\\\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\\\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\\\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the \"system?\" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT\'S who don\'t like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
So you are fine with your kid taking 2 years off after high school to play Tier I or Tier II Juniors to then possibly play D3 Hockey? Oooof. Why not just have the kid go to school now and play club hockey?
Who cares? You're talking about 2 years out of his kids life. Living is about experiences, he would not have the opportunity to play Junior hockey at age 23, so he's doing it now and it's something he'd never get the chance to do again, then he goes to college. Please tell us what meaningful things you accomplished post college at age 23-24 that make going 2 years earlier so essential.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\\\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\\\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\\\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the \"system?\" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT\'S who don\'t like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
So you are fine with your kid taking 2 years off after high school to play Tier I or Tier II Juniors to then possibly play D3 Hockey? Oooof. Why not just have the kid go to school now and play club hockey?
Meaning, your kid went straight to a top D-I academic school at 18 and playing hockey?

Was he drafted in the 1st or 2nd round?

Or is he one of those 14 year old commits and you THINK he's going straight to D-I?

But, to answer your question, yes, I am fine with it. It's his life, not mine.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\\\\\\\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\\\\\\\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\\\\\\\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the \\\"system?\\\" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT\\\'S who don\\\'t like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I\\\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\\\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
So you are fine with your kid taking 2 years off after high school to play Tier I or Tier II Juniors to then possibly play D3 Hockey? Oooof. Why not just have the kid go to school now and play club hockey?
Meaning, your kid went straight to a top D-I academic school at 18 and playing hockey?

Was he drafted in the 1st or 2nd round?

Or is he one of those 14 year old commits and you THINK he's going straight to D-I?

But, to answer your question, yes, I am fine with it. It's his life, not mine.
Not at all - its about being realistic. If your kid has a chance at playing D3 and you want to spend $20,000 for him playing two season for a Tier 1 team attempting just to make a D3 team where he gets zero $$$ then by all means go for it. Kid is better off going to college, graduating and getting into the workforce two years earlier...but spending your $20K, travelling on buses and getting a drinking problem are probably the better choice.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Not at all - its about being realistic. If your kid has a chance at playing D3 and you want to spend $20,000 for him playing two season for a Tier 1 team attempting just to make a D3 team where he gets zero $$$ then by all means go for it. Kid is better off going to college, graduating and getting into the workforce two years earlier...but spending your $20K, travelling on buses and getting a drinking problem are probably the better choice.
Ah. Now I understand. So, you don't know anything about American Juniors, do you?

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the \\\\\\\"system?\\\\\\\" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT\\\\\\\'S who don\\\\\\\'t like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I\\\\\\\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\\\\\\\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
So you are fine with your kid taking 2 years off after high school to play Tier I or Tier II Juniors to then possibly play D3 Hockey? Oooof. Why not just have the kid go to school now and play club hockey?
Meaning, your kid went straight to a top D-I academic school at 18 and playing hockey?

Was he drafted in the 1st or 2nd round?

Or is he one of those 14 year old commits and you THINK he\'s going straight to D-I?

But, to answer your question, yes, I am fine with it. It\'s his life, not mine.
Not at all - its about being realistic. If your kid has a chance at playing D3 and you want to spend $20,000 for him playing two season for a Tier 1 team attempting just to make a D3 team where he gets zero $$$ then by all means go for it. Kid is better off going to college, graduating and getting into the workforce two years earlier...but spending your $20K, travelling on buses and getting a drinking problem are probably the better choice.
Yeah my son played Tier 2 Juniors last year at a cost of hmmmm, let me see, $0

Not quite sure where the $20,000 figure comes from

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
anon
Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"system?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'S who don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
So you are fine with your kid taking 2 years off after high school to play Tier I or Tier II Juniors to then possibly play D3 Hockey? Oooof. Why not just have the kid go to school now and play club hockey?
Meaning, your kid went straight to a top D-I academic school at 18 and playing hockey?

Was he drafted in the 1st or 2nd round?

Or is he one of those 14 year old commits and you THINK he\\\'s going straight to D-I?

But, to answer your question, yes, I am fine with it. It\\\'s his life, not mine.
Not at all - its about being realistic. If your kid has a chance at playing D3 and you want to spend \$20,000 for him playing two season for a Tier 1 team attempting just to make a D3 team where he gets zero \$\$\$ then by all means go for it. Kid is better off going to college, graduating and getting into the workforce two years earlier...but spending your \$20K, travelling on buses and getting a drinking problem are probably the better choice.
Yeah my son played Tier 2 Juniors last year at a cost of hmmmm, let me see, $0

Not quite sure where the $20,000 figure comes from
It's one of those cases where a D Boarder is pretending to know more than they do.

I didn't bother arguing numbers with the guy,m because you could construct a "cost" that involves multiple trips to see the kid play, trips home during breaks in the schedule, etc. But you and I both know the $20K was for two years of pay-to-play Juniors, which of course Tier I and II aren't.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Anon
Why other sports don\'t do what hockey does:

D-1 Basketball teams: 347 4,500 scholarships available
D-1 Football teams: 252 18,700 scholarships available (128 FBS--85 FULL scholarships available; 124 FCS--63 scholarships)
D-1 Baseball teams: 298 3,500 scholarships available

Almost all of the scholarships on these teams go to American kids. In order to field competitive teams these sports need to get kids into school and can\'t afford to push them off 2-3 years.

The reason D-1 hockey teams can make kids jump through hoops:

D-1 Hockey teams 60 1,100 scholarships (18 per team) Total number of players (@25 per team) = 1500

Canadians and Europeans make up almost 40% of the total number of players - 600

Hockey spots for Americans 900 or 225 per year

There are literally thousands of kids who are good enough to play college hockey. There just aren\'t the spots. So hockey schools hold all the cards and can push kids off as long as they are willing to delay their lives. Which is surprisingly long time for a lot of them. And its not going to change unless a lot more schools take up hockey.
Th flaw in your math is you are centering on scholarships. Playing at D-III schools is still playing college hockey. At good academic schools, in many cases. Better than a lot of D-I schools. Not all, but many. So spare me the Harvard vs. Framingham State comparison.

I wonder, who exactly is complaining about the "system?" Kids? Not that I hear. Coaches? They may say they are just playing the game the way the system forces them to, that they wish for different rules, but in the end they get better players. Pros? They get who they want, when they want.

Ah, the parents. THAT'S who don't like it, I assume because they have to pay a little longer.

Well, I'm a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could't be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!
The math applies for D-3 too. 82 D-3 schools play hockey. There's 442 D-3 schools that play all the other sports. Of the D-3 schools that play hockey, I might consider 15 to be "good academic schools".

Of course its parents complaining about the system. They see their kids getting strung along in hopes of some elusive "dream" (to play hockey at Fitchburg State???). Of course parents shoulder most of the blame too--if they had the stones to tell little Johnny his hockey career is done it would change the landscape completely.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

The whining from hockey parents about how you can no longer control the outcome for your kids is so amusing.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
The whining from hockey parents about how you can no longer control the outcome for your kids is so amusing.
You mean like this dillusional parent:

"Well, I'm a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could't be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!"....

If he is a high school senior and will need 1-2 years of juniors to maybe land at a D3 school the writing is on the wall. Save your $$$ instead of paying for juniors and put that in the education fund. Have your kid go to the best school he can and play club hockey.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

anon
anon
The whining from hockey parents about how you can no longer control the outcome for your kids is so amusing.
You mean like this dillusional parent:

"Well, I\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!"....

If he is a high school senior and will need 1-2 years of juniors to maybe land at a D3 school the writing is on the wall. Save your $$$ instead of paying for juniors and put that in the education fund. Have your kid go to the best school he can and play club hockey.
Once again, you're demonstrating your ignorance about how American Juniors works. Now, you're showing you know little about how college hockey works, too.

And, we can add personal finance to that. If you're still putting considerable money away when your kid is a Senior, you're gonna be short. You had 18 years.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
anon
anon
The whining from hockey parents about how you can no longer control the outcome for your kids is so amusing.
You mean like this dillusional parent:

\"Well, I\\\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\\\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!\"....

If he is a high school senior and will need 1-2 years of juniors to maybe land at a D3 school the writing is on the wall. Save your \$\$\$ instead of paying for juniors and put that in the education fund. Have your kid go to the best school he can and play club hockey.
Once again, you're demonstrating your ignorance about how American Juniors works. Now, you're showing you know little about how college hockey works, too.

And, we can add personal finance to that. If you're still putting considerable money away when your kid is a Senior, you're gonna be short. You had 18 years.
My guess is the guy understands quite well how American juniors works for a kid who is grinding to make D-3. Its unlikely that they would be playing in the USHL or even the NAHL so they would, in all likelihood, be shelling out a lot of money. With D-3 giving no scholarship $$ all playing hockey does is help get you in. And if your kid needs help getting in to most D-3 schools he's spent way too much time playing hockey and should probably reconsider whether he's really cut out for college anyhow.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
Anon
anon
anon
The whining from hockey parents about how you can no longer control the outcome for your kids is so amusing.
You mean like this dillusional parent:

\\\"Well, I\\\\\\\'m a parent of a HS Senior that will likely land at a D-III school after 1 - 2 years in Tier I or II Juniors, and I could\\\\\\\'t be happier for him that his hard work has led to those opportunities. And his passion for his dream has led to his gaining Honors grades. A true win/win!\\\"....

If he is a high school senior and will need 1-2 years of juniors to maybe land at a D3 school the writing is on the wall. Save your \\\$\\\$\\\$ instead of paying for juniors and put that in the education fund. Have your kid go to the best school he can and play club hockey.
Once again, you\'re demonstrating your ignorance about how American Juniors works. Now, you\'re showing you know little about how college hockey works, too.

And, we can add personal finance to that. If you\'re still putting considerable money away when your kid is a Senior, you\'re gonna be short. You had 18 years.
My guess is the guy understands quite well how American juniors works for a kid who is grinding to make D-3. Its unlikely that they would be playing in the USHL or even the NAHL so they would, in all likelihood, be shelling out a lot of money. With D-3 giving no scholarship $$ all playing hockey does is help get you in. And if your kid needs help getting in to most D-3 schools he's spent way too much time playing hockey and should probably reconsider whether he's really cut out for college anyhow.
BINGO. There are kids playing in the USHL/NAHL that will be playing D3. If your kid was on the D3 top school radar at this point you would know and so would he. You are falling prey to the American Jr. Hockey "if you play for 2 years and spend $20,000 with us you will move onto college" which is an absolute deception on their part. If your kid is playing HS hockey as senior (unless at a top prep) he isnt playing D3 college hockey. Just the reality of it. This isnt 25 years ago when kids could walk on.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

So your saying that a kid who has played HS hockey as a senior in Massachusetts has absolutely no chance to play D3 hockey-i can think of a number of examples the last 5-7 years that would refute your claim, including a number from the town that I live in which plays D2 HS (had been D3).

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Anon
So your saying that a kid who has played HS hockey as a senior in Massachusetts has absolutely no chance to play D3 hockey-i can think of a number of examples the last 5-7 years that would refute your claim, including a number from the town that I live in which plays D2 HS (had been D3).
A kid who has played HS hockey as a senior in Massachusetts has absolutely every chance to play D3 hockey in college. Go and look at the top 8-10 D-1 high school teams and every team has at least 4-5 kids who can play D-3 college hockey at least. The difference is many don't want to go through with it. My son's team has had a few every year provided they go a year of juniors or a PG year but many opt to go to better schools and play D-1 or D-3 club hockey. I don't know but I've seen more than a few D-3 college games and to tell you the truth, it isn't 'all that.' To think it is a reach is completely a laugh.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

I can't think of any other NCAA sport that routinely shelves players (go play juniors for a few) without burning eligibility the way hockey does. The only applicable example in other sports that I can quickly think of is JUCO for football, baseball, hockey and unless the rules have changed (which is always possible) the time a player is enrolled in JUCO starts his 5 year clock ticking. So at least in that regards, hockey is the worst.

Re: Nepotism has its limits

Make commitments binding from both sides and put an upper age limit as to what a 4th year player can play at in college (23?). Away with the 13 year old 'commits' long before anyone knows if they can play, away with the repeat kids doing two years of juniors and showing up on campus as a bearded 21 year old, enough of 'committing' when it means nothing, away with spots being pulled at the last minute because a team over committed to kids...you sign them and you're on the hook for at least X% of 4 years of college...