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
View Entire Thread
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...