No but my kid was a boarder & that's what my family paid, 5K because if I didn't, it would have been considered taxable income. Since my kid wasn't in the same hockey universe skill wise (he was just a solid 2 year varsity player) as MW, JCB, NH, CW, etc. I am assuming they got similar deals. That is where I got my facts from.
Also, it was interesting as we went through the process how different the aid packages were from different schools. I don't think it is coincidence that schools with name recognition, many "full freight" students and very large endowments offered far more aid than those without, even though tuition costs were all similar.
Full season is not the way to go in this area - its clearly prep. Look at the college commits, look at the NHL mid season rankings.....NOTHING is pointing to full season as the best development method other than the marketing of the programs who are lining their pockets. All the best players play prep, leftover kids play full season. Sure you may find a player or two that goes to next level playing full season but 99% go the prep route. Your call.
That really only applies to area kids that aren't geographically mobile. The best of the best area players go NTDP, right? That's full season hockey.
It's also getting harder and harder to convince out of area kids to go the NE prep route. Outside of this area, everyone understands that T1EHL and HPHL are the easier path to the USHL.
And, area kids are starting to realize Prep isn't all that, either. More and more are trying to play USHL, at least in the Fall. Some are coming back for Prep season, but mostly because they aren't seeing TOI.
Want to see the "modern" path? Take a look at the kid from RI that's been pumping in goals for the Steel lately. His four years have been 1) full season U16, 2) Low half season/Low Prep, 3) Top half season/Top Prep, 4) USHL.