Ice Hockey DBoard
The Official New England Ice Hockey DBoard
Click Here to Visit Our Facebook Page
email: icehockeydboard@yahoo.com
Menu
Return to Website > Index > Junior & College Hockey > Junior & College Hockey > Re: I Thought The NCDC Was The Best? Recent Posts
Return to Website > Index > Junior & College Hockey > Junior & College Hockey > Re: I Thought The NCDC Was The Best?
Junior & College Hockey
It was tweeted out by AMHockey, some real good info on the pages tweeted out.
Anon
I saw this data cited somewhere else today, tried to find it on their website and on Twitter.
I assume they are using the league the individual committing in the past year last played in. So, it makes sense that it's going to be the higher levels. It also means it may include some players that played in the NCDC in 2018/19 but committed before the season started.
I don't think anyone ever said NCDC was "the best." It's an alternative. A rung on the ladder. I don't think it's surprising they had less than 25 commits in the last 12 months. it doesn't mean that players that actually play D-I in a few years won't have NCDC on their resumes.
Not saying it's attractive to us. The teams have their warts. They all do. That doesn't mean it's a bad choice, versus other choices a particular family may have.
I assume they are using the league the individual committing in the past year last played in. So, it makes sense that it's going to be the higher levels. It also means it may include some players that played in the NCDC in 2018/19 but committed before the season started.
I don't think anyone ever said NCDC was "the best." It's an alternative. A rung on the ladder. I don't think it's surprising they had less than 25 commits in the last 12 months. it doesn't mean that players that actually play D-I in a few years won't have NCDC on their resumes.
Not saying it's attractive to us. The teams have their warts. They all do. That doesn't mean it's a bad choice, versus other choices a particular family may have.
Yup:
"BEST COACHING. BEST COMPETITION. BEST LEAGUE"
Can’t be that bad it looks like the Generals drafted like 6 kids from the NCDC.
Anon
Can’t be that bad it looks like the Generals drafted like 6 kids from the NCDC.
Anon
Anon
Can’t be that bad it looks like the Generals drafted like 6 kids from the NCDC.
Anon
Can’t be that bad it looks like the Generals drafted like 6 kids from the NCDC.
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you're getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it's funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you're getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it's funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Welcome to junior hockey. Kids get cut, traded and even quit. Check out any tuition free league and you will see the same thing.
anon
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you\'re getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it\'s funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you\\\'re getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it\\\'s funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
anon
Anon
anon
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you\\\\\\\'re getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it\\\\\\\'s funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Premier call-ups would only be one reason.
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you're getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it's funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Anon
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you\'re getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it\'s funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Is that your thing, you dump on other player's experiences because your kid is oh, such a stud?
My kid is skipping NCDC, too, not for any of the bulls#it reasons you cited, by the way, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good alternative.
I hope your kid takes after his mother, 'cause you're the family douchebag.
Anon
Anon
Anon
Anon
Tier III, no USA Hockey affiliation, and funded by youth hockey. What a model
No tuition, good local option so your kid can continue his Northeast education, and you\\'re getting exposure to college programs.
USA Hockey affiliation means zero, and who cares who it\\'s funded by? You know taxpayers fund NCAA athletic scholarships, right? Do you care, when your kid is the recipient?
Is it the right development option for every kid? No.
Now, if you said they are killing the league by the way they complete the rosters, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Is that your thing, you dump on other player's experiences because your kid is oh, such a stud?
My kid is skipping NCDC, too, not for any of the bulls#it reasons you cited, by the way, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good alternative.
I hope your kid takes after his mother, 'cause you're the family douchebag.
Somebody claims their kid plays D1 hockey but doesn't understand how scholarships are funded. Taxpayers do not fund D1 athletic departments. College athletic departments fund their scholarships through donations, endowments, revenue from TV, ticket sales, concessions, corporate sponsorship, and other revenue sources. Now, one of those revenue sources can be direct institutional support which come in the form of student activity fees, so one could claim the school is paying for athletics, but it is a stretch to say taxpayer funds from the state house go directly to athletics.
What people need to understand about college athletics is that it is, for many, the window through which they perceive the school. Think of it as one of the marketing arms of the institution. It's no coincidence that after a major D1 school exhibits athletic success like, say, a program wins a football championship, like a Clemson or Alabama, that the school experiences a spike in applications to the university. Athletic success increases the profile of the school and leads to increased applications and enrollment. Viewed that way, direct institutional support can be justified if it is part of a comprehensive plan to increase the profile of the school.
Anon
Somebody claims their kid plays D1 hockey but doesn't understand how scholarships are funded. Taxpayers do not fund D1 athletic departments. College athletic departments fund their scholarships through donations, endowments, revenue from TV, ticket sales, concessions, corporate sponsorship, and other revenue sources. Now, one of those revenue sources can be direct institutional support which come in the form of student activity fees, so one could claim the school is paying for athletics, but it is a stretch to say taxpayer funds from the state house go directly to athletics.
What people need to understand about college athletics is that it is, for many, the window through which they perceive the school. Think of it as one of the marketing arms of the institution. It's no coincidence that after a major D1 school exhibits athletic success like, say, a program wins a football championship, like a Clemson or Alabama, that the school experiences a spike in applications to the university. Athletic success increases the profile of the school and leads to increased applications and enrollment. Viewed that way, direct institutional support can be justified if it is part of a comprehensive plan to increase the profile of the school.
What people need to understand about college athletics is that it is, for many, the window through which they perceive the school. Think of it as one of the marketing arms of the institution. It's no coincidence that after a major D1 school exhibits athletic success like, say, a program wins a football championship, like a Clemson or Alabama, that the school experiences a spike in applications to the university. Athletic success increases the profile of the school and leads to increased applications and enrollment. Viewed that way, direct institutional support can be justified if it is part of a comprehensive plan to increase the profile of the school.
Return to Website > Index > Junior & College Hockey > Junior & College Hockey > Re: I Thought The NCDC Was The Best?