When these discussion come up, as they do weekly, daily, hourly... why does nobody take into account geographic location ? (as the above poster kind of mentions)
Is it so people can just stick to the "EHF is the best" and further that propaganda ?
My point being this. If the E9 or even the BHL team in your area is a better option for development and a higher level of play than the EHF Elite or Tier 1 program in your area why do we not recommend that to people who inquire or even inquire where they live or are willing to travel.
Example : If you are looking to play in the Bridgewater/Raynham area for an 05/06/07 team wouldn't the Lovell Knights be a better option that the Boston Bandits ?
I would not want my kid playing in the EHF at any level for these age groups. Do kids develop playing better competition by getting outscored 380-6 in a season ???
Maybe there are other options out there on an individual basis but my kid isn't going through that just to play on a team that is labeled EHF, but in reality is a lower level than the town hockey in that area ?
E9 is not the Ehf elite however the E9 can and does develop players. Having kids play in both leagues, I think if the e9 and ehf elite played each other throughout the year, you would find the difference in the top players would be very close. Overall I think FED teams would win most of the games but the upper midlevel and top players would be closer in skill than you would expect.
Fact remains a lower level sub 500 E9 team was able to hang with the top two ehf teams. So at least at the 04 level there isn't much difference between leagues. Would be great if there was more cross over games but there aren't
It would be better so teams could play more competitive games local instead of so much travel to play the same level!
VJW did well over the weekend.