You don't know what you're talking about so please stop.
Prep is indeed just high school hockey. Instead of having two good lines like a public or a C.C. they have three and sometimes four. Is the top-end any different? Not really, just look at the numbers. Or better yet, go and look at top-end midget tournaments - the only way you can spot public, catholic or prep players is their helmets. It's not like the prep kids dominate, there are just more of them. Yeah, look at a team like Hingham. Those kids that want to go onto play are sprinkled about in Junior hockey from the USHL to Canada. But for many of them it makes no sense because they certainly understand the economics of junior and college hockey. Like a kid is going to delay for two years going to the school of their choice to gamble on a maybe going to a good school.
coaches are recruiting individual kids, not third or 4th lines.
Oh, I get it Sluggo....I get it. O.K. your kid play prep hockey then I see where you are coming from.
Without beating my chest too much (Wow! a current Keller Div. player!) my older boy had a pretty good high school, junior and current college career so I have no ax to grind or tuition payment to justify. He also played on a couple of the teams you mentioned so yeah I know a bit about it. I also know who coaches the teams and where they tend to find players, relax. You come on here acting like prep hockey is what it was years ago and it's the only place to play and it's clearly not. Kids do not go from prep to D-I college like you claimed; THEY ALMOST ALL GO TO JUNIORS. How do you get to juniors? It doesn't matter and you can get there through publics, catholics, preps and now through the junior teams own programs. Come to grips with it. I know you are spending a boat-load to get your kid a high school education and a couple years of juniors isn't cheap but good luck to you.
Granted Im not there just yet with my boys, if I can get a FA package at a prep and not have to pay tution for hockey how is Prep not the best option? Solid education/life experience and good hockey seems to make sense.
Agree 100% Plus it can get the little bugger out of the house sooner!
Seems like 100% FA package is a rare thing at most schools though - yes?
If so, the real question is, if you have to pay 40-60% tuition (with partial FA package), is it STILL worth making the jump.
M I C....see you real soon!...K E Y........M O U S E.......Mickey Mouse
The key to having a future "star" kid - is the type of aftermarket rims Daddy sticks on his Escalade. Spinning Gold ones guarantee Division 1.
Funny story. First they point out "Randy Hernandez isn't the son of a famous NHLer" to try to show there was no nepotism which USA Hockey has long suffered and then the go to great lengths to point out he's a Florida kid (untapped market), a hispanic kid (untapped race), who had little access to playing on good teams (USA Hockey love$ town hockey growth).
So basically the story states "see it wasn't the troubling nepotism of loading-up with legacy kids that has plagued USA Hockey (and most of hockey in general) in the past rather it was a self serving political pick which we need more of for the sport of hockey to grow (read: membership due$) the sport in the U.S."
Good luck to the kid and good luck to USA Hockey's PR efforts.