2 More 03's off the board! This is insane. Congrats, but a long way from Freshman year.

I have an 04' and I specifically remebered this exchange from earlier this year. Amazing how hockey has/is evolving, seems that development, age and leagues are constantly a moving target. (see below)


anon
Screw Prep school. Jerry York and Dick Umile both at 03 Fed Elite games this past weekend.
One of these days many of you will learn the real truth, I fear however, it will be too late.
Has the hittin' started? I thought it didn't matter until high school tryouts?


This is actually true JY was at a rink near the Charles on Sunday. I have seen more college coaches and scouts attending 03' and 04' games than I have ever seen in the past and it fascinates me. These age groups are clearly on the radar.

Umile is retiring at the end of the season and jerry is not wasting his time with 13/14 year olds.

Often these coaches are at these games for ulterior reasons rather than scouting. Don't kid yourself. Some have neighbor kids or grand children, nephews playing. And they are just hockey people taking in a hockey game.

My experience has been watching kids is interesting and you get to see some skilled little players out there but it is almost impossible to project who will have an upper hand at 19 - 20 years old. And defensemen, don't even look at them until they are 90% fully grown because you can never tell - unless dad is 6'5" 230 and mom looks like she should be throwing bails of hay to the upper loft of the barn. I've had Canadian Major Junior teams tell me, 'don't bring me any defensemen under 6'3",' so how do you project that onto a little kid?

My $.25

The CHL wants kids that are legitimate NHL prospects because its teams get $$ from NHL when their kids get drafted, hence their teams still care about size. NCAA teams get no such bonus--all they care about is winning now. The huge, late bloomer is completely off their radar since they are not in the development business.

It's amazing how in-accurate your statement is

Things change.
I talked to an NHL agent/advisor last weekend and he said b/c of the trend, if he's not already looking at 03s, he's behind the curve. It kills him to have to do it, but he knows he has to follow the trend to keep up.

However he also mentioned that accurately predicting the ceiling of an 18 yr old is somewhat of an inexact science......and suggested since that's the case, why is it so different to take a flyer on a 14/15 yr old that shows himself to en elite talent?

I don't get it, you have uncommitted 01's and 02's that would literally skate circles around all of these young 03's, would shut them down completely, but aren't committed yet? My 03 cant decide on dinner never mind what college he wants to attend in 3-4 years. Jeez. Good luck to those 2 kids but man the system is shattered!

Yup, the process has devolved. A buddy of mine's son was one of the few '97s that committed when he was in 8th grade (2011/12 season). The parents' reasoning was so he could focus on hockey and school and not answering questions from college scouts before and after every game. The schools' reasoning was to keep him out of Major Junior. And the verbals were backed by handshake agreements for 4 for 4 scholarships.

IMO the pivot point was 2014 when 2000 birth year kids started committing with abandon. Anyone remember when OW committed to UMaine and was the youngest commit in NCAA history? He was in 7th grade. Of course, some dad in Westchester took that as a challenge and shortly after that got a commitment for his son, who was a year younger.

Now it's an arms race. In a lot of cases there isn't even an offer of scholarship money, or maybe it's 1 for 4 or 2 for 4. And, of course, it's all non-binding until they sign their LOI. The colleges feel pressure to get the kids with the most talent committed. The parents want their kids to commit so they can be the envy of the other parents. The kids want their social media and locker room glory. Nobody's thinking about it as college or education. It's all about the hockey. And the money.

I don't follow LAX but my understanding is that they put the brakes on. Hockey needs to do the same.

Very good post by 1:08.
Lax is making moves to try to push back recruiting, and it sounds like hockey coaches are considering the same idea when they convene for their off-season association meetings.
JM from Northeastern mentioned a couple of weeks ago at TPE that most coaches support the idea of pushing earliest contact til later in high school. But he also just picked up 2 03s.
I guess as long as the game is played this way, you gotta play it too, or you're left behind.

Does anyone remember their 14-15 year old body compared to their 18-19-20 year old body! I went from 5' 9 to 6' 2 in that time frame. This is nuts, to prove the point they should have an annual commitment game series with teams made by birth year. Lets see these 03 College Commitments play the 02 or 01 College Commitments. You can say it wouldn't be fair, but these "little guys" are taking the same spots these "big guys" want. Doesn't make sense to have that game just like it doesn't make sense to commit a kid who cant drive a car yet.

Sorry your "big guy's" commitment has been cut, and my "little guy" is being chased around the rinks by players, coaches and scouts.

Shhh. the adults are talking. You don't get it.

Committing a young kid, like an 03, does nothing but add pressure to that kid and put a target on his back until he gets there. Not a smart move IMO. Good luck.

It hopefully keeps him from heading north to a CMJHL program, which is a huge part of the reasoning in chasing early commitments for coaches. If the NCAA would grant players coming out of major juniors amateur status, I would guess 95% of the 8th-10th grade early commitments wouldn't take place since nobody will care.

what the deuce is the CMJHL? is that the governing body of cracker barrel?

Canadian Major Junior Hockey League They begin recruiting kids as early as 14 and once a player heads north for Major Juniors, as opposed to Junior A or Junior B in Canada, they lose their NCAA eligibility. It is one of the many reasons D-I coaches use for having to recruit kids so early.

Guys, just remember there's a big difference between the Canadian Major Junior Hockey Leagues (CHL) and Canadian Junior Hockey Leagues (BCHL, AJHL, OJHL, etc.). Canadian Junior Hockey Leagues keep their college hockey eligibility. The CHL does not.

A commitment isn't taking a spot. Means nothing any more - well, very little. Couple of years ago the decommit rate was one in eight. I'm sure it has to be close to one in four by the time that 2000 wave hits college this year and next, and will only accelerate from there.

And those decommits are by both sides. If a kid develops more than projected, Bemidji, MN doesn't seem that attractive any more when U of Michigan comes calling. If he doesn't develop, Bemidji State will say Buh Bye!

If you look around, a lot of very experienced hockey people don't bother pursuing a commitment or accepting one for their own kid(s). Agree it only puts a target on a kid and most agreements are pretty meaningless. And who hows what college is a good fit for a 12 year old...heck, we still weighing offers for our daughter and she needs to sign by May 1st of this year!