Can someone explain to me SSM Org. Do they have a separate club team and HS team? Do they have 2 teams at each level? Is it like MSC with the HS kids and academy kids?
Prep (their top 18U AAA team)
18U AAA (their high school team)
Uh oh… someone’s kid didn’t get into Mount or Shattuck…
Someone’s kid is not yet in hs but was just curious. Someone will not be sending their kid to either bc someone thinks education is super important and someone’s kid has already been approached by msc but not SSM
what about that is false? genuinely curious
What are the “plenty of other academy’s” where top players at SSM and MSC can “get better development”?
If you think every family wants to send their hockey player to either of the two your the bigger joke. Yes other hockey academy’s offer better development and individualized attention and skill development than both. You paid for the connections and the school jackets nothing wrong with that.
There are certainly lots of hockey academies to choose from all over the country, TPH being one of the bigger ones -- almost like a franchise model. If you're cool with online school and your kid focusing exclusively on hockey, seems like it offers a good program and development for lots of kids, which is great.
But SSM and MSC seem like different animals to me. (Along with the likes of Northwood, South Kent, and Culver.) First off, they're attached to brick and mortar schools. The school experience is in-person and more traditional, offering a more well-rounded high school experience, which is appealing to many families.
And these schools, SSM and MSC in particular, also cater to the very, very top players. Starting at 14U, they recruit the top kids across the US and Canada. They are essentially birth year all-star teams. The top kids are attracted to playing with top kids. I think it's less about "connections" and more about the perceived prestige of being among the "chosen ones." Yeah, that may be a dumb notion, especially when talking about 14 year-old kids, but that's what those schools are selling to kids, and they have the tradition, alumni, and track records to back it up.
It also seems silly to say there is no development at these schools. Of course there is. The coaches are good. The kids are on the ice and working out every day. And they compete against other top kids. How do they not develop?
What's a more interesting debate relative to SSM, MSC and other academies is how good it is for the kids who are in the middle or bottom of the roster? No doubt those kids are solid players, but would they be better served going elsewhere?
Some of the kids will develop and potentially become top players as they get older and move up the ranks of the SSM and MSC teams. But, and this is just an opinion based on observations over the past couple years, SSM and MSC seem to be great for the very best players and a less great for everyone else.
Bottom line is if you're a great player at TPH or SSM, you're going to have lots of opportunities. If you're an average player, you're not. So hopefully you have a great high school experience wherever you end up playing...
Did someone really just say Generals Academy ? They might be the worst of all the academies in the country.
Ya using Attleboro High School Curriculum, we all know that's a straight line to Harvard.