Colleges Wage War with Canadian Junior Hockey

Submitted by w2j2 on

The conference room at the Ann Arbor, Mich., Ice Cube was packed. Some of the best hockey-playing 14- and 15-year-olds sat up front, and they were listening closely.

Their parents lined the back of the room, some sitting, others leaning against a glass wall, straining to hear over the music from a rink as figure skaters practiced behind them.

John Gibson is one of two elite goaltenders to bail on the University of Michigan in favor of the Canadian Hockey League in the last two years. (USA Hockey)

They were listening because their children's future was at stake.

In the front of the room, college hockey coaches filled a row of chairs. Leading the talk was Red Berenson, the University of Michigan's coach, a Stanley Cup winner with the Montreal Canadiens and a former Regina Pats juniors player.

Considering its proximity to Canada, Michigan is the battleground for a fight that’s not new, but grows hotter each year. It’s one the NHL is also watching.

On one side is Berenson -- an All-America player at Michigan -- and his fellow college coaches, trying to convince North America's best young players to commit to college hockey. On the other side is Canada’s major junior powerhouse, the Canadian Hockey League, where elite Canadians -- and a growing number of Americans -- parlay junior careers into NHL careers.

Berenson looked at the young players in front of him and offered a warning against choosing junior hockey.

“You’re giving up the four best years of your life,” he said.

In the past two years, Berenson has lost two high-end goalies. In 2010, Jack Campbell picked the Ontario Hockey League's Windsor Spitfires over the Wolverines. This year, John Gibson is headed to OHL Kitchener after committing to Michigan.

But it’s not just Berenson’s problem. A recent Boston Globe story put the number of elite players breaking college commitments this year at nine.

(Lots more)..........

Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2011-08-30/nhl-colleges-wage-war-with-canadian-junior-hockey-ohl-whl-qmjhl#ixzz1WbHs4TmA 

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2011-08-30/nhl-colleges-wage-war-with-canadian-junior-hockey-ohl-whl-qmjhl 

BlueinTC

August 31st, 2011 at 7:48 AM ^

the OHL is more likely where they're going to go.  OHL plays closer to NHL style hockey allowing them to prepare themselves better.  If the NCAA wants they're hockey players to be more like a development league for the NHL, as are the football players for the NFL, they need to play more like the NHL, things like using the Red LIne.

But, getting the elite young players would be great and they should work on those kids, but the market is bigger for very good players that probably won't make it to the NHL.  Those kids can benefit by having a college degree at the end.  College needs to sell that hard.  Show them the reality of maybe 1 percent of players make it to the NHL.  

ChasingRabbits

August 31st, 2011 at 9:02 AM ^

I would love to see the numbers.  Total kids in Canadian Jr A vs. total kids in D1 hockey.  Then see how many kids are in the NHL from both sides and what % that is of the total.  I am sure Jrs would win, but I am not sure it would be as one sided as most think.  There are tons of college kids in the league and even lots of elitel players.

Tater

August 31st, 2011 at 9:04 AM ^

In basketball, coaches have to strike a balance between prospective four-year players and one-and-dones.  In basketball, the Evil Columbus Empire has done well with mostly role players and various one or two year rentals, while Tom Izzo has done well with a lot of four-year guys.  Hockey seems to be the same everywhere: mostly role players and a few stars that have to decide whether or not to stay every year.

The OHL is for guys who "know" they are going to make the NHL.  The problem is that a role-player in college gets a degreee, while a role-player in hockey's minors becomes "meat" until he realizes he won't get promoted.  Then, he realizes he never made a backup plan and ends up with a menial job unless he is lucky enough to have a coaching opportunity.  

College hockey is the best for a player who doesn't project to the equivalent of a 5-star recruit.  Those who are on the cusp of NHL potential can defer their decisions by going to college for a year or two.  There are, though, some people who just don't belong in college.  They are better off in the OHL.  Really, for Michigan, they aren't an issue because they wouldn't get past admissions anyway.

The bottom line: I'm guessing that at least 90 to 95 percent of those who opt for the OHL should have gone to college. 

 

Blue in Yarmouth

August 31st, 2011 at 12:25 PM ^

I play junior hockey in Canada in the QMJHL, never made the NHL and currently am the cheif of internal medicine at the hospital in which I work. You can play in Canada and get an education too. In fact, because I played my junior hockey in the Q I got most of my university payed for. 

Don

August 31st, 2011 at 12:34 PM ^

Blue, congrats to you on all accounts; your combination of athletic ability, intellectual smarts, and work ethic necessary to do it all is impressive. It's also very rare.

Do you have any guess on how many kids who go to the OHL or the QMJHL (Quebec Major/Juniors?) eventually go to college and graduate?

Blue in Yarmouth

August 31st, 2011 at 12:53 PM ^

I am far removed from playing days, but strictly speaking in relation to the guys I played with that didn't make the NHL I would say the number is probably somewhere a little above 65% (that is really only my team and teams we were close to that I can speak of, I am not sure it is indicative of the entire league).

I agree though, that it isn't neccessarily the norm. My main point is that it is possible and the league helped me do it. If a kid wants and education, he can get it and is encouraged to do so. 

kevin holt

August 31st, 2011 at 9:11 AM ^

I thought the point about college players being more mature was really interesting. I feel like a kid coming from the OHL is gonna feel a lot more entitled and think he's the center of attention. And sometimes he is. Look at sidney crosby. (a note: I'm biased because I hate the shit out of sidney crosby and everything he represents in hockey)

Blue in Yarmouth

August 31st, 2011 at 1:00 PM ^

you shouldn't speak about things you know nothing about. As I said, I played in the Q and have many friends who are still in the NHL (by many I don't mean dozens, but I am still in close contact with 10 guys I used to play with). I can tell you without reservation that no one I played with or against had a feeling of entitlement like you see with NCAA football and basketball players. In fact, hockey in much more like basball in that there are very few entitled types (there are always some, but not much comparatively).

Also, I wouldn't say Crosby and I are best friends, but I have had quite a few encounters with him being a hockey player from the same province. I can tell you that your opinion of him is way of base and you couldn't meet a nicer young man. You can dislike him because he beat your redwings, but these personal attacks people make about professional athletes they have never met are beyond childish. Just say you aren't a fan and leave it at that.

Amaizeinblue

August 31st, 2011 at 1:36 PM ^

How can you hate a guy who cares so much about the game? He's a great face for hockey. Try and find me a better one because there isn't. I bet if he played for the Red Wings you'd be the first passenger on his lengthy bandwagon. As far as College Hockey vs the CHL, it's not even a contest. Like Blue said if you want the education you can get it, the elite guys like Campbell leave because it readies them better for the NHL.

JimLahey

August 31st, 2011 at 1:46 PM ^

Blue made some great points. You have all heard my thoughts on this so I won't respond to everything but I have a few points:

- Why do you all think the CHL is some place where you go to become dumb? If you want an education, you can get it, and they will pay for it. I got a 4 year degree from a great school on their dime. The choice is yours.

- The idea that CHL players are arrogant and entitled is probably a bit true. Maybe they are, but if the implication is that varsity college jocks are all humble and mature, then I have to laugh at you.

- The hate for Sid Crosby is also kind of odd. He is probably the least entitled superstar athlete on the planet. I've met him twice and I have friends who know him very well. He is incredibly polite and doesn't possess a hint of arrogance. I guess being the best player in the world makes certain people hate you no matter how well you behave.

74polSKA

August 31st, 2011 at 8:40 AM ^

This is an interesting article and I can see both sides of the issue.  You can't blame top notch players for wanting the quickest route to the NHL but it does stink for college coaches to have players backing out of commitments. 

I am glad that the players have a choice of going to college or playing in the juniors.  What would college football and basketball look like if their stars had such an option?  There would be more guys in college because they want to be there, not because they have to be.  Maybe you wouldn't get to see a few elite athletes at your school but you might also not have to watch as many NCAA violations be committed either.

jaggs

August 31st, 2011 at 9:01 AM ^

as a 16 year old drafted to OHL. I had a 4.0 or whatever you guys call it down there (I'm assuming this is like an 80% average?) Problem was, at 16, I didn't have colleges looking at me as I was 3 years of high school away from graduation and not a 'super-star'. Try telling a kid at 16 to wait 3 years in hopes of maybe landing a scholarship, not getting injured, to continue growing and developing, or they can live like a rock star in a CHL town. It's not a hard sell.

edit: check out jimlahey's diary on the subject for a very personal story about how it all goes down - http://mgoblog.com/diaries/ohl-snatchin-your-people

Waters Demos

August 31st, 2011 at 9:17 AM ^

4.0 is all A's, nothing below (not even A-).

An A in some classes at MSU, for example, can be achieved by getting 90%.  For some upper level courses, however, 90% is an A-, and 95% is an A. 

Also, we use the term "grades" instead of "marks."

lhglrkwg

August 31st, 2011 at 12:02 PM ^

I think the contact difference is a something huge that the ncaa can fix easily. I think it was jimlahey's post where he talked about not hearing from michigan and there were dead periods in contact, whereas the OHL can just call you up whenever. Lowering contact restrictions is an easy way to gain some ground on the CHL without sacrificing the ncaa's values

Waters Demos

August 31st, 2011 at 9:21 AM ^

Interesting stuff; I believe a lot of it has been covered by Mr. Lahey.  I knew a guy who made a run at the NHL by going through the OHL, and later (after several concussions sidelined him) went back to school (in Canada).  I don't think he ever considered an American university either for hockey or education purposes.

Don

August 31st, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^

If a kid's parents don't see the value in obtaining an education from a recognized four-year institution of higher learning, the chances are slim that their talented kid will forgo the immediate money of the OHL for a degree from UM or any other school in the US. It's a sad commentary on the attitudes towards education exhibited by people on both sides of the border, but college isn't for everybody, either. I don't really care, anyhow—I'm only interested in kids (and families) who want to attend my alma mater. The majority of kids who go the OHL route will have short NHL careers (if they even reach the bigs) but will have wasted an educational opportunity they'll never get again.

Blue in Yarmouth

August 31st, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^

The main problem that I see with the NCAA is that they are late to the party where hockey recruiting is concerned. When I was 15 and playing major midget hockey I was being courted by the QMJHL. I was in grade 8 and had 4 years of school left before I would ever get to university. It was an easy choice for me because at that age my priority was getting better. The difference between playing in major midget and major junior was huge when you take account of the facilities, the coaching and training staff, the fans and the over all experience. I couldn't put that on hold for four years until I could go to university.