The USHL against the CHL????
- Thread starter MikeC
- Start date
- Status
MikeC said:
You are right tho.
The USHL has nothing to lose while the CHL has everything to lose.
Why not make a challenge about Football. Cup Grey Champions(Canadian Football League) Vs. Super Bowl Champions(NFL)?MikeC said:
Jacobv2 said:
The USHL would have trouble claiming that it is the best Junior A tier II league, let alone attempting to compare itsself with the Major A ranks. The USHL is not older than the CHL and the players are much smaller and less talented.
Perhaps the USHL should lay down a challenge to the champions of the NAHL and the Canadian Junior A chaps before trying to go at the Memorial Cup champs. I know the NAHL would love the opportunity to play against USHL teams but the USHL is not biting and I wonder how come?
I had the opportunity of watching four different USHL teams in action this year and the eventual Royal Bank champions, the Aurora Tigers. The Tigers could have beaten any of the USHL teams I saw.
Living in a town with a NAHL team also allows me to see a variety of Junior A teams and I can say this, the USHL may have better depth than the NAHL but the top two lines in the NAHL are everybit as good as the top two lines in the USHL.
The USHL is Tier I, not Tier II, they had to jump through lots and lots of hoops to do it too.VOB said:
The league is better than most give it credit for, but no, not on par with the CHL yet.
If the NAHL were that good, more kids would get drafted from it. The numbers speak for themselves there.
Jacobv2 said:
The question you should be asking is why was Jesse Lane let go by the Victoriaville Tigres? He could not secure an overage spot with the team. Jesse returned to DesMoines mainly to be with his girlfriend and his mind really was and has not been on hockey.
If you are comparing players and want further proof then what about Matt Weir. He was another player who failed to secure a spot as an overager in the OHL and ended up playing for the Lincoln Stars. In the O, he was a third/fourth liner while in the USHL he was on the second line. His stats also improved in the USHL, where he had 31pts in 41 games as opposed to only 18 pts in 63 games in the O.
I remember when Chad LaRose left the Sioux Falls Stampede in the middle of the season to play for the Plymouth Whalers in the OHL. I remember him saying on a radio interview on how not only was the OHL quicker but how talented and stronger the average players were in the O compared to the USHL. His stats also dropped when he made the switch.
Like I said, the USHL should prove that it is the best league in the U.S. before trying to take on anyone else.
HollyG said:
And that much more are drafted from the USHL? Yeah sure the NAHL only had three players drafted but heck the USHL only had 11! Its not like the USHL is sending prospects en masse to the NHL!!
Have you ever even seen a NAHL team play? Trust me, its alot better than what you are giving it credit for.
CHL would probably beat the USHL but that doesnt mean the USHL is a bad league. Its an underrated league but i dont think its as good as CHL.
Over 100 kids were picked from the CHL in 2004 thats nearly 30 % of all drafted players.
Plus if the USHL was so much better why are there more and more american kids flocking to the CHL to play rather than USHL.
Over 100 kids were picked from the CHL in 2004 thats nearly 30 % of all drafted players.
Plus if the USHL was so much better why are there more and more american kids flocking to the CHL to play rather than USHL.
Jacobv2 said:
Does that really matter when we are talking about so few players drafted to begin with?
Look it, yes I agree that the USHL is better than the NAHL but only because it has more depth. The top players (heck the top two lines and top four D pairings) are everybit as good in the NAHL as they are in the USHL.
You talk about the USHL challenging the CHL, well are you aware that two years ago the USHL, after having achieved that meaningless tier 1 status, allowed the Danville Wings (a NAHL team at the time) into their Buc Bowl tournament and to their shock and dismay, they watched that NAHL team go 2 and 2 against their supposedly superior USHL clubs. It was embarassing to the USHL to have a "tier 2" team do so well and a NAHL team has not been invited since nor has the USHL been willing to schedule any games against NAHL teams.
HollyG said:
The problem with that though is the fact that the NAHL is not developing players for the NHL. The intent of the NAHL is to develop players for college not for the NHL.
Brad Coccimiglio said:
The USHL is not developping players directly for the NHL either. Their main purpose is to get as many of their players to the NCAA as possible.
The USHL might technically be a "Tier I" league, an on-paper equivalent to Canadian Major Junior, but the USHL only turned to "Tier I" a year or two ago. Realistically, it is comparable to the better Canadian Jr.A leagues, such as the BCHL.
Van said:
I realize that as I've been covering American hockey pretty closely over the past 4 or 5 years. The key for all of the American junior leagues, be them Teir I or otherwise, is to move players to college and any players drafted professionally is a bonus for them.
The thing that I was referring to was the post made it sound like the NAHL was a development league for the NHL and not college. That's all I was saying.
The USHL is a good developmental league for the US College system. It is a bit different of a game from the CHL. It is probably on par with the Junior A leagues. The Thunder Bay Flyers used to play in the USHL some years would win the Clark cup and bomb in the Centennial, other years do well at the Centennial after losing in the second round of the USHL playoffs.
Van said:
Believe me Van, "Tier I" in the U.S. doesn't mean anything! Do you know why the USHL was granted tier I status at the expense of the NAHL? The one main criteria that the NAHL could not meet was the attendance requirements and that was it!!!
Now tell me what does attendance have to do with developing players? That's right absolutely NOTHING!
The USHL buffaloed USA Hockey into inserting the attendance factor as a criteria in order to prevent the NAHL from achieving the same designation.
The NAHL does pretty well much everything for its players as the USHL does. The vast majority of teams in the NAHL ( I am pretty sure all of them really) pay for the players equipment and offset their billeting costs just as the USHL does.
Right, and so is the USHL, there's no difference in that aspect (nor was it implied).Brad Coccimiglio said:
HollyG said:
I know neither league is developing is developing for the pros. When I first read your post, it sounded like you were making reference that the NAHL was developing for places other than college hockey, which is why I made the comment. I realize that you were not comparing the two league's development, because as I said in another post, much of, if not all, of the junior league's under USA Hockey have the intent of developing for college, not the pros.
Jacobv2 said:
I bet the worst teams in the CHL would have a tough time with those 11, but the top 20 or so in the CHL would beat any of them.
The talent might be deeper because there is only 11 teams, but they're not getting the BEST 16, 17, and 18yr olds from the US while the CHL is getting the best from Canada, some of the best Americans, plus some top notch Europeans.
USHL would be more on par with our best Jr A teams then our best from the CHL imo.
Lard_Lad
Registered User
Just for comparison's sake:
2004 USHL champion Waterloo: one NHL draftee.
2004 CHL champion Kelowna: ten NHL draftees, two others with NHL contracts, one more who's been to an NHL training camp.
The result wouldn't be pretty. From the looks of their roster, I don't think Waterloo would even be able to handle a good BCHL team like Nanaimo or Salmon Arm.
That's not to say the league won't get better. But challenging the CHL is just silly grandstanding - the answer was obviously going to be no. If the USHL is serious about establishing credibility relative to Major Junior, they could try scheduling a few exhibitions - but one-sided CHL wins, the likely result at this point, would only give the CHL more ammunition with which to lure American prospects, so I doubt they'll do that.
2004 USHL champion Waterloo: one NHL draftee.
2004 CHL champion Kelowna: ten NHL draftees, two others with NHL contracts, one more who's been to an NHL training camp.
The result wouldn't be pretty. From the looks of their roster, I don't think Waterloo would even be able to handle a good BCHL team like Nanaimo or Salmon Arm.
That's not to say the league won't get better. But challenging the CHL is just silly grandstanding - the answer was obviously going to be no. If the USHL is serious about establishing credibility relative to Major Junior, they could try scheduling a few exhibitions - but one-sided CHL wins, the likely result at this point, would only give the CHL more ammunition with which to lure American prospects, so I doubt they'll do that.
Having seen both USHL and NAHL teams play, I can't say I agree with the poster that said their only difference is depth. The USHL is a superior league. They have had more star players come through the USHL in recent years and they play a faster brand of hockey.
Look no further than what college teams recruit in each league. For instance, take the incoming freshman for next year. You'll see the USHL is being recruited by big name programs like Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, etc. The NAHL? You'll find the occasional CCHA school like Michigan State that grabs one kid here and there but other than that, the much weaker programs in college recruit that league.
I know some kids who played in the NAHL and then tried to move on to the USHL later and they couldn't make it. The NAHL is mostly for kids who can't cut it in the USHL. If a kid really wants to play in the best league, he won't waste time in the NAHL.
As far as any Jr league that is a feeder to college hockey, only the BCHL comes close to the USHL and even then they come up short. The BCHL is a league where they don't have the depth of the USHL. But they are otherwise pretty comparable.
Look no further than what college teams recruit in each league. For instance, take the incoming freshman for next year. You'll see the USHL is being recruited by big name programs like Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, etc. The NAHL? You'll find the occasional CCHA school like Michigan State that grabs one kid here and there but other than that, the much weaker programs in college recruit that league.
I know some kids who played in the NAHL and then tried to move on to the USHL later and they couldn't make it. The NAHL is mostly for kids who can't cut it in the USHL. If a kid really wants to play in the best league, he won't waste time in the NAHL.
As far as any Jr league that is a feeder to college hockey, only the BCHL comes close to the USHL and even then they come up short. The BCHL is a league where they don't have the depth of the USHL. But they are otherwise pretty comparable.
PuckFan01 said:
former NAHL players are found throughtout the NCAA, in big programs and the newer smaller programs. It is true that you will find more USHL players in programs such as North Dokata and Wisconsin because those schools are in the league's backyard.
This year schools such as Ohio State, Michigan State, University of Miami and Minnesota have all recruited kids out of the NAHL.
Boston College and Maine, two of the country's finest programs have not recruited any player from the USHL or the NAHL but have taken several from the EJHL. According to your logic, the EJHL must be better than both the USHL and NAHL since those two leagues failed to place any players on those teams this year, right?
I will grant you that the USHL does indeed place more players in the NCAA ever year but, again, it goes back to the depth issue. Players on third lines in weaker USHL teams are still considered legit D-1 prospects in the eyes of many recruiters while the same cannot be said of those players on the third line of weak NAHL teams.
The only advantage the USHL has over the NAHL is depth and nothing more. A first line player in the NAHL could also be a first line player in the USHL. I think the USHL also has the depth advantage over the BCHL as well but on a much lesser scale and in fact, I think the BCHL may have had the better overall talent this year.
Letang fan 58
No More Fleury
MikeC said:
I hope to god you mean the Central hockey league because every single team in the chl with the possible exception of saskatoon would kill the winner of the ushl in a game series or league.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Legendary broadcaster Bob Cole passes away at 90
- Latest: Minnesota Knudsens
