USPHL 2015-16 Thread
- Thread starter doncherrysgrill
- Start date
please explain why so many in this league are encouraged to age out. Also what is enough ? $12000, $14000, $16000, $20000 are there any rules to how much a program or coach is allowed to pocket? tell me when's enough , enough? As long as the
almighty(tuition) dollar is the #1 player in this league it will always stink of manipulation.
almighty(tuition) dollar is the #1 player in this league it will always stink of manipulation.
This is kind of a cool link
http://www.scholarshipstats.com/hockey.html
I don't think this shows anywhere what % of NCAA scholarship recipients are Canadian. In my view it should be close to zero, but that's just me.
Tier 3 hockey is a tragic universe--plenty of talented kids that could play in either the NAHL or USHL, two of the most politics-laden leagues ever. But, they didn't get the nod, so their parents are spending $$$ chasing something that is very fleet indeed. Not only are you competing against all the BS from your own country's system, but also against all the Canadians that are "going the NCAA route".(What a croc that is--should be eliminated by allowing only 1-2 Canadians per roster, end of story).
If the USPHL is getting more commits, that's great, but it makes you wonder if that means the other "higher' leagues really, well, aren't higher. From what I've seen of each, which is a lot, neither is that impressive. There are a finite amount of commits to be had, so someone is giving up something, somewhere. Why are colleges looking to the USPHL for players if the other leagues have more than enough to fill their rosters? They're still taking Canadians--can't seem to find enough talent in the States in Tier1 and 2? Is the number of Canadians in the NCAA shrinking and being filled in by USPHL players? Are the Tier 1 and 2 leagues losing ground to the USPHL? Why aren't these stats available to everyone, along with some kind of analysis, so that parents and players can get the landscape straight before committing to expensive pipedreams? Maybe they are and I haven't looked that hard.
Hockey in general is a money grab. Maybe its time to pay attention the man behind the curtain?
http://www.scholarshipstats.com/hockey.html
I don't think this shows anywhere what % of NCAA scholarship recipients are Canadian. In my view it should be close to zero, but that's just me.
Tier 3 hockey is a tragic universe--plenty of talented kids that could play in either the NAHL or USHL, two of the most politics-laden leagues ever. But, they didn't get the nod, so their parents are spending $$$ chasing something that is very fleet indeed. Not only are you competing against all the BS from your own country's system, but also against all the Canadians that are "going the NCAA route".(What a croc that is--should be eliminated by allowing only 1-2 Canadians per roster, end of story).
If the USPHL is getting more commits, that's great, but it makes you wonder if that means the other "higher' leagues really, well, aren't higher. From what I've seen of each, which is a lot, neither is that impressive. There are a finite amount of commits to be had, so someone is giving up something, somewhere. Why are colleges looking to the USPHL for players if the other leagues have more than enough to fill their rosters? They're still taking Canadians--can't seem to find enough talent in the States in Tier1 and 2? Is the number of Canadians in the NCAA shrinking and being filled in by USPHL players? Are the Tier 1 and 2 leagues losing ground to the USPHL? Why aren't these stats available to everyone, along with some kind of analysis, so that parents and players can get the landscape straight before committing to expensive pipedreams? Maybe they are and I haven't looked that hard.
Hockey in general is a money grab. Maybe its time to pay attention the man behind the curtain?
The USPHL league would be charging a lot more for it to be a 'money grab' What they are charging is not a money grab. Not some of the teams we are familiar with.
DIstrict 9-if a player plays in every game one year. Does well. Ends up on a different team the second year -and isn't playing as much do they stay? They are good enough to play every game. In the past they have gotten up to 60 points a season-that would never happen with less games played and a drastic reduction in ice time.
Why would a coach take on players knowing these players would never be happy sititing (selfish reasons makes no sense)? There are other teams who have called these players-what does a player do? Stay put on a really good team-or go where they will play the game? Asking you District9 because i seem to agree with all of your postings.
DIstrict 9-if a player plays in every game one year. Does well. Ends up on a different team the second year -and isn't playing as much do they stay? They are good enough to play every game. In the past they have gotten up to 60 points a season-that would never happen with less games played and a drastic reduction in ice time.
Why would a coach take on players knowing these players would never be happy sititing (selfish reasons makes no sense)? There are other teams who have called these players-what does a player do? Stay put on a really good team-or go where they will play the game? Asking you District9 because i seem to agree with all of your postings.
if the players/parents have the money-why do you care what they pay? If they get their commitment--why do you care if the team charges 20k?? Who cares. The player decides what they can afford.
The stats are out there-you just have to do your homework-do the math. Do the % of commits per league/per team etc. it's there.
so then don't let your son play in it. 99% of the kids who play in the league have had no issues like this.
This.
However, I do agree with this: the books of many of these Tier 3 teams should be more transparent. Doing the fuzzy math on my own, I have to question some of the fees out there, especially for the North Eastern teams. With that said, I have a feeling it's to do with the cost of ice and league fees.
The high fees are definitely due to ice time/league fees. The east coast teams are nothing compared to some mid-west teams.
You pay the price-or just say no. Simple as that.
No clue where my kids will end up next year-or what will go down this year. Will wait and see-They got a few D3 calls I'm happy I just want them to go to college-but they really want to try for the D1. So, they are back at it...
You pay the price-or just say no. Simple as that.
No clue where my kids will end up next year-or what will go down this year. Will wait and see-They got a few D3 calls I'm happy I just want them to go to college-but they really want to try for the D1. So, they are back at it...
So, aside from all the money discussion, this league is fairly entertaining at times. It's tough to get a handle on the rankings though. It seems very spread out and diluted, no?
Here are the top USPHL Jr Teams.
Islanders Hockey Club (Premier) 11-2
Hampton Roads Whalers (Elite-South) 13-1
Islanders Hockey Club (Elite-North) 10-0
Hampton Roads Whalers (US3PHL-South) 11-2-1
Junior Bruins (US3PHL-North) 12-2-1
Chicago Cougars 15-0
Tri City Icehawks 11-1-1
Anyone know the differences here? Or could rank them?
Islanders Hockey Club (Premier) 11-2
Hampton Roads Whalers (Elite-South) 13-1
Islanders Hockey Club (Elite-North) 10-0
Hampton Roads Whalers (US3PHL-South) 11-2-1
Junior Bruins (US3PHL-North) 12-2-1
Chicago Cougars 15-0
Tri City Icehawks 11-1-1
Anyone know the differences here? Or could rank them?
If you got this from myhockeyrankings it's not going to be anywhere close to accurate when showing the USPHL.
Premier > Elite > USP3
Honestly can't tell you where Midwest falls because I haven't seen those teams in person. My guess is around USP3, based on having seen the MnJHL (old league where most of the Midwest teams came from) last season.
There will probably be some exceptions..maybe the top USP3 teams beat the bottom Elite teams. No one in Elite is better than anyone in Premier right now, at least IMO.
if the players/parents have the money-why do you care what they pay? If they get their commitment--why do you care if the team charges 20k?? Who cares. The player decides what they can afford.
Because supposedly this , and all of amateur hockey is a MERITOCRACY. Look up the meaning. Talented kids who are certainly able to contribute to most D1 and D3 teams for sure are passed over because they didn't "hook up" with the right coach or team . Didn't pay the $$ freight or didn't know about paying the freight in terms of the right program , showcase , private lessons, private training etc... I have seen it from the youngest ages-- If we are going to have a grown up conversation about playing in college its high time some tough questions were answered like why is it some programs it totally weaker leagues can still seem to find college spots for players while other coaches can never seem to move on more than one or two kids? Why is it that some players mistakes are called aberations while other players that consistently perform well , his good plays are called aberations. Bottomline is this should be a meritocracy and we ALL know its not except for the top 5%. Just because some will willingly pay $20k does that make it right? How about all the others being encouraged to age out? What other sport does this to prospective college players? If it were a true meritocracy then what a player actually does on the ice would be MORE important than what coaches say about what a player does on the ice.
I would still like to hear what you'all think is an appropriate pay package for a junior hockey Tier 3 coach.
Because supposedly this , and all of amateur hockey is a MERITOCRACY. Look up the meaning. Talented kids who are certainly able to contribute to most D1 and D3 teams for sure are passed over because they didn't "hook up" with the right coach or team . Didn't pay the $$ freight or didn't know about paying the freight in terms of the right program , showcase , private lessons, private training etc... I have seen it from the youngest ages-- If we are going to have a grown up conversation about playing in college its high time some tough questions were answered like why is it some programs it totally weaker leagues can still seem to find college spots for players while other coaches can never seem to move on more than one or two kids? Why is it that some players mistakes are called aberations while other players that consistently perform well , his good plays are called aberations. Bottomline is this should be a meritocracy and we ALL know its not except for the top 5%. Just because some will willingly pay $20k does that make it right? How about all the others being encouraged to age out? What other sport does this to prospective college players? If it were a true meritocracy then what a player actually does on the ice would be MORE important than what coaches say about what a player does on the ice.
I would still like to hear what you'all think is an appropriate pay package for a junior hockey Tier 3 coach.
Anyone else very pleased with how many good teams are in the league this year? I mean there's less than half the teams who are far away from .500, yet I do feel like the league is more competitive this year. I mean, just look at the top scorers this year and you can see there's atleast 1 from 10 of the teams in the top 30 instead of them all being Hitmen, Jr Bs, SSK and IHC in the past years.
In my opinion the playoffs will be very interesting this year since I think the top 6 or 7 teams can really take games off of any other team on any given day, however I do feel like obviously we have the top 4 of IHC, SSK, Jr Bs and Hitmen. Either way, in my opinion, this league is way better than the last two years whereas you had Hitmen/Jr Bs just completely stomping everyone.
In my opinion the playoffs will be very interesting this year since I think the top 6 or 7 teams can really take games off of any other team on any given day, however I do feel like obviously we have the top 4 of IHC, SSK, Jr Bs and Hitmen. Either way, in my opinion, this league is way better than the last two years whereas you had Hitmen/Jr Bs just completely stomping everyone.
maybe
maybe the addition of all these juniors teams across the board has finally cramped teams like Hitmen's recruiting style. Rumor is they passed on some very good players .
maybe the addition of all these juniors teams across the board has finally cramped teams like Hitmen's recruiting style. Rumor is they passed on some very good players .
Agreed. However, I do feel like unfortunately you will have the top 4 teams just because of their recent success and more talented players wanted to play for the team that won playoffs or regular season, and the fact that some of these coaches are just leaps and bounds ahead of others. I mean, I don't think any of the coaches are even close to being as good as Tremblay, (IHC), Harris, (Hitmen), Masters, (Jr Bruins) or Harlow, (SSK). I mean these guys have so much experience in winning and coaching juniors it's almost unfair. You can just tell that the coaching is so good compared to the other teams just in the way that they cycle the puck, breakout and even just run their PP and PK.
Still, there are so many different options and situations that work for different kids now. As the league becomes older and older I believe that they could eventually catch up to the USHL in terms of talent, but may not ever reach the USHL in terms of structure. I mean, the league was created what, 3 years ago? and I think some of top Premier teams like IHC, SSK, Hitmen and Jr Bruins can easily compete with some of these middle-of-the-pack USHL teams if not the top team, and possibly some middle pack teams of the USPHL, (Flyers and PAL) can contend with the USHL teams.
for me i will maintain
its not coaching at ALL . It's a 100% recruiting which is 100% based on which programs have relationships to move on players consistently over the rest of the league. Isn't it strange that year after year the same teams move majority of players yet as you go down the rosters you all know there are players on other teams that did more, and did it with a lot less talent around them but don't move on. For this league to really move up there has to be more consistent recruitment and movement up across the ENTIRE league and not just 4 teams.
its not coaching at ALL . It's a 100% recruiting which is 100% based on which programs have relationships to move on players consistently over the rest of the league. Isn't it strange that year after year the same teams move majority of players yet as you go down the rosters you all know there are players on other teams that did more, and did it with a lot less talent around them but don't move on. For this league to really move up there has to be more consistent recruitment and movement up across the ENTIRE league and not just 4 teams.
With all do respect, no they couldn't
Coaching is 100 times better, every kid has a high end D 1 deal, 50+\_ players drafted last year from Ushl, USPHL had 1 and he left
Tire 1 vs tier 3, period
Great local option but let's not get ahead of ourselves
This year, no chance. The first year of the USPHL those Hitmen and Jr Bruins team could have competed in the USHL. Last year's Hitmen team definitely could have too. Not sure there's a team in the league this year that could do that.
I don't think USA Hockey would ever want the financial structure of the league to be different, because it'd clearly take away from what the USHL is doing. The percentage of east coast kids who are in the USHL would plummet to basically 0 if they didn't have to pay to play locally.
I don't think USA Hockey would ever want the financial structure of the league to be different, because it'd clearly take away from what the USHL is doing. The percentage of east coast kids who are in the USHL would plummet to basically 0 if they didn't have to pay to play locally.
This is absolutely CORRECT. USA Hockey protects the USHL at both ends, having Pay for Play eliminate East Coast kids at the top of their game staying home, AND screwing the CHL by creating B.S. rules about amateurism. One of their Rules prohibits playing on a team with "professionals". But it's OK to play against them on the same ice?? (USHL vs. OHL/Q). And how about providing billets, ice, equipment,food in the USHL but declaring OHL/Q kids as "professionals" because they get a few bucks to subsist on? And now the NCAA allows the "major" football programs to do exactly that. HYPOCRITES?
^^totally true^^
Just reading the board catching up. Been awhile. I do agree with some of the discussion about players/teams/commits. Trying to decide if the kids should go off to college next year, play D3 or stay around and hope for the D1. I think they should just go off to school. I think they can get a D3 commit-so why not go play and study? Why wait for D1 if it might never happen. I truly believe they are good enough, but as past discussions have stated-it's not always about the talent/player.
Some USPHL plays featured on ESPN SC Top 10, absolutely insane plays.
https://youtu.be/zxQ2j9Ug6Ps?t=1m56s
https://youtu.be/zxQ2j9Ug6Ps?t=1m56s
