CoasttoCoast
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2012
- 168
- 0
I was actually thinking the same thing, I think it will turn into a 17 year old dominated league, because you would pay that to play Major Midget AAA. Your top line players may pay that in hopes of the scholly to NCAA, but older guys WILL NOT pay that if they may get ten shifts a game. Imagine how much complaining will come from the parents when little Johnny gets 3 shifts a game,or doesnt dress.
The on ice product will suffer dramatically in my opinion.
--Like I said before, everything changes.
18-19 yr. old americans will come and play.
Rich 16-17 yr. olds will continue to play, like it is a extension of minor hockey (without the fair play rules and protection of minor hockey)
If you are a eastern ontario product, who is broke or over 18, good luck finding a place to play.
Oh wait a minute, the rich clubs can pay the fee for the top kid's, guess were the top kids are going to play?!?!
The poor teams will develop players for the rich teams, the poor teams will be better off financially, but be worse off on the ice. The owners can choose to pay the kid's fees, and be competitive but then they are right back to where they started.
I understand the business model, I beleive they can get more money from the parents but the the rich teams should not be able pay for the players and they should phase it in, if they phased it in over 3-5 years, it would be accepted without much disruption.
As far as 5, 16-17 yr. olds. If you want to be competive at the RBC Cup and Fred Page Cup, you need to have the maximum of 7 20 yr. olds on your team plus 18 & 19 yr. olds. Unless of course you change the rules across the country.
IMO