Commercialization ruining minor hockey

[Porter Stoutheart]

I absolutely support minor hockey in the abstract. I don’t support this elite-exclusive youth hockey industry. I don’t honestly know why anyone would, even if they’re on the inside of it.

I don't think anybody here is supporting the ideology of the modern commercialized youth hockey industry. But Yukon Joe is just pointing out that it's not going to change, and it's not like it's only happening to hockey. Sure, hockey is not the same as when we were growing up... and we can hate that it has become like this. But end of the day, while hating it and lamenting it here, we can also recognize it's not going to get any better. This effect is present in all walks of life in our capitalist society, people will chase the $$$. And the $$$ are apparently there to be chased this way in hockey too.

Meanwhile, if a kid's family can scrape together the $1000 or so it takes to play in a local house league, they can still play organized hockey with used gear today. For now, while those local associations still exist. Yes, just for fun from Day 1. After those associations go away, they could maybe play shinny on ponds or ODR in some places in the world, perhaps... until climate change takes those away too. Most likely they'll just play EA Sports instead, right? Or the next VR hockey game that eventually comes out? Maybe for the cost of whatever a PS7 or Xbox Series ZZ costs they can become world champs and make a few million as pro gamers at least? Times change.

I'm sympathetic to the lamentations about a bygone era, but aside from lamenting it, I don't see anything to be done about it. It's just like the Ferrari analogy above... if you want a Ferrari and can afford it, good for you, go ahead. If you want one but can't afford it... c'est la vie. The used Honda will do. That's the way we built our society, I don't see any reason why hockey should get any special exemption.

 

[tarheelhockey]

To add a data point to this topic, today’s local news has an article saying there are 2000 youth hockey players in the Raleigh area. 700 of them are playing travel hockey.

Do the math on that… the number of travel players is greater than 50% of the number who play house hockey at any level (including kids too young to travel yet).

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't think anybody here is supporting the ideology of the modern commercialized youth hockey industry. But Yukon Joe is just pointing out that it's not going to change, and it's not like it's only happening to hockey. Sure, hockey is not the same as when we were growing up... and we can hate that it has become like this. But end of the day, while hating it and lamenting it here, we can also recognize it's not going to get any better. This effect is present in all walks of life in our capitalist society, people will chase the $$$. And the $$$ are apparently there to be chased this way in hockey too.

Meanwhile, if a kid's family can scrape together the $1000 or so it takes to play in a local house league, they can still play organized hockey with used gear today. For now, while those local associations still exist. Yes, just for fun from Day 1. After those associations go away, they could maybe play shinny on ponds or ODR in some places in the world, perhaps... until climate change takes those away too. Most likely they'll just play EA Sports instead, right? Or the next VR hockey game that eventually comes out? Maybe for the cost of whatever a PS7 or Xbox Series ZZ costs they can become world champs and make a few million as pro gamers at least? Times change.

I'm sympathetic to the lamentations about a bygone era, but aside from lamenting it, I don't see anything to be done about it. It's just like the Ferrari analogy above... if you want a Ferrari and can afford it, good for you, go ahead. If you want one but can't afford it... c'est la vie. The used Honda will do. That's the way we built our society, I don't see any reason why hockey should get any special exemption.

Hockey Canada is publicly subsidized. It is in their mission to preserve access to the game irrespective of socio-economic status, and to protect the national tradition of participation. Have they ever spoken out the economic stratification of the game? About the plummeting participation rate in the working and middle classes? Have they lobbied for anything to be done about this?

Of course, I don’t need to point out the culture of non-accountability in that organization. The current approach is clearly broken, and there most certainly is something that can be done if the community demands it loudly enough.

Also, the Ferrari example makes no sense. Car dealerships are not community institutions with a mission to develop children physically and socially. All adults don’t all get to drive Ferraris, but all children should have the same fundamental access to development opportunities. Are we really going to sit here and say the hockey community will deliberately organize around exclusion and nobody should bother speaking up about it?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Hockey Canada is publicly subsidized. It is in their mission to preserve access to the game irrespective of socio-economic status, and to protect the national tradition of participation. Have they ever spoken out the economic stratification of the game? About the plummeting participation rate in the working and middle classes? Have they lobbied for anything to be done about this?

Of course, I don’t need to point out the culture of non-accountability in that organization. The current approach is clearly broken, and there most certainly is something that can be done if the community demands it loudly enough.

Also, the Ferrari example makes no sense. Car dealerships are not community institutions with a mission to develop children physically and socially. All adults don’t all get to drive Ferraris, but all children should have the same fundamental access to development opportunities. Are we really going to sit here and say the hockey community will deliberately organize around exclusion and nobody should bother speaking up about it?

Is lamenting that things have become this way on a hockey message forum really speaking up about it, though. I mean, I don't disagree with any single point you've made. It's all bad. Every bullet down the list, bad, bad, bad. But at the end of the day, it's just listing all the different symptoms, while McCoy could just come up and say "It's dead, Jim".

There are plenty of ways to develop children physically and socially, hockey doesn't need to be one. End of the day, while us old-timers cling to our fond memories of the way things used to be, it's still JUST A GAME. Exclusion has already been built in, it was when my kids played over a decade ago, we're too far down the slippery slope to get back IMO.

Hockey Canada probably shouldn't be publicly subsidized anymore either. I don't know if they really know what their own mission is, aside from preserving their individual personal status quos at whatever level, though you'd think it would occur to them at some point that letting things go like they have would have some eventual impact on those status quos. But apparently that hasn't happened. So be it.

I don't think the grassroots/community level type of passion for the game is enough to bring us back from the brink. It wasn't a decade ago, and it's only going to get more unlikely, unfortunately, because we're aging out and the next generations have already pivoted away.

 

[oldunclehue]

So I'll just run through WHL, since that's what I know.

As an aside, I do feel it's kind of unseemly that CHL teams are drafting 15-16 year olds. The idea that at age 16 you're going to go move 1000km away and live with some random billet family... I don't love it. But the system isn't going to change anytime soon.

So anyways, here's this year's WHL bantam draft results:

Western Hockey League

chl.ca

So by my count, in the top 10, 7 go to hockey academies.

But that doesn't tell the entire story either. So attending a hockey academy costs like $20-$30k per year. But at least they cover all the incidentals.

The kids not going to hockey academies are not attending some subsidized league. Their parents costs are probably $3-$5k - but you have fundraising on top of that, plus covering transportation and other incidentals.

It's actually All 10 of the top WHL draft picks that went to Academies. Some Academies don't have teams in the Academy league but their students play AAA but attend the academy for school which is centred around on ice programming. So they have classroom and hockey skills development throughout the day and then AAA practice and games on evenings and weekends.

Jaxon Jacobson's dad is the owner of the WHL Wheat Kings and started a hockey academy in Brandon 3 years ago, building a multi-million dollar facility which has a full time Academy and houses the U18AAA and U15AAA programs. Basically kids go to the Academy school all day and on ice. Then play AAA in the evenings.

It appears the one from St Albert AAA also played club/Academy hockey through their programs.

So 9/10 of the 2023 WHL draft kids are academy kids....and 16 of the top 22 draft picks were Academy kids. So theres your evidence...if you want to get drafted to the WHL, Academies are your best bet. Minor hockey programs are not.

As far as equipment costs in regards to commercialization....I agree with you, you can find a cost effective way to make due in the younger ages. But I am talking about U11 and older and how wild the commercialization has become. As well as how much people are willing to spend to give their kids the edge when it comes to the next hockey season.

 

[oldunclehue]

The OHL is a different beast, the GTA AAA league is a private league in which owners can sell rights to teams for Millions of dollars. QMJHL, I have no idea anymore.

 

[MeHateHe]

How does it work in Canada with getting drafted in the CHL? Do you essentially HAVE to play in these expensive private leagues to get a shot or does Canada have localized and mostly city/township subsidized leagues (Park League) for kids in that 12-14 age group?

Here's an anecdote to illustrate this point.

Western Hockey League

chl.ca

The WHL draft is for 14-year-olds. I had to go to round 6, pick 126 before I found the first player from BC who wasn't playing on an academy team. It's illustrative because BC was the last of the western provinces to be rigid about limiting players from playing either outside their home association or in regional teams. It was probably not great before, with too many little associations playing all over the place (six MHAs in greater Victoria, for example), but in years past you could at least expect that players from Cowichan Valley or Fernie or Williams Lake MHAs would get drafted somewhere in the first few rounds.

It's overstatement to say this has all been borne of the commercialization referenced in the OP, but the vain belief parents have that Johnny Sixpucks is going to the show if he just had a chance is where the academies came from - and the regionalization that other provinces embraced years ago.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Is lamenting that things have become this way on a hockey message forum really speaking up about it, though.

Yes, it is. We are a bunch of people who are involved enough to be on HFBoards, in The Rink forum, clicking on minor hockey topics. This is the community. When the community moves on, ceases agitate against the problem, that’s when you can call it truly dead.

For my part, I’ve spoken directly to the community relations folks in the Hurricanes front office about this issue. I’ve heard the excited pitch about how local travel teams are producing more high-level talent, and pointed out (likely to their quiet irritation) that this leaves the great majority of families behind. That’s the highest extent of the influence I’m able to have, without becoming independently wealthy and making activism my day job. But at least the message has been broadcast. If the message isn’t received — and I suspect it isn’t, because the people at the highest levels of hockey are very wealthy and business oriented, and truly don’t understand the social ramifications on a practical level — that is to say, if the message isn’t received, it won’t be for lack of speaking up on my part.

There are plenty of ways to develop children physically and socially, hockey doesn't need to be one. End of the day, while us old-timers cling to our fond memories of the way things used to be, it's still JUST A GAME. Exclusion has already been built in, it was when my kids played over a decade ago, we're too far down the slippery slope to get back IMO.

Hockey Canada probably shouldn't be publicly subsidized anymore either. I don't know if they really know what their own mission is, aside from preserving their individual personal status quos at whatever level, though you'd think it would occur to them at some point that letting things go like they have would have some eventual impact on those status quos. But apparently that hasn't happened. So be it.

I don't think the grassroots/community level type of passion for the game is enough to bring us back from the brink. It wasn't a decade ago, and it's only going to get more unlikely, unfortunately, because we're aging out and the next generations have already pivoted away.

I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said here, particularly the middle paragraph.

It just sucks to watch something die this type of death, and feels defeatist to allow a community asset to be commercialized and exploited to this extent. And particularly shitty to transform a children’s activity into a life lesson on how the key to success is to be born rich and exploit your advantages. It’s the wrong way to go, and we know it, and there doesn’t seem to be much actual resistance. Instead it’s just a shrug and a “that’s the way it is”.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Yes, it is. We are a bunch of people who are involved enough to be on HFBoards, in The Rink forum, clicking on minor hockey topics. This is the community. When the community moves on, ceases agitate against the problem, that’s when you can call it truly dead.

For my part, I’ve spoken directly to the Hurricanes front office about this issue. That’s the highest extent of the influence I’m able to have, without becoming independently wealthy and making activism my day job. But at least the message has been broadcast. If the message isn’t received — and I suspect it isn’t, because the people at the highest levels of hockey are very wealthy and business oriented, and truly don’t understand the social ramifications on a practical level — that is to say, if the message isn’t received, it won’t be for lack of speaking up on my part.




I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said here, particularly the middle paragraph.

It just sucks to watch something die this type of death, and feels defeatist to allow a community asset to be commercialized and exploited to this extent. And particularly shitty to transform a children’s activity into a life lesson on how the key to success is to be born rich and exploit your advantages. It’s the wrong way to go, and we know it, and there doesn’t seem to be much actual resistance. Instead it’s just a shrug and a “that’s the way it is”.

I know many people are carrying on the fight, still volunteering their time, even as associations shrink and levels get shaved away due to lack of participation. I hope they don't all succumb entirely to defeatism, but... I also couldn't blame anybody who did either, though. It's certainly not a "shrug", but I don't honestly see any way things are going to change. Many folks are going to continue to have a hard enough time just putting food on the table and finding somewhere to live in the coming years, so it's only natural that playing organized hockey will continue to fall by the wayside. If some older people can hang in there and give that experience that we benefited from to our kids for a little longer, so much the better. But that's isolated individuals with only localized influence. I have a complete lack of faith in any broader positive change happening. I guess if you feel that way for enough years, and things are only continuing to get worse, maybe it does kind of get translated to a "shrug" eventually after all.

And then, at the same time, there are still something like 1 million kids registered in hockey in the USA and Canada, even this year. So I mean, we shouldn't let the doom and gloom completely rule our outlook, even if the projections down the road aren't too hopeful. Those 1 million kids can still have fun, even if many of their families are paying crazy money for it (and sapping some of the fun from it). I think that's kind of where this all started... "that's the way it is"... BUT... even "the way it is" is still something fun for an awful lot of kids, even while our previous generation remembers something better and more inclusive/accessible.

 

[Slats432]

Interesting some comments. I told my son that he wasn't getting an expensive composite stick until he made an elite team. He did that in U15. He then progressed to play some Junior A. So people suggesting at 8 years old that expensive sticks make a difference, they don't, only if they weigh enough to utilize the flex. The rest is just keeping up with the Joneses.

Now, that said, training is necessary and comes at a cost, but a bunch can be done at home. My son shot 500 pucks a day in the basement. Cost? Free pucks, synthetic plastic ($50), Tarp to protect wall in basement ($50), quality net ($100). Probably the reason he could shoot 90 MPH is U18AAA. (That and being a big guy ).

Hockey can be expensive no doubt, but it can be just a fun sport for a kid playing with his friends. The commercialization does limit the potential success of lower income families, but is a barrier to the elite levels, not to just play the sport. The costs only go crazy if you are trying to develop an elite athlete, and that choice does get taken away for some people.

 

[Yukon Joe]

What exactly is the goal that hockey parents have? To let their kids have fun and play hockey? Or to create a future pro? Because it appears to me you can do the former without shelling out massive amounts of money.

There's a world between "trying to make a future pro", and "just playing to have fun".

So I want to bring up the world of girl's hockey. Nobody is getting rich playing girl's hockey. But they still have all of the same "keeping up with the jones" pressures that boys hockey has. You feel like you need to do the best camps, the best gear.

It's just a weird dynamic. It's not just hockey - you can look at basketball, volleyball, swimming, dance, gymnastics - even in things where you'll never ever make a living at, there's still competition.

And I kind of get it. My oldest son is doing well. I get a certain cachet amongst the other hockey parents as a result, even though his success has almost nothing to do with me, and everything to do with him. But there's a certain sick pleasure in consoling one parent whose kid didn't make the cut, while mine continues on.

 

[jetsmooseice]

There's a world between "trying to make a future pro", and "just playing to have fun".

So I want to bring up the world of girl's hockey. Nobody is getting rich playing girl's hockey. But they still have all of the same "keeping up with the jones" pressures that boys hockey has. You feel like you need to do the best camps, the best gear.

It's just a weird dynamic. It's not just hockey - you can look at basketball, volleyball, swimming, dance, gymnastics - even in things where you'll never ever make a living at, there's still competition.

And I kind of get it. My oldest son is doing well. I get a certain cachet amongst the other hockey parents as a result, even though his success has almost nothing to do with me, and everything to do with him. But there's a certain sick pleasure in consoling one parent whose kid didn't make the cut, while mine continues on.

I suppose some sports have always been that way... think of the 'country club' sports like tennis, golf, polo which emphasize technique, or require expensive equipment. Not many kids from the wrong side of the tracks are going to be in a position to pick up a set of golf clubs and excel without an awful lot of support.

This is as opposed to more egalitarian sports like basketball, soccer, even football where raw athleticism can shine through even in the absence of high end equipment, coaching, etc.

Even at the most basic level hockey does require a fair bit of parental support... just to play pick-up hockey someone has to get a kid their skates and stick, and invest either time or money in teaching them how to skate. To actually play organized hockey, even at the Timbits level, it takes a lot more than that. It's not something you can learn in a gym class at school. So that automatically excludes a large number of kids right off the bat. But I suspect that our egalitarian reflexes might start twitching only once the bar is raised over our heads

(And to be clear I don't mean you personally, Yukon Joe, I mean in general... I am the same way. I will probably become annoyed at the unfairness of it all when my kid's A1 teammates go off to academies and he doesn't.)

 

[Yukon Joe]

I suppose some sports have always been that way... think of the 'country club' sports like tennis, golf, polo which emphasize technique, or require expensive equipment. Not many kids from the wrong side of the tracks are going to be in a position to pick up a set of golf clubs and excel without an awful lot of support.

This is as opposed to more egalitarian sports like basketball, soccer, even football where raw athleticism can shine through even in the absence of high end equipment, coaching, etc.

Even at the most basic level hockey does require a fair bit of parental support... just to play pick-up hockey someone has to get a kid their skates and stick, and invest either time or money in teaching them how to skate. To actually play organized hockey, even at the Timbits level, it takes a lot more than that. It's not something you can learn in a gym class at school. So that automatically excludes a large number of kids right off the bat. But I suspect that our egalitarian reflexes might start twitching only once the bar is raised over our heads

(And to be clear I don't mean you personally, Yukon Joe, I mean in general... I am the same way. I will probably become annoyed at the unfairness of it all when my kid's A1 teammates go off to academies and he doesn't.)

Yeah I think you're on to something.

Nobody would ever think to complain that equestrian is too expensive - it's just an inherently expensive sport. Same thing with golf.

Hockey isn't quite at that level. But ice time is expensive, and even cheap gear adds up.

But even basketball - my one kid was really excited to have made his junior high school team last year. He's shot a lot of hoops in the driveway, but never played organized basketball before. But he wound up on the bench an awful lot, because the kids that have been playing outside of school and who have gone to camps and the like certainly outshone him.

 

[jetsmooseice]

Yeah I think you're on to something.

Nobody would ever think to complain that equestrian is too expensive - it's just an inherently expensive sport. Same thing with golf.

Hockey isn't quite at that level. But ice time is expensive, and even cheap gear adds up.

But even basketball - my one kid was really excited to have made his junior high school team last year. He's shot a lot of hoops in the driveway, but never played organized basketball before. But he wound up on the bench an awful lot, because the kids that have been playing outside of school and who have gone to camps and the like certainly outshone him.

That's what I was getting at with my 'raw athleticism' comment, though. It's true that extensive coaching and assistance can elevate a player. But if you have someone truly gifted, they can probably step on the field or the court and shine even without an extensive background in the sport. For instance, I live in Manitoba and over the past 15 years there were a couple of Nigerian kids who basically stumbled into football late in their teenage years. They ended up playing for the U of M Bisons and then went on to the NFL where they had fairly lengthy careers (David Onyemata who still plays, and Israel Idonijie).

That type of scenario is possible in football, basketball, athletics, etc. but it is damn near impossible to imagine in hockey. There is no way that a kid is going to get on skates for the first time at 17 and make it to the pros. To even play something like U15A2 hockey requires a very considerable investment of time and money over several years that goes beyond the means of a lot of people. So that does make hockey a bit like those country club sports.

How do you really correct this? You can't stop the wealthy from spending money on frills. I guess all you can do is make that sort of thing more accessible. But who pays for it if not the user? No easy answer there.

 

[Primary Assist]

That's what I was getting at with my 'raw athleticism' comment, though. It's true that extensive coaching and assistance can elevate a player. But if you have someone truly gifted, they can probably step on the field or the court and shine even without an extensive background in the sport. For instance, I live in Manitoba and over the past 15 years there were a couple of Nigerian kids who basically stumbled into football late in their teenage years. They ended up playing for the U of M Bisons and then went on to the NFL where they had fairly lengthy careers (David Onyemata who still plays, and Israel Idonijie).

That type of scenario is possible in football, basketball, athletics, etc. but it is damn near impossible to imagine in hockey. There is no way that a kid is going to get on skates for the first time at 17 and make it to the pros. To even play something like U15A2 hockey requires a very considerable investment of time and money over several years that goes beyond the means of a lot of people. So that does make hockey a bit like those country club sports.

How do you really correct this? You can't stop the wealthy from spending money on frills. I guess all you can do is make that sort of thing more accessible. But who pays for it if not the user? No easy answer there.

All completely valid points, and to add my 2 cents the other major factor is that outside of pond hockey or some niche circumstances, if a kid wants to play hockey then her parents have to have a car and the free time to take her to games and practice. The car part is largely correlated with wealth as well, outside of some urban settings where cars are less prevalent, and it means the sport thrives primarily in the suburbs as opposed to cities.

So you have these added, built in limitations of players coming primarily from 2 parent households in the suburbs with access to an automobile and free time. Again, there are exceptions, such as kindhearted family friend or teammate's parents who don't mind a carpool, but over time we are seeing the demographics of hockey players match the demographics of people who live in the burbs

 

[Yukon Joe]

How do you really correct this? You can't stop the wealthy from spending money on frills. I guess all you can do is make that sort of thing more accessible. But who pays for it if not the user? No easy answer there.

In Canada we do take steps to make the sport accessible. The municipality typically provides the rinks themselves. They will provide public skate and "stick and puck" sessions free of charge, plus the ice cost is reasonable. You have charities like Kidsport which will cover costs for kids of poor families to play.

But when it comes to elite hockey - do we really want to start subsidizing that? Should some level of government be putting on advanced power skating classes at reduced fees? Is that really the best use of public resources? I say no.

 

[jetsmooseice]

In Canada we do take steps to make the sport accessible. The municipality typically provides the rinks themselves. They will provide public skate and "stick and puck" sessions free of charge, plus the ice cost is reasonable. You have charities like Kidsport which will cover costs for kids of poor families to play.

But when it comes to elite hockey - do we really want to start subsidizing that? Should some level of government be putting on advanced power skating classes at reduced fees? Is that really the best use of public resources? I say no.

I agree with this take. Not sure how it is in the rest of Canada, but skating rinks are incredibly accessible in Manitoba. Every community has seasonal ice available for drop in/casual use, generally for free. This typically means outdoor rinks or the small town arenas with natural ice... they are only available from maybe mid-December to mid-March (so really only about 3 months and a bit) but for the time they're open you can skate your heart out free. At my local community club, there are pick up games going on most evenings. In more limited cases you can also get year round access to indoor rinks with artificial ice at little or no cost. This is totally different from many US or European locales where outdoor ice doesn't exist and you play and practice indoors only, when your team is booked to play and practice.

On top of that, many communities offer inexpensive skating lessons to get people started. And as you point out there are charities to help the disadvantaged get started in the game.

So it is pretty accessible to learn and enter hockey. But that's where the responsibility ends IMO, and that's fair. It's kind of like with swimming lessons, most towns/cities will teach you the basics. But if you want to train for the Olympics, you have to pony up yourself.

 

[Slats432]

In Canada we do take steps to make the sport accessible. The municipality typically provides the rinks themselves. They will provide public skate and "stick and puck" sessions free of charge, plus the ice cost is reasonable. You have charities like Kidsport which will cover costs for kids of poor families to play.

But when it comes to elite hockey - do we really want to start subsidizing that? Should some level of government be putting on advanced power skating classes at reduced fees? Is that really the best use of public resources? I say no.

There is some minor subsidizing in academy because they ask for billets for some kids.

 

[jetsmooseice]

There is some minor subsidizing in academy because they ask for billets for some kids.

That's interesting. I wonder who takes this role on? And how much they get paid?

I can see billeting being a bit of a civic pride thing when it comes to junior hockey. You live in Swift Current, Brandon or Brooks and chances are you're a fan of the home team. The teams put your community on the map, so billeting is a way of contributing to that.

But academies and the CSSHL have a very low profile outside of the world of teenage hockey players, coaches and scouts. Even in a hockey hotbed like this forum I doubt many here have watched an academy game or could name a player at the nearest hockey academy. I sure couldn't tell you who is playing down at The Rink Hockey Academy. So I wonder who the people are that are doing the owners of The Rink a solid by putting up a billet?

 

[colchar]

I am at my wits end with how much the commercialization of kids hockey has ruined the sport in Canada for the average family/kid and how parents are willing to do ANYTHING to give their kids some form of advancement.

Background: I played QMJHL hockey and had offers to go minor pro but decided to pursue my current career (no regrets). But as a parent and coach in our minor hockey system I am blown away at what the "business" of kids hockey is doing to this sport for kids and families. I have coached minor hockey for the past 9 years and up until last year enjoyed it a ton. But the desperation of parents has ruined the environment for me and many others.

1. I live in a rural city area in western Canada. We have a strong minor hockey system but are far away from larger city centers and the "Hockey Academys" are taking our best players out of the system and parents are willing to re-mortgage homes, taken on second jobs and drained savings to chase their kids "dreams".

2. Our AAA program is at risk of folding because 7 of the top players have left for Hockey Academies at a cost of $30,000 plus. The program has had success and has a great coaching staff (not me). But yet all of these kids pay "advisors" who sell the academy life to the parents and now its at risk of ruining the program for many many others.

3. Hockey camps/skills coaches: - Many kids don't have a summer or time away from the rink anymore. Many parents are willing to pay thousands of dollars upon thousands to take their kids to camps and hire skills coach (at the age of 10).

4. 10-11 year olds having a trainer, nutritionist, skating coach and advisor is WILD but happening all over the place. If you have the money these people will take it and sell you a story of how much your KID is going to be the best thing since Crosby.

Parents willing to step on anyone friend or foe to try and get their kid to a certain level is AMAZING as well.

The worst has to be parents that have never played a competitive level of the sport. They have ruined the rink atmosphere and its sickening.

Anyone else worried about where our sport is going in Canada? With multiple hockey academies popping up anywhere and everywhere, commercial (non-sanctioned) AAA leagues in many Provinces and the copious amounts of "skills" coaches all offering extra this and that....the average family can't keep up and just end up leaving the sport. It's sad. But I predict we won't see a middle income or lower kid make it anymore.

Sad.

Similar things happened with football and basketball (and maybe baseball?) in the US and didn't ruin those sports.

 

[Squiffy]

Similar things happened with football and basketball (and maybe baseball?) in the US and didn't ruin those sports.

There's a whole high school and college structure that exists in the States for those sports though that doesn't in Canada. As I gather, playing QB for your towns high school is a fairly elite thing, and people will notice, and now you are getting offers to college if you are naturally talented. That's the path right? I'm sure it comes with outside training expenses that are comparable, but none of that comes with the expense of paying top dollar to have your kid on a top level rep hockey team. There's a reasonably affordable path that exists for those sports that doesn't for hockey.

Two kids playing rep hockey in Toronto, not quite 20 years on HF, just looking in here now the last couple weeks, interesting discussions. Deep in the weeds of the GTHL, if only lower levels, no one here is playing AAA. Yet .

 

[colchar]

There's a whole high school and college structure that exists in the States for those sports though that doesn't in Canada. As I gather, playing QB for your towns high school is a fairly elite thing, and people will notice, and now you are getting offers to college if you are naturally talented. That's the path right? I'm sure it comes with outside training expenses that are comparable, but none of that comes with the expense of paying top dollar to have your kid on a top level rep hockey team. There's a reasonably affordable path that exists for those sports that doesn't for hockey.

There is a lot more to it than what you described and some of it can be really expensive.

 

[wetcoast]

I am at my wits end with how much the commercialization of kids hockey has ruined the sport in Canada for the average family/kid and how parents are willing to do ANYTHING to give their kids some form of advancement.

Background: I played QMJHL hockey and had offers to go minor pro but decided to pursue my current career (no regrets). But as a parent and coach in our minor hockey system I am blown away at what the "business" of kids hockey is doing to this sport for kids and families. I have coached minor hockey for the past 9 years and up until last year enjoyed it a ton. But the desperation of parents has ruined the environment for me and many others.

1. I live in a rural city area in western Canada. We have a strong minor hockey system but are far away from larger city centers and the "Hockey Academys" are taking our best players out of the system and parents are willing to re-mortgage homes, taken on second jobs and drained savings to chase their kids "dreams".

2. Our AAA program is at risk of folding because 7 of the top players have left for Hockey Academies at a cost of $30,000 plus. The program has had success and has a great coaching staff (not me). But yet all of these kids pay "advisors" who sell the academy life to the parents and now its at risk of ruining the program for many many others.

3. Hockey camps/skills coaches: - Many kids don't have a summer or time away from the rink anymore. Many parents are willing to pay thousands of dollars upon thousands to take their kids to camps and hire skills coach (at the age of 10).

4. 10-11 year olds having a trainer, nutritionist, skating coach and advisor is WILD but happening all over the place. If you have the money these people will take it and sell you a story of how much your KID is going to be the best thing since Crosby.

Parents willing to step on anyone friend or foe to try and get their kid to a certain level is AMAZING as well.

The worst has to be parents that have never played a competitive level of the sport. They have ruined the rink atmosphere and its sickening.

Anyone else worried about where our sport is going in Canada? With multiple hockey academies popping up anywhere and everywhere, commercial (non-sanctioned) AAA leagues in many Provinces and the copious amounts of "skills" coaches all offering extra this and that....the average family can't keep up and just end up leaving the sport. It's sad. But I predict we won't see a middle income or lower kid make it anymore.

Sad.

Fair enough but there have always been good parts and not so good parts to hockey, this is perhaps the tradeoff for better talent....?

 

[Yukon Joe]

There's a whole high school and college structure that exists in the States for those sports though that doesn't in Canada. As I gather, playing QB for your towns high school is a fairly elite thing, and people will notice, and now you are getting offers to college if you are naturally talented. That's the path right? I'm sure it comes with outside training expenses that are comparable, but none of that comes with the expense of paying top dollar to have your kid on a top level rep hockey team. There's a reasonably affordable path that exists for those sports that doesn't for hockey.

Two kids playing rep hockey in Toronto, not quite 20 years on HF, just looking in here now the last couple weeks, interesting discussions. Deep in the weeds of the GTHL, if only lower levels, no one here is playing AAA. Yet .

The development model in football in the US is entirely different, and I'm not exactly convinced it's better.

In the US, high school football is huge. Think Friday Night Lights. So yes, you have local communities and local school boards spending huge sums of money on high school kids sports. You have stadiums that cost millions to build, coaches that (googles) can make $150k per year or more. All of that comes from the taxpayer.

Then of course they move on to university football. Depending on the program of course some are massive moneymakers, but others also get huge public subsidies. And now we're talking stadiums in the tens of hundreds of millions of dollars, and coaches making multi-million dollar salaries.

So yes - it is a system where poor kids have a much better shot at being able to go on to become pros. It does avoid the problem we see in hockey where most players are white and come from privileged backgrounds. But it comes at enormous cost to the taxpayer - and is that really a good use of taxpayer funds? I don't think so.

There is another model of player development - European soccer. As I understand it (and please correct me if I'm wrong) many of the biggest clubs all run development academies. They recruit promising players at a young age, bring them into their academy system - all paid for by the club. So it avoids the problem of taxpayer money being required, plus it avoids the problem of poor kids not being able to compete.

The downside to that model is A: the club owns that kids rights for a certain amount of time, and B: runs against the North American ethos that all clubs are supposed to be equal and competitive.

So, as I see it, from 50,000 feet there are three different development models for elite athletes: -parent funded (hockey), government funded (US football), and club funded (soccer). And obviously there some blending and different combinations depending on the sport and country.

But the thing is - when you consider the pluses and minuses of each model, I'm not sure that the hockey model actually looks all that bad.

 

[tarheelhockey]

There is a lot more to it than what you described and some of it can be really expensive.

I have kids playing high school football right now. While it can be expensive if you go hardcore, it’s not remotely as expensive as hockey. Like not close at all.

More importantly, it’s damn near free for the kids who aren’t going the college route. I had to buy cleats and a couple of minor clothing items, and contribute to a fundraiser. They had the option to do some summer camps for about $100 apiece, which many kids simply did not attend because it’s not mandatory. All in, including the cost of medical checkups etc, I’d say we’ve spent less than $200 per kid per season. That’s comparable to signing up for Cub Scouts or something, and therefore massively more inclusive and accessible.