NY Times: In Canada, the Cost of Youth Hockey Benches the Next Generation

[TCNorthstars]

Who says your kid has to play in travel leagues or higher. Nothing wrong with playing house league and buying used equipment.

All the adults who think their kid is special and is the next McDavid. If parents were more realistic in their assessment of their children's abilities it might not be as much of a problem. Keeping up with the Jones's is a bad way to live.

 

[Melrose Munch]

With that said, as well as a previous post saying it's just as bad as in the US, I wonder why these cost of playing hockey articles and opinions only seem to pertain to Canada.

So many people here say the cost of playing hockey is what contributes to the myth that minor hockey is dying in Canada (Minor hockey registration in Canada actually higher than it's ever been).

Hockey is expensive everywhere, why only make it out to be a Canadian problem?

You cannot be serious.

 

[End on a Hinote]

You cannot be serious.

I can't?

 

[Yukon Joe]

All the adults who think their kid is special and is the next McDavid. If parents were more realistic in their assessment of their children's abilities it might not be as much of a problem. Keeping up with the Jones's is a bad way to live.

You know, it's not that I think my kid is special, and he's certainly not the next McDavid. In fact he's pretty certain to never get a sniff of high level junior hockey, never mind play professional.

But right now he's 1st year Atom, Tier 3. He wants to make Tier 1 next year. So maybe I put him in a $300 camp for one week. I put him in a once per week extra training session for $800 during the season. Maybe put him in another camp right before next evaluations. That time does make a difference.

Sure I could say no. But his buddies are in a lot of those same camps. If we don't sign him up then maybe they move up and he doesn't.

 

[Melrose Munch]

I can't?

No.

We play hockey the most. That's why it's focused on us. Enrollment has fallen. I don't see the anti Canadian bias. Lower costs or be passed by other sports and activities.

 

[End on a Hinote]

No.

We play hockey the most. That's why it's focused on us. Enrollment has fallen. I don't see the anti Canadian bias. Lower costs or be passed by other sports and activities.

I personally did, simply due to the reputation of the American/non-Canadian mind set in that Canada must fail in any regard to hockey for the sake of "growing the game" and because we are all "bullies".

I'm not saying this article is being Anti-Canadian, it just came across that way because if what I'm use to seeing either on here or other Canadian hockey related articles.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Canadian parents should probably learn Panarin's history, and they they will probably stop whining... or not, because humans will never stop whining.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Who says your kid has to play in travel leagues or higher. Nothing wrong with playing house league and buying used equipment.

What if your kid is actually really good?

 

[BadgerBruce]

Full disclosure: I’ve been a volunteer non-parent coach for over 35 years. My own kids became very good hockey players but I never coached them, not even once. In other words, I’ve coached about 600 kids who are not my own over the years.

This past season (abruptly halted on March 13) I coached a Bantam AA team in a medium size Ontario city.

I’d be happy to break it down for you all, but the financial bottom line is that the season cost me approximately $7000, well over $1000 per month for the season.

The biggest expenses by far were lost wages to attend 4 out-of-town tournaments and the accommodation/travel costs for those tournaments.

Some coaches pass these costs on to the parents, but I don’t. Years ago I tried this for one season but stopped. As soon as parents got the idea that they were “paying” for me, they tried to exert far too much control over the team and some saw me as an employee they could direct at will. Not worth it to me.

So how do we attract the next generation of young coaches to volunteer when the price tag is so high? My staff is 100% non-parent, all 4 of us, and every year we dig more deeply into our own pockets to “volunteer.” Our time is running out and there isn’t anyone waiting in the wings.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

What if your kid is actually really good?

Yeah, we're not really talking about rec hockey here.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Yeah, we're not really talking about rec hockey here.

Well that's a different conversation though.

Every once in a while we get these stories with a headline like "kids hockey is unaffordable", when the body of the story talks about the cost of elite hockey development. But they're different issues. I'm not particularly worried if the cost of developing future NHLers is skyrocketing, but I would be worried if average kids couldn't afford to play hockey. But they can.

 

[ForumNamePending]

What if your kid is actually really good?

Ya, unfortunately hockey, on any level, is never going to be accessible to those below, or hovering around, the poverty line, but house league is probably manageable for just about everyone else. The problem is playing hockey at the level required to have any type of shot at making a living playing it is becoming exclusive to those who are very well off.

Going a bit off topic... The general narrative regarding the recent uptick in NHL scoring has been that it is being driven by a new generation of hyperskilledsuperathlete players. I'm beginning to wonder though if it isn't being driven by a growing gap (at least relatively speaking) between the players at the top and bottom ends of the rosters, caused by a shrinking pool of talent due to potential players being priced out of high level youth hockey. When you look at history, the NHL saw a brief increase in scoring during WWII (when a lot of potential talent was unavailable for obvious reasons) and a much longer period of time, starting in the late 60s, when rapid expansion (and the WHL) would have severely diluted the talent pool. The high scoring era of the late 60s to early 90s finally ended when the talent pool was reinforced by the NHL becoming the ultimate destination for European talent and a growing player base in the US. I'm by no means convinced by any of this, but I suppose it's something to think about.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Well that's a different conversation though.

Every once in a while we get these stories with a headline like "kids hockey is unaffordable", when the body of the story talks about the cost of elite hockey development. But they're different issues. I'm not particularly worried if the cost of developing future NHLers is skyrocketing, but I would be worried if average kids couldn't afford to play hockey. But they can.

Playing sports (kids or adults) is as expensive as you want it to be. You (or the parent) control:

* How much you play
* What kind of equipment you use

Parents also need to be realistic with how good their kids are and if they have potential to play at the "next level." That said, the path to being a pro in any sport is a huge financial drain. There are certainly resources but by and large it's a huge money sink. That's why there is this "sky is falling" narrative about the Canadian way going by the wayside. It's an upper-middle class/wealthy pathway by and large. Again there are exceptions but those come with steep sacrifices.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Well that's a different conversation though.

Every once in a while we get these stories with a headline like "kids hockey is unaffordable", when the body of the story talks about the cost of elite hockey development. But they're different issues. I'm not particularly worried if the cost of developing future NHLers is skyrocketing, but I would be worried if average kids couldn't afford to play hockey. But they can.

Ya, unfortunately hockey, on any level, is never going to be accessible to those below, or hovering around, the poverty line, but house league is probably manageable for just about everyone else. The problem is playing hockey at the level required to have any type of shot at making a living playing it is becoming exclusive to those who are very well off.

Going a bit off topic... The general narrative regarding the recent uptick in NHL scoring has been that it is being driven by a new generation of hyperskilledsuperathlete players. I'm beginning to wonder though if it isn't being driven by a growing gap (at least relatively speaking) between the players at the top and bottom ends of the rosters, caused by a shrinking pool of talent due to potential players being priced out of high level youth hockey. When you look at history, the NHL saw a brief increase in scoring during WWII (when a lot of potential talent was unavailable for obvious reasons) and a much longer period of time, starting in the late 60s, when rapid expansion (and the WHL) would have severely diluted the talent pool. The high scoring era of the late 60s to early 90s finally ended when the talent pool was reinforced by the NHL becoming the ultimate destination for European talent and a growing player base in the US. I'm by no means convinced by any of this, but I suppose it's something to think about.

I don’t think it’s just about trying to develop future NHL’ers or pro athletes.

If your kid is scoring 8 goals a game against house leaguers, he shouldn’t be playing at that level. It’s not just stalling his development as an athlete... it’s unhealthy for him as a human and it steals the fun from the other kids in that league. NOBODY likes it when one player ruins the competitive balance because he shouldn’t even be there.

The next step up is travel leagues which are more expensive to a factor of 10. This is a real problem for middle class parents whose kids are good athletes.