The BCHL

[sunb]

Yes they are NHL players but have they all had "good" careers.

In state tuition at Michigan runs about 7000 a year + 8000-9000 for residency. That still does not add up to $100 000 over four years. The CHL also invests heavily into their players including paying the full cost of tuition and residency for many of its former players.

sehnsucht, yes Leopold has done well thus far and I expect his progress to continue. He is still to young to say that he has had a good NHL career but I am sure that he will after such a promising start. According to Jovanovski though a comparable CHL player would not be at the same level as the college trained Leopold because the CHL just doesn't develop and train to the degree that college does. Well it might shock Mr Jovanovski to note that Regehr is the same age as Leopold but has been playing in the league twice as long and is considered by many to be not only the Flames best Dman but one of the better ones in all of the NHL. Just another tidbit that further discredits Jovanovski's theory of the NCAA being so much better.

No one cares about in-state tuitions. Of course if you were an in-state Michigan citizen, the tuition would be cheaper. But if you were an American or Canadian wanting to attend a top NCAA school it would cost around $30,000 per year. Please use facts and don't distort the truth. Of course it would be cheaper for in-state students anywhere. Usually schools, because they are subsidized by the state-government, has tuition for in-state students at around $5,000 - $10,000. Other students (most students) without financial aid packages or scholarships have to front around $30,000 per year for the tuitions.

 

[VOB]

VOB, you have no clue what your talking about. A lot of scholarships are worth more than $100,000, for example a scholarhip to BC is worth about $160,000 to $170,000. As far as only about half the kids being on scholarhip, each team gives out 18, do you know of any hockey team with 36 players? It should be noted that most schools split scholarships so not all kids get full rides and there are very few players who don't get anything. As for my main point, the main difference between the CHL is age, there is a huge difference between a kid who is 18 and a man who is 22.

Yes and I merely pointed out that alot of scholarships are worth alot LESS than 100,000! Most NCAA teams by the way carry 25-27 players. Few teams have players paying their full costs so they divide up the 18 scholarships between the 26 or so players. As a result on most programs, only about half the players are on full rides, the other half are receiving anything from 80% scholys to 25% packages.


Jovonovski, I am 100% certain that ALMOST EVERY UNIVERSITY In the States cares about In State Tuition, especially concerning scholarship packages because it saves the school a ton of money! I was not distorting the truth, merely correcting your erroneous perceptions on the situation!

 

[sunb]

Yes and I merely pointed out that alot of scholarships are worth alot LESS than 100,000! Most NCAA teams by the way carry 25-27 players. Few teams have players paying their full costs so they divide up the 18 scholarships between the 26 or so players. As a result on most programs, only about half the players are on full rides, the other half are receiving anything from 80% scholys to 25% packages.


Jovonovski, I am 100% certain that ALMOST EVERY UNIVERSITY In the States cares about In State Tuition, especially concerning scholarship packages because it saves the school a ton of money! I was not distorting the truth, merely correcting your erroneous perceptions on the situation!

Well since you've used the Michigan example, as you are from Michigan, I hopped onto the University of Michigan website at www.umich.edu and looked up the information.

The term fee for residents = $4,000 per term.
and two terms + room & board + misc = around $15,000 per student per year
http://www.umich.edu/~regoff/tuition/fullresident.html

The term fee for non-residents = $13,000 per term.
And two terms + room & board + misc = around $33,000 per student per year
http://www.umich.edu/~regoff/tuition/fullnonresident.html

If you look at the University's Hockey Roster, half the roster is from out of state so that is a lot of scholarship money to offer away. Maybe the school doesn't offer full-rides to all the out-of-staters but you also have to take into account the fact that many of the in-staters also have scholarships so I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of money is invested per student. Here is the link to UMich's hockey team and 12 of their 25 players are out-of-state and 13 of their 25 players are in-state. I would assume all of them get some form of scholarship and i would also assume most of their better players get full-rides
http://mgoblue.com/roster.cfm?section_id=285&top=2&level=3&season=228

You also have to take into account the fact that Michigan is a popular hockey state in the US whereas not all NCAA schools are blessed with great in-state talent. The University of North Dakota is one of the premier NCAA development programs and lets look at their roster. 20 of their 26 players are out of state while only 6 of their players are in-state. And many NCAA teams have more out-of-state students and they would have a lot of scholarship money to put up
http://www.fightingsioux.com/sports/mhockey/review/2003/roster.asp

Also you don't realize the biggest aspect of all of this. You argue that this isn't "smart business" for the universities to do this and offer scholarships. I'm sure the thousands of trustees out there know more about "smart business" than you. Simply because Varsity sports and sensational and they:
1.) Attract fans: meaning the schools get revenue in ticketsales + merchendise
2.) Attract publicity: meaning the school get more students applying
So in the end the scholarship money offered eventually is well worth the investment. You also have to remember that endowment also goes up with a successful college sports franchise. Don't just assume $100,000 per student is a lot of money as that is an illustrious four years of a star's career that gives the school many benefits.

 

[sunb]

You might take the Hobey guys but take a look at players that have come out of both systems in the past ten years. For the CHL you have Richards, Iginla, Hossa, Tanguay, Gagne, Thornton, Marleau, Doan, LeCavalier, Nash, Briere, Spezza....and those are just forwards. What has come out of the NCAA in the past ten years that is comparable? You have St Louis, Heatley, Morrison, Drury and who else...Arnason?

On D you have McCabe, Redden, Regehr, Stuart, Jovonoski, Mara, Morris, Boynton, Jackman, Hamhius, Sopel and Brewer. What has the NCAA produced? I can think of Leopold, Poti, Hale, Boyle, Martin, Liles and who else?

In goal the CHL can claim Luongo, Esche, Bergeron, Theodore, Cloutier, Biron, Denis and Garon. For the NCAA you have Turco, DiPietro....and who else?

Let me again say that the NCAA is a good league but it bugs me when people like Jovanovski = Norris spout off crap about the CHL.

NCAA Alums
--------------
Rob Blake
Ed Belfour
John Madden
Brian Leetch
Brian Rafalski
Paul Kariya
Brendan Morrison
Chris Drury
Curtis Joseph
Mike Richter
Marty St. Louis
Keith Tkachuk
Tony Amonte
Mike Knuble
etc....

Recent NCAA Grads
-------------------
Jordan Leopold
Jeff Jillson
David Tanabe
Zach Parise
David Hale
etc....

those are the ones i can think of off the top of my head

 

[VOB]

Well since you've used the Michigan example, as you are from Michigan, I hopped onto the University of Michigan website at www.umich.edu and looked up the information.

The term fee for residents = $4,000 per term.
and two terms + room & board + misc = around $15,000 per student per year
http://www.umich.edu/~regoff/tuition/fullresident.html

The term fee for non-residents = $13,000 per term.
And two terms + room & board + misc = around $33,000 per student per year
http://www.umich.edu/~regoff/tuition/fullnonresident.html

If you look at the University's Hockey Roster, half the roster is from out of state so that is a lot of scholarship money to offer away. Maybe the school doesn't offer full-rides to all the out-of-staters but you also have to take into account the fact that many of the in-staters also have scholarships so I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of money is invested per student. Here is the link to UMich's hockey team and 12 of their 25 players are out-of-state and 13 of their 25 players are in-state. I would assume all of them get some form of scholarship and i would also assume most of their better players get full-rides
http://mgoblue.com/roster.cfm?section_id=285&top=2&level=3&season=228

You also have to take into account the fact that Michigan is a popular hockey state in the US whereas not all NCAA schools are blessed with great in-state talent. The University of North Dakota is one of the premier NCAA development programs and lets look at their roster. 20 of their 26 players are out of state while only 6 of their players are in-state. And many NCAA teams have more out-of-state students and they would have a lot of scholarship money to put up
http://www.fightingsioux.com/sports/mhockey/review/2003/roster.asp

Also you don't realize the biggest aspect of all of this. You argue that this isn't "smart business" for the universities to do this and offer scholarships. I'm sure the thousands of trustees out there know more about "smart business" than you. Simply because Varsity sports and sensational and they:
1.) Attract fans: meaning the schools get revenue in ticketsales + merchendise
2.) Attract publicity: meaning the school get more students applying
So in the end the scholarship money offered eventually is well worth the investment. You also have to remember that endowment also goes up with a successful college sports franchise. Don't just assume $100,000 per student is a lot of money as that is an illustrious four years of a star's career that gives the school many benefits.

So you made my point, not all schools invest over $100 000 dollars per player. Michigan, using your own example spends less than that on at least half of its roster. I do agree with you that North Dokata does invest more heavily in their players because most of them are out of staters but does that mean North Dokata is a better program than Michigan? I don't think so.

As for your list of players
NCAA Alums
--------------
Rob Blake
Ed Belfour
John Madden
Brian Leetch
Brian Rafalski
Paul Kariya
Brendan Morrison
Chris Drury
Curtis Joseph
Mike Richter
Marty St. Louis
Keith Tkachuk
Tony Amonte
Mike Knuble
etc....

Only a few have come out of the NCAA in the past ten years and this list still doesn't compare with what has come out of the CHL.

Plain and simple, you are dead wrong in your belief that the NCAA produces better players.

 

[sunb]

So you made my point, not all schools invest over $100 000 dollars per player. Michigan, using your own example spends less than that on at least half of its roster. I do agree with you that North Dokata does invest more heavily in their players because most of them are out of staters but does that mean North Dokata is a better program than Michigan? I don't think so.

As for your list of players
NCAA Alums
--------------
Rob Blake
Ed Belfour
John Madden
Brian Leetch
Brian Rafalski
Paul Kariya
Brendan Morrison
Chris Drury
Curtis Joseph
Mike Richter
Marty St. Louis
Keith Tkachuk
Tony Amonte
Mike Knuble
etc....

Only a few have come out of the NCAA in the past ten years and this list still doesn't compare with what has come out of the CHL.

Plain and simple, you are dead wrong in your belief that the NCAA produces better players.

What are you talking about? I know that the NCAA doesn't invest $100,000 per player but they still spend $100,000 on most players the even the in-state players get $60,000. The players are given those scholarships because they deserve them.

That list of the NCAA players were off the top of my head. I can easily find 50 more if i did 5 min of research. It doesn't compare to the CHL players? I remember correctly, the Art Ross, Hart and Lester B winner this year goes by the name of Marty St. Louis.

And I NEVER SAID the NCAA PRODUCES BETTER PLAYERS! NO ONE DID! We are simply saying the level of competition in the NCAA is more competitive than the leve of competition in the CHL and the competition is more NHL-like and the players in the NCAA are usually more NHL-ready and more proven.

 

[VOB]

What are you talking about? I know that the NCAA doesn't invest $100,000 per player but they still spend $100,000 on most players the even the in-state players get $60,000. The players are given those scholarships because they deserve them.

That list of the NCAA players were off the top of my head. I can easily find 50 more if i did 5 min of research. It doesn't compare to the CHL players? I remember correctly, the Art Ross, Hart and Lester B winner this year goes by the name of Marty St. Louis.

And I NEVER SAID the NCAA PRODUCES BETTER PLAYERS! NO ONE DID! We are simply saying the level of competition in the NCAA is more competitive than the leve of competition in the CHL and the competition is more NHL-like and the players in the NCAA are usually more NHL-ready and more proven.

I will say it one last time Jova, your NCAA list does not compare to the CHL list, I could give you a year to research it and it still wouldn't compare! This debate started because you specifically said, and I quote "all professional scouts agree that NCAA players who do well in College are better bets to make the NHL than CHL stars." Well that obvioulsy implies that the NCAA produces better players. I believe I have already proved my point as to how silly that statement was!As for your comment of "ready made players", well how many NCAA players steped right into the NHL this year? Malone and Lyles and Martin were the only three. Horton, Staal, Stajan, Tootoo, Roy and Vermette all made the jump directly from the CHL this year. Sorry to burst your bubble on that one!

The level of competition is great in the NCAA but it is no better than the level found in the CHL.

 

[MS]

I will say it one last time Jova, your NCAA list does not compare to the CHL list, I could give you a year to research it and it still wouldn't compare! This debate started because you specifically said, and I quote "all professional scouts agree that NCAA players who do well in College are better bets to make the NHL than CHL stars." Well that obvioulsy implies that the NCAA produces better players. I believe I have already proved my point as to how silly that statement was!As for your comment of "ready made players", well how many NCAA players steped right into the NHL this year? Malone and Lyles and Martin were the only three. Horton, Staal, Stajan, Tootoo, Roy and Vermette all made the jump directly from the CHL this year. Sorry to burst your bubble on that one!

The level of competition is great in the NCAA but it is no better than the level found in the CHL.

I have to weigh in here because I don't think the NCAA point of view has been articulated as well as it should be. I think there are a few assumptions that should be made here:

1) More players with NHL skill packages choose the CHL over the NCAA. When you look at the percentage of NHL players from Canada vs. the US, and the percentage of players who choose the CHL from Canada, this seems obvious.
2) As a result of this, the CHL produces more NHL players than the NCAA.

As a result of this as well, if you put together an all-star team of CHL 18 and 19 y/o players and put it up against an all-star team of 18-19 y/o NCAA freshmen and sophomores, I would suggest that the CHL team would destroy the NCAA team.

The difference is that in the CHL, the 18-19 y/os are the 'veteran' players in a league with a huge percentage of 16 and 17 year olds, and in the NCAA the 18 and 19 y/os are 'young' players in a league filled with 20-24 year old players and no-one under the age of 18.

The average age of CHL players is around 18 while the average age of NCAA players is around 21. This is a huge difference, as three years of extra development time means players who are far more mentally developed and far more aware at both ends of the rink, players are faster, the pace of games is generally higher, and there is less time to make decisions. And this is what people were trying to say earlier in the thread - the NCAA has older players and a higher overall calibre of play. This doesn't change the fact that the CHL has better 19 y/o players and more players with NHL tools and upside, but it shouldn't be ignored.

If you take a 19 y/o hockey player and stick him in both leagues, the player will almost certainly find the NCAA more challenging. This is borne out when you look at guys like Duncan Keith, Carter Trevisani, Matt Dzieduszycki, Mike Henderson, etc. who have split seasons between the NCAA and the CHL. Inevitably, their PPGs go through the roof after the switch, and this can't be blamed on overall scoring since the goals-per-game in the two leagues are very similar.

 

[VOB]

Actually a very good post MS and I tend to generally agree with your assumptions but as I said in a prior post, the age factor does not make one league better than the other. I will grant you that Boston College would probably beat Kelowna in part due to the age factor but, and this is a big but, B.C. is one of the most talented teams in the NCAA, far more talented than say a team like Western Michigan and it is this TALENT more so than the age factor that would put Denver over the top against a Kelowna (granted were this same Kelowna team play this same B.C. team five years from now, Kelowna might very well win). Western Michigan, even though they are on average three years older than Kelowna would not fare well against them. I can also say that having seen both Western Michigan and the Soo Greyhounds (two slightly below average teams in their respective leagues), my money would be on the Greyhounds beating Western in a head to head match.

The problem with the NCAA is that its talent is not spread out as it is in say the CHL. As a result you have about 12 really good teams and then a dramatic drop off in talent. So yes a game between B.C. and North Dokata would be played at a higher level than say a game between the Hounds and the Sudbury Wolves but what about a game between B.C. and Merrimack or Providence? Or how about a game between Michigan(another high octane NCAA team) and Lake Superior State? Well I have seen some of those games and even when a highly talented club plays a LSSU, the game is neither uptempo, nor are the players faster, nor is the game played better than an average OHL game. In fact many times it is worse!

Seeing how a Michigan played a LSSU, a Bowling Green, a Quinnipiac and a Nebraska-Omaha several times during the course of a season, I (as a long time NCAA fan) can say that on average an NCAA game is no better in terms of competition, quality and skill than an OHL game.

 

[EJG123]

back to the original thread argument - I too believe that the talent level in the BCHL is improving over the last several years. Comparing players from yesteryear that came from which league is a moot point. I believe that time will tell that the talented hockey players now have more viable routes to the NHL. I think that CHL was believed to be the "best" route for most in the past but now with other options available to them the future stars would look at the these other leauges. Getting 3 top picks out of the BCHL this season might create the snowball effect needed to have players who are on the fence about which is their personal best option to consider the BCHL-NCAA route more seriously instead of dismissing those choices for the NHL star factory that is the CHL. Just an opinion on the potential future of the BCHL players chances of making the NHL.

 

[MN_Gopher]

The NCAA IMO is tougher league. It does not mean it produces better players. Take your superstar NHLer at 14 and put him against guys who are 18-19. The NHL guy will lose. The NCAA has guys who are anywhere from 17-26. Older usually = bigger stronger. Most other NA leagues do not have guys that size yet. Hence it is tougher for yopunger guys, usually draft age to have great years.

Mark Parrish 3rd round 96. 20-30 gaol scorer.
Jason Blake FA. 20 goal score last two years.
Rob Blake 4th rd 88.
Keith Tchachuk 19th overall.
Jordan Leopold 44th overall 99. Could be great someday.
Paul Martin 62 overall. Decent rookie year. Taken from HS
Tony Amonte rd 4 88.
Ed Belfour FA
Curtis Joseph FA
Chris Chelios 40th overall 81
Chris Drury 3rd round 94
Steven Reinprect FA 30 points last 3 years.
So not only do young NCAA guys not get much hype, well they used to not get hyped. They play against older guys and look ok. Instead of playing against kids there same age and dominating. Yes the NCAA is a shorter season, and the talent is spread out. But the top conferences are as hard as they come. I bet if those guys from the short list up there payed juniors they probally would have been first rounders. So now teams are drafting from HS and the BCHL is because they passed on Chris Chelios. Rob Blake and Tony Amonte four times. 18 teams missed Tchachuk. Nobody wanted Joseph, Belfour. And they missed out out on guys that could have helped them. Parrish, Jason Blake, Reinprect.

 

[VOB]

The NCAA does have the age but not the size. On average, CHL teams are bigger than their NCAA counterparts.

 

[MN_Gopher]

Taller or heavier or both? They may be taller but i cant see them weighing more. The gophs had 7 over 200pds and and 8 over 190pds. Compared to the wild with 11 over 200pds and 3 over 190pds. The gophs avg 189pds and the wild 194.25pds.

 

[VOB]

Taller or heavier or both? They may be taller but i cant see them weighing more. The gophs had 7 over 200pds and and 8 over 190pds. Compared to the wild with 11 over 200pds and 3 over 190pds. The gophs avg 189pds and the wild 194.25pds.

According to the CSB site (a pretty accurate source since they actually measure most potential draft picks and usually they always come out an inch shorter and five pounds lighter than what their team is trying to pass them off as) the Gophs average height was 6ft and weight was 186. The OHL champions, the Geulph storm, averaged 6 ft and a weight of 191. The Brampton Battalion's average height is 6'2 and weight is 199 lbs. They are the largest team in the OHL. The smallest is the Mississauga Ice Dogs who come in at 6ft and 187 lbs. The biggest team in the WCHA is North Dokata whose average height and weight are 6ft and 190 respectivly. Minnesota Duluth is the smallest with a height and weight of 5'11 and 180.

As you can see, Major A teams are on average larger than their NCAA counterparts. Having seen both leagues numerous times, I can also tell you that the CHL is more physical than the NCAA.

 

[MN_Gopher]

Is the CHL more physical in game, without fighting. In the NCAA a punch thrown is a major, a match penalty and a 1 game suspension. Other than fighting and scrums is the CHL more physical? It can be deseptive. I honestly have no idea having never seen a CHL game. Alot of NCAA games are on olympic ice too usually leads to less hitting and more skating.

 

[VOB]

Is the CHL more physical in game, without fighting. In the NCAA a punch thrown is a major, a match penalty and a 1 game suspension. Other than fighting and scrums is the CHL more physical? It can be deseptive. I honestly have no idea having never seen a CHL game. Alot of NCAA games are on olympic ice too usually leads to less hitting and more skating.

Yes it is more physical, even without the fighting.