Discussion in 'National Hockey League Talk' started by Variable26, Jan 25, 2020.
Private schools will recruit kids that they see as having a future in hockey
There's also more teams and more leagues because there's more players . By pro team i don't mean just NHL or AHL but every team and league that generates a profit would benefit from promoting the game by chipping in at the kids level so the parents don't have to pay as much .
Probably more difficult to implement though because alot of the system in europe finances ittself from the transfer fees of talents / players when they change clubs which doesn't really exist in NA sports.
US/Candada has a by far bigger hockey market than Sweden/Finland. Why not f.x. use some of the revenue gained throughout the All Star Weekend to promote hockey education?
It's possible. But if you're good enough they find you. Word spreads fast especially with the technology we have now. When I was a kid I knew about players my age from other cities/countries 2-3 years before I ever played against them. We also had kids show up from out of nowhere (multiple Kids from Yukon/NWT) making our rep teams so it's not like kids are stuck out on an island somewhere.
Many leagues do have some sort of kids league programs to help out, but a lot of pro and junior leagues in NA are struggling to turn a profit, especially on individual levels for teams.
Again I really do like the idea in theory, it just can’t be implemented the same way European hockey does.
Most NHL teams/ The NHL itself do a lot with minor hockey and have programs/incentives.
There are just SO many players to try and support that it would require a whole lot of changes and money.
I mean you’re asking the 31NHL teams to support over a million people VS the 14 SHL teams to support 50,000 people
I do sadly agree with that because the youth and senior league systems aren't interconnected. In europe you go through different stages of the same system . If a kid wanted it and is good enough he could play from 5-6 years old until his career is over at the same club . In NA its very different . All the youth , midget , minor teams , the NCAA , CHL and the pro clubs don't really work together all that much.
NHL talent is god given. You are talking about the top 1000 hockey players in the world out of millons. These guys are genetic freaks physically and usually have off the charts Spatial awareness too. Equipment and training advantages are marginal and maybe could mean the difference between minors and nhl for a few 3rd/4th liners in specific circumstances but that’s it, certainly not for impact players.
anyway CBC is pathetic no surprise here. Just another post modernist Marxist trying to tear down part of our culture
While obviously they’re at the top of the athletic scale since birth, it’s definitely wrong to suggest the top equipment and training from 5-6 years old VS an equally athletic kid who can only get on the ice once a week with volunteer coaches and old crappy equipment is not going to make a very big difference long term.
I played fairly high level hockey growing up (I’m complete garbage now) and there was one kid specifically who was not very good, but it was well known his parents were “paying” his way onto our competitive teams VS another guy who was WAY more skilled but was cut in favour of him.
Fast forward 3 years and the less talented kid is now a vastly better better hockey player because he’s been getting trained coaching 5 times a week and top of the line equipment and the other guy plays twice a week for a coach who can barely skate.
It happens a lot, unfortunately.
Using NHL All-Stars from one particular year as your sample size is about as anecdotal as it gets. Nobody should be getting their kids into youth hockey with the expectation that they will make a career out of it, let alone become NHL all stars.
Private schools are better than public schools.
I don't know. I saved up all year, worked weekends for a month to have the money to send my son to ONE week long camp at just under $1000.
My son who wasn't a very good skater, came out of that camp a different player. He is so much better, and more confident. I can only imagine if I had had the resources to send him to more camps at an earlier age than he is now (13) how much better than he would be. I don't mean NHL or anything but maybe playing on a better travel team or being able to try out in college for a D3 school. For the record, I don't play full price for his small time travel team as I apply for a scholarship every year that cuts some of the cost.
Natural athletic ability is a must for sure, but actually being taught the mechanics and physics by former professionals can't be discounted. This year again, it will be one clinic, hopefully he takes another step in his development, I really wish I could do more, because he really loves ice hockey.
A lot of players go to prep schools before CHL or NCAA (ex Shattuck-St.Mary's), even if its for only one year. Has been that way for as long as I can remember.
Hockey pretty unattractive for alot of parents to get their kids involved in it because it costs so much more than other sports just for the basics . There's plenty of other options that don't cost as much and are easier to get someone interested in. Thats sort of a problem for the sport. At least if it wants to be more than a niche.
Why not go a step further and just start taxing citizens to build more ice arenas and subsidize equipment for lower income households?
You do know that this is already how that works when its comes to arenas and stadiums for many teams ? Has any NHL club build its arena without any tax money ? I don't think so.
What's wrong with being a niche sport?
Not a thing.
Imagine thinking coerced state-sponsored education is good. Imagine caring about anything a state-sponsored broadcaster thinks about state-sponsored education.
Absolutely. Based on my skills playing road/ball hockey, I would have been a generational goaltender had my parents allowed me to play ice hockey.
I wonder how many Canadian born NBA players went to private schools. I would guess the number is above 40%, which would mean that basket is also "increasingly a sport not just for those who can afford it, but for those in the highest tax brackets".
Hockey will always be an expensive sport to access thus only certain kids will have access to it. Even just hockey for fun at the park (not on an organized team) is just logistically harder to organize and play than soccer, baseball, football, and basketball. In all those other sports, one kid with the appropriate ball and dozens can play some form of the sport. That's simply not the same with hockey. And it will never be.
And yo, the average NFL (starters), MLB, and NBA players make more than double than the average NHL player. I'm not shedding a tear because some kids might only have access to sports that are less expensive to play, have a lot more scholarship opportunists, and have a shit ton more professional pay upside.
This is what gets me salty about journalism these days. All they care about is optics and appearances. I've seen more thorough and thoughtful analysis at a 10th grade science fair.
I mean its an article from a Canadian website and hockey is supposed to be Canadas #1 sport. The way the programs for the kids are run though that will very likely change at some point if it hasn't already. If you accept hockey is a niche sport then the current system works fine just if you want hockey to be more than that well you would need to change some things.
Separate names with a comma.