Deadpool8812
Registered User
- Feb 10, 2018
- 12,735
- 16,200
It’s a good idea in theory, but think of the huge difference in registered hockey players in different countries.
Canada has what, 650,000 registered players last I checked?
USA has 560,000
Then countries like Finland and Sweden have 75,000 and 55,000 respectively.
When you have 10x + the players it’s a massive job to support poor families in a meaningful way.
It’s a good idea in theory, but think of the huge difference in registered hockey players in different countries.
Canada has what, 650,000 registered players last I checked?
USA has 560,000
Then countries like Finland and Sweden have 75,000 and 55,000 respectively.
When you have 10x + the players it’s a massive job to support poor families in a meaningful way.
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.I have always told my hockey buddies that we have missed out on a Gretzky or two because of circumstance
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?
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.
What's crazy is the kids that don't need a free ride get one because of course their kids are better. Their kids are better because they have the best equipment, they go the to best clinics and a lot of them, they do off ice training and they are able to be on the ice all the time because they can afford to play with the best travel programs.
It's an insanely vicious circle.
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
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
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.
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?
Why not go a step further and just start taxing citizens to build more ice arenas and subsidize equipment for lower income households?
Not a thing.What's wrong with being a niche sport?
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 have always told my hockey buddies that we have missed out on a Gretzky or two because of circumstance
I'd say the article doesn't really mean anything without knowing how many of them received scholarships/financial aid to go to the schools.
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 **** ton more professional pay upside.