Why has the USA become a sought after destination for young Canadians?

[S E P H]

Also most CHL programs have elite facilities that are better than most NCAA schools. Most schools aren't the Michigans, BUs, BCs or Denvers. Some have argued that kids don't get to pick their chl team which is largely true but it's the same for kids going the junior A route and they get traded a lot more than Major Junior kids do. Also have to pay to play in most cases. Everyones path is different but for me if you actually are good enough to go on to pro hockey CHL is the way to go. If you're undersized/late bloomer/likely not a future pro level kid then taking the longer path is probably best....assuming you're still good enough to actually get a scholarship.

It depends on the programmes against each other. There is no way I would choose Moose Jaw Warriors over a route of Waterloo Blackhawks and going to UMass-Lowell. I wouldn't choose Lake Superior State if I was drafted by Medicine Hat. Each team's development also throws a wrench in the grey picture of either route. No way I would choose Regina Pats (who've been bad for a long-time now) over the University of North Dakota. The NCAA route is superior to that, very few players can pull the Matt Duchene or Nathan MacKinnon route and choose the team they want to go to. On the other hand, even if you project as a third-line player for the majority of your career in the NCAA or OHL, you might get better development at an NCAA school with a better coach that you can choose from (if you have multiple options) compared to going to a below-average coach on the OHL team that drafted you.

 

[BB79]

MONEY. 1 mil USD= 1.35M Canadian. Well explains why they'd rather sign here

 

[koteka]

The undergraduate student body of the average college in the US is 56% female and 44% male. If you were an athletic male on a popular sports team, you would probably be doing pretty well with the ladies. Heck, the gender ratio is so skewed, you could be the team manager on an awful college hockey team but women would still be lining up to date you because there aren’t enough men. Compare that to rural areas of Canada where the women worth dating mostly leave for colleges or bigger cities and better opportunities.

Add in the training, facilities, education, path to AHL, etc., and I think the US college route makes too much sense.

 

[WarriorofTime]

For each year in the CHL you play, you get 1 free year of schooling at any college.

Unless that has changed recently, I understand that to be an exploding offer where if you don’t use it upon graduating from Juniors, you lose one year as each progressive year passes. If that’s still the case, then kids are basically in a spot where they have to make a decision on whether to pursue the pro hockey dream or go the school route and study and play at USports and likely come to grips that the nhl isn’t going to happen. Obviously for a draft pick with an NHl contract that’s an easy decision, but for others that’s a tough call. The Rockford Ice Hogs signed an overage ‘02 OHL recent grad to an AHL deal today. Not sure if that means that guy loses a year of access to the scholarship fund accordingly.

 

[landy92mack29]

The undergraduate student body of the average college in the US is 56% female and 44% male. If you were an athletic male on a popular sports team, you would probably be doing pretty well with the ladies. Heck, the gender ratio is so skewed, you could be the team manager on an awful college hockey team but women would still be lining up to date you because there aren’t enough men. Compare that to rural areas of Canada where the women worth dating mostly leave for colleges or bigger cities and better opportunities.

Add in the training, facilities, education, path to AHL, etc., and I think the US college route makes too much sense.

Don't think that'd be a main selling point but even if most colleges hockey isn't the main sport where in Canada the CHL guys are the big dogs and can get any girl they want basically....also no CHL team is rural, well for canada standards lol. The college lifestyle is appealing though but if you're actually focused on school and becoming a better hockey player you don't really experience the true college experience

 

[2014nyr]

It depends on the programmes against each other. There is no way I would choose Moose Jaw Warriors over a route of Waterloo Blackhawks and going to UMass-Lowell. I wouldn't choose Lake Superior State if I was drafted by Medicine Hat. Each team's development also throws a wrench in the grey picture of either route. No way I would choose Regina Pats (who've been bad for a long-time now) over the University of North Dakota. The NCAA route is superior to that, very few players can pull the Matt Duchene or Nathan MacKinnon route and choose the team they want to go to. On the other hand, even if you project as a third-line player for the majority of your career in the NCAA or OHL, you might get better development at an NCAA school with a better coach that you can choose from (if you have multiple options) compared to going to a below-average coach on the OHL team that drafted you.

but i agree with the overall sentiment no one route is best for everyone. all comes down to where the player is personally both physically and maturity and evaluating their options to find which they see being the best fit.

i'd include the cultural fit as one additional consideration and which schedule seems to make more sense. major junior has a different feel than ncaa with kids being on a campus surrounded by peers. just makes for a different experience that has a lot of appeal to some. that and then the respective practice/game schedule competition. either can be a much better fit for any given player

 

[landy92mack29]

Unless that has changed recently, I understand that to be an exploding offer where if you don’t use it upon graduating from Juniors, you lose one year as each progressive year passes. If that’s still the case, then kids are basically in a spot where they have to make a decision on whether to pursue the pro hockey dream or go the school route and study and play at USports and likely come to grips that the nhl isn’t going to happen. Obviously for a draft pick with an NHl contract that’s an easy decision, but for others that’s a tough call. The Rockford Ice Hogs signed an overage ‘02 OHL recent grad to an AHL deal today. Not sure if that means that guy loses a year of access to the scholarship fund accordingly.

you don't lose it unless you go pro for more than 1 year. could play echl for a year, realize it ain't for you and not lose your scholarship. if you don't play pro hockey you won't lose it if you don't go to school/trades right away

 

[WarriorofTime]

you don't lose it unless you go pro for more than 1 year. could play echl for a year, realize it ain't for you and not lose your scholarship. if you don't play pro hockey you won't lose it if you don't go to school/trades right away

Got it, so you get a year before it starts to explode? One to test it out and feel yourself and then you can decide school or pros from there?

 

[landy92mack29]

Got it, so you get a year before it starts to explode? One to test it out and feel yourself and then you can decide school or pros from there?

from what I've been told by players and scouts yes

 

[StreetHawk]

Since chl and ncaa years in terms of your age don’t exactly overlap have to consider the 2 years a pre September birthday would be spending in the chl vs being in tier 2 in Canada like an AJHL, BCHl, etc or USHL in the states. Once your chl eligibility is over you’d be looking at the ahl during what would be a junior and senior season in college.

Only a handful of players ever play full time in the nhl immediately following their draft.
Get some 19 year olds playing a year after their draft.

 

[MS]

Other than what the Chicago Steel are doing being noteworthy, I don’t see a huge difference from historically?

There have always been Canadian kids taking the NCAA route and 1-2 Canadian kids drafted in the first round most years through the 90s and 00s whether is Toews or Turris or whatever.

 

[wetcoast]

Kinda weird that the USHL won't implement some kind of quota on them. I mean they already have some of the best kids in Canada and US and they can recruit from basically anywhere. Outside the NDTP, they have the best kids.

Sounds like a version of Penticton in the BCJHL?

 

[NotProkofievian]

The level of hockey is higher in the NCAA, because Canada doesn't have its own U20+ league. Kids play fewer games, have more time for off ice development, and while they're playing their hockey, they get their education. After they get drafted they can go play wherever they want.

If you play CHL for 4 years, and decide to try and have a pro career for more than something like 6 months, your scholarship is revoked.

On balance it's a pretty clear choice if you ask me. It's more confusing that it's taken this long for the torrent of top Canadian talent to arrive in the USA. There have always been a few Canadians going south (Kariya, Toews), but now it seems much more common.

 

[Bubbles]

Sounds like a version of Penticton in the BCJHL?

I suppose, but at least other teams in the BCHL are getting the top recruits. Victoria has a great program and they got Wood and Newhook. And Trail got Kent Johnson to play for them.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Easy free spirited college girls

 

[ponder]

I say this as a Canadian - why would any top prospect chose the CHL route? You’re just MASSIVELY limiting your options.

Top players, from the age of ~3-16, play 1-2 years at one level, master it, then move onto the next level. Continually pushing/challenging themselves, to keep their rate of improvement as rapid as possible. With the USHL route, you can keep this up beyond the age of 16 - USHL, NCAA, AHL, NHL, making each move the first year you’re ready. With the CHL route, the NCAA isn’t an option, and due to protectionist agreements, you have to spend 4 years in the CHL before you’re allowed to progress to the AHL. Great way to stagnate/slow your development.

Choosing the CHL is opting into fewer options and slower development, it’s just a poor choice.

 

[Mathieukferland]

why would any top prospect chose the CHL route?

The schedule and lifestyle is the most similar to the NHL; whilst I would agree that the NCAA route is probably best for individual development, in terms of preparing you to be a professional, that is where the main benefit of the CHL is

 

[koteka]

also no CHL team is rural, well for canada standards lol. The college lifestyle is appealing though but if you're actually focused on school and becoming a better hockey player you don't really experience the true college experience

Americans and Canadians probably have a different definition of rural.

I went to a college with a decent Division 1 NCAA hockey team. The players were pretty normal students. The guys I knew on the team never made the NHL, but a couple played in the AHL, so they were pretty serious about hockey. They would drink, hook up with girls, and live the college life. One guy I knew was pretty realistic of his and anyone else’s chances of making it to the NHL, so working towards his degree was pretty important to him.

 

[JackSlater]

USHL and Canadian junior A hockey have gotten stronger. Before if you wanted to go to the NCAA you basically wasted your age 16-17 development years, and that's a huge problem. Now a player can go to one of those leagues and, and in some cases to the Steel in particular, and not miss out on much. NCAA itself is a lot stronger now that USA is producing good players in much greater numbers than it did for the vast majority of hockey history.

I do not buy that 15/16 year olds considering their route care about the "college lifestyle" in the least. Some families will care about education, but that isn't really going to be the focus for the elite players or their families. The route has become more attractive because NCAA hockey is much stronger than it used to be and the paths to get there are much more viable than they used to be. It's a quality route to take.

 

[bigdog16]

Yeah I dislike how the USHL is strictly midwest teams, not many attractive destinations in the midwest

If there was an east coast team and I was good enough to play more than AAA->ACHA d2 i would have immediately tendered with an east coast team

Too difficult to make it work financially in the east, they wouldn’t get enough fan support to pay the bills. Between NHL and NCAA, there is too much competition to be the third fiddle as a USHL team in the east.

The NCDC tried to close the gap on the NAHL to be that “premier” league in the east. But all that ended up happening was completely watering down the NCDC and strengthening the NAHL.

 

[jfhabs]

Prospect of having a paid scolarship and a plan B if they don't make it for whatever reason... it's a smart choice. CHL is taking steps , but still far behind.

 

[Craig Ludwig]

A lot of people are acting like most kids get to pick the programs they want where that's only the case for the future nhl draft picks. Most of the kids take what they can get and lots don't even get one where chl even if you don't go pro you at least have schooling/trade school paid for. If my kid/relative was a high end player I'd definitely choose the chl route it's the kids who are either undersized, late bloomers or the mid round chl picks where college makes sense. You need to actually be a elite junior A player to actually get a commitment, especially to a good school. I say this as someone who scouts for a AJHL team and has a cousin who went the SJHL-USHL/NAHL-NCAA(Maine) route


Also most CHL programs have elite facilities that are better than most NCAA schools. Most schools aren't the Michigans, BUs, BCs or Denvers. Some have argued that kids don't get to pick their chl team which is largely true but it's the same for kids going the junior A route and they get traded a lot more than Major Junior kids do. Also have to pay to play in most cases. Everyones path is different but for me if you actually are good enough to go on to pro hockey CHL is the way to go. If you're undersized/late bloomer/likely not a future pro level kid then taking the longer path is probably best....assuming you're still good enough to actually get a scholarship.

I would say that's true if your name is Steven Stamkos, Sidney Crosby, Vincent Lecavalier, or one of the Connors, of course CHL is maybe, maybe a bit better to prepare you for the NHL when you are a sure fire future NHL'er/Top 5 Draft pick. But 99% of the kids are not sure fire NHL'ers, and I really don't see your argument for the CHL here. There are 50+ U.S Division 1 schools and most are fantastic facilities, and even some of the Division 3 U.S Colleges are pretty fantastic. You play hockey there, AND you live at your school. I definitely wouldn't say that it's a major drop in facilities after Michigan, BU, Denver, there are tons of stunning campuses and facilities after those.

 

[Craig Ludwig]

I have been arguing vehemently for the NCAA route, but I will also be a devil's advocate for the CHL. Once again keeping the Stamkos/Crosby/Bedard/Fantilli out of the equation (the 0.1% that are on their way to the NHL), it can be very EXPENSIVE going the U.S route. Not every player receives a full ride to a Division 1 school, it is a lot of money to possibly go the prep school, BCHL and then NCAA route, let's not kid ourselves. If a family is not well to do, and they have a good little hockey player (not elite), they don't go to the U.S for free. That family with little money eyes the CHL, as there is little cost involved being with a billet family. Sometimes we always assume that these kids come from wealthy families, definitely not always the case.

 

[WaW]

I feel like in recent years, we have seen a number of good Canadian prospects (ie. Savoie, Power, Fantilli, Sillinger, Celebrini) decide to play in the USA rather than in the Canadian major junior system. While I understand COVID may have played some part in this, I fail to see how a prospect (especially a top end prospect) would benefit from playing in the States.

Any insight on this would be greatful!

Nothing has changed. This has always been happening and it's still a small minority of Canadian players.

If the Big 10 ever increases its hockey footprint where more of its schools joined and devoted resources to hockey considering they all have shitloads of money to throw at non revenue sports, then junior hockey in Canada would be worried, but as long as only Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota care enough about it then it will remain a small minority. Aside from those 3 schools, there are only a handful that are rather attractive hockey schools for Canadians.

 

[seafoam]

I’m assuming living in a dorm instead of a billet family is also an attractive option for the players. They can get drunk, smoke weed, and have girls over without really any adult supervision.

All while the actual parents are thinking their kid is there studying on a Saturday night and working towards their degree!