Girls Prep Hockey

[whfan]

Your report is excellent! Thanks for the bird's eye view!

vas,

After catching up with this post after nationals, you seem to be putting alot of emphasis on the hockey for your daughters choice of prep school. With that in mind, you may want to start checking on SSM or NAHA - they both emphasize hockey. I don't know SSM's coach from Adam, but the team seems to be well coached. I do know Driscoll at NAHA, and he's a quality guy that always seems to have a players best interest at heart. The disadvantage here is the same for any other prep school - no chance to compete to play in nationals.

[vas]

vas,

After catching up with this post after nationals, you seem to be putting alot of emphasis on the hockey for your daughters choice of prep school. With that in mind, you may want to start checking on SSM or NAHA - they both emphasize hockey. I don't know SSM's coach from Adam, but the team seems to be well coached. I do know Driscoll at NAHA, and he's a quality guy that always seems to have a players best interest at heart. The disadvantage here is the same for any other prep school - no chance to compete to play in nationals.

I looked up the academics, though and they are not strong in that area. I'm not bragging, but my kid got a 97% on the SSAT, so I think she can handle someting alot more challenging.

Also I thought SSM just won Nationals? Didn't they?

[whfan]

I looked up the academics, though and they are not strong in that area. I'm not bragging, but my kid got a 97% on the SSAT, so I think she can handle someting alot more challenging.

Also I thought SSM just won Nationals? Didn't they?

Congratulations to your daughter on the outstanding score on the ssat. And yes, SSM won at the 19u level.

[dumpitin]

Whfan,
I think you are missinformed about your academic assesment at NAHA. THis topic has been discussed in a few past threads, not sure where but do remember the discussions. First off NAHA is simply a different model and many of their kids do not come from big money like many of the prep parents who financially could afford any option. These same parents also have no problem kicking in 40plus at an Ivy or Nescac. Four or less years at a prep at 30-40 and fours years at the college level is about 300 grand for schooling. Not everyone has that kind of dough to put out. Yes the preps do give out financial aid, but generally have many full pay kids on their rosters.

NAHA is a model that allows a player to concentrate on Hockey and academics at their own level. They have had many players that are recruited at the Ivy's but opted for full hockey scholarships instead. If you are top student in your high school, you are able to stay on that track at NAHA with each of your classes being a 1 on 1 tudor teacher. They have almost as many tudors as students and regardless of the subjects your daugther takes, they seem to find a teacher with teaching experience in that subject. The difference is that NAHA can also take an academically challenged student do the same tudoring and maximize that's students potential. These students actually benefit the most with that model as they get the individualized attention they need. This done without holding back others while they might play catch up. NAHA has placed numerous kids in the IVY's and Nescac's as evidence. THey have one heading to Harvard next season. I've also heard they have 7 full scholarships leaving from this years senior class. Not many can compare to those numbers.

[ref11]

[QUOTE=dumpitin]Whfan,
They have had many players that are recruited at the Ivy's but opted for full hockey scholarships instead. QUOTE

NAHA is a great hockey program. Key word in above quote "recruited". I too have heard the antidotes about players "turning down" Ivy offers, and I am sure that there has been a player or two who has choosen a non Ivy over an Ivy, but I am very skeptical. Recruited and actually offered a letter of intent, or likely letter or being supported by the coach in admission are two different things. Based upon the number of D1 kids who have the chance to attend an Ivy this is a very difficult group to get into. Goldman Sachs will recruit an art Major out of Brown, but won't make a recruiting visit to a State University.

My primary, and different reason for this post is to generate discussion / opinion in a different view on NAHA. Simply; should USA Hockey allow them to compete in the USA Hockey Championship?

My bias is this is a slippery slope that boys hockey has already gone down. Simply with boys hockey, if you want to play D1, 1) Leave HS / Prep Hockey as a 16 / 17 year old. Play 2+ years of Juniors, then hope to become a 20 yr old freshmen. and a 24 year old graduate. The school benefits by your hockey skill, but how much do you benefit by being 3 years (in the business world) behind your peers who don't play a sport. Don't get me wrong, I love the sport of hockey, and a 20 yr old freshman will be (on average) stronger and more mature than a 18 year old, but I see this as a trend that benefits the school more than the athlete, and is NAHA (NSA and SSM) the beginning of a "good" trend for Womens Hockey. :cool:

[coolsports]

[QUOTE=dumpitin]Whfan,

and is NAHA (NSA and SSM) the beginning of a "good" trend for Womens Hockey. :cool:

The points you have raised on this thread have been very thoughtful and it would appear to be based on much wisdom.

I too reflect on what is "good" for the women’s game. Based on what was reported at nationals, USA should give pause and reflect on a woman’s development path as seen today. Specifically, should USA hockey continue to move to elite programs either at the preps (SSM) and super clubs (NAHA, NSA) or refocus on the traditional (Troy Ice Cats, Buffalo Bison’s).

Based on comments from others the nationals were really about these two groups. Although both NAHA and NSA were not in attendance it sounds like at least one will be eligible next year. If and when this happens you potentially will be looking at three programs that could be called super clubs. To this group I would now add the Wild, Honey Bake Cal Selects and Polar Bears. My concern is how do the traditional clubs compete? And what does this mean to player development in districts?

I think you see some reaction in the districts by the top players going from club to club seeking to develop a quasi "all-star" team --And, a better chance at nationals. But what do these teams gain playing in-district and winning 6,7,9-0? Are the players really developing? And what about the players on the other side of these scores.

The door was open when SSM became eligible. (Congratulations on back to back championships) but now you potentially have a movement that would seem to take the word development away from all but the best. And IMO has the potential to affect USA Hockey for a long time.

[dumpitin]

Ref,
I understand your skepticism and you are probably correct in the assesmant of many of those offers. However, knowing a couple of family's personally that opted for the full scholarship over an Ivy at NAHA, I will assure you this is indeed the case. As I stated below, not all family's have the amount of disposable cash to shell out for an Ivy league education.
I surely do not need to write on the benifits of going to an Ivy as there history alone stands up to most criticism. The same is true for many of the Preps.
My reason for jumping into this discussion is not to knock the preps, but more to point out that their experience is not for everyone and the hockey piece they provide alone is not what many think.
As far as 20 year old girls, I see that trending a little in that direction, but not nearly on the level of the guys. However, keep in mind that many of the preps already have many of their kids repeat a year of high school when they enter after their first year, especially the better academic schools.

[Black Bear]

Whfan,
I think you are missinformed about your academic assesment at NAHA. THis topic has been discussed in a few past threads, not sure where but do remember the discussions. First off NAHA is simply a different model and many of their kids do not come from big money like many of the prep parents who financially could afford any option. These same parents also have no problem kicking in 40plus at an Ivy or Nescac. Four or less years at a prep at 30-40 and fours years at the college level is about 300 grand for schooling. Not everyone has that kind of dough to put out. Yes the preps do give out financial aid, but generally have many full pay kids on their rosters.

NAHA is a model that allows a player to concentrate on Hockey and academics at their own level. They have had many players that are recruited at the Ivy's but opted for full hockey scholarships instead. If you are top student in your high school, you are able to stay on that track at NAHA with each of your classes being a 1 on 1 tudor teacher. They have almost as many tudors as students and regardless of the subjects your daugther takes, they seem to find a teacher with teaching experience in that subject. The difference is that NAHA can also take an academically challenged student do the same tudoring and maximize that's students potential. These students actually benefit the most with that model as they get the individualized attention they need. This done without holding back others while they might play catch up. NAHA has placed numerous kids in the IVY's and Nescac's as evidence. THey have one heading to Harvard next season. I've also heard they have 7 full scholarships leaving from this years senior class. Not many can compare to those numbers.

I have a hard time believing that "many of their kids do not come from big money". Having visited their site, I'm unable to find where there is financial aid available. Loans, yes. Aid, I'm missing it. That being said, as a parent you have to come up with 20k+ per year. Don't get me wrong, I think the guys running the program are super hockey people and you can't argue with their results. But, for my family, to spend almost 100k to maybe get a scholarship is not a good bet. My daughter did a camp up there last summer though and as we pulled in with our 2002 Focus with the missing hub cap, we parked next to a BMW and a Porsche Boxter, both driven by girls to the camp. (Maybe they both didn't belong to NAHA girls but one did for sure.) No question that their are big money people at the preps but my daughter is going for a whole lot less than 20k, a lot less than 5k for that matter, and that seems to be the case with the majority of her teammates. The majority come from working class families like mine and, to be honest, I spend more money on her when she's home than it costs to send her to school. As far as academics, the small class size affords a lot of options for teachers to either accelerate students who are not challenged enough or to provide extra help for those who might be struggling. It might not be one on one tutoring but, in effect, it's close enough to keep me happy. Either way, whichever you can do, prep or programs like NAHA, there are some great opportunities out there if you take a hard look.

[nut_case]

Just as a matter of curiosity, I wonder why so many people seem to make such a big deal out of the national tournament. Many fine players can have a very productive hockey season playing until the first part of March and then move on to a spring sport such as lacrosse and, in my opinion(and, I believe, in the opinion of many hockey experts) be in a better overall situation in terms of athletic development and enjoyment.

[coolsports]

Ref,

My reason for jumping into this discussion is not to knock the preps, but more to point out that their experience is not for everyone and the hockey piece they provide alone is not what many think.
.

A very good point. Each has it's pro's and con's. Bottom line a family can find the right program for their needs.

[dumpitin]

Black Bear,
I loved your point about shooting for a scholarship. Far too many folks approach the recruiting process with the idea that their child is at the scholarship level. Reality is that are far less than people percieve.
As far as NAHA parents income level, I'm sure their are parents on that team who are well off financially, but my guess is that the majority are middle class. The preps, especially the big name schools, are full of high income folks that have no problem paying full at 30plus a year.
I do know a number of kids who have gone thru the NAHA program and most were not from parents of affluence. Also a number of the players that have recieved scholarships from NAHA were not at that level of play when they entered the school. With that said though, do not make the mistake that NAHA will make that happen for your child. They do indeed do a great job developing, but for some the jump to a scholarship level will not happen.
The reality is that their are lots of good choices out their for many different reasons. Do your homework and make a great choice for your child. My points previous are to shed some light on some of the differences between the preps, high school, club teams and hockey schools like NAHA, Shattuck and others.

[Hux]

[QUOTE=ref11]

I too reflect on what is "good" for the women’s game. Based on what was reported at nationals, USA should give pause and reflect on a woman’s development path as seen today. Specifically, should USA hockey continue to move to elite programs either at the preps (SSM) and super clubs (NAHA, NSA) or refocus on the traditional (Troy Ice Cats, Buffalo Bison’s).

Based on comments from others the nationals were really about these two groups. Although both NAHA and NSA were not in attendance it sounds like at least one will be eligible next year. If and when this happens you potentially will be looking at three programs that could be called super clubs. To this group I would now add the Wild, Honey Bake Cal Selects and Polar Bears. My concern is how do the traditional clubs compete? And what does this mean to player development in districts?

I think you see some reaction in the districts by the top players going from club to club seeking to develop a quasi "all-star" team --And, a better chance at nationals. But what do these teams gain playing in-district and winning 6,7,9-0? Are the players really developing? And what about the players on the other side of these scores.

The door was open when SSM became eligible. (Congratulations on back to back championships) but now you potentially have a movement that would seem to take the word development away from all but the best. And IMO has the potential to affect USA Hockey for a long time.

If you end up with several years of routs by the academy type programs you will probably see a super division created for just those teams.

[vas]

This is a list of almost ALL the girls going to a D1 college in September. (the maker of the list says it may not be 100% complete). This list was posted on another thread. Of the 105 D1 girls on this list, 71 are from Canada, Europe or Minnesota. None of the Canadians can partake at USA Hockey Nationals, and of the Minnesota girls all but approx 4-5 (playing on the Wisc. Wild team and perhaps on one other team) were not at nationals. Of the reamining 34 girls on the list, most although not all were at Nationals.

School
Player-Position Height (Last Team) [From]
Bemidji State
Casey Irving-D 5'11" (Okotoks Midget AA) [Okotoks, AB]
Lexy Parenteau-D 5'7" (Chisago Lakes HS) [Chisago Lakes, MN]
Jessica Ptachick-G 5'9" (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [Burnsville, MN]
Nicole Rawlings-F 5'3" (Hill-Murray HS) [Maplewood, MN]
Jacqueline Robertson-D 5'8" (South St. Paul HS) [Inver Grove Heights, MN]
[B]Boston College[/B]
Gabrielle Beaudry-D (Syracuse Stars) [Cortland, NY]
Tracy Johnson-D (Benilde-St Margaret's HS) [Plymouth, MN]
Megan Keever-F 6’2” (Washington Pride) [Harrisburg, PA]
Anna McDonald-F (Totino-Grace HS) [New Brighton, MN]
Molly Schaus-G (Deerfield Academy) [Natick, MA]
Kelli Stack-F (HoneyBaked) [Brooklyn Heights, OH]
Allison Thunstrom-F (North St. Paul HS) [Maplewood, MN]
[B]Boston University[/B]
Melissa Anderson-F (Pacific Steelers) [Langley, BC]
Sarah Appleton-D (Berkshire School/Connecticut Stars) [New Canaan, CT]
Jonnie Bloemers-F (South St. Paul HS) [Brooklyn Center, MN]
Lynn Hillen (Holy Angels)
[B]Brown[/B]
Jenny Cedorchuk-D, (Nobles/Assabet) MA
Erin Conners, (Assabet)
Elizabeth Denis-F
Rickie Kostiner, F, (Choate/Syracuse Stars),(Chicago, IL)
Andrea Hunter (Pomfret School, Syracuse Stars)NY
Kath Surbey (Calgary Bruins) [Alberta]
[B]Clarkson[/B]
Carlee Eusepi-D [Toronto]
[B]Colgate[/B]
Jill Cater-F, (Syracuse Stars, NY)
Marissa Dombovy-F (Syracuse Stars, NY)
Nicole McDonald (Calgary Bruins) [Alberta]
Katie Stewart-F (Bluewater Jr.)
Jen Taylor-G
[B]Cornell[/B]
Laura Danforth-F (HoneyBaked)
Rebecca Flewelling-F (NCCP Junior Raiders) [Kanata, ON]
Gabrielle Mazade-F (Shattuck-St. Mary's) [Downers Grove, IL]
Kelly McGinty-D (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [Long Lake, MN]
Jenny Niesluchowski-G (Cal Selects)
Megan Niesluchowski-F (Cal Selects)
Liz Zorn-F (Rochester Edge)
[B]Dartmouth[/B]
Jenna Cunningham [Medicine Hat, AB]
Sue Schmitz-D (Wisconsin Wild) [Brookfield, WI]
[B]Harvard[/B]
Cory Basset
Kathryn Farni-D (Hopkins HS) [Hopkins, MN]
Randi Griffin (Assabet / EC Eagles)
Christina Kessler-G (Toronto Jr. Aeros)
Amy Uber (North American Hockey Academy) [Trenton, MI]
Maine
Jenna Ouellette-F (Warner Warriors) [Warner, AB]
Taryn Peacock-F (Calgary Chaos) [Calgary, AB]
Elyce Thomas-D/F (Pacific Steelers) [Port Coquitlam, BC]
[B]Mercyhurst[/B]
Lexie Hoffmeyer-F (HoneyBaked)
Angelica Lorsell-F [Lidingo, Sweden]
[B]Minnesota[/B]
Kelli Blankenship-F (North American Hockey Academy) [Lusby, MD]
Brittany Francis-F (Toronto Junior Aeros) [Thunder Bay, Ont.]
Michelle Maunu-D (Cloquet/Esko/Carlton HS) [Esko, MN]
Alexandra Zebro-D (St. Francis/ North Branch HS) [Oak Grove, MN]
[B]Minnesota - Duluth[/B]
Kim Martin-G (Team Sweden)
Sarah Murray-D (Fairbault, MN) [Shattuck-St Mary's]
Jaime Rassmussen-F/D (Garden Grove, CA) [California Selects]
Saara Tuominen-F (Team Finland & Ilves Tampere) [Tampere, Finland]
[B]Minnesota State[/B]
Kala Buganski-F (Anoka HS) [Andover, MN]
Jessie Knight-F (North American Hockey Academy) [Alfred, ME]
Christina Lee-F (Wayzata HS) [Maple Plain, MN]
Kathleen Rosso-D (Buffalo HS) [Buffalo, MN]
Holly Snyder-D (Kenosha HS boys) [Kenosha, WI]
[B]New Hampshire[/B]
Steph Holmes (Berkshire School/Ct Stars) [Rye, NY]
Micaela Long (Pomfret/Assabet Valley/Wisc Wild) [South Boston, MA]
Kelly Paton (Huron Park Secondary School) [Woodstock, Ont.]
Lucy Schoebel-G (Ithaca HS )Styracuse Stars[Ithaca, NY]
Coutney Sheary (Cushing Academy) [Melrose, MA]
[B]Niagara[/B]
Alison Malty-D (Capital Centre Pride)
Megan Price-D (Bowness Bruins) [Calgary, AB]
Mallory Yorkson-F (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [So. St, Paul, MN]
[B]North Dakota[/B]
Cassandra Flanagan-D (Notre Dame) [Saskatchewan]
Jody Karnik-G (Wisconsin Wild) [Overland Park, KS]
Brittany Kirkham-G (Team Ontario/Ottawa Junior Raiders) [Nepean, Ont.]
Ashley Lynch-D (Gilbert Plains Collegiate) [Gilbert Plains, Man.]
Ashley Paulson-F (Culver Academy) [Onalaska, WI]
Samantha Turner-D 5’2” (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [Hudson, WI]
Alex Williams-F/D 5’2” (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [Eagan, MN]
[B]Northeastern[/B]
Katy Applin-D (North American Hockey Academy) [Palmer, AK]
Ginny Berg-D (North American Hockey Academy) [Sterling, AK]
Lindsay Berman-F/D 5'7" (Washington Pride) [Odenton, MD]
Julia Clark-D (Cushing Academy) [Westford, MA]
Annie Hogan-F (Lawrence Academy,Assabet) [Medford, MA]
Chelsey Jones-F (Stillwater HS) [Lake Elmo, MN]
[B]Ohio State[/B]
Rachel Davis-D (HoneyBaked) [Horton, MI]
[B]Princeton[/B]
Madeleine Endicott-D (Toronto Jr. Aeros)
Julie Flynn, (Lawrence Academy/Assabet)
Emily Tiernan-F 5'6" (Washington Pride) [Chevy Chase, MD]
[B]Providence[/B]
Colleen Martin-D 5'9" (Woburn HS) [Woburn, MA]
Pamela McDevitt-F 5'6" (Noble & Greenough/Assabet) [South Boston, MA]
Brittany Nelson-F 5'7" (Pomfret School) [Shelburne, VT]
Quinnipiac
Breana Burton-F (Pacific Steelers) [Surrey, BC]
Janine Duffy-F (National Sports Academy) [Toronto]
Kallie Flor-F (Farmington HS) [Farmington, MN]
[B]RPI[/B]
Jodi Yaworski, Choate, Calgary
Laura Gersten-D (Troy/Albany) [Queensbury, NY]
Whitney Naslund-F (Bloomington Jefferson HS) [MN]
Allysen Weidner-F 5'7" (Shattuck-St. Mary's) [Wichita, KS]
[B]St. Cloud State[/B]
Danielle Hirsch-D (Shattuck-St. Mary's) [Fairbault, MN]
Caitlin Hogan-F (North St. Paul HS) [No. St, Paul, MN]
Katie Kemmerer (North American Hockey Academy)
Kelly Meierhofer-D (Sauk Rapids-Sartell HS) [Sauk Rapids, MN]
Meghan Pezon-F 5'6" (Eden Prairie HS)
Holly Roberts-F (Warroad HS) [Warroad, MN]
[B]St. Lawrence[/B]
Tara Akstull-F (Troy/Albany) [Clifton Park, NY]
Brittany Maschmeyer-D 5'7" (Edmonton Chimos) [Bruderheim, AB]
Courtney Sawchuk-F 5'5" (Edmonton Chimos) [Sherwood Park, AB]
Brittany Smith-F
Maxi Weisz-G 5'7" (Washington Pride) [Severna Park, MD]
[B]UConn[/B]
Cristin Allen-D (Durham Jr. Lightning) [Pickering, Ont.]
Jennie Bellonio (Pomfret School/CT Polar Bears)
Michelle Binning-F (Toronto Jr. Aeros) [Oshawa, Ont.]
Justine Cigna-F (HoneyBaked) [Milford, MI]
Tiffany Good (North American Hockey Academy)
Amy Hollstein-F (Lawrence Academy/Assabet) [Pembroke, MA]
Christie Houser-G (National Sports Academy) [New Hope, PA]
[B]Union[/B]
Brenna Malnar-F (HoneyBaked) [Riverview, MI]
Lauren Muske-F (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [Ramsey, MN]
[B]Vermont[/B]
Nicole Brown-F (Notre Dame) [Saskatchewan]
Melanie Greene-D (Adirondack Northstars) [Queensbury, NY]
Sash Hochlander-F (Bowness Bruins) [Calgary, AB]
[B]Wayne State[/B]
Chelsea Burnett-D (Stoney Creek Jr. Sabres)
Brandi Frakie-F (Minnesota Thoroughbreds) [St. Louis Park, MN]
[B]Wisconsin[/B]
Megan Duggan-F 5'9" (Cushing Academy) [Danvers, MA]
Emily Kranz-F 5'7" (Shattuck-St. Mary's) [Waukesha, WI]
Alannah McCready-G 5'6" (Centennial HS) [Blaine, MN]
Kyla Sanders-F 5'6" (North American Hockey Academy) [Parrish, FL]
[B]Yale[/B]
Berit Johnson-D
Caroline Murphy (Pomfret School/CT Polar Bears)
Mandi Scwhartz-F
Denise Soesilo-F (German Olympic Team) [Hamburg, Germany]

(Information for this post was obtained from other posts made to this forum. I have never stated that this is an official list and it should not be treated as such. Official information should not be obtained from a fan site, but from official press releases by the schools and their conferences.)

[teresa greene]

I was at the Nationals watching the U19 - a great admirer of the talent of the SSM U19 and congrats for their 2-1 victory. I also watched the semi-final with the Ct Polar Bears that went into overtime after SSM tied it in the last minute, and then won on a shorthanded goal after surviving an extended 5-3 powerplay by the PB's...there was a collision of 2 PB players who were overplayed and exhausted. In the quarter final. the Troy Ice Cats held onto a 1-0 lead going into the final third period. In the Final, Assabet had it tied 1-1 in the last few minutes of the 3rd period ( which was a remarkably improved team effort from their earlier 6-1 round robin defeat by SSM).

My point is that the club teams of Troy Ice Cats, Polar Bears, and Assabet seemed to improve as the tourney progressed (PBs only tied their first game).
and as these club teams are mostly different prep school players who in some cases haven't played together on the club team since the Ct Polar Bear Tourney in Dec. Imagine the development if they had all been practicing together 5-6 times a week, play 40-50 games together and then be truly prepared at the same level as the SSM, NAHA, type teams.

Yet those who recognize the value of education as more than just hockey - particularly for women who don't have a NHL and hockey careers beyond the college level for most - if your daughter is a select "elite" player - should it be all about the hockey or the complete high school / social experience??? What other life skills (ie getting along with other non-crazed hockey people in a regular high school ) are nurtured when its all hockey all the time???

This group at SSM is a very talented group of girls who as 89's have dominated the U19 for two years now and I suspect will continue to do so until they graduate. And this happens when a particular gifted group of players come together. However, the SSM U16 did not fare as well at all with the other club teams and may not share the same success as the present U19 team. So maybe its not so much the advantage of being together playing for 6 months 5-6 days a week than just that special group of individual talent.

[dumpitin]

Hux and Vas,
Couple of great posts to point out just how much ground we are losing out East with the prep model of development. That 70% of the D 1 kids are from Canada and Minn is an eye opener, but not at all a surprize from what I've been saying. Like I said before to think you are developing to your full potential in the preps with the limited everything they provide hockey-wise is proved out by the numbers simply untrue. Adding the club experience can help, but still not what are neighbors up north or in Minn are developing like.
The Minn situation is unique in that their high school hockey is still growing and many teams are not there yet. However, their high season is longer than ours out east and more impotantly, most of the top kids supplement their hockey developement with a number of programs we don't have out east. First off many players play in summer and fall leagues and best of all many participate in the summer ODP program where they get great skating in skill instruction. The summer is a great time to improve skating, skills and strength and the kids close to Metro-Minniapolis have a great advantage being involved in that program.
The other message of stunting the growth of women's hockey with the super clubs as Coolsports is totally backwards. The super clubs are actually driving the Developement in the women's game. Getting the best players together and having them compete against other super clubs as she puts it drives those players to higher and higher levels of play. It's the same on the men's side where the junior clubs in the US and Canada produce most of the talent that plays Div 1 hockey. Call the men's junior teams super clubs or whatever you want but quality players, competition and coaching is the route to Developement. Not sure what coolsports is trying to say other than some kids do not play in areas that have super clubs, which is another issue all together. But that's why you'll continue to see more programs like NAHA, Shattuck ect in the future in my opinion.

[vas]

Judging by the D1 list, (71% vs 29%) one must only conclude that the D1 coaches are sending alot more time watching events where there are lots of Canadians and lots of Minnesotians (if thats a word?).

Perhaps COPD, Jack Blaitherwick and the Prospects Tourney in Toronto? So really, summer hockey or off-season hockey may be even more important than Prep/Club or just prep and just club. Any thoughts on that?

[BKDad]

Perhaps COPD, Jack Blaitherwick and the Prospects Tourney in Toronto? So really, summer hockey or off-season hockey may be even more important than Prep/Club or just prep and just club. Any thoughts on that?
I am not a college hockey coach. Nor a coach of any kind.

But, I will repeat what two different coaches have said in my presence. They are both D1 coaches. One I barely know, while the other is a long time friend of the family.

They both said that they will look for hockey players suitable for their program wherever and whenever is appropriate and possible.

Obviously, neither has an unlimited budget or unlimited time available. But, they feel they are seeing who they need to. Like other hockey fans, they get their "leads" based on game results, word of mouth, and even unsolicited "resumes."

Both have said that if you have the talent, skills, and so on, you will be seen. If you don't think that they have seen you for some reason, send a tape, DVD, or just an email and they will follow up if that is appropriate. It is their job to find the right players and it is in everybody's interest for them to do the best job they can.

An obvious question might be: Is going to one of these larger "exposure" opportunities really the best idea? Is it better to be one of a large crowd, or part of a smaller one?

Plotting the best course for development is a different question, which I myself am still puzzling out some.

[dumpitin]

Vas,
First off do not confuse the development you get at the CODP program with Prospects. COPD is all about devel where Prospects is a showcase and has nothing to do with Development. The reality is the showcase events are just that and really only help the kids that have not been seen otherwise. You can have a great showcase and get on some lists, but hockey being the small world it really is most colleges already know the players. The hard time I have with Prospects is the costs and money making grab for the program. There are other showcases that are equally scouted at a much lower cost than that event.
Also yes the summer is important, but made even more so if you spent the winter not developing. That being said many kids do develope in the winter, where getting stronger and maybe getting some skill work in should be the focus. The thing I tell parents all the time is to identify where your childs weakness' are and find a program or two that can help in that area.

[nut_case]

Re: Club teams and the possibility that eastern prep players are falling behind. I think that this line of discussion seems to be focused on the success of a particular club team as the ultimate indicator of hockey development. I do not think that this is necessarily the case. While I do agree that a team which plays together from September until April will have some definite advantages in a late season tournament over a team such as the Polar Bears, whose players are prep players who have played primarily with their school teams(and whose seasons ended in early march), I do not think that it necessarily follows that the individual Prep players on a team such as the Polar bears have fallen behind the skill levels of the individual players on a team such as SSM. In any event, I think that a lot of the discussion doesn't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, since the prep/club approach is the best available option for a lot of kids. The ironic thing about the growth of the game, and the definite improvement in the overall talent in the girls' game, is that soon there will be cases where fairly talented girls will have no college playing opportunities, since there are at present only about 1600 -1800 roster slots in all of US collegiate hockey.(It might feel a bit like it was in the old days, when a great high school baseball player matriculated at a University with 12000 men and couldn't even get a tryout with the baseball team).

[dumpitin]

Nutcase,
Sorry to step on your toes a little, but I and numerous college coaches would disagree with your assesment of improvement. I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here a little, but here's the view from many knowledgable coaches out there on this issue. It's my perspective, but rest assured many people feel the same way. If you've been following this debate you've already read a number of qualifiers to bear out this line of thought.
First off, the Polar Bears as an example are a very good hockey club. They have many kids who will go on to Div 1 programs and have much success. That being said though, the improvment of their players in the past year is not what it could have been if they were in a more developmental situation. An interesting aside to this is that you can't make the assuption that the superclubs as Coolsports call them have a roster full of elite players. The Polar Bears on the other hand generally have the pick of many of the top players and regardless of the restaints put on their training they will have success.
The top club teams usually have a core group of top players and a group of good players for lack of a better term. The thing the top clubs do very well is raising the level of play in those kids to very good with better training models. Many of these good players go into the program not prepared to play at a high level and train them to do just that.
The reason I jumped into this discusion in the first place was to displace some thoughts that the prep model is a great developer of talent, it simply is not. There are some programs that do do a great job of developing, but in general the preps are much better at bringing in good talent than actually nurturing it. The preps were mainly the only avenue out east a few short years ago, but like the boy's preps where the junior route has taken over in college placement, the girls are simply headed in that direction, as well.