PDA

View Full Version : Raids on Collge Hockey Programs



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Split-N
08-07-2011, 12:32 PM
Interesting commentary in today's (Sun.) Boston Globe on blue chip college hockey recruits de-dommitting from their LOIs to go the major junior route. Doesn't seem to address current players like Jamie Oleksiak tho. Also, there is a veiled reference to NHL clubs possibly encouraging draftees to move but no mention of the role of the so-called family advisors. Still, a pretty good read.

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/articles/2011/08/07/college_programs_being_forced_to_play_shorthanded/?page=1

IrishHockeyFan
08-07-2011, 06:03 PM
Paul Kelly better watch his step when he refers to all that under the table $$$ the CHL teams are paying NCAA recruits to de-commit and come to Canada to play. Just ask Notre Dame coach Jeff Jackson. Oh wait, that's right, the Kitchener Rangers didn't have a leg to stand on when they threatened to sue Jackson for libel when he accused them of paying Cam Fowler $500,000 to play for the Rangers, and let their threat die the quiet death it deserved. Ummm, maybe because he was telling the truth and had the evidence to prove his claims, while the CHL powers that be who claim otherwise have a hard time telling you what time it is with a straight face.

Neil Diamond
08-07-2011, 06:16 PM
Paul Kelly and Co and College Hockey, INC, better get their act together, because there is more than just a trickle of blue chip prospects leaving college and heading to Major Junior.

When they announced the CH,I initiative, I thought it was a great idea. But it sure hasn't shown much so far. In fact, I'd say college hockey has went back a few steps since CH,I's inception.

IrishHockeyFan
08-07-2011, 06:24 PM
Paul Kelly and Co and College Hockey, INC, better get their act together, because there is more than just a trickle of blue chip prospects leaving college and heading to Major Junior.

When they announced the CH,I initiative, I thought it was a great idea. But it sure hasn't shown much so far. In fact, I'd say college hockey has went back a few steps since CH,I's inception.

While I agree that we've seen some backwards steps in losing some talent to Juniors, I think it may be something cyclical in nature and not because of anything that CHI HASN'T done. I do agree with you that they haven't shown us much so far. In the face of his first chance to show some leadership in the matter Kelly and his organization haven't done much of anything.

Split-N
08-07-2011, 06:41 PM
I haven't seen much discussion on to what degree the so-called "family advisors" are playing in the migration to major junior. I'm led to believe that a lot of these guys are employed by sports management companies, which would present an innate conflict of interest since the company will get a cut (I think) of what the kid gets in major junior but nothing if he goes the college route. Am I off-base here?

Somewhere down the road, some angry former player, unhappy family member, or spurned "advisor" is going to spill the beans on all of the behind-the-scenes shenanigans. But even then, I have my doubts the NCAA will be able to do much about it and that most people--even within the hockey world--won't care.

Osorojo
08-07-2011, 07:48 PM
Nonsense. There is no crossover or conflict between major junior and college hockey. The cheetos gurus have declared college hockey and major junior hockey have separate agendas and different standards for player recruitment. Only troublemakers would postulate a rivalry between college hockey and major junior hockey. I like cheetos.

solovsfett
08-07-2011, 08:04 PM
Paul Kelly better watch his step when he refers to all that under the table $$$ the CHL teams are paying NCAA recruits to de-commit and come to Canada to play. Just ask Notre Dame coach Jeff Jackson. Oh wait, that's right, the Kitchener Rangers didn't have a leg to stand on when they threatened to sue Jackson for libel when he accused them of paying Cam Fowler $500,000 to play for the Rangers, and let their threat die the quiet death it deserved. Ummm, maybe because he was telling the truth and had the evidence to prove his claims, while the CHL powers that be who claim otherwise have a hard time telling you what time it is with a straight face.

wow. if this is true I just don't know how the NCAA can compete against that. Kudos to JJ for speaking up.

maybe it's time for the NCAA to analyze this situation a bit more. I mean what harm is there in setting up a bifurcation with the NHL/AHL/ECHL on one-side as the pay leagues, and MJ on the other as well you got paid but that's not professional hockey and in no way can that be considered professional hockey in that you'd only ever be there for maybe 3 years (ala college) and you're using that as a step toward the REAL pay leagues.

it really seems NCAA is shooting themselves in the face by not allowing kids w/MJ experience to play in the NCAA if they so desire

and yes, College Hockey Inc better start getting into 14-16 year-old kids and informing them immediately of the upside of playing college. namely that almost 1/3 of the NHL are college players, and you'll get a better more well-rounded experience and more hands-on practice (what, 125 practices a year?)

just ask Dany Heatley. he actually laments leaving college early and has stated on record he wished he'd branched out and done more than just hockey in madison, the world was there for him in terms of classes and meeting new people outside of the hockey sphere and he didn't take advantage of it

IrishHockeyFan
08-07-2011, 08:36 PM
wow. if this is true I just don't know how the NCAA can compete against that. Kudos to JJ for speaking up.

maybe it's time for the NCAA to analyze this situation a bit more. I mean what harm is there in setting up a bifurcation with the NHL/AHL/ECHL on one-side as the pay leagues, and MJ on the other as well you got paid but that's not professional hockey and in no way can that be considered professional hockey in that you'd only ever be there for maybe 3 years (ala college) and you're using that as a step toward the REAL pay leagues.

it really seems NCAA is shooting themselves in the face by not allowing kids w/MJ experience to play in the NCAA if they so desire



An idea like this would open up a large can of worms. It could be argued that minor league baseball players don't really earn a "living" playing baseball. An undrafted free agent, or someone drafted in the latter few rounds of the MLB draft may earn as little as perhaps 11 or 12 hundred dollars a month. And nothing during spring training or the off season. Only when they reach the AAA level is a player assured of even $2000/month. While draft picks in the early rounds can receive signing bonuses that should assure a decent future and a chance to pay for an education even if they are dumber than Brien Taylor, many kids get hardly anything to sign. Should these kids then be allowed to enroll in college and play NCAA baseball if after a couple of years riding buses they realize that while they may be talented enough to play at the college level, they'll never be a major-leaguer? I'm not saying either is right or wrong, just that the NCAA won't likely touch it.

uaafanblog
08-07-2011, 08:40 PM
Don't many college baseball players play "summer league" baseball (National Baseball Congress (http://www.nbcbaseball.com/)) and get food/lodging and other expenses etc paid by the clubs?

Flashy Man
08-07-2011, 08:44 PM
Don't many college baseball players play "summer league" baseball (National Baseball Congress (http://www.nbcbaseball.com/)) and get food/lodging and other expenses etc paid by the clubs?

Every league I know of, food and housing is provided by host families. A friend's family had their basement converted to house 4 players.

aallenpollreisz
08-07-2011, 09:48 PM
Don't many college baseball players play "summer league" baseball (National Baseball Congress (http://www.nbcbaseball.com/)) and get food/lodging and other expenses etc paid by the clubs?As somebody who worked in the Alaska Baseball League once upon a time, our players were given free lodging with host parents and the parents will given a small monthly stipend for food. Some players pick up part-time work to supplement their income during the summer.

That's it, though.

Hockeybuckeye
08-07-2011, 11:05 PM
I can't help but wonder if someday soon the NCAA is going to have to change on their rules on "pay to play". When Ohio State's situation blew up with football players getting tatoos for memorabilia & autographs I saw lawyers on national tv saying they'd lead a class action suit against the NCAA as they make millions off of the student athletes and the kids get nothing. Could have been these guys just grabbing tv time but you have to wonder. There is also an ongoing class action suit against the NCAA by former football players suing EA Sports & the NCAA for using their likeness' in the video games without their consent and the athletes have won up to the appellate level so far. So if the NCAA has to capitulate in one sport it will have to in all, including hockey. I personally don't like the NCAA for the reason they have authority over public institutions but the public has no authority over them so it's their way or the highway.

uaafanblog
08-08-2011, 03:10 AM
I personally don't like the NCAA for the reason they have authority over public institutions but the public has no authority over them so it's their way or the highway.
The public (and private institutions) that are members of the NCAA ... they ARE the NCAA. The whole IS the sum of it's parts.

Flashy/aallen,
Thanks. Was always curious about that and if it had any similarity to college players going to NHL development camps. Never really knew exactly how they worked it.

Hockeybuckeye
08-08-2011, 07:22 AM
The public (and private institutions) that are members of the NCAA ... they ARE the NCAA. The whole IS the sum of it's parts.

In theory, yes. In reality, no. John Q. Public whose taxes support most colleges & universities has no true oversight that can affect the NCAA or in any way change their leadership.

manurespreader
08-08-2011, 09:00 AM
Certainly losing talent to the MJ teams is not good, but it has been happening for a while. It just didn't happen to high profile programs. I seriously doubt anything can be done about it.
I'm more worried about the MJ teams grabbing top 16 yr olds, which they do, as I don't see this as a level playing field at all. I also think they'd sell their mother to get a recruit and deny it later.

buoldtimer
08-08-2011, 01:36 PM
Interesting commentary in today's (Sun.) Boston Globe on blue chip college hockey recruits de-dommitting from their LOIs to go the major junior route. Doesn't seem to address current players like Jamie Oleksiak tho. Also, there is a veiled reference to NHL clubs possibly encouraging draftees to move but no mention of the role of the so-called family advisors. Still, a pretty good read.

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/articles/2011/08/07/college_programs_being_forced_to_play_shorthanded/?page=1

My guess is that MJ executives read an article like this and laugh like hell.

Happy
08-08-2011, 02:46 PM
Why would any of you think NCAA had any of that talent to begin with. Most of these kids are using the NCAA as a negotiating tool to get more money from the MJ teams. Also, MJ teams will make a deal with a player, the player will claim they are going to the NCAA, and then many MJ teams will not draft them, but the team with the deal will.

A player in the NCAA cannot sign a contract with an agent, so the agent will always want the kid in MJ so he can lock up the future profits.

it's all very corrupt, so it's best for the NCAA to just not get involved. If you want to watch professional, watch the NHL, AHL and MJ, I want the NCAA to stay amateur, so let these money grubbers leave as far as I am concerned.

Lakerblue
08-08-2011, 03:50 PM
. . . Or perhaps the question is why are Major Junior Leagues losing top players to the NCAA? Who is determining the winner and loser of this alleged war? Colleges show the most visible loss when a player decommits -- but in actuality those de-commitments are relatively few and far between, and are usually attached to much press coverage.

Conversely, many, many, many 15-16 year olds are drafted by the Major Junior who decide instead to play USHL or Provincial Junior A with an eye towards NCAA hockey. I would guess that most of the top Provincial league players were drafted by CHL teams.

And there is MUCH, MUCH more misinformation floating around the US about Major Junior than there is in Canada about the NCAA route. In the U.S., we hear absurd stories of CHL teams making massive under-the-table payments, apartments, cars. None of that is true. BUT we sure do hear a whole lot of cases of NCAA players in FF and BB getting those types of perks, don't we? Isn't it perhaps hypocritical to claim that an NCAA institution is the victim of improper perks and payoffs?

BUt more to the point -- and I've asked this before -- what is the difference between Junior A and Major Junior? They all get a place to live, a living stippend, a food budget, players are drafted, recruited, and traded (trades taking place in mid-year, and the players have no means of objecting other than quitting). There are no salaries for players in either league. Why does the NCAA handcuff itself by declaring one form of junior hockey good -- and another form of junior hockey (with the better palyers, BTW) bad? Why not allow a kid to play CHL until he is 18 or the end of his high school senior year? (I know the answer, Mr. Mariucci and all those who seek to protect Minnesota high school hockey -- I ask only rhetorically).

In full mea culpa, I myself played in North Bay for the Centennials many (many) years ago. (And in the interest of full disclosure, I played for two years -- that is to say I practiced hard for two years, and played about 1/2 the time). And I have a nephew who just recently opted to play CHL hockey this spring. But I am a life-long passionate supporter of LSSU and NCAA hockey. I sort of have feet in both camps. I just think the if you had to choose between two organizations which maybe making questionable recruiting tactics -- my best bet would fall on the NCAA.

Runsub5
08-08-2011, 04:51 PM
I read the Boston Globe article and the major point involved commitment. When 15 and 16 yr. old kids make commitments by signing letters of intent to attend a college or university, they should honor that commitment. Unless, there are are legitimate reasons for backing out. The article also points out that how many 15 and 16 yr. olds know what they really want at that age? The article doesn't mention that perhaps these kids (advisors), are using these signed letters as leverage to negotiate better deals with major jr. teams? Just speculating.

uaafanblog
08-08-2011, 04:57 PM
I read the Boston Globe article and the major point involved commitment. When 15 and 16 yr. old kids make commitments by signing letters of intent to attend a college or university, they should honor that commitment. Unless, there are are legitimate reasons for backing out. The article also points out that how many 15 and 16 yr. olds know what they really want at that age? The article doesn't mention that perhaps these kids (advisors), are using these signed letters as leverage to negotiate better deals with major jr. teams? Just speculating.

Or maybe 15 and 16 year olds don't sign LOI's.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJD1dCKpHFo