RANT: The state of hockey development in Canada is completely broken, and national pride/arrogance is preventing us from fixing it

[PureQuickness]

1 hour ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Canadian/American kids can still choose a Canadian college route and universities have made massive strides in that area.  But that entire system runs independently from Hockey Canada and the CHL.  Some of the best hockey development systems (BCHL/ parts of AJHL) are running independently from Hockey Canada.  These entities had to break off in order to keep up with the style of hockey development the United States enjoys.  Obviously the Canadian counterparts are still vastly inferior, but they are still there and they are trying their hardest to improve it.  

 

TSN and Sportsnet have already been forced to discuss why all the best defencemen and goalies tend to come from the States.  Even Cale Makar, a future Canadian HHoFer, hails from U-Mass.  That's because defencemen and (especially) goalies take longer to develop than forwards.  The best development comes from a heavy mixture of practice and games, and the NCAA has a very practice-heavy schedule.  It also has the reputation for being very defence-oriented, which you can take as a criticism if you want.  But to be honest, that doesn't explain why lottery pick forwards like Adam Fantilli and Macklin Celebrini choose the USHL and NCAA to develop their game. 

 

I remember you from CDC.  You said Canada would beat USA in a best-on-best because our players have something special (I think you mentioned pride) that makes them better.  A very interesting take to have given the current structure of our Canucks.

 

And none of this, ESPECIALLY the bolded, addresses what Shiznak said. It's crazy to me that you're not listening or reading the stuff you're replying to, but I guess this fits your MO. You don't care about strengthening your own argument; you just want to find arguments that fit your conception. That is what you call a confirmation bias - and it's a logical fallacy.

 

Academic opportunities are SO MUCH BETTER in the United States than in Canada. NO ONE can argue this. The scale of the countries are 10x bigger and so are the employment opportunities. When your education is paid off in AMERICA (better education system overall for people who can afford it), you will be more likely to succeed, not to mention the networking opportunities found there.

 

You keep harping on Canada hockey development vs United States development, but you obviously shied away from the intangible benefits of going to school in the US. It's not that Hockey Canada is crap because the junior players go to the US. It's because the opportunities AFTER hockey are much bigger when you go to a US school THAT IS PAID FOR.

This doesn't even dive into the cherrypicking that you do to try and support a point of yours that had been invalidated several times over.

 

So you might have a point that Hockey Canada needs an overhaul, but it's not for the reasons you provided. If you had said the things that Shiznak had mentioned, I would've been 100 percent on board. They're entirely right.

Edited January 24 by PureQuickness

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

And this is HILARIOUS.

 

You now accept medal counts in your argument AFTER arguing that medal counts in tournaments don't matter? You wanna know why you change your argument? Because this FITS in your narrative (never mind the factual country medal count that doesn't)

 

This is proof that you don't care how your argument lands as long as it pushes your narrative - and that makes a very disingenous discussion. I've been calling you out for that, plus more.

 

Holy crap.  I said interpret it how you want.  I don't care.  I literally laid out in that entire post how a fantastic prospect has not and never will play in the world juniors.  He has no bearing on international success or failure, but he IS a product of the CHL.  Just like Connor Bedard or anyone who comes out of the CHL, regardless of country of origin.

[PureQuickness]

2 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Holy crap.  I said interpret it how you want.  I don't care.  I literally laid out in that entire post how a fantastic prospect has not and never will play in the world juniors.  He has no bearing on international success or failure, but he IS a product of the CHL.  Just like Connor Bedard or anyone who comes out of the CHL, regardless of country of origin.

 

Glad that you mentioned it. We are still producing superstars year after year after year then, if we're going to cherrypick like you've been doing in your arguments.

 

Do you see what I'm trying to point out? Cherrypicking arguments doesn't make a point valid. It means that someone is too stubborn to weigh out all the evidence, especially ones that don't support the point they are trying to push.

Edited January 24 by PureQuickness

[Miss Korea]

5 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

And none of this, ESPECIALLY the bolded, addresses what Shiznak said. It's crazy to me that you're not listening or reading the stuff you're replying to, but I guess this fits your MO. You don't care about strengthening your own argument; you just want to find arguments that fit your conception. That is what you call a confirmation bias - and it's a logical fallacy.

 

Academic opportunities are SO MUCH BETTER in the United States than in Canada. NO ONE can argue this. The scale of the countries are 10x bigger and so are the employment opportunities. When your education is paid off in AMERICA (better education system overall for people who can afford it), you will be more likely to succeed, not to mention the networking opportunities found there.

 

You keep harping on Canada development vs United States development, but you obviously shy away from the intangible benefits of going to school in the US. It's not that Hockey Canada is crap because the junior players go to the US. It's because the opportunities AFTER hockey are much bigger when you go to a US school THAT IS PAID FOR.

This doesn't even dive into the cherrypicking that you do to try and support a point of yours that had been invalidated several times over.

 

Buddy.  You can't even explain to me what USPORTS is.  You can't even explain to me what's going on in the BCHL/AJHL.  I gave you multiple chances and you just couldn't come up with anything.

 

It's okay to not understand.  Most people don't pay attention and not much has been written about it.  But you're in way over your head trying to argue about this, since you simply don't know the basics.

Edited January 24 by Miss Korea

[Miss Korea]

Just now, PureQuickness said:

 

Glad that you mentioned it. We are still producing superstars year after year after year then, if we're going to cherrypick like you've been doing in your arguments.

 

No, you don't get to co-opt my argument to your liking.  Hunter Brzustewicz is an American.  His success or failure in the CHL means nothing to you because the United States doesn't have as many golds as Canada.

[shiznak]

2 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Canadian/American kids can still choose a Canadian college route and universities have made massive strides in that area.  But that entire system runs independently from Hockey Canada and the CHL.  Some of the best hockey development systems (BCHL/ parts of AJHL) are running independently from Hockey Canada.  These entities had to break off in order to keep up with the style of hockey development the United States enjoys.  Obviously the Canadian counterparts are still vastly inferior, but they are still there and they are trying their hardest to improve it.  

 

TSN and Sportsnet have already been forced to discuss why all the best defencemen and goalies tend to come from the States.  Even Cale Makar, a future Canadian HHoFer, hails from U-Mass.  That's because defencemen and (especially) goalies take longer to develop than forwards.  The best development comes from a heavy mixture of practice and games, and the NCAA has a very practice-heavy schedule.  It also has the reputation for being very defence-oriented, which you can take as a criticism if you want.  But to be honest, that doesn't explain why lottery pick forwards like Adam Fantilli and Macklin Celebrini choose the USHL and NCAA to develop their game. 

 

I remember you from CDC.  You said Canada would beat USA in a best-on-best because our players have something special (I think you mentioned pride) that makes them better.  A very interesting take to have given the current structure of our Canucks.

As much as we rag how little educated the Americans are. You can’t compared our education system to theirs. The US has the advance resources and more viable options than Canada has. Look at how many big named Universities around the US compared to Canada. That’s why you see more and more Canadians (Canadian in general) player take that route. It isn’t any different from any other profession. You go to the States because of the many different options of post secondary.

 

For every Makar, Fantilli, Celebrini there’s always guys like Bedard, Wright, and Misa, who stay in Canada. Read the article I posted, It isn’t about which is better, it’s about finding the right fit for your child. There’s no correct path of development. As both has its pros and cons. 

 

BTW, I never said anything about Canadian pride. I said, Canada would most likely best the USA because the USA has a lot of individuals, while Canada always seem to find a way to fight through adversity. The US never had that feeling. Canada also has more depth in the league. I’ve always said, the US reminds me of the Russian in the 00s. All the skill and talent in the world, but never able to win when it matters. 

Edited January 24 by shiznak

[PureQuickness]

1 minute ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Buddy.  You can't even explain to me what USPORTS is.  You can't even explain to me what's going on in the BCHL/AJHL.

 

It's okay to not understand.  Most people don't pay attention and not much has been written about it.  But you're in way over your head trying to argue about this, since you simply don't know the basics.

 

You went way off topic with the Shiznak post. Seriously, I expected nothing more from your post, but somehow I was still disappointed. I thought maybe you might just might have something to add. But nothing.

[PureQuickness]

Just now, shiznak said:

As much as we rag how little educated the Americans are. You can’t compared our education system to theirs. The US has the advance resources and more viable options than Canada has. Look at how many big named Universities around the US compared to Canada. That’s why you see more and more Canadians player take that route. It isn’t any different from any other profession. You go to the States because of the many different options of post secondary.

 

For every Makar, Fantilli, Celebrini there’s always guys like Bedard, Wright, and Misa, who stay in Canada. Read the article I posted, It isn’t about which is better, it’s about finding the right fit for your child. There’s no correct path of development. As both has its pros and cons. 

 

BTW, I never said anything about Canadian pride. I said, Canada would most likely best the USA because the USA has a lot of individuals, while Canada always seem to find a way to fight through adversity. The US never had that feeling. Canada also has more depth in the league. I’ve always said, the US reminds me of the Russian in the 00s. All the skill and talent in the world, but never able to win when it matters. 

 

I absolutely agree with this.

 

I just don't understand why it's taking Miss Korea so damn long to accept the fact that their points are not supporting what they're trying to push. The scale of the countries ABSOLUTELY has to be taken into consideration, which is also why Canada is doing GOOD for its scale.

 

Never mind the fact that OP can't explain why Canada is competitive with the US, despite 10x smaller (including its funding). @Miss Korea You have to understand that there's a law of diminishing returns. Is the US 10x better than Canada in terms of success?

 

The answer is obviously no. Then your argument about FINANCIAL ADVANTAGE with the US Hockey Development program is out the window.

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

You went way off topic with the Shiznak post. Seriously, I expected nothing more from your post, but somehow I was still disappointed. I thought maybe you might just might have something to add. But nothing.

 

Can you explain what USPORTS is or not?  It's a simple question.

[PureQuickness]

6 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Can you explain what USPORTS is or not?  It's a simple question.

Did you even address a single point about academic opportunities in the US? No, you were jerking back and forth about CHL and choices and that irrelevant stuff that you were harping around.

 

This is why I don't even want to get into a deeper discussion with you on this topic beyond this. You're incapable of re-assessing your points. You're just shoving them and re-working them to fit your narrative.

 

Look at this post

 

You deliberately AVOID talking about increased academic/employment opportunities in the UNITED STATES. Of course because that would take you away from slagging Hockey Canada. Like I said, you are trying to pin everything on Hockey Canada. You are not really trying to understand why people would choose to go to the US.

 

P.S. I already admitted to you that the Canadian education system is basically no real match versus the United States. The US has A LOT MORE of a pulse. There's just so much more room to navigate there. It's crazy to me why someone would deliberately throw away a US scholarship just to stay in Canada, especially if it's paid for.

 

2 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Canadian/American kids can still choose a Canadian college route and universities have made massive strides in that area.  But that entire system runs independently from Hockey Canada and the CHL.  Some of the best hockey development systems (BCHL/ parts of AJHL) are running independently from Hockey Canada.  These entities had to break off in order to keep up with the style of hockey development the United States enjoys.  Obviously the Canadian counterparts are still vastly inferior, but they are still there and they are trying their hardest to improve it.  

 

TSN and Sportsnet have already been forced to discuss why all the best defencemen and goalies tend to come from the States.  Even Cale Makar, a future Canadian HHoFer, hails from U-Mass.  That's because defencemen and (especially) goalies take longer to develop than forwards.  The best development comes from a heavy mixture of practice and games, and the NCAA has a very practice-heavy schedule.  It also has the reputation for being very defence-oriented, which you can take as a criticism if you want.  But to be honest, that doesn't explain why lottery pick forwards like Adam Fantilli and Macklin Celebrini choose the USHL and NCAA to develop their game. 

 

I remember you from CDC.  You said Canada would beat USA in a best-on-best because our players have something special (I think you mentioned pride) that makes them better.  A very interesting take to have given the current structure of our Canucks.

 

Edited January 24 by PureQuickness

[Miss Korea]

1 minute ago, PureQuickness said:

Did you even address a single point about academic opportunities in the US? No, you were jerking back and forth about CHL and choices and that irrelevant stuff that you were harping around.

 

This is why I don't even want to get into a deeper discussion with you on this topic beyond this. You're incapable of re-assessing your points. You're just shoving them and re-working them to fit your narrative.

 

Varsity hockey has existed in the United States since the 1950s.  Through the years, hardly anyone from Canada looking to go pro went to college.  Joe Neuwendyk and Jonathan Toews made headlines because they did just that.  Not anymore.

 

You can't even answer my basic question about what USPORTS is.  How can you even try and talk about hockey development in Canada without knowing what USPORTS is?

[PureQuickness]

Just now, Miss Korea said:

 

Varsity hockey has existed in the United States since the 1950s.  Through the years, hardly anyone from Canada looking to go pro went to college.  Joe Neuwendyk and Jonathan Toews made headlines because they did just that.  Not anymore.

 

You can't even answer my basic question about what USPORTS is.  How can you even try and talk about hockey development in Canada without knowing what USPORTS is?

 

So using your logic, how can you talk about American hockey development being superior to Canada's without TALKING about academic and employment opportunities in the United States?

 

You can't.

 

It's like trying to say that American cars are bad, but you're unable to describe a single American sports car. It's ridiculous. This thread is nothing more than you trying to slag Hockey Canada without being able to explain why. Just admit it: you have a vendetta with the organization and call it a day.

[Miss Korea]

1 minute ago, PureQuickness said:

 

So using your logic, how can you talk about American hockey development being superior to Canada's without TALKING about academic and employment opportunities in the United States?

 

You can't.

 

It's like trying to say that American cars are bad, but you're unable to describe a single American sports car. It's ridiculous. This thread is nothing more than you trying to slag Hockey Canada without being able to explain why. Just admit it: you have a vendetta with the organization and call it a day.

 

Answer the fucking question.  What is USPORTS.

[PureQuickness]

1 minute ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Answer the fucking question.  What is USPORTS.

 

Funny you tell people to answer the question, but you refuse to directly address @shiznak's points. Why?

 

[Miss Korea]

Just now, PureQuickness said:

 

Funny you tell people to answer the question, but you refuse to directly address @shiznak's points. Why?

 

Shiznak is actually trying to form an argument which requires a more thought-out response.  I am trying to get to his point but you continue to barge in.

 

At least I'm fucking trying to answer questions.  I'm asking you one simple thing and you can't do it.  I'm giving you one last chance to tell me what USPORTS is.

 

For what it's worth, you have been openly criticized by @Provost, @DeltaSwede, and @Rekker just today over your poorly crafted arguments.  They've all said the same thing.  Your arguments are incoherent and completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[shiznak]

9 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Varsity hockey has existed in the United States since the 1950s.  Through the years, hardly anyone from Canada looking to go pro went to college.  Joe Neuwendyk and Jonathan Toews made headlines because they did just that.  Not anymore.

 

You can't even answer my basic question about what USPORTS is.  How can you even try and talk about hockey development in Canada without knowing what USPORTS is?

Actually, it wasn’t a rarity for Canadians to go to college.

 

Crosby almost went to UND.

Heatley was drafted #2 overall and took the college route.

Brett Hull

Paul Kariya

 

Vice versa a few American born players almost went to the CHL. 
Jack Johnson

Phil Kessel

Brady Tkachuk

Jack Hughes

 

 

 

 

[Miss Korea]

4 minutes ago, shiznak said:

As much as we rag how little educated the Americans are. You can’t compared our education system to theirs. The US has the advance resources and more viable options than Canada has. Look at how many big named Universities around the US compared to Canada. That’s why you see more and more Canadians (Canadian in general) player take that route. It isn’t any different from any other profession. You go to the States because of the many different options of post secondary.

 

For every Makar, Fantilli, Celebrini there’s always guys like Bedard, Wright, and Misa, who stay in Canada. Read the article I posted, It isn’t about which is better, it’s about finding the right fit for your child. There’s no correct path of development. As both has its pros and cons. 

 

BTW, I never said anything about Canadian pride. I said, Canada would most likely best the USA because the USA has a lot of individuals, while Canada always seem to find a way to fight through adversity. The US never had that feeling. Canada also has more depth in the league. I’ve always said, the US reminds me of the Russian in the 00s. All the skill and talent in the world, but never able to win when it matters. 

 

I have read Button's comments from that article before, and I had a different takeaway than you.

 

Guys like Makar, Fantilli, and Celebrini did not choose the NCAA so they could have access to greater education - especially the two forwards.  They are one-and-done kids.  One year in college and straight to the NHL.  Fantilli spent two years in the USHL on top of that.  These decisions were made for the sake of their hockey careers.  These lottery picks aren't committing to the United States as 15 year olds because they have post-retirement aspirations.  They're doing it to get into the NHL.  There is a long-standing reputation that players who did well in the NCAA can make the jump to the NHL far more successfully than from the CHL.  That's just facts. How often have you seen kids make the jump straight from the CHL to the NHL?  And before you reply with "the college guys are much older when they make the jump", that's the point.  They get to benefit from an extra four years of pure development, while CHL guys have to go pro immediately after aging out.

 

Now keep in mind that USA Hockey does not directly control what happens in the NCAA.  What they control is the NTDP and the USHL.  A lot of the growth we've seen in the US is owed to USA Hockey and their expansion programs.  Arizona, Texas, California.  Having NHL teams help with the hype, but you don't get junior hockey in places like that without proper development.

 

Also keep in mind this does not even speak to the state of hockey in Canada.  What happens here is a complete mess.  Canadian universities are trying to keep up with the allure of the NCAA.  The BCHL/AJHL are trying to keep up with the pace of the USHL.  The common theme?  They all operate outside the jurisdiction of Hockey Canada.

 

And as for Canadians having the adversity factor, I must imagine you think this Canucks team is full of me-first guys who will fail to win when it matters most.  Over half of our team (and almost all our superstars) are American.

[Miss Korea]

2 minutes ago, shiznak said:

Actually, it wasn’t a rarity for Canadians to go to college.

 

Crosby almost went to UND.

Heatley was drafted #2 overall and took the college route.

Brett Hull

Paul Kariya

 

Vice versa a few American born players almost went to the CHL. 
Jack Johnson

Phil Kessel

Brady Tkachuk

Jack Hughes

 

Ah, Heatley and Kariya are good examples.  The rest are what-ifs.  Hull did go to college.  Those other Americans did go to college.  Jack Hughes didn't even go to college - he just made the jump straight from the USHL.  Meanwhile, Crosby did not go to college.  Maybe he would've picked college in today's age. 

 

But it's not like North Dakota or Boston College suddenly developed into great academic institutions overnight.  They've always been better schools than a lot of Canadian counterparts.  11 years ago, six players from the US junior gold squad came from the CHL.  This year, just two.  If you track the numbers of Americans coming up to the CHL, it has dropped dramatically.  If you look at the numbers of Canadians going down to the NCAA, that has increased dramatically.  You cannot deny  the shift that we have seen in the past decade.  Educational opportunity doesn't explain the shift.

[PureQuickness]

7 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

I have read Button's comments from that article before, and I had a different takeaway than you.

 

Guys like Makar, Fantilli, and Celebrini did not choose the NCAA so they could have access to greater education - especially the two forwards.  They are one-and-done kids.  One year in college and straight to the NHL.  Fantilli spent two years in the USHL on top of that.  These decisions were made for the sake of their hockey careers.  These lottery picks aren't committing to the United States as 15 year olds because they have post-retirement aspirations.  They're doing it to get into the NHL.  There is a long-standing reputation that players who did well in the NCAA can make the jump to the NHL far more successfully than from the CHL.  That's just facts. How often have you seen kids make the jump straight from the CHL to the NHL?  And before you reply with "the college guys are much older when they make the jump", that's the point.  They get to benefit from an extra four years of pure development, while CHL guys have to go pro immediately after aging out.

 

Now keep in mind that USA Hockey does not directly control what happens in the NCAA.  What they control is the NTDP and the USHL.  A lot of the growth we've seen in the US is owed to USA Hockey and their expansion programs.  Arizona, Texas, California.  Having NHL teams help with the hype, but you don't get junior hockey in places like that without proper development.

 

Also keep in mind this does not even speak to the state of hockey in Canada.  What happens here is a complete mess.  Canadian universities are trying to keep up with the allure of the NCAA.  The BCHL/AJHL are trying to keep up with the pace of the USHL.  The common theme?  They all operate outside the jurisdiction of Hockey Canada.

 

And as for Canadians having the adversity factor, I must imagine you think this Canucks team is full of me-first guys who will fail to win when it matters most.  Over half of our team (and almost all our superstars) are American.

 

People go to school for different reasons, one of those big reasons is to fulfill playing hockey while fulfilling their academic aspirations.

 

The so-called lottery pick players have a prime reason to play in the NHL now. That has always been their dream and teams are going to give them the time and space now. Failing that, the college route is a safe space for them to stew while their NHL team waits for them.

 

Someone like Boeser left school for different reasons (father's illness, financial motivations etc etc). It just shows that people's situations are so different.

 

You emphasized so much of the mess of Hockey Canada, but you don't address the benefits of going to school in the US. That's not Hockey Canada's fault obviously, but look at your vindictive attitude. It says a lot about where your priorities are.

[Miss Korea]

Just now, PureQuickness said:

 

People go to school for different reasons, one of those big reasons is to fulfill playing hockey while fulfilling their academic aspirations.

 

The so-called lottery pick players have a prime reason to play in the NHL now. That has always been their dream and teams are going to give them the time and space now. Failing that, the college route is a safe space for them to stew while their NHL team waits for them.

 

Someone like Boeser left school for different reasons (father's illness, financial motivations etc etc). It just shows that people's situations are so different.

 

You emphasized so much of the mess of Hockey Canada, but you don't address the benefits of going to school in the US. That's not Hockey Canada's fault obviously, but look at your vindictive attitude. It says a lot about where your priorities are.

 

Read the fucking posts.  Defensive coaching.  Goaltending coaching.  Better facilities.  More practices, less games.  Extra years of development.  None of that has to do with fucking school.  Had you actually read anything I said you'd have seen I mentioned those things numerous times already.

 

But go ahead.  Keep defending Hockey Canada.  Ignore the fact that the majority here (who actually follow Canadian junior hockey unlike you) agree with me.  And ignore the fact that you STILL don't know what USPORTS is, you don't know what's going on the BCHL, you don't really know anything....

[Miss Korea]

@PureQuickness the difference between you and me is I have the balls to at least try and respond to your questions.  But when I ask you something, you can't.  Answer the question.

[PureQuickness]

5 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Ah, Heatley and Kariya are good examples.  The rest are what-ifs.  Hull did go to college.  Those other Americans did go to college.  Jack Hughes didn't even go to college - he just made the jump straight from the USHL.  Meanwhile, Crosby did not go to college.  Maybe he would've picked college in today's age. 

 

But it's not like North Dakota or Boston College suddenly developed into great academic institutions overnight.  They've always been better schools than a lot of Canadian counterparts.  11 years ago, six players from the US junior gold squad came from the CHL.  This year, just two.  If you track the numbers of Americans coming up to the CHL, it has dropped dramatically.  If you look at the numbers of Canadians going down to the NCAA, that has increased dramatically.  You cannot deny  the shift that we have seen in the past decade.  Educational opportunity doesn't explain the shift.

 

It absolutely does. As you said, 10 years ago, the US has quietly been improving (in the case of UND) and places like UMich are very well established entities now. Yet the networking opportunities cannot be understated.

 

This is why you have to acknowledge the scale in the US is so much bigger. You can't just simply focus on bashing Hockey Canada without talking about the overwhelming advantages to paid for schooling in America.

 

 

[PureQuickness]

4 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Read the fucking posts.  Defensive coaching.  Goaltending coaching.  Better facilities.  More practices, less games.  Extra years of development.  None of that has to do with fucking school.  Had you actually read anything I said you'd have seen I mentioned those things numerous times already.

 

But go ahead.  Keep defending Hockey Canada.  Ignore the fact that the majority here (who actually follow Canadian junior hockey unlike you) agree with me.  And ignore the fact that you STILL don't know what USPORTS is, you don't know what's going on the BCHL, you don't really know anything....

Did you read the part where shiznak said nothing to do with development?

 

Holy shit, this is so fucking funny. Shiznak was invalidating your point and you ignorantly are waving it at me as proof?

[Miss Korea]

4 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

It absolutely does. As you said, 10 years ago, the US has quietly been improving (in the case of UND) and places like UMich are very well established entities now. Yet the networking opportunities cannot be understated.

 

This is why you have to acknowledge the scale in the US is so much bigger. You can't just simply focus on bashing Hockey Canada without talking about the overwhelming advantages to paid for schooling in America.

 

2 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

Did you read the part where shiznak said nothing to do with development?

 

Holy shit, this is so fucking funny. Shiznak was invalidating your point and you ignorantly are waving it at me as proof?

 

All I hear is you talking and talking, and continually failing to answer my one question to you: what is USPORTS?  You could've quoted a Google or Wikipedia page a long time ago.

 

Also tell me - what's going on with the BCHL/AJHL right now?

Edited January 24 by Miss Korea

[shiznak]

28 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

I have read Button's comments from that article before, and I had a different takeaway than you.

 

Guys like Makar, Fantilli, and Celebrini did not choose the NCAA so they could have access to greater education - especially the two forwards.  They are one-and-done kids.  One year in college and straight to the NHL.  Fantilli spent two years in the USHL on top of that.  These decisions were made for the sake of their hockey careers.  These lottery picks aren't committing to the United States as 15 year olds because they have post-retirement aspirations.  They're doing it to get into the NHL.  There is a long-standing reputation that players who did well in the NCAA can make the jump to the NHL far more successfully than from the CHL.  That's just facts. How often have you seen kids make the jump straight from the CHL to the NHL?  And before you reply with "the college guys are much older when they make the jump", that's the point.  They get to benefit from an extra four years of pure development, while CHL guys have to go pro immediately after aging out.

 

Now keep in mind that USA Hockey does not directly control what happens in the NCAA.  What they control is the NTDP and the USHL.  A lot of the growth we've seen in the US is owed to USA Hockey and their expansion programs.  Arizona, Texas, California.  Having NHL teams help with the hype, but you don't get junior hockey in places like that without proper development.

 

Also keep in mind this does not even speak to the state of hockey in Canada.  What happens here is a complete mess.  Canadian universities are trying to keep up with the allure of the NCAA.  The BCHL/AJHL are trying to keep up with the pace of the USHL.  The common theme?  They all operate outside the jurisdiction of Hockey Canada.

 

And as for Canadians having the adversity factor, I must imagine you think this Canucks team is full of me-first guys who will fail to win when it matters most.  Over half of our team (and almost all our superstars) are American.

 

If these kids, are one-and-done talents…… wouldn’t they choose the CHL, where it’s the fastest way to the NHL? If you’re talented then it doesn’t really matter where you go, right? Take Bedard for example, he could have just stayed in prep school a year, go to college to strengthen his body and then go straight to the NHL. Why didn’t he take that route? Why didn’t Auston Matthews take the same route as his peers and play for Nebraska rather than play in Sweden? Again, it’s more about preferences than development. 
 

We seen numerous players, over the course of time, go straight to the NHL. Most recently, Zach Benson. 

Our American superstars have been here since 2019 and haven’t done anything for us until now. Is it because we got all the “ Canadian crap” out of our team or is it because we finally have a coach who can implement a winning structure?