Things are heating up on the NCAA/CHL front.
Gregg Drinnan, Taking Note, Feb 7 2012
Brad Elliott Schlossman of the Grand Forks Herald reports that “College Hockey Inc., is working to enact legislation — either with the oversight of the NHL or through the transfer agreement between USA Hockey and Hockey Canada — to bar Canadian major junior teams from stealing a player who has signed a letter of intent until after the player’s freshman year.”
As Schlossman reports, NCAA teams can’t recruit CHL players, because they no longer are eligible to play at a U.S. school.
“We need to have a deal in place with the NHL and with the CHL,” U of North Dakota head coach Dave Hakstol said. “We are going into a back-alley brawl. They are bringing guns. We’re coming with no weapon and one hand tied behind our back.”
Paul Kelly, the executive director of College Hockey Inc., told Schlossman that “it is our position that once a kid signs a letter of intent, he’s made up his mind and demonstrated it in written form. He should be off limits and shouldn’t be continually recruited until at least after his freshman year. Continued recruiting of players after they’ve committed in writing to college, we find that conduct to be unacceptable. We’ve communicated that fact to the NHL. We’re hoping to bring some order to the process.”
Schlossman’s complete story is below, including thoughts from Hakstol on the possibility that the NCAA could re-do its rules regarding the college eligibility of CHL players.
Folks, take cover. The shooting is soon to start.
-----
UND MEN'S HOCKEY: Signing day could become vital in the future
Brad Elliott Schlossman, Grand Forks Herald, February 04, 2012
Signing day has become, perhaps, college football’s biggest holiday with schools and fans waiting anxiously for players to make their college destinations official.
In the college hockey world, where players often commit two-plus years in advance of signing and almost always stick to it, signing day passes without registering a blip on the radar.
That may soon be changing.
College Hockey Inc., is working to enact legislation — either with the oversight of the NHL or through the transfer agreement between USA Hockey and Hockey Canada — to bar Canadian major junior teams from stealing a player who has signed a letter of intent until after the player’s freshman year.
And while this is happening, there is a behind-the-scenes movement by some coaches to try to ditch the longstanding gentleman’s agreement between coaches that they won’t recruit players that have made verbal commitments.
If either happens, letters of intent will become big deals to the college hockey world.
The Canadian Hockey League, which routinely tries to poach college players and recruits, is driving these developments to an extent.
UND has lost two highly regarded recruits to the CHL since July in first-round draft pick J.T. Miller and possible 2012 first-rounder Stefan Matteau. Both had signed letters of intent. Miller bolted in July, leaving UND with few options to find a replacement before the start of this season.
And while the CHL routinely pursues college players, NCAA teams are not allowed to do the same because CHL players are currently not eligible for college.
“We need to have a deal in place with the NHL and with the CHL,” UND coach Dave Hakstol said. “We are going into a back-alley brawl. They are bringing guns. We’re coming with no weapon and one hand tied behind our back.”
Paul Kelly, the executive director of College Hockey Inc., is leading the charge to enact the new legislation.
“It is our position that once a kid signs a letter of intent, he’s made up his mind and demonstrated it in written form,” Kelly said. “He should be off limits and shouldn’t be continually recruited until at least after his freshman year. Continued recruiting of players after they’ve committed in writing to college, we find that conduct to be unacceptable. We’ve communicated that fact to the NHL. We’re hoping to bring some order to the process.”
If no agreement is reached with the NHL or the CHL, Hakstol thinks it’s worth exploring the possibility of opening up CHL players to colleges.
The NCAA would have to change its stance on the CHL, but Hakstol believes it’s possible.
“The first and most important step would be the coaches discussing it and deciding that it would be a good pathway for us to take,” he said. “I think if that group was to decide on it, it would be feasible.”
The positive for college hockey would be that teams could pluck CHL players, including high-end guys, to replace recruits it loses. If the CHL is open to colleges, it also may be more likely to agree to new transfer rules.
The negative for college hockey is that all of the high-end players may immediately go to the CHL, knowing that the college hockey window would remain open.
“We discuss it each year,” Hakstol said. “The sentiment is against it as a body. I’m not speaking for anybody except myself. There are potential pros and potential cons to it. My belief is that we have to look at every potential avenue to improve our game and improve our ability to build quality teams. I believe this is one avenue we need to have more serious discussion about.
“We have to decide whether or not that’s a worthwhile challenge to take on.”
Verbal commitments
In the meantime, verbal commitments have been taking center stage at recent coaches conventions.
Currently, college hockey coaches do not recruit players once they have made a verbal commitment. In other NCAA sports, coaches routinely pursue them until they have signed letters of intent.
“I like that our coaches have abided by this gentleman’s agreement,” Kelly said. “It does lead to some abuses — programs that verbally commit a large number of players, probably with the full realization that they aren’t going to be able to take all of them. Not everyone is treating it in the manner that it was intended. But this is a coaches’ issue.”
Most likely, some of the more established programs — the ones most affected by the CHL poaching players — would be open to ending the gentleman’s agreement. It would allow them to poach top recruits of smaller schools to replace those lost via the CHL or NHL.
“Verbal commitments, early commitments and long lists of future commitments are serious areas of discussion right now,” Hakstol said. “There are a lot of sides to that issue. It’s a very complicated issue. My opinion has changed over time. I was a very strong proponent of it eight to 10 years ago. I think we need to find a middle ground on verbal commitments.
“I think we want to continue the gentlemanly side of college hockey and our close-knit community. At the same time, I think it’s time we take a real close look at exactly what we’re doing.”
NCAA vs. CHL: Strengthening NLIs, Opening College Hockey to CHLers
Chris Peters, The United States of Hockey, February 8, 2012
The recent article in the Grand Forks Herald, in which Brad Schlossman interviews North Dakota head coach Dave Hakstol has stirred up a bit of NCAA vs. CHL conversation. It usually doesn’t take much to get tempers flaring in this hotly contested debate, and there has been a wide array of responses, both positive and negative.
The key points of Schlossman’s piece include the revelation that College Hockey, Inc., is pursuing legislation through the National Hockey League that once a player signs a National Letter of Intent with a college, he is off limits to major junior for one year of college hockey. Letters are typically signed in November or February of the year preceding college. This would prevent situations like players bailing on their commitment in June or July, which happened a lot over the summer (John Gibson, Connor Murphy, J.T. Miller among the notable decommits).
The late decommits are a real issue as they really tend to hamper college programs. It is not easy to replace a first-round draft pick, or any recruit for that matter, two months prior to classes beginning. There are more instances where recruits have bailed for various reasons, like coaching changes, or changing his mind about what school he wants to go to. However, the ones that frustrate the NCAA is when a player has made a written commitment to a school and that commitment is ignored by an outside entity, that has no such rules to abide by.
The CHL is merely operating within its own set of rules, as there is no obligation to abide by the NCAA’s commitments. You can’t fault them for that, but if College Hockey, Inc., is to succeed in its aim to strengthen the NLIs, it at least gives the NCAA schools a little more power to keep the players that have said they want to play college hockey.
Making the NLI a binding document is going to be tough, especially when it’s basically going to probably have to amount to a gentleman’s agreement between the NHL and both the NCAA and CHL. Where it gets a bit more interesting is using the transfer agreement between USA Hockey and Hockey Canada.
Before a player of a certain nationality can play in a foreign country, he has to be released by his home country’s hockey federation, per IIHF regulations. This is where college hockey may be able to find appropriate leverage to make binding NLIs a reality.
Without the transfer agreements, who knows what kind of consequences would be able to be put in place if there was some violation. Who would sanction it? You can’t depend on the NHL to. Again, at that point, it’s simply a gentleman’s agreement.
Another factor: it’s hard to imagine the NHL would prevent its own teams from signing players early, as was the case with Connor Murphy and J.T. Miller, thus ending their college eligibility. However, players that sign NHL contracts the same summer in which they are drafted is rare. So while the NHL might be able to protect college hockey from the CHL in some regard, there’s no guarantee the league would be able to protect the NCAA from NHL teams.
Neate Sager also brings up a very salient point regarding the strengthening of NLIs.
…would knowing the letter of intent — which many believe is of contestable legal validity, although it has never been challenged in court — effectively binds a player to attending school cause some to get cold feet about committing and elect to keep their options open? Quite possibly.
Having spent enough time around players that have to have this inner debate about what to do with their hockey careers, it’s not something I’d wonder about. I’d expect it.
The elite players would wait longer to make a choice. Even if that’s the case, I think most college coaches would rather have a guy keep his options open for as long as possible, rather than backing out of a commitment he made months prior and leave the team holding the bag.
It might delay the building of recruiting classes to some degree, but the number of players who wait to make a decision are often among the better players in a class. Those are guys you don’t mind waiting around for.
The kids that always wanted to go to college, will still commit on schedule. The ones that aren’t sure should be given all the time and space they need for a decision.
The one area where this could backfire is if players wait to commit until after they are drafted. That’s when it becomes almost too late for schools to add a player to the mix. So that’s a valid concern.
Players can’t sign NLIs until they are seniors in high school anyway. So there’s still the possibility of kids making verbal commitments at age 15 or 16 and backing out later. College coaches would rather not have any kids break their commitments, but it’s those late ones that are particularly difficult to swallow. Eliminating those would be a step in the right direction as far as college hockey is concerned.
Hakstol also talked about the benefit of potentially opening up the college ranks to former CHL players if this proposed legislation falls through.
While it makes sense on many levels, many arguments still remain for why it’s a bad idea.
First off, allowing CHL players to retain college eligibility could have a gigantic impact on the USHL. More top-end players would go to the CHL fully knowing that they’ll have a fall-back plan. So they can go up and get added exposure, get in front of more scouts on a nightly basis. The top end in the USHL could be significantly diminished in such a scenario.
While this move would help the NCAA’s depth, it would most likely eliminate many of the top-end players from ever making it to the NCAA. By the time a player’s Junior career is over at age 20, most would go to the NHL or AHL. Only the guys that would have otherwise played lower-level minor-league hockey would end up in college. The quality of play gets dragged down in the college ranks. While the NCAA would remain a developmental option, it also becomes a safety net for CHL players similar to what the Canaidan Interuniversity Sport is right now. That’s an ugly scenario for American college hockey, which has produced NHL talent as long as it’s been in existence.
Granted, there will still be players that prefer college hockey, and the NCAA was never going to lose those guys anyway. It’s losing those players that are on the bubble that would really hurt. The allure of playing in the CHL, with the chance to go to American college hockey if it doesn’t pan out, is attractive. A player might feel he can get the best of both worlds that way. Which, if it’s allowed, then more power to him.
Another interesting column came out in the wake of Schlossman’s Herald piece, this one from Patrick King of Rogers Sportsnet. The column is titled “Misguided Anger from NCAA.” I know and respect Patrick a heck of a lot, but in my opinion, the column misses the point of what this debate is actually about.
A large portion of King’s column is geared towards the fact that the NCAA is limiting itself by not allowing CHL players. Particularly, King takes Hakstol to task for the UND coach’s comments in Schlossman’s piece about how the NCAA is at an unfair disadvantage in this battle. The only thing I didn’t understand, is that in that article Hakstol is quoted from, he admits that there needs to be reform. Hakstol even said he is in support of opening up college hockey the CHL players, which King never mentions, focusing solely on Hakstol’s analogy that the NCAA is fighting with one hand tied behind its back. So I felt it was a bit of a misrepresentation of what Hakstol was talking about.
King later goes on to chastise the NCAA programs for recruiting kids in Grade 9 without ever mentioning the fact that the WHL annually holds its “Bantam Draft,” the primary method the league selects its players, in which 14-year-old hockey players become property of a WHL member club. For most kids selected in the Bantam Draft, they’re still two years away from even being eligible to play Junior hockey.
Just for an example… Luke Moffatt was drafted as a 14-year-old bantam second overall by Kelowna. Moffatt would end up verbally committing to Michigan when he was 16 and sticking with that commitment.
While I absolutely agree that the early recruiting needs to be curtailed, we’re seeing fewer commitments being made by 14-year-old kids. Many players are getting the idea that it is better to keep their options open and make a more conscientious decision at a more mature age.
It’s unfair to knock college hockey for a poor practice, when a CHL-sponsored league engages in an equal “offense.”
King also paints the CHL as a bit more innocent, claiming the league is blissfully unaware it is in a battle with college hockey. If it were so blissfully unaware, would Windsor Spitfires GM Warren Rychel routinely crow in the media about his recruitment of college committed players and making every effort to get that player into the OHL? Would Kelowna’s Bruce Hamilton be publicly blasting the USHL and college hockey in his pursuit of Zemgus Girgensons?
This is not one-sided. I might not go as far as Hakstol who said, “We are going into a back-alley brawl. They are bringing guns. We’re coming with no weapon and one hand tied behind our back.” There is still some truth to his comment, and yes, that one hand is tied behind their backs by their own rules, partially.
Where I agree with King is that the NCAA needs to take a long look at itself and its policies, which unfortunately are not specifically tailored to hockey. There is certainly need for reform. As all of us can agree, the NCAA is far from perfect in all sports. The only issue is, the NCAA has to make rules that fit across all sports, they don’t make special rules for one.
As I mentioned, I respect Patrick and really enjoy his work. This column, for me, was a bit off point and perhaps unfair.
My hope is that one day there is a compromise between the NCAA and CHL. It’s gotten to a point where it feels detrimental to the game to have such a feud. It’s a battle that is masked in “doing what’s best for the players,” when all it really is, is a pair of rival businesses looking out for their own best interests (which you can’t really fault them for).
To be honest though, it’s getting old. Perhaps it gets worse before it gets better, but count me among those that hopes each finds a way to get this thing figured out once and for all.
Misguided anger from NCAA: North Dakota head coach Dave Hakstol is fed up with the CHL.
Patrick King, Sportsnet.ca, February 8, 2012
The endless saga that is the Canadian Hockey League and college hockey cold war reached new lows recently.
North Dakota head coach Dave Hakstol is understandably upset after losing forwards J.T. Miller to the Plymouth Whalers last summer and now Stefan Matteau to Blainville-Boisbriand a month ago. Neither suited up a game (nor will ever suit up) for the school where Jonathan Toews once starred.
Frustration is giving way to sensationalism, something those within the college game never seem to shy away from. The portrait being painted south of the border is that of a renegade league of bandits, one part Jesse James another part John Dillinger.
"We need to have a deal in place with the NHL and with the CHL," Hakstol told the Grand Forks Herald recently. "We are going into a back-alley brawl. They are bringing guns. We're coming with no weapon and one hand tied behind our back."
If a picture can tell a thousand words, Hakstol managed to use far fewer to portray the CHL as a callous, indignant league with no remorse for its ramifications on the college game. It's hardly the first time -- and we're betting far from the last -- where a coach of a college program cries foul over a rule whose injuries are self-inflicted.
It is, after all, the NCAA's rule which prevents players from joining their program if they sign a standard CHL contract or play so much as an exhibition game of major junior. Therefore, it's the NCAA, not the CHL, that handicaps its own program.
It's not exactly like showing up with a knife to a gun fight, which, as per Hakstol's comparison, would actually lessen the disadvantage. This is a supposed war involving two parties, one of which is practically blissfully unaware of its participation. That's more like a back-alley brawl where a punch-drunk boxer is fighting with the image he sees in the mirror.
College Hockey Inc. is now working on a legislation that would enable any player who signs a letter of intent, as Matteau did, to join the CHL only until after one season in the NCAA.
Michigan's head coach, Red Berenson, once went as far to say a player "contaminated" his college eligibility by playing major junior in a Globe and Mail story. Others have called it poaching or stealing. We get it. Playing major junior renders one ineligible for college. But is it really necessary to be so dramatic and negative towards another program that did nothing shady or outside of their own rules and regulations?
No such rule exists where a player can't play in the CHL after suiting up in college. No such rule exists within the CHL that declares a player ineligible of taking his craft to the college game after his junior career concludes.
Their arguments make about as much sense as the analogy Hakstol presented. We've heard it all before; a player makes a verbal commitment and must then fulfill his obligations. Should he back out, he is then viewed as a liar and accused of using the NCAA as a bargaining chip to land in whichever CHL destination he desires most.
What's never mentioned is the timing the commitments are being made. To get a leg up on the CHL, players are being recruited and giving verbal commitments around the same time as they're attending a Grade 9 math class.
Kenny Ryan's father, K.C., once put it in perspective when his son was being wooed by college programs.
"Here's a kid who is still having sleepovers," he said.
And yet, when a young kid returns from said sleepover, he's supposed to have his college career sorted out well before high school graduation day. Should he change his mind, as teenagers are prone to do and hardly ever chastised for doing with any other decisions, he's suddenly a liar unwilling to see through a commitment.
Sometimes it's a matter of numbers. Jack Campbell withdrew his commitment to Michigan to join the Windsor Spitfires last season. As a goaltender, he knew his college options would be lessened if he waited to declare his destination after attending the United States National Team Development Program and the NHL draft, since a team would make sure those spots are taken care of well in advance.
"Really, what it comes down to is people don't realize that players are getting recruited at such a young age, 14, 15-years old," Campbell said. "Being a goalie, there's only two spots on the team, especially with scholarships and everything. It wouldn't have been possible for me to wait until my (age) 18 year to commit to a college or after the draft."
If a college coach feels slighted, and there are many examples, he should redirect his anger. Rather than pointing a disapproving finger at the CHL and saying, "shame on you," maybe it's time for those within college hockey to review their constitution.
Blaming the CHL for doing nothing more than operating their league as they see fit is nothing more than looking for a scapegoat.
If Hakstol and others feel as though their hands are tied behind their backs, it's bound by the NCAA and not the CHL. And if they're at such a disadvantage, then maybe they should stop looking for a fight.
NCAA/CHL Battle Heating Up [UPDATED]
Chris Peters, United States of Hockey, July 27, 2011
The college hockey world has been mainly focused on the constant realignment talk, but there’s another big story developing over this summer and it’s not a good one.
In recent weeks, three of the four college-committed players selected in the first round of the 2011 Entry Draft have decided to go to the OHL. J.T. Miller, previously committed to the University of North Dakota, has reportedly signed with the Plymouth Whalers. Jamie Oleksiak, who would have been a sophomore at Northeastern signed with the Saginaw Spirit last week. And the latest: I was informed by two independent sources that Connor Murphy will drop his commitment to Miami University and will sign with the Sarnia Sting. That is expected to be announced soon.
That leaves Tyler Biggs, a Miami recruit, as the only first-round draftee that has yet to drop his commitment in favor of the OHL. Biggs reaffirmed his commitment to Miami on the Pipeline Show Tuesday night. His rights are held by the Oshawa Generals.
Biggs is a Toronto draft pick. Brian Burke has a special connection to Miami and likely wouldn’t push Biggs in one direction or another. Burke knows Miami can develop his first-round pick. That said, Biggs just lost his college roommate in Murphy and there’s no doubt Oshawa has the full-court press on the power forward. You just never know.
The hits didn’t stop there. I was told last night by a reliable source that John Gibson, easily the top goaltending recruit in all of college hockey, will forego his commitment to Michigan to sign with the Kitchener Rangers. Michael Spath later confirmed this report via text with Gibson and Michigan head coach Red Berenson issued a statement saying, “John Gibson has decided not to attend the University of Michigan or to play college hockey.” This particularly stings for Michigan in that this is the second straight year they’ve lost the top goalie recruit in the country, as Jack Campbell was a previous Michigan commit before signing with Windsor.
Earlier today, I also got word that Reid Boucher, who was the leading goal scorer for the U.S. Under-18s at the World Under-18 Championship, also will be headed to the Sarnia Sting. Boucher, who was selected in the fourth round by New Jersey, has one year of high school left and was slated to play in the USHL next year before heading to Michigan State in 2012-13. Looks like plans have changed and Sarnia has itself another huge coup, while college hockey takes another hit.
[UPDATE (7/29): J.T. Miller signed with the New York Rangers Thursday, and Plymouth officially announced Miller signed with them on Friday morning. John Gibson's signing with the Kitchener Rangers was made official Wednesday afternoon. Connor Murphy's signing with the Sarnia Sting was announced Wednesday, shortly after this post was published. Just minutes prior to this update, Sarnia also announced that it had signed Reid Boucher. That's a rough couple of days for college hockey.]
Not only has college hockey lost the players that saw their profiles raise after being drafted this past June, they’re losing some top-end youngsters as well.
Three players that wouldn’t have been on college campuses until 2013-14 at the earliest have also gone north. Former BU recruit Anthony DeAngelo, who skated for Cedar Rapids in the USHL this year, signed with Sarnia earlier in the summer. Adam Erne, another BU recruit who played in the USHL last year, was traded to the Quebec Remparts and is expected to sign. Most recently, Brandon Shea, who had previously committed to Boston College and was slated to play at the NTDP this year, has reportedly agreed to a deal with the Moncton Wildcats.
These three players are top-end 1995 birth years. Unlike their older counterparts who are more developed, we don’t know how good these guys will be in the next two years. We know how good Miller, Oleksiak, Gibson and Murphy are. So college hockey losing those guys hurts a little more, for now at least. However, seeing three high-profile youngsters head north is bad news not only for college hockey, but the USHL as well.
So what does it all mean? This isn’t a post to argue college or Major Junior is a better option, because that’s a silly apples and oranges argument. Each path has benefits unique to individual players and it is impossible (and unfair) to make a blanket statement of one being better than the other.
As a fan of college hockey, I think there should be concern, though. Concern that this summer is going to become the norm and that more elite players are going to choose the CHL over the NCAA, thus hurting the level of play in college hockey.
Does a summer like this give off the impression that the CHL is actually better? To me it doesn’t, but to people unfamiliar with the development process it just might. Most importantly is this signalling to other prospective players that the CHL is clearly the “better” option?
Brad Schlossman of the Grand Forks Herald wrote about the NCAA’s perception problem, and makes a ton of valid points while focusing on one case. Neate Sager of Buzzing the Net had a counterpoint that I think may have taken Schlossman’s column slightly out of context, but still made valid points along the way.
I count eight (what I would consider) top-end, high-profile players that have chosen the CHL route after previously committing to a college, all of which are mentioned above. The optics of this are not good for college hockey. In this case, it is not necessarily the quantity of players choosing the CHL route, but the quality. The good players have influence over the next class coming up, without ever having to say a word.
I posed the question on Twitter as well, asking my followers: Knowing however much or little you know about this topic, which is better? CHL or NCAA? Most responded with “it depends on the player,” which I think is correct. It does in some ways. I’m not fully on board with that though, only because I believe if a player is good enough he’ll make it to the NHL regardless of path. I had to ask the question though, to see if that perception that one is better than the other exists. I was impressed and surprised to see the majority of people who answered couldn’t pick one over the other or say one was better.
A few folks have asked whether all of this realignment talk has had any affect on the players’ decisions. I would have to say no. It might have a little influence, but having been around top-end teenage hockey players, realignment is likely a tiny blip on their radars. The only thing on these kids’ minds is going to the NHL, in almost every single case. That player is going to make the choice that he and his family (or in some cases his NHL team) feel is the best path to get him to the NHL as quickly as possible.
Another issue at hand is the lateness of these broken commitments. Neate Sager had a great take on this very topic today. Regardless of what side of the debate you’re on, the college teams are getting royally screwed with these late defections.
I’m not going to criticize a kid for changing his mind. I’ve been around long enough to know that it happens far more than any of us would like. However, the teams that are just a month away from fall practice have to entirely shift plans for the season. They may have to find replacements. They can only hope they’ll be as lucky as Notre Dame was last year in being able to call in T.J. Tynan who was scheduled to play one more year of junior and went on to lead the team in scoring after Kyle Palmieri went pro. Odds are, that won’t be happening. It’s a shame for those schools to have such little time to recover.
At the end of the day, college hockey is a great path for pro development and shouldn’t be considered an inferior product to the CHL. It is just… different. That said, these high-profile defections deliver quite a blow to the college game. What is left to do? How does college hockey keep this from continually happening?
I guess that’s up to College Hockey, Inc., the commissioners and head coaches to figure out, but there really is no easy answer in this whole ordeal. I take issue with people saying the CHL “stole” a player, because at the end of the day, the choice is the kid’s (though its fair to say the CHL teams can be extra persuasive). College hockey has to find a way to make sure more kids are choosing it as opposed to the CHL.
It has been a long summer, and it might get longer, for college hockey. As a fan of the college game, I hope we continue to see a great on-ice product and more college kids making it to the NHL.
All that said, we all have to understand that these kids have options and there is never going to be an absolutely correct answer for which option a player should take. It’s one of those things that makes hockey’s development system entirely unique and often times entirely confusing.
Rockets battling over import’s playing rights
Larry Fisher, Kelowna Daily Courier, August 19, 2011
The Dubuque Fighting Saints have won this battle, but might still lose the war. That is, the war over dynamic Latvian forward Zemgus Girgensons, a top 2012 NHL draft prospect.
The Kelowna Rockets selected Girgensons with the 45th overall pick in this summer’s CHL Import Draft, but the 17-year-old won’t be reporting to the Central Okanagan for next week’s rookie camp. Instead, Girgensons will be returning to Dubuque, Iowa, where he posted an impressive 21 goals and 49 points in 51 games last season for the Fighting Saints of the United States Hockey League.
Still, Rockets president and general manager Bruce Hamilton hasn’t given up on luring Girgensons north of the border at some point this season or next.
“It’s at a stalemate,” Hamilton said. “His agents think (Dubuque) is where he should be playing and he’s very loyal to that program. But I know as soon as he’s drafted, the NHL team’s not going to want him in Dubuque and they’re not going to want him going to the University of Vermont, either. We’ll have a real good opportunity to have him here for sure next year, and potentially after Christmas this year. When the Latvian team plays in the world juniors, we’ll be very aggressive again there.”
There is no transfer agreement between the WHL and USHL and no transaction would be necessary for Girgensons to jump ship mid-season. The Rockets have rolled the dice on high-end Europeans in the import draft and successfully landed them in years past, such as current Calgary Flames forward Mikael Backlund, who was another late arrival but helped lead Kelowna to the 2009 WHL championship and Memorial Cup final.
The Rockets have also had success with another Latvian product, Lauris Darzins, a left-winger who called Kelowna home from 2004 to 2006, was drafted by the Nashville Predators and currently plays in Russia’s Kontinental Hockey League. Hamilton even had Darzins help in selling Girgensons on Kelowna and the Rockets, to no avail.
“We’re going to go after him still,” Hamilton insisted. “I’m not worried about him starting the year down there because the USHL is stealing players out of Canada on a daily basis right now, so it won’t bother me if we steal one out of there.”
For now, the Rockets will have to settle for one import — Slovakian sniper Filip Vasko, the 58th overall selection this year. Kelowna traded for that pick, acquiring it from the Portland Winterhawks, after catching wind that Vasko was contemplating coming overseas to play.
“This guy was never coming over and then we got word late in the draft that he would consider coming and would consider coming here, so we took a gamble and picked him,” Hamilton said of Vasko, who is expected to arrive in Kelowna next Wednesday. “We’re excited to have him coming, and from all reports he’s a pretty good player. He’s another skilled guy and he’s going to be a good draft pick next year, too.”
Rockets head coach Ryan Huska is looking forward to Vasko’s addition, to see where and how he fits into the depth chart. Also 17, Vasko has played against older competition the past two seasons in Slovakia’s under-20 league, tallying 23 goals and 60 points in 78 games, plus 32 goals and 71 points in 61 games at the under-18 level.
“I’ve had great reports from a lot of different coaches on this young man,” Huska said. “One guy you could make a comparison to is Zach Franko, where he’s a very fast and skilled forward that will hopefully fit in nicely with one of our offensive lines.”
Vasko joins a talented offensive core that already consists of last year's leading scorer Shane McColgan, Franko and another top 2012 prospect in Colton Sissons, with the potential for veterans Brett Bulmer and Mitchell Callahan to return if released by their respective NHL clubs.
Huska added that he’d gladly welcome Girgensons to the fold in the future. The hope is these imports, specifically Vasko for the time being, will be upgrades on last year’s castoffs — forwards Andreas Stene of Norway and Gal Koren of Slovenia.
“We went through a tough year last year,” Hamilton said. “The two kids we had, they both came and did everything they could, but they just weren’t good enough. And there’s no sense having those (European) guys if you’ve got Canadian guys that are better than them. Hopefully (Vasko) will be a better fit for what we want and need.”
-----
Spitfires continue pursuit of Schmaltz
Jim Parker, The Windsor Star, October 21, 2011
The Windsor Spitfires will draw a lot of attention for the 2012 NHL Draft.
Eight current players on the roster are up for the draft for the first time in June, but Spitfire fans should not forget the name Jordan Schmaltz.
“He’s a top 10 player,” Spitfires head coach Bob Boughner said.
And someone the Spitfires have been trying to bring to Windsor since the club took the offensive-minded defenceman in the seventh round of the 2010 OHL Draft from the Chicago Mission minor midgets.
“We’ve talked to his advisor,” Boughner said of Kurt Overhardt, who also represents Spitfire goalie Jack Campbell.
“We’ve expressed our heavy interest to get him into a Spitfire uniform.”
For two years, the Spitfires have had their overtures rebuffed by Schmaltz and his family, who have son Nick Schmaltz eligible for the 2012 OHL Draft.
“It hasn’t been as pleasant as I had expected,” Spitfires general manager Warren Rychel said. “I think he’s making a mistake in not exploring his options.”
At this point, the 18-year-old Schmaltz is playing his third season in the United States Hockey League with the Sioux City Musketeers in Iowa.
Next year, he’s scheduled to attend North Dakota University on a full-ride scholarship, but the Spitfires believe professional hockey will come calling long before he gets his degree.
“He won’t play four years of college hockey,” Rychel said.
“(And) you can’t attend an NHL training came when you go to college.”
International Scouting Service has Schmaltz rated 21st overall, but at six foot-two and 175 pounds with a big offensive upside, most expect him to climb much higher.
When the draft arrives in June and Schamltz’s name is called in the first round, that’s when things might get interesting.
“He has to make a decision,” Boughner said.
“College is the right decision for some guys, but a guy like that, we’re the one that going to get you prepared for the NHL.”
Boughner said Cam Fowler, who compares to Schmlatz in many respects, is a perfect example.
He turned down a scholarship from Notre Dame University, came to the Spitfires for one season where he won a Memorial Cup.
He was then taken in the first round by the Anaheim Ducks and went straight to the NHL.
“The Cam Fowler situation is a perfect scenario where you could be in the NHL in 18-to-24 months,” Boughner said.
For now, the Spitfires would just like Schmaltz to make a phone call and not to someone and not to someone in club management.
“Just look at Cam Fowler,” Rychel said.
“(Schmaltz) should pick up and phone and call Cam Fowler or his dad should pick up a phone and call Perry Fowler (Cam’s dad) or pick up the phone and talk to Jack Campbell, (who walked away from a scholarship at the University of Michigan to join the Spitfires).”
If that call doesn’t come before the draft, the Spitfires are hoping it might come after the draft like it did for many players from this year’s NHL Draft.
J.T. Miller was headed to North Dakota until the New York Rangers made him a first-round pick and he changed directions and joined the Plymouth Whalers. He wasn’t the lone player to spurn college hockey for the OHL.
Goalie John Gibson passed on Michigan to join the Kitchener Rangers, Jamie Oleksiak left Northeastern University to join the Saginaw Spirit, Reid Boucher opted for the Sarnia Sting over Michigan State while Connor Murphy spurned Miami of Ohio to play in Sarnia.
“Bob and I have a great relationship with NHL teams,” Rychel said.
“Hopefully, he’s taken by one of those teams that can give him direction.”
CHL vs. NCAA: The Public Pursuit of an American Top Prospect
Chris Peters, The United States of Hockey, October 24, 2011
Sunday night, I was alerted to a story from the Windsor Star regarding Jordan Schmaltz. In it, Windsor Spitfires GM Warren Rychel and head coach Bob Boughner reveal that they are continuing their pursuit of Schmaltz, currently a defenseman for the Sioux City Musketeers in the USHL, a top 2012 Draft prospect and verbal commitment to the University of North Dakota.
That Windsor is hot on the trail of a college-committed American top prospect is nothing new. The squad has had success luring away several previously committed Americans like Cam Fowler, Jack Campbell and Kenny Ryan. There have been other, less publicized, instances where Windsor was unable to secure the rights to players they pursued (Stephen Johns, for example), but they’ve reeled in some big fish over the last few years.
This curiously timed article really piqued my interest, and it should be required reading for anyone that has been following the ongoing battle between the Canadian Hockey League and NCAA for a variety of reasons.
First, just to quickly reset the stage…
Jordan Schmaltz is considered a likely first rounder for this year’s NHL Entry Draft. He was selected by Windsor in the seventh round of the OHL Priority Draft in 2010 at age 16. Schmaltz previously was committed to the University of Wisconsin (a verbal he made at age 14), but later backed out. He then gave a verbal commitment to North Dakota in September of 2010. Schmaltz spent last season with Sioux City and returned this year. Since drafting him, Windsor has been in hot pursuit.
If the allure of racking up points with the Spits during his draft season wasn’t enough to get Schmaltz to leave the USHL and his commitment to North Dakota, I have a hard time believing his mind will change. If he was going to go, why not this year?
That is what makes the timing of this piece so curious to me. The season is only a few weeks old, the tumultuous summer of broken commitments to college hockey programs has begun to fade, so why bring this up now? It’s just so out of the blue.
The Spits are an average team this year, but still possess a winning record in a very tough Western Conference in the OHL. You don’t think… Nah… They couldn’t be trying to get him out of the USHL for this season, could they? Well, maybe, just a bit.
It is rare for a player to leave one league in-season for another, though not unprecedented. Kenny Ryan left Boston College a few weeks into his freshman season to join Windsor. That said, I can’t recall it ever happening during a player’s draft-eligible season and I don’t see Schmaltz being the first.
So what gives?
First off, there might not be a better team in hockey that is as good at utilizing the media as the Windsor Spitfires. This article reads like a public challenge to Jordan Schmaltz. It also plainly lays out the cookie-cutter CHL recruiting pitch, as to why a prospect should choose that route over the NCAA.
Rychel told Windsor Star reporter Jim Parker that Schmaltz is making a mistake in not “exploring his options.” Now, we have to take Rychel at his word, I guess, but how do we know Schmaltz hasn’t been exploring his options in his own way? I’m not saying Rychel is lying, I’m just saying he’s not Jordan Schmaltz.
Additionally, Boughner brought up Cam Fowler as a comparable player to Schmaltz and a big reason why the latter should consider Windsor.
Rychel also mentions that Schmaltz should call Fowler and Jack Campbell and have his father call Fowler’s father.
That’s great. But why is Warren Rychel telling us this? Most likely, it’s because whatever he’s saying to Schmaltz and his family in private is not getting through. So he’s taking it public.
This piece allows Rychel to let everybody know Windsor wants Jordan Schmaltz and if Schmaltz doesn’t go to Windsor, he’s making a mistake. Whoever reads the piece is getting that as the takeaway.
There will be no rebuttal in public from North Dakota, and likely none from Schmaltz himself, and Rychel knows that. North Dakota Head Coach Dave Hakstol can’t say a word about Jordan Schmaltz publicly because Schmaltz has yet to sign a National Letter of Intent. So for now, there is one public voice on this issue, and it’s the voice Rychel most wants you to hear. His own.
This is not a criticism of Windsor. In fact, I think it might be quite smart. If Schmaltz elects not to go to Windsor, the team has already stated they think that’s a mistake. Then again, perhaps Schmaltz takes the challenge to heart and gives Windsor an extra look (assuming he’s not offended by the public nature of the challenge).
There are no rules preventing Rychel or Boughner from talking to the media about a prospective player. It’s merely a tool that they have, and they’re using it well.
So now, it puts the ball is in Schmaltz’s court. The Spits have laid it all out there for everyone to see. Odds are, he sticks with his USHL club this season, continues to raise his draft stock and earns a first round selection, but the war doesn’t end there as Rychel notes in the piece…
“Bob and I have a great relationship with NHL Teams,” Rychel said.
“Hopefully he’s taken by one of those teams that can give him direction.”
Just a friendly reminder from Rychel, regarding the few college committed players that were advised by the NHL teams that selected them in last year’s draft to go the CHL route.
It’s also a reminder that there are more hurdles than ever before for colleges to overcome in order to get a top player into their hockey programs.
Schmaltz seems firm in his commitment. He has family ties to North Dakota (including his father, who is an alum). Still, with the landscape the way it is, it seems as though every top player becomes an individual case study on the CHL vs. NCAA battle. Schmaltz will be no different.
So which recruiting pitch does he become part of next year?
Personally I feel CHL should honor NCAA commitments. I understand why they take players leaving NCAA but it seems they still recruit players that have committed to NCAA.
Disclaimer. I?m American and played NCAA.
But the other side is its apples to oranges. NCAA takes 20-21 year old freshman while CHL drafts out of Bantams. Players that are serious about hockey don?t want to wait. I see both sides.
Abredeen,
I too see both sides. I don't like seeing kids make a commitment and then back out. I also question whether either side (NCAA or CHL) should be allowed to 'force' a kid to make a commitment at such a young age. I didn't even 'know' what I wanted to study in university when I got there; I took interesting courses that were 'easy' because I was playing hockey and working. I wish I 'knew' what I wanted to study instead of taking the path of least resistance and getting a relatively useless BA degree!
Right now, the CHL can recruit NCAA players and they don't have any repurcussions if they choose to do so. If it were the other way, I am sure the NCAA would do the same. At the end of the day, it is a competitive business for the CHL teams / NCAA programs and they must do whatever is best for their own programs. They don't care about the opposition. That's reality and a competitive market!
I think the rules must be re-examined, discussed and then all parties must abide by them (CHL / NCAA / USA Hockey / Hockey Canada / IIHF / CIS, etc.) In my own personal world, these would level the playing field for both systems and not allow for immediate transfer - they must complete a year or sit out a year before being able to play - among other things.
I played for Spokane while attending school in the US but upon my graduation from junior, I moved back to Canada to finish school (I was recruited by CIS teams) but focussed on coaching instead. Later, I coached in the Tier 2, WHL, Canadian College and University ranks, so my experiences are based on those leagues. The only places I haven't coached are in the NCAA (would like to one day!) and in the US junior league (USHL - maybe coach there one day too?) I was always a fan of the WHL and CIS because that is what I knew best.
If someone was to ask me my opinion on what direction their son should take, I would say, "if the kid is big for his age (an early developer) and isn't academically inclined, lean towards the CHL. If he is average (or small) for his age and is average or better at school, lean towards Tier 2 with the goal of an NCAA / CIS scholarship." After coaching at Tier 2 and in the WHL, I would also tell the kids / parents to do their homework on the individual programs. Tier 2 seems to be more 'unprofessional' than the CHL; but while the CHL is run like a pro league, that can also have a negative impact. The old cliche: "Sometimes your greatest strength is your greatest weakness - and vice versa!" Caveat Emptor!
Today, I have similar feelings but truly appreciate putting the education and hockey option first wherever possible (Tier 2 / NCAA or CIS). Hockey is only a game and a very small number play in the NHL. More play in the minors, Europe and at college / university. At the end of the day, the game ends and it is time to 'reintegrate' into society; most likely needing to work and 99.9% of the time, you need at least an undergraduate education to be considered. Kind of like in the 1950's / 1960's - a high school education was needed. Now it's an undergraduate degree or technical diploma... and even now, many places are advertising requirements asking for advanced degrees / diploma standing! I think as time goes by, it will become even more competitive so far as school credentials go.
Ultimately, I think the CHL has done a number of things that hurt it's credibility and perception when it is compared side by side with the NCAA - either through arrogance or stupidity. The more I see / hear, the more I like the CIS and NCAA. If I was advising my own kids, (if they were to play hockey), I would encourage academics first and this means Canadian university or NCAA.
Quebec league schedule change does more harm than good
WILLY PALOV, Halifax Herald, February 17, 2012
I understand why the Quebec league pushed the start of next season back a couple of weeks.
It gets them in line with the Canadian Hockey League’s other partners — the Ontario Hockey League and Western Hockey League. It also means teams can ice more legitimate rosters during the early part of the season.
Opening on Sept. 8 this year meant several league stars were still away at NHL training camps. The Saint John Sea Dogs, for example, were missing a dozen players for a few games. Naturally, they lost those outings to teams that normally wouldn’t have any business making it close against them. Fans who paid to attend those games may not have felt like they got fair value for their dollar.
So for a lot of reasons, the decision to move opening night to Sept. 20 makes sense. But there are plenty of other reasons why it makes no sense at all.
For starters, the pre-season is already too long. Players reported to training camp in mid-August last year, like they do every year. That gives teams just over three weeks to make their roster decisions and get everyone on the same page. That’s more than enough time to ramp up for the season, perhaps even too much time for junior teams whose rosters are typically 80 or 90 per cent set before the first skate of training camp is held.
So now they’re going to add nearly two more weeks to the pre-season to make it a five-week slog? That’s absurd.
I don’t envy coaches who will now need to find even more ways to keep the players engaged during the tedious lead-up to the season. And if the league decides to pass that time with more exhibition games, I pity the general managers who have to watch their top talent risk injury a few more times.
Does anyone recall what happened to Marty Frk in the Halifax Mooseheads’ second-to-last game of the pre-season this year? Frk suffered a concussion and missed the first 3 1/2 months of the regular season. Mooseheads teammate Andrew Ryan also broke his ankle during a training camp practice.
I’m sure the Mooseheads brass were thrilled to lose two top players during a pointless part of the year.
The obvious compromise would be to start training camp later to make up for the Sept. 20 regular-season opening, but that’s where everyone’s hands are tied. The Quebec college system requires students to be enrolled and available for classes by Aug. 20 each year. Since the majority of the league’s players are from that province, roster decisions must be made for those kids by that deadline.
It wouldn’t be fair to those players or the teams to start training camp on, say, Sept. 1, when those kids are already supposed to be attending classes. So we’re stuck with the Aug. 15 training camp start.
What’s worse, by starting the regular season on Sept. 20, the league is compromising the education of every player in the league.
When the league pushed its season opener into the Sept. 8 range, a bit of breathing room was created in the schedule. The league was able to schedule fewer weekday games so players didn’t have to miss as many classes or sacrifice as much of their study time. Now they have to cram those games into a shorter time frame. For a league that prides itself on its education standards, this is a step backwards.
An acceptable solution to the education issue would have been to start the season later but cut a few games out of the schedule to make it more manageable for the players. But let’s not be naive. There is no way the league’s owners would sacrifice that much revenue just to lighten the players’ load at school.
So for better or worse, we have an imperfect schedule with an imperfect set of variables dictating that it won’t be optimized any time soon. C’est la vie in the Quebec league, I suppose.
I like the discussion. I think the elite level players are going to make it to the NHL no matter what. In fact, an added bonus for a player like Jaden Schwartz who has gone the NCAA route, is that if he signs next year and doesn't make the parent club, he gets to play in the AHL as opposed to being forced back to the CHL.
Either way, the teams that sign players at a younger age on both sides of the border are taking large risks at players expense. Would be nice to see both sides not be allowed to commit kids until they turn 17. CHL would not be allowed to have players U17 rostered. This would allow time for the players to explore both options while also taking an extra year to develop and might stop some players who excel at a young age from going the wrong direction.
Eric,
I enjoy the discussions too. "Armchair league presidents!"
I also agree that if a player is good enough, "the cream will rise to the top" - regardless of which path they take.
The younger any league drafts a kid, the larger the risk. Kids haven't matured physically, mentally, emotionally, etc.
Wouldn't it be nice to increase the NHL draft age up to 19 (it used to be 19 or 20 - the "Ken Linsman rule" is when it changed in the 1970's) and move the CHL draft age to 15 (or better yet - 16!) Have the NCAA also allowed to come in at the same age as the CHL.
Next year, the WHL is going to increase their roster size by two players to 25. People smarter than me have asked why they don't allow for an addtional two 20-year olds to make up this increase (up from three per team) to make the league more mature. This would fit nicely if they increased the NHL draft age.
Sources: Commissioners told Kelly to resign or be fired as College Hockey Inc. executive director
By Todd D. Milewski • Executive Editor USCHO.com • Feb. 20, 2012
Paul Kelly was given a choice Monday to resign or be fired as executive director of College Hockey Inc., sources said, and he chose the former.
An erosion of trust in Kelly from the commissioners of college hockey’s five Division I men’s leagues led them to end Kelly’s two-plus-year term leading the promotional and marketing group.
The announcement was made Monday afternoon by the Hockey Commissioners Association, which controls College Hockey Inc.
Sources described a falling out between the commissioners and Kelly that had been a while in the making, based on a difference of opinions on College Hockey Inc.’s scope.
But the final straw, the sources said, was Kelly recently approaching athletic directors from some ECAC Hockey schools about meeting to give College Hockey Inc. a more leading role in the administration of Division I men’s hockey.
Kelly could not immediately be reached for comment. In a text message to TSN’s Pierre LeBrun posted on the broadcaster’s website, Kelly said: “Time to move on. I told them I’d give them 2-3 years to get the entity established and operational. It’s been 28 months and it’s time for a new challenge.”
“The HCA would like to thank Paul for his service to CHI and wish him the best in his future endeavors,” Steve Hagwell, Hockey Commissioners Association president and ECAC Hockey commissioner, said in a statement.
The commissioners group also said in the statement that it expects to discuss a “different course” for the executive director position. A replacement for Kelly was not immediately announced.
Kelly, the former executive director of the National Hockey League Players Association, was hired in November 2009 by the commissioners to run College Hockey Inc.
College Hockey Inc. was formed by the commissioners as a central marketing vehicle for college hockey. It is funded in part by a grant from the NHL through USA Hockey.
TMQ: BU and Kelly’s ouster
By Jim Connelly and Todd D. Milewski • Senior Writers USCHO.com • Feb. 21, 2012
Jim: That was a very impressive week for Boston College. Monday’s Beanpot final was dramatic and emotional and it would’ve been very simple to let up against Merrimack. It may have been convenient that the Eagles had further motivation — BC coach Jerry York going for win No. 900 — on Friday. But there’s no explaining Saturday and a tough road atmosphere in Merrimack’s Lawler Arena. That win took the determination of a champion. Man, where have we seen this before?
Now, down Commonwealth Avenue, things may not be as nice where, for the second time this year, the Boston University Terriers have had a player arrested for alleged sexual assault. This time it was defenseman Max Nicastro, just two months Corey Trivino was booted from the team. It’s impossible to know exactly what happened in either case, but at this point it seems like the Terriers are developing a bit of a bad reputation. Being in Boston, I can tell you it was one of the top stories on all the newscasts all day on Monday. Regardless of the outcome, you have to think head coach Jack Parker is anything but pleased with his team’s reputation right now.
Todd: It’s really a scary situation there, to be honest, and you have to think there’s going to be a lot of scrutiny on that program, not only from the media but also from the school itself. And there should be. These are serious accusations that have been made, and at some point, fairly or not, people are going to have to ask some tough questions of people in the program.
Are these charges indicative of the culture of the team? It’s impossible to say from my chair, and I wouldn’t even want to go down that road with what we know now.
Jim: I actually will say straight out that this is not indicative of the culture of BU’s team. But perception is reality far too often and it takes just a few small instances as such to damage a reputation.
BU wasn’t the only big news this week. Late on Monday, the Hockey Commissioners Association announced that Paul Kelly has resigned. As USCHO.com’s story said, though, Kelly’s resignation may have been a bit of face saving. Now, I’ve met Paul a number of times and like him very much. But we all know he comes from a position of power at the NHLPA and, without knowing all the facts, we could speculate that Kelly wanted more power in the college hockey world.
Todd: I still hope we hear from Kelly on this story because I think he can fill in some gaps. We’ve tried reaching out to him but haven’t heard back. The news was surprising when it first came out, but after hearing what sources had to say, it sounds like this has been brewing for a while.
Let’s be honest here: The Division I men’s commissioners, it seems both individually and collectively, have ways that they like things to be done. So does Paul Kelly. Maybe it wasn’t exactly destined to come to this from the start, but there were strong forces on each side, and in the end the commissioners had the last say.
It does bring up some important questions about the future of College Hockey Inc., and what kind of replacement the commissioners will seek.
Jim: My thought is that the commissioners will look to take the solid roots that Kelly has put in place but get someone more in line with their thought processes to take the top role. And that’s not to suggest that Kelly wasn’t aligned with the commissioners in many ways. But I do believe that his past made him someone who could see himself as the overall spokesperson for all things college hockey. And the individual — and, as you mention, the collective — personalities of the five commissioners doesn’t seem to jell with that.
I will say, though, what Kelly did in his two-plus years was a major positive for college hockey. He stirred debate, brought together college hockey and the NHL, created tremendous structure to the marketing of college hockey in general and served as a face that college hockey has never had.
Todd: It would be a shame to go backward on the outreach that Kelly helped get going with CHI. The idea of the group is still much needed — in part, to get into places where individual college hockey teams can’t get because of NCAA rules — so let’s hope the overall message doesn’t get lost.
Dean where you play university? In the US or in Canada?
Little off topic here but wanted to bring up something that most in Canada dont know about. Thats US ACHA (American Collegiate Hockey Association). The topic is for elite players, what about the good players that just dont get that opportunity to be part of an elite program?
NCAA rules and guidelines are outdated, just look at the mess with the recent NCAA Football story lines. Title IX is also an issue and in the US the fastest growing league for College/University is ACHA.
Formally known as Club hockey. The hockey is way too good now and far more organized than "Club" but its now sort of a sister league to NCAA. Let me be clear though, it is NOT NCAA level hockey. But the reason I bring this is up there are 300 school that play in the ACHA 3 levels. Now most of these are true non varsity sports and offered as a service the universities students. But the in the ACHA DI level and top DII teams are legit, they actively recruit and compete at high levels. The top ACHA teams play some NCAA DIII teams. Take a look at Lindenwood roster (http://www.lindenwoodlions.com/roster.aspx?path=mhockey&;
). Liberty is where Ryan Walters son played and activity recruits Canadians ( http://www.liberty.edu/campusrec/clubsports/index.cfm?PID=15305).
The reason this league is getting better each year is because there arent enough teams at NCAA for the players.
I coached a ACHA DII team so I do have a bias. But I got NCAA caliber players that didn?t make NCAA team. I got a player that captained his Jr A team and aged out, went to NCAA DIII team in Mass and found out there were 15 players for 3 spots. Welcome to NCAA hockey! Where do those 12 cut players go? Most go ACHA.
Anyway sorry that was long. Again for the sake of conversation and I would bet within 10 years ACHA will rival NCAA DIII programs because they don?t have NCAA restrictions like Title IX. If NCAA doesnt add more NCAA DI programs soon they will really suffer.
And here is the real reason I mention this. Its gives players another option to continue playing. And isnt that why we coach? To help them reach their potential and continue playing as long as they want. At the end of the day it doesnt matter what
Aberdeen,
I played junior in Canada and the US. University in Canada.
I know of the ACHA and have watched it's progression since around 2000 - when I first became aware of 'club programs' in the US. The play by play person from Tri-Cities had a son who played for EWU (the US university I attended) so that's where I first became aware of it. Not sure if they are now in the ACHA, but I have also seen the rise of various Junior B and Junior A leagues throughout the US - leagues that previously went unnoticed by 99.9& of Canadians. And yes, there are more Canadians being recruited into these programs.
I heard rumours that the NCAA was considering implementing new scholarship rules that would start to 'cap' the number of Canadian kids allowed with the intent to provide more spots to Americans. (If this is true, this shows how quickly US hockey is developing. If the NCAA leaves the rules as is, I am sure a free-market economy in hockey players will take care of itself! In time, it will become a moot point as the talent pool in the US grows.)
Looking at Lindenwood's roster, I see Rick Zombo is the head coach (former Detroit Red Wing / St. louis Blue) and Ted Sator (former long-time NHL coach) is the Assistant Coach.
While not 100% current on the NCAA regulations (or those of the ACHA), I agree it is good that there are more places for kids to play and people to coach. Does the ACHA provide athletic scholarship monies to it's players? I would love to hear more details...
Thanks for the post. I will have changed the title of the thread to include 'ACHA' and CIS as I hope this becomes a wider-ranging discussion.
OMG ACHA is in the title of this thread. I didn?t see that, sorry. Ha
Best hockey name ever....Rick Zombo!
No scholarships for ACHA, which isnt all that different than NCAA. No scholarships for Ivy League, DII, and DIII. I think some Atlantic Hockey Assoc only offer 12 scholarships.
I know you know this Dean but for those that will be reading this.
59 total NCAA DI programs. Only the top 120 US players each year get some form of scholarship with the avg scholarship being $20K. The max is 18 scholarships per program. Not per year, per program. The numbers suggest that programs can only offer 2-3 full rides each year. From what I hear most hockey programs that offer scholarships break them up so each player gets some form of money while the blue chip players get full rides. Scholarships are provide one year at a time so they need to be re-upped after each year.
I do a presentation to the parents of a local youth org on the info above trying to set expectations. Most of them want their kids to get scholarships but have no idea how it works. Its actually easier to get an academic scholarship than an athletic scholarship.
Aberdeen,
I changed the title after you brought the information about the ACHA to the discussion. No worries!
Roman Hamrlik is one of the funniest player names I can recall. I also like Cal Clutterbuck!
Ivy league schools offer 'financial aid' based on the parents latest income tax returns. The more money your folks declared, the less the schools will offer.
Last I heard, the NCAA Div 1 hockey programs get 18 scholarships, per year (is this different than what you said?), and divide these up according to how they value their players. These are decided on a year-by-year basis, so the concept of a 'full ride / 4 year scholarship' is a marketing misnomer. Most parents and kids don't realize that their scholarship offer must be reviewed and renewed annually... and that there are less 'full' scholarships per year (18) then roster spots (20+)!
Here is more info to help provide backing to Aberdeen's comments:
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/icehockeyscholarships.htm
How many ice hockey scholarships are available and what schools offer them?
Number of scholarships offered per team, per year, by DivisionNot all colleges that are eligible to offer scholarships will choose to do so. For example, Ivy League schools choose not to offer athletic scholarships.
Hockey is an equivalency sport which means all scholarships are NOT full scholarships. For example, in NCAA D1, hockey coaches can divide the value of the 18 scholarships available to them between as many players as they see fit.
Men’s Hockey
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/icehockeyscholarships.htm#q4
NCAA D1: 18
Women’s Hockey
NCAA D1: 18
NCAA D2: 18
Number of College Hockey Programs
Men’s Hockey
NCAA D1: 58
*NCAA D3: 70
Total: 136
Women’s Hockey
NCAA D1: 34
NCAA D2: 2
*NCAA D3: 48
Total: 84
*NCAA Division 3 schools do not offer athletic scholarships, but do offer other forms of financial aid.
Of course, it is always best to go to the horse's mouth - here is the link to the NCAA:
www.ncaa.org
"Athletics grants-in-aid (frequently referred to as athletics scholarships) for Divisions I and II undergraduate student-athletes are partially supported through the NCAA revenue distribution. About $2 billion in athletically related financial aid is awarded each year at Divisions I and II institutions to more than 126,000 student-athletes. Grants-in-aid are awarded and administered directly by each institution, not by the NCAA.
Division III members do not offer athletically related financial aid."
NCAA Last Updated: Jan 31, 2012
Correct. max is 18 but Altantic Hockey has a max of 12
http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2011/05/26_atlantic_hockey_shoots_down.php
A proposal to increase the scholarship limit for Atlantic Hockey teams from 12 to 13, failed at the recent league meetings.
The vote was 7-5 in favor, but eight votes were needed for passage.
The NCAA's scholarship limit is 18 per team, but Atlantic Hockey has limited that to 12.
With the landscape of college hockey in complete flux, the decision could have a number of ramifications.
There is thought to be at least five teams among the 12 willing to play with 15 scholarships or more. They are widely believed to be Mercyhurst, Canisius, Robert Morris, Niagara and Air Force. RIT cannot give scholarships, directly, because it's a Division III institution and joined D-I in hockey after the grandfather clause was in effect. However, it is still believed to support being a part of the group supporting the scholarship increase.
The failure to pass the increase could hasten a split of the 12 teams into two different camps, a possibility which is only further hastened by the shifting landscape around college hockey. It's possible that some current CCHA teams could be looking for new partners or new homes, as well.
There are a variety of possible scenarios that could unfold as a result, but the status quo does not appear likely.
and not much change but good overview on updates to stipend
http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2011/11/03_ncaa_enacts_scholarship,_academic.php
I have added the ACAC, Alberta Colleges Athletic Conference to the list as it is also a league that offers partial scholarships. There is a men's and women's division. http://www.acachockey.info/index.php is the link to the hockey section.
Both Dean and I have coached in that league.
The men's division is mostly made up of players who chose Jr. A hoping to get an NCAA scholarship and that didn't work out for them. The CIS gets most of it's players from major junior. If the pro career didn't work out they get a years tuition and books for every year they played in the CHL.
The women's division is the same with high school aged girl's who play U18 midget or go to sports schools usually look NCAA first, CIS second and ACAC third.
Of course there are some major junior grads in the ACAC and some Jr. A in the CIS and oftern players chose the ACAC first because they either like the programs or don't want to move away.
A nice thing about the ACAC is that the government pays about 75% of the actual tuition cost, so it is much cheaper to get a degree than private universities. The Province gives a grant to all Alberta students who play hockey and to everyone in their second season. Each institution also has a scholarship fund to help with expenses.
Tom
Tom ACAC sounds like great hockey! That would be above ACHA for sure.
I love that fact that there are the chances for players to keep playing
Once I finish my "So you child wants to play college hockey" (WORKING TITLE) presentation Ill post it for upload.
Lots of fine details, like for NCAA DI admissions is handled though the athletic dept but NCAA DIII is handled through admission dept. This is why DIII over recruits because without a Letter of Intent process coaches have no idea who will show up until schools starts
Emotions Run High After Kelly's Departure
With Coaches Upset, Many Issues Lurked Below the Surface
Adam Wodon, College Hockey News, February 23, 2012
Paul Kelly was asked to resign earlier this week as executive director of College Hockey Inc. after 27 months on the job.
The reactions ranged from shock and outrage, to disappointment and resignation, and everything in between. Or everything all at once.
"All of the above," said Notre Dame coach Jeff Jackson.
Universally, coaches around the country reacted negatively to Tuesday's news that Paul Kelly had resigned — forced to resign — as executive director of College Hockey Inc. To the coaches, Kelly, the former head of the NHL Players Association, was the perfect person to help resolve many issues important to coaches, and college hockey in general.
"Paul Kelly is the best thing that happened to college hockey in 25 years," Jackson said, echoing the sentiments of every coach.
The decision to push Kelly out was made by the Hockey Commissioners Association, the organization in charge with establishing College Hockey Inc. two years ago, and the one that Kelly ultimately reported to. But the coaches were working with him, too, a good idea to be sure, but where the seeds of discontent were sewn.
"There were a lot of very positive things that Paul was developing for us, as a result, you can imagine how disappointed we all are to hear the news," Denver coach George Gwozdecky said.
"He opened lines of communication. We made great first steps with all of these entities — the NHL, the NHLPA, the NCAA, USA Hockey. There was so many positive steps in those regards. That dialogue shed light on a number of issues. ... Just to sit down with them is huge."
Said Jackson, "You couldn't have asked for a better representative. ... He was making major gains. All of the things that he was doing, I think it's all down the drain now."
The impression you get is that these comments are mild compared to what coaches are saying to each other.
The commissioners are not oblivious to this reaction.
"I'm not looking forward to Naples, that's for sure," said Steve Hagwell, president of the HCA and ECAC commissioner, referring to the annual coaches convention each April in Florida. "But I'm not going to hide from it. I'll be there and address whatever the coaches have to say."
The decision is inexplicable to the coaches, who were thrilled with what Kelly had been doing. The news is made even more hard to understand because the commissioners haven't given any reason for the move, even privately to the coaches.
"The commissioners have not informed the coaches as to what the issues are and were, and so before going off and condemning someone, I think as coaches we need to be given the facts by the commissioners," Gwozdecky said. "I've spoken with one of the commissioners, and he was not willing to share the reasons."
Power Play
Kelly was ultimately asked to resign because the commissioners believed he was making clandestine maneuvers intended to consolidate more power for College Hockey Inc. itself, sources tell College Hockey News. Essentially, rightly or wrongly — and it could be argued that it was a very good idea — Kelly wanted to be the commissioner of college hockey, with all of the authority that the title implies.
As far as the coaches were concerned, this was favorable, if not outright encouraged. To the commissioners, this is an impractical concept outside the established structure. To them, dealing with Kelly became like dealing with a renegade coach who skirts the system and is combative with his own athletic department, but nonetheless wins a lot of games.
Of course coaches would want a single "commissioner" to deal with, one with the power to do what they want — the same way Gary Bettman does for NHL owners.
Unfortunately, the NCAA doesn't work this way.
The amount of attention placed on Paul Kelly as a theoretical head of college hockey, was not commensurate with the amount of authority he actually had. That is inevitably and understandably frustrating.
The commissioners supported Kelly's main goals, but did not support the way he tried to make them happen. After trying to manage this situation for two years, a straw broke the camel's back.
Ultimately, the commissioners believed that Kelly, more and more, was lobbying overtly for more authority. He was going to the NHL, the athletic directors, and to anyone else who might listen.
The Labyrinth
College Hockey Inc. was created to be the "marketing arm" of college hockey. Kelly's mission was to do outreach, educate, hold seminars, and be the public face of the sport to many people, particularly in Canada, who needed to know what college hockey was all about. It was an attempt to offset the obvious advantages of the Major Junior system, which can speak to kids at will. Because of NCAA regulations, college hockey coaches are not allowed to speak to prospects until they are 16.
In fact, this end run around the NCAA regulations almost ran afoul of the NCAA itself. When the commissioners were establishing College Hockey Inc., the NCAA wanted to know how this would work, so that it wasn't in fact taking advantage of a loophole in order to "recruit" players earlier.
But with so many pressing issues, the coaches wanted Kelly to do more than just marketing and giving speeches. They saw his background as an attorney with deep connections to the NHL and its players, and general stature in the pro hockey world, as something that could be leveraged further.
Coaches are notoriously frustrated by the NCAA's labyrinthine politics, and saw College Hockey Inc. as an opportunity to get around all of that. Their oversight group, comprised of some of the sport's most well-known names, like Gwozdecky and Jackson, met with Kelly to push their agenda with him.
Take, for example, the issue of helmets. Coaches have by and large loathed the idea of full face shields/masks since it was legislated in 1980. They believe it actually makes the sport less safe. They also believe that Major Junior uses half shields vs. full shields as yet another selling point. Kelly was someone that could work the angles with the NCAA from a legal perspective to try to make inroads in this department.
Then, of course, there's the ongoing battle with the Canadian Hockey League — the overseer of the Major Junior system — over players jumping ship. That fight is being fought on a number of fronts, including trying to get NHL rules changed, and/or working with the CHL on an understanding.
And Kelly was in discussions with the NHL and NHLPA on increasing the Draft age to 19, as part of the new collective bargaining agreement. Coaches believe this could help alleviate the pressure on kids looking to leave, if they haven't even been drafted yet.
Who better than Paul Kelly to facilitate these talks, and to help move the needle?
"He got us into discussions we've never been able to do in the past," Jackson said. "He was able to get that done. ... We had somebody that was never really able to challenge things in that way before. Everybody respected him at the NHL level."
According to Hagwell, Kelly had the blessing of the commissioners to do what he could in those departments. The coaches' priorities may have been different than the commissioners, but the efforts weren't at odds with each other. In fact, the commissioners group was largely trying to do the same things prior to Kelly's hiring.
Inevitably the structure of the NCAA will be at odds to getting many of these things accomplished. The commissioners are people who understand and work within that system. Kelly was trying to overthrow the system.
The System
There's a point often lost in the haze — criticizing the NCAA's labyrinthine politics is really just criticizing your own school, or collection of schools. The schools have the authority, and the schools themselves — via the athletic directors — hire the commissioners, who in turn, collectively, hired Paul Kelly.
Meanwhile, the commissioners created College Hockey Inc. at the behest of USA Hockey. After first sending a "shoot for the moon" proposal to the NHL for money to fund something like College Hockey Inc., the NHL decided to give $8 million to USA Hockey instead. Thus, the commissioners needed to appeal to USA Hockey for a piece of that pie.
"They didn't say, 'Here's a pot of money, go do what you want,'" Hagwell said. "It's a grant. Each year we have to report to them on what we did."
That means College Hockey Inc.'s masters are the commissioners, followed in turn by USA Hockey and the athletic directors.
Trying to make an end run around all of that, as enticing as it may be, was going to inevitably lead to conflict.
The sentiments of Gwozdecky and others point to this conflict.
"The overwhelming feeling from the coaches (is), 'How did this happen? Why did this happen?'" Gwozdecky said. "As far as the coaches were concerned, Paul was doing a terrific job for college hockey. He had our support. And he was working for college coaches.
"He reports to the commissioners, he works for the 58 D-I programs."
The question is whether the commissioners should have, or could have, put up with the difficulty of handling Kelly, because of the myriad of great things he brought to the table. Or did his maneuverings rise far enough above insubordination to make the relationship no longer sustainable?
Would it have made a difference if Tom Anastos, former CCHA commissioner and now Michigan State coach, and former president of the Hockey Commissioners Association, still been in the group? Anastos was a point person pushing for the hiring of Kelly to begin with. And Anastos himself was the man who was leading the efforts previously to get a dialogue with the NHL and so on, responsibilities that ultimately went to Kelly. But Anastos knew the parameters under which he was working, for better or for worse.
Difficult Position
Kelly wanted more authority. He wanted the NHL to directly fund College Hockey Inc. instead of having to deal with the measly sum being steered from USA Hockey. He considered, at the coaches' encouragement, ideas like being in charge of supplemental discipline (suspensions) across all leagues, scheduling, and helping with television contracts.
He wanted to be the commissioner of college hockey.
But that job doesn't exist.
There was an actual formal proposal, to the NCAA hockey rules committee, to have a central figure handle discipline for non-league games. The proposal was shot down.
Because there are so many institutions with so many different interests, it's not feasible for a "grand poobah of college hockey" to exist — as much as we might all like to see one. If there was, we wouldn't have had all of last summer's turmoil. But who is going to create that position? Who is going to give that authority? The executive director needs to play inside the system that exists, for better or for worse. That is not the fault of the commissioners.
It could be argued that the commissioners should have kept managing this situation, since Kelly probably wasn't going to ever succeed in superseding anyone's authority anyway.
Instead, the commissioners believed the situation could no longer be sustained.
Some have argued that the commissioners were just trying to keep power for themselves. I don't believe that makes any sense.
As Hagwell said, "Even if they did (give up authority), if my group of ADs came to me and said, 'You're no longer involved with College Hockey Inc., no longer a part of the HCA, you're solely doing the work of our league,' what am I going to say? I'm going to say 'OK.' ... So to say I'm out for power. I'm not. I spend an inordinate amount of time on broad issues, like amateurism. If someone wants to take that off my plate, I'm not going to fight it.
"I'm not sitting here fighting it saying, 'Oh my gosh, don't take supplemental discipline off my plate.' Every time I'm calling someone to suspend their kid, that's not a good thing."
Really, the schools themselves have the power and authority to make decisions, and you're not going to get 58 schools — each with much larger athletic departments and institutional hierarchies within them — to give up their authority to a college hockey commissioner.
The hierarchy exists to bring order to the madness. And yes, it also gets in the way sometimes, as any bureaucracy does. It's a catch-22. But if you decide to break a law because you don't think it's just, don't be surprised when you get arrested.
The commissioners obviously know about Kelly's strengths. They obviously know, and were pleased, that Kelly was getting to the table with the NHL and NHLPA. They obviously knew that firing him would enrage the coaches.
Yet they did it anyway. Why? Out of hubris? Out of power? Out of stupidity?
That can hardly be the reason.
This is a difficult and unfortunate situation. Everyone, from coaches, the commissioners, to ADs, to fans wanted Paul Kelly to continue to do the great things he was trying to do for college hockey.
But the commissioners did what they believed they had to do, not for petty reasons like power, but for good, albeit difficult and debatable, reasons. And it's up to everyone to decide whether they were justified in that or not.
Paul Kelly Explains Surprise Resignation, What May Come Next
Chris Peters, The United States of Hockey, February 24, 2012
In the days following Paul Kelly’s abrupt resignation from College Hockey, Inc., speculation and various reports have surfaced as to the reasoning behind the surprising end to Kelly’s tenure. Aside from a radio interview in Toronto Wednesday night, Kelly’s version of what transpired in the lead up to his surprise resignation has gone largely unheard. The man who joined the hockey elite when named the executive director of the National Hockey League Players Association approached United States of Hockey about sharing his side of things.
Kelly confirmed to United States of Hockey that he was asked to resign or face action from the Hockey Commissioners Association, which oversees College Hockey, Inc.
Todd Milewski of USCHO reported Monday that Kelly’s forced resignation was a result of “an erosion of trust in Kelly from the commissioners of college hockey’s five Division I men’s leagues,” according to a source. Milewski’s source also informed USCHO that Kelly had recently approached athletic directors from ECAC Hockey to give CHI a more leading role in college hockey.
Kelly admitted that he had talked to two athletic directors on this topic, one of which was from ECAC Hockey, but that his intentions differed from what USCHO’s source relayed.
“The notion that I was out shopping to talk to athletic directors, that didn’t happen,” Kelly said in a phone conversation. “The suggestion that this was a power grab, that I was involved in trying to wrestle power or a money grab, if that’s a picture they’re trying to paint, that ain’t what happened at all.”
As Kelly revealed to Bob McCown on his radio program Wednesday night on Toronto’s The FAN590, the former CHI executive director was in the middle of an underlying tug-of-war between the commissioners and many head coaches in Division I college hockey about the scope of College Hockey, Inc.
“For many months I was trying to stay out of it,” Kelly said of the disagreement between college hockey’s coaches and commissioners.
That was until Kelly caught wind that his tenure at College Hockey, Inc. may soon come to an involuntary close in an effort by one unnamed commissioner trying to save money, essentially.
“When it was pretty clear that my tenure was going to come to an end relatively soon anyway, I figured I should try to help [the coaches] at least by getting some input from some people who could deal with the issue,” Kelly said.
Kelly laid out the coaches’ vision for College Hockey, Inc. in an email to United States of Hockey: “A committee of veteran coaches, while pleased with our efforts, believed that College Hockey, Inc. could be a more vital and impactful organization for D-I college hockey. Their vision was to increase the entity’s areas of responsibility, and to change the structure of oversight and supervision from the Commissioners to a representative committee of head coaches and ADs.
“They felt that since one of the primary objectives of College Hockey, Inc. was education and recruitment of new prospects, as well as the retention of existing student athletes, that this fell more into the domain of coaches rather than administrators. The coaches wanted a greater voice in setting the strategy, and deciding how best to employ the limited resources of the organization. Given my legal background, the coaches sought my advice and input on how best to bring their desire and vision forward for discussion and decision in an appropriate forum. Since I worked on behalf of the coaches, I felt a responsibility to assist them in determining how best to bring this issue forward.”
Kelly admitted in our phone conversation that his conversations with the athletic directors were handled quietly and confidentially, in an effort to gather information, advice and input on this topic, not to set the wheels in motion on anything.
“What the Commissioners appear to have found objectionable, was my effort to help the coaches frame this matter for consideration at the approaching coaches’ convention in April,” Kelly said.
The argument can also be made that the commissioners took issue with Kelly’s perceived lack of transparency on this issue with them. That could have contributed to “the erosion of trust” as it was put to USCHO.
Kelly, however, felt that he had a responsibility to both parties. He cited that while the HCA signed his pay checks, he felt he also worked for the coaches. That feeling of responsibility to both parties stems from how College Hockey, Inc. was developed.
The wheels on College Hockey, Inc. started rolling due to the coaches’ desire to create an outside entity to assist in the education and recruitment of prospective student-athletes and combat the looming threat of the Canadian Hockey League.
The commissioners association was integral in securing the funds necessary to build College Hockey, Inc., an effort spearheaded by then CCHA commissioner and president of the HCA, Tom Anastos, who is now head men’s ice hockey coach at Michigan State University.
Despite the joint effort to build CHI, the vision of its scope has become increasingly different, and came to a head ultimately with Kelly’s forced resignation.
While Kelly had plans for stepping away from College Hockey, Inc. in about six months, he was still disappointed that he will not be able to see through some of the initiatives he helped get off the ground.
“I had hoped to see through some of these important tasks and initiatives that we had started and it bothers me that some of these things are going to fall by the wayside,” Kelly said.
The former NHLPA executive director expressed great faith in CHI’s interim director Nate Ewell and Jeff Dwyer, CHI’s director of education and recruitment, but also feels the organization will miss his prior experience and connections within the hockey community.
“There’s nobody that can immerse himself in the CBA negotiations with the league and the NHLPA the way I could have. Or negotiate with [CHL President David] Branch or deal with the heads of the ice hockey federations in Sweden and Finland and Norway. They just don’t have those kinds of links and a lot of that stuff just won’t happen.”
In addition to his disappointment of not being able to see the job through, Kelly took particular issue with a report published Thursday by Adam Wodon for College Hockey News.
Wodon got reaction from a few veteran college hockey coaches and Steve Hagwell, ECAC commissioner and president of the Hockey Commissioners Association, on this situation, but did not speak with Kelly. (Editors note: After his piece was published, Wodon expressed on Twitter that he was under the impression that Kelly did not want to speak with CHN and offered an invitation for the former executive director to speak with CHN.)
Both Notre Dame’s Jeff Jackson and Denver’s George Gwozdecky, two giants in the college coaching fraternity, expressed deep dissatisfaction with Kelly’s surprise resignation and high praise for the former CHI exec.
“Paul Kelly is the best thing that happened to college hockey in 25 years,” Jackson said to Wodon.
“There were a lot of very positive things that Paul was developing for us, as a result, you can imagine how disappointed we all are to hear the news,” Gwozdecky told the CHN editor.
Gwozdecky also informed Wodon that he questioned one of the commissioners about the reasons for Kelly’s force out and received none.
Wodon also shared this bit of information from inside sources, which somewhat corroborates USCHO’s earlier report:
Kelly was ultimately asked to resign because the commissioners believed he was making clandestine maneuvers intended to consolidate more power for College Hockey Inc. itself, sources tell College Hockey News. Essentially, rightly or wrongly — and it could be argued that it was a very good idea — Kelly wanted to be the commissioner of college hockey, with all of the authority that the title implies.
After our initial conversation, Kelly reached out through email to respond to some of the accusations levied in the College Hockey News piece, particularly the above text.
“The premise of Mr. Wodon’s article – that I was akin to a ‘renegade coach who skirts the system and is combative with his own athletic department’ and that I was lobbying to be the ‘Commissioner of college hockey’ – is utterly false,” Kelly wrote.
“At all times during my tenure as Executive Director I respected the NCAA system and worked within it. I also did not have a combative relationship with the Hockey Commissioners. In fact, I respected them individually and as a group; we worked well together and enjoyed each other’s company. They helped to shape and support the mission of College Hockey, Inc. and did what they could to give us the tools needed to succeed. We spoke often, including during monthly conference calls, and I regularly provided them with detailed written status reports of our efforts and any significant new developments. The notion that there was friction, or that I was acting independently or contrary to their wishes and objectives is untrue.”
Kelly also took issue with the notion that he was trying to overthrow the NCAA system.
“Just three weeks ago I traveled to Indianapolis for a several hour meeting with officials at the NCAA to discuss a range of topics, from dealing with family advisers to the recruitment of players from Europe. My purpose in doing so was to the ensure that we fully understood and abided by NCAA by-laws and interpretations, and identified areas for possible future legislative change.”
Kelly reiterated that this was not a power grab, but that the issues raised by the coaches are valid and should be closely examined.
“We certainly were not trying to overthrow any system or structure, and neither were the coaches,” Kelly wrote. “However, the coaches did deserve to have their views and vision for what College Hockey, Inc. could and should be properly addressed at the April convention. It appears from recent events that the Commissioners would rather not have this issue raised for legitimate discussion and deliberation.
“The committee of veteran head coaches may have had a different vision of what College Hockey, Inc. could or should be, with sound reasoning and years of experience behind their views, but I was content to fulfill my responsibilities regardless of who was overseeing our efforts.”
In our prior discussion, Kelly also expressed that this issue of the tug-of-war between coaches and commissioners is far from over.
“This issue isn’t going away,” Kelly said.
“That someone is asked to resign or resign, who is in the process of just trying to bring to the floor [the coaches'] desire to at least have an intelligent discussion about something; if the act of talking to athletic directors about that and trying to figure out how do you at least start this discussion is enough to get rid of the person, something is dramatically wrong.”
As suggested in a post earlier this week, the recent happenings with Kelly’s resignation bring the many fractures in college hockey’s power structure to the forefront.
That coaches are unhappy with the direction of college hockey and the limitations of the NCAA are unsurprising. In fact, it’s stereotypical more than anything.
College hockey is faced with a set of unique challenges that no other NCAA sport faces. That is a fact. While Kelly insisted that he had no aspirations for power, he did outline what an independent entity could do for college hockey, based on the ideas of a committee of veteran coaches.
“I think [an independent entity] can and should [exist],” Kelly said.
Without a hint of irony, Kelly pointed to the Canadian Hockey League as an example of what an overseeing umbrella can do for a fractioned organization.
“There’s the Ontario league (OHL), Western Hockey League, and the Quebec league (QMJHL) than overarching that, they have the CHL office. It’s the CHL which negotiates a number of things like national sponsorships and national television and deals with their Memorial Cup. They have an umbrella entity that handles certain aspects and it’s critically important and it gives them a certain consistency and clout in working together as a 60-team super league.”
Hard to believe the man recently dedicated to challenging the CHL for recruits paying such a high compliment, but it is an intriguing analogy.
College hockey’s conference structure, as evidenced most recently by the flurry of realignment, operates very much in an every-man-for-himself fashion.
“Having commonly five conferences, soon to be six conferences, and you may one day have the Ivy League spinning out for seven conferences, what you get is very parochial interests,” Kelly said.
Kelly pointed to the recent television deals struck by Notre Dame and Hockey East with NBC and the NCHC’s recently announced deal with CBS Sports Network, as two instances where it was singular conferences looking out for their best interests. Kelly surmises that an umbrella that oversees all of college hockey could potentially work out television deals that benefit each conference, pointing to the ECAC and Atlantic Hockey being left “to the side.”
Kelly said that the coaches’ vision for an umbrella entity would find a way to ensure that all conferences reap some rewards.
“In their view, if you have a commissioner or a central office, an objective, independent office, whose job it was to oversee the best interest of college hockey: Marketing, promotion, certain business initiatives, championships, special events, dealings with the NCAA on bylaw issues and rule issues, etc., that in fact you would help all of the programs. You would particularly help the small programs that don’t have the resources, the have nots, that need an entity to kind of look after their best interests.”
Kelly admitted that College Hockey, Inc., could be the beginnings of that entity, but that it didn’t have to be. It could still operate as the educational arm, while a different group takes on the other responsibilities under the umbrella.
There is some concern on Kelly’s part that the current setup with the commissioners looking out for their own interests won’t help the game advance or expand.
“[The commissioners] are looking at these developments through the lens of their conference, their region of the country,” Kelly said. “They’re not looking at it through the lens of the greater good, the longterm best interest of the sport as a whole and that’s what concerns the coaches.”
It appears that a good portion of college hockey’s coaches are in concert on their vision for the game. That could cause a certain amount of consternation at the annual coaches convention in Naples, Fla., this April.
“This issue isn’t going to fade,” Kelly said. “The fact that the coaches hold a certain view of what college hockey can be, should be, will be in the future, if anything, the recent developments will cause the issue to come to the surface, which is ultimately probably going to be a good thing.”
While the coaches and the commissioners butt heads, none of either party’s ideas or visions for the future can come to fruition without a collective green light from the real power brokers in college athletics:
“The athletic directors. They employ the coaches. They employ the commissioners,” Kelly said. “How do you get that group to reach some consensus?”
That’s the million dollar question, and one that won’t come with an easy answer.
What happened to Kelly isn’t the story. It is what comes next. Clearly, the coaches and commissioners are not on the same page. This issue is far from over and there is no clear vision of when this might end.
With the athletic directors, a group of individuals with more than just ice hockey to worry about, holding all the power, how will they deal with this current disconnect? Are we headed for a quiet return to the status quo? Will the coaches have enough pull with their bosses to force more college hockey introspection? Who will support the commissioners?
What we do know is that Paul Kelly will not be taking part in this discussion, which is certain to dissapoint the former College Hockey, Inc. executive director who had become a strong voice in the ever-changing college hockey landscape.
“My capable staff and I worked very hard to market college hockey and expand its geographic footprint, to educate elite young players of the many benefits of playing NCAA hockey, and to seek out new approaches to protect and promote the sport,” Kelly said. “I am proud of the work we did, but disappointed that I will not be able to see through to conclusion many of the important and ongoing initiatives we had underway.”
While Kelly is disappointed that his tenure came to an abrupt end, college hockey will always have a place in his heart.
“I’ve enjoyed the opportunity,” he said. “I’ve enjoyed the role and enjoyed being an advocate for college hockey. I believe very firmly in the mission and the message. That’s never going to change. I’ll probably continue to be an advocate for college hockey regardless of what I do in the future.”
Coming off of a near insufferable off-season in which the entire college hockey world was turned upside down by realignment, it appears we are headed for yet another messy summer; the kind that even the most seasoned janitor wouldn’t go near.
Battle over North Dakota Fighting Sioux nickname ramps up
The Fighting Sioux logo has been a point of contention for years and the issue seems to be coming to a head.
Ryan Kennedy, The Hockey News, 2012-03-01
Fighting Sioux fans, I have some advice for you. Actually, wait – can I call you Fighting Sioux fans? Not sure where the lawsuits are at today.
Anyway, for those unaware, the University of North Dakota has once again been thrust into the spotlight because of its Fighting Sioux nickname. The NCAA sent a letter to the school stating that the potential of forfeiting post-season games is now a real possibility if the team logo or nickname is displayed on its uniforms. The women’s team will already play any national post-season games on the road, even if they earn a high seed – the NCAA’s policy against what it deems to be an offensive nickname prevents the school from hosting playoff events (conference games are different).
If you’re not familiar with the controversy, here’s a quick and dirty primer: When the NCAA cracked down on nicknames a few years ago, schools could earn an exemption if the peoples of the local tribes involved were OK with it. That’s why the Florida State Seminoles retain their famous moniker, while Miami, Ohio ditched ‘Redmen’ in favor of ‘RedHawks.’
North Dakota was in a bit of a spot because there are two separate Sioux tribes in the state. The Spirit Lake Sioux gave consent to use the name, while the Standing Rock Sioux did not. The school had three years to convince the tribe otherwise, but could not. Therefore, the NCAA said the name had to go. A lot of legislation, bad feelings and paperwork ensued and the issue still isn’t resolved. North Dakota legislators even passed a pro-Fighting Sioux law stating the team had to wear the logo and name on its uniforms, essentially daring the NCAA to come after them. Now it’s happening.
Of course it’s the players who lose out here. The men’s team has “neutral-themed” jerseys on order in case the squad makes it to the Frozen Four – and with 15 NHL draft picks on the roster, including first-rounders Brock Nelson and Derek Forbort, that’s not a stretch – but state law would prevent them from wearing the alternative sweaters. What, exactly, is the university’s sports department supposed to do?
I understand how passionate the people of North Dakota are about the Fighting Sioux name and “Indian Head” logo, but optics are not on their side. When Ralph Engelstad dedicated $100 million to build the arena that bears his name, he made sure there were so many logos included inside that stripping them off would be nearly impossible. He also dictated that North Dakota hockey had to retain the Fighting Sioux name and look in order to play there. It’s pretty obvious he knew what was going to happen, just as the state’s legislators only passed the pro-Sioux law in order to stick it to the NCAA.
But the fun and games ends now because North Dakota needs the NCAA more than the other way around. A Frozen Four without UND would be a shame, given that recent alumni include Jonathan Toews, Zach Parise and T.J. Oshie. But Michigan, Boston College and Minnesota bring just as much profile to the table.
On the other hand, what high-profile recruit is going to come to a school that literally has no shot at a national title? Here’s a perfect case study for you: Right now, top 2013 draft prospect Seth Jones is deciding where he’ll play next season. The U.S. national team development program defenseman can head to the Western League’s Everett Silvertips, or a college program. One school high on his list is North Dakota. Jones would be the biggest UND recruit since Toews – in fact, one NHL exec told me it was unfair for the 2011 draft-eligible blueliners on the NTDP when Jones was on the ice, because all the scouts were watching the Texas native. That was last year, when he was supposed to be with the under-17 team, not the under-18s.
So ask yourself, Fighting Sioux supporters: What’s the name and logo worth if there’s no one around worthy enough to wear it?
-----
One of my friends played for UND way back in the day (before the new rink) but he has gone back for some slumni events and told me this is perhaps the best rink he has ever been inside. He claims it is better than most NHL rinks... and he has been to quite a few of those in his day. I hope they get this naming issue settled. Far too many times, we make a mountain out of a molehill.)
WHL PeeWee Prospects Camp Announced
Gregg Drinnan, Taking Note, March 8 2012
BOOM! The WHL has fired a shot across the bow of the NCAA’s ship. . . . The WHL announced Wednesday that it will hold a prospects camp at in Calgary, March 23-25. What is interesting about this camp is that it is open, according to a news release, to “Major Pee Wee (1999-born) AA players across Alberta.” . . . Again, according to the news release, the camp “will be the first in a series of prospect camps the WHL will be staging, focusing on player development and education.” . . . Players attending that camp will be 12 and 13 years of age. . . . The WHL also holds an annual U.S. prospects camp in Anaheim, which is in California, and will hold a camp for 1998-born players in Calgary in August.
-----
The younger these leagues can get the propoganda into the parents and players face, the better for those leagues (but not necessarily for the athletes and kids if only one point of view is provided!) The NCAA can't initiate contact until the end of the athlete's Grade 10 (?) year. But kids and parents can initiate contact with the NCAA programs... This battle is going to get more involved before it (ever?) gets solved!
Western, McGill advance to CIS men's hockey final
FREDERICTON— The Canadian Press, Mar. 24, 2012
The University of Western Ontario Mustangs are playing every game like it's their last at the Canadian university men's hockey championship.
Keaton Turkiewicz had a goal and an assist as Western advanced to the championship final with a 3-2 upset victory over top-seeded New Brunswick Varsity Reds on Saturday.
No. 4 Western will now meet No. 2 McGill in Sunday's final in a rematch of the Queen's Cup. The Mustangs lost that game 4-1.
“We've played some great games, but in terms of playing with a desperate energy inside of you, every game (at the University Cup) has seemed like an overtime game for us,” said Western defenceman Adam Aarssen. “I'm really proud of how the guys have worked so far. I haven't seen that out of the guys many times this year and it's great to see we're rising at the right time.”
The Redmen booked a spot in the final earlier in the day, despite a 4-3 loss to the No. 3 Saskatchewan Huskies in the other semi-fnial. McGill advanced thanks to a better goal differential.
Jason Furlong's short-handed goal at 17:48 of the first period stood up as the eventual winner for Western. The Mustangs had a 3-0 lead after the first period, with Dominic De Sando also scoring in the frame. Goaltender Josh Unice made 31 saves and was named player of the game for Western.
“I think we even elevated our game (from Thursday),” said Unice. “Guys were diving and we had, who I feel is the best player in the CIS (Aarssen) putting his bare hands in front of pucks just to block them.”
“It's a great attribute of our team. We have a lot of sacrifice in our locker room.”
New Brunswick scored twice on the power-play goal in the third period on goals by Jon Harty and Kyle Bailey, but couldn't complete the comeback. Travis Fullerton made 40 saves for UNB.
“It's tough right now and obviously we've done some incredible things over the past five years and one of those things is developing this expectancy (to win),” said fifth-year player and New Brunswick captain Bailey.
“I'm sure there's however many teams here that are dancing around happy that we lost right now, but in our dressing room it's an expectation, we're expected to win and win expect to win in our locker room. It didn't happen today and it's disappointing.”
Earlier on Saturday, Huskies captain Kyle Ross scored the winner during a power play with five minutes remaining in regulation.
The second-seeded Redmen could afford to lose to the Huskies by two goals or less and still qualify for the championship match. The OUA champions had doubled the Moncton Aigles Bleus 6-3 on Thursday, while Saskatchewan lost 5-1 to Moncton on Friday.
The three teams finished Pool B with identical 1-1 records but McGill advanced on a goal differential.
It's the Redmen's second straight appearance in the gold medal game. They dropped a 4-0 decision last year to UNB.
Kyle Bortis had a goal and two assists while Derek Hulak and Cory Smuk also scored for Saskatchewan.
Netminder Ryan Holfeld of Leroy, Sask., delivered a 40-save performance for the Huskies.
Captain Evan Vossen, Francis Verreault-Paul of Mashteuiatsh, Que., and defenceman Keven Dupont of St-Charles-de-Bellechasse, Que., had the goals for McGill.
Morin, a native of St-Georges-de-Beauce, Que., turned aside 26 of 30 pucks fired his way.
-----
A highly entertaining game! Can't wait for the final tomorrow!
The Decision: OHL or U.S. college?
Eric Cornel is on the fence when trying to decide between the OHL and U.S. college
Andrew Duffy, The Ottawa Citizen March 24, 2012
The last big decision in Eric Cornel’s life required him to choose a high school. His hometown, Kemptville, has two. Most of his friends were going to one of them.
“Yeah, I guess it really wasn’t that tough,” concedes Cornel, a Grade 10 student at St. Michael’s Catholic High School.
Yet the decision that now faces the 15-year-old is, undeniably, a whopper: It will determine the course of his education and his hockey career.
Both are currently flourishing.
Cornel, captain of the minor midget AAA Upper Canada Cyclones, is widely regarded as the best 15-year-old hockey player in the region. This season, in minor midget, he recorded almost two points per game. At the recent Winter Youth Olympic Games in Innsbruck, Austria, he registered nine points in six games.
The playmaking centre is projected to be a Top 10 pick in next month’s Ontario Hockey League (OHL) draft. One scouting service, TheScout.ca, has him going sixth overall.
But Cornel is also an honour roll student — he carries an 88 average at St. Michael’s — and is being recruited by Boston College, one of the most successful programs in U.S. college hockey. He has also paid visits to other schools interested in his services: The University of New Hampshire and the Ivy League’s Harvard and Cornell.
Sometime in the next month, Cornel must decide whether to take the well-travelled Canadian road or a scenic American detour to his NHL destination. It is the kind of decision that every young hockey player dreams of facing. But that doesn’t make it any easier — especially for someone not yet old enough to drive.
“It’s tough,” Cornel says. “It doesn’t keep me up at night, but when I have spare time, in class or whatever, I find myself thinking about it … I know I’m fortunate: I have lots of options and both have their benefits. So that makes the decision even harder.”
Junior hockey has always offered the shortest route to the NHL, but U.S. college represents an increasingly attractive alternative. This year, 30 per cent of those who have played at least one game in the NHL have college experience.
So what should Cornel do?
If he goes to the OHL, he’ll be able to play next year against top-flight competition, the kind that can accelerate a player’s development. He’ll face a 68-game schedule that some believe best prepares a player for the rigours of the NHL.
What’s more, if he succeeds, Cornel is highly likely to be drafted into the pro ranks: About 20 per cent of NHL draft picks have come from the OHL in recent years. Eleven of last year’s 30 first-round picks came from the league; the year before, nine first-round picks came from the OHL, including the entire top three.
Cornel would have his school-related costs, along with his room and board, paid for by his OHL team. A scholarship program would also cover one year of post-secondary education for each year he’s in the league.
On the downside, Cornel will have little control over where he plays — and his university education could be put on hold for a time.
The U.S. college route obviously offers a more robust educational experience: Cornel would be living on campus and surrounded by other student-athletes.
An Ivy League education costs more than $50,000 a year. Cornel could have four years of that education largely paid for through scholarships or bursaries (the Ivy League does not offer athletic scholarships) and still emerge with a legitimate shot at a pro hockey career. Boston College has a dozen players in the NHL, including Montreal’s Brian Gionta and Pittsburgh’s Brooks Orpik, while Princeton, Harvard, Cornell and Dartmouth each have several players in the league.
If he goes the college route, Cornel will control what team — and coach — he plays for in the U.S.
But the college route also presents some problems. Since Cornel still has two years before he graduates from high school, he’ll have to play in a lesser league until then: Either with the Kemptville 73’s of the Central Canada Hockey League or at a U.S. prep school (he loses U.S. college eligibility if he plays in the OHL).
What’s more, U.S. college teams are restricted to 34 regular-season games a year — half an OHL season — limiting the opportunity for development.
Many players with modest academic skills publicly muse about going the college route in order to deter certain OHL teams from selecting them; they’ll whisper the truth about their intentions only to select coaches in the cities where they want to play.
But Cornel, for one, is not bluffing. He understands that an Ivy League education offers a much more certain path to success than hockey. He has strong marks in math and science. Last year, in Grade 9, he earned an 89.6 average while playing a raft of varsity sports, including basketball, volleyball and soccer. He wants a career in sports medicine or physiotherapy if a life in hockey doesn’t materialize.
“School is something I take pride in — I have always worked hard,” says Eric, whose mother, Heidi, is a supply teacher. “My parents have always been pretty good at making us understand that homework just has to get done.”
The 6-1, 165-pound Cornel is built of hard, sharp angles; his wide-set brown eyes dominate his still-narrow face. Potential drips from him like an XL T-shirt.
So which way is he leaning? The OHL, with its lure of a fast ride to the NHL? Or U.S. college and its priceless education?
“I’m pretty much stuck right in the middle,” Cornel says.
He’ll rely on his parents to help him make a final decision. His father, Rob, an electrical engineer for Alcatel-Lucent in Kanata, says the decision would be simpler if they could see two or three years down the road.
“If we had a crystal ball, it would be easy.”
Rob expects hockey considerations will weigh evenly against academic ones.
“Eric is disciplined enough that he won’t let one slide because of the other no matter where he goes,” he says. “He has that drive about him.”
Hockey agent Andy Scott says there are hockey families that struggle with the same decision every year.
“The best thing we can do is put all of the options on the table,” says Scott, a University of Ottawa law school graduate who works with the Octagon sports management agency.
Unscrupulous agents, he says, will push young clients into the OHL because the player’s pro potential will be revealed within two years, limiting a firm’s investment.
Scott says Cornel needs to do what’s best for the long term.
“For Eric, it’s really, really tough because he’s going to be a Top 10 pick for sure if he decides to go OHL. For a kid like that, the upside is huge,” Scott says. “But at the same time, he’s an ‘A’ student. He has all of his options open. For him to come out of an Ivy League program or a Boston College, with a degree and no debt — and not to shut doors to a pro career — is huge.”
So how does he make up his mind?
“It will be whatever feels right,” says Cornel, who often sounds older than he is. “And it will be whatever I think is the best fit for my development, not only as a hockey player but as a person.”
Wickenheiser leads Calgary to CIS hockey crown
EDMONTON — The Canadian Press, Mar. 11, 2012
Add CIS champion to Hayley Wickenheiser's impressive list of accomplishments.
Wickenheiser scored two goals and added two assists as the University of Calgary Dinos won their first ever CIS women's hockey championship with a 5-1 victory over the Universite de Montreal Carabins on Sunday at the University of Alberta's Clare Drake Arena.
It's the latest in a long run of hockey accomplishments for the 33-year-old Wickenheiser, who has led Canada to three Olympic golds and a silver and six world championships.
“This one is surprisingly very special,” she said. “It's not been an easy road for this team. Playing in this league has brought a lot of challenges. A lot of people wrote us off. I'm really proud of how much these girls have improved in a year's time. It's remarkable.”
Dinos' head coach Danielle Goyette, Wickenheiser's former teammate on the national team, was soaking in every moment after the victory.
“It was their Olympics,” she said. “As a player when you win something you have some emotion. But as a coach you multiply that by 23. It's hard to describe. The players worked so hard for this.
“At one point they thought about cutting this program and now five years since I have been there, here we are. This is just going to make this program better.”
Jenna Smith, Elana Lovell and Iya Gavrilova also scored for the third-ranked Dinos, who were making just their second appearance in the national championship tournament, having finished fifth in 2001 when they were the host team.
Calgary goalie Amanda Tapp was named the tournament MVP.
“It's amazing,” said the Calgary native. “To win it so close to home and have our parents be able to be here. It was very special to be able to share this. I'm just so proud to be a part of this program.”
It was the 18th consecutive win this season for the Dinos.
Elizabeth Mantha scored the lone goal for the sixth-seeded Carabins, also making their first appearance in a national final after just three years in the CIS.
“Just getting to the final was a great accomplishment for us,” said Montreal head coach Isabelle Leclaire. “We played an amazing game, probably one of our best performances ever. We had a lot of scoring opportunities. I have every reason to be proud of this.”
While some may question having a player of Wickenheiser's stature playing at the college level, Leclaire doesn't have a problem with it.
“We've faced other teams that have players with the national program as well,” she said. “I think it is a good learning experience for our players. I think they just realized that they can compete against a team like that and against a player who is among the best in the world. If you can compete against her, you can compete against anybody, which is a positive.”
It was a tight defensive battle for much of the first period before Canadian Olympic team mainstay Wickenheiser took over.
With 3:14 left in the opening frame, Wickenheiser put on a show short handed, cutting through the defence before scoring on a backhand.
Just over a minute later Wickenheiser scored her second of the match. She sent a wrist shot over the shoulder of Montreal goalie Rachel Ouellette for a 2-0 Calgary lead heading into the second period.
Tapp kept it a two-goal game with a huge stop on a partial breakaway by Kim Deschenes and several more quality saves during a Montreal power play midway through the second.
The Dinos went up 3-0 with just over a minute remaining in the middle period as Smith tipped home a point blast from Casey Irving.
Calgary extended their lead to four goals just over a minute and a half into the third as Wickenheiser made a nice feed to set up an easy tap in at the side of the net for Gavrilova.
The Carabins finally got on the board six minutes into the third as Mantha scored on a power play point blast.
Calgary went up 5-1 just past the period's midway point as Lovell intercepted a shot in front of the net and undressed Ouellette with a deft move to the backhand.
Earlier in the day, McGill defeated Wilfred Laurier 4-0 in the bronze medal match while the U of A Pandas got past UPEI 1-0 in the fifth-place game.
Notes: The Carabins upset top-seeded Wilfred Laurier 6-5 and then fourth-ranked UPEI 4-1 to advance through to the gold-medal game... The Dinos won both of their games to punch their own ticket to the final, defeating McGill 1-0 and the University of Alberta by a 4-2 score... In addition to former Canadian Olympians Wickenheiser and Goyette, the U of C team also featured former Russian Olympian Iya Gavrilova... Wickenheiser has posted 72 points in 31 games in two seasons with the Dinos... The defending champion McGill University Martlets had appeared in five consecutive gold-medal games in the tournament prior to missing out this season and had won three of the last four CIS championships.
McGill stops Western for CIS men’s hockey crown
FREDERICTON— The Canadian Press, Mar. 25, 2012
Evan Vossen ended his CIS men's hockey career in spectacular fashion.
The McGill captain scored in overtime as the Redmen won their first CIS men's hockey title in program history, beating the Western Mustangs 4-3 Sunday.
Vossen broke into the Western zone to the right of goaltender Josh Unice 6:00 into overtime. He fanned on his shot, but the puck slid through Unice's pads.
“It's like a storybook ending,” Vossen said. “I mean overtime, my last game, a national championship. It doesn't get any better than that and I'm very grateful for that.”
Vossen said he was going to go high, but with Unice taking away the top half of the net he just wanted to put the puck on goal.
“He whiffed,” Unice said. “He made a wicked play over the blue-line and we know they like to go three guys hard to the net. We didn't want to give up the two-on-one on the backside.”
“I'm pretty sure he tried to go high with it and it tricked me and it went in.”
McGill lost in the 2011 final 4-0 to the UNB Varsity Reds.
“McGill is one of the oldest hockey teams,” said McGill forward Francis Verreault-Paul. “This is huge part of the history of the program in the future. I'm in my fourth year. In the first year we won no games, won one in my second, and lost in the final last year.
“We learned from mistakes and now we're champions.”
Alexandre Picard-Hooper assisted on the winner to break the all-time points record for the Redmen. He ended his career with 268 points in 175 games.
Verreault-Paul was named the tournament MVP. The trophy, named after former NHL supervisor of officials Major Danny McLeod, was presented by McLeod himself.
“I'm really proud of winning this, but you know I couldn't win this by myself,” Verreault-Paul said. “I had a lot of good bounces this tournament that I was able to capitalize on and I'm really honoured to be named the MVP.”
Benoit Levesque added a pair of goals for the Redmen, while Nicholas Biniek also scored. Hubert Morin stopped 19 of 22 shots.
Keaton Turkiewicz scored a pair of goals for the Mustangs, while Kevin Baker had the other Western goal. Unice made 38 saves.
“I just tried to do what I'm supposed to do and in the end there's a couple things I wish I could have done differently,” Unice said. “I owe it to the team. We battled hard and never gave up all the way to the last second. We did a lot of things this year that no one thought we could have.”
McGill will lose eight or nine players from this championship, making it more difficult to repeat next year.
“It's going to be another fresh start for the program next year,” Verreault-Paul said. “I won't be here, but after seeing this team win a national championship, the future is bright for the program.”
Unice was named the goaltender of the tournament all-star team.
UNB's Jonathan Harty and McGill's Marc-Andre Dorion were named as defencemen.
Turkiewicz, Verreault-Paul and Picard-Hooper were named all-star forwards.
-----
The neat back story: Mike Babcock (Detroit) is an alum of McGill; playing there in the mid 80's. He allowed McGill's head coach (Kelly Nobes) to come to the Red Wing training camp for 10 days and observe. Kelly got to sit in on all the discussions, etc. and said it was an incredibly wonderful PD experience. (No doubt - one lucky guy!) Mike didn't really know Kelly prior; it is a tribute to Mike's love for his old team and desire to give back to McGill that allowed this to happen. It would be great if more (former college) coaches in these positions did the same! (I have heard of some doing it; even former junior coaches moving to the NHL and allowing the 'new' junior coach from their 'old' team to have some interaction with them.) Hats off to Mike for the opportunity and to McGill for winning a great game!
Leo-Guy Morrissette is still a Titan of controversy in the QMJHL
Sunaya Sapurji, Yahoo! Sports, Mar 31 2012
There’s never a dull moment in the QMJHL, in part because of the many outspoken and colourful characters the league seems to attract.
The latest controversy in the Quebec league surrounds comments made by Acadie-Bathurst Titan owner Leo-Guy Morrissette, in which the long-time lightning rod alleges his fellow QMJHL owners are using their riches to help entice high-profile players to join their teams.
Saint John Sea Dogs owner Scott McCain seems to be Morrissette’s biggest target, though Quebec Remparts owner Patrick Roy as well as the Moncton Wildcats, Rimouski Oceanic and Shawinigan Cataractes are also name-dropped in his accusations.
“They use money because they have money,” Morrissette told Peter McGuire, sports editor of the Telegraph-Journal. “They have more money than me for sure. Mr. McCain is a nice guy but his organization uses that money. They use too much money. They can have more (NHL) first-round picks on their teams, European and American players. Mr. Coyle is a very good player, eh… . You need a lot of money for that. Patrick Roy, Shawinigan, Mr. McCain … other teams can’t fight with this.”
“Mr. Coyle,” better known in Saint John as Charlie Coyle, was a big free agent acquisition for the Sea Dogs in December, when he decided to leave Boston University and sign with the defending Memorial Cup champions. Since joining the Sea Dogs, the Minnesota Wild prospect has been on a tear. In Saint John’s four-game sweep of the Cape Breton Screaming Eagles, Coyle scored nine goals and added four assists. So the rich got richer, so to speak.
It seems like time has not tempered Morrissette’s ire since he was equally displeased when Coyle was signed, telling Le Nouvelliste reporter Steve Turcotte: “Une équipe qui achète les championnats, ça n’a pas d’affaire dans notre ligue!” or roughly translated: “A team that buys championships, has no business in our league!”
Allegations of players receiving “impermissible benefits” have been around forever – in all three branches of the Canadian Hockey League – but what makes this most interesting is that this is coming from a team owner and not some scuttlebutt heard around the rink or posted on a message board. The idea of owners turning on each other is no doubt causing headaches for QMJHL commissioner Giles Courteau and CHL president Dave Branch. As we’ve been told ad nauseam, the CHL is a beacon for all that is good, safe and decent in junior hockey. Under-the-table payments and shady dealings – that only happens in the NCAA, right?
Understandably, Sea Dogs owner Scott McCain was none too pleased to have Morrissette air the league’s alleged dirty laundry in the press. Although, in a league with Morrissette, Patrick Roy and Cataractes GM Martin Mondou, the public airing of grievances is almost a daily occurrence.
“It is somewhat disturbing that [Morrissette] would make these statements,” McCain wrote in an email to the Telegraph-Journal. “It’s not good for owners to be critical of each other in public. If Leo-Guy has a concern, he can call me directly and voice his opinions. Being critical towards my ownership of the Saint John Sea Dogs does nothing to promote harmony in our league and it is truly unfortunate.”
Sure, it would make for better business to keep these kinds of accusations private, but that wouldn’t be much fun, would it? One thing that has always made the QMJHL most interesting – from a media perspective, at least—is the fact that many of their owners, general managers and coaches aren’t afraid to speak their minds for fear of fines.
This year alone, Patrick Roy has paid the QMJHL $12,000 in fines because of his comments. Of course that’s a drop in the bucket, because as Morrissette has already noted, Patrick Roy is rich.
The odd thing about this, though, is the fact that the Morrissette family (Leo-Guy and his five brothers) were always accused of bending the rules when they were owners of teams in the QMJHL during the mid-1990s. Rumours of trading elite players amongst themselves for playoff runs, at a heavy discount, were always rampant back when Leo-Guy Morrissette was running the Titan franchise in Laval.
In 1998, the year Morrissette moved the team to Acadie-Bathurst, N.B., the Titan were involved in one of the biggest scandals in QMJHL history over a trade with the Chicoutimi Sagueneens. The convoluted deal involved more than 10 players, prospects, draft picks, and cash—which contravened the league’s bylaws. Courteau spent six weeks investigating the transaction and found both teams guilty of collusion, fining each franchise $100,000 and taking away their first-round draft picks for the following two years (2000 and 2001). Morrissette denied any wrongdoing and threatened to take the league to court.
It’s hard to believe that more than a decade later, Morrissette is now the Robin Hood figure trying to fight against the rich teams on behalf of the QMJHL’s poor ones.
“It’s a bit funny to see that because he used to be one of the kings of the league,” said veteran QMJHL reporter Stephane Leroux of RDS. “Now he’s not the king anymore and that’s why he’s crying. But I can understand, because he’s playing in a small market and he can’t fight equally with all those other teams, that’s for sure.”
And while his brothers eventually left the QMJHL, Morrissette has stayed on in Acadie-Bathurst, one of the smallest markets in the league. No longer having the same kind of clout in the league might be taking its toll on the long-time owner.
“He’s like a supporting actor in a movie,” said Leroux, who has been covering the QMJHL for RDS since 1990. “He’s not the big star now, so he’s tired of not getting the chance to have the big Europeans like the Radulovs or the Grigorenkos. He doesn’t have the money needed to afford those big European players that are coming over to play here. He’s tired of that and he’s complaining about it.”
Like some of his newer QMJHL counterparts, Morrissette has never been one to shy away from controversy. Back in their heyday, the Morrissettes were nicknamed “The Daltons” by long-time Journal de Montreal scribe Marc Lachapelle, after the outlaw brothers in the Lucky Luke cartoons.
“He’s from the old school,” said Leroux of Morrissette. “That was the old junior stuff of the 1990s in the league, but it’s not like that anymore. Leo-Guy is coming from that time when he used to have control, and he doesn’t have that anymore.”
-----
There have always been rumours in regard to paying the top bantam picks / list players / NCAA players to come to the CHL. I remember hearing stories about Tri-Cities offering Terry Ryan $100,000 to 'burn' his potential scholarship offers to the NCAA (he was playing Tier 2 at the time) by signing in Tri. He did and was drafted by the Montreal Canadiens, but never had a notable NHL career. I imagine things like this happen behind closed doors in both Major Junior and the NCAA...
I decided I would start a discussion on junior / CIS / NCAA / ACHA hockey as I suspect this will become an even bigger topic in the future.
I will also include articles pertaining to junior and college hockey in here... enjoy!
Dean
M.Ed (Coaching)
Ch.P.C. (Chartered Professional Coach)
Game Intelligence Training
"Great education depends on great teaching."