FTR: You mentioned the choices between junior hockey and the NCAA. Following your initial debut and the first few interviews you've done, there's been a negative response from the CHL. They've used the words "unfairly targeting" to describe the things that College Hockey Inc. has said about the CHL.Personally, I don’t see college hockey being all that successful in the west past DU and C.C., just my humble opinion, while there is some youth hockey out west it’s definitely not as strong as strong as Minnesota, Massachusetts and Michigan, where would they get a majority of their recruits from?
Kelly: I don't think we're unfairly targeting anybody. We need to provide information to people so that they can make informed decisions. Many times we need to draw distinctions between the experience of playing NCAA hockey as opposed to playing junior hockey in Canada. In order to do that, you need to point out the pros and cons for both of us. If that's viewed as a negative by them, I would say that whatever statements we've made are backed up by solid evidence and facts. If we make a claim that some of the statements that they make and some of the information that they put forth on their website regarding their education packages are somewhat suspect, then players need to read the fine print. We've found many instances of players that have had difficulties of players obtaining their educational benefits. In fact, a vast majority of players that have played in the CHL have never tapped into those benefits - the rate of kids that never get an education, that never get a diploma is very high in the CHL. I think that it's important for players, whether they are from the United States or Canada to know these facts. I'm not saying that NCAA hockey doesn't have it's own bumps and bruises and issues, because it does, but I think it's fair for us to point out some of these things to players and their families. We're not doing it to be purposefully negative, that's not our intention at all. I've always said that the CHL may be the right course for some kids and I think that means that NCAA hockey and the juniors programs in Canada need to co-exist.
FTR: One piece of the Canadian program that does co-exist with the NCAA is the BCHL. So many kids come out of the BCHL and play NCAA hockey. As an Edmonton writer, one that sticks out for me is Riley Nash from Cornell. Are you going to work with the BCHL at all?
Kelly: There are a number of programs up there, the BCHL is one of them, the Albert Junior Hockey League is another, the Prince Edward Island League is another. I actually traveled out to British Columbia and spoke at the BCHL All Star banquet, attended the Owners and Board of Governors Meeting for the league and spoke very candidly with them about our support of what they're doing. The answer to your question is yes, the BCHL is doing a terrific job, they're producing some great players, they've put a great number of very talented kids into NCAA programs. We have every desire to see that continue.
FTR: There are so many kids coming out of California now that have to travel a long way if they want to play Division I hockey, and many of them choose to go to the WHL instead. Is California expansion of NCAA Division I hockey a priority?
Kelly: Frankly, the first college or university that decides to add Division I hockey in California will have just an absolute bounty in front of it. They will have their pick of some of the most talented kids in the country and they've got some great young kids coming up. If we could ever convince USC or UCLA or Stanford or California to add a program, they would have such an immediate impact. It's impossible in football or basketball to start a college program and think that you could have a team that could compete for the national championship any time soon. That's not the case in hockey. You could start a hockey program, get the right coach and bring in the right recruits and within a matter of three or four years, you could be challenging for the national title. I think that many of these big schools need to take a look at that and realize that many of the teams in Division I do so very successfully from an economic perspective. Most of the teams in the WCHA do very well. They fill their buildings, there is a lot of excitement, it attracts students, not just athletes, to the school. It's another activity that they can offer to the student body that brings excitement and enthusiasm. We've got three NHL teams in California and there is a hockey following out there, so I think it's a natural fit for one of those schools.
One could make the argument that UAA and UFA have had very limited success and they have decent to very good high school hockey in Alaska. Unfortunately for both schools there has been an out migration of good home grown hockey players to the lower 48 states. These schools would be in direct competition the WHL and the WCHA for recruits. If the western schools could support hockey successfully wouldn't they attempted it already?
No comments:
Post a Comment