I have been at home today not feeling well and have been reading some of the blog posts as they respond to this comments from
College Hockey Inc. executive director
Paul Kelly apparently Kelly started the proverbial crap storm with this zinger that appeared in the
Boston Globe.
Fluto Shinzawa; Boston Globe --- There isn't an overriding reason why future collegians are opting out of the classroom. It could be academics. It might be heat from NHL personnel who believe junior is the preferred route over college. Money could also be a factor.
"As much as the CHL denies it, there are still instances where money is being paid to the family to lure kids away and de-commit from colleges," Kelly said. "It's off the books, under the table, whatever you want to call it. If your dad is a fisherman, an out-of-work machinist, or a farmer, and a CHL program comes along and offers you $300,000 in cash, it's tough for these families not to accept that type of proposal."
One solution might be a first-year grace period. For example, a collegian would be off limits from NHL or CHL contact for his freshman year. If he believes that college isn't for him after one year, then he'd be free to consider other options. (Boston Globe)
Jess Rubenstein from Prospect Park countered with this zinger of his own... Seriously, you have to give Jess credit, historically there has been a lot of issues with Division I college sports, as we have seen this year, some sports are ripe with corruption, cough, cough, cough
Ohio State University football... So maybe the
NCAA needs to be careful and to not throw stones while living in the proverbial glass house.
See we hear this accusation on almost every single occasion when Paul Kelly speaks but we are still waiting to see some actual proof. In the meantime, it is rather funny to hear someone representing NCAA hockey crying about under the table money when in NCAA basketball as well as NCAA football have a couple of highly ranked programs (like the school right down the road from us Oregon) find themselves under investigation for possibly paying for football recruits.
Here is what
Buzzing the Net had to say in response to Paul Kelly's comments. Obviously Neate Sager is pro CHL/junior hockey but he does bring up some good points as well, in a nut shell he is right, bad mouthing the CHL does nothing for Division I Hockey's cause.
No doubt this has been said before on BTN, but the endless blame game doesn't really serve College Hockey, Inc.'s cause. That's not meant to let anyone in junior hockey off the hook, but let's be realistic and admit recruiting is cutthroat. My understanding of Kelly's organization, though, is that its main aims are to advise NCAA Division I schools interested in icing a hockey program and promote college hockey as a viable option for potential recruits. Both are worth fighting for; more major colleges competing in hockey would increase opportunities for both male and female players. As far as talking up the NCAA to young players, some in the CHL do not like the incursions on to their turf, but younger players and their families should have all the information before choosing which track...
Those are each nobler goals than fulminating about not having a few NHL first-round picks in school for a year or two. It's just a lot less sexier for the media
The Wisconsin Badgers' Beat writer Andy Baggot from
Madison.com had this interesting quote from Badgers head hockey coach
Mike Eaves, in reading that quote one can make the inference/argument that the NCAA route is just as successful for developing
NHL hockey players as the CHL, especially if you're not a first round draft choice and end up being a late bloomer.
CHL teams work the same talent pools as colleges, billing themselves as the fastest route to the NHL. In some cases that's true, in part because Major Junior clubs play longer, pro-style schedules and are the preferred developmental sites for some NHL organizations.
Yet, as Eaves and his college peers are quick to point out, NHL rosters currently have the same percentage of talent from colleges, Major Junior and European leagues.
"The difference between Major Junior and college is that 66 percent of kids that play Major Junior don't make (the NHL)," Eaves said. "What do they have left?
Probably one point that some people might be missing is maybe Division I hockey needs to have the right people promoting the game of college hockey. Maybe the messenger needs to change, it's something that Division I hockey might want to look at, maybe we need to have more people Mike Eaves promoting the college game.
Where do we go from here?
I have to admit that I don't like to see potential college hockey players defecting to the CHL, no one does, but it's been happening for a very long time and there is really no way to stopping it from happening. The coaches can't be with their recruits during the off season. Let's be real, the CHL has no incentive to stop recruiting players that are already committed to Division I programs, why should they? Some of these kids are going to change their mind and go the Major Junior route no matter what, maybe in retrospect Division I hockey should concentrate more on the players that are staying in college and worry less about the players that are leaving.
Don't let the door hit you in the...
Take J.T. Miller for example, my favorite team the UND Fighting Sioux while it hurts losing Miller, the Fighting Sioux are going to be fine without him, like some Sioux fans including myself said, screw him!!! Miller is one player and the Fighting Sioux still have a great class of committed incoming freshman, no one player is above the program. UND head coach Dave Hakstol is a team orientated coach and is not afraid to sit a player if his attitude needs adjusting, no matter what his press clipping read.
I believe that NCAA Division I college hockey just has to do a better job of promoting the game to potential hockey recruits. I also can't fault J.T. Miller from signing and cashing in on a
92,000 signing bonus as well, that's a lot of money and I might sign if I was standing in his shoes as well. With the news of NBC showing Division I hockey on television, that could possibly sway some kids from staying in college, or maybe not but it's a start.
I am a realist and know that Division I college hockey is not for every hockey player, every situation is different. It's hard to go to college and be a student athlete, some of the schools in Division I hockey are very hard to get into and their class work is also very difficult. One side of the argument is; If a player knows that he could be in the NHL in a season or two why would he potentially want to go to school and do a bunch of studying and home work? As a former Division II football player I know that balancing school work and athletics is very difficult and time consuming and doesn't leave you a lot of time for socializing if your serious about your schooling and are taking a bunch of difficult classes.
I also don't know if NCAA hockey can compete
mano a mano with the CHL, NCAA Division I hockey is going to lose some of the battles because the CHL is going to serve as a faster pathway than the NCAA for some players... Also, do we want to see a bunch of one and or two and done players in Division I hockey?
Image via WikipediaFormer Fighting Sioux tight end Jim Kleinsasser weighs in on the Fighting Sioux logo issue. Like I have said in the past, as soon as today's meeting is over between the NCAA and the North Dakota delegation I think we will see a move away from the Fighting Sioux logo because UND can not jeporidize their membership in the Big Sky Conference. 
