OHL vs Prep

[iamcanadian 0]

maybe I'm wrong but don't you think OHLer's or CHLer's tend to get more attention from the scouts.

[chippa13 1844]

That can be good and bad. Too much attention and scouts start tearing your game apart because they already know your strengths. NCAA gets a lot more attention now than it used to, besides, most guys show up on campus past their draft years.

[shooter27 116]

In the OHL/CHL you get attention from NHL scouts, whereas in the prep route you get attention from NCAA and NHL scouts. At the end of the day I feel the best way to lok at it is: The OHL/CHL is an NHL or bust path. It locks you into one option at the age of 16-17 and thats that. On the other hand, the prep/Tier 2 Junior/College route gives you many more options, allows you to puruse an education at the same time as your hockey career and still gives you every opportunity to be an NHL player. However, by choosing that route, even if your not an NHL stud you still have the background of an education when the time comes for you to move on with your life without hockey. In my opinion, unless you are a sure fire NHL stud and high draft pick, there are simply too many pratfalls along the path to choose the Major Junior route while you have other choices that will leave as many potential paths as possible open to you and still give you the chance to be seen by NHL scouts.

[QandA 0]

You guys are basically saying you can't play college or university after playing CHL. Well you can, just in Canada, and depending on where you play, can get a pretty good education package. Oh, and CIS is not as good as NCAA? Some of the better CIS teams can skate with any NCAA teams. So playing in the CHL doesn't ruin any chance of not going to school, it might just be a little later than some...

[chippa13 1844]

I don't know a lot about the CIS deal, but being recruited NCAA D1 usually means education gratis. Not a bad deal if you don't hit the show.

[Law Goalie 147]

That's not "basically" what I said, nor anything like it.

I said that your accumulated CHL scholarships are forfeit the moment you sign a pro contract. Unless that's changed, it stands.

It's also the case that Canadian universities cannot give athletic scholarships. Athletics are at best a tertiary concern in funding allocation. Yes, there are funds available for scholar-athletes, but they're peanuts compared with what's available in the NCAA.

I don't recall anyone saying that the CIS isn't good hockey - I certainly didn't. The CIS is not, however, a viable route to the NHL, nor a particularly sound one for any other level of pro hockey. They place a fair number of guys into lower-tier Eurpoean pro leagues, but still nothing like the NCAA.

[eddyo57 0]

what part of the decision were you talkin about a couple posts ago Law goalie?

[Pats 0]

Canadian universities can give scholarship for tuiton as far as I know just not for housing. Some former CHL players are actually making money to play CIS hockey because of their given scholarships from their major junior league and the scholarship money from he university.

That's not "basically" what I said, nor anything like it.

I said that your accumulated CHL scholarships are forfeit the moment you sign a pro contract. Unless that's changed, it stands.

It's also the case that Canadian universities cannot give athletic scholarships. Athletics are at best a tertiary concern in funding allocation. Yes, there are funds available for scholar-athletes, but they're peanuts compared with what's available in the NCAA.

I don't recall anyone saying that the CIS isn't good hockey - I certainly didn't. The CIS is not, however, a viable route to the NHL, nor a particularly sound one for any other level of pro hockey. They place a fair number of guys into lower-tier Eurpoean pro leagues, but still nothing like the NCAA.

[JohnnyCanuck 0]

Two guys I played with in PeeWee, Bantam, and one of them in Midget.

The first guy left Minor hockey at the end of our second year Bantam and finished the year off in Jr B, then went to the Calgary Hitmen in the Dub. Played on a line with two proven NHL'ers (now) and was drafted in the 5th round IIRC. He played approx 15-20 NHL games in 2 years and is now (if he is even still playing pro) between Europe and ECHL.

The other guy played first year Midget AAA and then went to Jr B the following year. The played 2 years of BCHL (Tier 2 Junior A) and was drafted in the 7th round from there. Went to an NCAA D1 school on full ride and played 4 years of AHL hockey before getting a chance to prove himself at the NHL level, where he is currently on a 3 year 1 way 1Mill+ per year deal.

The second guy has a lasting career, got some/most of his education done which can be completed once his career is over if he wishes.

The first guy got there quicker, but flamed out and has zero education and has a floundering career if he is not retired.

Both guys are 27 now and the guy that went to the WHL was the "Can't miss guy" where nobody ever thought the second guy would get anywhere.

Just my experience.

I would always champion people/kids to go the prep school/tierII Junior A route to NCAA over Major Junior hockey uless the kid was truly can't miss. If you are not there by the age of 16 you probably aren't "can't miss" and thus the decision should be easy.

Of course there are exceptions to every rule (David Perron as an example)

[automorph 0]

The first guy got there quicker, but flamed out and has zero education and has a floundering career if he is not retired.

Yeah but think how he lights up work leagues, beer leagues and pickup hockey games :lol:

[Law Goalie 147]

Canadian universities can give scholarship for tuiton as far as I know just not for housing. Some former CHL players are actually making money to play CIS hockey because of their given scholarships from their major junior league and the scholarship money from he university.

That's not "basically" what I said, nor anything like it.

I said that your accumulated CHL scholarships are forfeit the moment you sign a pro contract. Unless that's changed, it stands.

It's also the case that Canadian universities cannot give athletic scholarships. Athletics are at best a tertiary concern in funding allocation. Yes, there are funds available for scholar-athletes, but they're peanuts compared with what's available in the NCAA.

I don't recall anyone saying that the CIS isn't good hockey - I certainly didn't. The CIS is not, however, a viable route to the NHL, nor a particularly sound one for any other level of pro hockey. They place a fair number of guys into lower-tier Eurpoean pro leagues, but still nothing like the NCAA.

Not quite. A Canadian university can give an undergraduate scholarship that includes on-campus residency fees, which could include full room & board. What they can't do is give a scholarship for an athlete simply on athletic grounds - which an NCAA school can do. A Canadian scholarship can only be awarded on academic grounds with *some* subsequent considerations - and as I said, athletics are not high on that list. I'm a professional student and will be for a few years yet, so I know whereof I speak.

Those ex-CHL players who are supposedly making money as you say must be pretty few and far between, since they'd have to be all of A) excellent students B) enrolled in well-funded fields and C) willing to turn down pro contracts to go to a Canadian university.

I'm going to guess that number is less than 10 per year, and probably closer to 10 per decade.

And they're still not going to see anything like the amount of money available in the NCAA.

In fact, they're supposed to disclose exterior educational funding, which may invalidate their university scholarships. If you win a grant from SSHRC or NSERC you're no longer eligible for university funding; I imagine the CHL scholarships fall under the same category.

There are a large number of kids for whom the NCAA would be a wash-out. They rightly stay to play Major Junior.

[QandA 0]

Canadian universities can give scholarship for tuiton as far as I know just not for housing. Some former CHL players are actually making money to play CIS hockey because of their given scholarships from their major junior league and the scholarship money from he university.

That's not "basically" what I said, nor anything like it.

I said that your accumulated CHL scholarships are forfeit the moment you sign a pro contract. Unless that's changed, it stands.

It's also the case that Canadian universities cannot give athletic scholarships. Athletics are at best a tertiary concern in funding allocation. Yes, there are funds available for scholar-athletes, but they're peanuts compared with what's available in the NCAA.

I don't recall anyone saying that the CIS isn't good hockey - I certainly didn't. The CIS is not, however, a viable route to the NHL, nor a particularly sound one for any other level of pro hockey. They place a fair number of guys into lower-tier Eurpoean pro leagues, but still nothing like the NCAA.

Not quite. A Canadian university can give an undergraduate scholarship that includes on-campus residency fees, which could include full room & board. What they can't do is give a scholarship for an athlete simply on athletic grounds - which an NCAA school can do. A Canadian scholarship can only be awarded on academic grounds with *some* subsequent considerations - and as I said, athletics are not high on that list. I'm a professional student and will be for a few years yet, so I know whereof I speak.

Those ex-CHL players who are supposedly making money as you say must be pretty few and far between, since they'd have to be all of A) excellent students B) enrolled in well-funded fields and C) willing to turn down pro contracts to go to a Canadian university.

I'm going to guess that number is less than 10 per year, and probably closer to 10 per decade.

And they're still not going to see anything like the amount of money available in the NCAA.

In fact, they're supposed to disclose exterior educational funding, which may invalidate their university scholarships. If you win a grant from SSHRC or NSERC you're no longer eligible for university funding; I imagine the CHL scholarships fall under the same category.

There are a large number of kids for whom the NCAA would be a wash-out. They rightly stay to play Major Junior.

Players at the bigger hockey schools in the CIS are getting a fair amount of schooling paid for. A lot of them could go the ECHL, some the AHL, but opt to go to school as they realize that the NHL dream is less than likely. American schools cost WAY more to attend than Canadian schools, so, if a CIS hockey player and an NCAA hockey player are gettign full scholarships, the NCAA guy is getting more money. They're not 'peanuts,' the bigger hockey schools are having players paid good money. How else do you think a team from New Brunswick is going to recruit guys out of Ontario and the West? Certainly won't just be being a hockey power.

It's not a viable route to any level of pro hockey? Rob Hennigar, Justin Bowers, Darryl Boyce, Mike Mole, all guys who played CIS and went to 'pro' hockey. Most of these players could be playing some level of pro hockey, do you think they'd go to school for free, or make a few bucks playing pro for awhile?

[chippa13 1844]

Canadian universities can give scholarship for tuiton as far as I know just not for housing. Some former CHL players are actually making money to play CIS hockey because of their given scholarships from their major junior league and the scholarship money from he university.

That's not "basically" what I said, nor anything like it.

I said that your accumulated CHL scholarships are forfeit the moment you sign a pro contract. Unless that's changed, it stands.

It's also the case that Canadian universities cannot give athletic scholarships. Athletics are at best a tertiary concern in funding allocation. Yes, there are funds available for scholar-athletes, but they're peanuts compared with what's available in the NCAA.

I don't recall anyone saying that the CIS isn't good hockey - I certainly didn't. The CIS is not, however, a viable route to the NHL, nor a particularly sound one for any other level of pro hockey. They place a fair number of guys into lower-tier Eurpoean pro leagues, but still nothing like the NCAA.

Not quite. A Canadian university can give an undergraduate scholarship that includes on-campus residency fees, which could include full room & board. What they can't do is give a scholarship for an athlete simply on athletic grounds - which an NCAA school can do. A Canadian scholarship can only be awarded on academic grounds with *some* subsequent considerations - and as I said, athletics are not high on that list. I'm a professional student and will be for a few years yet, so I know whereof I speak.

Those ex-CHL players who are supposedly making money as you say must be pretty few and far between, since they'd have to be all of A) excellent students B) enrolled in well-funded fields and C) willing to turn down pro contracts to go to a Canadian university.

I'm going to guess that number is less than 10 per year, and probably closer to 10 per decade.

And they're still not going to see anything like the amount of money available in the NCAA.

In fact, they're supposed to disclose exterior educational funding, which may invalidate their university scholarships. If you win a grant from SSHRC or NSERC you're no longer eligible for university funding; I imagine the CHL scholarships fall under the same category.

There are a large number of kids for whom the NCAA would be a wash-out. They rightly stay to play Major Junior.

Players at the bigger hockey schools in the CIS are getting a fair amount of schooling paid for. A lot of them could go the ECHL, some the AHL, but opt to go to school as they realize that the NHL dream is less than likely. American schools cost WAY more to attend than Canadian schools, so, if a CIS hockey player and an NCAA hockey player are gettign full scholarships, the NCAA guy is getting more money. They're not 'peanuts,' the bigger hockey schools are having players paid good money. How else do you think a team from New Brunswick is going to recruit guys out of Ontario and the West? Certainly won't just be being a hockey power.

It's not a viable route to any level of pro hockey? Rob Hennigar, Justin Bowers, Darryl Boyce, Mike Mole, all guys who played CIS and went to 'pro' hockey. Most of these players could be playing some level of pro hockey, do you think they'd go to school for free, or make a few bucks playing pro for awhile?

Ummmmm..........who?

[Law Goalie 147]

"Viable" is not a synonym for "remotely possible."

You're missing the point. The NCAA gives purely athletic scholarships. The CIS does not; you cannot get a scholarship in Canada without being a first-class student. If you and some geek both have 95% averages, your hockey playing *might* put you over the top for a scholarship, but if the geek happens to sing in a choir or do volunteer work, you're no better off. American universities offer true "full ride" scholarships where all living expenses are covered; this is basically non-existent in Canada, and even where it can be found, the amount of actual subsidization *above and beyond tuition* is nothing compared with what's available in the NCAA. In terms of equipment, facilities, coaching, training - the NCAA wins hands down.

There are three reasons NB, St.FX and other East Coast teams get good hockey players. #1, they have lower academic entry requirements. Sad, but true: hockey and academics rarely mix at high concentrations. If you're a Provincial Jr. A player with an 80 average, you're not getting in to UofT, period. #2, largely as a result of #1, they have historically strong programs. #3, the East Coast hockey centres have well-deserved notoriety as party schools, which rightly attracts a hockey culture.

I have absolutely nothing against these schools. I love UNB; it's one of the great caretakers of the Canadian literary tradition, and a damn fine time to boot. Their hockey teams could probably skate with many NCAA D1 teams. But in nobody's imagination is the best player at St.FX on the same radar screen as the best player in the Minnesota or Boston schools in terms of professional development. Maybe that's unfair. Personally, I'd like to see it changed. But that's the way it is.

[QandA 0]

I guess were getting pretty off topic here but it seems to have a purpose.

Chippa, those names are in response to this post:

"The CIS is not, however, a viable route to the NHL, nor a particularly sound one for any other level of pro hockey. They place a fair number of guys into lower-tier Eurpoean pro leagues, but still nothing like the NCAA."

I understand CIS schools cannot give athletic scholarships, but they find their loopholes, and CHL teams are paying more their players more money to attend school than ever. The point I am making is CIS schools along with the CHL will likely pay the majority of an athletes tradition.

And I guess, since I am a UNB student, I see one of the finest programmes in the country (we beat BC and Maine this year), who have our own 3700 person arena, site of former AHL teams to ourselves, a great coach, great facilities and training and what not. As for your points #1- I don't think academics are the main priority when schools are recruiting, that's my opinion. And yes it is easy to get into school here, I haven't heard of many people not getting accepted haha. #2 speaks for itself, and #3 didn't McGill get rated as one of the best party schools in North America? That's not to take away from UNB not being a party school, it is.

I agree with you, the best player from a BC team is not on the same level as St. FX team. The point I am trying to make is that you can still go places playing CIS. I look at success stories like Darryl Boyce who actually suited up with the Leafs less than a year after winning a National CIS title. I'm just making a case for a post OHL career, and the CIS. Finally, I too wouldn't mind seeing it changed, but it's not going to happen.

edit

http://bestofbothworlds.ca/hm/inside.php?s...p;static_sid=17

interesting note on OHL scholarships along with some associated links.

[Pats 0]

Law Goalie: Yes, you are correct in that the scholarships are supposed to be based on academics, but the only year that is somewhat hard to manage is the first year where you need an 80% average from high school. After that it is not too hard to meet the standard.

I'm not saying which route is better, but it really bugs me when people say two things:

1) assuming that just because it costs a lot more for a Canadian to go to school in the States that the education is worth more because of the difference in price and

2) that by playing major junior you've hit a dead end in hockey if you don't go pro.

[shooter27 116]

Interesting article recently in the Kitchener press about the education packages that we discussed. If nothing else it shows that these packages are not anywhere near what the OHL is publicly selling them to be. Not that its really earth shattering - that a lot of the kids don't take advantage of the packages, or that the league limits its cost exposure through a serious of Draconian restrictions on the packages - but just something else to think about if you're out there trying to make the NCAA vs. OHL decision. Also, let's not forget that this is written in a paper where the OHL is the only game in town in terms of spectator sports.

http://news.therecord.com/article/645999

[Law Goalie 147]

That is an interesting article, shooter, and a good contribution to the discussion.

I missed Pat's reply earlier, but I do think it's worth addressing.

Re: the point about Canadian scholarships, the perennial minimum requirements are well-published, but the fact remains that you *cannot get* a purely athletic scholarship from a Canadian university. Most scholarships do take extra-curriculars into accounts, among which high-level sport would certainly be counted, as I clearly acknowledged, and some few do specify some level of athletic involvement, but they a purely supplementary qualification - a tie-breaker in cases where the marks even out, or a conditional exclusion.

Re: #1, I never said an American education was worth more than a Canadian one because of money; that's putting words in my mouth, not to mention clouding the issue. What is under discussion is not whether post-secondary education is better North or South of the border, but whether the opportunities for simultaneous athletic (primarily) and academic (secondarily) development are. Given that you can get a full-ride scholarship (that is, zero cost to you for four years) in the U.S. and not in Canada, and that the requirements for holding said scholarship are MUCH lower in the US, I'd say that's pretty clear-cut. Do I agree with those priorities? Not necessarily, but we're discussing the how's and where's, not the why's and wherefore's.

However, you will not find a university in Canada academically or athletically that can stand up to the very best scholastic institutions in the US - Harvard, Cornell, Yale, etc. - except perhaps in some very specific program, like plant biology at UBC or veterinary sciences at Guelph. Schools like UofT and Queen's only think they're world-class universities - and this is coming from one of their graduate students. In spite of David Naylor's efforts to turn UofT into a research university, what it's really becoming is a university that cannot and does not teach its undergraduates, preferring to sell paper degrees at $24k amortised over four years, while exploiting contract sessional lecturers with minimal benefits, criminal salaries, and no hope of tenure to babysit classrooms of children who can barely read and write to begin with and will be no better when they leave - children from whom the university attempts to extract as much money as possible in concessions (books, food, residence, etc.) over that four-year amortisation. It's no coincidence that all of UofT's current major development projects are in real estate.

Re: #2, as per shooter's article, it is much, much more difficult to continue one's education while playing major junior. The financial support is dubious, and the cultural support exists largely in theory, and is really only paid lip-service at ice-level in most cases. More to the point, the timelines between education and the major junior are not commensurate:

15-17 - player typically enters OHL from lower-tier junior or high-level youth

18 - finishes high-school, NHL draft-eligible

20 - last year of OHL eligibility

21 - OHL overager year

22 - end of average four-year undergraduate program

So unless you're asking OHL hockey players to do their four-year degrees in three years (since most universities have by now phased out the three-year Bachelor's), which means doing 20% more work per year than the average student while still playing the highest level of hockey possible in a given age-group, there's going to be a gap-year.

Two things can happen in this gap-year: either the player can turn pro, earn a paycheque and forfeit his entire OHL scholarship allowance, or take a definite step backward in his hockey development to finish his degree and play a year in the CIS. Some may say that the CIS is very good hockey, arguably better than the OHL - but show me a scout who would regard that as a positive decision for a future professional player.

Oh, and let's not forget that in order to make this happen, the player in question would have had to refuse to sign his entry-level professional contract after being drafted - and we all know how much NHL teams love that.

And, of course, that the OHL team has no affiliation with the university the player is attending, and the player has no avenue of recourse if the two are in conflict. Missed an exam to play a playoff game? You fail. Missed a playoff game for an exam? There goes your coach's recommendation.

I would argue that's a pretty major incompatibility.

The fact is that the OHL and CIS have backed players into a corner because they refuse to cooperate. It would be so easy to beat the US at their own game by integrating major junior hockey with Canadian universities: all you'd need to do is put the players into a bridge-program like Woodsworth's at UofT to overlap first-year university with grade twelve in the player's 18th year, and presto: you have Canadian athletes leaving their undergraduate and major junior careers at the same time. More to the point, I don't think there's a single major junior team that doesn't have reasonable geographical access to a Canadian university; someone could probably Googlemap it, and I'd bet they'd find an uncanny correspondence. From there, it's simple: CIS varsity becomes a farm-team for the affiliated major-junior team, the junior team gets access to the university's medical and training facilities, and the players have their education and athletics in the same package. Moreover, because the OHL's scholarships are considered private, their regulatory restrictions are *slightly* more lax than normal university scholarships: they should still have the ability to restrict their scholarships to their players.

A lovely dream - and good luck selling it to the owners of major junior teams. They'd be about as likely to do that as to outlaw fighting.

[chippa13 1844]

Something in me just doesn't like the idea of a college's varsity team being a farm team for a major junior team. There is just too much potential for conflict of interest issues and for good kids who normally would have been CIS student/athletes to get screwed out of their place because the CIS team is filled with kids almost good enough for major junior. There are plenty of other headaches that could arise from this situation.

[Law Goalie 147]

Absolutely - I'm by no means saying it's a perfect solution. For one, all the OHL/CHL owners are typically businessmen who would balk at the idea of handing over their profitable teams to the universities.

I relish the position of the classical student/athlete, but it's a dying breed, and I really am troubled by the fact that so many intelligent Canadian athletes end up going South for their educations. We do a fine job in some sports (rowing, chiefly) of keeping them here, but we're abysmal in hockey, baseball, and many others.

[iamcanadian 0]

Does anyone know the rules involving your eligibility to play NCAA if you have gone to a ohl camp ect. I can't find any info on the net. Thanks in advance.

[DEATHTRON 19]

You can only have 2 days on their tab? Someone correct me on that, but thats what I want to say. If anything, contact someone if unsure, or just pay for yourself the entire time, that way you dont get screwed over.

Zach

[starsfan71 9]

I know you can go to NHL camps without pay and still maintain eligibility.

[shooter27 116]

The last time I checked (about 5 years ago) the rule was that you could attend camp for less than 48 hours (i.e. 47 hours and 59 minutes) and could not skate in any exhibition games. Once you go past the time limit or play an exhibition game its considered a year playing juniors and you lose one year of NCAA eligibility plus however many games (exhibition or otherwise) you were dressed, regardless of whether or not you saw the ice. The two rules are also independent, meaning even if you are there less than 48 hours, but play a game, that dings your eligibility. So if you played 2 exhibition games you would lose your freshman year of NCAA eligibility and the first two games of your sophomore year. Also, from what I've been told, the NCAA is extremely strict on the 48 hour rule, I've never heard of anyone being dinged literally up to the minute, but I know of one instance where someone was dinged for staying about 30 minutes too long. Finally, if I remember correctly, a game is considered any contest in which two different organizations are on the ice. Meaning even if its an unofficial scrimmage between two teams and not a full fledged exhibition game, its treated like a game.

An interesting fact about the 48 hour rule is that it also applies to players that are invited to the NHL scouting combine. I've seen a couple interviews where palyers mentioned having to be extremely careful of when they entered and exited the hotel to make sure they didn't harm their eligibility.

[epstud74 24]

Maybe he should be trying out for a US Junior league team and if that does not work out, go play Prep back out east. Here in MN, a kid can play in the USHL and come back and play on his HS team as well. A lot of them end up in the USHL right after the HS season is over too