USHL vs QMJHL

Appears Omaha Lancers and Indiana Ice will be playing exhibition games with the Q this fall.

Appears Omaha Lancers and Indiana Ice will be playing exhibition games with the Q this fall.

Wow, where did you hear that? There's nothing yet on any of the websites...
I have a tough time believing the Q would agree to that. Too much to lose.

Appears Omaha Lancers and Indiana Ice will be playing exhibition games with the Q this fall.

Any idea which teams in the Q. Would this have any affect on NCAA eligibility. NCAA can be real anal about that :dunno: After all according to NCAA the Q is a professional league :thumbd:
Just wondering if maybe they'll be playing LHJAAAQ teams? But against LHJMQ teams, seems there's too many bridges to be built.
But good if true.

Yeah, unless I see a legit link about this....I'm skeptical.

The USHL site is very quick to post news items like this, and there is nothing on their website about it.

If this were true...

There's really no way the Q would come out of this looking good unless they absolutely smoke those two teams, and I'm not sure that would happen pre-season.
As an example, last season IFK Helsinki beat St. John and Moncton in pre-season play. The two Q teams were playing many guys trying to make their teams, so they didn't have their full rosters.
I'm not sure the Q teams would play regular rosters against USHL teams in exhibition games either. On the flip side, I bet you'll see USHL squads ice the best possible rosters they can and be seriously fired up for those games, as they'd feel they have a point to prove.
About 5 years ago the NAHL's Pittsburgh Forge beat Erie pretty badly 4-1 in an exhibition game, outshooting them 44-11. Pittsburgh, which went on to win the USA national championship, iced pretty much their full roster. Erie had several players off at NHL training camps, and went with alot of rookies. It was pretty bad.
Does that mean the NAHL is on par with the OHL? Hell no. But in the pre-season anything is possible.
Hell, the OPJHL's Buffalo Lightning, traditionally one of the weakest teams in the league, tied Erie two years ago in the pre-season. Buffalo normally stinks pretty bad, and wouldn't get within two touchdowns of OHL teams in regular season play.

I think that unless you were to go in a tournament that actually meant something, where teams played their legitimate rosters, it wouldn't prove much.
But man, the USHL will NEVER shut up about this if they win,
even if it is pre-season :D

Looks like Omaha and Indiana will both be playing Quebec and Rimouski.

LINK (http://www.lhjmq.qc.ca/lang_en/?page=234342412&calendar_mode=0&id_type_cal=1&id_saison=98&browse_mode=1&startdate=2007-08-01&enddate=2007-09-12&id_equipe=-1&teammode=1&serie_ronde=0&dynOrderBy=date_match&dynOrderMode=ASC)

Wow, wow, WOW... Circle THOSE dates on your calendars folks.
I am honestly very surprised the Q will be playing the USHL.
Looks like it's close to the end of exhibition season as well...

Anyone want to start making predicitons?:sarcasm:

Yup...the USHL site now has an article about it (pdf format):

http://www.ushl.com/news/0607/20070606CCMClassic.pdf

Love This... September 7th and 8 i think the last weekend of pre-season for the Q. They should have decent line-ups but middle of NHL Training Camps.

Maybe the Ice can steal Tavares for the weekend :sarcasm:

At least there will be some proof now for all the junior league debates

I stand corrected .
Good move, we need more bridge building. Who wins will just come down to who places the most importantce on bragging rights. But it is important that our young players on both sides of the border get as much exposure as possible.
I don't think any other game has the variety of choices available to play at an elite level as hockey. Let's use the variety to the players advantage.

Love This... September 7th and 8 i think the last weekend of pre-season for the Q. They should have decent line-ups but middle of NHL Training Camps.

Maybe the Ice can steal Tavares for the weekend :sarcasm:

Wow, won't most prospects be at NHL camps at the time of these games? I dont' think camp officially opens until mid-September, but I believe the prospects tournaments will be taking place.
Doesn't this mean that both Quebec and Rimouski will be missing the core of their best players?
Rimouski has several players who will be drafted this year, including
David Skokan, Olivier Fortier, Max Gratchev, Maxime Tanguay and Tommy Legault.
Will 1st Rounder Michael Frolik be in the NHL/AHL, or will he be back? He's 19.
Regardless, he'll be at NHL camp.
Quebec will likely be missing newly drafted Esposito, Ruslan and Roman Baskirov.
Plus Maxime Lacroix and Joey Ryan, and other undrafted veterans who will still get invites to NHL camps.

If most of those players are gone, these games
a) won't really be a fair indication of how the two leagues match up
b) could spell serious trouble for the Q, who could get embarassed

If training camp really does overlap with these games, could someone please tell my WHY the Q agreed to this? Without their main players, it seems pointless they would want to take on a league that is positioning themselves as a QMJHL rival...

Here we go. You are making excuses and the freekin game is 3 months away.

Here we go. You are making excuses and the freekin game is 3 months away.

Hell no. No excuses. I'm actually very excited they've decided to do this.
I think I bring up some valid points about why the Q would want to play this at a time when they could possibly have weaker teams due to camps.
If anything, I'm speaking highly of the talent the USHL has. As I said before, I think the Q could end up looking pretty bad in these games.

Don't these USHL teams also have players at pro camps and kids trying out for spots?

I expect close games.

Don't these USHL teams also have players at pro camps and kids trying out for spots?

I expect close games.

Maybe someone could answer this. Is there not an NCAA eligibility rule that prevents players from attending CHL/NHL camps for an extended period of time?
I believe for the CHL it's 48 hours, so is it the same for NHL?

Maybe someone could answer this. Is there not an NCAA eligibility rule that prevents players from attending CHL/NHL camps for an extended period of time?
I believe for the CHL it's 48 hours, so is it the same for NHL?

I believe it's 48 hours for NHL too.

Maybe someone could answer this. Is there not an NCAA eligibility rule that prevents players from attending CHL/NHL camps for an extended period of time?
I believe for the CHL it's 48 hours, so is it the same for NHL?
Yes, NCAA has rules about attending CHL training camps, 48 hours sounds about right.
Not sure if I want to call it hypocrisy or out right self interest. With the way Major Midget players are playing the NCAA card these days. It's become a bidding war.
I'll stick with hypocrisy it fits the NCAA motives better.

Yes, NCAA has rules about attending CHL training camps, 48 hours sounds about right.
Not sure if I want to call it hypocrisy or out right self interest. With the way Major Midget players are playing the NCAA card these days. It's become a bidding war.
I'll stick with hypocrisy it fits the NCAA motives better.

Alpine, you're a Moncton guy. What do you know about last year's games against IFK Helsinki? Did the Wildcats have many players missing?
How will things play out this September - will players be gone to NHL camps at the time of the USHL games? Sorry, questions, questions... ;)

Alpine, you're a Moncton guy. What do you know about last year's games against IFK Helsinki? Did the Wildcats have many players missing?
How will things play out this September - will players be gone to NHL camps at the time of the USHL games? Sorry, questions, questions... ;)

Quite frankly it'll be training camp and exhibition games. No I'm not making excuses in advance...........
The coaches will have alot of players on the bubble playing, afterall that's why they play exhibition games.
I will mention that last year Maritime Junior A teams also played pre-seaon exhibition games against IFK Helsinki and NCAA Hockey East and fared just as well as Q or AUS teams.
It is the responsibility of the coaching staffs on both sides to give players on the bubble an opportuntity to show themselves. That's why they play exhibition games. Otherwise teams should be honest with players on the bubble and either release them or assign them back to their Junior A or Major Midget teams.
I've said it to you in the past and I'll say it again; take what you want from exhibition games. Untill these teams meet each other in January or March for points, we're only looking at bragging rights. But these games will be interesting.
The Wildcats will be playing one game this pre-season in Grindstone,Iles d'Madelaine against a local team, because of the heavy Acadian population there....what should we take from that?

Any truth to this? I found it on a USHL blog:

One thing to note is the Q plays a month of exhibition games in August before the matchups with Indiana and Omaha, whereas Omaha and Indy will probably have played maybe 1 real game by the time this happens.

derbyfan, I find it interesting that you are worried about the Q clubs and their possible performance against the USHL. Why would they schedule such a thing in September you ask...when their best players will be either at NHL rookie camps or playing for Canada in the Russia summit series?

Easy answer, because its a win win for the Q.

If Rimouski and Quebec both win or heck even split, many will say "Look those USHL clubs couldn't even beat a Q exhibition B team!.". If they lose even four straigt, the reply simply will be "yeah so they beat our rookies and walk on free agent try out players, big deal!"

In all actuality, its the USHL that has the most to lose.

BTW, I actually remember the Erie-Pittsburg game and you are right, the Forge absolutely dominated the Otters. Of course the Otters iced about a dozen rookies, half of which never ended up making the team, were missing a couple of their star players and dressed only about 6 vets.

Regardless...the games will be fun.

derbyfan, I find it interesting that you are worried about the Q clubs and their possible performance against the USHL. Why would they schedule such a thing in September you ask...when their best players will be either at NHL rookie camps or playing for Canada in the Russia summit series?

Easy answer, because its a win win for the Q.

If Rimouski and Quebec both win or heck even split, many will say "Look those USHL clubs couldn't even beat a Q exhibition B team!.". If they lose even four straigt, the reply simply will be "yeah so they beat our rookies and walk on free agent try out players, big deal!"

In all actuality, its the USHL that has the most to lose.

BTW, I actually remember the Erie-Pittsburg game and you are right, the Forge absolutely dominated the Otters. Of course the Otters iced about a dozen rookies, half of which never ended up making the team, were missing a couple of their star players and dressed only about 6 vets.

Regardless...the games will be fun.

LOL, you're actually my source on the Forge/Otters game, I asked you about it a couple of years ago. I knew they lost badly, and the shot count, but wasn't sure how it was they'd been beaten so badly.
I especially realized a couple of years ago how little these games can mean, when Erie tied Buffalo of the OPJHL. That Buffalo team wouldn't beat most top Jr. B squads in Ontario, so it shows just how many rookies and bubble players CHL teams can play in the exhibition season.

You've got a good point about the "win-win" for the Q. But it's really all a matter of perception. You know the USHL will spin this to their advantage as well, especially if they are even close in the games.
My point was that the Q has taken a step many didn't think they would, myself included. They've in a sense legitimized the USHL as competition to them.
Don't you feel the USHL will use this as a recruiting tool, if they fare at all well against major junior?

.
Don't you feel the USHL will use this as a recruiting tool, if they fare at all well against major junior?

derbyfan, the reality is that the majority of players actually know where leagues stand and know what can happen in a game or two. The only traction the USHL will get will be with certain posters on this site, nothing more. It will be the same if the Q trounces the USHL, it won't really change the opinions of players and where they choose to play.

How do I know? About five years ago when the USHL was embarking on its inaugrial season as "America's Tier 1 league" a tournament was held that featured several USHL teams and one lone NAHL team. That NAHL team went 2-1. Yes the NAHL whooped it up and did in fact embarass some top level USHL suits but it didn't cause a ripple as to where players were going to decide to play. As you know the NAHL has continued to decline over the past several season while the USHL has cemented its spot as the dominant Junior league in the U.S.

Yes, NCAA has rules about attending CHL training camps, 48 hours sounds about right.
Not sure if I want to call it hypocrisy or out right self interest. With the way Major Midget players are playing the NCAA card these days. It's become a bidding war.
I'll stick with hypocrisy it fits the NCAA motives better.

My question is this: I'm positive there's an NCAA rule regarding players wanting to keep their NCAA eligibilty that says they can't play any exhibition games while attending a training camp of a CHL team (on top of the 48hrs rule), so how do these exhibition games not violate this rule?

My question is this: I'm positive there's an NCAA rule regarding players wanting to keep their NCAA eligibilty that says they can't play any exhibition games while attending a training camp of a CHL team (on top of the 48hrs rule), so how do these exhibition games not violate this rule?

Easy, its the same reason why the NCAA considers the CHL a "pro" league and the USHL and NAHL not.

interesting discussion. How will the result(s) impact future decision making? Seems to me that the "U" can use a respectable performance to add to it's position as an alternative to Major Junior ( w/o the loss of NCAA eligibility) While it would seem that the "Q" would only benefit if they were to dominate the games. With the top Canadian born players apparently using the NCAA option as leverage success by "U" teams might only provide more fuel for this leverage.

It would seem to me the "Q" needs to market itself better in the US if it wants to overcome the impact of the loss of NCAA eligibility to Amercan players. Remember the average American kid grows up with the dream to play D-1 college hockey and in hotbeds of hockey like Mass playing college hockey at a local D-1 school is enough to make you a "Hometown Hero" for life. LOL

Different cultures, Different dreams.

Just my observation, (and opinion, everyone has one)

F1

Easy, its the same reason why the NCAA considers the CHL a "pro" league and the USHL and NAHL not.

Well obviously, La-la, I meant is there any reason other than "just because".

Well obviously, La-la, I meant is there any reason other than "just because".

:)

Likely not...its the NCAA...they set their own rules :)

thats great news! A friend of mine plays for the Ice and Quebec city is only 2.5 hours away from my house! Al ot closer then driving to Indiana :biglaugh:

I figured there'd be a thread on this here after the recent news. :)

NCAA on major juniors players not being considered amateurs: They are paid to play in major juniors. It's not much, but it counts. Yes, I'm fully aware of all the ways Tier I and Tier II teams can get around this by using "allowances". But, the check isn't written out to Joe USHLer.

USHL vs. QMJHL: I would expect the QMJHL teams to win this, but it should be close. I hope both Omaha and Indiana have strong rosters next year. This might help those two teams convince a couple players on the fence about playing in the USHL to make that jump. I firmly support players playing juniors before going to college, from a hockey standpoint and an academic standpoint. Unless you're a stud coming out of high school or prep school like Erik Johnson and the like, you really should consider further developing your game in juniors first so that you can be an impact player in college from the get go.

NAHL vs. USHL: This was mentioned a bit earlier how the NAHL team did well when the USHL first became Tier 1. The criticism of the USHL was that in it's reformulation of the rosters with the requirements of certain players at certain ages was that it'd become a glorified midget league. Well, that hasn't happened (and I'm one of the ones who criticized the move when it first happened). The USHL has done a fabulous job of attracting top American talent. It's really very easy as to why the USHL can do this: the teams receive far more support in fan attendance and from the community than NAHL teams. The USHL teams can provide more amenities to their players. Many USHL teams play in fairly new facilities, too. What has happened in the USHL is that exceptionally talented 16- and 17-year-olds have come to play against those 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds that are in the USHL. The overage players that remain are THE best overagers that have not already committed to a college (or are transferring and need to sit out a year!), because the USHL limits the number of them allowed. So, a lot of 19- and 20-year-olds that were once in the USHL that were not top players end up in the NAHL to close out their junior career.

The NAHL tends to be an older league than the USHL. The USHL has its role of developing high-end prospects and the NAHL has its role of helping its top younger guys move up to the USHL and then help the older players still earn a scholarship from an NCAA DI school. What I hope can happen is that the NAHL can expand so that the teams in their league don't have to spend as much on travel. They almost need an Alaskan or Northwest division now to keep that travel reasonable. Then, try and group Texas, Wichita Falls, Topeka, St. Louis, and Springfield together; Mahoning Valley, Alpena, Marquette, Traverse City, and the USNTDP together; and lastly Bismarck, North Iowa, Southern Minnesota, and Alexandria together (Fargo-Moorhead will be receiving a USHL team again in 2008-09). It would be great if the NAHL could secure one more team in Minnesota or the Dakotas, and then two more teams in the Pacific Northwest to join Fairbanks, Alaska, and Kenai River. I'm not certain if any teams currently in the Nor-Pac could move up to make that happen. In Minnesota, one might say that the Minnesota Ice Hawks of the Minnesota Junior Hockey League would be a great team to join the NAHL because the Ice Hawks are in Rochester and have firmly established themselves as one of the the top Junior B teams in the nation. However, don't expect that to happen. Would the Ice Hawks receive much more fan support and community support to would offset the added budget concerns that joining the NAHL would have for the Ice Hawks? Highly doubtful. Plus, in Junior B, the players pay to play. One might ask whether struggling Junior A teams shouldn't considering dropping down to Junior B.

Hopefully the NAHL remains a viable league. Its teams do need more than the average 1000 fans per game that they see (and some teams really skew the average high).

USA Hockey in general needs to educate players and parents how helpful Tier II Junior A and then also Junior B hockey can be for developing players. It's a great way for players to physically and mentally mature before going to college. It's really very helpful for players to take those 9 to 11 credit hours while they're also playing junior hockey, because it'll allow players to maintain a lower course load while playing college hockey. If a collegiate player can keep his course load as close to 12 credit hours as he can, all the better for his grades AND his hockey (assuming he has the work ethic to do that and stay on task).

Interesting question: Do the USHL players lose their NCAA eligibility if they play teams in the CHL, or the Q specifically in September? My opinion is no; they will still retain their amateur status, but they must be careful. My son will play 18AAA next year and is going through the NCAA Clearinghouse right now, so I have done some research because he has been invited to and wants to attend a CHL camp this summer. The USHL teams cannot receive any monies or financial support to attend and play in these games above reasonable expenses. For example, the Remparts can provide the Collisee’ for free, or at their cost (reasonable expense), but Omaha and the Ice should pay their own way to the games, pay their own lodging and other expenses, and not participate in the gate. The key here is that the U teams are playing against a team deemed pro, not for a pro team. Case in point would be where the MLB San Diego Padres have played exhibition baseball games during the school year against the SDSU Aztecs (ie Feb, 2005, and only 7 years prior in 1998 when the Padres beat the Aztecs 4-2). The Aztec players retained their amateur status because they only played against a pro team, not for one.

The NCAA Clearinghouse has their academic requirements (save that for another topic of discussion), and their Amateurism questions. If a player answers “ yes” to any of these questions, then they are in jeopardy of losing their amateur status. These questions are:
1.In any sport, have you ever (other than your parents or coach) asked anyone to market your athletic skill or reputation?
2. In any sport, have you ever accepted any benefits from an agent (or other individual who has marketed any individual’s athletic skill)? If the answer is YES, the following information will be requested.
- name of individual or corporation
- benefits received, ie. Meals, lodging, money
- explanation of situation and benefits received.
3. Before ever attending classes full time at any college, have you ever:
Competed in an event and accepted prize money?
Competed in an event where any part of your expenses were paid by anyone other than your family, your team or the sponsor of the event?
Been paid to compete?
4. Have you agreed to compete on a professional sports team?
5. Competed on any team where anyone received more than their expenses to play on the team?
6. Had a professional sports team pay any of your expenses for a practice or tryout?
Answer Yes to any of these questions, and the Clearinghouse will look at it and give you one of three results. Certified, Certified with Conditions, or Not Certified.
The preliminary status is available to the prospect and institution via the clearinghouse website. The process is repeated when the prospect updates athletic participation.

The following explains that if you pay your own way, you can tryout for a pro team for an indefinite period. The 48-hour rule applies if the pro team is paying any expenses.
Tryouts With Professional Teams
It is permissible for a prospective student-athlete or a currently enrolled student-athlete to try out with a professional team, provided the following conditions are met:
1. Prior to collegiate enrollment: A student-athlete remains eligible in a sport even though, prior to enrollment in a collegiate institution, the student-athlete may have tried out with a professional athletics team in a sport or received not more than one expense-paid visit from each professional team (or a combine including that team), provided such a visit did not exceed 48 hours and any payment or compensation in connection with the visit was not in excess of actual and necessary expenses. A self-financed tryout may be for any length of time.
2. Tryout after collegiate enrollment: A student-athlete shall not try out with a professional athletics team in a sport or permit a professional athletics team to conduct medical examinations during any part of the academic year (i.e., from the beginning of the fall term through completion of the spring term, including any intervening vacation period) while enrolled in a collegiate institution as a regular student in at least a minimum full-time academic load, unless the student-athlete has exhausted eligibility in that sport. The student-athlete may try out with a professional organization in a sport during the summer or during the academic year while not a full-time student, provided the student-athlete does not receive any form of expenses or other compensation from the professional organization.
Please note that during a tryout, an individual may not take part in any outside competition (games or scrimmages) as a representative of that professional team.
Please contact the certifying institution or conference for additional information. You also may contact the NCAA membership services staff at 317/917-6222 should you have further questions.
In the NCAA “do’s and dont’s” they specifically reference Major Junior Hockey. They say” if you as an athlete participate on a major junior ice hockey team, you will be considered as having played on a professional team, and thus lose your eligibility for intercollegiate competition in ice hockey.”

Hope this helps anyone wanting to got to CHL camps this summer and still retain their NCAA amateur status. The keys are don’t get an agent, pay your own way, and don’t play a game for a deemed pro team against another pro team.

Wow, where did you hear that? There's nothing yet on any of the websites...
I have a tough time believing the Q would agree to that. Too much to lose.

Told ya so :D

Told ya so :D

Geez, look what you started.
This should be fun though...

Should be fun. Nick Larson and Nicco Saccetti of Omaha will hopefully look really good.

Even without Fortier, Skokan, Tanguay, Gratchev, Frolik and probably some invites for the rookie camps of NHL teams, we'll eat USHL ass off ! Go Nics go !

Even without Fortier, Skokan, Tanguay, Gratchev, Frolik and probably some invites for the rookie camps of NHL teams, we'll eat USHL ass off ! Go Nics go !

NHL camps don't usually open until Sep 13-15, so it's possible that all those guys could be in Rimouski's lineup.

Even without Fortier, Skokan, Tanguay, Gratchev, Frolik and probably some invites for the rookie camps of NHL teams, we'll eat USHL ass off ! Go Nics go !

Classy!

This is the best thing for american hockey. If the games are even remotly close it will look great for the USHL. Players will be able to wait on the NCAA abd know they are playing at a top level of hockey. If the USHL does well or even wins it might keep the next Peter Mueller from jumping to the CHL thinking he would have only played one year NCAA any way. But the USHL then would not look so bad.

If the loose bad. Then that just keeps them as a feeder league to the NCAA. As most any top or medium level NCAA team would eat up a USHL team.

This is the best thing for american hockey. If the games are even remotly close it will look great for the USHL. Players will be able to wait on the NCAA abd know they are playing at a top level of hockey. If the USHL does well or even wins it might keep the next Peter Mueller from jumping to the CHL thinking he would have only played one year NCAA any way. But the USHL then would not look so bad.

If the loose bad. Then that just keeps them as a feeder league to the NCAA. As most any top or medium level NCAA team would eat up a USHL team.

Honestly I don't see the outcome of these games affecting the decisions of the kids much at all no matter what happens. It's the summer - neither team will have their full rosters or be in particularly great shape - should be a good exhibition of some talented players.. nothing more.

Honestly I don't see the outcome of these games affecting the decisions of the kids much at all no matter what happens. It's the summer - neither team will have their full rosters or be in particularly great shape - should be a good exhibition of some talented players.. nothing more.

I agree it probably won't have much effect on players' decisions, but I disagree that the teams (at least the QMJHL teams) won't have their full rosters.

These games take place Sep 7 & 8. They are the last 2 exhibition games for both Rimouski and Quebec (both teams play 8 ex. games) as the Q regular season begins Sep 13, so most of the dead weight should be cut by then.
Also, NHL camps don't open until around Sep 13-15 so both Q teams could have all their star players.

As for the USHL, I'm not too sure. Their regular season doesn't begin until Oct 6, but all the teams seem to have camps scheduled throught June, July, and Aug. But as the perceived 'lower level' league, and since they're the teams making the big trip, I would imagine they would like to bring as strong a team as possible.

I agree it probably won't have much effect on players' decisions, but I disagree that the teams (at least the QMJHL teams) won't have their full rosters.


I'll take your word for it - I just know that if the knights played such a game - their roster would probably be missing a good 1/4 of their best players.

Is not going to make or break anything. But it will help, and its another thing that shows USA hockey is at least worthy of an invite. 5 years ago, unless it was Vaneks team, the USHL would have got embaressed and probally their players hurt.

derbyfan, I find it interesting that you are worried about the Q clubs and their possible performance against the USHL. Why would they schedule such a thing in September you ask...when their best players will be either at NHL rookie camps or playing for Canada in the Russia summit series?

Easy answer, because its a win win for the Q.

If Rimouski and Quebec both win or heck even split, many will say "Look those USHL clubs couldn't even beat a Q exhibition B team!.". If they lose even four straigt, the reply simply will be "yeah so they beat our rookies and walk on free agent try out players, big deal!"

In all actuality, its the USHL that has the most to lose.

I can't say this won't be a win for the Q regardless...but to say the USHL will lose more is wrong.

Sure a handful of key players may be missing from Q teams...but the Q teams will still have the core of their roster, will have had considerably more playing time together than the USHL teams and will be playing at home in Canada. They really should win these games.

Although just a blip regarding the big picture, a strong USHL showing will likely continue the trend toward more USHL/CHL comparisons and fewer NCAA/CHL comparisons.

I can't say this won't be a win for the Q regardless...but to say the USHL will lose more is wrong.

Sure a handful of key players may be missing from Q teams...but the Q teams will still have the core of their roster, will have had considerably more playing time together than the USHL teams and will be playing at home in Canada. They really should win these games.

Although just a blip regarding the big picture, a strong USHL showing will likely continue the trend toward more USHL/CHL comparisons and fewer NCAA/CHL comparisons.

It really depends on what rosters the Q teams use. If the "handful of players missing" represent the top line and D pairings and the Q teams still win, the USHL will indeed have egg on their face.

It really depends on what rosters the Q teams use. If the "handful of players missing" represent the top line and D pairings and the Q teams still win, the USHL will indeed have egg on their face.

So you're putting the USHL (full roster) as favorites over CHL teams (signifcantly more ice time, home rink). Has USA hockey really made those kind of gains?

So you're putting the USHL (full roster) as favorites over CHL teams (signifcantly more ice time, home rink). Has USA hockey really made those kind of gains?

He is working on a pre-excuse i would guess.

Considering how many people here think the CHL>NCAA>USHL to say that the USHL is a favorite or even has a chance means that the there is something wrong with that logic. It would be like saying USHL>SHATTACKS>MNHS. If Duluth East played the Sioux Falls Stampede there is no reason even if the USHL team has players missing that they should not pound the hounds.

USHL players for the most part are not good enough to play NCAA. The USHL is built up of 5-6th line NCAA guys and 7-9 D men at their point in devolpment. Unless the CHL teams are missing their top 4 lines and top 6 d men there should be no excuses if they are a superior league to the NCAA.

So you're putting the USHL (full roster) as favorites over CHL teams (signifcantly more ice time, home rink). Has USA hockey really made those kind of gains?

If the Q teams are missing their top players while the U teams have their full roster, don't you think that the USHL representatives should perform well???

If the Q teams do in fact have their full rosters, then yes, they should be able to easily beat the USHL teams.

Take some of the better prep teams and have them play a USHL team missing their top players. I certainly would not be surprised in the least if the prep teams did well.

If the Q teams are missing their top players while the U teams have their full roster, don't you think that the USHL representatives should perform well???

If the Q teams do in fact have their full rosters, then yes, they should be able to easily beat the USHL teams.

Take some of the better prep teams and have them play a USHL team missing their top players. I certainly would not be surprised in the least if the prep teams did well.

The 16-17 year old talent in both leagues is probably somewhat similar. However, just about all the top 16-17 year olds in the USHL are in the NCAA by the time they're 18-19. The Q still has those players at 18-19. Rimouski could have 5 NHL picks in their lineup and Quebec 3. Will Omaha and Indiana have any?

The 16-17 year old talent in both leagues is probably somewhat similar. However, just about all the top 16-17 year olds in the USHL are in the NCAA by the time they're 18-19. The Q still has those players at 18-19. Rimouski could have 5 NHL picks in their lineup and Quebec 3. Will Omaha and Indiana have any?

Nick Larson, Nicco Saccetti for Omaha for sure are both drafted. Barry Almeida is going to BC and should be good. Novak and White round a solid team for Omaha. White to NH in 09 and Novak to JBU in 08 is an 88 born.

Indiana will not have as many top players but Brett Bruneteau is a NoDak recruit and should be pretty good.

First off, does anyone know if these games will be available to watch on the net?

Everyone will seemingly have their own definition as to who the "winners" and "losers" of these games will be.

I'll reiterate a couple of points:

1) I think the USHL squads will do fine. I think they've made significant strides over the past few years, and the players will be seriously pumped up for these games.

2) How much stock should we really put in to games like these? I suppose the answer will lie with what kind of a roster the Q teams play with. If they don't play a full roster, but rather alot of up-and-comers trying out for the team, they most certainly could lose.
History shows us that CHL teams playing exhibition games against American Jr. A, Canadian Jr. A and even European Jr. A squads don't always prevail. In some cases they've actually been beaten, sometimes badly.
I used the example previously of the Buffalo Jr. Sabres (previously called the Lightning) that played Erie to a tie in pre-season action a couple of years ago. Buffalo was a bottom dweller in the OPJHL, which means that they're pretty frickin' bad - worse than many top Jr. B programs in Ontario.
Does that mean that the OPJHL is equal to the OHL? Of course not.
The USHL is stronger than the OPJHL by a wide margin, I don't think there's any comparison. Yes, maybe the top OPJHL teams could compete, but I'm talking about the league as a whole.

Last year IFK Helsinki beat two Q teams in the pre-season, while they'd gotten beaten by two USHL teams in the Buc Bowl in 2005.

For those who think these games will be a cakewalk for the Q, I disagree. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Q teams pound them. That's the perverse proudly Canadian coming out in me, sorry. :D

What I'd love to see is a tourney in mid-season, when teams play their full rosters.

What I'd love to see is a tourney in mid-season, when teams play their full rosters.

I'd like that too. But when its all said and done each time will want 2 things from these games. Experiance and go home injury free. A mid season game does not mean anything if there is no rivalry or nothing to do with the their respective leagues. It would still be the same thing. Some extra ice time and hope no one gets hurt.

They would need to pump the USA- Canada rivalry to a point where both teams would want the W vs going home in one piece. Unless there is some serious bragging rights these games will mean little and the results should be read this way.

But man i hope the USHL wipes the floor.

I dont think many Q fans are taking these games lightly.

The people who ive talked to RESPECT the USHL and dont think its a Teir III league or something.

That being said, its 2 games in September...its not going to sway any kids decision on whether to go NCAA or go to the CHL. As fans we would love to think that, but at the end of the day its just 2 games.

If a kid from Boston is watching these games, and the Q kills the USHL, i dont think that will have an effect on his choice to go NCAA or Q.

The USHL has produced top players, as has the QMJHL. The path a player takes has very little bearing on if they will make it or not.

Just my opinions.

Games getting close. Q players need to watch out for Dakota Eveland, rookie from Socal suiting up for the Omaha Lancers. Dakota lit it up last year and it starts in PQ!

Update:

Omaha Lancers beat the Québec Remparts 3-2.

Omaha goals:
Sacchetti
Novak
Arnt

Québec goals:
Bergeron
Audy-Marchessault

Shots on goal:
Omaha - 35
Québec - 30

GO USHL!!! :yo:

http://www.lhjmq.qc.ca/lang_en/index.php?page=342374&id_partie=14567

Congratulations to Omaha. I am an avid Q fan, i knew that the USHL will play tough and i am cheering for them because I thought other Q fans thought this would be a complete walk over for them and i thought it was an unfair statement

Congratulations to Omaha. I am an avid Q fan, i knew that the USHL will play tough and i am cheering for them because I thought other Q fans thought this would be a complete walk over for them and i thought it was an unfair statement

Appreciate the congrats, I'm sure it's not easy :)

The fans will make this out to be more than it is. I just hope the USHL can get some respect from the CHL now.

Update:

Rimouski Océanic beat the Indiana Ice 6-5 in an OT shootout.

Rimouski goals:
Cornet (2)
Boudreau
Jocas
Caron

Indiana goals:
Skjodt (3)
Suires
Carlson


Shots on goal:
Rimouski - 29
Indiana - 22

http://www.lhjmq.qc.ca/lang_en/index.php?page=342374&id_partie=14568

Pretty good showing for the USHL so far. :handclap:

BTW, shootout goals in the Indiana/Rimouski OT game:

Rimouski:
Caron
Cornet

Indiana:
Kemp

I found it very strange that Indiana didn't send Jake Skjodt out to be one of their 3 shooters in OT. The kid had a natural hat trick in the game. Weird.

congrats to Rimouski.

Indiana kept coming back and never let up. Great game for Indy.

Damage Control!!!

If I was a betting man...I'd expect the USHL sweeps to continue. Indy will lose a close one...but Omaha should win by a couple.

The USHL teams iced far older lineups...personally i was expecting the games to be very tight...which they were.

Omaha:
20 - 3
19 - 6
18 - 7
17 - 2
16 - 1
Average 18.42
(no age for their back up goalie)

Quebec:
20 - 2
19 - 3
18 - 5
17 - 9
16 - 1
Average 17.8
Missing Espo and Lacroix


Indiana
20 - 3
19 - 9
18 - 6
17 - 2
16 - 0
Average 18.65

Rimouski
20 - 2
19 - 4
18 - 4
17 - 9
16 - 1
Average 17.85
Missing Frolik, Fortier, Skokan.

The USHL teams iced far older lineups...personally i was expecting the games to be very tight...which they were.

Omaha:
20 - 3
19 - 6
18 - 7
17 - 2
16 - 1
Average 18.42
(no age for their back up goalie)

Quebec:
20 - 2
19 - 3
18 - 5
17 - 9
16 - 1
Average 17.8
Missing Espo and Lacroix


Indiana
20 - 3
19 - 9
18 - 6
17 - 2
16 - 0
Average 18.65

Rimouski
20 - 2
19 - 4
18 - 4
17 - 9
16 - 1
Average 17.85
Missing Frolik, Fortier, Skokan.

Your welcome for the math.
:)

Your welcome for the math.
:)

LOL...yeah i stole it...what ya gonna do about it? lol jk

Omaha's back up goalie is 17.

Does about a year older really make that much of a difference? :shakehead

I believe there were 29 guys between Omaha and Indiana that were USHL rookies themselves.

Omaha's back up goalie is 17.

Does about a year older really make that much of a difference? :shakehead

I believe there were 29 guys between Omaha and Indiana that were USHL rookies themselves.

It doesn't look like a lot, but it is when you consider Que and Rim each played with 10 players aged 17 or younger and the USHL teams had 5 combined. If Rimouski replaces 4 of the 16-17 year olds with Frolik, Fortier, Skokan, and Dupont, that makes a big difference.

All in all, the games were about where I thought they would be, with the big Q guns not playing.

Omaha's back up goalie is 17.

Does about a year older really make that much of a difference? :shakehead

I believe there were 29 guys between Omaha and Indiana that were USHL rookies themselves.

I think age is huge. From 16-25 in some cases each year in there can he huge. Mentally, physically and in hockey sense. The only way to get sense is to play the game. Players can add on average 5-12 pounds of pure muscle mass each year from about 18-25. Age is huge in amatuer sports.

It'll be interesting to watch what the Canadian hockey media says about the Lancers' victories, whether they bring up this whole age thing, or if it's just one USHL team, Team USA beating the Soviets on one night, etc. The fact that the Lancers won and the Ice "let 'em knew they were there" should hopefully prove that the USHL has very competitive hockey, is a viable path for top American prospects (if recent NHL drafts weren't proof enough), and even a viable path for Canadian prospects who want to play NCAA DI college hockey, too (such as what Eric Gryba did and what Patrick Wiercioch is about to do).

Not bad for a league dismissed by an OHL official as a "Tier III" league...

As an American hockey fan, many thanks to the QMJHL for agreeing to do this, because the Q had a lot to lose and I certainly hope that these losses to the Lancers do not serve to only lower the opinion of the Q in Canada, instead of raising the opinion of the USHL.

I've seen it in the skill level of the USHL over the past decade, the league is getting much better and American hockey in general is doing a better job of developing players' skills. American hockey still needs to work on helping develop players with great hockey sense, too, something Canadian players have historically developed playing hours and hours of pond hockey (global climate change now permitting). We have a lot of American players who never play pond hockey in their life.

I know I'd be very interested in seeing more games between major juniors, Tier I junior A, and Tier II junior A, and not just the BCHL and AJHL.

It'll be interesting to watch what the Canadian hockey media says about the Lancers' victories,.

I really don't think they will say anything about it. Some of you feel that this is a first time occurance, meaning a non CHL team playing a CHL team in the pre-season. It is not. NAHL, AWHL, OPJHL and NOJHL and Prep teams have all played exhibition games against CHL teams. Some of them fared well.

Four years ago, a bunch of prep all star players from Boston beat the then expansion Lewiston Maneiacs by a pretty wide margin (by at least 3-4 goals). Like now, many drew conclusions that the Q was over-rated since how could a collection of prep players lay such a beating on a Major A team?

The answer of course is simple, pre-season rosters and exhibition contests do not mean you were playing the real Lewiston Maineacs but rather young hopefuls intent on at least surviving the next round of cuts.

Five or six years ago I found myself in Erie Penn. watching a pre-season matchup between the Pittsburg Forge of the NAHL and the Erie Otters. Pittsbury wiped the ice with the Otters and the score (4 or 5 to 1 if I recall right) actually flattered the OHL club as they were sorely outplayed. Afterwards (and I suppose this is why I remember the game) I went for drinks with some Forge fans. Naturally they were whooping it up and could not believe how well they competed against an OHL team. Several asked (some taunted) how could this have been. How did a team from the mighty OHL play so poorly against a NAHL team. I kept my mouth shut, congratulated them and told them they were going to go on and have much success because they honestly did have a good team. I didn't want to rain on their parade and tell them the team they played was a mere shadow of what the the real Otters were going to be like.

I was not at any of the games in Quebec and I cannot comment on them as there are a lot of variables involved such as how much ice time did the vets receive, what were the line combos and Dpairings --were they regular or mixed. What systems were the coaches trying to implement? Were they new or ones that had been practiced before? How did both Omaha and Quebec actually view the games? Ect ect.

What I can tell you is that exhibition doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot. Does it mean that Indiana is a very bad team because they lost to two lower Q teams who employed a bunch of young players in their lineups? Does it mean that Omaha is that much better than Rimouski???

No and no. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see Indiana challenge for a title this year (though I do feel Rimouski will have trouble once again in the Q but not because of these games).

An interesting side note here (sorry for the length). Last year I had the opportunity of meeting and talking with the Lakehead T-wolves coaching staff (a CIS teams for those of you who don't know). They were on a 3 game exhibition tour of the U.P and had just gotten spanked pretty bad by NMU and Tech. Apparantly the Laker coaching staff was worried that the T-Wolves were not going to provide a game for their players, as the coach wanted to break in his freshman right away and didn't want to waste his time on looking to see what he had.....he wanted a real game. The T-Wolves coaching staff told him not to worry as they would bring in their A team and A game. As it went, the Lakers got the game they wanted.....even though they lost! Some of the T-wolves staff had a nice chuckle over that one.

How could a team lose so bad to other opponents, hop a bus and play the very next night and win? Easy, they were simply exhibition games.

I really don't think they will say anything about it. Some of you feel that this is a first time occurance, meaning a non CHL team playing a CHL team in the pre-season. It is not. NAHL, AWHL, OPJHL and NOJHL and Prep teams have all played exhibition games against CHL teams. Some of them fared well.

Four years ago, a bunch of prep all star players from Boston beat the then expansion Lewiston Maneiacs by a pretty wide margin (by at least 3-4 goals). Like now, many drew conclusions that the Q was over-rated since how could a collection of prep players lay such a beating on a Major A team?

The answer of course is simple, pre-season rosters and exhibition contests do not mean you were playing the real Lewiston Maineacs but rather young hopefuls intent on at least surviving the next round of cuts.

Five or six years ago I found myself in Erie Penn. watching a pre-season matchup between the Pittsburg Forge of the NAHL and the Erie Otters. Pittsbury wiped the ice with the Otters and the score (4 or 5 to 1 if I recall right) actually flattered the OHL club as they were sorely outplayed. Afterwards (and I suppose this is why I remember the game) I went for drinks with some Forge fans. Naturally they were whooping it up and could not believe how well they competed against an OHL team. Several asked (some taunted) how could this have been. How did a team from the mighty OHL play so poorly against a NAHL team. I kept my mouth shut, congratulated them and told them they were going to go on and have much success because they honestly did have a good team. I didn't want to rain on their parade and tell them the team they played was a mere shadow of what the the real Otters were going to be like.

I was not at any of the games in Quebec and I cannot comment on them as there are a lot of variables involved such as how much ice time did the vets receive, what were the line combos and Dpairings --were they regular or mixed. What systems were the coaches trying to implement? Were they new or ones that had been practiced before? How did both Omaha and Quebec actually view the games? Ect ect.

What I can tell you is that exhibition doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot. Does it mean that Indiana is a very bad team because they lost to two lower Q teams who employed a bunch of young players in their lineups? Does it mean that Omaha is that much better than Rimouski???

No and no. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see Indiana challenge for a title this year (though I do feel Rimouski will have trouble once again in the Q but not because of these games).

An interesting side note here (sorry for the length). Last year I had the opportunity of meeting and talking with the Lakehead T-wolves coaching staff (a CIS teams for those of you who don't know). They were on a 3 game exhibition tour of the U.P and had just gotten spanked pretty bad by NMU and Tech. Apparantly the Laker coaching staff was worried that the T-Wolves were not going to provide a game for their players, as the coach wanted to break in his freshman right away and didn't want to waste his time on looking to see what he had.....he wanted a real game. The T-Wolves coaching staff told him not to worry as they would bring in their A team and A game. As it went, the Lakers got the game they wanted.....even though they lost! Some of the T-wolves staff had a nice chuckle over that one.

How could a team lose so bad to other opponents, hop a bus and play the very next night and win? Easy, they were simply exhibition games.

The Maineiacs weren't a expansion team they just relocated from Shrebrooke Quebec. Was that the team that had Chris Bourque on it? I think it was more of scrimmage then an exhibition game. If I recall it happenend during the 1st week of training camp like you said with a full training camp roster.

Be careful Canada ,USA is gaining by leaps & bounds!!

Be careful Canada ,USA is gaining by leaps & bounds!!

Yes, but there's still a ways to go. The USHL has 12 teams - add one for the NTDP and in a good year, one for Shattuck...the CHL has 60.

Yes, but there's still a ways to go. The USHL has 12 teams - add one for the NTDP and in a good year, one for Shattuck...the CHL has 60.

CHL has expanded there's 62 teams ;)
CJAHL has 142 teams
CIS has 33 teams.
No doubt about it, USHL is a good league, other wise the 'Nics and the Rems wouldn't have played them.
I've never been able to figure out the alphabet soup of US Junior leagues.
MJAHL Woodstock Slammers beat EJHL Bay State Breakers and New Jersey Hitmen.....
Does that make MJAHL better than EJHL or were they just pre-season games?
Hockey East recruits heavily from EJHL and AUS recruits from MJAHL. Do these results mean AUS is better?
Also a group of 99.99999% CHL all-stars with a BCHL star just beat what was supposed to be the best Russia had to offer 7-0-1.
Will that have any impact or when we get to the one and done stage of WJC will we just start from scratch?

CHL has expanded there's 62 teams ;)
CJAHL has 142 teams
CIS has 33 teams.

The US has quite a few other leagues that can be compared with the CJAHL and the CIS.

But if you're going to compare the CHL to the USHL (with the NTDP and Shattuck)...you want to compare how watered down the talent is between the two of them.

The US has quite a few other leagues that can be compared with the CJAHL and the CIS.

But if you're going to compare the CHL to the USHL (with the NTDP and Shattuck)...you want to compare how watered down the talent is between the two of them.
And I thought you'd just make fun of my inaccurate #'s .
I don't think any leagues can be compared with-out meaningfull games for something, being played. Even if full game-day rosters are used, there's no intensity and guys who don't see the ice alot will in any kind of exhibition game. I don't see anything in US developmental hockey that says it's inferior to Canadian hockey development. More an emotional reaction by Canadian and American fans rather than from hockey people. Unless they're trying to sell season's tickets. Nothing sells like a "come see the best" campaign.
USA Hockey as a governing body may want to look at structure of leagues and maybe a more geographical approach. Hockey Canada may want to start stressing the U-17 and under levels a bit more?
But c'mon add in the U-20's in NCAA and USA Hockey or maybe hockey in USA is developing alot of top quality players.
But I'm from north of the border and am looking from the outside in.

And I thought you'd just make fun of my inaccurate #'s .
I don't think any leagues can be compared with-out meaningfull games for something, being played. Even if full game-day rosters are used, there's no intensity and guys who don't see the ice alot will in any kind of exhibition game. I don't see anything in US developmental hockey that says it's inferior to Canadian hockey development. More an emotional reaction by Canadian and American fans rather than from hockey people. Unless they're trying to sell season's tickets. Nothing sells like a "come see the best" campaign.
USA Hockey as a governing body may want to look at structure of leagues and maybe a more geographical approach. Hockey Canada may want to start stressing the U-17 and under levels a bit more?
But c'mon add in the U-20's in NCAA and USA Hockey or maybe hockey in USA is developing alot of top quality players.
But I'm from north of the border and am looking from the outside in.


Based on a poll they just ran from voters of the site...Americans made up almost 7 of the top 15 players...and exactly one third of the top 50 prospects.

The US has quite a few other leagues that can be compared with the CJAHL and the CIS.

But if you're going to compare the CHL to the USHL (with the NTDP and Shattuck)...you want to compare how watered down the talent is between the two of them.

Compare who to what? The CHL's talent base is watered down compared to the USHL? Not likely. If the USHL were to receive all the country's top talent, then yes you would be right. It doesn't, as a result you can in no way say that the average (or even top) USHL team has more talent than its CHL counter-part.

Not sure what you mean by placing Shattuck in the equation. The team has had good players come through but remember, Parise did not play with Crosby and Crosby did not play with Esposito and so on. Did Shatuck have anybody of note on the entire team last year????

NTDP is a different situation of course as the program is stocked with talent. You can also throw in about 8-10 NCAA teams that are also stocked with talent (of course that is the general gripe about college hockey, a few have teams and a whole lot of have nots and its implications for competative games and so forth)

Oh by the way Major, did you read the latest edition of the Hockey News. Apparantly the war for players between Major A and the NCAA has really heated up over the years (as you know) and the sentiment among most is that Major A is gaining the upper hand(not that it ever really lost it). This has caused a growing number of college coaches demanding a rule change that would make CHL players eligible to play U.S. college hockey.......

Oh the interesting times we live in.

Compare who to what? The CHL's talent base is watered down compared to the USHL? Not likely. If the USHL were to receive all the country's top talent, then yes you would be right. It doesn't, as a result you can in no way say that the average (or even top) USHL team has more talent than its CHL counter-part.

Not sure what you mean by placing Shattuck in the equation. The team has had good players come through but remember, Parise did not play with Crosby and Crosby did not play with Esposito and so on. Did Shatuck have anybody of note on the entire team last year????

NTDP is a different situation of course as the program is stocked with talent. You can also throw in about 8-10 NCAA teams that are also stocked with talent (of course that is the general gripe about college hockey, a few have teams and a whole lot of have nots and its implications for competative games and so forth)

Oh by the way Major, did you read the latest edition of the Hockey News. Apparantly the war for players between Major A and the NCAA has really heated up over the years (as you know) and the sentiment among most is that Major A is gaining the upper hand(not that it ever really lost it). This has caused a growing number of college coaches demanding a rule change that would make CHL players eligible to play U.S. college hockey.......

Oh the interesting times we live in.

Shattuck comes and goes. So Shattuck has its down years. They have seen Parise, Smaby, Stafford, JJ, Crosby, Esposito, Okposo, Toews, Hirsch, little Toews(last year), Chourney, Blood(last year), Gergen. Many of those guys overlapped. And there are more that have had smaller inpacts at the D1 level.

I hope the NCAA never lets CHL players join. It would create more headaches than anyone would want to deal with.

Are you sure he means the CHL is a watered down version of the USHL. Instead of the USHL has 12 teams and the CHL has 60 i think. Meaning unless the CHL has x5 the talent at that age level the USHL talent is tighter. Where the CHL has more teams and talent is spread around. Toss in Shattucks, the u18 and maybe enough prep and HS players to make up another 3-5 teams. The talent then gets spread around. But like we have seen with Shattucks they are not all american. And neither is the USHL. With Shattuck alone seeing players from Czech Republic, Canada, and Japan over the last few seasons. If the USHL went to 20 teams it would not be nearly as good. Just as the CHL were to cut to 50 teams it would be even better.