At the moment, NCAA scholarships are officially on a yearly basis without any guarantee of renewal. In practice, they very rarely are not renewed for athletes that meet academic requirements simply because reputation and trustworthiness are so important in recruiting.
It's funny that you bring it up though, because there are NCAA proposals to make scholarship offers multi-year...but that gets into politics a bit beyond this thread.
Just so people know, in the OHL for example, teams have educational consultants who set up each player in either high school or college / University with a very specific learning regimine, and are regularly monitored for attendance, preformance etc. In Kitchener as an example, it IS priority that all players are enrolled in either full-time (modified to fit the OHL schedule, but still full class load) or part-time college/university classes.
This notion that the NCAA graduates more doctors, business owners etc then the CHL may very well be true, but show me some statistics to prove it. You act like kids that go to the CHL are dummies and they're only hope at success is the NHL.
Players have choices, NCAA, CHL, USHL etc. Those who are arguing that the NCAA or USHL are better development leagues as a whole (not just one off examples) are statistically incorrect. The numbers speak for themselves, and of course each league (More particularly CHL vs. NCAA) is more suited for a different type of player or skill set at the time. Alot of people who pursue NCAA, aside from the obvious high end prospects from the start, wouldnt make a CHL team until later in their careers.
For me:
CHL - Better for players of higher caliber and who appear to be on standard developmental pace (ie can make a CHL roster at 16-17). (Skinner, Richards etc etc
NCAA - Better for players a little behind the typical development curve that would benefit from a prolonged development curve that is offered in the NCAA. (matt read, Gilroy etc)
I stand by the CHL being the better of the two simply based on a closer representation of the Pro game from media, practice schedule, game schedule etc and the sheer numbers in comparison to the CHL. Not only do fewer NCAA players make the NHL, but there are many more of them aswell which further strengthens my argument about the success rates of each league.
Just so people know, in the OHL for example, teams have educational consultants who set up each player in either high school or college / University with a very specific learning regimine, and are regularly monitored for attendance, preformance etc. In Kitchener as an example, it IS priority that all players are enrolled in either full-time (modified to fit the OHL schedule, but still full class load) or part-time college/university classes.
This notion that the NCAA graduates more doctors, business owners etc then the CHL may very well be true, but show me some statistics to prove it. You act like kids that go to the CHL are dummies and they're only hope at success is the NHL.
Players have choices, NCAA, CHL, USHL etc. Those who are arguing that the NCAA or USHL are better development leagues as a whole (not just one off examples) are statistically incorrect. The numbers speak for themselves, and of course each league (More particularly CHL vs. NCAA) is more suited for a different type of player or skill set at the time. Alot of people who pursue NCAA, aside from the obvious high end prospects from the start, wouldnt make a CHL team until later in their careers.
For me:
CHL - Better for players of higher caliber and who appear to be on standard developmental pace (ie can make a CHL roster at 16-17). (Skinner, Richards etc etc
NCAA - Better for players a little behind the typical development curve that would benefit from a prolonged development curve that is offered in the NCAA. (matt read, Gilroy etc)
I stand by the CHL being the better of the two simply based on a closer representation of the Pro game from media, practice schedule, game schedule etc and the sheer numbers in comparison to the CHL. Not only do fewer NCAA players make the NHL, but there are many more of them aswell which further strengthens my argument about the success rates of each league.
I don't think anyone is saying the CHL is populated by dummies, but if you think the percentage of athletes who view education as a priority is anywhere close to that of the NCAA (which in itself is debatable) I don't know what to say.
I don't think anyone is saying the CHL is populated by dummies, but if you think the percentage of athletes who view education as a priority is anywhere close to that of the NCAA (which in itself is debatable) I don't know what to say.
But your point is skewed by the fact that the NCAA players are already in university so naturally they will help your figures.
Also isn't there a majority of players not on athletic scholarships (or partial) so they are there for the education and the athletics are "fun and nice to do".
I suspect the % of CHL players who places a priority on education would match up favourably with the general high school population in Canada or the U.S..
Last edited by Ward Cornell: 10-28-2011 at 02:01 PM.
The Windsor Spitfires and Canadian Hockey League appear unfazed by changes the NCAA has approved for its scholarship program.
Long an opponent to paying athletes, the most notable change will see the NCAA allow conferences the option to pay athletes a $2,000-per-year stipend to cover incidental costs of college. That’s over an above the money paid out for scholarships, which can cover tuition, fees and books as well as room and board.
“I’m a little disappointed the NCAA felt they had to do that,” Spitfires goaltender Jack Campbell said. “You go to school because you want an education.”
NCAA president Mark Emmert said the move isn’t meant as a pay-for-play, but rather a recognition that athletes train year round and because of that cannot get a part-time job to cover some costs.
“Two thousand (dollars) will buy a nice laptop, but it doesn’t matter,” the 19-year-old Campbell said.
While the move wasn’t designed to specifically aid NCAA hockey teams in their battle with CHL clubs for talent, it’s hard to imagine schools won’t promote it as another benefit to a college education.
Campbell, who is from Port Huron, Mich., walked away from a full-ride scholarship to play at the University of Michigan in order to join the Spitfires last season and said the new NCAA stipend would not change that decision had it been in place at that time.
“Two thousand (dollars) might seem like a lot, but I came to the OHL in hopes of being able to make two million (dollars) in a couple of years,” said Campbell, who is a signed first-round pick by the NHL’s Dallas Stars.
It’s not the only move the NCAA took with its scholarship program. Schools now have the option of offering guaranteed multi-year scholarships to athletes rather than a year-by-year renewal.
“What motivates players to come to the CHL is the opportunity to develop on and off the ice,” CHL president and OHL commissioner David Branch said. “I don’t think anything being suggested (by the NCAA) will change that.”
With some schools offering scholarships to players at the age of 14, CHL teams aren’t expecting the daily battle for talent to be change and already have a weekly allowance program for players already in place along with an education package that comes with signing.
“We’re not worried about what everyone else is doing,” Spitfires president and head coach Bob Boughner said. “We’re trying to get the best players attracted to our program and our track record speaks for itself.”
<snip>
“I went this way because I wanted to play for the Windsor Spitfires, play 60 games a year and a playoff schedule that’s like the NHL,” Campbell said.
Looks Campbell breaks down the NCAA vs CHL debate in a few short sentences.
It's a much different perspective for a goalie, too. The added game experience is probably a bigger incentive, and the size or maturity of NCAA players is almost a non-factor compared to what it is for skaters.
I thought about The Q (The Quebec Major Junior Hockey League) and the Quebec Remparts, but (Kelowna) drafted me and didn’t say anything to me about it. After that, I felt they disrespected me a little bit. They pushed it a little bit onto my adviser and I don’t think he really liked it.”
__________________
Stay on top of the 2013 NHL Draft by getting your 2012-13 Season Pass today!
Visit Future Considerations today, your home for the 2013 NHL Draft!
For the latest in draft eligible prospects, Follow me on Twitter at @VickersFC
Interesting the quotes from Jack Campbell, who was traded today from Windsor to the Soo.
Jack decided to go to the OHL in large part because he was able to stay close to home. Windsor is about an hour and a half drive from Jack's hometown of Port Huron, MI. Now he is going to be nowhere close to home, if I had to guess over 6 hours away, maybe more in the winter.
I'm not sure Jack expected to be playing in the Soo when he made his decision to go to the OHL.
And yes, the trade factor is definitely one to consider in the NCAA vs. CHL debate. If you sign at Michigan or Wisconsin you can't be traded to Alaska or Michigan Tech, in the CHL you can be traded to Moose Jaw or Sudbury.
Interesting the quotes from Jack Campbell, who was traded today from Windsor to the Soo.
Jack decided to go to the OHL in large part because he was able to stay close to home. Windsor is about an hour and a half drive from Jack's hometown of Port Huron, MI. Now he is going to be nowhere close to home, if I had to guess over 6 hours away, maybe more in the winter.
I'm not sure Jack expected to be playing in the Soo when he made his decision to go to the OHL.
And yes, the trade factor is definitely one to consider in the NCAA vs. CHL debate. If you sign at Michigan or Wisconsin you can't be traded to Alaska or Michigan Tech, in the CHL you can be traded to Moose Jaw or Sudbury.
He has a no trade clause so he was not moved anywhere that he did not consent to.
