Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreal
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by getbak
If that were to happen, there would be a lot more top players in that age range playing Junior A because none of them would be able to play in the CHL. It would also likely attract better coaching to the Junior A leagues.
An interesting side effect would be that we'd likely see more Canadian kids choose the NCAA if they didn't have to commit to the CHL at 15 or 16.
If there was too much of a talent gap, there would also be the possibility of splitting the CHL into separate draft-eligible and pre-draft leagues.
|
Many posts in here omitting actual facts. The WHL has had one 15 year old rostered player in the last 25 years, that being Connor Bedard last season. The league has very few 16 year olds, most teams with only one or two. The AJHL can only roster one 16 year old.
Parents are shipping their kids off the academies starting at age 13. More and more academies means more and more parents willing to spend 10's of thousands of dollars so their kid can live at a school or with billets and play hockey. So to insist sending kids away to play junior hockey "at 15" is the problem is not entirely the case and not even factual. Outside of the cities, AAA U17 programs are essentially run like Jr A programs. Players billeted out and team activities 3- 4 times a week and on the road every other weekend.
The problem is not the league or the coaches or being away from home, or the time in the dressing room, it is the entitlement. Entitled kids, be it that they live at home or at a school or with a billet in another city, are going to continue being entitled as long as their parents (and Hockey Canada) continue to entitle them. And being that most hockey players, especially at the elite levels are rich white kids, the level of entitlement can be off the charts.