Quote:
Originally Posted by combustiblefuel
Ncaa is over rated. Yes the elite teams are elite but there's also alot of teams low as the low in the chl.
|
Those bad teams are not in the top-ranked conferences.
Quote:
|
Also false he was 20 when he leaped into the ncaa. At 19 Mkar was still playing AJHL . A pretty deep step down so players can still have NCAA eligibility at the time.
|
Makar was born October 30, 1998. He turned 19 in October of 2017. The 2017-18 season was his first playing for UMass-Amherst. He was already there on his 19th birthday.
Quote:
|
50 % of the nhl come from Chl graduates vs 13% from the NCAA . You know a League that exists to produce pro players vs a leugue that has some exceptional stars that want to get an education as backup . The exceptional stars are turning pro regardless of path in hockey they take but now those tht are elite in hockey have what? Usually 2 years of education more than their chl conter parts. Rarely do the athletes that are truly exceptional get a full 4 year degree.
|
So what? Does that make the teenagers in the CHL more physically mature than the grown men in the NCAA? No, it does not.
Quote:
|
I maintain the chl is still better because If you don't play college your going to the echl or ahl where you are playing literally with men, not "men " aged 21,22,23". Actual.fully developed men.
|
But you are not playing against those men WHILE you are in the CHL.
Quote:
|
Let's not pretend the NCAA is a higher leugue for 20,21,22,23 age players to play in vs the AHL maybe slightly better than echl.
|
Well, it's a good thing I never pretended that. I was comparing Makar as a 19-year-old playing in the NCAA to Parekh as an 18/19-year-old playing in the OHL.
Quote:
|
The way currently the NCAA is set up is a joke. And to equate it as a best on best leque is a freaking force.
|
Nobody said the NCAA was best-on-best. You're arguing with your own imagination here.
The fact is, Hockey East has a higher NHL equivalency than the OHL. It's a tougher league.