Mark "Fricken" Jankowski (aka The Big Jankowski)

[dieHARDflameZ]

I don't know if this has been mentioned anywhere else, but Providence lost to Boston University 4-2 today. Jankowski didn't register a point, had 2 shots on goal and was -1. Jon Gillies stopped 27 of 30 shots and was named the game's third star.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by dieHARDflameZ

I don't know if this has been mentioned anywhere else, but Providence lost to Boston University 4-2 today. Jankowski didn't register a point, had 2 shots on goal and was -1. Jon Gillies stopped 27 of 30 shots and was named the game's third star.

What a bust of a player.

[dieHARDflameZ]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

What a bust of a player.

That's not at all what I'm saying.

[Diverce]

Originally Posted by Mike F

This won't be a perfect analogy, but. . . .

The CHL produces more and much better players than the Swedish Elite League, but the SEL is likely the better league on account that you have more physically mature men playing a more advanced systems game. Leaving aside the differences between the European and North American styles of hockey, if a prospect could get first line ice time on a SEL team, it could well accelerate his development compared to playing against kids in the CHL.

My point being that it could well be that the NCAA being populated by more mature athletes with a greater ratio of practice to game time could make up for the lesser number of top flight prospects, evening up if not surpassing the quality of hockey and thus quality of development experience.

Not quoting you cause I disagree with you, I do agree with you, except the more I talk to parents of kids who played in the CHL I'm finding it's not so much a developmental league as it is a support league.

Just today I was having this discussion with a parent who's son played WHL and it was horrible. If anyone asks him what is better, CHL or NCAA the first question he asks if you see yourself as a top 6 player, if not, go the NCAA route. If your anything but a top player in the CHL you don't get enough ice time to develop. The top players are getting 30 mins a game the other players are getting maybe 10 min a game. So in a 70 game season the top players are essentially playing 30 more games. And your on a bus all the time travelling so not as much practice time, and the practice time is still geared around the top players.

The CHL is structured; top players can do whatever they want on the ice. Support players have to play a certain role, do your job to help those players get to the show, and don't show them up.

The coaches have their 5 or 6 guys and they play them all the time regardless of how they are playing at the time, or how many mistakes they make.

And there is nothing wrong about that, it's sport, but it's more about winning then it is about development.

The NCAA on the other hand is a developmental league. Less travel so your home all the time. And in that time, you work out, and they work you out harder then most think. You can work on your skill level, and develop. And you practice, you have free ice. And in that sense I find it a far better developmental league then the CHL. And I for one am happy that Jankowski went the NCAA route as opposed to the CHL route. NCAA he is playing against physically stronger adults, rather then 16 year old kids. It's more structured in it's play, and with the lighter game schedule he won't be burnt out by the time he gets to the NHL.

[greentree]

Originally Posted by Diverce

Not quoting you cause I disagree with you, I do agree with you, except the more I talk to parents of kids who played in the CHL I'm finding it's not so much a developmental league as it is a support league.

Just today I was having this discussion with a parent who's son played WHL and it was horrible. If anyone asks him what is better, CHL or NCAA the first question he asks if you see yourself as a top 6 player, if not, go the NCAA route. If your anything but a top player in the CHL you don't get enough ice time to develop. The top players are getting 30 mins a game the other players are getting maybe 10 min a game. So in a 70 game season the top players are essentially playing 30 more games. And your on a bus all the time travelling so not as much practice time, and the practice time is still geared around the top players.

The CHL is structured; top players can do whatever they want on the ice. Support players have to play a certain role, do your job to help those players get to the show, and don't show them up.

The coaches have their 5 or 6 guys and they play them all the time regardless of how they are playing at the time, or how many mistakes they make.

And there is nothing wrong about that, it's sport, but it's more about winning then it is about development.

The NCAA on the other hand is a developmental league. Less travel so your home all the time. And in that time, you work out, and they work you out harder then most think. You can work on your skill level, and develop. And you practice, you have free ice. And in that sense I find it a far better developmental league then the CHL. And I for one am happy that Jankowski went the NCAA route as opposed to the CHL route. NCAA he is playing against physically stronger adults, rather then 16 year old kids. It's more structured in it's play, and with the lighter game schedule he won't be burnt out by the time he gets to the NHL.

You forgot to mention one thing: In NCAA hockey, a kid's getting a first-rate college education. Usually for free. Speaking of development...!

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by greentree

You forgot to mention one thing: In NCAA hockey, a kid's getting a first-rate college education. Usually for free. Speaking of development...!

THe last thing we need is hockey players with first rate educations; it'll just lead to more of them thinking they understand labor laws and costing us seasons down the road.

[Husky]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

THe last thing we need is hockey players with first rate educations; it'll just lead to more of them thinking they understand labor laws and costing us seasons down the road.

I am thinking the opposite. They would understand how good they have it and not be so brainwashed by the union or agents.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

THe last thing we need is hockey players with first rate educations; it'll just lead to more of them thinking they understand labor laws and costing us seasons down the road.

I agree with Husky, it would most likely be the opposite as educated people are less likely to be led around by the nose. They tend to be able to think more for themselves.

[moon]

I would think that most guys that end up in the NHL that go the college route don't end up spending all that much time in class or focusing on studies.

Not sure they would be that much smarter than the average hockey player.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Diverce

The NCAA on the other hand is a developmental league. Less travel so your home all the time. And in that time, you work out, and they work you out harder then most think. You can work on your skill level, and develop. And you practice, you have free ice. And in that sense I find it a far better developmental league then the CHL. And I for one am happy that Jankowski went the NCAA route as opposed to the CHL route. NCAA he is playing against physically stronger adults, rather then 16 year old kids. It's more structured in it's play, and with the lighter game schedule he won't be burnt out by the time he gets to the NHL.

The CHL is very much a continuation of the minor hockey system. The best 16 year old players in Canada will almost always opt for the CHL, and hope to eventually be a top line 17 year old. Most CHL players who get to the NHL were top 6 junior guys or top 4 defenceman getting a lot of ice time their 2nd, 3rd, and 4th seasons. There are very few guys who established themselves as 19 year olds in the CHL go on to be NHL players.

For the kids who had not physically matured at 14 years of age, other routes do give the player a better oppurtunity to either get a pro hockey career, or at least an education thru playing hockey.

But for the exceptional players, the CHL is the league where they will play a lot, travel a lot and be prepared for what NHL life will be like.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Husky

I am thinking the opposite. They would understand how good they have it and not be so brainwashed by the union or agents.

Nah; they just get one more first-rate thing for free and think they're entitled to that as well.

What originally started as a joke has become a semi-serious notion from a thoroughly jaded individual very quickly. Bad times.

[mikeecho]

Originally Posted by moon

I would think that most guys that end up in the NHL that go the college route don't end up spending all that much time in class or focusing on studies.

Not sure they would be that much smarter than the average hockey player.

I know "Joe Average" players that went both routes. None of them ever made it but in their life after hockey, the differences were blatantly obvious.

The NCAA guys did indeed attend classes, do the work and received a solid education that allowed them to be competent professionals after hockey.

The guys who went the WHL route barely squeaked out a high school education, had it pressed on them that the AHL was the absolute next step which essentially killed their WHL scholarships and now spend their time in entry level labourer type jobs. As guys lower on the depth scale, given the chance to do it all again pretty much all of them would go the NCAA route. Problem is that most of them at decision time thought they were gonna make it and didn't care at all about school. Now they're getting a dose of reality.

[moon]

The problem with personal stories about which way is better is that they represent a small segment and are easily countered by other personal stories.

Guys I know that went the WHL route have done fine after the league is over. The guys who wanted to go to university did and the guys with no interest in it didn't.

It may not be true for every guy but it seems very unlikely that guys that squeaked by high school would have been very successful in university had they gone the NCAA route. I know guys who went that route and were home in a 6 months to a year because school was not for them, especially when coupled with hockey.

For some guys sure they likely take full advantage of NCAA classes offered but for the majority of NHL guys that spend a year or two at college I am not so convinced these guys are coming out with a large understanding of the economics of the NHL.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by moon

I would think that most guys that end up in the NHL that go the college route don't end up spending all that much time in class or focusing on studies.

Not sure they would be that much smarter than the average hockey player.

Are you always this condescending?

[sun]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Are you always this condescending?

New here?

[moon]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Are you always this condescending?

You think that was condescending?

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by moon

You think that was condescending?

You don't? You negatively stereotyped a group of players with no facts to support it.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by moon
You think that was condescending?

Originally Posted by Cole436

You don't? You negatively stereotyped a group of players with no facts to support it.

I took that a different way. Moon meant "I'm just getting started" or "Let me give you condescending".

[moon]

Originally Posted by Cole436

You don't? You negatively stereotyped a group of players with no facts to support it.

I don't think condescending is the right word but anyways I do t necessarily have facts about what each guy did but spending a year or two in school like most of these guys do isn't going to give them a strong understanding of the economic issues of the NHL.

Some guys may have a better understanding but overall I would expect the majority are not that much more educated on the matter after their short time in college and that most guys out of the CHL could be at the same level by getting informed once they enter the league.

[Diverce]

Originally Posted by moon

I would think that most guys that end up in the NHL that go the college route don't end up spending all that much time in class or focusing on studies.

Not sure they would be that much smarter than the average hockey player.

You do realize that in order to play they have to keep a solid GPA and go to class unless they have a reason to be excused like a road trip. They do have tutors that go on trips with them so they don't fall behind.

And no, they don't have people that do their homework for them. If any athlete is caught cheating they can get kicked off the team. And the school, and the program can be put under investigation to make sure whether or not it was just an isolated incident.