THN.com Blog: Don't knock college route to NHL
Jonathan Toews came out of the North Dakota program. (Photo by Bill Smith/NHLI via Getty Images)
Ryan Kennedy
2008-06-13 11:12:36
The NCAA is taking a lot of body blows lately in terms of recruiting.
Two big-name defensemen in John Carlson and Garrett Clarke recently turned down their commitments to college programs in favor of spots on major junior teams, while the best American prospects in the past two drafts – Patrick Kane last year and Zach Bogosian this year – played in the Ontario League.
The perception is that major junior is the best ticket to a stellar NHL career. However, the announcement of this season’s NHL All-Rookie Team should give the NCAA some ammunition in what recently has been a rather one-sided war with Canadian junior leagues for attracting – and keeping – high-end talent. Here’s the breakdown of where this year’s winners came from:
Nicklas Backstrom – Europe
Carey Price – Major Junior
Tobias Enstrom – Europe
Tom Gilbert – NCAA
Patrick Kane – Major Junior
Jonathan Toews – NCAA
Pretty good parity there, eh?
Even though the Canadian League boasts many more draft picks, the NCAA still consistently puts out top talent. The 2007 team also featured two college boys in San Jose’s Matt Carle and Colorado’s Paul Stastny. In fact, the sophomore Av is the best player to date on that squad behind Evgeni Malkin, who was developed in Russia.
Now, this is not a knock on the CHL: After all, the other three members of the 2007 team came from its ranks (Jordan Staal, Marc-Edouard Vlasic and Mike Smith) and the rigorous schedule of major junior certainly helps a player’s development and stamina (Malkin detractors are nodding right now).
But the notion the NCAA is immensely inferior as a stepping-stone to the NHL is simply not true.
If there’s one thing I learned attending my first draft combine this year, it’s that the difference in body types among prospects can be downright shocking. There’s a huge gulf in some cases and clearly having a lighter NCAA schedule, thus leaving more time for weight training, is a benefit for some young men.
Now, I don’t know what Colin Wilson looked like before his first season at Boston U., but after, he looked NHL-ready.
Some of the kids at the combine who were NCAA-bound were much less developed physically and the college game seems better geared to getting them developed at the pace proper for them.
The drain away from college hockey and towards major junior seems to be quickening. And because of the tighter rules surrounding NCAA entry, junior will always have a recruiting advantage.
In terms of producing high-caliber talent, however, those players who stick it out in a college game – which is receiving more attention as the years go on – should look to those who came before them as proof you can get a higher education and still make it to the top.
Ryan Kennedy is a writer and copy editor for The Hockey News magazine, the co-author of the book Hockey's Young Guns and a regular contributor to THN.com. His blog appears Wednesdays and his features, The Hot List and Year of the Ram, appear Tuesday and Thursday, respectively.
For more great profiles, news and views from the world of hockey, Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.
Paul Skjodt (Posted 2008-06-17 07:20:16)
Problem is the pressure from agents, attorneys and false information for young prospects as young as 13 yrs old. In the 70's we played for the same reasons, but could enjoy playing the sport we loved without all the "experts" advisors who in many ways are pushing kids to make decisions sometimes 3-4 yrs before they are mentally mature enough. For select Global players and Americans in general the USHL allows a young man to develop at the same pace as the CHL, without losing their eligibility. If you are talented enough to play in the USHL until you are finished high school, why lose your college eligibility because of politics? The Canadian and US based Tier Two leagues are secondary options as well. At 18 you are now able to make an informed decision on what best fits your athletic and academic needs. Remember only 3 in 96,000 kids make it to the NHL every year, sort of like winning the lottery. A Division One US scholarship is a nice thing to have in your back pocket when it is time to enter the work force in your middle to late 20's, especially in todays world. CHL vs USHL / College hockey are both good options for your hockey development, but parents should really be thinking 10 years out after hockey is over before just throwing a degree out the window.
Samantha (Posted 2008-06-15 08:41:53)
Dave, Caz and Mitch, you have it bang on the money. Any kids out there who have the marks to get into college and aren't a guaranteed top 10 NHL pick should go for the college route. It's a no-brainer. And after one season if you simply don't like college, it's an easy transition into major junior. And Mitch, you're completely right. The NCAA needs to loosen their eligibility requirements of all their athletes, not just hockey players. Allow any former CHLers to spend one season as a red shirt, then let them play. And Rich, chances are fighting (in the NHL) will be on the way out pretty soon - unless you're training for the ECHL or Sunshine leagues - so choosing the CHL because of the half shields isn't really an intelligent choice anymore. Besides, today's pro athlete needs a little more brains than just being able to sign their signature on a puck. Besides, what teams really look for are the basic skills - skating, puck skills, passing and hockey sense, all of which are developed mainly thru practices, which the NCAA has waaay more of than major junior.
Rich (Posted 2008-06-14 20:18:09)
CHL anyday. 72 game sked, 4 rounds of playoffs, and if your good & lucky enough the Memorial Cup. No full face shield required and dropping the gloves when needed gets the boys ready for the grind of the NHL. I will watch both but for my buck it's CHL.
Cid from Indiana (Posted 2008-06-14 11:07:02)
If I'm an NHL GM, I look at NCAA kids for defensemen and possibly goalies. Kids from the Q or the O are my main source of forward talent along with kids from the Russian Super. The W is another great place to find defensive talent, and Europe can be none or all of the above depending what year it is. Just seems to be the way it is.
Rondo (Posted 2008-06-14 00:55:23)
Major Junior is still the way to go. If you don't play pro CHL teams pay for most of your schooling so you still get an education. I would like to see how many guys actually graduate from NCAA before their NHL teams pull them out early, so that shoots down the theory of NCAA getting a way better education.
CHL has a more NHL like schedule and atmosphere as opposed to a light schedule that NCAA has. NCAA is great for smaller players who play junior till there 20 and then need 4 more years to develop. But much like Turris/Okoposo NHL teams end up pulling kids out before they graduate so what is the point of playing a third of the games?
Mitch Heimpel (Posted 2008-06-13 22:03:33)
The NCAA screws themselves out of the best prospects. If it was as easy to move from the CHL to the NCAA as it is to move from the NCAA to the CHL, the NCAA might lose less or gain more prospects. NCAA rules also prevent prospects from signing their entry level deals with their pro clubs. Which means that, in the end, very few NCAA prospects actually graduate, negating the major benefit of actually taking the college route. There is a lot that the NCAA could do to aid their own situation, they simply choose not to.
Chris (Posted 2008-06-13 18:13:54)
I think college is the way to go because lets say you get injured or you just don't make it you've still got a degree to fall back on
Caz (Posted 2008-06-13 13:01:24)
I think the college route is the way to go if you aren't a can't miss prospect. Tom Gilbert was a middle pick and played 4 seasons in college and developed into an NHLer. Other players like St. Louis, McDonald and Kunitz were never drafted and played 4 seasons and still found a way to make it. At least if they wouldn't have made it they would have an education to fall back on. However, I don't see much benefit for top picks like Erik Johnson or Toews playing college for only 1 or 2 years if they're good enough to make the jump to the NHL right away and don't complete their education.
dave (Posted 2008-06-13 12:41:17)
If I had a son who was touted as a potential 1st or 2nd round pick, I would strongly consider Major Junior, because I feel the atmosphere is very close to the pros. If he was a middle or the road draftee, I think the U.S collage route would be the best. They focus a lot on practise, which can really help build skill and speed. I think the NCAA should relax its eligability rules a bit, though to give parents a bit more time to help thier son make a decision.
Advertisement
Should the Canadiens be retiring Patrick Roy's No. 33?
"The big thing with Carlo — and I tell him that every day — is that 'You're not in very good shape.'"
- Leafs coach Ron Wilson on the conditioning of Carlo Colaiacovo, which Wilson believes is one of the reason's the defensman is oft-injuried.
Our Partners
The Hockey News Corporation. All Rights Reserved © 2008 Transcontinental
Standards: XHTML 1.0 STRICT + CSS 2. V 1.5 17.09.2008
