Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

USPHL


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
207 replies to this topic

#1 DM47

 

    Cup Winning Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,012 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 07:37 AM

I came across this article yesterday I found interesting and wonder what impact it will have on recruiting on the east coast for the USHL. It seems like there was already some talented players that chose to play in the USPHL and stay close to home instead of playing for free in the widwest.  I definitely see the USPHL and the WSHL being a problem for the NAHL.  Anyone with more experience of the recruiting methods of teams have thoughts on the effects this will have?

 

https://thejuniorhoc...and-whats-next/



#2 Mr Ricochet

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:City Of Big Shoulders, South Side
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 09:21 AM

I came across this article yesterday I found interesting and wonder what impact it will have on recruiting on the east coast for the USHL. It seems like there was already some talented players that chose to play in the USPHL and stay close to home instead of playing for free in the widwest.  I definitely see the USPHL and the WSHL being a problem for the NAHL.  Anyone with more experience of the recruiting methods of teams have thoughts on the effects this will have?

 

https://thejuniorhoc...and-whats-next/

 

 

If I understand the article correctly 47, the lower levels of USPHL clubs who are already pay to play are being asked to add another 100-200 dollars per player per year to help defray rising costs for the free to play (the top rung) to keep that level free to play.   Do I understand this correctly?

 


Now, the USPHL model would have been to raise fee’s a little for pay to play teams, to help pay for these free to play teams.  This in hockey circles was being called a “Tax”.


Crush Em Steel
Blackhawks Rock
RIP Huckleberry. 1995-2009.... Thanks for 14 unforgettable years Huck. You will forever be loved and missed.

#3 iowaninja

 

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Monticello, IA
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 10:55 AM

That's the way I read it as well which doesn't seem like a bad program

#4 BackCheck

 

    2nd Line Center

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 402 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 11:58 AM

TJHN seems to be the only outlet reporting on this and they seem pretty biased in favor of the proposal but I tend to agree with a lot of their thinking on it. A 2%-4% increase at the lower levels doesn't seem outrageous for another free to play league under USA Hockey. I did see an article where they were equating things to the NTDP, which I thought was a bit of a stretch. I called them out of Facebook and it pretty much just turned into things we don't like about the NTDP.

 

I have to give the USPHL some credit, they seemed like a joke when they were starting but seem to have put together a pretty respectable league, no one seems to be laughing now. I personally think boosting the tier 2 level would be a huge benefit to all of American junior hockey. Having a second league and a separate business model just makes sense to me.



#5 Mr Ricochet

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:City Of Big Shoulders, South Side
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 12:07 PM



TJHN seems to be the only outlet reporting on this and they seem pretty biased in favor of the proposal but I tend to agree with a lot of their thinking on it. A 2%-4% increase at the lower levels doesn't seem outrageous for another free to play league under USA Hockey. I did see an article where they were equating things to the NTDP, which I thought was a bit of a stretch. I called them out of Facebook and it pretty much just turned into things we don't like about the NTDP.

 

I have to give the USPHL some credit, they seemed like a joke when they were starting but seem to have put together a pretty respectable league, no one seems to be laughing now. I personally think boosting the tier 2 level would be a huge benefit to all of American junior hockey. Having a second league and a separate business model just makes sense to me.

 

Good post, BC.......... Refresh my memory, from what league(s) did the USPHL evolve from? 

 

I do have to admit as I read that article asking for the lower levels to support the USPHL (the pyramid we so often read about) it reminded me of the NTDP.  How is that thinking wrong? 


Crush Em Steel
Blackhawks Rock
RIP Huckleberry. 1995-2009.... Thanks for 14 unforgettable years Huck. You will forever be loved and missed.

#6 BackCheck

 

    2nd Line Center

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 402 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 12:27 PM

 



TJHN seems to be the only outlet reporting on this and they seem pretty biased in favor of the proposal but I tend to agree with a lot of their thinking on it. A 2%-4% increase at the lower levels doesn't seem outrageous for another free to play league under USA Hockey. I did see an article where they were equating things to the NTDP, which I thought was a bit of a stretch. I called them out of Facebook and it pretty much just turned into things we don't like about the NTDP.

 

I have to give the USPHL some credit, they seemed like a joke when they were starting but seem to have put together a pretty respectable league, no one seems to be laughing now. I personally think boosting the tier 2 level would be a huge benefit to all of American junior hockey. Having a second league and a separate business model just makes sense to me.

 

Good post, BC.......... Refresh my memory, from what league(s) did the USPHL evolve from? 

 

I do have to admit as I read that article asking for the lower levels to support the USPHL (the pyramid we so often read about) it reminded me of the NTDP.  How is that thinking wrong? 

 

 

Iirc, the lower levels of the league were formed partially by the Empire Hockey League and another league that escapes me at the moment. I do remember a lot of controversy before they were sanctioned by USA Hockey that they were already trying to pass themselves off as Tier 1 or Tier 2. There was rumor that they may go under the AAU due to some issue with getting sanctioned under USA Hockey but I don't know if there was any real threat of them going that route.

 

The article I was referring to about the NTDP comparison is here. It conveniently omits the fact that the NHL dumps a lot of money into USA Hockey and that pays for a good chunk of the NTDP. I refer to their financial statements and this in particular

 

 

O. NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE
The National Hockey League support is based on past
performance and specific objectives. A significant portion
of their funding is intended to provide budget relief for
existing costs associated with the national team development
program and junior officiating development program. The
balance is to be directed to offset costs associated with new
initiatives, specifically the American Development Model and
membership development, plus support for the United States
Hockey League and College Hockey Inc.

 

No one is arquing that the NTDP takes from the many to give to the few but there are comparatively much different funding methods. 



#7 DM47

 

    Cup Winning Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,012 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 01:00 PM

 

If I am making a side bet, my money is on the USPHL.  There will be Tier II USPHL hockey next year, one way or another.  The USPHL will either win an appeal if its filed, or will leave and USA Hockey will have lost either way.

 

I find it interesting that they decided to allow them to be free to play but denied them Tier II status.  What really separates them from Tier II being a Tier III pay for play league other then the status?  Is this  them trying to protect the NAHL as being the only Tier II league or a slap in the face to USPHL?  The WSHL already seems to be gaining ground not being USA hockey sanctioned so it will be interesting to watch how this all unfolds.



#8 BackCheck

 

    2nd Line Center

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 402 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 01:07 PM

I find it interesting that they decided to allow them to be free to play but denied them Tier II status.  What really separates them from Tier II being a Tier III pay for play league other then the status?  Is this  them trying to protect the NAHL as being the only Tier II league or a slap in the face to USPHL?  The WSHL already seems to be gaining ground not being USA hockey sanctioned so it will be interesting to watch how this all unfolds.


I can't comment on the difference in level of play and arenas but I suspect the gap between the two leagues has closed a lot, so probably just the free vs pay to play. I think it's both protectionism and just an unwillingness to change the status quo, I'm not sure if any real insult was intended but that seems to be how a lot of people are taking it. My guess is that USA Hockey will be shamed into seeing the light and next year the USPHL will put a very similar proposal forward and it will be accepted. I don't see it taking affect until the season after though.



#9 Bevalaqua

 

    Checking Forward

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 01:25 PM

At the end of the day, I don't think it matters much if you call it Tier 2 or Tier 3 - there's only a finite amount of top level players and there is only one USHL.  It's almost like the inflation in youth hockey with hundreds of Tier 1 elite, AAA, premier organizations.   It's not as if you can call USPHL tier 2 and all of a sudden you've got 50 more teams full of D1 level talent that are just as good as the USHL teams.   But I agree it's great for more junior level players to have free to play opportunities.  I just don't know how the math will work out for the owners of USPHL teams???   Those teams don't draw any spectators, so there's little outside revenue to make the economics work.  It's hard enough for USHL teams to earn a profit with thousands of fans.  And to give you an idea of the difference in competition between USHL and USPHL, I know a player who I thought was pretty decent who is committed to a D1 program and scored about 0.10 pts/game in the USHL last season.  He got cut and now plays for a USPHL team and scores 1.2pts per game.  So I don't know if calling USPHL tier 2 would magically create a multitude of D1 scouting/recruiting opportunites for that league??



#10 minor life

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Location:Michiagn, somehwere it doesnt suck!
  • Interests:Hockey, hunting and fishing. Is there much else?
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 01:41 PM

To clarify, the USPHL is not being allowed to do anything.  No Tier II label under USAH and you have to charge.  That said, when its official that their 144 teams from junior down to cross ice leave USA Hockey at the end of this season, you will get the story from TJHN first. 

 

The plan for new Tier II leagues the USHL and the new Central league under AAU is to bring the 441 American players home from Canada first.  Plenty of US talent up there that does not need to be up there.

 

The only reason this happened is because the NAHL and USHL were threatened.  For good reason too.  We have a few other stories in the works on both of those organizations that they don't want talked about.


Edited by minor life, 06 December 2016 - 01:42 PM.

There is a difference between someone who plays hockey, and a Hockey Player. which one are you?

#11 Mr Ricochet

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:City Of Big Shoulders, South Side
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 02:15 PM



To clarify, the USPHL is not being allowed to do anything.  No Tier II label under USAH and you have to charge.  That said, when its official that their 144 teams from junior down to cross ice leave USA Hockey at the end of this season, you will get the story from TJHN first. 

 

The plan for new Tier II leagues the USHL and the new Central league under AAU is to bring the 441 American players home from Canada first.  Plenty of US talent up there that does not need to be up there.

 

The only reason this happened is because the NAHL and USHL were threatened.  For good reason too.  We have a few other stories in the works on both of those organizations that they don't want talked about.

 

Guess I'm way behind the curve here but there is much I don't understand......... Nice work on this by the way, Joe........

 


 

 

 

 

To clarify, the USPHL is not being allowed to do anything.  No Tier II label under USAH and you have to charge.  That said, when its official that their 144 teams from junior down to cross ice leave USA Hockey at the end of this season, you will get the story from TJHN first.

 

 

It is contractual that if you aren't at least Tier II you have to charge (pay to play)

 

 

 

 

 

The plan for new Tier II leagues the USHL and the new Central league under AAU is to bring the 441 American players home from Canada first.  Plenty of US talent up there that does not need to be up there.

 

There will be a new Tier II league next year called the Central league?   And if so how will this bring American kids back to the US?  If they wanted, and were good enough, to play free Tier II hockey wouldn't they be in the NAHL right now?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The only reason this happened is because the NAHL and USHL were threatened.

 

Who made and what were the threats to the USHL and what would the consequences be if the perceived threats, assuming they are not hollow, to the USHL and NAHL?


Crush Em Steel
Blackhawks Rock
RIP Huckleberry. 1995-2009.... Thanks for 14 unforgettable years Huck. You will forever be loved and missed.

#12 minor life

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Location:Michiagn, somehwere it doesnt suck!
  • Interests:Hockey, hunting and fishing. Is there much else?
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 03:56 PM

DM47 looked a little confused on whether Tier III was going to be free to play.  USA Hockey says Tier III is pay to play. Technically the "Tiers" are only distinctions in business models and are not in theory a measure of any level of play.  We all know the best players go to free to play.

 

Centralonehockeyleague.com will be a new free to play league under AAU.  There are 441 players in Ontario alone that are paying to play Tier II.  Many are Canadian.  Under AAU, a Canadian is just a North American, like a US player.  So, they are not imports. 

 

There arent enough NAHL teams for all the players that are Tier II ready, so nearly 600 US kids a year head north.  Some don't want to play in the NAHL because of various reasons too.   The NAHL was going to get crushed by the USPHL out east if this were approved, not only in Tier II but in Tier III they would have been decimated over night.

 

Now USA Hockey, the NAHL and USHL are betting the USPHL doesn't have the balls to leave.  A bad bet on their part.  If the USPHL joins AAU, USA Hockey will no longer be the largest junior hockey organization in the United States.  The real risk for USAH is losing the youth teams.  They think it wont happen, but again another bad bet.  People in general are fed up with USAH leadership, and that includes the NAHL and USHL.

 

While I wouldn't normally use a political analogy, USA Hockey may have just set themselves up to be Trumped. 


There is a difference between someone who plays hockey, and a Hockey Player. which one are you?

#13 BackCheck

 

    2nd Line Center

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 402 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 04:23 PM

Now USA Hockey, the NAHL and USHL are betting the USPHL doesn't have the balls to leave.  A bad bet on their part.  If the USPHL joins AAU, USA Hockey will no longer be the largest junior hockey organization in the United States.  The real risk for USAH is losing the youth teams.  They think it wont happen, but again another bad bet.  People in general are fed up with USAH leadership, and that includes the NAHL and USHL.

 

While I wouldn't normally use a political analogy, USA Hockey may have just set themselves up to be Trumped. 

 

One would hope that USA Hockey wouldn't call a "bluff" that big when they have to know there is even a slim chance that it's not a bluff, but I've never thought they were the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree. Your point about the U18 and U16 programs is certainly something that hasn't really been factored into the discussion but definitely needs to. Losing those would indeed be a big blow to USA Hockey and think of all those lost dues.



#14 minor life

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Location:Michiagn, somehwere it doesnt suck!
  • Interests:Hockey, hunting and fishing. Is there much else?
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 04:57 PM

LMAO you have never met USAH leaders if you hope they wouldnt try to call a bluff.  Almost impossible to get those ego's all into one arena sized room together.  Someone called the presidential election an experience of "whitelash" where some people underestimated the will of the other people to make change......History tends to repeat itself doesn't it? 


There is a difference between someone who plays hockey, and a Hockey Player. which one are you?

#15 Mr Ricochet

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:City Of Big Shoulders, South Side
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 06:11 PM

LMAO you have never met USAH leaders if you hope they wouldnt try to call a bluff.  Almost impossible to get those ego's all into one arena sized room together.  Someone called the presidential election an experience of "whitelash" where some people underestimated the will of the other people to make change......History tends to repeat itself doesn't it? 

 

 

Respectfully your presidential analogies are weak, ML.   How a candidate who got 2 and a half million less votes than the opponent and won indicates the will of the people is in some how a parallel to jr hockey is a head scratcher.

 

The NHL with throw it's money at the USAH, or has no say in this matter? 


Crush Em Steel
Blackhawks Rock
RIP Huckleberry. 1995-2009.... Thanks for 14 unforgettable years Huck. You will forever be loved and missed.

#16 minor life

 

    Cup Winning Goalie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Location:Michiagn, somehwere it doesnt suck!
  • Interests:Hockey, hunting and fishing. Is there much else?
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 08:10 PM

I didnt say the analogy was perfect! lol  Speaking plainly then.....what we will see, and have already begun seeing in less than 48 hours is a mass of people wanting to leave USAH.  This isnt just the USPHL now.  Where they go, most of the leagues, not just junior, will follow when it comes to the east coast.  The USPHL is not the electoral college, but they have so much sway over how things go out east, the USHL and NAHL can only dream of having that influence.

 

The NHL isnt going to throw money at this.  Some NHL owners own USPHL teams, others own stakes in some, and others have long standing relationships with others. 

 

People can make light of this.  They can say what ever they want, but this little earth quake may have triggered the tsunami that wont hit landfall for a while yet.  But when it does, it could wipe out everything in its path.  Better analogy? lol


There is a difference between someone who plays hockey, and a Hockey Player. which one are you?

#17 DM47

 

    Cup Winning Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,012 posts
  • Gender:Male
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 08:42 PM

I didnt say the analogy was perfect! lol  Speaking plainly then.....what we will see, and have already begun seeing in less than 48 hours is a mass of people wanting to leave USAH.  This isnt just the USPHL now.  Where they go, most of the leagues, not just junior, will follow when it comes to the east coast.  The USPHL is not the electoral college, but they have so much sway over how things go out east, the USHL and NAHL can only dream of having that influence.

 

The NHL isnt going to throw money at this.  Some NHL owners own USPHL teams, others own stakes in some, and others have long standing relationships with others. 

 

People can make light of this.  They can say what ever they want, but this little earth quake may have triggered the tsunami that wont hit landfall for a while yet.  But when it does, it could wipe out everything in its path.  Better analogy? lol

 

I could definitely see a large number of kids wanting to stay closer to home.  People on the coasts don't have much interest in coming to the Midwest much like Minnesota kids don't want to leave high school until they have too.  If they are getting the same perks staying closer to home a lot will choose that option.  The USPHL on the east coast has an advantage in this aspect over the WSHL in all the colleges with hockey nearby to come recruiting.



#18 Canarse

 

    Checking Forward

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 126 posts
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 09:34 PM

Most folks on the east coast are well aware that the USHL is by far the best junior league in the US.  The USPHL tries to bill itself as equal to the USHL, but very few are buying.  Some good players stay east for various reasons, but most want to be in the USHL ore even the BCHL.  The USPHL doesn't have the best reputation as they really push the truth in their marketing.  Things like saying Jack Eichel played in the USPHL.  Eichel played youth hockey for a team that now has a USPHL franchise.  Typical USPHL marketing.   The NAHL started this fight by moving teams into New Jersey and Mass.  Plenty of money behind the big USPHL teams so they will eventually get what they want.

 

Just my opinion FWIW.



#19 iowaninja

 

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Monticello, IA
 

Posted 06 December 2016 - 11:56 PM

This league is kinda like the old EJHL am I correct?   That league had some good players and was a T3 league, at one point I would have said the EJHL was better than the NAHL when the NAHL just about killed themselves trying to be T1



#20 Canarse

 

    Checking Forward

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 126 posts
 

Posted 07 December 2016 - 06:32 AM

The USPHL was spun off of the EJHL.  The EJHL is still there, but is mainly a D3 proving ground.  The USPHL produces D1 and D3 players as well as a strong business model that dominates areas.  Three levels of Tier 3 juniors (Premiere, Elite and USP3HL) and corresponding youth hockey programs.