http://www.centralconferencehockey.com/post.aspx?t=features&f=view&id=82

Of all the goals set out by the Central Division prior to its inaugural season in 2008-2009, one of the primary objectives was to provide an environment conducive to player development, one that would allow players to improve from a young age and would be considered an attractive destination for scouts and recruiters from the NCAA, CHL, CIS and NHL. Ask any player or coach firmly entrenched in the game and they will tell you a strong and consistent level of competition is necessary for players to reach their potential.

"Obviously good instruction, players being in an amicable position from a coaching perspective, a competition level thats high and getting a chance to play in critical situations" said Cornell University Big Red Associate Head Coach Casey Jones when asked what conditions he felt young players develop best under. "I think it's a combination of those things that help develop players over the years."

Jones, who has coached at the NCAA Division I level since 1992-1993, and the rest of the Cornell coaching staff followed Central Division action closely during the past season as the Big Red will welcome four new recruits (Nick DAgostino, Erik Axell, Greg Miller and Jared Seymour) from Central Division teams for the 2009-2010 season.

As for the competition level, a scenario in which any team could beat any other team was the ideal outcome for the Central Division and when looking back at results from the first season of competition, it is clear that goal was achieved.

The Cobourg Cougars and Stouffville Spirit, finishing in seventh and eighth place respectively in the eight team division, beat six out of seven different opponents at least once during the regular season including three occasions on which the Spirit defeated the Central Division Champion Wellington Dukes. The sixth place St. Michaels Buzzers beat every opponent at least once.

Unlike in previous seasons where top teams would routinely walk over lower seeded teams putting up scores that would indicate a lopsided baseball game let alone a lopsided hockey game, there was no recourse on the schedule for the Central Divisions top teams when taking on lower seeded teams. Consider that of Stouffvilles forty losses, exactly half of those came by two goals or less; hardly a team that opponents could guarantee wins against.



Despite playing on that last place team, Spirit defenseman Patrick McEachen, whose exceptional play led him to a commitment to attend Clarkson University and play NCAA Division I hockey in 2009-2010, did not feel he was robbed of an opportunity to take great strides in his development.

"The competition level last season (in the Central Division) really mimicked the play at higher levels like college hockey and professional hockey because you were forced to play at a consistent level every night," said McEachen, who completed his second season with the Spirit. "Thats what I was forced to do last year in the Central Division because there were no easy games like in past years in the provincial league. There were no slouches in this division as you could see, we were the last place team but we gave every team a run for their money especially in the playoffs with Wellington where the first three games were decided by one goal. I think just being forced to play consistently at your highest level every night really helped develop not only myself but all the other players in the division as well."

In McEachens rookie season in 2007-2008, the Spirit finished fourth in the North Division wining thirty one of forty nine games; however, nearly forty percent of those victories, twelve wins to be exact, came by four goals or more. Playing in so many close games in the Central Division last season, McEachen said, helped him to refine his game, prevent bad habits from developing and become a more consistent player.

"I think the fact that if you have an easy game lets say every three or four games, its not that youre trying to be less aggressive, you just have a tendency to play more nonchalantly," he said. "You may not be trying to but the fact that the competition is much weaker some nights, you can create bad habits because you are not playing to your highest potential; you sort of lower your play to your opponents level of play and that will show up when you play the stronger teams."

McEachens accomplishments last season certainly illustrate his improvement finishing the year with seven goals and twenty six assists, an eleven point increase from his rookie season. At just seventeen years of age, McEachen, a Stouffville native, was named captain of the Spirit midway through the season after Myles Gomes was traded to the Couchiching Terriers. He also earned a coveted spot on the Central Division Prospects Team that competed in January against the top prospects from the CJHL in the "Battle of Ontario" in Pembroke, scoring a goal in a CD Prospects 3-0 victory.



St. Michaels Buzzers forward Reilly Smith, who is ranked 158th overall among North American skaters by NHL Central Scouting for the 2009 NHL Entry Draft and will attend Miami University to play Division I hockey with the Redhawks in 2009-2010, agreed that consistently strong competition is required to continue improving.

"Absolutely," said Smith on whether the guaranteed competition Central Division teams saw last year made him a better player. "It really made me focus on every game and you could not take a night off especially in the Central Division because you knew there was going to be competition every night. If you took even a second off, a team would comeback or you would give up a goal because every team had players that could score and turn the game around."

For the Buzzers in 2007-2008 as members of the South Division, they faced only two real threats in the Markham Waxers and Vaughan Vipers. Smith indicated that there was definitely a lazier atmosphere in the locker room prior to any game against an opponent other than the Waxers or Vipers.

"It was tough because getting up for those games is a real challenge especially since you always have the mentality to kind of play down to the level of your opponent and still pick up a victory just because you think you can win on talent alone," said Smith. "It was a lot different this year because you knew every game was a battle and you had to bring your best for every game."

Reilly Smith's season was rich with rewards as well, deservedly so after exhibiting marked improvement throughout the season. After getting into only thirteen games in his rookie season, Smith became a key player with the Buzzers in 2008-2009 scoring twenty seven goals and adding forty eight assists for seventy five points in forty nine games. He also competed along with Patrick McEachen for the Central Division Prospects team at the "Battle of Ontario", earned an invitation to the 2008 CJAHL Prospects Game in Summerside, Prince Edward Island and helped Team Canada East to a bronze medal at the 2008 World Junior A Challenge in Camrose, Alberta.

The competitiveness that existed in the Central Division also was beneficial to scouts, making it more likely for them to see a competitive game when using up one of their limited number of scouting visits. Due to NCAA restrictions on the amount of scouting visits that can be made, scouts and recruiters are always searching for games likely to be highly competitive in order to assess how players compete with the game on the line. More often than not, the Central Division was able to provide those types of games regardless of the teams position in the standings.

"You are looking for the competitive games so that the players are going to be challenged in critical times in a game because you get such a limited view," explained Jones. "If you have a choice, you want to see competitive games that are played in important situations because you want the kids to have to make decisions under duress because thats what translates to the college game."

When scouting players, Jones added that seeing them compete in a variety of different scenarios is the goal but that the best possible assessment of a player comes from how they play in close, competitive games.

"You like to see a player that youre looking at have to protect the lead, have to play with the lead, have to come from behind and then face the risks of that but most of the situations where you want kids making good decisions under pressure comes from close games," he said. "Probably the best evaluation of a player comes from a competitive game, no questions asked."

Between himself and the rest of the hockey staff at Cornell, Jones estimated that they were able to watch each of their commitments from the Central Division at least twice. From the action he saw firsthand, Jones pointed out several specific aspects of competition from the Central Division that he thought were particularly beneficial.

"I did like the fact that the young kids were in the line up and I did like the fact that they took a player off the ice (dressing only nineteen players) because of the amount of shifts you are able to see from a scouting perspective, said Jones. I like some of the things they did moving forward so I think the model and the ideas are exciting from our perspective and a scouting perspective."

The Central will be huge this upcoming season with young development, you and all can be assured,the matchups in this new division will draw many fans to games no matter what town games are being held through out the year and be very competive action,playoffs will be amazing in every series!

The Central developement is the future for NHL talent for years to come,i think the Ontario Division is for alot of 19 & 20 yrs olds looking for last ditch NCAA or Canadian College hockey,seeing that chances are slim to none making an OHL club at that age.

I wish the best for all players in the Ontario Division,but i think the Central will prove the better in the long run,and graduate players to the next level in hockey and education!

I agree with these two posters. The Central is going to provide some terrific, quality hockey this season.

One of the arguments I have loved, and I keep hearing, is that 16 year olds should have to "earn their ice time" by sitting in the crowd game after game.

The people who throw that argument out there blissfully ignore the other side of the equation...

Shouldn't the 20 year olds have to EARN their ice time, too? Why the hell should a complacent 20 year old continue to be given ice time he isn't earning, while a younger, hungrier 16 year old sits and watches from section 22? I have seen so many teams over the years continue to skate their 20 year olds game after game; and the 20 year olds skate around like they are in rec league, knowing that their spot on the team is safe.

The Central rules turn that attitude and philosophy on its ear.

Yes and let's forget how SOME of the teams from the Central bailed out on their own philosophies to go out and pay BIG bucks and many young players to get 20 year olds, to help them WIN, NOW!

How great is it when the big dogs can't control themselves?

Sharpie great remark on the Central Division cant agree with you more on this,it will be good for the 16&17 year olds to focus on perfection at the junior level, and higher down the road may it be NCAA/OHL/NHL, but they will always say they played and learned from the Central Division!

Theres so many reasons to disagee with this "unbiased" article its unbelievable...to start

1. Parity makes better players. Parity makes better players of players that cant excel against higher levels of competition....but doesnt make them quality players. Ask any OHL scout they want there 16 yr olds playing Jr A against the best and strongest to make them better....if you need to reduce the quality of play in the league to allow young kids to compete, shouldnt be in competitive hockey...form a "house league" league. Suck it up princesses and play.

2. Close games make better players. I saw a good Banam A game the other day 3-2, wonder how many will go pro?

3. Now that all the teams that cant compete at higher level are in the Central....lets see how much parity there is.


4. Scouts like the Central because its small and competitive. The Ontario is 15 team including Oakville, Kingston, Huntsville, Auroraj....etc....wonder which conf they'll want to scout this year.

5. 19 and 20 yr olds taking "last shots" at making it. Any D1 scout will tell you thats the age they're scouting. D1 schools routinely send player to BCHL for 3 yrs of play until they are mature enough to play. Its not last shot age, its primary shot age.

6. "Probably the best evaluation of a player comes from a competitive game, no questions asked." ...but a player in a HIGH level competitive game...you have to be playing against the best to excel and develop.

The Central concept is the first step in developing adequate Jr A players from adequate minor hockey players.

Very well put,but alot of 19&20 year olds give up on hockey because they know its over at that age,not saying they are bad players.. but it was not to be for them.

If you are not drafted by the age of 18 to the OHL,things get darker for an NHL shot agree!

"Shouldn't the 20 year olds have to EARN their ice time, too? Why the hell should a complacent 20 year old continue to be given ice time he isn't earning, while a younger, hungrier 16 year old sits and watches from section 22? I have seen so many teams over the years continue to skate their 20 year olds game after game; and the 20 year olds skate around like they are in rec league, knowing that their spot on the team is safe." Sharpie, I don't know which teams you've been watching, but any team that skates a player like you discribed is not only hurting thier team but thier future as well. I watched the likes of Jon Whitelaw, Cory George, Rob Waddel, Jesse McConney, Dan Pinkney. They not only helped this years team but next years team will be awesome again because of the things the younger players learned from these guys. They were a joy to watch all season and boon to the comunity as role models to minor hockey as well.

BUT...the key to younger players LEARNING from these guys is getting to PLAY with these guys...not in practice. And a 16 year old can learn more from PLAYING with 5 hard-working 20 year old players who are fighting for their ice time like everyone else than from watching 9 20 year olds whose ice time is being handed to them because they are 20 years old.

puckpig's (no relation to puckmaster lol) huntsville revisionist history. maybe had a few good oa's this year but look back at the last 5 years and the bad examples outweigh the good by far. the worst ones were the send downs from the o that just played it out and enjoyed the ride.

huntsville has a history of advancing players to the next levels. mostly when they leave for other teams they rise.

$$PM87$$

I agree, there are some OA players who play hard and are still looking to play for scholly's etc.

But there are far too many who, knowing that they are going to get the playing time no matter what they do, are just out for a leisurely skate. Some are just out to stay in shape because their agent already has semi-pro or Europe lined up for them. No matter what the reason, watching these players from the stands is not at all going to help any 16 year old player become a quality hockey player.

It is those OA's that the limit on 20 year olds will weed out, and that is why the development of young hockey players will be much more noticeable in the Central, in my opinion.

Why aren't 16 year olds playing Midget hockey, where they belong?

Most 16 year olds who are good enough to be playing junior hockey are not playing Junior A, they're playing in the OHL. Junior A takes kids out of Midget, which has declining numbers, and most of them spend their time in the stands anyway. SEND THEM BACK TO MIDGET. Many kids are too small at 16 to be playing against 19/20 year olds, simply because they haven't grown yet, and are NOT good enough skill-wise for junior hockey. When I was out west, one of my buddies was telling me about a "major midget" league in BC and Alberta. We should have this. It would help the kids to get better, and give them another year to grow both physically and as hockey players. prepare the players for junior with a little bit of bus travel, a little more gruelling schedule than minor hockey, but not as insane as junior.

And now for you visual learners, let's see what some people who started playing junior A at 16 (or younger) developed into... please, direct your attention to Exhibit A.

*Jason Fraccaro*, played for the Waxers at 16. Where's he now? Quit hockey.

Mike Fish. Owen Sound Attack draft pick, played for the Waxers at 16. Didn't get much ice, went up to Owen Sound, couldn't crack the lineup and ended up playing for their Junior B team. Where's he? MIA.

Kevin Sit. Waxers backup goalie, played at 16. Didn't see much ice, was a permanant fixture in the stands after the Wax picked up a second overage goaltender, dressed for a couple CIS games with U of T as their backup goalie. Where is he? Teaching English in Korea.

Mike Pain. Played for the Waxers at 16. Had a couple mediocre years in the OHL with Saginaw. Two years with the worst team in CIS hockey, Ryerson. Currently a member of the Norwood Vipers Sr. AAA hockey club.

Kyle Zoon. Played for the Stouffville Spirit at 16. Backup goalie. St. Mike's Majors draft pick. Got traded to Thornhill (I thought he was kidding when he told me this in English class one morning. I was not impressed.) stayed behind a year after we graduated, headed to U of T where he dressed in five CIS games (finished one at my school, actually) and currently attends law school.

Austin Corredato. Played for Stouffville at 16. Wow. I can't even remember where HE ended up. I just looked him up and the guy played for ten teams in five seasons, including 3 OHL teams, and 2 QMJHL teams. Couldn't tell you where he is now.

Jeff Weiss (brother of Florida Panther Steve Weiss) played for the Waxers at 16 - couldn't even crack the Kitchener Rangers lineup when his uncle Steve Spott was ass't coach. Where's he? got a BA from Brock university, didn't play CIS hockey.

Daniel Torres (brother of Columbus Bluejacket Raffi Torres) played for the Waxers at 16 - where's he? Played 18 games in the OHL, and had a couple playoff games in the Central League. Couldn't crack the ECHL's worst team's lineup, and is, as far as I know, still in Markham.

Nathaniel Brooks - played for the Waxers at 16 - played ONE season in the OHL after failing to secure the grades necessary to attend his scholarship, then got dumped at the start of his overage season, and ended up at York, playing CIS hockey.

Dave Lyall - played for the Waxers at 16. Played FIVE games for the Sarnia sting and spent the rest of his lacklustre career in Markham (half of which he was suspended for). Where's he now? A proud member of our country's armed forces.

Rainor Gumminy - played for the Waxers at 16. Had three quiet seasons with the Waxers. Last I talked to him, he was a student at Texas A&M.

Ian Brunt. Played for the Toronto Marlboroughs in minor hockey, because I remember him wearing that jacket to school EVERY day... played for stouffville as a 16 year old. Last I heard of him, he was playing for the UOIT Ridgebacks in CIS.

Lee Maxwell. Good stouffville boy. Played in Stouffville as a 16 year old, four games at least, before going back to high school hockey with the brother andré cardinals. Also played a handful of games for the waxers years later. I couldn't tell you where this kid was if my life depended on it. Haven't seen or heard from him in years.

Chad Dunlop - He played 40 games with the cobourg cougars in 02-03, this guy's an 87. I was in grade 12 then, so that makes him 15, not 16. He had part of one mediocre season with the Erie Otters and is now a member of the Sr. AAA Whitby Dunlops.

I mean, sure, you're going to get the odd story of a guy like Andrew Cogliano (who really should've gone to the OHL, he dropped out of school anyway), Mike Angelidis, Dave Clarkson, Steve Weiss (who played for NYR as a 15-year old), Ben Cottreau, Steve Downie (although his success is debatable) or Mike Duco. Or even the nice little stories like Kevin Henderson (played five games as a 16 year old with Thornhill), and Brent Burns. but the majority of these guys, are not that good, didn't get much ice at 16 and would've probably ended up better hockey players if they'd had that extra year under their belts. I could go on, if I dug up some more team rosters from 2002 and added the rest of my buddies who never got division 1 schollies or made it to the OHL (although some people were lucky enough to get both - like Jesse Boucher and Jeff Kyrzakos, neither of whom played at 16).

At any given point there are roughly just under 1000 kids in the league, give or take, based on roster affiliations, etc. One, maybe two of them will make it to the NHL. a few will get D1 scholarships - many will drop out, or get kicked out before finishing school. A bunch will get d3 scholarships, and if they graduate, depending on their school packages, end up roughly 50k in the hole. And some will go to canadian universities, if they're lucky, getting some kind of deal out of it, like Chris Whitley got from Lakehead. (Which if they played major junior, instead of holding out for a "scholarship" to a crappy D3 school, they would've gotten for free from the Canadian Hockey League.)

(Okay. That's my essay on why 16 year olds should be playing midget hockey.)

Sources Cited:
- A heap of rosters from the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 season, acquired circa 2001-2003

- The Internet Hockey Database, http://www.hockeydb.com>, accessed June 7, 2009

- Facebook, http://www.facebook.com>, accessed June 7, 2009

"Well, hello there! Your watch is very today!"

There's one line in your dissertation that sums up the problem nicely.

"... didn't get much ice at 16"

Meanwhile, I bet all of them watched from the stands as a large number of OA's got a regular shift, game in, game out, whether they were hustling on the ice or not. Under the old system, many OA's got complacent, comfortable that their spot was safe no matter how they played. I saw a lot of 16 year olds over the years rot in the seats at the Pickering Rec Complex, too, while certain OA's phoned in their efforts game after game. The coaches would continue to skate the OA's though, because of that same backwards thinking you provided..."the 16 year olds could not possibly be better...they're only 16". The fact is, even when OA's who had been stinking up the place all season long got hurt and the young kids got a chance to play, and played better than the OA's...as soon as the injury was done, the 16 year old would be back in the stands to the detriment of the team. And that is not a unique situation, it is a backwards thinking philosophy that was league wide..."20 year olds are better because of their age, not their skill or effort level, just their age".

Can you imagine that in any other field of competition? "Okay, Johnny, you cannot represent our high school at the Science Fair, even though your theory on quantum physics blew away the competition, because you're only in grade 10. Allen's baking soda and vinegar volcano is our best shot at winning, because he's in grade 13, and even though he failed science twice, that makes him better than you. Maybe next year."

A 16 year old should play Midget. End of story. They a lot of years left to play in Jr hockey.

Right. Same mentality. Let the 16 year old players who are just biding their time until a Jr. team picks them up have all the spots in midget, at the expense of development of younger players.

The 16 year olds who should be playing Jr. A should be PLAYING Jr. A. End of story.

lol @ IBG. nice research. but you forgot alot of people. fair and balanced reporting?

Torres is playing CIS @ york btw. and CIS is nothing to sneeze at, considering its the alternate path once done with the CHL.

now without doing research and just knowing some people off the top of my head there are successes out there in recent memory..i wont name names for personal reasons rather i will use divisions . These players all played junior a in our league as 16 year olds and saw significant ice

North Division

1 Player in AHL (drafted to NHL)
1 Player in minor pro (undrafted, attending NHL camps)
1 Player in final year of CHL eligiblity, drafted to NHL
1 Player in OHL, expected to be drafted to the NHL this year

South Division

4 Players drafted to NHL either in ncaa or ohl.


and i am certain there are as many if not more success stories as there are "failures"

but i am also certain, without a doubt, the players who "make it" in our systems are the ones that played significantly as 16 year olds and the moved up. i highly doubt you can show a player who was on their way down in hockey (sent down from the O as a 20 year old) that turned around and then "made it" according to your criteria.

why does the chl keep their 20 year olds at 3 and want the younger players in the game? right...as a 20 year old for the most part you should have advanced, only a few are actually still trying the rest see its over and shut down. the younger players on average work harder and play harder since they still see a goal to work for on a personal level.


$$PM87$$

sharpie....your comments on 20 yo playing when they dont deserve to is subjective...its YOUR opinion that there are better younger players not playing...thats a coaching and mgmt decision, your not suggesting that the league needs to mandate whos a better player and that they have to play.....

I'm not saying anything about "better" or "worse".

A kid could be Sidney Crosby, but if he is cruising game after game because he doesn't have to earn his playing time, because his coach is going to play him just because he is twenty, then I guarantee the young, hungry 16 year old in the stands will be more productive on the ice. But the 16 year old has never been given the chance before, because the reigning philosophy has always been that you play your overagers no matter what, because that's what you brought them in for.

I can't see one possible scenario where cutting it to 5 twenty year olds and making them fight for ice time won't make both the overagers and the 16 year olds better hockey players.

everyone has to earn their playing time and it is up to coaches and management to decide who plays. reducing the number of 20 year olds should in no way mean that 16 year olds are guaranteed playing time. fewer 20 year olds should translate to more ice time for all other ages of players. teams should not sign a 16 year old that is not capable of playing regularily at this level.you are allowed 2 16 year olds BUT you don't have to have 2.

I found it rather funny that this article was talking all about the parity, competitiveness & that there were no slouches in last years 8 team "division". So this year they have now gone to 21 teams, there goes the self accolades of parity, competitiveness & no slouches.

With respect to Sharpies, 16 year old vrs 20 year old argument. There is only one "mandatory play rule" & that is for 16 year olds. So in essence you are arguing about the non-rule that 20 year olds always get to play in favour of an existing rule in the Central that 16 year olds must play. Almost like the pot calling the kettle black.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against 16 year olds playing, but they should be earned positions with earned icetime. This rule just seems a little too convenient considering it's the owners/coaches/sponsors whose 16 year old kids that always seem to make the team.

"I'm not against 16 year olds playing, but they should be earned positions with earned icetime"

Exactly. And how can they "earn" their ice time under the old system, which sees them sitting in the stands game after game? Under the Central Conference system, they are given the opportunity to earn ice time.

if a 16 year old is legitimatly good enough to be a top six forward or top 4 d man then they should be at the junior A level as they will develop faster. if they are not then it is in their best interest to play midget and develop. to be mandated to play is like house league! next we will see the central instigate the two minute buzzer for line changes ,must roll all lines and the goalies switch at the half way point of the game. its against the principal of putting the most competitive product on the ice! same as the gmhl please dont call it junior A hockey!!!

That's a load of crap. A 16 year old doesn't need to be a top six forward to be beyond the point of learning anything more or developing further at midget. Most 16 year olds have learned all they can from midget, and one more year does not help them much more...much like the 20 year olds in Jr. A that have not much more to learn. And, the ones who are not good enough to play at Jr. A still will not make it. But there will not be the ones that are good enough to play that are sitting in the stands, either.

I still defy anybody to explain how a 16 year old sitting in the stands develops any kind of skill.

No one is arguing that 16 years should be playing. The question is where. A 16 year old player that is a boarderline Jr A player would probably be better off playing in Midget. That player will have plenty to learn at midget and will benefit from the ice time which will probably include PP and PK. Forcing teams to play 16 year olds just because they are 16 is rediculous. If the talent level isn't their to justify the ice time then they shouldn't be there.

You seem to think because a player is 16 they have a right to ice time over other players even if the other players deserve the ice time based on merit.

thanks loslobos. sharpie seems to have bought into the cd cr5ap. hockey canada mandated a maximum number of sixteen year olds for a reason. MOST of them are not ready to play with 19 and 20 year olds and develop properly! they will develop more at the midget level. if they didnt mandate the sixteen year olds , i bet their wouldnt be two on every team.
sharpie i like the fact that you are a great volunteer and do everything to help junior hockey but the 16 vs 20 year old argument just doesn't fly if you want to put the BEST product on the ice.

Nobody learns better by playing against weaker competition. And nobody in the Central mandates a regular shift, they mandate that 16 year olds dress. Ice time is up to the coach, and is earned based on merit.

Also, to say that they take away ice time from 20 year olds who earn it on merit, that is not the case. Limiting the number of 20 year olds will weed out the ones who are being given ice time despite giving lackadaisical effort, and keep the ones who do work hard game in and game out, the way it should be.

Also, by developing the 16 year olds by actually putting them on the ice with BETTER COMPETITION, they will eventually develop into much better 19 and 20 year old players, thereby improving the product immensely.

The trouble with the old way, and those who espouse it, is lack of long-term vision.

I'm done discussing this, because those of you who are so set in your ways will never see reality, just what you want to see. And you have some weird need for having the last word, so I won't deny you that. I will rest my case on truth, fact, and reality.

The best players are the best players whether they're 16 or 20.  Development occurs at any age, and there is often a huge gap between a 16 year old and a 20 year old in both physical stature and mental maturity.

I don't get this notion that somehow by putting jerseys on a mandated number of 16 year olds and letting them occupy bench space that that constitutes a development strategy that somehow generates superior competition that will be the saviour of this league.  Talk about looking through rose-coloured glasses.  Take your head out of your southfacing oriface and get some air!

 

there is absolutly no reasoning behind the mandating of 16 year olds to improve development.
they are limiting 20 year olds because they think you have to pay them to play and that is b.s.
newmarket and st mikes spearheaded this BUT they had soso and smith as twenty year olds and before that henwood at st mikes and read between the lines . ex ohlers that must have done a lot of driving to justify their gas money. hypocrits!!!
this is about changing so they will lessen expenses. thats fine but just admit it!!!dont create some b.s about parity and development when the only way to achieve that is to enforce the rule of paying players with stiff penalties and instead of limiting 20 year olds and mandating 16 year olds..try limiting crappy owners and mandating strong franchise standards.
hello mr ladds...are you there!!!

sharpie you arent making any sense.
16 year olds that are good enough should play! they should not be MANDATED to play every night. you now have to healthy scratch a 17 or 18 year old..no one says they have to play.
if a 17 or 16 year old is better than a 20 year old by all means play him.
thats why i said if they are top 6 or top 4 then they should be there.
look at your goalie. he sure as heck hasnt developed because he was in over his head and now has no confidence.
your way will do more harm than good.
if the hockey canada rules say that you can have 16-20 years olds on your team and the limit of 20 year olds is 9 then build your team within those parameters. i could care less how many are 16 as long as you are putting the BEST possible team on the ice!!!
THAT'S HOCKEY!!!!!!

Thank you, Wingfan!

Icing the best possible team should be every manager and coach's TOP priority. Not dressing 16 year olds and having them sit on the bench instead of in the stands. Then you have exactly the scenario described above, where 17, 18, 19 year olds are sitting in the stands while the coach runs a short bench and the fourth "line" of 16 year olds sits there wasting space on the bench... still not learning anything, because they're still not playing. What is wrong with a Midget AAA league? Since I posted earlier, I have learned that Manitoba has a similar set-up. Kids still get the chance to play against the top calibre of players THEIR AGE, where I'm sure the competition is pretty tough.

And to PM, because I forgot to reply to you before, I never said CIS was $h!t hockey.. I followed my school's (very bad) team for four seasons and thought it was very good - in fact, I'd put it up there with the Sr AAA league, which is high-speed, quality hockey. It's just that hockey players who don't get "scholarships" are seen as a "failure," (because that's the point of "choosing" - and i use that word VERY loosely - Tier II over Major Junior) I think more Junior A kids should look at attending a Canadian school (which costs LESS even with the "financial aid" of a crappy D3 school package) as a veritable option instead of viewing it as a last resort. I feel it has the same reputation as the Georgetown Raiders.... a retirement home for washed up OHLers. And I'm glad Torres got his life together. To be honest, I didn't even know he had gone back and finished high school. Good for him. Nice to hear.

"If you can't take the heat... stay outta the kitchen"

in the central division when teams are down to their 23 man roster where 4 players have to sit every game why should 16 year olds be guaranteed a playing spot over a 17,18 19 or 20 year old. the best 19 available players should be dressed.
if the sole reason for the central division is to develop players and winning is secondary then they should go with no 20 year olds and limited 19 year olds.

thats probably what they will do next. then they can change the name to midget and be done with it!
the cd is going to be a great developement conference but it will be for the ontario conference!!
get the young ones. develop them for a year or two then sell them to the junior a conference.
it'll help pay the bills i guess.