Mats Naslund (Login Mats_Naslund) Registered Members
-
I was just wondering for those who have both in their cities and have experienced it (Oshawa, Kingston, Toronto teams), which is the better hockey? Also, if you could choose between the two which would you pick? And, if someone can, how does it compare to major junior?
Essentially every CIS men's hockey team has a number of major junior hockey graduates on their roster. Those with more tend to do better than those with fewer.
The average age of a CIS hockey team is about 4 years older than a tier II or major junior team. This maturity often shows on the ice.
CIS teams play about 30-45 games a season with time off for Christmas exams. Most junior teams play 60-80 games and don't respect school demands in the same way.
There are strict limits on the number of hours of practice per week a CIS team can have, Junior is unlimited (as far as I know).
Many tier II and major junior players are looking to advance to "the next level" whatever that may be including CIS. This can lead to more individual type play sometimes.
Most all CIS players are focussed on education and hockey is a sideline.
The CIS game is often more enjoyable to watch because the more mature players play a more intelligent team game. The speed is the same as major junior and tier II. The game is just as physical but no one is out to prove to scouts they are tougher than the other guys.
Teams can coexist in the same city, in Kingston there are two CIS teams, a major junior team, a tier II team, and 4 tier III junior teams all competing for fans.
Just my opinion of course but I do watch all levels of hockey every year.
I like Major Junior over CIS, but would have to say Tier 2 and CIS are equal.
With Major Jr I find it is more of a *town team*, especially with billeting.
CIS players would be in school, studying, playing or letting off steam(partying) when not in class or on the ice. They(CIS) would not be as visible in the community, at least that is what I think.
When it comes down to it, I would pick junior over CIS, but would be happy with CIS rather then no hockey at all.
CIS is heads and tails above the TierII simply because of the maturity of the players.
The major jr players add a level of expierience that you don't see at the lower level. Even if the players with only tier 2 expierience seem to excell at this level, I don't think they're as worried about the rough stuff and that gives them more room to show off the skills they do have.
You see a higher level of respect between players, simply because they have played against and with each other at some period during thier careers.
But you did say in your first sentence that you would have to say CIS and Tier 2 are equal, maybe that's what threw them off.
I find CIS underappreciated for the quality of play. I don't know if they just don't market their product as well, but plenty of great hockey played in the CIS.
I had the pleasure(?) of taking in a CIS game featuring a Toronto team and a Montreal team this past season. We stand a ridicule teams in the OP that pull in 50+ fans in a game well...this game was lucky to have 20. We make fun of teams that think in-game entertainment is comprised of "jock jams cds"...this game had dead silence. Quality of play? The top 10 teams in the OP would have been competitive in this game with the top 5 demolishing these two squads. The Toronto based team was comprised of mainly B-rate or lower players from the OP and a handful of C-rate ex-OHL players. The event looked like it was someone's hobby hockey organization. There may be a few really good teams across Canada in any one year but overall CIS is a poor homeless cousin in University hockey across North America. Anyone that thinks the CIS in Ontario is consistently quality hockey (on ice, entertainment value)is sadly mistaken. Can you get an education while attending an Ontario University and playing CIS Hockey? Sure. A chance of getting noticed beyond it for your hockey skills? Make sure you get a useful degree.
The "town feel" thing is very important to hockey and it seems that the smaller the town, the more important it is. Along with that, smaller towns seem to support their teams to a greater extent be they varsity, major junior , tier II or tier III. In the Kingston area, where the major junior team struggles to get 2000 to a game, the two men's varsity teams get 300-500 depending on the opposition and the day of the game. The Queen's football team by contrast gets 1500+. The tier II team might get an average of 200-350 (double that when the closest team to them brings 400 fans). The two ODHA tier III teams sell out (300-400) even for exhibition games while two of the three OHA tier III teams get about the same for regular season games. One of them (Napanee) was getting almost 1000 to their playoff games.
One of the bench marks of fan support is the size of the 50-50 prize. The Kingston Frontenacs prize is about $700.00, the Vees is about $400.00 and during the playoffs, the Napanee raiders was about $1500.00. (regular season was $500.00)
Now for some "quality of play" observations. My opinion only of course.
Most major junior teams would match up well against most CIS teams.
Most tier II teams would lose to most CIS teams.
There are some CIS teams that would lose to some tier II teams.
There are some major junior teams that would lose to tier II teams.
There are tier II teams that would lose to tier III teams.
There are some CIS teams that would also lose occasionally to tier III teams.
All in all this is an important discussion given the proposed fate of the North Bay tier II team. Their situation may be a bit unique given that fact that they would not only be competing for fans but also sharing an ice surface. There may well be other financial issues at stake (the rink board advertising has been mentioned). It is always a sad day for hockey when a team is forced to fold for any reason. In this particular case, the entire league may be in jeopardy which is a tragedy.
Mats Naslund (Login Mats_Naslund) Registered Members
Re: Tier II vs CIS???
May 6 2008, 9:19 AM
That's exactly it, the league could be in jeopardy. Sure it will carry on the year after, but then what? Good news for the NOJHL is that the Soo Indians could be returning under the name the Michigan Soo Eagles, barring USA Hockey approval.
I'm wondering how a team like Villanova is able to share a rink with York Universities team?
If the CIS team and Tier II team were to coincide, it would make for a dandy of a double header. Say around 2/3 you have the CIS game, leaving time for the teams to get back for classes on Monday and then have the Tier II team after. Charge maybe $20 or $22 for both games.
Just of the top of my head, some NHLers who went the CIS route are Jody Shelley, Steve Rucchin and Mathieu Darche. Can anyone think of anymore?
The Villanova /York situation is unique in that the sheer size of the university coupled with the population of the area almost eliminates competition for viewers.
It is a rare situation for a player to go the CIS route to the NHL.
PM87
I think part of the reason for your bad experence is you went to games in toronto and montreal.Both citys really are not well supported anything below the nhl.Cis hockey on ontario is not all that bad at all.In ottawa we have 2 cis teams and 4 tier 2 teams.The cis teams draw good crowds and that will get better.The tier 2 teams out draw the cis team but with time i think that may change.
K2four the size of the 50-50 draw determines fan support. come on fronts, raiders, vees, I know for a fact the vees don,t even have a 50-50. teir2 all the way
Cedarhouse, yes that was my point. The size of the 50-50 is clearly an indication of fan support which is why I made the statement. The Fronts get 2000 to a game and the 50-50 is $700.00. The Raiders get 800 and the 50-50 is $1500.00. The math is pretty simple.
Tier II is great hockey but there are teams in the OPJHL that struggle and one can't help wonder if the point of view of people who suggest that there needs to be fewer teams should be explored further. Face it, in smaller markets or extremely large markets, there is a saturation in terms of fan support.
The demands that some higher level teams make on the lifestyle of players has caused some to look at other alternatives be that a lower tier or a geographical move or other things. Not every player who currently plays tier II is looking to move on in hockey but they are all looking to move on in life. This can often mean playing CIS hockey or taking post secondary schooling without playing at all.
Many of us know of extremely talented players who for one reason or another are not playing at a level that matches their talent. They all have their reasons but one thing shines through it all and that is their love of the game. If it is not fun anymore why play? A team that recognizes the priorities of other factors such as education and family will have more contented players. Education can be high school, college, university, technical training and apprenticeships. It can even be the start-up of a personal business.
This is off topic a bit for this thread but a factor none the less.
