HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Sat, 23 Jan 1999 17:40:31 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (55 lines)
I remember starting a similar dicussion back in the fall of 1995 on this
list, after noticing a surprising number of players who would turn 25 by
the end of the year.
 
Then I realized something.
 
Just about of the top players that I watched through the years -- both
within Hockey East and the league in general -- were at most 1 year removed
from high school.
 
A lot of people pointed out then that many of these players are at schools
like Boston University which can afford to recruit the younger, more
talented players, compared to other schools which find more talent
available in the Junior leagues.
 
However, as someone else on the list already pointed out, these younger
players still didn't -- and don't -- have a problem dealing with the
"older, bigger kids." In most cases, they excelled over the older players
who had more playing experience, more muscle, more body weight, and perhaps
more aggression.
 
In fact, of all the great ex-college NHL stars we've discussed here, an
extreme few were older players.
 
So if that's the case, then what's the big deal? If the "older and bigger
kids" have so much of an advantage, then why don't we see it too often? I
don't recall an 18 year-old Mike Grier backing down from anyone. Ever. Saw
quite a few 20-somethings doing everything they could to avoid his hits.
 
Nor do I recall Cal Ingraham playing tenatatively against overwhelmingly
large players. I recall a lot of players not being able to touch the guy.
 
 
To top it off, of all the players I've known over the years, none ever
mentioned anything about older players. Why? Hockey is hockey. You need to
be able to defeat an opponent, period. Doesn't matter if he's bigger,
older, and more experienced. You still gotta beat him.
 
Most players at the college level are used to years competing against all
ages. The young hotshot players have generally played most of their lives
with kids older than them simply because their peers couldn't play on their
level.
 
Likewise it continues on into the pros the same way; there are rookies
under 21 facing off against players over 35. Nobody has a problem with that.
 
So when you're talking about 18-25 year olds, how much difference can there
really be?
 
 
greenie
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2