Yesterday, Craig Woods posed the question of whether college or major juniors
(CHL) was the better training ground for future NHL players.  In my opinion,
from a strict hockey standpoint,  there is no definitive answer to this
question.  Most NHL scouts and coaches would rather have their young
prospects play major junior rather than go to college.  However, many
collegians have enjoyed successful NHL careers.  A few current NHL players
that immediately come to mind are Chris Chelios & Gary Suter (Wisc); Adam
Oates & Darren Puppa (RPI); Brian Leetch (BC) and Guy Hebert (Hamilton).
 This year, at least four former collegians are vying for the NHL Rookie of
the Year award: Paul Kariya (Maine); David Oliver (Mich); Jim Carey (Wisc);
and Blaine Lacher (LSSU).
 
The average length of an NHL career is less than five years.  Assuming that a
prospect is fortunate enough to play in the NHL, by his mid to late 20's his
career has ended.  What does he then do for the rest of his life?  To me that
is the key question to be asked by anyone facing the dilemma of Juniors vs.
College.  Last week, I attended the Hockey Night in Boston All Scholastic
Awards Dinner for New England Prep and High School Seniors.  Tim Taylor of
Yale was the keynote speaker.  He best summed up this issue by saying that
"there is life after hockey" and you had better prepare for it.
Several NHL scouts have told me that if a prospect has the talent to play in
the NHL, he will ultimately play there, whether he goes to college or whether
he goes to juniors.  Certainly, there are more junior players in the NHL than
collegians.  In part, however, that is because virtually all Canadian hockey
players choose the junior route rather than the collegiate route.  In life,
it is important to keep open as many options as possible.  When a sixteen or
seventeen year old hockey player chooses to play major junior, he foregoes
his collegiate option and is gambling that he will be a professional hockey
player.  On the other hand, when the player chooses the college route, he may
still have the opportunity to play professional hockey, but if he doesn't
make it to the NHL, he still has a college degree.
 
To me, the answer to Craig Woods question, is a no brainer.  I agree with
Arthur Berman's comments that "Juniors are a trap for naive 16 year olds (and
sometimes parents with stars or dollar signs in their eyes)."  While some CHL
teams provide a "college package" to players who do not sign a professional
hockey contract (not necessarily an NHL contract) by the age of 21, virtually
none of the U.S. born players in the CHL, ever receive those benefits.
 
In today's USA Today, Kevin Allen's article about Brian Holzinger, touches on
the college/junior issue and talks about the NHL's perceived bias against
college and in favor of major juniors.
 
It would be interesting to hear the views of some of the collegiate players,
or their parents, who subscribe to hockey-L.
 
Jack Berenzweig