KTF

Wow, what a well thought out response..don't even know how to reply to such deep insight and analysis.... Well something tells me I overstayed my welcome here. I understand that in this day and age having a countervailing position to the general (group think) consensus is quite frowned upon on American college campuses. I would hate to get in trouble with the though police down there, especially during my annual fall trip to the Big House to see Michigan play. To yzerman 19, you seem like a well informed poster who is not quite so provincial minded, even though I'm sure you feel NoDak is better, perhaps you could continue to educate some of these college fans about the merits of the CHL.

Again I will say I saw much more time and space in the NoDak - Quinn game than the Memorial Cup game...on NoDak's first goal, 2 on 1 numbers down in the slot, where is the Q Defense?? Gersich all alone was allowed two quick shots, his second goes in. On the 2nd goal, horrible goal tending from Garteig , No. 6 Toews from Q utterly misses his check and lets Boeser easily pass him by for the goal after a misplay from Garteig. 3rd goal, absolute confusion from Q D, Boeser easily takes puck away and passes it to an unmolested wide open Caggiula for the goal. 4th goal, Boeser on a one on one battle going to the net spins around and passes to yet again a streaking and wide open Caggiula for the goal. 5th goal. after Garteig gives up a fat juicy rebound, Poganski all alone shoots it in.

Those two games were in essence try out games for the Canada hopefuls while the CIS finally got to play on a big stage with a ton of scouts watching...the games meant everything to both sides playing, were hard fought and intense and of course proved that the CIS was in no way superior to what some posters on HFBoards thought...after all the college boys were flat out dominated in the second game Tkachuk and Mathews complimented each other quite well...who knows, maybe of Boeser was as good as Tkachuk instead of his inferior he might of got to play more with Mathews.. Your last point was merely a biased opinion...I'm still waiting for you all to explain the mighty NoDak depth over London..

Hmmm, the best CIS players squared off against a portion of the better CHL players in a pre exhibtion WJC tune up for the Canadian World Junior team. Now keep in mind that the best Canadian CHLers sat out the games because their spot on the team was assured and that many top American, Russian, Swede and Czech CHLers were of course not there. The CIS all star team was of course several years older and in fact many of them were ex CHL players and were from teams like UNB, Alberta and the like that generally do well against NCAA competition. So the best from the CIS faced off against the not so best from the CHL and according to these so called sages from HFBoards, the CIS should of mopped the floor with the much younger and smaller CHL players right.? Well not exactly, the first game ended in a tie but the CIS did win in a shoot out. The CHL players then blew the door off the older, supposedly stronger and more experienced CIS players 5-0 the next game. So much for the CIS being better...imagine if the CHL actually had all their best players playing...

Dvorak earned PP time, Schmaltz did not..Marner did much better than Boeser and had the same PPG as Schmaltz... UND is older but I've proven that age isn't anything and for the upteenth time show me this better depth!

Fact, Dvorak centered the 2nd line while Schmalts centered the third...Fact, Tkachuk was on the first line. If it was only about chemistry then why were two players that were part of the best line in college hockey on the third line and why did Tkachuck finish with a point total that equaled that of Schmatz and Boeser combined?? Spin it how you want but when the two best players on NoDak played with the two best players from London, the NoDak players were second fiddle..

I understand that, and I've already been over the line combinations, my point was and remains (and is quite valid) that London's top line would have been among if not the outright best line in all of NCAA hockey.

CHL players are not paid to play. They receive a monthly stipend to offset living expenses in much the same way college athletes now receive cost of attendance subsidies. Sorry for high jacking your thread, but it always made me laugh the way many college fans, who for the most part are completely unfamiliar with the level of play in the CHL dismiss the league as being second rate. In terms of development, it is hard to argue against the CHL route but there are many players who would be better served going through the college route. The fact is, that if you are an elite prospect that is almost guaranteed to have a NHL career then the CHL is the preferred option, now that doesn't mean its the only option however. If you are a border line NHL prospect then the NCAA offers you more advantages, with the greatest being the time it allows you to develop. You can enter college at 18, 19 or even 20 and give yourself a full four years to strengthen your body and hone your skills and then hit the pros as a very mature and well rounded 23-24 year old. I happen to know more than a few agents from various agencies and that is generally the advise they give. The high end prospects are steered toward the CHL while the rest are told the merits of the D-1 route. Now of course many elite prospects will take the NCAA way while many marginal ones will go on the CHL path but by and large that is the way it is increasingly playing out over the past decade or so.

Fact is that Mathew Tkachuk was tied with Auston Mathews as the leading point getter on the team and Dvorak was the teams second line center and had more than double the points of Boeser while Schmaltz centered the third line...small sample size but what evidence do you have that would suggest that NoDak's top line is better...let me know when the crickets stop chirping.

Ahh thanks hon...

The assertion made was that London's top line was a cut below that of NoDaks but the best two London players, when placed together with the two best NoDak ones, proved to be better.

Not at all, just that the two London Knights were on the top two lines while the two best NoDak players rounded out the bottom lines.

I understand I will never convince any NoDak fan otherwise, but I will correct the many misconceptions college hockey fans have of the CHL, the first being that the league is comprised of mainly a single talented but very young line of 16/17 year olds and a bunch of weak 17 and 18 year old players rounding out the other lines..nothing can be further than the truth and while you may never believe that London would beat NoDak, you at least have to concede that London is a very deep and talented team that would be among the best NCAA D-1 teams.

I was comparing him to two players on your own team that had rather difficult freshman seasons yet came back to be regular contributors during their sophomore campaigns. Chyzyk and Simonson are not considered busts so why should Piccinich?? And who exactly is the second NCAA "bust" on London's roster?? Believe what you want about your Dcore being too much to handle but that is only your opinion, I don't see how they would manhandle the London Knights as so many of you hope they would. I think I've more than proven that age isn't everything. You can make all the excuses you want about exhibition games but there is no way that any college program takes the NTDP lightly and treats it as a no show game. The NTDP has shown time and time again that a bunch of 16 and 17 year old high school seniors can go up against players 5 to 6 years their senior and compete. If exhibition games are meaningless and do not tell us anything then I suppose the Canadian CIS teams are just as good as NCAA clubs.. Many of you here dismissed London's talent saying they had no depth but their top line would have easily been the top line on any college hockey team including North Dakota. Their second and third lines could easily have handled playing and thriving in the NCAA. Some posters have tried to claim that London's defense is weak. Tell me, who on NoDak's vaunted defense has the talent and skill as a Olli Juolevi? The young (18 year old weakling as so many of you like to describe CHL players) stud is a sure fire top 10 pick in this year's draft and will most likely crack a NHL roster in four months time. You think a young 18 year old Dman like Mattinen would struggle against NoDak and other NCAA competition simply because of age? The kid is talented enough to be drafted this year (ranked 139) and has the size and strength to compete against any grown man in college hockey. He stands at 6'3 and weighs in at 230, and he's quite mobile and has a cannon of a shot. Oh by the way, this player is on the bottom pairing on the Knights Defense roster. Victor Mete, there other youngster had full ride scholarship offers from B.U., Notre Dame and Michigan and stands an excellent chance of being a late 2nd/high 3rd NHL pick this summer. If he were American he easily would have been on the NTDP, you know that team that plays against D-1 teams and actually wins some games...

Pretty harsh to say Piccinich was a bust since you really don't know how he would have did on B.U.s team as a sophmore this year if he did not leave...I mean I'm not quite sure what the deal was with John Simonson freshman season where he only played 22 games and registered 5pts but he did manage to play in all the games this year and tripled his point totals. Even Chyzyk didn't have the best freshman season did he? Also scouts some something in Piccinich to make him a 4th round NHL pick. Explain more about the second NCAA bust?