Is it time for a change in Team USA's selection process?

First off, I'm not going to get into all the B.S. that was going on around the other threads.

Second, I was totally disappointed in Team USA in the second, and especially third periods. But that's a totally different discussion.

...which brings me to my question for all of you that follow Team USA.

For the last several years (at least), Team USA has selected predominantly players who've played with the NTDP. It seems as though the selection committee either ignores or overlooks other leagues (i.e. USHL) or simply has some bias heavily in favor of the NTDP players (present or past). This year's team had something like two players (I believe it was) who were NOT NTDP players - Okposo and Ruegsegger.

As us die-hard American hockey followers know, the USHL has grown in terms of quality and quantity of outstanding players. Furthermore, we're also seeing some very good looking kids coming out the MN HS leagues and NE preps. Yet kids from neither of these leagues are given a chance. Case and point, Ryan McDonagh. From what I understand, McDonagh was not selected for this year's team because he "lacked international experience". Then how in the world is he suppose to GET international experience if he isn't chosen or given serious consideration?

My point here is that ALL players, regardless of what junior/developmental league that they've come from/are with, the best should be considered.

Do you all feel that the NTDP-bias has to/should change? Why or why not?

Yes, absolutely. Absolutely no reason Bogosian, McDonagh, or Bowman should NOT be on the team. I'm guessing Bogosian and Bowman were stiffed for the same reason McDonagh was.

EDIT: All in all, yes the best players should be selected regardless of what league they play in or how much international experience they have. Clearly their selection process isn't working.

Yes, absolutely. Absolutely no reason Bogosian, McDonagh, or Bowman should NOT be on the team. I'm guessing Bogosian and Bowman were stiffed for the same reason McDonagh was.

As someone who spends a lot of time in Spokane, I can defintealy agree that Bowman should've been on the team. I was shocked when I saw he wasn't.

As someone who spends a lot of time in Spokane, I can defintealy agree that Bowman should've been on the team. I was shocked when I saw he wasn't.

Bowman was the least surprising guy left off the team. I highly doubt he makes the team that much better. I mean, who do you have him replace? He can pretty much only slot in as either a 13th forward or on the top 2 lines. I don't see many players he'd be able to replace up there.

Bogosian and McDonagh, however, were surprisingly left off the team. Both of whom would've been better choices than Cade Fairchild.

There definetly is some odd politics in USA hockey, however I think that todays game isn't a good indicator. I think they had a team that could have beaten Canada, but they just made a few crucial mistakes. Coaching seems to have been a problem in the past as well, if anything the coach let down the players today, not the other way around.

However, the US does need to change the way they make their team, the team is announced very early and doesn't have a late evaulation camp which I think is strange.

Bowman was the least surprising guy left off the team. I highly doubt he makes the team that much better. I mean, who do you have him replace? He can pretty much only slot in as either a 13th forward or on the top 2 lines. I don't see many players he'd be able to replace up there.

Bogosian and McDonagh, however, were surprisingly left off the team. Both of whom would've been better choices than Cade Fairchild.

That's fine. Throw him in as the 13th F, and don't take 8 D. Then, when struggling to get something going, (first two periods today), throw him out there on the PP to try to ignite something. Similar to Tavares' role early in the tourney (Czech game). Not saying he's Tavares or anything, but a similar role.

That's fine. Throw him in as the 13th F, and don't take 8 D. Then, when struggling to get something going, (first two periods today), throw him out there on the PP to try to ignite something. Similar to Tavares' role early in the tourney (Czech game). Not saying he's Tavares or anything, but a similar role.

Well, technically they took 8 D but they really took 7 and a half D and 12 and a half forwards since Summers is a swing-man who can play both.

I just fail to see how Bowman helps the team do much of anything. Yes -- the other two in Bogosian and McDonagh were head scratchers. But Bowman? Who cares?

Well, technically they took 8 D but they really took 7 and a half D and 12 and a half forwards since Summers is a swing-man who can play both.

I just fail to see how Bowman helps the team do much of anything. Yes -- the other two in Bogosian and McDonagh were head scratchers. But Bowman? Who cares?

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that then. I think he'd give them an extra punch on the PP, and could take a regular shift with little risk. And yes, McDonagh needed to be there too. Not even as a 7th D-man, he should've been a top 4 guy.

There definetly is some odd politics in USA hockey, however I think that todays game isn't a good indicator. I think they had a team that could have beaten Canada, but they just made a few crucial mistakes. Coaching seems to have been a problem in the past as well, if anything the coach let down the players today, not the other way around.

However, the US does need to change the way they make their team, the team is announced very early and doesn't have a late evaulation camp which I think is strange.

I might disagree with your point on the need to a 'late' evaluation camp.
Hockey Canada has hosted a last minute camp in recent years but I keep hearing questions about what good that camp actually does and it wouldn't suprise me if they change next year.

As for changing the selection process for the USA under 20's...Having some contrversial deletions is a GOOD THING. When Canada went through a drought in the early part of this decade we were cutting star players almost every year...but were better off in the long run because we now take a TEAM to the tourament with 4 lines that each play the kind of special roles that you need to win at a TEAM GAME.

IMO USE wasn't missing any type of PLAYER...they were missing POISE today.

The penalties USA took in comparison to the ones Canada took tell a truthful tale:\

We took penalties on infractions that occured 30 feet around our net.

USA took penalties for mental lapses and careless stickwork.

That shows who played as though they have been here before and who didn't.

That being said...There isn't JACK wrong with USA Hockey. Nothing not to be proud of as far as the players you brought to Paradubice. Just didn't quite put it together at the moment of truth.

There definetly is some odd politics in USA hockey, however I think that todays game isn't a good indicator. I think they had a team that could have beaten Canada, but they just made a few crucial mistakes. Coaching seems to have been a problem in the past as well, if anything the coach let down the players today, not the other way around.

However, the US does need to change the way they make their team, the team is announced very early and doesn't have a late evaulation camp which I think is strange.

Goaltending was this teams biggest problem from the minute the goaltenders were announced. I'm fine with Smith, though I really don't think he's anything to write home about.

I cannot believe that Joe freaking Palmer was on the team instead of Josh Unice -- who should've been the damn starter. Simply outrageous! Yes, Palmer was the golden boy for a few years... a long time ago. Since then, all he's proven is that he's a terrible goaltender.

Goaltending was the only really bad thing about this team, IMHO. Everything else was pretty much fine outside of picking Fairchild over McDonagh or Bogosian.

I might disagree with your point on the need to a 'late' evaluation camp.
Hockey Canada has hosted a last minute camp in recent years but I keep hearing questions about what good that camp actually does and it wouldn't suprise me if they change next year.

As for changing the selection process for the USA under 20's...Having some contrversial deletions is a GOOD THING. When Canada went through a drought in the early part of this decade we were cutting star players almost every year...but were better off in the long run because we now take a TEAM to the tourament with 4 lines that each play the kind of special roles that you need to win at a TEAM GAME.

IMO USE wasn't missing any type of PLAYER...they were missing POISE today.

The penalties USA took in comparison to the ones Canada took tell a truthful tale:\

We took penalties on infractions that occured 30 feet around our net.

USA took penalties for mental lapses and careless stickwork.

That shows who played as though they have been here before and who didn't.

That being said...There isn't JACK wrong with USA Hockey. Nothing not to be proud of as far as the players you brought to Paradubice. Just didn't quite put it together at the moment of truth.

7 straight gold medal appearances, and if they win, 4 straight victories makes me hope that they don't change anything about how the team is picked/prepared.

Granted, that's not what this thread is about, so I digress.

The problem with the USA NDTP is that while it has developed some great prospects over the years it has yet to really develop a great "team".

Most of the Canadian players play Junior hockey in the CHL. They play on all sorts of teams bad and good. They face all sorts of adversity over the year and know how to play in any situation. In short they are ready for anything and it shows year after year they come together in short period of time and play there roles and win consistently.

The NDTP program is about development and not about winning. They play in the NAHL or play exhibition games against college opponents but those games dont really matter. They dont face adversity and dont react well to it.

But the exclusion of CHL and players that do not come up from that program year after year is baffling to me. This was the USA's best chance to win gold I think. Canada's team was probably the weakest and I got to tell you the next 3 years Canada's teams are going to be Stacked and will take a mammoth effort from some country to beat them

We were outmatched in the defensive department. Mason is much better than Smith and the D sucked..

As for changing the selection process for the USA under 20's...Having some contrversial deletions is a GOOD THING. When Canada went through a drought in the early part of this decade we were cutting star players almost every year...but were better off in the long run because we now take a TEAM to the tourament with 4 lines that each play the kind of special roles that you need to win at a TEAM GAME.

No one said it's not, but there were a few headscratchers this year and MANY huge ones in the past. Last year, they left off Bobby Sanguinetti -- a guy who could've helped them on their mediocre powerplay.

They've left off many, many players in the past from the CHL ranks who were shut out only because of politics. The process has to chance. It absolutely has to. Otherwise, the US will continue to let down their fans and their nation as a whole.

To me, they took a much more well balanced team this year but left off THE most key position in the game -- goaltending -- in order to take a guy they've been way too loyal to in Joe Palmer.

There has to be a big change.

7 straight gold medal appearances, and if they win, 4 straight victories makes me hope that they don't change anything about how the team is picked/prepared.

Granted, that's not what this thread is about, so I digress.

The team is already picked before that evaluation camp though. They announce the team at the end of that camp...but the players who make the team make it on merit they display before that camp.
Eg: Angelo Esposito making a token trip out to Calgary this year.

First off, I'm not going to get into all the B.S. that was going on around the other threads.

Second, I was totally disappointed in Team USA in the second, and especially third periods. But that's a totally different discussion.

...which brings me to my question for all of you that follow Team USA.

For the last several years (at least), Team USA has selected predominantly players who've played with the NTDP. It seems as though the selection committee either ignores or overlooks other leagues (i.e. USHL) or simply has some bias heavily in favor of the NTDP players (present or past). This year's team had something like two players (I believe it was) who were NOT NTDP players - Okposo and Ruegsegger.

As us die-hard American hockey followers know, the USHL has grown in terms of quality and quantity of outstanding players. Furthermore, we're also seeing some very good looking kids coming out the MN HS leagues and NE preps. Yet kids from neither of these leagues are given a chance. Case and point, Ryan McDonagh. From what I understand, McDonagh was not selected for this year's team because he "lacked international experience". Then how in the world is he suppose to GET international experience if he isn't chosen or given serious consideration?

My point here is that ALL players, regardless of what junior/developmental league that they've come from/are with, the best should be considered.

Do you all feel that the NTDP-bias has to/should change? Why or why not?

Yes there needs to be a change. A few years ago it seems that the bias against the kids who played Jr A in Canada was worse. Not sure if it's my perception.

Not sure why the powers that be feel it's a slap in the face if they cut someone they had in their NTDP program. They have to understand that there are different paths for everyone.

That being said, there had to have been some better puck moving defenseman than what this team had. Too much hesitation and puck holding by this D

You would have to think that Bogosian and McDonagh could have made a difference.

They'res been some questionable omissions in the past too (Bobby Ryan?)

I do not think they change anything. Yeah i would have liked to see other players in there. But to say they are taking the wrong players. We very easy could go through this thing with one loss. Does that mean that a McDonaugh alone would have won us gold. Or Sanguenetti last year would have hepled us beat Canada. We are not a bottom team at theses tournies. One guy is not going to change that.

If we won today and won gold. No one asks these questions. If we start finishing 5th and 6th year in year out. Its time for a change. But not now.

Flynn was a longer shot. But he was one of a few people that did not look scared today. Schroeder was the young american prodigy, but he proved his critics wrong and can play the game with older competition. As long as guys like Parise, Lee, Okposo make it out of the USHL and Shattucks i have no problem with going with the old and current u18 guys.

There was alot of interesting players that could have went

Drayson Bowman and Colin Long the number 3 and 1 scorers in the WHL
Josh Unice
Ryan Mcdounagh

some would have crucified Brooks for starting Craig and keeping Eruzione, but that worked out OK

they know more about hockey and the players involved, on and off the ice then 99.95% of the people here (myself included). i trust their judgement. it sucks the US lost, but someone has to lose

No one said it's not, but there were a few headscratchers this year and MANY huge ones in the past. Last year, they left off Bobby Sanguinetti -- a guy who could've helped them on their mediocre powerplay.

They've left off many, many players in the past from the CHL ranks who were shut out only because of politics. The process has to chance. It absolutely has to. Otherwise, the US will continue to let down their fans and their nation as a whole.

To me, they took a much more well balanced team this year but left off THE most key position in the game -- goaltending -- in order to take a guy they've been way too loyal to in Joe Palmer.

There has to be a big change.


I wonder if your not suffering from a case of '49th Comp-arallel'?

You feel as though USA disappointed the entire country by NOT getting to the Golden Game?

Thats not fair to the players.

At the risk of sounding arrogant: The ONLY country that is disappointed with anything less than GOLD is Canada. There are lots of obvious reasons why Canada EXPECTS to win every year. Bottom line is its our game...really...but USA has an excellent program and you can't tear it apart based on one bad game agianst the leaders of the Hockey Empire.

Why is anyone surprised about USA's result They continually do NOT take the best players. They take the players in good favor with them. I said before the tournament they didn't have the team to beat Canada but they may have if they took the pure BEST players.

Leave politics to the politicians, leave it out of sports.

p.s nice to see the Canadian arrogance still going strong.

I wonder if your not suffering from a case of '49th Comp-arallel'?

You feel as though USA disappointed the entire country by NOT getting to the Golden Game?

Thats not fair to the players.

At the risk of sounding arrogant: The ONLY country that is disappointed with anything less than GOLD is Canada. There are lots of obvious reasons why Canada EXPECTS to win every year. Bottom line is its our game...really...but USA has an excellent program and you can't tear it apart based on one bad game agianst the leaders of the Hockey Empire.

You DO sound extremely arrogant with that last statement. I'm sure that every American who actually knows about this damn tournament is disappointed with this loss. And they should be. This is a team that had the opportunity to knock off Canada in Canada's weak year. I am NOT overly impressed by this Canadian team and I think that better goaltending and maybe 1 or 2 small changes top the line-up would've put the US out on top.

To top it off, the coaching was extremely mediocre. I mean, who lets their team lose so much confidence and play so flat when you're down a goal or two? That's Tom Renney-esque and is simply intolerable.

And how is it "not fair" to be disappointed in a team that won their division and lost to the team ranked below them in the tournament so far? While not an upset by any means, this is a game that the US should've stayed much closer in and, IMHO, should've won. They **** it away with a horrible goaltending selection, a really bad defensive selection (I mean, is there anyone in their right mind who wouldn't have had McDonagh on the team?) and coaching that lacked any real emotion in a tight game.

I can say that there is always next year, but with this team I don't think I can, unfortunately. Call me a pessimist and whatnot, but the selections that Team USA has made time and time again really don't offer up much enthusiasm.

Why is anyone surprised about USA's result They continually do NOT take the best players. They take the players in good favor with them. I said before the tournament they didn't have the team to beat Canada but they may have if they took the pure BEST players.

Leave politics to the politicians, leave it out of sports.

p.s nice to see the Canadian arrogance still going strong.

While I certainly think that this year showed less of that (with the selections of Blum and Sanguinetti), I still have to agree. When you leave top players like McDonagh and Bogosian off along with taking a goaltender that everyone knows is just ****ing awful then you sort of know what to expect. Still, I think the US could've pulled through with better goaltending/coaching this year even if you leave the others off still.

When will the Team USA brass learn?

Why is anyone surprised about USA's result They continually do NOT take the best players. They take the players in good favor with them. I said before the tournament they didn't have the team to beat Canada but they may have if they took the pure BEST players.

Leave politics to the politicians, leave it out of sports.

p.s nice to see the Canadian arrogance still going strong.

It might SOUND arrogant to say but Canada is setting the bar at the U-20's 'RK'. Thats all I am saying.

Team USA beat everybody BUT Canada and I doubt they will change the selection process based on that.

That being said: ANY team that loses will ask questions about why certain players were left off the team or why certain coaching decisions were made. I readily admit that Canada will be beaten at some point..and when it does happen...we'll hear questions too.

You DO sound extremely arrogant with that last statement. I'm sure that every American who actually knows about this damn tournament is disappointed with this loss. And they should be. This is a team that had the opportunity to knock off Canada in Canada's weak year. I am NOT overly impressed by this Canadian team and I think that better goaltending and maybe 1 or 2 small changes top the line-up would've put the US out on top.

To top it off, the coaching was extremely mediocre. I mean, who lets their team lose so much confidence and play so flat when you're down a goal or two? That's Tom Renney-esque and is simply intolerable.

And how is it "not fair" to be disappointed in a team that won their division and lost to the team ranked below them in the tournament so far? While not an upset by any means, this is a game that the US should've stayed much closer in and, IMHO, should've won. They **** it away with a horrible goaltending selection, a really bad defensive selection (I mean, is there anyone in their right mind who wouldn't have had McDonagh on the team?) and coaching that lacked any real emotion in a tight game.

I can say that there is always next year, but with this team I don't think I can, unfortunately. Call me a pessimist and whatnot, but the selections that Team USA has made time and time again really don't offer up much enthusiasm.


No question the game was there for the taking.

Personally I am really not big on looking at a one game-winner-take-all scenario as the gauge for who was/wasn't a good pick for ANY team. You asess your team on the total tournament. From Day 1 until the last time they are together as a group.

THIS USA team did NOT quit. They bungled 2 line changes and had a 30 second fire drill that cost them 2 G's but they won some battles and went out fighting.

No question the game was there for the taking.

Personally I am really not big on looking at a one game-winner-take-all scenario as the gauge for who was/wasn't a good pick for ANY team. You asess your team on the total tournament. From Day 1 until the last time they are together as a group.

THIS USA team did NOT quit. They bungled 2 line changes and had a 30 second fire drill that cost them 2 G's but they won some battles and went out fighting.

agreed 100%. Down 4-0, they fought until the game was over, playing for nothing but pride at that point.

I just fail to see how Bowman helps the team do much of anything. Yes -- the other two in Bogosian and McDonagh were head scratchers. But Bowman? Who cares?

Team USA should care. Bowman has one of the best releases of any player in the WHL and has 27 goals in 38 games in a defensive league to show for it. If Mitch Wahl and Drayson Bowman make the team and play on the same line then there is no telling what kind of offensive potential the USA team could have had. Wahl may have been a stretch but if they took one they should have considered the other.

If they would have had a selection camp they would have seen how far along Bowman has come from last season. He was impressive in our rookie camp against and with Brandon Sutter and looked like a legitimate NHL prospect. The type of puck skills that Bowman has shouldn't be left off of any WJC team. The sad part is that if he was Canadian he probably would have gotten a look in a tryout camp to see if he could add anything to the roster.

To say that Bowman couldn't supplant just about anybody on the first two lines aside from JVR, Okposo, and Wilson is underrating his ability. I think the kid could skate and compete. He plays all forward positions also.

Team USA should care. Bowman has one of the best releases of any player in the WHL and has 27 goals in 38 games in a defensive league to show for it. If Mitch Wahl and Drayson Bowman make the team and play on the same line then there is no telling what kind of offensive potential the USA team could have had. Wahl may have been a stretch but if they took one they should have considered the other.

If they would have had a selection camp they would have seen how far along Bowman has come from last season. He was impressive in our rookie camp against and with Brandon Sutter and looked like a legitimate NHL prospect. The type of puck skills that Bowman has shouldn't be left off of any WJC team. The sad part is that if he was Canadian he probably would have gotten a look in a tryout camp to see if he could add anything to the roster.

To say that Bowman couldn't supplant just about anybody on the first two lines aside from JVR, Okposo, and Wilson is underrating his ability. I think the kid could skate and compete. He plays all forward positions also.

It doesn't help that you're a Carolina fan who's been harping about Bowman not being on the team for a while, does it?

Bowman simply doesn't make this team much, if any, better than they already were. There were a number of issues one can take with the team selection other than Drayson Bowman.

The goaltending issue and defensive issue were MUCH larger than the lack of a one dimensional scorer.

I think the US should take a page out of Canada's program of Excellence.

They take the best player available, regardless of NCAA or CHL. They have taken kids with little or NO international experience (Cody Franson and Darren Helm last year.)

I think it also might be a culture thing. A lot of my American friends who love hockey are "Meh, its the world juniors. Big dea." where Canada is nuts about it.

You can see that its starting in the US, but the program of Excellence has been in place since the early 90's (I think)>

It takes time as does everything.

I think the US should take a page out of Canada's program of Excellence.

They take the best player available, regardless of NCAA or CHL. They have taken kids with little or NO international experience (Cody Franson and Darren Helm last year.)

I think it also might be a culture thing. A lot of my American friends who love hockey are "Meh, its the world juniors. Big dea." where Canada is nuts about it.

You can see that its starting in the US, but the program of Excellence has been in place since the early 90's (I think)>

It takes time as does everything.

The POE was started in about 96'

They do NOT take the 'best players available' though. They start building a U20 team with U18 and U17 teams and THOSE teams are skill showcase selctions...but they U20 team often takes the TOP player in each 'role' be it a checker or a scorer...it means the best stats are NOT always on the U20 team.

I think the US should take a page out of Canada's program of Excellence.

They take the best player available, regardless of NCAA or CHL. They have taken kids with little or NO international experience (Cody Franson and Darren Helm last year.)

I think it also might be a culture thing. A lot of my American friends who love hockey are "Meh, its the world juniors. Big dea." where Canada is nuts about it.

You can see that its starting in the US, but the program of Excellence has been in place since the early 90's (I think)>

It takes time as does everything.

Team USA is far, FAR too loyal to their development program (loyal to the point of being almost arrogant about it) to start dropping some players from it for higher skilled guys who took a different path. Though hopefully that changes with a few more years of missing the gold.

I think the US should take a page out of Canada's program of Excellence.

They take the best player available, regardless of NCAA or CHL. They have taken kids with little or NO international experience (Cody Franson and Darren Helm last year.)

I think it also might be a culture thing. A lot of my American friends who love hockey are "Meh, its the world juniors. Big dea." where Canada is nuts about it.

You can see that its starting in the US, but the program of Excellence has been in place since the early 90's (I think)>

It takes time as does everything.


Canada's PoE began in 1982.

It might SOUND arrogant to say but Canada is setting the bar at the U-20's 'RK'. Thats all I am saying.


Yeah, thats easy to forget at times. Canada have now lost like 1 out of the last 25 games. They can afford to build a team without loosing any in the skill department because of their depth. And every kid is used to the coverege and pressure after playing several years with allot of people in the stands et c.

After the series against the Russians everybody where gooing on and on about how poor the Russians where and how great the Canadians where. Its not really about skill or potential; its about Canada beeing built as a team, playing as a team, and on top of that, of course, having a ton of talent. Often the strongest D's infront of their net and the best goalie in the net.

If WJC teams played again 5 years later, it would be allot closer; I don't even think thats up for debate. To say that Canada got their kids "peaking" at this age is wrong, but Canada got their kids prepaired at a diffrent level then the other countrys. That makes a big diffrence.

Yeah, thats easy to forget at times. Canada have now lost like 1 out of the last 25 games. They can afford to build a team without loosing any in the skill department because of their depth. And every kid is used to the coverege and pressure after playing several years with allot of people in the stands et c.

After the series against the Russians everybody where gooing on and on about how poor the Russians where and how great the Canadians where. Its not really about skill or potential; its about Canada beeing built as a team, playing as a team, and on top of that, of course, having a ton of talent. Often the strongest D's infront of their net and the best goalie in the net.

If WJC teams played again 5 years later, it would be allot closer; I don't even think thats up for debate. To say that Canada got their kids "peaking" at this age is wrong, but Canada got their kids prepaired at a diffrent level then the other countrys. That makes a big diffrence.

The reason non-Canadian players are behind the Canadian curve is because Canadian kids are introduced to hard contact at a very early age.

The level of hitting/intensity on the ice during a PEE-WEE game in Canada (12 yrs old) would SHOCK most people not from Canada. They look like minitature solidiers.

I think it also might be a culture thing. A lot of my American friends who love hockey are "Meh, its the world juniors. Big dea." where Canada is nuts about it.

As bad as it sounds, I think winning WJC means more to the Candian kids...probably on a subconscious level anyway.

Canada population - whole country watching and scruitinizing every player's smallest move.

every other population - what's the WJC?

I think that 'breeds' the winning culture more than anything.

Goaltending was this teams biggest problem from the minute the goaltenders were announced. I'm fine with Smith, though I really don't think he's anything to write home about.

I cannot believe that Joe freaking Palmer was on the team instead of Josh Unice -- who should've been the damn starter. Simply outrageous! Yes, Palmer was the golden boy for a few years... a long time ago. Since then, all he's proven is that he's a terrible goaltender.

Well, this is just me from watching the OHL all the time, but... in that league, Smith looks like a notably superior goalie to Unice to me. I know nothing about Palmer. But if I was picking a starter, I'd be taking Smith over Unice too. :dunno:

USAhockey is a disaster. they push ntdp players because they would look stupid if the other guys beat their own guys out. which is POLITICS.i reached level 4 as a coach in the usa before i moved to canada, and have dealt with many in the upper echelon in Usahockey,and when you need something done ...forget it. everyone has to ask their immediate superiors to the point that by time your problem has passed, they return with "sorry we can't help you".
a shame really.

The reason non-Canadian players are behind the Canadian curve is because Canadian kids are introduced to hard contact at a very early age.

The level of hitting/intensity on the ice during a PEE-WEE game in Canada (12 yrs old) would SHOCK most people not from Canada. They look like minitature solidiers.

In the USA they start checking at the pee-wee level.

and the hits just keep on coming... team ontario just shut out teamUSA in the under 17 worlds for the gold. when it rains it pours.

To say that Canada got their kids "peaking" at this age is wrong, but Canada got their kids prepaired at a diffrent level then the other countrys. That makes a big diffrence.

I think that's a very good point.

To further it and stay with this thread, a kid like McDonagh has only played 15 games above the MN HS level. I love him as a Habs pick but I don't know that he can make an impact at this tournament with so little high level experience. Of the 8 d-men the US took, 2 are CHL veterans (3rd and 4th year respectively) and the other 6 are former NTDP players. Besides politics, these guys have played a higher level of hockey than McDonagh before this year.

USA Hockey probably needs to do a better job scouting, especially since they can't have a pre-tournament selection camp (too many NCAA players writing exams at the time).

But they have a few more challenges than Hockey Canada when it comes to scouting: their players are scattered in various leagues (NCAA, CHL, USHL, NTDP), and some of them play only around 15 games before mid-December.

Basically they have a summer camp and probably limited scouting opportunities before they announce their squad. Besides politics (which I don't doubt play a role), maybe part of the reason why they go with so many NTDPers is their familiarity with those kids and the knowledge that they've been exposed to higher levels of hockey for longer than kids from high schools and prep schools.

The only thing USA Hockey should care about is developing players to get drafted by NHL teams. No one cares about these U-18/20 tournaments (besides Canada).

USA Hockey probably needs to do a better job scouting, especially since they can't have a pre-tournament selection camp (too many NCAA players writing exams at the time).

I don't think scouting is really a problem for selecting the national team. They know who their best players are. They don't need scouts to know that Sanguenetti, McDonagh and co. should be on team USA. It's all favoritism and politics.

It's too bad this problem didn't happen to Canada instead. If the US WJC team was under the eye of the Canadian media and Canadian WJC fans (like the Canadian WJC is), they'd have less room to play with politics.

USA lost because they didn't take players from CHL......

and the hits just keep on coming... team ontario just shut out teamUSA in the under 17 worlds for the gold. when it rains it pours.

does the USA usually even do well at that? I know the USA usually does well in the U18 tournament...at least in the past few years

The only thing USA Hockey should care about is developing players to get drafted by NHL teams. No one cares about these U-18/20 tournaments (besides Canada).

Where do you think the biggest NHL scouting events are held? :help:

I think a number of you are missing what the topic I posed is all about. This isn't about CHL players vs. NCAA players being chosen by Team USA. This is about NTDP players seemingly being the favored choices over other developmental leagues such as the USHL.

Of the four CHL players on Team USA's roster, only Bobby Saguinetti didn't play with the NTDP. And that is part of what I'm trying to convey here. Why must a player be a current or former NTDP player to be given what looks to be the most serious consideration? I brought up Ryan McDonagh because: 1) he was a player that many felt deserved to be on the team and 2) he was another non-NTDP player. Remember, he came to Wisconsin directly from Cretin-Derham Hall HS.

Whether some of you feel that more CHL players should make Team USA is somewhat beside the question that I'm posing here. That could be a totally different discussion.


If we won today and won gold. No one asks these questions.

I was actually asking this question way back when Team USA DID win gold. Whether they finish first or dead last makes no difference to me as far as the selection process goes because I do feel that there is a certain amount of NTDP bias in the selection process. This could even go as far back as the invite list to the WJC evaluation camps that take place in August. If we could take non-NTDP kids like Okposo, Ruegsegger and Saguinetti, what is wrong with considering having more and tossing out the biases? That's all I'm suggesting.

this is why they do that.
USAhockey is a disaster. they push ntdp players because they would look stupid if the other guys beat their own guys out. which is POLITICS.... a shame really.

USA lost because they didn't take players from CHL......

Are you willing to say if the USA took more CHL players they would some how own Canada every year. The last two years Canada was our only roadblock. I do not know how that would work. Or on the flip side. If they took all CHL players and they finished last would you say to never take another CHL player again.

USA politics is not all about u-18 guys or not. Brian Lee, Taylor Chourney, Alex Goligoski, Blake Wheeler, Matt Niskanen, Drew Stafford, Kyle Okposo, Zack Parise, and would you have left off EJ, JJ, Kane, Mueller, Kessel, Skille, JVR, Schroeder. A few off the top of my head. They left of Stoa who was having a good year for the gophers his freshman year, Mike Hoeffel has been the hardest worker and has had the best chances for us this year. James O'Brien did not make the team and he is another u18 alum.

If you win you picked right. When you lose you pick wrong. Look back at all the Canada posts after the loss. They got it wrong...blah blah. If you win gold are you going to second guess and feel that if your omissions were there it would have turned out better. When team USA was rolling. No one questioned anything. Its all a bunch of fair weather fan moaning.

In any tournamant ever played. The best team does not always win. Upsets happen. We could play canada tommoroow and win. Thats why the stanley cup is best of seven. Not one and done. If USA comes away with one loss. I ll take that no problem.

I think a number of you are missing what the topic I posed is all about. This isn't about CHL players vs. NCAA players being chosen by Team USA. This is about NTDP players seemingly being the favored choices over other developmental leagues such as the USHL.

Of the four CHL players on Team USA's roster, only Bobby Saguinetti didn't play with the NTDP. And that is part of what I'm trying to convey here. Why must a player be a current or former NTDP player to be given what looks to be the most serious consideration? I brought up Ryan McDonagh because: 1) he was a player that many felt deserved to be on the team and 2) he was another non-NTDP player. Remember, he came to Wisconsin directly from Cretin-Derham Hall HS.

Whether some of you feel that more CHL players should make Team USA is somewhat beside the question that I'm posing here. That could be a totally different discussion.



I was actually asking this question way back when Team USA DID win gold. Whether they finish first or dead last makes no difference to me as far as the selection process goes because I do feel that there is a certain amount of NTDP bias in the selection process. This could even go as far back as the invite list to the WJC evaluation camps that take place in August. If we could take non-NTDP kids like Okposo, Ruegsegger and Saguinetti, what is wrong with considering having more and tossing out the biases? That's all I'm suggesting.

I am sure you see as much WCHA hockey as i do at least. How many freshman have major impacts? And of them how many do it i nthe first half? I remember when Wheeler was invited. He had some USHL games under his belt and 3 years at Breck. Not an impressive resume. Guys like Niskanen, Lee made out as freshman. But i would say they did not look all that great. Both players might have decent impacts at the NHL level. The u-18 teams as you know plays colleges and internatioal tourneys. I forgot who said it. But at the MN high school hockey tourney. Players feel over whelemed at the X. Now place them against better teams in a foreign country. Maybe McDonagh crumbles.

There is a clear bias. I feel its becasue the USA feels those players have the experiance needed to win. Give them 3 months playing together and playing a tough schedule. I say yeah pick a lot differently. But to put a team together in a few weeks. It could look a lot worse with more talent.

i think that Team U.S.A at times turns their back on American players that choose to play in the OHL /CHL vs the NCAA.thats a huge part of the problem imo.

sorry to focus this on one player, but will McDonaugh be considered a lock for next year's squad with a year of university under his belt and being 19?

You would have to think that Bogosian and McDonagh could have made a difference.

They'res been some questionable omissions in the past too (Bobby Ryan?)

You guys should really all give your heads a shake!

BOGOSIAN is a 17 yr old D-man - he would not have made a difference to this team other than sitting on the bench for most of the tourney! This is not a tourney for 17 yr old D-men! It might have been good to have him for experience, but next year I am sure he will be a 'no brainer'.

BOWMAN would not have been a difference maker either! I mean Canada doesn't even have the points leader from WHL, heck, he wasn't even invited to the selection camp! Now I'm not saying Bowman shouldn't have been invited and next year I think him and Wahl should definitely be on the plane to Ottawa.

You guys should really all give your heads a shake!

BOGOSIAN is a 17 yr old D-man - he would not have made a difference to this team other than sitting on the bench for most of the tourney! This is not a tourney for 17 yr old D-men! It might have been good to have him for experience, but next year I am sure he will be a 'no brainer'.

BOWMAN would not have been a difference maker either! I mean Canada doesn't even have the points leader from WHL, heck, he wasn't even invited to the selection camp! Now I'm not saying Bowman shouldn't have been invited and next year I think him and Wahl should definitely be on the plane to Ottawa.

The points leader from the WHL is Colin Long an american

as a habs fan I was very disapointed to learn McDonaugh was left off the team.
I was looking forward to getting to see him play.

TSN commentator Gord Miller actually commented on the fact that he should have been on the team. (miller said it when there was about 8 minutes left in the game.)

Team USA is far, FAR too loyal to their development program (loyal to the point of being almost arrogant about it) to start dropping some players from it for higher skilled guys who took a different path. Though hopefully that changes with a few more years of missing the gold.

well I dont think thats going to change even after this tournament. They will probably continue to go this route as long as they are in contention for a medal. If they win on Saturday nothing will change. They will keep doing what they are doing with the thought that hey we were 60 minutes away from competing for the gold medal.
Its going to take a monumental collapse one where they finish 6th or 7th say, maybe even more then 1 junior tournament in a row where they might start looking at things differant on how they put together a team built to win the Gold and not just a team built to compete for a medal.

Canadiens fans love this thread!

This could even go as far back as the invite list to the WJC evaluation camps that take place in August. If we could take non-NTDP kids like Okposo, Ruegsegger and Saguinetti, what is wrong with considering having more and tossing out the biases? That's all I'm suggesting.


Just trying to get into the brains of the USA Hockey decision makers

Do you think USA Hockey thinks

-Quality players would not go NDTP if they knew they could make the USA squads no matter which route they chose

-USAHockey feels they would be admitting that they aren't the only path for a USA player (ie USHL, CHL, High School, etc)

-Why would USA Hockey continue funding a program that in the end only a few NDTP members made and players who took different routes filled the roster?


Maybe you know this Oilers Chick , How many players turn down the NDTP? I think I've heard that Parise turned them down but not sure if that's something that happens every year.
If they do get turned down by a handful every year and some of those are top level players, I would think that now we are talking a higher level of recruitment, much like college now. I could see how USAHockey decision makers in that position could make promises to players about future USA team considerations.

Just throwing some things out. I find it hard to believe that a USA hockey decision maker isn't thinking in the back of his/her mind about many of these things

Goaltending was this teams biggest problem from the minute the goaltenders were announced. I'm fine with Smith, though I really don't think he's anything to write home about.

I cannot believe that Joe freaking Palmer was on the team instead of Josh Unice -- who should've been the damn starter. Simply outrageous! Yes, Palmer was the golden boy for a few years... a long time ago. Since then, all he's proven is that he's a terrible goaltender.

Goaltending was the only really bad thing about this team, IMHO. Everything else was pretty much fine outside of picking Fairchild over McDonagh or Bogosian.

Unice might well be a great goalie but he has the luxury of playing behind a very strong D in Kitchener. On top of that The Rangers have traded for the guy the US faced in net, Steve Mason.

Smith is a known commodity. It was not his best game but I believe that given the choice of Unice or Smith, Smith was the right guy.

Not sure why McDonagh was left off. That was peculiar.

As an outsider I am always surprised by the political aspects under which this team is chosen. For years it has appeared that any players who left to play in the CHL were punished by being left off the team. Or if they made the team, could not get on the ice. Some of these guys, like Bobby Ryan are playing games in the NHL now.

The only thing USA Hockey should care about is developing players to get drafted by NHL teams. No one cares about these U-18/20 tournaments (besides Canada).

That and maybe winning some tournaments.

The POE was started in about 96'

They do NOT take the 'best players available' though. They start building a U20 team with U18 and U17 teams and THOSE teams are skill showcase selctions...but they U20 team often takes the TOP player in each 'role' be it a checker or a scorer...it means the best stats are NOT always on the U20 team.

It was started well before that. Kariya was part of the POE.

It was started well before that. Kariya was part of the POE.

1982.

In the USA they start checking at the pee-wee level.

In Canada it's minor atom. Watch any 9 year old AAA game in Canada and you'd be shocked at the competitiveness and physical play.

I strongly believe the US program has to go away from trying to take so many of their players from the USNDP and start taking the players that would make the best team possible. US players that are playing in the CHL that are clearly good enough to make the team (i.e. Bobby Ryan) don't get a spot because they betrayed the US hockey program and came to play in the evil CHL (even though it may be what's best for the players' development).

I strongly believe the US program has to go away from trying to take so many of their players from the USNDP and start taking the players that would make the best team possible.
They could start by getting rid of the USNDPT which is a waste of money to begin with. Then there wouldn't be as much political BS when it comes to picking the team.

1982.

Not THAT Program of Excellence. I'm talking about when Hockey Canada took over the U17 tournament from Quebec. That was in 96'(??)

In Canada it's minor atom. Watch any 9 year old AAA game in Canada and you'd be shocked at the competitiveness and physical play.

I strongly believe the US program has to go away from trying to take so many of their players from the USNDP and start taking the players that would make the best team possible. US players that are playing in the CHL that are clearly good enough to make the team (i.e. Bobby Ryan) don't get a spot because they betrayed the US hockey program and came to play in the evil CHL (even though it may be what's best for the players' development).

But that's just recently changed. It used to be PeeWee.

I agree with the culture. Ever since I can remember our family would watch the WJHC. I even remember some of our neighbours watching. We would go out with our skates and play during the intermissions.

But that's just recently changed. It used to be PeeWee.

I agree with the culture. Ever since I can remember our family would watch the WJHC. I even remember some of our neighbours watching. We would go out with our skates and play during the intermissions.

I think the point about how Canadian Minor Hockey is often extremely intense is worth looking at irregardless of whether were in contact hockey at 10yrs old or 12 yrs old.

The guys who are playing for the U20's were playing HIT HOCKEY when they were 10 yrs. old. Even if they were atom age they were probably all playing pee-wee anyways! Thats what happens when your an elite player.

But they also played on TEAMS that were taught to play together and tranined to win. I know a lot is said nowadays about 'having fun' and good sportsmanship...thats very important...but youth sports should also allow for hard core,aggresive hockey because thats what THIS game requires in order to get the most out of it.

I know for a fact that recent American kid was told that he if went to the CHL rather than going to the NCAA he would be left of their WJHC team. The kid chose the CHL, won major awards and is now in the NHL, but was left their WJHC roster. This speaks volumes as to why the US hockey system will never work accept for the odd year.

That and maybe winning some tournaments.

they usually do well at the U18 at least

I think the point about how Canadian Minor Hockey is often extremely intense is worth looking at irregardless of whether were in contact hockey at 10yrs old or 12 yrs old.

The guys who are playing for the U20's were playing HIT HOCKEY when they were 10 yrs. old. Even if they were atom age they were probably all playing pee-wee anyways! Thats what happens when your an elite player.

But they also played on TEAMS that were taught to play together and tranined to win. I know a lot is said nowadays about 'having fun' and good sportsmanship...thats very important...but youth sports should also allow for hard core,aggresive hockey because thats what THIS game requires in order to get the most out of it.

ewwwwww

ewwwwww

It's in the dictionary dewd.

As for the guy that said it's not a tourney for 17-year-old defencemen..arguably the three best defencemen in the tournament have yet to be drafted - Doughty, Schenn and Hedman, one being 17 and the other barely turned 18.

Bogosian and McDonagh would have helped that defence corps I think.

I think the point about how Canadian Minor Hockey is often extremely intense is worth looking at irregardless of whether were in contact hockey at 10yrs old or 12 yrs old.

The guys who are playing for the U20's were playing HIT HOCKEY when they were 10 yrs. old. Even if they were atom age they were probably all playing pee-wee anyways! Thats what happens when your an elite player.

But they also played on TEAMS that were taught to play together and tranined to win. I know a lot is said nowadays about 'having fun' and good sportsmanship...thats very important...but youth sports should also allow for hard core,aggresive hockey because thats what THIS game requires in order to get the most out of it.

Ages for when body checking is introduced is different for each branch of Canadian hockey. There are only three branches that allow checking at Atom.

I think there are benefits to starting body checking but I also think there are benefits to starting body checking later.

I've heard that Hockey Canada is looking at some changes.

http://www.hockeycanada.ca/6/8/6/2/index1.shtml

It's in the dictionary dewd.

As for the guy that said it's not a tourney for 17-year-old defencemen..arguably the three best defencemen in the tournament have yet to be drafted - Doughty, Schenn and Hedman, one being 17 and the other barely turned 18.

Bogosian and McDonagh would have helped that defence corps I think.

perhaps you missed this part:

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

The problem with usa hockey is much deeper than selection process.
The coaching is marginal.
The NTDP is not as good as it could be.
The wrong people are running usah.
The list is endless and until they are willing to listen, usah is going nowhere fast.

Just trying to get into the brains of the USA Hockey decision makers

Do you think USA Hockey thinks

-Quality players would not go NDTP if they knew they could make the USA squads no matter which route they chose

-USAHockey feels they would be admitting that they aren't the only path for a USA player (ie USHL, CHL, High School, etc)

-Why would USA Hockey continue funding a program that in the end only a few NDTP members made and players who took different routes filled the roster?


This is the meat of the discussion right here. As long as the NDTP exists, they're going to use that program for the team. If they only use 6 players from the program to field the team...then what would be the point of spending millions on the program??? If anything is ever going to change, it will be the day the program is scrapped.

Does anyone have some dollar figures of what is exactly spent on the ntdp each year?

This is the meat of the discussion right here. As long as the NDTP exists, they're going to use that program for the team. If they only use 6 players from the program to field the team...then what would be the point of spending millions on the program??? If anything is ever going to change, it will be the day the program is scrapped.

The NDTP is not the problem. The problem is they need to expand it. USA has too many outlets for players under 20 years of age. There is Shattucks, USHL, u-17 and u-18 teams, high school and going to canadian juniors. The program was set up to bring the best USA players into one team and let the best talent all be in one place before college. Still many of USA's best do not follow that route. The u-18 team is pretty dang solid year in and year out. They do play a good amount of NCAA games. But i bet if you took the u-17 team, a MNHS all star team, a MASS, a MICH team, Shattucks and another team of players from the rest of the country. The games would be close.

If USA really wants to change and start winning junior level tourneys. They need to make a league where all the talent is. I do not see that happening. There is a lot of tradtion to play in the MNHS league. As i am sure there is in other states. For many kids the USHL is a lot closer to home than going to Mich. Shattucks is just a top notch prep school any way you look at it.

Guys like Oshie, White, Ness, Niskanen, Youso, Marvin. All play or played in northern MN. All stayed 4 years of high school. Not all future NHLers but top players for their age range. All could have played in better leagues.

So how do they change it? They cannot play regular games against CHL teams. That would most likely ruin everyones NCAA eligability. You cannot have a six team league. I do not know what the answer is. But like i said if they want to make USA hockey better. Rounding up talent and brining it together is always a good start. Would be nice if the USHL really blew up. But i find it hard to imagine the USHL drawing alot of players from out east. At least with the NDTP they have the draw of wearing a USA jersey. With only four from MN on the u 18 team and one on the u-17 team. The NDTP does not draw well from MN. Canada has it allready set up like that. When you are good enough. You play on your drafted junior team. USA is not set up like that. With the few exeptions of Canadians that want to play i nthe NCAA.

Some good points Gopher but the NTDP is one of the main inhibitors (the CHL is the other) for a league like the USHL to try and set its self up as the main draw of talent in the U.S.

This is an interesting comment I came acorss recently

rec'd this email this morning. If the facts are correct, it is an interesting look at the "results" of this program.

The Colorado Springs people run hockey in this country. They are great spinmesiters.


US had 2 WJC medals in 11 years prior to Ann Arbor.

Since Ann Arbor 2 medals. Eleven years of ANN Arbor and the same number of medals. Is this a successful program? Is this an improvement? Not statistically.

Bill Parcells says , "you are what your record says you are." 2 medals previous, 2 medals after. No change.

The highest scoring Ann Arbor developed forward in NHL last year was Pat Eaves at , I think 239th in scoring? After 11 years of development, that is the best they can do? Whitney(1 year in Ann Arbor), Carle & I think Liles were in top 239. This is success?

Being rated 7th in hockey playing world, is success after 11 years?

What Fortune 500 company would be considered successsful with this record?

I have no problem giving credit where credit is due. Where does one give credit with this record?

Points are not everything. We all know that, but where are the creative , threatening offensive players, that they "developed". They did not "develop", Higgins or Parise etc. Kane, he was that way prior to going to Ann Arbor.

Our country hockey is dumbed down.

1/2 way point of NHL Top 100 Scoring List 2007 - 08

Players born 1980 or later (1980 1st Ann Arbor age group)

Canada

24 players born 1980 or later

Russia

6 players born 1980 or later

Swede

4 players born 1980 or later

Czech

5 players born 1980 or later

US

6

5 players who did NOT attend Ann Arbor

1 player, Kane, attended 1 year

Slovakia

1 players born 1980 or later

Slovenia

1 players born 1980 or late

Part of the problem is that when you select the under 17 team of 16 year olds they're right off the bat not the best possible team of 16 year old American players. As someone said, players from Minnesota rarely choose to play for the NTDP. There are other factors as well, like kids choosing the CHL.

They definately don't make up the best possible team of American players as the next two to three years pass. Some kids that were selected lag behind in development (guys like Jimmy Fraser for example) and others who weren't considered at 16 for the NTDP or who chose to play elsewhere develop into top level players. The brass need to recognize this. No one cares who came from where when you win.

And the coaching is awful. Two years in a row with great round robins, only to come up small against Canada in the semifinal and three losses (all due to failures to show up) in four bronze medal games is unacceptable. Three times these kids are moping around when they can still win a medal? I'm putting that on the coaches.

i can state with certainty that the usahockey program will continue on as is until the quagmire of administrative hogwash in colorado is gotten rid of. why would ANYONE send their kid to ann arbor when they will develop better in shattucks or ontario?
the ntdp is a GREAT IDEA on paper. but until the BEST players are committed to it . it will NEVER produce the best team.but just try telling that to colorado.
p.s their coaching clinics are a joke too.

Usah had a chance to go in a different direction a couple of years ago with the departure of Ron Degrario but instead they brought back Dave Ogrean. I guess they thought the old ideas that did not work before will start to work soon.

I realize Ogreans mandate was abit different as to "growth and retention" but still no bold moves to progress forward. There are some great ideas already out there. Did this guy not learn anything from his time at usa football?

The NDTP is not the problem. The problem is they need to expand it. USA has too many outlets for players under 20 years of age. There is Shattucks, USHL, u-17 and u-18 teams, high school and going to canadian juniors. The program was set up to bring the best USA players into one team and let the best talent all be in one place before college. Still many of USA's best do not follow that route. The u-18 team is pretty dang solid year in and year out. They do play a good amount of NCAA games. But i bet if you took the u-17 team, a MNHS all star team, a MASS, a MICH team, Shattucks and another team of players from the rest of the country. The games would be close.

If USA really wants to change and start winning junior level tourneys. They need to make a league where all the talent is. I do not see that happening. There is a lot of tradtion to play in the MNHS league. As i am sure there is in other states. For many kids the USHL is a lot closer to home than going to Mich. Shattucks is just a top notch prep school any way you look at it.

Guys like Oshie, White, Ness, Niskanen, Youso, Marvin. All play or played in northern MN. All stayed 4 years of high school. Not all future NHLers but top players for their age range. All could have played in better leagues.

So how do they change it? They cannot play regular games against CHL teams. That would most likely ruin everyones NCAA eligability. You cannot have a six team league. I do not know what the answer is. But like i said if they want to make USA hockey better. Rounding up talent and brining it together is always a good start. Would be nice if the USHL really blew up. But i find it hard to imagine the USHL drawing alot of players from out east. At least with the NDTP they have the draw of wearing a USA jersey. With only four from MN on the u 18 team and one on the u-17 team. The NDTP does not draw well from MN. Canada has it allready set up like that. When you are good enough. You play on your drafted junior team. USA is not set up like that. With the few exeptions of Canadians that want to play i nthe NCAA.

Good post, Gopher. One thing, as far as scheduling/competition goes, that I'd like to see changed is moving the NTDP out of the NAHL and into the USHL. Then you'd have two of the best American junior leagues going head-to-head. Aside from collegiate and international competition, all of the NTDP competition is coming from the NAHL, the "junior league" that they are associated with. Why not try and move them into the better USHL instead? I realize that it may never happen and probably won't go over too well with USA Hockey, but this would probably be the closest thing to actually getting all of the best American-born (and some non-American born) players together.

Someone asked earlier about players entering the NTDP. The NTDP invites a lot of kids. Many will accept to play in the NTDP and many will not. Some very good players don't even get invited.

Some of those who do accept to play in the NTDP, also leave for a variety of reasons. It's not much different than any other league in that regard.

Having said of all this, does this mean that the NTDP features ALL of the US's best players? No. Does it mean that the NTDP should be scrapped? No. It develops players quite well, but IMO there does need to be changes made. Where I think it should start (or partially begin at) is on the financial side. Far too much of the money for the various programs funded (fully or partially) funded by USA Hockey is tied up in the NTDP. Last estimate was something around 40%. If USA Hockey's mission to support ALL hockey across the US, specifically developmental leagues, then the funding should go across the board.

Also, as a number of people have alluded to earlier, the hierarchy in terms of who makes the decisions, financially or otherwise, also needs to change. USA Hockey should not only about the NTDP. Though, they do support other leagues, it doesn't seem to be not nearly that of the NTDP and that is part of the problem.

Some good points Gopher but the NTDP is one of the main inhibitors (the CHL is the other) for a league like the USHL to try and set its self up as the main draw of talent in the U.S.

This is an interesting comment I came acorss recently

Not to nit pick too much. But when guys like Kessel, Mueller, Kane, JJ and EJ all get a few season under their belt. The programs alum will look alot better. By then maybe Skille, JVR, Schroeder, and a few more will be breaking in.

Best case senerio. I'd like to see the program field more of a summer camp/league. Where they could get a hundred or so kids from all around. Putting less pressure on MN kids to stay. But where all the USA talent could be. Then dump alot of money into a league. If they put a team in International Falls, Duluth, Moorhead, Minneapolis it would be easier to get players away from high school. Better competion would draw players from all over. Even bringing in players from europe maybe earlier that want to play NCAA.

They cannot play regular games against CHL teams. That would most likely ruin everyones NCAA eligability.

A bit off topic, but why does the NCAA have this particular bug nesting in its posterior?

I find it an utter joke that pampered football and basketball players living in separate dorms, enjoying state-of-the-art training facilities, flying charter to road games, assisted by dedicated academic tutors, often illegally favored by deep-pocketed alumni, are deemed pure-as-the-driven-snow amateur athletes, while some Canadian prairie kid living with billets many hundreds of miles from home, riding the bus, sometimes all night, to and from road games, attempting to maintain grades in high school or college, getting $100 a month or whatever for gas and walking around money is deemed a professional.

God forbid the NCAA sullies its exalted reputation by suffering such vulgar individuals in its midst.

The hypocrisy is rank. It absolutely thrills me every time a U.S. player succeeds after choosing the CHL over NCAA hockey. Good on you Modano, Hatchers, Mueller, Kane, Yandle, and hopefully many more to come.

A bit off topic, but why does the NCAA have this particular bug nesting in its posterior?

I find it an utter joke that pampered football and basketball players living in separate dorms, enjoying state-of-the-art training facilities, flying charter to road games, assisted by dedicated academic tutors, often illegally favored by deep-pocketed alumni, are deemed pure-as-the-driven-snow amateur athletes, while some Canadian prairie kid living with billets many hundreds of miles from home, riding the bus, sometimes all night, to and from road games, attempting to maintain grades in high school or college, getting $100 a month or whatever for gas and walking around money is deemed a professional.

God forbid the NCAA sullies its exalted reputation by suffering such vulgar individuals in its midst.

The hypocrisy is rank. It absolutely thrills me every time a U.S. player succeeds after choosing the CHL over NCAA hockey. Good on you Modano, Hatchers, Mueller, Kane, Yandle, and hopefully many more to come.

IMO it goes alot deeper than just CHL kids get paid. Recruting is not an easy thing. The way it is now. Coaches know where they can get players from. If you open the door to pulling CHL players. It's a whole new can of worms. Players jumping leagues would ruin both the CHL and NCAA. Then there is this senerio. Trade me or i ll go play NCAA. CHL players comitting to an NCAA team only to back out. It happens on small scales. With players leaving comittments. But this would put it on a large scale. They have to narrow it done some how.

The NCAA as a whole has a rule that if you get paid as a pro. No matter what amount you can lose your amaetur status. Its is getting better. I think it was Darnel Autry that was not allowed to be in a comercial because he would get paid. He was Northwesterns RB a while back. It would have lost him the ability to play football. Think he was a performan arts major too, so it really hurt him. Later i am pretty sure, some old Iowa WR, was allowed to run track while he was a memeber of the Atlanta Falcons. So it is getting better. It was not the same sport was the NCAA ruling. Once NCAA players sign an agent they are done, that will never go away. Thats what killed Clarett.

I would guess coaches would never go for it. Their jobs are hard enough. Adding in another couple hundred players with great abilities would make recruiting a nightmare. It would not be bad if they could nab players over 20 from the CHL. That at least would weed out a few guys. In the end. I am glad guys like Evan Kauffman can walk on to the gophers and earn a scholarship. He is a local kid. If you recruit heavy from Canada; you would lose a lot of those players in the mix. This years gopher team is all Minnesotians. That would never happen with CHL recruiting.

On a small scale the USHL did play games vs the QMJHL this year. Having regular scheduled games would be crossing the line.

While I consider it a huge honor to be considered or selected for the NTDP, I personally do not think it is a smart move. This team carries 12 forwards and 8 defensemen, and although they preach team play and conditioning, it can turn creative players into robots. If you are a top line player on your midget minor team, and go to the NTDP and play on the 3rd or 4th line, and trap every game, it doesnt help your individual skill. If your that calibre, I think it would benefit most players to go to the CHL or the USHL because you will likely be placed in a better situation to succeed. You will likely play against better players and teams, and in most situations receive better coaching then teh NTDP can provide. Who would ever want to play on a team with 8 defensemen either?

I see next year as basically the final verdict on USA Hockey if they are really as political as we all think. Many of the top 1989s and 1990s did not commit to the program, choosing major junior instead. It will be tough to keep alot of these players off the team.

Drayson Bowman - 89
Colin Long - 89
Eric Tangradi - 89
TJ Brennan - 89
Tom McCollum - 89
Josh Unice - 89
CJ Stretch - 89
Shane Harper - 89
Nick Palmieri - 89
AJ Jenks - 90
Mitch Wahl - 90
Phil McRae - 90
Zach Bogosian - 90
Tristan King - 90
Tyler Myers - 90
Adam Comrie - 90

IMO, I don't think it's fair to label the results in a one and done tourney (more or less) like the WJCs as an evaluator of the merits of demerits of the USNDTP. As a program, it has it's place, but the problem is it shouldn't be the de-facto supplier of the bulk of the talent on the team that competes in the event. One year (2004) it worked really well, and that's probably the worst thing that could have happened, because of the false sense of security it created (the program really does work!). The selection process needs to get out of the hands of the few that orbit the program, and into the hands of a cross-section of American evaluators from across the board.

How many players turn down the NDTP? I think I've heard that Parise turned them down but not sure if that's something that happens every year. If they do get turned down by a handful every year and some of those are top level players, I would think that now we are talking a higher level of recruitment, much like college now.

I know that David Fischer turned down an invite to the NDTP, not saying he should have made the team this year as his development has been slow going from the USHS to the WCHA. I can see why they would take Fairchild over him as he's clearly better offensively, although if they wanted a defensive defensemen, it's Fischer that's on the ice in the final minute of the game when Minnesota is trying to hold a one goal lead. (unless there's a PP then Fairchild will be on the ice as he's on the top PP and Fischer's on the 2nd PP unit)

I don't follow American hockey to much and I was shocked McDonagh wasn't on the team. Another guy I thought would've made it was Kevin Shattenkirk? What's the story on him? has his development been underwhelming this season?

Bogosian and McDonagh, however, were surprisingly left off the team. Both of whom would've been better choices than Cade Fairchild.


I disagree here. Cade Fairchild had a decent year going for U of Minn., a great selection camp in August (based on Kekklienins take on the camp - he was much more impressed w/ Fairchild then w/ Cole), and a good tournament. There were a number of times that the anouncers talked about his positive play. And in watching the games he played well.

Should McDonagh have been on the team? Sure, but look at someone like Blum or Cole. (Dont pick on the late rounder because he was a late rounder and played for the USDP).

I think the big difference between Canada and the US is in 1 area and that is between the Pipes. You look at the loss last year and this year, we are being eliminated by the team that typically wins it all - and last years game should have gone the other way. But the difference is in Net. We just have not had a game breaker (someone who can steal a game, since Montoya). That is a big issue.

Further, when you are looking at players, it is really difficult to create separation between yourself and another top player. What I mean by this is, is McDonagh a big, noticable upgrade over Cole or Blum that his inclusion will count for a win? (And you can't look back on this tournament w/ hindsight). If the committee feels that players are equivolent, then you will always go w/ the known player.

I do not think the loss was a inclusion or exclusion of a player or 2. Unless you area really looking at a goalie. The loss last year, shoot that came down to a shoot out - and I felt we deserved a win. This year, the team imploded and Canada exploded. McDonagh would have made no difference in the outcome, because he is one player in 20.

Finally, OC, I understand that you feel the USND takes a lot of money from hockey USA, but I would argue if everyone was a piece of the pie it would creare a couple of problems. 1. Who decides who sould be included in this special group. 2. The funding is limited and can not support everyone. By the time you have divided it up, no one winds up w/ much and therefore the results are very limited. (Here is an analogy - I have $1000 and give $10.00 to 100 people, who really has enough to do something with, where if I were to give $500 to one and 100 to 5 others, those 6 actually see benefit that can be measured.)


Lastly, life is cyclical. There are ups and downs in all programs. While the U20s are down, but playing well, the U18s/17s have done very well on an international level.

Those who were invited, but declined NTDP invitation in recent memory off the top of my head.

Zach Parise
Danny Fritsche
Josh Hennesey
Robbie Schremp
Chris Bourque
Bobby Ryan
Steve Spade
Joey Ryan
Dev Heshmatpour
Andrew Andricroupolos
Bobby Sanguinetti
Kyle Okposo
Tyson Dowzek
Jason Reese
Matt Smyth
Nick Petrecki
Tommy Cross
Mitch Wahl
AJ Jenks
Zach Bogosian
John Henrion
Steve Whitney

Why is anyone surprised about USA's result They continually do NOT take the best players. They take the players in good favor with them. I said before the tournament they didn't have the team to beat Canada but they may have if they took the pure BEST players.


This post would have merit if there were specific players a) that should have been there but were not and b) players on the team that didn't belong in the tournament.

After the US breezed through the opening round games I saw little criticism. Therefore, it's a bit disingenuous to criticize the process now. At least without specific players who should have been on the team.

The Americans will not be a dominant country in this tournament until they start putting the best team they possibly can. Right now they do not. They blacklist players who abandon their NDP. They're also not the only ones guilty...how many countries only take a few, if any, players who jump to the CHL, even though they're better than what they have?


Canada ices the best team they feel they can, and that a reason why they win. You see Canadian fans worry about who isn't there, but they worry about that based on merit. You see American fans worry about who isn't there based on politics.

The Americans will not be a dominant country in this tournament until they start putting the best team they possibly can. Right now they do not. They blacklist players who abandon their NDP.....

Sorry I missed this when you posted it a few months ago, but are there specific instances of players who have been "blacklisted" by USA hockey?

It would seem that several CHL players - Sanguinetti, Dustin Brown, and others - have played for the team through the years.

And, as has been pointed out on Chris Warner's website for the past few years, the difference between Canadian junior and both US junior and college hockey may not be the gap that once existed. There have been several players who, for whatever reason, struggled for a spot on their university team only to head up to either the OHL or Quebec League and put up outrageous scoring numbers.

And in terms of top quality players, it is tough to knock what the US development program has produced.

Maybe it's just that the US does not place the same importance on this tournament as other countries do since their regular seasons are taking place and some coaches may not want to release their players?

Sorry I missed this when you posted it a few months ago, but are there specific instances of players who have been "blacklisted" by USA hockey?

It would seem that several CHL players - Sanguinetti, Dustin Brown, and others - have played for the team through the years.

And, as has been pointed out on Chris Warner's website for the past few years, the difference between Canadian junior and both US junior and college hockey may not be the gap that once existed. There have been several players who, for whatever reason, struggled for a spot on their university team only to head up to either the OHL or Quebec League and put up outrageous scoring numbers.

And in terms of top quality players, it is tough to knock what the US development program has produced.

Maybe it's just that the US does not place the same importance on this tournament as other countries do since their regular seasons are taking place and some coaches may not want to release their players?


First of all, the U.S. brass gets whatever players they want for the WJC's. Often, they're pulling four or more players from schools like Minnesota and Michigan. I'm sure that doesn't make Lucia or Berenson happy, but that's the way things go. I think the only request is if a player is taken, he plays (no bench warmers). Second, I think the selection process boils down to one idea: If player "A" from the NCAA/USNTDP/USHL/U.S. High School is virtually identical to player "B" from the CHL, let's take player "A" he's typically a more known commodity to the U.S. brass. The issue this year (in particular), is a bulk of the superior U.S. talent (especially at forward and in goal) is from the CHL. We'll find out how political a process it really is.

The issue this year (in particular), is a bulk of the superior U.S. talent (especially at forward and in goal) is from the CHL. We'll find out how political a process it really is.

In fairness, I have only looked at the players invited to camp and not all of the American players playing in the CHL so this may be a slanted survey, but in looking at the players invited it would appear that there will be a good mix of both.

In goal, in fact, the only non-CHLers are the two youngsters: Mike Lee and Brandon Maxwell - so I'd imagine both goalies will be Major Jr players.

Looking at the rest of the invitees in terms of where they were drafted by the NHL clubs (admittedly, not an exact science due to the disparity in how teams evaluate players), it would seem the college/US junior guys have a slight edge - both in terms of first round picks and top-three rounds.

On defense, there will be six college or college-bound players who were first round (4 more in the 2nd or 3rd) picks compared to two CHL first rounders (1 in the next two).

At the forward position, one of the CHL players was drafted in the first round (James O'Brien) compared to three of the US-college bound players (van Riemsdyk, White and Wilson). Four CHL guys were drafted in the 2nd and 3rd rounds compared to seven college or college-bound guys.

Where there may be disparity is in some of the older guys who were undrafted - all four of whom were college or college bound players - Scooter Vaughan, Jack Connolly, Justin Florek, and Drew LeBlanc.

As for the seven players who were not eligible for this year - the split is 5-2 to university-bound players with only Ryan Bourque and Tyler Johnson pursuing the CHL in Spokane.

At any rate, it should be a very interesting week in Lake Placid next month.

Just to follow up - it appears there are two highly drafted US players currently playing Major Junior who were not invited to the camp. Not sure about the particulars in the cases of any of the three - any info is appreciated.

Frm this past draft, Kelowna's defenseman Tyler Myers (Houston, TX) was taken with the twelfth pick overall. Last year, the Quebec League's TJ Brennan (Willinboro, NJ) was drafted by the Buffalo Sabres with the first pick in the second round.

Other top three rounders were - last year, Nico Sacchetti (Dallas 2nd-50th overall) and in this past draft - Derek Stepan (Rangers 2nd-51st), Justin Daniels (San Jose (3rd-62nd), Corey Fienhage (Buffalo 3rd-81st), Steve Quailer (Montreal 3rd-86th) and Detroit's Max Nicastro (3rd-86th).

Admittedly, I've seen none of these guys play. And because an NHL team selects them doesn't make them better or worse than any of the other players.

But is there anyone here that deserves a shot on the team?

From this past draft, Kelowna's defenseman Tyler Myers (Houston, TX) was taken with the twelfth pick overall.


My mistake. Didn't realize that he played for Canada last year and is thus ineligible for US anymore in IIHF tournaments. Was born in Texas but moved to Canada when he was 10.

I'm just curious why don't we have a selection camp closer to the WJC's? wouldn't it be nice if you put all of these guys in one place, during the season and take the guys who perform the best? Does anyone honestly believe Cade Fairchild would've outplayed Zach Bogosion? lol...and that's why there is no selection camp closer to the tournament..

I'm just curious why don't we have a selection camp closer to the WJC's? wouldn't it be nice if you put all of these guys in one place, during the season and take the guys who perform the best? Does anyone honestly believe Cade Fairchild would've outplayed Zach Bogosion? lol...and that's why there is no selection camp closer to the tournament..

I thinks its because most of the ncaa kids would miss their final exams.

I thinks its because most of the ncaa kids would miss their final exams.

The Canadian kids always attend the Canadian tryouts.