Talk:List of ice hockey leagues

Level of calibre

I think the only person who realy considers the ECHL a "higher caliber" of hockey than the CHL or the UHL is the ECHL itself and the ECHL fans that have been brainwashed by their PR machine. They might have a better league front office and a union, but the players are pretty much equal.

Could we please refrain from listing leagues that haven't played any games. Ex: According to its website: the Canadian Professional Hockey WAS scheduled to start in 2004. Is it still on for next season? Is there any press about it? Any venue leases signed? Any actual teams? Anyone can register a domain name and declare that they are forming a league. This article isn't titled "List of Rumored Ice Hockey Leagues". And how far down do we let this go? It looks like we're listing regional pickup leagues. We have to draw a line somewhere. I play kickball in a rec league, but I don't feel the need to wikify it. Comments? ccwaters 21:40, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gods, yes, please. It's like the hype with the "new" WHA, down to someone wikifying it into a "major" league and putting down a list of "Interested Players." That's not a serious encyclopedia entry, that's the gossip column from The Hockey News. Accomplished fact is one thing, wish fulfillment another. User:Ravenswing 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Damn... just hours after I post this we find the WHA popping up again and someone else insisting on a baseballesque A-AA-AAA classification. At this point I'm asking myself what should we revert back too, or should I even bother???? ccwaters 05:22, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Keep reverting. Fight the good fight. – flamurai (t) 06:44, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

USHL

USHL is NOT considered major junior in the United States...it is considered normal Jr A "Tier 1", as NAHL is considered Jr A "Tier 2" 66.99.53.29 15:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SEHL

What's this about the SEHL reforming for this season? I can't anything that suggests that's happening. It looks like they tried to regroup for last season but only managed to round up 2 teams: Tupelo and Birmingham (Pelham). Something tells me its dead. ccwaters 11:14, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

CHL: amateur or professional?

Aren't Canadian Junior leagues professional? Those players get paid - why would they be classified as amateur?

Zubizuva 16:01, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They are Hockey Canada leagues. Hockey Canada only governs amateur hockey.[1] They only get paid a stipend that averages $60 a week, not a salary.[2] I admit it's a gray area because the NCAA considers major junior teams professional for the sake of eligibility, but it's splitting hairs to put them under professional. The players cannot make a career out of playing in the CHL because of the age limitation. It's intended as the top level of amateur hockey. – flamurai (t) 19:54, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I knew it was something that could be argued either way. I was going by NCAA declaring junior player inelligible.... I just wanted some input before I went off and changed it. Zubizuva 28 June 2005 04:00 (UTC)

The NCAA only considers them professional for the sake of Scholarships. They can however, still play in the NCAA if they have played in the CHL. --Djsasso 28 June 2005 04:08 (UTC)

Same League, different name

The Western Canada Hockey League and Western Hockey League (professional) were the exact same league with only a name change. Do we need to list them as separate entries? Masterhatch 27 August 2005

Junior B, etc

Would it be possible to build/reference some sort of article about the "Junior"/"Senior" A/B/C variants of hockey leagues in Canada? As an ignorant American, I had no idea that "Junior B" was an equivalent (roughly, as I am starting to understand it) of college-level hockey amateur teams... but paid? You understand my confusion, I hope. I'm searching for clarity here, and you seemed like the folks to know... -- nae'blis _(talk) 21:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a plan, but let me give you a precis. "Major Junior" leagues run from (roughly) ages 16-20, and are pretty much feeders into pro hockey. They aren't pro teams, per se (not according to the NCAA, anyway, but that hasn't always been their take), but the players receive stipends. Junior A are the top level junior teams that aren't in the OHL/WHL/QMJL troika. Junior B & C are lower levels that either feed into the Junior A or college programs. "Senior" leagues are fully adult loops; technically, the NHL and the various minor pro leagues are all "senior" leagues, as is the local beer-and-pretzels leagues running out of your hometown hockey rink. The best of them (the "Senior A" loops) are organized into regional leagues and are heavily stocked with former pro and college players. Ravenswing 21:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NCAA

Is it necessary to list out all the conferences in both Division I and Division II/III? No other leagues have conferences listed. It seems to me that there should just be two entries on this article, one for Division I and one for Division II/III. DII and DIII should be listed together I'm guessing due to the very low number of Division II teams and also that DII/DIII play each other.Limasbravo 15:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would gather the guys that play in DII would object to being lumped into DII ;)-

Beyond that, the separate "conferences" are in fact leagues. We don't clump Canadian major junior teams into a generic "Hockey Canada" label, however much HC is an umbrella organization much alike to the NCAA, nor do we compact the CHL/UHL/etc teams into a bloated "Low Minors" category. Is there a reason why listing the conferences is onerous? Ravenswing 11:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What division II? There hasn't been any Div II conferences in at least 10 years. Not sure the of the exact time frame, but there were just a handful of schools during the 90ies, and the last championship held was 1999. [3] ccwaters 13:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Division II teams still exist, there just is no Division II championship due the small amount of them. The ECAC Northeast division has four of them (So. New Hampshire, Stonehill, Franklin Pierce, and Assumption). And yes, they're leagues. Terminology, my bad. I guess they should be kept then (Rats, I forgot to sign my name last time)Limasbravo 15:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[4]: Never noticed that before. So, those four plus St. Anselm (ECAC East) are it? What makes them Div II? Do they give out scholarships? Are they just stragglers that haven't made the switch up or down?. ccwaters 16:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[5] : Here is a good link to see the NCAA teams/Divs. I would say until there are no more DII teams out there we should at least recognize the fact that there are teams playing DII —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Khoogheem (talk • contribs) 19:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I really don't know about the circumstances, but I'd immagine it's other athletics they are in besides hockey. I'm sure they wouldn't want to switch everything to be Division III, but them deciding to "play up" and be Division I is a huge step up. They'd have to worry about needing better facilties and other things like that. I'm not sure if D-II can give out scholarships or not. There are a number of D-II schools that "play up" right now in Division I, my favorite team the University_of_Minnesota_Duluth Bulldogs are one example. Limasbravo 13:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an RIT alum. I don't recall seeing any of the ECAC NE Div II schools come in when I was there (and RIT hockey was Div III). That's why I never noticed. RIT's schedules back then were mostly in conference ECAC West, the SUNYs, Eastern power schools (Norwich, Middlebury) and occasionally a lower tier Div I team. ccwaters 13:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United Hockey League / International Hockey League

According to the league's web site, this isn't a "renaming," but an entirely new corporate entity. The presumption so far on Wikipedia is that the league's just changed names, but is that how we want to handle it? Ravenswing 13:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you mentioned that RG. Do you have any further details as to why its a completely new corporate entity? Flibirigit 15:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Language such as "Paul L. Pickard has been named the first President/CEO of the new IHL," which wouldn't be necessary for a mere name change, as Pickard was President of the UHL, and "The Bloomington PrairieThunder, the Flint Generals, the Fort Wayne Komets, the Kalamazoo Wings and the Muskegon Fury join the league after being member clubs of the UHL during the 2006-07 season." Ravenswing 18:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I see your point, as mentioned on the web site. Does anyone know why the new league was formed, and the fate of the UHL? Was there also a similar situation when teams switched from the Colonial Hockey League? Flibirigit 05:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North American section

This should be split between Canada and the United States. There really is no reason to combine them like this, especially since the European section is divided by country. A matter of consistency. NorthernThunder (talk) 01:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This suggestion is still worth consideration fourteen years later. If there are no objections, I will attempt to undertake the reorganization by country in the near future. Spitzmauskc (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Womens Ice Hockey Leauge.

This womens leauge should be added to the list for Oceania.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Women's_Ice_Hockey_League — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.166.15 (talk) 23:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

South America?

Are there no South American ice hockey leagues? I guess it wouldn't be too surprising if there weren't, but every other populated continent is mentioned, so it's still somewhat surprising that S. America isn't there. 174.124.184.66 (talk) 03:59, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with List of ice hockey teams in the United States and Canada

The overlap with List of ice hockey leagues appears considerable. It should be merged, or more clearly differentiated. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:36, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose contextually and conditionally (with alternate suggestion). The content in the proposed merge is a list of teams while the destination is a list of leagues so to content is different. It does however have severe overlap with List of professional sports teams in the United States and Canada#Ice hockey but with the addition of the junior/amateur level teams (with the top level also listed at Canadian Hockey League#Teams). The content as it is currently written is problematic in that it has no references, but it also does not seem to violate WP:LISTN (as "List of X of Y"). The new list itself has many other problems and needs significant improvement. It also appears to be one those types of very broad lists that will be quickly out of date after a year because there aren't many pages that would have the potential to link to it and the teams and organizations frequently change on the lower levels.
In terms of improvement, I would remove all Notes columns as it is ambiguous and if it is to be used for relocations, then just have a look at American Hockey League#Timeline for the content that would be needed there. Lots of info there not relevant for a List article. There also needs to be a limit to level of the teams on the list. If uncontrolled you could get a list with every non-notable amateur team in the US and Canada, see Template:Junior Hockey for just the list of leagues in Canada B, C, and D. There are also no mention of NCAA Div III or CIS/Usport, both usually around the level Junior A or the Tier II NAHL.
Of course, if we limit it to just professional, then Redirect to List of professional sports teams in the United States and Canada#Ice hockey. While I think the the new list does appear as WP:LISTCRUFT, if taken to AfD, it may or may not be deleted in the same way that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor sports teams in the United States by city was argued. (Which in this case I would probably lean towards delete as well because of the undiscussed "List of X of Y" difficulty in deciding on an appropriate destination). Yosemiter (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yosemiter, you make sense. Do you want to have a go at it? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps when I get a bit more time. However, I would be interested in other's opinions on other redirect possibilities. "List of X of Y" articles seem very subjective and WP:LISTCRUFTy to me. Yosemiter (talk) 20:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of ice hockey leagues. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070918205804/http://www.usahockey.com/aaha/ to http://www.usahockey.com/aaha/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071108011038/http://www.usahockey.com/ussha// to http://www.usahockey.com/ussha/
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.usahockey.com/Season/TournamentStandingTab.aspx?EventID=2632&AgeDivisionID=19%2F
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060915152215/http://www.dsusa.org/ to http://www.dsusa.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]