A battle that has been brewing for over a year has finally spilled over this week when the National Women’s Hockey team, very publicly, called out USA Hockey for its inequitable treatment of its women’s players. Male and female athletes from across the globe and across the athletic spectrum have come out in support of the USA Women’s team.
As a neutral party, we can provide a fair, unbiased platform to talk about some of the known facts of this discussion without taking sides or getting caught up in back and forth. We will analyze registration numbers, the NTDP vs. National Women’s Team funding and the question of who bares the responsibility.
By the Numbers
Looking at the data from 2015-2016 we see that male registrations were 469,507 while female registrations were 73,076. That is more than a 6:1 male to female ratio.
From the 2014-2015 season to the 2015-2016 season we saw the rate of increase in male registrations was up 1.31% year over year. One of the main reasons men’s hockey was over 1% increase was from adult hockey which equates to 34% of male registrants had an increase of 2.18%. If we eliminate adult hockey, then male hockey is growing at a rate less than 1% year over year.
Compare those number to growth of female hockey. Looking at the same years (2014-2015 and 2015-2016) we see that, as a nation, girls hockey is growing at a rate of 4.78%. The adult female hockey registrations have only grown at a rate of 1.46%. Therefore, opposite of the boys data, we see adult hockey is slower in growth than youth hockey. Removing adult hockey which accounts for 25% of female hockey registrations, we see that the youth hockey level is actually growing at a rate of 5.6%.
What is most compelling are the growth rates for girls hockey at the youngest levels. 6 and under is growing at a rate 13.32%, and girls aged 7-8 is growing at a rate of 9.09%. There were more new registrations to girl’s hockey in 2015-2016 ages 6 and under than for boys ages 6 and under, 7-8, 9-10 and 11-12 combined. Yes combined!
There is an argument that there are a lot more boys playing than girls so there will naturally be a boys bias when the player ratio is 6:1. However, if we look at the growth rates, girls hockey is a much faster growing sport than boys and at current rates it won’t be long before that numbers gap tightens.
USA National Women’s Team vs. National Training Development Program
The financial statements that USA Hockey provides are very vague. We could not figure out exactly how much is being spent on girls hockey or boys hockey from public record. However, one of the big discussions has been USA Women’s National Team and the National Development Program. Given that there is a lot of confusion over this topic we’ll break down both teams, their players and their purpose.
US Women’s National Program:
The women’s national team is a combination of current college players (9), NWHL (10) and Independents (4). Therefore, every player on these teams is over the age of 18 and they have matriculated out of USA Hockey sponsored leagues to move towards professional leagues or NCAA leagues. The goal of this program is to win in international competition.
National Development Program:
There are two national teams in boys hockey, the U17 NTDP team and the U18 NTDP team. These programs have been rumored to cost approximately $3.5 million per year to run. However, USA Hockey is not fronting that bill; the NHL is. The other piece to consider is that these are 16 and 17-year-old players who are not old enough to play in the NCAA or NHL/AHL/ECHL. The goal of this program is to develop the country’s top prospects in preparation for the NHL and future Olympics.
If you look deeper at what these programs are trying to accomplish the women’s program is far less expensive and it has much greater success. In world championships in the past 10 years the women’s have 7 gold medals and 3 silvers. That means they have played in the championship game every year. If we compare that to the world championship performances of the men’s team, they have zero golds, zero silvers and two bronze over the same span. Men’s have other international events, the U18 World Championships, the U20 World Juniors, 5 Nations Tournament, and several others where they have had higher levels of success.
Looking at the ultimate prize as the Olympics, here again US women’s hockey has outperformed men’s considerably. The first year of women’s hockey in the Olympics was in 1998 so the US team has been to 5 Olympics and have one gold medal, three silvers and a bronze. Compare that to men’s hockey which has accumulated zero golds, two silvers and zero bronze over that time.
The NTDP vs. Women’s National Junior program argument however, is a bit misplaced because they are entirely different programs, funded differently and have a different end goal. NTDP isn’t specifically designed to win world juniors and Olympic medals, they are in large part designed to provide the ultimate training and development program for top caliber US players to then go on to the NCAA/CHL and ultimately the NHL.
However, where the women’s team would have a strong argument would not be in the finances, seeing how it’s an NHL sponsored program, but rather in their success versus NTDP/National Team/Olympic Teams success.
Who bares the responsibility
Members of the women’s team would like to be paid more in order to adequately train and prepare for the World Championships and the Olympic Games. However, their “employee” argument could create an issue for the 9 NCAA players who would have to walk the delicate line of amateur vs. professional as it relates to NCAA guidelines. Also, the compensation disparities have more to do with NHL vs. NWHL or CWHL than it does USA Hockey. The caliber of players on the men’s World Championship teams and Olympics teams are likely multi-million dollar earners where NWHL stars don’t make enough money to focus on their hockey careers exclusively. Therefore, there is more strain on women’s players to be able to stay in shape, continue to develop their skills and train for these international competitions without the necessary funding. However, is this the fault or the responsibility of USA Hockey? Some would argue yes, some would argue no. There is an argument the NWHL needs to do more to help promote women’s professional hockey to fans and sponsors in order to pay players full time salaries. There is another argument that USA Hockey needs to provide an opportunity for these women to compete at the international stage the way other Olympic athletes are funded through their governing bodies.
USA Hockey could be a major sponsor of the NWHL both financially and in terms of promotion of the league. USA Hockey could help foster sponsorships where major companies can help fund the women’s hockey programs. Lastly, USA Hockey could talk to the NHL to allocate some of the resources they receive for player development to go towards women’s and girls’ hockey. There is a very important connection between youth hockey and the NHL; not just for the player pool, but also the future fans and people interested in the sport.
While becoming an “employee” of USA Hockey is probably not the best route, the governing body could be doing more to provide financial opportunities for its world class female athletes.
USA Hockey Fallout
The one thing that USA Hockey does not want to happen is happening. Parents, players and fans are starting to question USA Hockey; where their money is going and if they are doing a good job.
At the youth levels, by all measures, it appears USA Hockey is doing an excellent job. The ADM practice model has driven down costs and helped improve the overall skill set of players. The coaching clinics, officiating clinics and overall structure of youth hockey in the US is well organized and efficient. With a decline in the number of babies being born, the economy, rising costs of the sport and sports specialization it is really impressive that USA Hockey has had increases in player registrations year over year.
Where USA Hockey struggles is not at the youth levels but at the highest levels of the game. Whether its NTDP, or National Women’s Team or the Men’s Olympic Team. The country has more resources than any of its hockey competitors, they have the second highest number of youth hockey registrations, they are the only country with a national development program dedicated to developing its top prospects and they have the NHL in their backyard. Yet with all of that, the Olympic men’s team hasn’t won a gold medal since 1980! NTDP could very well go without a single first round NHL pick this season, whereas American players like Callan Foote (WHL), Casey Mittelstadt (MN HS), Keith Petruzelli (USHL), Ryan Poehling (MN HS/NCAA) and Kailer Yamamoto (OHL) could all find their way into first round without going that route. Lastly, Americans (while growing) still only make up roughly a quarter of the NHL.
At the end of the day, because of the work of the Women’s National Team, the spotlight is now upon USA Hockey. How they respond will not only be felt by the National Team players, but the trickle down will make its way to local community ice arenas to the five-year-old girl who is at learn to skate while her parents try to figure out if she should play hockey or basketball.
Closing thought: $1,000,000 divided by 23 athletes is $43,478. With all the attention on women’s hockey right now, what a great opportunity for the business community to step up and show their support of equality in athletics!