Steady decline in youth hockey participation in Canada raises concerns about the future of sport

[Arthur Morgan]

families cant even afford their homes and food. hockey is doomed moving forward. only the rich kids will play.

 

[Captain Mountain]

OK, so I'm the father of three boys, two of whom play hockey, one at a high level.

The decline of hockey registration is important and concerning. But I want to clear up a few reasons of what AREN'T the reasons:

-cost of equipment. Hockey has always required equipment. That can't possibly be the reason why registration is down. Just because you can spend $600 on a stick doesn't mean you need to - you can buy a $25 wooden stick (or a $50 composite) that'll work just as well for 99% of players.

-cost to play. Look, if you just want to play fun hockey / house league / whatever you call it, it's really quite reasonable. My youngest who doesn't play hockey (he tried and it and didn't like it) does martial arts - it costs just as much as house league hockey.

-cost to develop elite athletes. Again, you don't have to play at that level to play hockey. Plus the cost to develop elite athletes in any sport is huge.

-immigration. Look, on the one hand, if you're fresh "off the boat" from the Punjab you don't immediately sign your kid up for hockey, I get that. But you know around the rink I see lots and lots of kids from "new Canadian" families. Now they might be second generation Canadians, but if you spend time in Canada you start following hockey - even if it's just to talk with your neighbors about how the Leafs or Oilers did the night before. But you grow to love the sport, and then you want to get your kids involved. Or the kid grows to love hockey and bugs his parents to play.


I think the problem is more insidious. It's about the growth of technology and the atomization of society. Look I saw some statistics about hockey registration in the 1970s. Really - what was there to do if you're a kid in the 1970s? You had a TV with three channels on - maybe. There were no video games, no internet, no smartphones. You either sat around the house being bored - or your parents signed you up for sports like hockey to get you out of the house.

Because this phenomenon extends well beyond hockey to all kinds or organized activities. Service clubs like the Masons or the Rotary have had huge declines. Fraternities / sororities have had huge declines. I used to be an avid curler and still enjoy the sport - curling registration is way down.


So there's a real problem here - but one that doesn't have easy answers.

I'd push back on the bolded.

Not that its always prohibitively expensive, but cost factors are more external. The GTHA and Lower Mainland have some of the highest cost of living (relative to local median purchasing power) in the world, and that makes up almost a quarter of Canada's population. Cost of living is going up everywhere, but its particularly acute there. And from a couple of reports I've seen, on average hockey can be up to 3 times as expensive as soccer, martial arts or swimming. Every dollar matters when money gets tight.

There also hasn't been much meaningful growth in the part of the population who participate in youth hockey. When it comes to immigration, its not that "new Canadian" families don't play hockey, its that its less likely that they would play hockey relative to "old Canadian" families, both because of general interest in the sport and for a part of "new Canadian" families, its too expensive. A family who has been in Canada for multiple generations (or who originate from a Country with a big hockey culture) are more likely to participate in hockey than families who are from places with a bigger Basketball or Soccer culture.

Technology and the atomization of society likely plays a role (particularly in highlighting other extra-curricular activity options), but I don't think its a bigger reason than cost. When more young families can barely afford more essential expenses, they're generally going to first look to cut expenses in things like extracirricular activities. That can mean spending less on equipment, but also picking cheaper sports (or foregoing altogether).

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

It's not that Canadians don't want to, it's because it has gotten way too expensive.

I think Canada will still be in the top for Olympics, just a lack of Canadian players in the NHL.

 

[Voight]

The only reason hockey used to be that was the limited spread of the sport.

Hockey didn't "abandon" those roots, those blue collar families just got passed up by wealthier families who could give their kids advantages over the blue collar families. This has just worsened as the sport has spread out more and more. There's really nothing hockey as a sport can do about it. They can get poorer kids to start playing the sport, but their families can't spend with the wealthier families who can send their kids to the best trainers/camps/tryouts/ect.

This is true. Way back in the 20s/30s/40s etc there were things such as local Church teams that players could play for and get their start with. Those types of grassroots programs aren't around any longer.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Not doing well on viewership
Game 1 and 2 of finals - 200-300k
Basketball had one good year, Raptors winning.

NHL is at 2-3 million every year in Canada, not just this year.
Basketball has a very long way to go.

Maybe. But not according to the Globe & Mail. I’ll post a link (might be behind a paywall) but quote the salient part:

“The few ratings numbers that have been released haven’t been great. They’re up in Canada, but not up in a way that suggests the Oilers have captivated any non-sports obsessives. According to the NHL, seven million people across North America watched Game 1.

When the Toronto Raptors were rolling to the 2019 NBA championship, the nightly number crested eight million. And that was just in Canada.”

Lack of interest in Stanley Cup final suggests hockey isn’t what it used to be for Canadians

Hockey in Canada is never going away. But warning signals are flashing if you can’t get people to watch a series featuring the greatest player in the world, who is Canadian, and plays in Canada

www.theglobeandmail.com

Now, I’m not actually pursuing a basketball vs hockey argument. My point was simply that basketball doesn’t draw its youth participants solely from one demographic (upper middle class and above white people) the way hockey in Canada does. A kid can find a lots of basketball heroes who are “like him,” while a much smaller percentage of kids can find hockey players about whom they can say the same.

 

[Voight]

The joke with Canada soccer is that it is team Brampton.

I think southern ontario makes a large part of the basketball roster too, which I think was propelled by the Vince Carter era. I truly think Carter had more of an impact on basketball in this country in terms of getting kids into it than Steve Nash himself.

Thats a fact. Check out the doc The Carter Effect if you haven't, really explains the bolded.

Nash was a helluva player but he spent his entire career in the US, whereas kids could watch Vince Carter 82 times a year on their TV's.

 

[BigEezyE22]

I think a big part is wealthier families and "elite" organizations buying up the limited ice time.

 

[Voight]

It doesn't matter. Do you think someone like Lemieux's family, who lived in an appartment in Ville Emard (small suburb of Montreal) would be able to pay for AAA hockey in today's world? Not a chance in hell.

My point is elite talent should resurface regardless what the family income is.

Or Gordie Howe, who grew up poor in Saskatchewan. 0 chance he plays hockey if he was born today.

Heck, even Gretzky who was the son of a telephone cable repair man.

 

[mondo3]

I don't think it's been mentioned yet, but could the popularity of video games be a factor? While they've been around for decades, now it seems like a high percentage of kids are spending their spare time on steam, their PS5 etc. instead of physical activities.

 

[wmupreds]

I'm not sure if cost is factor #1 or not. Granted, I have no doubt that costs for youth hockey have outpaced inflation and I would not argue it doesn't have an impact. But it's been a relatively expensive sport for a long time.

Here in the States, football is actually a relatively cheap sport to play (cost varies wildly, but stay with me) because it's still largely high school based and the schools generally provide equipment. There is still big money that can be spent on all sorts of camps and travel competition, but unlike some other sports that isn't really required to, say, be noticed by colleges and recruited. And yet, participation is declining and safety is consistently cited as a main reason for that by parents.

Personally, while I don't have kids or plan to, it's hard for me to imagine allowing them to play a sport like football or hockey. I love to watch both sports (yes, I know that's hypocritical), but there's just so many sports out there with lessened (not zero) risk where kids can still learn character lessons, teamwork, make friends, etc. and even compete for scholarships if they had real talent and drive.

To bring it back to hockey, I think the sport has a real chance to turn this around, or at least survive it better than a sport like American football. It's hard to imagine what football would look like with real effective safety rules that are strictly enforced. Hockey would certainly look different, but at its core it would still be hockey without players blowing each other up or fighting.

 

[beachcomber]

If you want to spend money on a lifetime sport for kids then spend it on golf.

 

[albator71]

They've been prediction the decline of youth hockey for a decades now, but it's true that the cost of playing the game as gone through the roof like everything else for that matter.

I don't think it's been mentioned yet, but could the popularity of video games be a factor? While they've been around for decades, now it seems like a high percentage of kids are spending their spare time on steam, their PS5 etc. instead of physical activities.

Absolutely it's a factor, when I was a kid back in the 70's we had two tv channels where we live, we had not computers, no video games, no internet, no social media, what an amazing era it was, so the only thing left to do during those long cold winter days was play hockey.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Maybe. But not according to the Globe & Mail. I’ll post a link (might be behind a paywall) but quote the salient part:

“The few ratings numbers that have been released haven’t been great. They’re up in Canada, but not up in a way that suggests the Oilers have captivated any non-sports obsessives. According to the NHL, seven million people across North America watched Game 1.

When the Toronto Raptors were rolling to the 2019 NBA championship, the nightly number crested eight million. And that was just in Canada.”

Lack of interest in Stanley Cup final suggests hockey isn’t what it used to be for Canadians

Hockey in Canada is never going away. But warning signals are flashing if you can’t get people to watch a series featuring the greatest player in the world, who is Canadian, and plays in Canada

www.theglobeandmail.com

Now, I’m not actually pursuing a basketball vs hockey argument. My point was simply that basketball doesn’t draw its youth participants solely from one demographic (upper middle class and above white people) the way hockey in Canada does. A kid can find a lots of basketball heroes who are “like him,” while a much smaller percentage of kids can find hockey players about whom they can say the same.

Ya like I said the basketball viewership numbers are very poor, and only did great during the one year only. You can follow along in the business of sports section to see game by game numbers.
but it’s not happening for basketball viewership wise, in Canada.

It was shown in there, in the regulation season, Basketball national numbers in Canada in most cases are surpassed by hockey regional numbers, on that night.

 

[viper0220]

If you want to spend money on a lifetime sport for kids then spend it on golf.

Why golf?

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm not sure if cost is factor #1 or not. Granted, I have no doubt that costs for youth hockey have outpaced inflation and I would not argue it doesn't have an impact. But it's been a relatively expensive sport for a long time.

Here in the States, football is actually a relatively cheap sport to play (cost varies wildly, but stay with me) because it's still largely high school based and the schools generally provide equipment. There is still big money that can be spent on all sorts of camps and travel competition, but unlike some other sports that isn't really required to, say, be noticed by colleges and recruited. And yet, participation is declining and safety is consistently cited as a main reason for that by parents.

Personally, while I don't have kids or plan to, it's hard for me to imagine allowing them to play a sport like football or hockey. I love to watch both sports (yes, I know that's hypocritical), but there's just so many sports out there with lessened (not zero) risk where kids can still learn character lessons, teamwork, make friends, etc. and even compete for scholarships if they had real talent and drive.

To bring it back to hockey, I think the sport has a real chance to turn this around, or at least survive it better than a sport like American football. It's hard to imagine what football would look like with real effective safety rules that are strictly enforced. Hockey would certainly look different, but at its core it would still be hockey without players blowing each other up or fighting.

Hockey has always been dangerous. As a youth amateur player playing only once or twice a week in a non-hitting league, the chances of breaking an arm or getting your teeth knocked out are a lot higher than your chances of CTE. That didn’t stop parents from signing their kids up, fully aware of the doctors’ bills to come. The working-class culture of the game was that the kid should lean into the danger — you have to pay the price if you want to win fame and fortune.

So here’s the thing — if danger were the reason people stopped playing, we would expect to see mostly working-class people still putting their kids in hockey. As in football, which is being abandoned along socio-economic lines, educated people of means will make a business decision to remove their kids from the risk of brain damage, while less-educated people on the edge of poverty will push their kids into football as an avenue for escape.

Walk into a hockey rink and it’s immediately obvious that the opposite is the case. Wealthy people are increasingly taking over hockey, not abandoning it. People with means are seeing an opportunity to put their kid ahead of the pack for a multimillion dollar living, and they’re doubling down on their advantages. It’s the working class people who are dropping out, realizing that there’s not a realistic path forward regardless of their kid’s talent.

All of that is a big blazing neon sign pointing to economics rather than safety as the core issue.

 

[JianYang]

I'm not sure if cost is factor #1 or not. Granted, I have no doubt that costs for youth hockey have outpaced inflation and I would not argue it doesn't have an impact. But it's been a relatively expensive sport for a long time.

Here in the States, football is actually a relatively cheap sport to play (cost varies wildly, but stay with me) because it's still largely high school based and the schools generally provide equipment. There is still big money that can be spent on all sorts of camps and travel competition, but unlike some other sports that isn't really required to, say, be noticed by colleges and recruited. And yet, participation is declining and safety is consistently cited as a main reason for that by parents.

Personally, while I don't have kids or plan to, it's hard for me to imagine allowing them to play a sport like football or hockey. I love to watch both sports (yes, I know that's hypocritical), but there's just so many sports out there with lessened (not zero) risk where kids can still learn character lessons, teamwork, make friends, etc. and even compete for scholarships if they had real talent and drive.

To bring it back to hockey, I think the sport has a real chance to turn this around, or at least survive it better than a sport like American football. It's hard to imagine what football would look like with real effective safety rules that are strictly enforced. Hockey would certainly look different, but at its core it would still be hockey without players blowing each other up or fighting.

I'm the same hypocritical guy. I'll watch hockey, but unless my kid really pushes me and I see he has a real passion for the game, I'm not going to push him into hockey.

 

[MS]

I have two kids under age 3 and the biggest reason I probably won't put them into hockey is me.

We love doing outdoor things and if we put our kids into mountain biking and ski racing, we can be outdoors enjoying ourselves as well. I have literally zero desire to be travelling every weekend to be sitting in an arena watching kids play hockey. I've had friends who have done it ... and it looks miserable.

Also from playing hockey as a kid and from the experiences of those friends now ... the politics and the people around minor hockey are nauseating and I want nothing to do with that, either.

In terms of cost, the biggest thing for me wouldn't be the immediate cost, it would be the insane cost if our kids actually turned out to be good. That 'maybe my kid will be great!' is kind of a selfish thing that exists I think for every parent but when that means spending $50k/year to send your kid to a specialized hockey academy or breaking their heart if you say no ... yuck.

Of course, if either kid really really really wants to play hockey we'll probably cave. But we sure as hell won't be pushing it.

 

[Sky04]

They may have lower numbers but the skill level has never been as high in youth hockey, watching triple A camps and these kids are stupid good for their age. They've pretty much made the sport exclusive to upper middle class and above.

 

[hypereconomist]

Hockey has always been dangerous. As a youth amateur player playing only once or twice a week in a non-hitting league, the chances of breaking an arm or getting your teeth knocked out are a lot higher than your chances of CTE. That didn’t stop parents from signing their kids up, fully aware of the doctors’ bills to come. The working-class culture of the game was that the kid should lean into the danger — you have to pay the price if you want to win fame and fortune.

So here’s the thing — if danger were the reason people stopped playing, we would expect to see mostly working-class people still putting their kids in hockey. As in football, which is being abandoned along socio-economic lines, educated people of means will make a business decision to remove their kids from the risk of brain damage, while less-educated people on the edge of poverty will push their kids into football as an avenue for escape.

Walk into a hockey rink and it’s immediately obvious that the opposite is the case. Wealthy people are increasingly taking over hockey, not abandoning it. People with means are seeing an opportunity to put their kid ahead of the pack for a multimillion dollar living, and they’re doubling down on their advantages. It’s the working class people who are dropping out, realizing that there’s not a realistic path forward regardless of their kid’s talent.

All of that is a big blazing neon sign pointing to economics rather than safety as the core issue.

The worsening economics and shrinking middle class are significant factors, but it's not the only core issues.

The low cultural attachment of hockey to new immigrants is also a significant issue that the NHL and Hockey Canada aren't seriously addressing.

30-50 years ago, it was relatively easy for visible minority immigrants from non-hockey playing countries to access hockey if they wanted to because of the larger portion of demographics that were playing it (i.e. not just rich families) and because community/house/minor hockey was still within the realm of affordability for the average family. I lived this. My brother and I, as well as numerous cousins played hockey growing up because minor hockey was relatively affordable and it was "the sport" that everyone was into. All of this made it much easier for my family to take a chance on a sport that was foreign to them.

Nowadays, people don't have to "like" hockey to fit in with Canadian society and visible minority immigrant families entering the country have significantly less societal pressure to try it out, watch a game, etc. Why would newcomers even attempt to figure out hockey if they have access to their cultural sports (e.g. all major cities in Canada have dedicated cricket fields now) and its much easier to access basketball and soccer?

If Hockey Canada and the NHL can and were interested in making the game more affordable for the average family, I still don't see them breaking any ground with Canada's changing demographics until they find a way to make it more culturally relevant to new immigrants. HC and the NHL's increasing dependency on rich, caucasian families is almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy to irrelevance of the sport.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The worsening economics and shrinking middle class are significant factors, but it's not the only core issues.

The low cultural attachment of hockey to new immigrants is also a significant issue that the NHL and Hockey Canada aren't seriously addressing.

30-50 years ago, it was relatively easy for visible minority immigrants from non-hockey playing countries to access hockey if they wanted to because of the larger portion of demographics that were playing it (i.e. not just rich families) and because community/house/minor hockey was still within the realm of affordability for the average family. I lived this. My brother and I, as well as numerous cousins played hockey growing up because minor hockey was relatively affordable and it was "the sport" that everyone was into. All of this made it much easier for my family to take a chance on a sport that was foreign to them.

Nowadays, people don't have to "like" hockey to fit in with Canadian society and visible minority immigrant families entering the country have significantly less societal pressure to try it out, watch a game, etc. Why would newcomers even attempt to figure out hockey if they have access to their cultural sports (e.g. all major cities in Canada have dedicated cricket fields now) and its much easier to access basketball and soccer?

If Hockey Canada and the NHL can and were interested in making the game more affordable for the average family, I still don't see them breaking any ground with Canada's changing demographics until they find a way to make it more culturally relevant to new immigrants. HC and the NHL's increasing dependency on rich, caucasian families is almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy to irrelevance of the sport.

Looking back a few generations, this principle even extends beyond visible minorities. Immigrants from Ireland, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe were a huge part of hockey’s expansion beyond a few social clubs into becoming a national sport. At that time, those groups were largely marginalized in other aspects of life, but they could make their mark as hockey players. Even Germans, like Boston’s Kraut Line, had to overcome some pretty intense cultural bias and became representatives for their community at a sensitive time. Hockey definitely still wasn’t a sport for visible minorities, but there was some vague sense that the game could provide opportunities and eventually inclusion for outsiders.

Somewhere along the line, hockey lost that role as a social ladder for immigrants to climb. It has reached the point of being a feedback loop where hockey is increasingly exclusive, so outside groups increasingly ignore hockey, so hockey becomes even more exclusive. It was not always that way.

 

[awegrzyn]

Also said U18 numbers are steady/flat not increasing or decreasing.

The over 18 number was where they saw some decrease, from before Covid. (But increasing since Covid).

YES on the first sentence. NO on the second.

I did a related study comparing USA and Canada for 18U AAA. It was about flat for Canada since COVID except for 23/24 where it dropped off by 6 teams, just like you're saying. But...

Trend is down in Canada though. The increase since COVID is still below last year before COVID, so from 2013 peak it is going straight down. It's only recovering from COVID but overall going down.

The problem is cost. We Financialized everything on the planet by increasing money supply to the point where few people who received that money bid up prices for most of the people, and grinded expensive sports to a slowdown, and if it keeps going, to a halt. So naturally people started doing something else and to be exact: something cheaper.

Look what happened to back country skiing. I have not seen so many people wondering through mountains in the winter. All expensive sports will die off. That's literally how it works. Even capitalism undoes itself. You're not being poor to play those sports, you are being robbed.

I actually believe we don't need NHL, Hockey USA, or Hockey Canada. I think we need independent cheap amateur hockey like back in the day, where kids are not over coached, but do it for fun.

 

[Night Shift]

Bettmans answers are let's add more teams!

 

[PoutineSp00nZ]

Canadians can't play hockey when they're standing in line for food banks

Unfortunately this is very on point.

 

[Melrose Munch]

Not doing well on viewership
Game 1 and 2 of finals - 200-300k
Basketball had one good year, Raptors winning.

NHL is at 2-3 million every year in Canada, not just this year.
Basketball has a very long way to go.

Now post all the regular season NHL games vs NBA games. All the non-Leafs/Canadiens ones that happen on the weekdays. I'm in the BOH section too. We all saw the poor ratings for the Jets, Flames, Senators vs the NBA and even the CFL at points. But...this is about youth hockey, which is in decline. Wether you want to admit it or not.

 

[joelef]

Looking back a few generations, this principle even extends beyond visible minorities. Immigrants from Ireland, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe were a huge part of hockey’s expansion beyond a few social clubs into becoming a national sport. At that time, those groups were largely marginalized in other aspects of life, but they could make their mark as hockey players. Even Germans, like Boston’s Kraut Line, had to overcome some pretty intense cultural bias and became representatives for their community at a sensitive time. Hockey definitely still wasn’t a sport for visible minorities, but there was some vague sense that the game could provide opportunities and eventually inclusion for outsiders.

Somewhere along the line, hockey lost that role as a social ladder for immigrants to climb. It has reached the point of being a feedback loop where hockey is increasingly exclusive, so outside groups increasingly ignore hockey, so hockey becomes even more exclusive. It was not always that way.

Another thing is the internet streaming and in the past cable television has made it way easier to follow foreign sports/ leagues. Just look at soccer on the states where nbc has the epl and Liga Mx get just as high of ratings as nhl regular season games. There’s no need to assilmate into mainstream sports culture.

Looking back a few generations, this principle even extends beyond visible minorities. Immigrants from Ireland, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe were a huge part of hockey’s expansion beyond a few social clubs into becoming a national sport. At that time, those groups were largely marginalized in other aspects of life, but they could make their mark as hockey players. Even Germans, like Boston’s Kraut Line, had to overcome some pretty intense cultural bias and became representatives for their community at a sensitive time. Hockey definitely still wasn’t a sport for visible minorities, but there was some vague sense that the game could provide opportunities and eventually inclusion for outsiders.

Somewhere along the line, hockey lost that role as a social ladder for immigrants to climb. It has reached the point of being a feedback loop where hockey is increasingly exclusive, so outside groups increasingly ignore hockey, so hockey becomes even more exclusive. It was not always that way.

There’s was always jokes about hockey being mostly white since back in the 70s and hockey has never really taken that image seriously