When “Players First” Meets Real-World Agendas: An Initial Analysis of the Shanahan Report

I’ve read the Players First interim report released today , and I want to start with this:

It’s encouraging.

For the first time in a long time, it feels like someone at the top is openly acknowledging what some in the Junior game in Ontario been saying for years - the system isn’t aligned, the pathways aren’t clear, and the player experience is inconsistent depending on where you live, what league you’re in, or how much money you have.

That matters.

What I Appreciate

First, the tone.

Shanahan’s introduction (pages 4–5) is personal. It recognizes that not every player’s path looks like his. That’s important. The acknowledgment that “the vast majority” of players won’t play professionally is overdue. Junior hockey cannot be built around the 1–2% outcome.

Second, the pillars identified on pages 9–11 are not wrong.

• Player movement

• Training standards

• Safety and culture

• Off-ice experience

• Financial accessibility

Those are the right conversations.

Especially financial accessibility. When a report openly states that uneven player fees create barriers and that some leagues eliminating fees are gaining popularity (page 11), that’s not subtle. That’s a direct acknowledgment that the current financial models are influencing competitive balance and access.

And when leagues allow teams within the same league to charge different player fees - without a standardized league-wide structure - the inequity is amplified. Add in the impracticality of drafting and retaining player rights in certain environments, and you create a system where access, leverage, and mobility are not evenly distributed.

That doesn’t just impact affordability.

It impacts competitive balance.

It impacts transparency.

And it impacts trust.

That’s real.

The State of the System, Finally Quantified

The numbers on pages 7–8 are useful.

• 165 teams

• 5,548 players

• 19% high school-aged

• Huge variation in Ontario-born participation at the Junior A level

• Older, more stable rosters in Junior B and C

That data confirms what many of us see daily:

• Junior A has become increasingly transactional.

• Junior B and C remain more community-rooted.

• There is no truly harmonized provincial model.

Three Member Branches. Nine leagues. Different rules, philosophies, financial structures, roster churn rates.

And we wonder why parents are confused.

Here’s Where Reality Has to Enter the Conversation

Now let’s get practical.

A provincial vision is one thing.

A rink in Northern Ontario, a privately owned franchise in the GTA, and a volunteer-run community team in south-western rural Ontario are three completely different realities.

Not all leagues are created equal.

Not all teams are created equal.

Not all owners are created equal.

Not all facilities are created equal.

Not all volunteer bases are created equal.

And most never will be.

You cannot centralize passion.

You cannot standardize resources.

You cannot equalize market size.

You cannot duplicate community culture.

And you absolutely cannot legislate culture into existence.

Some teams will always be Players First.

Some teams will always be Profit First.

Some teams will always be Wins First.

And some will always be “Place for My Son First.”

That’s not pessimism. That’s experience.

Another Hard Truth

Here’s something else we need to be honest about.

For many organizations, whether it’s stated publicly or not, the primary purpose is not “Players First.”

For some, it’s franchise sustainability.

For some, it’s profitability.

For some, it’s market visibility.

For some, it’s community identity.

For some, it’s competitive success.

If they can also accommodate a strong player experience within that structure, that’s a bonus.

But it’s not always the driving force.

That doesn’t automatically make them unethical. It reflects incentive structures.

Junior hockey organizations operate inside financial realities, political realities, and human realities. And in many cases, livelihoods, or at minimum meaningful personal commitments, are attached to those realities.

For some people, this isn’t philosophical.

It’s how they pay their mortgage.

For others, it’s not a livelihood but a deep passion - volunteered for, or supplemented by an honorarium - that carries personal identity and community standing.

Trainers.

Coaches.

Managers.

Owners.

Front-office staff.

Wins impact attendance.

Attendance impacts sponsorship.

Sponsorship impacts revenue.

Revenue impacts payroll and player 'benefits'.

Player fees cover ice.

Ice fees cover rent.

Roster decisions impact retention.

Whose kid you play.

Which costs you cut.

Which best practices you trim.

How much development you invest in versus how much you sacrifice for short-term results.

All of those are variables.

And when livelihoods, or even personal reputations and volunteer positions, are at stake, agendas can take priority over philosophical mandates issued at the provincial or league level.

That’s not a moral judgment.

That’s structural pressure.

And Here’s the Part We Don’t Talk About Enough

Even when a province sets a philosophy…

Even when a league promotes best practices…

Even when standards are written clearly…

The managers, coaches, and trainers tasked with implementing those standards often sit in the middle of competing pressures.

And those pressures don’t only exist when someone’s full-time income is involved.

Sometimes it’s a volunteer role someone deeply values.

Sometimes it’s an honorarium position that supplements income.

Sometimes it’s simply a passion role that someone has poured years into.

Agendas set at the ownership or executive level - whether financial, competitive, political, or personal - can directly affect whether organization members keep or lose their roles.

A coach who fully adopts long-term development may sacrifice short-term wins.

A trainer who insists on strict safety protocols may increase costs or reduce roster flexibility.

A manager who refuses to blur movement rules may lose leverage in recruitment.

If those decisions conflict with an organization’s internal agenda, the individuals upholding philosophical mandates can find themselves marginalized, replaced, or undermined - either internally or by competing organizations willing to operate differently.

There is another uncomfortable layer here.

Coaches and trainers are required to meet minimum certification and education standards.

Owners and executive decision-makers often are not.

Some individuals in ownership or executive roles bring extensive experience and knowledge.

Others may not have demonstrable hockey development backgrounds, yet they hold significant influence over the livelihoods, job security, or participation opportunities of highly qualified professionals beneath them.

That structural imbalance matters.

Because philosophy only works when the people with ultimate decision-making authority are aligned with it.

If not, philosophy becomes optional.

The Real Question Isn’t “Can We Make Everyone Equal?”

We can’t.

The real question is:

Can we create guardrails strong enough that even unequal systems, and even systems operating under financial or political pressure, still protect players?

Because inequity will always exist:

• Some facilities will have full-time trainers. Others won’t.

• Some teams will travel by charter. Others won’t.

• Some markets will generate profit. Others will rely on fundraising.

• Some organizations will attract elite coaches. Others will depend on volunteers.

That gap is permanent.

So the goal cannot be forced uniformity.

The goal must be:

• Clear minimum standards

• Transparent financial models

• Consistent player movement rules

• Enforced safety protocols

• Defined governance accountability

• Structural protection for those implementing best practices

Not because everyone is equal.

But because players deserve protection regardless of inequality.

And because qualified coaches and trainers should not have their professional or volunteer futures hinge solely on agendas that may diverge from provincial philosophy.

As a Coach

From a coaching perspective, the most important line in the entire document might be in the Training and Competition Standards section:

“Siloed processes and minimal communication around development objectives between levels of play results in fragmentation.”

That fragmentation is real.

We develop differently at different levels.

We communicate differently.

We prioritize differently.

Players bounce between systems that don’t speak the same language.

Alignment would help.

But alignment is not sameness. It’s clarity.

It’s ensuring that even when motivations differ, financial pressures exist, agendas compete, and authority structures vary, the player experience does not collapse.

Final Thought

Calling it Players First sets a high bar.

Because if the final structure protects leagues before players…Protects franchises before families…Protects politics before development…

Then it won’t be Players First.

It will be branding first.

But if this process truly re-centers the system around development, clarity, safety, and accessibility, while acknowledging unequal resources, competing agendas, structural power imbalances, and the reality that both livelihoods and passions are intertwined with outcomes, then it has a chance to build something realistic instead of idealistic.

I’m optimistic.

But I’m realistic.

And I’ll be participating in the survey.

Because if they’re asking for honest feedback...

They’re going to get it.

Ed Garinger is a seasoned hockey coach, mentor, and educator with over two decades of experience. A native of the Bruce Peninsula, he played minor and junior hockey before earning his BA and BEd from Nipissing University, where he also competed in varsity volleyball and extramural hockey.

Coaching since age 14, Ed has balanced his teaching career with an extensive coaching and development portfolio, working with players at all levels. He has coached in the Provincial Junior Hockey League, led youth and high school teams, and served as a learning facilitator for the OMHA. His experience includes elite programs like the OHL/OHF U15 and U16 camps, U17 Regional Camps, and Hockey Canada’s Skills Academy.

A Hockey Canada HP1-certified coach, USA Hockey-certified coach, and Chartered Professional Coach (ChPC), Ed is committed to ongoing professional development and continually seeks to expand his knowledge to better serve players and coaches. Now based in Orillia, he enjoys passing on his passion for hockey to the next generation.