LPH Article on USA Hockey

[CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD]

Good read, comments?

http://www.letsplayhockey.com/online-ed ... ockey.html

[SCBlueLiner]

You tell 'em, Jack.

The pushback has begun. Nice to see LPH listens to its readership, understands what is going on out there in the hockey world, and expresses that opinion.

Much better than that monthly propaganda magazine I get in the mail each month from USAH.

[barry_mcconnell]

Don't even get me started on that cheesy "magazine". It seems like they go out of their way to not cover anything related to Minnesota hockey.

The article/advertisement for the hockey Intelligym was shameful.

LPH is so much better it isn't even funny.

I'm curious what would happen if a whole district just opted out of USA Hockey. I've always struggled to understand why it is required.

[mnhockey2019]

Good article, but why stop with USA hockey? I think there are several places in the article where USA hockey could be replaced with Minnesota hockey and the conclusion would be the same.

[57special]

It is kind of odd that MN contributes mightily dollar wise to USAH, but because of our different age groupings we have little to no contact with anyone outside of MN.

Do we spend all that money so 3 or 4 kids per year can go to Ann Arbour?

Do we really need the ADM to teach us how to play hockey?

Where is the benefit for us?

[Cdale]

Don't even get me started on that cheesy "magazine"....
I'm curious what would happen if a whole district just opted out of USA Hockey. I've always struggled to understand why it is required.

Agree. It's like a union one is forced to join.

[Deep Breath]

Good article, but the question remains? Now what? Many people have been bemoaning the fact that USA Hockey takes millions and yet really doesn't provide Mn Hockey with equal returm. That argument is nothing new. The question is, what to do about it?

[the_juiceman]

It is kind of odd that MN contribute's mightily dollar wise to USAH, but because of our different age groupings we have little to no contact with anyone outside of MN.

Do we spend all that money so 3 or 4 kids per year can go to Ann Arbour?

Do we really need the ADM to teach us how to play hockey?

Where is the benefit for us?

so why not use the same age groupings? why does MH feel the need to be different?

[observer]

so why not use the same age groupings? why does MH feel the need to be different?

Because the July 1 date better aligns with grades for HS hockey.

[MrBoDangles]

It is kind of odd that MN contribute's mightily dollar wise to USAH, but because of our different age groupings we have little to no contact with anyone outside of MN.

Do we spend all that money so 3 or 4 kids per year can go to Ann Arbour?

Do we really need the ADM to teach us how to play hockey?

Where is the benefit for us?

[SCBlueLiner]

First, I don't think the answer is for Mn Hockey to leave USAH. That would be bad for both. Mn Hockey has its own share of stupid rules that they would be well to adopt some of the rules that the rest of the country is using. Conversely, the rest of the country could certainly learn something from what Mn does.

I'd like to see Mn Hockey change the age rules to birth years. That would bring Mn in line with the rest of the country and allow Mn kids to go out and compete at the same level in some of the bigger national tournaments. I understand wanting to keep grade levels together but that already doesn't happen in the summer, so that box has already been opened. I think the age thing is one of the reasons there aren't more MN kids on the national teams. They're not in the system, so to speak.

At the same time, I think the rest of the country should look at MN Hockey and its association based model. Yes, I know that may not be popular and many of you hate being held hostage by the local association. However, have you looked at what youth hockey is like in other areas of the country, freaking crazy. Costs through the roof. Clubs here and there. It's a minefield for parents to navigate and a whole lot of people out there profiting off parents ambitions for their kids. Mn Hockey has a good model to bring hockey to the masses, make it somewhat affordable, and turn out some dang good players.

Bottom line is USAH does good things and bad things. Mn Hockey does good things and bad things. The beef I have is the heavy handed way in which policy is dictated to its members and that they don't seem to LISTEN to what its members are saying.

Also part of the problem is there are too many people out there involved in youth hockey who are not hockey people that blindly follow what USAH says because, well, it's USAH and they must know the answer as to how to develop players so we should blindly follow what they say.

[JSR]

First, I don't think the answer is for Mn Hockey to leave USAH. That would be bad for both. Mn Hockey has its own share of stupid rules that they would be well to adopt some of the rules that the rest of the country is using. Conversely, the rest of the country could certainly learn something from what Mn does.

I'd like to see Mn Hockey change the age rules to birth years. That would bring Mn in line with the rest of the country and allow Mn kids to go out and compete at the same level in some of the bigger national tournaments. I understand wanting to keep grade levels together but that already doesn't happen in the summer, so that box has already been opened. I think the age thing is one of the reasons there aren't more MN kids on the national teams. They're not in the system, so to speak.

At the same time, I think the rest of the country should look at MN Hockey and its association based model. Yes, I know that may not be popular and many of you hate being held hostage by the local association. However, have you looked at what youth hockey is like in other areas of the country, freaking crazy. Costs through the roof. Clubs here and there. It's a minefield for parents to navigate and a whole lot of people out there profiting off parents ambitions for their kids. Mn Hockey has a good model to bring hockey to the masses, make it somewhat affordable, and turn out some dang good players.

Bottom line is USAH does good things and bad things. Mn Hockey does good things and bad things. The beef I have is the heavy handed way in which policy is dictated to its members and that they don't seem to LISTEN to what its members are saying.

Also part of the problem is there are too many people out there involved in youth hockey who are not hockey people that blindly follow what USAH says because, well, it's USAH and they must know the answer as to how to develop players so we should blindly follow what they say.

Your association model is excellent and believe it or not many areas of the country Do try and replicate it. The problem is numbers and passion for the game. Where else in the country do you have both the numbers of kids playing combined with the passion for the game that you find in MN. Basically no where. So it's not a matter of other parts of the country ignoring what Mn is doing but rather it's virtually impossible for other parts of the country to mimic. Here in WI we'd actually love our association hockey to look like Minnesota's but the reality is we have 17,000 registered skaters, MN has 50,000 so it's not going to and because it isn't going to (for now) we do feel the need to have some Tier 1 AAA options for our top end kids because if we didn't we wouldn't produce the D1 players that we do produce (which is still way less than MN). If we can ever get to 50,000 member skaters then maybe it will change.....

[CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD]

Mn Hockey has a good model to bring hockey to the masses, make it somewhat affordable, and turn out some dang good players.

What would you say to the statement that many scouts that believe the MN model really good at developing a lot of mediocre players?

Being from Chicago originally, where I have a nephew playing hockey, my observation is that the majority of the higher costs can be attributed to the cost of ice at for-profit ice arenas. Four years ago at the Intl Ice Centre in Romeoville, IL evening/ weekend ice was $400/hr, off peak $250. We do not have that issue here in MN. But what we do have is associations with a monopoly that do not have to offer a good product to compete. I don't think giving consumers a choice necessarily means increased cost. I get it, it's all about perserving the sanctity of the MSHSL. So it comes down to choose where you live wisely if you have the foresight to think you might have a player with the aspirations to compete with those at the highest success levels.

[Little King]

After typing this, I apologize for the bouncing around and somewhat incomplete thoughts....

I have for years sung the praises of the ADM and LTAD. But I over the years have first hand, started to see the downfalls of the ADM, and it's "boxed in" approach. I do feel the ADM is a GREAT base model to start with, especially for non experienced coaches, who don't have the experience with skill development, skill progressions, practice planning, etc.

That being said, in our association, we have tried to open up the basic ADM approach, and let coaches have some freedom in their practices to remove certain drills or aspects of the ADM practice plans. Much like Mr. Blatherwicks comments on dictating that the ADM must be strictly followed, I feel that may actually hinder creativity and skill development based on what coaches/associations see their kids may need more work on.

I also know, that changes can be hard to implement, and I think there does need to be a time to test out any process and find it's strengths and weeknesses. The brass at MH and USAH both have had to take a hard line approach to this, and while I understand it on the front end of the implementation, I also believe that there should be an evolution to the (ADM) process. The problem then lies in their unwillingness to veer from the agenda they have put forth. I feel they do need to hear both the strengths and weaknesses of the program, so that they may tweak it to become most effective. From experience with being part of that process, I can assure you that one sided rants on how "stupid" it is will not be heard. If we want to see a change we need to approach it more how to improve it, not to remove it.

As an administrator, I understand the challenges that MH and USAH face with the amount of push back they receive, and their hesitancy to bend on any approach, ADM, CFB, hits to the head etc. While they were probably (too) quick to react to the Jablonski incident, they have been much slower in their approach to ADM, coaches cerification etc. I hope that over time, they(MH and USAH) and we (coaches, parents, and players) can open our minds to making changes for the better, of not just the programs put forth, but the kids, and the game as a whole.

[SCBlueLiner]

After typing this, I apologize for the bouncing around and somewhat incomplete thoughts....

I have for years sung the praises of the ADM and LTAD. But I over the years have first hand, started to see the downfalls of the ADM, and it's "boxed in" approach. I do feel the ADM is a GREAT base model to start with, especially for non experienced coaches, who don't have the experience with skill development, skill progressions, practice planning, etc.

That being said, in our association, we have tried to open up the basic ADM approach, and let coaches have some freedom in their practices to remove certain drills or aspects of the ADM practice plans. Much like Mr. Blatherwicks comments on dictating that the ADM must be strictly followed, I feel that may actually hinder creativity and skill development based on what coaches/associations see their kids may need more work on.

I also know, that changes can be hard to implement, and I think there does need to be a time to test out any process and find it's strengths and weeknesses. The brass at MH and USAH both have had to take a hard line approach to this, and while I understand it on the front end of the implementation, I also believe that there should be an evolution to the (ADM) process. The problem then lies in their unwillingness to veer from the agenda they have put forth. I feel they do need to hear both the strengths and weaknesses of the program, so that they may tweak it to become most effective. From experience with being part of that process, I can assure you that one sided rants on how "stupid" it is will not be heard. If we want to see a change we need to approach it more how to improve it, not to remove it.

As an administrator, I understand the challenges that MH and USAH face with the amount of push back they receive, and their hesitancy to bend on any approach, ADM, CFB, hits to the head etc. While they were probably (too) quick to react to the Jablonski incident, they have been much slower in their approach to ADM, coaches cerification etc. I hope that over time, they(MH and USAH) and we (coaches, parents, and players) can open our minds to making changes for the better, of not just the programs put forth, but the kids, and the game as a whole.

Making changes would amount to admitting they were wrong. Also, if you've read my other posts I haven't ranted against ADM. I like the concept, there's some good stuff in there. There's also some things that need to be changed.

As far as strict adherence, as a coach I never just pulled one of their ADM practice plans out of the book and followed it religiously. I've always taken a drill here, a drill there, tailored them to what I thought we needed to work on, and developed a practice plan. To USAH's credit, from the CEP clinics I've attended the instructors never said practice plans were to be followed to a T. They always said it was a resource to use. I think it is associations (i.e. boards comprised of non-hockey people) who are mandating strict adherence to the program.

[MrBoDangles]

Mn Hockey has a good model to bring hockey to the masses, make it somewhat affordable, and turn out some dang good players.

What would you say to the statement that many scouts that believe the MN model really good at developing a lot of mediocre players?

Being from Chicago originally, where I have a nephew playing hockey, my observation is that the majority of the higher costs can be attributed to the cost of ice at for-profit ice arenas. Four years ago at the Intl Ice Centre in Romeoville, IL evening/ weekend ice was $400/hr, off peak $250. We do not have that issue here in MN. But what we do have is associations with a monopoly that do not have to offer a good product to compete. I don't think giving consumers a choice necessarily means increased cost. I get it, it's all about perserving the sanctity of the MSHSL. So it comes down to choose where you live wisely if you have the foresight to think you might have a player with the aspirations to compete with those at the highest success levels.

Summer Hockey has helped and we will see the number of high end players from this state go way up in the 99' and younger age groups. 99's were the first LARGE group of 1st year capable AAA players... Also need to give some credit to the Showcase group for that.

MSHSL Hockey had been around for a long time before we started putting any numbers(since 2000?) in the NHL. Training outside of the walled box has been the key......

[Stars67]

Standing Ovation for Mr Blatherwick

If i had the time I would go around the state to each association begging to sucede from the union known as USA Hockey... I would ask to take their kids to a body where money and feelings aren't changing the game that many before worked so hard to create.

As a coach with no kids, I cannot express how excited I would be to coach in a governing body that doesn't honor fair play points and doesn't take checking out of the game until players are adolescents.

3 things I would love to see

1. No fair play points
2. No 10 automatic 10 minute major penalties
3. Checking at all levels including squirts and GIRLS...

[freighttrain]

Standing Ovation for Mr Blatherwick

If i had the time I would go around the state to each association begging to sucede from the union known as USA Hockey... I would ask to take their kids to a body where money and feelings aren't changing the game that many before worked so hard to create.

As a coach with no kids, I cannot express how excited I would be to coach in a governing body that doesn't honor fair play points and doesn't take checking out of the game until players are adolescents.

3 things I would love to see

1. No fair play points
2. No 10 automatic 10 minute major penalties
3. Checking at all levels including squirts and GIRLS...

Fair play points came from MN Hockey not USAH.

[old goalie85]

Chi- After I got off the phone w/you pertaining average/mediocore athletes I beg to differ with yor #'s. How many Top Baseball players do we put out every ten years Mauer 2000's/ Steinboch90's/Winfield 80's/Molitier 70's. I'm sure I missed some, Football would be less. Hockey NHL ALL stars MN perduce's more than Baseball or Football. Maybe we mn Swedes/germans/Weigen/YADA don't put out the talant your Chi does. Much Luv !!!

[old goalie85]

Sorry about the typing up North at a tourny.

[5thgraders]

31 of the 45 players who were chosen to usndtp earned the honor of becoming a minus player to the team. And they are the Nations best.

Jack KUDOS TO YOU..

SHAME ON USA HOKEY FOR FREE RIDES TO USNDTP NO WONDER WHY ALL THE GREAT PLAYERS RAN FOR SHELTER.. BRONZE AT U17 THANK'S TO POGANSKI. WOODAH KUDA SHOODA BEN THE GOLD. THE NEW YORKERS GOT IT DONE NEW YORK STYLE.

GOTTA LOVE THE 10 SUITS IN THE PICTURE WITH THE ATHLETES DO US ALL A FAVOR AND STAY IN THE HOTEL THE GAME IS FOR THE 'KIDS'

I HATE TO SAY IT BUT I WILL.. USNDTP NEEDS A NEW TALENT EVALUATOR.

IS IT TRUE THEY LEFT USNDTP PLAYERS AT HOME AND BROUGHT IN OUTSIDERS INSTEAD FOR THE U17 AND U20 TOURNEY.

[Section 8 guy]

I tend to be a fan of many of Jack Blatherwicks pieces, but I find this one to be pretty disingenuous. He talks about how the LTAD is full of off the mark assumptions and data that is arrived at by leaping to conclusions.......and then goes on to show how out of touch with reality that he is by making it sound like every mini mite coach out there is some junior version of Herb Brooks whose creativity and innovation is being stifled by the ADM.

The coaches we've had through our hockey experiences are phenomenal and are extremely, knowledgeable, capable and dedicated to what they do. We're very lucky. But you don't have to read this board long to realize not everyone is that fortunate. Coaches everywhere work hard and do great things for their kids. Im not questioning that at all. But most of them have full time jobs, kids and many other commitments. Many (most?)of them are drawing up practice plans on the dashboard of their car on the way to practice after a hectic day at the office. I know this because I've done it myself plenty of times. Needless to say those don't end up being the best plans. Many of the coaches also aren't experts on what skills should be mastered at what ages. The ADM assists with that.

The coaches that are innovative and have an advantage because they are Brooks like know who they are and are innovative enough to figure out how to incorporate their knowledge into an ADM model practice or to stray from it a bit where needed. But for every one of them there are dozens that will benefit from having a ready made practice plan that they can use or at least build off of. This will help to strengthen the quality of practices at many, if not most, associations throughout the state. To paint a picture that this is some sort of tragedy is silly. The people on this board that are constantly griping about the shortcomings of association hockey should see that more than anyone.

[dlow]

Section 8 you hit the mark about how ADM can be a guide for busy coaches volunteering to do their best by kids. I think a lot of us appreciate some of the things USA Hockey does.

Where I think the Blatherwick article really strikes a cord is the amount of $ they are using up on our behalf and the fact that we are forced to support the USA Hockey enterprise and all its entities because without them we cannot play authorized games, etc. I didn't see an exact figure in the article but he says TENS of MILLIONS are being sent from us overspent hockey families to USA hockey, that's crazy. Its also crazy that every time you try to do anything with them there is another fee. Our association wanted to do a Try Hockey Day, to get more kids, and USA Hockey wanted us to pay a ~$150 fee...

The other thing is the insurance issue. You gotta have it and they do provide it so what do you do? They have done a nice job of tying our hands.

What alternatives do we have? How can we change this situation? Could MN Hockey break away? Is there any will for that within the state organization? Other options?

Oh, BTW USH thanks for the birthday email for the little guy!

[O-townClown]

I can see I'm not alone in my frustration with the rigidity of the ADM message from USA Hockey. There are a lot of good ideas in there, but it comes across as holier-than-thou to me. One example is the implication that adherence will certainly create more top players. Really? How come so many of the best players in the world spent far more time on the ice than "recommended" in LTAD?

It isn't the only way.

I really like Jack's article. On balance, my feeling is USA Hockey does more harm than good and it takes feedback like this to force them to be better.

[Section 8 guy]

Dlow, fair points, and I don't disagree. However I think the Millions of $ hyperbole is a bit disingenuous as well. Personally, I spent more $ filling my cooler with cold ones for our teams parents evening gatherings on our last road trip than I will send to USA Hockey this year. My guess is I'm not alone. Is it an issue....maybe. Is it a major "problem"..... With the overall costs to the average hockey family and how small a piece of it the USA hockey fee is.....not sure.

The oversight and heavy handedness of USA Hockey may be an issue. I'm sure there's many people on here that are far better equipped to comment on that than I am. If that, along with the cost, ar what JBs complaint is than he should focus on that and not the ADM, which is what most of his article is pointed at.

That said, people can't have it both ways. You can't spend as much time as people spend on here complaining about inadequate coaching and poor instruction........and then complain as loud or louder when someone tries to address the issue and improve it.

Is the USA Hockey structure the best way to do it? I have no idea......but you can't gripe at both sides of the coin.