98 Fire tryouts?

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

RMWCHOCKEY
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:56 pm

98 Fire tryouts?

Post by RMWCHOCKEY » Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:10 pm

Does ANYONE know what is going on with the 98 Fire??!?!?!

Tryouts are next week and the Fire website doesn't have any info listed except for the date, time, place and cost for the tryout. Would be nice to know if there was a coach or something in place so that people wouldn't have to waste $50 on a tryout fee and not have the team come together again like last year.

Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!

old goalie85
Posts: 3696
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm

Post by old goalie85 » Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:50 pm

Isn't that a Wi, team ??? This is Mn youth hockey forum!!!!!

RMWCHOCKEY
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:56 pm

Post by RMWCHOCKEY » Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:08 pm

old goalie85 wrote:Isn't that a Wi, team ??? This is Mn youth hockey forum!!!!!
Yes, but the FIRE hockey teams are made up of 80-89% Minnesota kids.

inthenet
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:54 pm

Post by inthenet » Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:25 pm

I'm guessing at this, but I'm sure it will be announced before tryouts.

inthenet
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:54 pm

Post by inthenet » Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:26 pm

I'm guessing at this, but I'm sure it will be announced before tryouts.

old goalie85
Posts: 3696
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm

Post by old goalie85 » Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:07 am

RMW- yea I know-I was joking.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:10 am

RMWCHOCKEY wrote:
old goalie85 wrote:Isn't that a Wi, team ??? This is Mn youth hockey forum!!!!!
Yes, but the FIRE hockey teams are made up of 80-89% Minnesota kids.
Should be interesting to find out how the WAHA meetings went. As I understand it they were going to propose a new rule change in regards to how many WI players had to be on a team in order to be registered in WI, whether you were classified or unclassified. I can't remember for certain but I thought the proposal said something to the effect that 60% of the team had to be residence of WI going forward, so if that is so that would definitely effect the FIRE I would imagine

Task Force 34
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am

Post by Task Force 34 » Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:22 am

Mar 15, 2011 - Additions to or amendments of WAHA Bylaws must be sent to the WAHA Secretary prior to this date Apr. 1, 2011.

I don't think any modification was submitted.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:47 am

Task Force 34 wrote:Mar 15, 2011 - Additions to or amendments of WAHA Bylaws must be sent to the WAHA Secretary prior to this date Apr. 1, 2011.

I don't think any modification was submitted.
To my knowledge it was submitted timely and properly and was to be part of the May meeting vote. I just am not aware of how said meeting turned out yet. But you never know, could have bad info

Wrister
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:57 am

98 Fire Tryout

Post by Wrister » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:59 pm

JSR is correct. There was a change submitted to the by-law committee requiring a majority of players playing on any team in WI be a legal WI residence. I don't believe it got a majority vote of the committee, however, I believe it was evenly divided, so their was a strong interest by many to have this a new rule. I don't know how the entire WAHA board voted on it at their May Annual meeting.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Re: 98 Fire Tryout

Post by JSR » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:25 pm

Wrister wrote:JSR is correct. There was a change submitted to the by-law committee requiring a majority of players playing on any team in WI be a legal WI residence. I don't believe it got a majority vote of the committee, however, I believe it was evenly divided, so their was a strong interest by many to have this a new rule. I don't know how the entire WAHA board voted on it at their May Annual meeting.
If your info is correct and if what I heard was correct back in March, I'd bet this becomes a rule at next years meeting. Sometimes the intial introduction doesn't get the votes because they want more time for clubs to make the necessary adjustments for the future and then it will get the support it needs at the following meeting. Should be interesting to see if it does.

Wrister
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:57 am

98 Fire Tryout

Post by Wrister » Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:09 am

All of the proposed rule changes were posted at one time on the WAHA web site back in early May and this proposed change was clearly shown as one of them. Like I said, if I remember correctly, it was split amongst the committee members and because it did not have the required majority, I believe it went forward without a recommendation of approval. As you said, look forward to more for next year. It sounds like WAHA wants to make sure and protect their players and programs, which you can't fault them for doing so.

old goalie85
Posts: 3696
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm

Post by old goalie85 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 9:17 am

What % of teams like Chi-Mission, Det. Honey, Compuware, St Louis Jr, Blues, Yada yada are from those states??? This question maybe up O-town's alley.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Jun 09, 2011 9:34 am

old goalie85 wrote:What % of teams like Chi-Mission, Det. Honey, Compuware, St Louis Jr, Blues, Yada yada are from those states??? This question maybe up O-town's alley.
Can't speak to the St. Louis Jr. Blues but in general the MI AAA teams and Illinois teams are usually made of a majority of in state kids. Yes, they have a decent amount of out of state kids but I don't think I've personally seen any teams from those two states (atleast at the Squirt through Bantam levels, not sure about MM or mm levels) that were made up of a majority of out of state kids.

old goalie85
Posts: 3696
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm

Post by old goalie85 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 9:47 am

What about the Madison Caps, Team Wisc. Millw Adm, teams??

Wrister
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:57 am

98 Fire Tryout

Post by Wrister » Thu Jun 09, 2011 10:28 am

In response to old goalie85, easily the vast majority if not all the kids on the teams you mentioned are residence of WI.

old goalie85
Posts: 3696
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm

Post by old goalie85 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:02 am

Thank you !

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:35 am

old goalie85 wrote:What about the Madison Caps, Team Wisc. Millw Adm, teams??
The Squirt through Bantam teams are virtually 100% Wisconsin kids for those teams (GB Jr. Gamblers occasionally get a U.P. kid on their teams but not too often). The MM and mm teams have some out of state kids but the majority are WI residence.

old goalie85
Posts: 3696
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm

Post by old goalie85 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:54 am

Sooooo the ? would be," why would they treat the Fire differently". If I lived in western Wi I would welcome a rule change. As will alot of Mn assc.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Jun 09, 2011 12:26 pm

old goalie85 wrote:Sooooo the ? would be," why would they treat the Fire differently". If I lived in western Wi I would welcome a rule change. As will alot of Mn assc.
It's not so much they are being treated differently. As there was a time when the Capitols attracted alot more out of state kids, as did the Jr. Admirals, I just think hockey has grown significantly enough in WI they no longer have to go outside the state as much as they used to AND also, let's face it, as good and respectable as those programs are they did not have the Tier 1 AAA competition 10 - 15 years ago they have now, so attracting good out of state players is alot harder now than it used to be. The rule change would probably be a good one though considering the changing landscape of the state of hockey in WI. JMHO, not trying to get rid of the Fire or anything, I have no beef with them or any Tier 1 organizations for that matter, but sometimes you have to change with the times so to speak and this might be a change that needs to be made for WI, because let's face it, if they did in fact vote in favor of said rule change there is literally only ONE organization that would be effected, and that is the Fire, which naturally leads one to ask then, "if only 1 organization out of hundreds is effected then why is that organization so out of congruence with all the rest?" :?:

Task Force 34
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am

Post by Task Force 34 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 12:35 pm

It also begs the question as to why you would put the rule in place to impact one program unless your true intention of the rule was to kill that program.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Jun 09, 2011 12:48 pm

Task Force 34 wrote:It also begs the question as to why you would put the rule in place to impact one program unless your true intention of the rule was to kill that program.
Not kill the program. No one says it has to fold up and go away. Just bring the program into congruence with the rest of the state by saying you have to have 60% of the players be from in state. If that "kills" the program then maybe the program wasn't operating in the best interest of the community because there are ALOT of good hockey players in this state that can play at that level and they could still field good teams.

Quasar
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:27 pm

Post by Quasar » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:20 pm

JSR wrote:
Task Force 34 wrote:It also begs the question as to why you would put the rule in place to impact one program unless your true intention of the rule was to kill that program.
Not kill the program. No one says it has to fold up and go away. Just bring the program into congruence with the rest of the state by saying you have to have 60% of the players be from in state. If that "kills" the program then maybe the program wasn't operating in the best interest of the community because there are ALOT of good hockey players in this state that can play at that level and they could still field good teams.
Everyone knows that the Fire is the only outlet for kids in the twin city metro to play winter AAA tier 1 hockey.

We also know that Minnesota hockey want's the Fire magnet gone.

As a Wisconsin resident that is living within spitting distance of Hudson, I can say the Fire program isn't hurting anyone in this part of Wisconsin.

Perhaps the fact that they are always competitive on the national level has something to do with the fact so many people would like to see them gone.

There are a lot of people that have pretty solid opinions regarding the Fire.

The fire club isn't hurting anyone. In fact it's helping a few..

Get off the kill the Fire kick and worry about your own programs.

phil mccracken
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 2:40 pm

Post by phil mccracken » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:27 pm

Received a Fire Tryout notice today via spam email.
It came from mnmade@mnmadehockey.com

How would the conversation have gone asking Minnesota Hockey to send out to their database?

Quasar
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:27 pm

Post by Quasar » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:40 pm

old goalie85 wrote:Sooooo the ? would be," why would they treat the Fire differently". If I lived in western Wi I would welcome a rule change. As will alot of Mn assc.
Why would you say this?
How has the fire harmed the program in FL?
Why do you feel the need to control a Wisconsin program?

What do you have against choice ?

You seem to be heavily involved in summer AAA. I'm sure you know all the pros and cons, If you've got something to say, why not just say it instead of sniping from the sidelines ?

Post Reply