Mnhockeys wrote:
Would that mean the selection process is at fault for not selecting the better players? It is advertised as to choose the best hockey players from the great hockey state of Minnesota. A good 15/16 year old got cut and a trott made it, would be easy explanation by the adults to the players, right?
How did all the finalists last year do in the mn high school season? Would that be a measure how the selection process performed?
It means the level of players is constantly evolving. Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
I keep coming back to big picture. How is it possible that Blaine had no representatives on the 16 team, when their bantam team was rated number two in the state. and they split with Minnetonka (along with a tie), which was the most dominant statewide Bantam team in recent memory .
Seems almost impossible to believe every single Blaine kid could've had such a terrible tryout that it overshadowed their talents which came thru during their great bantam season
Answer : it is not possible
Why did it happen? I don't know, but doesn't seem right
4on5again wrote:IF the players are evaluated individually, the odds are still low that section 5 only sends one skater to the 54.
There should be individual feedback, or better yet straight up publish a ranking after the festivals. I suspect they come in with ranking at the start. These are big boys they can handle it. More transparency.
Ding, ding, we have a winner !
I'll never be convinced many decisions aren't already made before the first puck drops.
Always been that way, always will.
It'd be nice if we were given a list beforehand so we could avoid flushing money down the toilet.
You don't need a list. This discussion has been going on ad nauseum for the past 10 years. If money is still being flushed down the toilet, look in the mirror, or simply credit the weekend experience for what it is, an opportunity. No more, no less.
zamboniexhaustinhaler wrote:
Ding, ding, we have a winner !
I'll never be convinced many decisions aren't already made before the first puck drops.
Always been that way, always will.
It'd be nice if we were given a list beforehand so we could avoid flushing money down the toilet.
You don't need a list. This discussion has been going on ad nauseum for the past 10 years. If money is still being flushed down the toilet, look in the mirror, or simply credit the weekend experience for what it is, an opportunity. No more, no less.
WestMetro wrote:I keep coming back to big picture. How is it possible that Blaine had no representatives on the 16 team, when their bantam team was rated number two in the state. and they split with Minnetonka (along with a tie), which was the most dominant statewide Bantam team in recent memory .
Seems almost impossible to believe every single Blaine kid could've had such a terrible tryout that it overshadowed their talents which came thru during their great bantam season
Answer : it is not possible
Why did it happen? I don't know, but doesn't seem right
The reality is, it's rigged now, it was rigged years ago, and will be rigged for years to come. In the past there have been players who were unable to tryout for one reason or another, and somehow mysteriously make the cut. I do know this for certain, he lived in my house. So 247, continuosly defending this tainted system is making a fool of you!!!!
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
Thanks for the adult response. You've established your true colors.
WestMetro wrote:I keep coming back to big picture. How is it possible that Blaine had no representatives on the 16 team, when their bantam team was rated number two in the state. and they split with Minnetonka (along with a tie), which was the most dominant statewide Bantam team in recent memory .
Seems almost impossible to believe every single Blaine kid could've had such a terrible tryout that it overshadowed their talents which came thru during their great bantam season
Answer : it is not possible
Why did it happen? I don't know, but doesn't seem right
I only counted five bantams that made the Final 54, two from Minnetonka, three from the rest of the state.
Bluewhitefan wrote:
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
Thanks for the adult response. You've established your true colors.
Thanks for the adult response. You've established your true colors.
Thanks for establishing you are parent A
And you're parent C, so of course you continue to support a flawed system. How many times has your kid gotten to the next phase without even trying out?
Bluewhitefan wrote:
Thanks for the adult response. You've established your true colors.
Thanks for establishing you are parent A
And you're parent C, so of course you continue to support a flawed system. How many times has your kid gotten to the next phase without even trying out?
All my kids have made it and been cut at different phases throughout the years. Its a good experience. Like I said before if you don't like HP don't go. I'm sorry your child was cut but this doesn't mean his hockey career is over.
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
hunting247 wrote:
Thanks for establishing you are parent A
And you're parent C, so of course you continue to support a flawed system. How many times has your kid gotten to the next phase without even trying out?
All my kids have made it and been cut at different phases throughout the years. Its a good experience. Like I said before if you don't like HP don't go. I'm sorry your child was cut but this doesn't mean his hockey career is over.
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
Mnhockeys wrote:
Would that mean the selection process is at fault for not selecting the better players? It is advertised as to choose the best hockey players from the great hockey state of Minnesota. A good 15/16 year old got cut and a trott made it, would be easy explanation by the adults to the players, right?
How did all the finalists last year do in the mn high school season? Would that be a measure how the selection process performed?
It means the level of players is constantly evolving. Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
I'm the parent with the wrong connections.
Get 247's connection and he will teach us how to use his perfect system.
Surprised that the getting-cut part was not explained as to teach kids a good lesson.
hunting247 wrote:
It means the level of players is constantly evolving. Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
I'm the parent with the wrong connections.
Get 247's connection and he will teach us how to use his perfect system.
Surprised that the getting-cut part was not explained as to teach kids a good lesson.
Bribe me a little and I will get you the national list
U-17's were a joke in some sections.
No big surprises really in 6AA/A, things pretty fell to how you'd expect. My family have no complaints, seemed about right.
But a friend of mine from 2AA/A, said an email was leaked out with player rankings, prior to going into the first tryout. OOOPS.
Now that is a complete joke. You have to feel for some of those players who didn't even have a chance.
8 Holy Family kids made it out of 2AA/A. You knew which HS coach was evaluating. 'nuff said.
@hockeytweet wrote:U-17's were a joke in some sections.
No big surprises really in 6AA/A, things pretty fell to how you'd expect. My family have no complaints, seemed about right.
But a friend of mine from 2AA/A, said an email was leaked out with player rankings, prior to going into the first tryout. OOOPS.
Now that is a complete joke. You have to feel for some of those players who didn't even have a chance.
8 Holy Family kids made it out of 2AA/A. You knew which HS coach was evaluating. 'nuff said.
Ouch..
Coaches should swap sections they coach
50 bucks and have ten out of state guys evaluate
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
Totally agree.
247 assumes that these parents who disagree with HP will somehow encourage their kids to sit and sulk. Think again. How about teaching your kid that there are injustices in sports (like all of life), and a time will come when you will be on the receiving end. And it hurts. Teach them that injustice can be a big motivator, and that their hard work can hopefully make their future chances undeniable. They need to learn how to handle success as well, (Clearly 247 is struggling with it)
Forums are a place for discussion, to air out gripes, get input from others, and hopefully better understand what is going on. It is too easy sometimes, when things are going well, to call others whiners and make yourself out to be the parent of steel.
hunting247 wrote:Two kids get cut, kid A sulks about it and does nothing to improve and his parents whine on a hockey forum about the injustice and the corrupt system and tell him/her it was the system to blame. Kid B learns from it and works harder to improve everyday and parents understand and support his/her growth. Which one has more of chance in the future, or a better question which parent are you?
What a load of crap. Have you actually witnessed this in real life? Kid B represents most kids after suffering disappointment - because kids are resilient. Kid A doesn't exist, except in very isolated situations. What kid B gets tired of is Kid C getting a pass through tryouts every year and continuing to make cuts even though he's no longer the player he was when he was younger. It actually happens 247, and you choose to delude yourself that the process is not flawed. Like it or not, progressing through these tryouts to St. Cloud, or ultimately New York, makes a difference in how players are perceived in the future, whether it's warranted or not. And just working harder isn't necessarily enough to alter perceptions of people that look at past accolades without actually watching the play on the ice.
Totally agree.
247 assumes that these parents who disagree with HP will somehow encourage their kids to sit and sulk. Think again. How about teaching your kid that there are injustices in sports (like all of life), and a time will come when you will be on the receiving end. And it hurts. Teach them that injustice can be a big motivator, and that their hard work can hopefully make their future chances undeniable. They need to learn how to handle success as well, (Clearly 247 is struggling with it)
Forums are a place for discussion, to air out gripes, get input from others, and hopefully better understand what is going on. It is too easy sometimes, when things are going well, to call others whiners and make yourself out to be the parent of steel.
Bored arguing with a bunch of whiners because there kid isn't good enough. I'll see your kids at nationals..... Oh wait maybe I won't
