Winning Teams/Programs

Zamman · Post by **Zamman** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:55 am

I never said that I was righteous or holier than thou. Look back someone else mentioned that I must be a Holy Angel, that is what I was writing about. ________________________________ Academy of Holy Angels 2005 GIRLS STATE CHAMPS! 2002 & 2005 BOYS STATE CHAMPS!! GO STARS!!Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... >Zamman</A> at: 12/13/05 6:27 am

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:22 am

I realize that it is uncomfortable for people to have their believe sysytems shaken. Everybody wants to think that the local youth programs depend on the local high school.....for what I dont know. But I suppose if it is repeated often enough .....well it must be true. The truth is that the school districts do nothing for youth hockey. I have been involved in youth hockey for 15 years in a number of different capacities. Other than the high school coach showing up for a some clinics, the school district has done nothing. Thats OK. They dont have to. But when some of the members of our privately funded and staffed youth program go to a private school, the phobics come out of the woodwork and complain that the private schools are stealing "their kids". Right. That makes sense. The high school coach shows up for half a dozen clinics and they are "your kids". Bizzare. Forget about the fact that the parents of private school kids have supported and run the program with thousands of dollars and volunteer hours while the local school disctrict has done nothing. Y Some of the truly insightful posts on this fine forum point out that AHA or other privates dont have a Bantam program. Well, guess what, neither do any of the public schools. But keep posting that the youth programs depend on the high school....maybe that will make it become true.

Bart82 · Post by **Bart82** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:52 am

Packerboy, You are relying on your personal experience to make your argument; that's an error in logic. Why don't you address some of my points head on. Is it your contention that Jefferson and Moorhead have not built up powerful high school programs by having a symbiotic relationship with the high school staff? If it is, then you need a history lesson as you'd be wrong. Is it your contention that high school coaches HAVE NOT lost their jobs because they did very little with the youth program? Again, you would be wrong. So, keep avoiding the questions - you're sure to be right and you can go right on lecturing all of us.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:38 am

Here Bart, there are two ways to go. 1. Keep teling us that the youth programs depend on the high schools with out any support for your statement. OR 2. Tell us specifically what the high schools do that the youth programs depend on. I have held just about every position a person can hold in youth hockey..including president of the association, so I will help you out. Here are the things that occupy your time: 1. Finances./fundraising..tell us how the school discticts finance youth hockey 2. Volunteer/people hours. tell us how the school district helps out here 3. Facilities/icetime .. how many rinks have the school disctricts built? Private schools have probably built as many that are used by da yutes. 4. Coaching ....not sybioism but hands on every day from Oct to March.. not some perfunctory "skate with the varsity" feel good BS. 5. Scheduling:.... after all of this is put together...some body has to schedule games, practices, scrimmages and tournaments..how does the good old local ISD help out here? Sure, we are all limited by our own experience. But name me a school district that makes any material contribution to youth hockey. I dont have any problems with the school districts not being involved...they have better things to do. The problem I have is with people who dont have a clue as to how this all really works spouting off about how "the private schools steal the kids". It's nonsense.

ChrisK · Post by **ChrisK** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:40 am

I brought up the Trebil-parent incident because Zamman had said "There is none of this parent pressure I see in the youth organizations." Who knows maybe this was a one time incident but considering the type of player who goes to AHA it's probably more a case of Trebil getting more adept at dealing with that pressure. Packerboy makes the good point that the youth hockey associations are private organizations, but his other point that the school districts "do nothing for youth hockey" is incorrect. The support may not be financial, though the Park-Rec programs in St.Paul do provide some minimal support and it may vary from district to district but it is there.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:55 am

Chris, Park and Rec depts are run by the city not the school. What is it that you think the school districts do for youth hockey that they depend on. Why is my statement incorrect?

NPGandyDancer · Post by **NPGandyDancer** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:06 pm

packerboy, bart82...etal. keep up the highly informative posting on this topic. i would add, that, without trumping anyone, the aha coaching staff is in an enviable position with the talent that is canted to their program for a variety of reasons. one can debate the reasons endlessly. which is why these posts are so interesting. coach trebil is adept at insulating himself from the pressure of parents. arguably thats in his favor and contributes to his ongoing success. he can focus on coaching without always lending an eye over his shoulders. he does not have the "political" payback (read parents in power i.e. "on the board") issue to contend with via the association-high school symbiosis. packerboy...you have worked in the trenches on these issues. elaborate more on why parents/players, in your view, jump ship to the private schools.

Bart82 · Post by **Bart82** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:22 pm

My qualifications to speak on the topic go as deeply as yours - more deeply then you know - so I'll just look past your lesson on youth hockey and your arrogance. And you STILL have not answered my questions in respect to Jefferson and Moorhead. Two very concrete examples of how it can be done right. So, I'll help YOU out - Terry Cullen and Tom Satedalen planted those youth programs. Gave them direction. Set up clinics. Worked with youth coaches. Advised board members. Should I go on ? How about Jim Pohl down in Red Wing who planted that program and got the first rink built? How about Dave Esse up in Cloquet who spearheaded the efforts to have a beautiful arena built in Cloquet and has volunteered hundreds of hours of his own time. You are limited by your own experience. So, limited that you cannot see those men who have coached at the high school level and put countless hours in with the Youth Hockey Folks. Perhaps you have never seen it done right. I don't know. Yes, the school district, per se, does not pour thousands of dollars into youth sports - but you miss the point. It's those people in the hockey community who are the ones who place the real investment in these kids - YES, packerboy, that includes the high school staff. So, I've got my facts and I have a lot, lot more but this board is not for books. So, now that I've answered your question - will you ever answer mine? AND, I go back to my original point - I NEVER have bashed private schools. Kids belong to parents - not schools. It's your right to go wherever you want and it's no one's business. My own kids go to a local Catholic Grade School and when it comes time to make a high school decision I will not ask for any input from high school hockey coach. I just think it's only honest to recognize that the community has invested something into these kids AND if the high school staff is deeply involved in the youth program then they are part of that community. And to pretend that it doesn't hurt to see them move on is just crass. The high school coach who sits on his butt and waits for kids to come to him deserves to lose the kid to someone else. Greg Trebil used to make these same argument before he moved onto Holy Angels.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:04 pm

You believe that Saterdalen and Cullen and Pohl started the youth programs as teachers? Remember those guys had kids in those programs. They spent hundreds of hours just like many other parents (a good example to those of you that dont) We have private and public school teachers in our program that coach their kids and volunteer a lot....does that mean the school disctrict/private school is contributing to the program? Weak. You give the school district credit for the work of parents and community volunteers. Your claims of great contribution due to "spearheading" and "advising" are vague at best and not well recieved by myself and many others who have to do the work. I am not saying it doesnt dissapoint people that kids go to private schools(something you characterize as "moving on"..they didnt move). I suggested a solution to that years ago. Take the sport away from the MSHSL. But no one seems interested. So, we are stuck with this private school phobia which is rooted in ignorance.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:39 pm

Well NP, they are not "jumping ship". They are going to private schools . Anyway, there are different reasons why kids are at nonpublic schools. 1.The grampa went there, the uncles went there, the dad went there, they go there. Some of these are also varsity athletes and good ones. Joe Mauer? CDH didnt have to recruit him. It would not have mattered if the local public school was just voted the best in the nation. He was goin to CDH...from birth. 2.Kids who attend Catholic grade schools and continue on with a Catholic education. That describes a lot. Admission into affordable Catholic high schools is highly competitive. CDH turns away as many as they accept. Again, nothing the public schools can do about it unless they wish to violate court orders and incorporate religious values into their every day curriculum. 3. Kids whose parents think the public school system isnt good enough for them and can afford to go private school 4. Kids who arent satisfied with the local school's sports teams. Number 4 is the one that all the posters complain about and I think consists of a diminumus number. Sometimes that can be a key player on a team and we all know examples but a very small percentage. Public schools in MN are excellent. But some just prefer the private route. And all kidding aside, its really the Catholics who are kickin butt these last few years, with due respect to the Episcopals at Breck. The vast majority of students and athletes at Catholic schools fall under 1 and 2.

nolookpassguy · Post by **nolookpassguy** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:40 pm

Bart82, One of the best lines I have ever read on here, "Kids belong to parents-not schools". Nice job!

Hockisbest · Post by **Hockisbest** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 3:45 pm

Let me put this simple.....money buys everything including hockey talent, the best coach, the best school. We no longer live in a society that has kids playing outside on outdoor rinks honing their personnel skills (rink rats)...too much playstation and computer play...we now have kids whose parents send them to the best hockey camps and if talented enough and enough money, send them to the best HS hockey schools. Too many parents live through their kids by hoping, buying and praying for the kids success.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:00 pm

First, I too have been around hockey programs for a long time (still around) and sports programs. I have lived in relatively (compared to TC area) small, rural towns. I am not Catholic. Not even a fan of the Catholic religion, but have many, many Catholic friends. My children went to public schools as did I and every relative that I know. But have many, many friends that went to private schools. I have been involved with local, regional and state politics. I am fairly intelligent and versed in the world around me. WHAT I KNOW FROM WHERE I HAVE BEEN. 1. Private schools can recruit kids to their schools and I am sure many need to recruit to insure the quanity of kids to effectively operate a private school (just go online). Does this give them some advantage over open enrollment? Sure, but we definely do not want to abolish private schools. And we do not want to disallow those kids the opportunity to play sports. 2. Youth Hockey supports the high schools and the community much more than the reverse. Can youth hockey survive without the school and the community? In my opinion, no. Is the reverse true? No. But the local school reaps an obvious benefit. They spend little on youth programs that provide them players (some will spend more than others). No hiring of coaches as they do for 7th, 8th, 9th grade basketball. Some do not have rinks so no facility cost as they do for the 7-9th grade wrestling team. The community (local businesses) may sponsor a team, or take an ad for a program, but in Bemidji the motels, restaurants, gas stations, and other retail outlets benefit a great deal by the teams coming to town every weekend for games or tournaments (per study in 1995 $1.25 million direct dollars just from tournaments held). 3. Most involved with hockey beyond what our kids are, want the Minnesota boys and girls to do well and have fun. We like to send 'our' kids to college teams, to the Olympic team and to the pros. Private schools help in that cause, by giving more kids an opportunity to play high school hockey, to receive a good education, in some cases get better coaching (just because of budget restrictions on the public schools), and, in some cases, get more opportuinites to be seen by the scouts. 4. Who contributes to the development of the kids? Well, just about everyone that pays taxes becasue most arenas receive a subsidy and give a reduced hourly rate to youth organizations. And the volunteers that run organizations are from every where (private, public, Catholic, Lutheran etc...). So when a kid leaves Public schools (some don't leave becasue they spend all their school years there) for Private school, he is not leaving his community, he is just making a choice of where to get educated and play hockey (sports). Some enlarge their community by going from Marshall to AHA, but still a MN based school. Too long, please ignore if you wish..... Bottom line - public and private both have advantages and disadvantages... If a kid leaves for private or open enrollment.. be good to the kid, because he is just a kid.

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:11 pm

There are many excellant posts on this thread, very enjoyable to read. Bart had many good pitches. However, hung one curveball (linking some dedicated coaches to the high school district), and the experienced Packerboy hit it out of the park. I disagree that hockey talent can be purchased. Talent is God given, and mostly further developed by the players themselves, with the help of some caring coaches and instructors along the way. Sure it is not without cost, but for the most part, its up to the players. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". Elliott definately is a politician,....I will leave it at that. With regard to the topic of the thread, all great teams must have at least a few talented players, whether "homegrown" or "imported". I don't think the present AHA coach could go to Sleepy Eye for example and immediately be successfull, unless he came with a core of talented players, like he did when he started at AHA.

puckingood · Post by **puckingood** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:35 pm

Incredible......One would think life itself revolves around H-M and AHA...........I think I'm gonna puke.......nope.... just did

SB24 · Post by **SB24** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:36 pm

Knowlze- You must've never played for a truely great coach. You seem to underestimate the impact a great coach can have on a player. Play another sport if ya dont got what it takes to DangleMcFangle.

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:02 pm

I have played for both good and not so good coaches, and have done a little coaching myself. By the way, it is a very difficult job. But along the way I have realized that the bottom line is that the players have to get it done. The better coaches can maximize the potential of the team, and with the not so good coaches, you're on your own. Players play the game, hopefully, the coaches can assist in making the game a little easier. All coaches need a few that can DangleMcFangle. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... Knowlze</A> at: 12/13/05 8:10 pm

SB24 · Post by **SB24** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:19 pm

yes, the danglers do indeed help. But i have seen first hand what a coach can do with a team that has no danglers whatsoever. And BTW, you said it yourself you've played for "good" coaches but how about a "great" one...i suspect not. Its a shame that not everyone could have a chance to play for my h.s. coach. a great coach can do amazing things with whatever hand he's dealt. Play another sport if ya dont got what it takes to DangleMcFangle.

Bart82 · Post by **Bart82** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:24 pm

Perhaps I'm a bit guilty of "hyperbole" when I said that those coaches planted those programs - but I'm not way off. However, having known coaches who have spent countless hours helping a youth associations - and without financial or familial reward - I can say there is NOTHING vague about the hours and time spent away from one's own family. In many cases high school coaches have something that most people who sit on youth hockey boards do not - actual playing and coaching experience. If you have the right person, it's an asset that would be foolish not to tap into. The best associations do. For your information, Jim Pohl is considered the godfather of Red Wing hockey. He did things with that youth program long before he knew there would be any benefit to his children. So, Knowlze, that's one curve that wasn't hung. You'd have to have all of the facts to hit it. Packerboy you are indeed crafty at avoiding the obvious truth. You don't speak for all those who have ever worked for associations. You continue to present your experience as the final say. Perhaps my point about high school coaches being a part of the larger hockey community was too subtle; I never truly linked them to the school district. Your experience is clearly different than mine has been. I can top your work with a youth association by about 10 years. Saterdalen was the ONLY coach Jefferson High School had until Lindquist. Are you really making an argument that his help with that association wasn't adifference maker? (Trust me, I don't like the guy much! But that's not the point.) Cullen's work at Moorhead has been emulated and copied by many. There are just as many names out there that no one would recognize. Are you honestly sayting that these men had nothing to do with the youth program's success? You won't even concede this simple point. Who is pathological? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... >Bart82</A> at: 12/13/05 8:38 pm

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:43 pm

I have seen, and been a part of some amazing games, both the winning side and not. But it is all relative, there is not a coach alive that can take the "bad news bears" and win a Championship. At some point along the road to the title, reality steps in, and a player or two must be able to DangleMcFangle or you lose. You are fortunate to have had an experience with a great coach, not all players get the opportunity.

MediaGuide · Post by **MediaGuide** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:52 pm

The assertion that the Jefferson program was not and is not supported by the HS program in a variety of ways is absolutely absurd, and I'd be embarassed to be the one making it. The same can be said of Moorhead, maybe not to the extent of Jefferson - Bart82, what do you think?

Bart82 · Post by **Bart82** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:22 pm

I could not agree more with you MediaGuide and I'm a bit taken aback that some on this board would choose to question it. I truly thought that I was making a point that all people who are involved in hockey recognize as gospel - the most successful youth programs work alongside the high school program. I think the key phrase is the "most successful". Of course, many do not and their programs are the poorer for it and it creates a lot of bad feeling. This has been Packerboy's experience; it has not been mine. The hockey world in Minnesota certainly have recognized these two programs as a model.

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:29 pm

I don't think anyone is denying the personal contributions of the named coaches to the respective youth programs. The point is that the HS coaches are the beneficiaries (or not) of all successfull (or not as successfull) youth programs, whether they contribute or not. Some coaches contribute more than others. It does not have to be the HS coaches involved with a successful youth program. However, again, it is to their benefit, so you'd think they would want to be involved. I doubt any of the named coaches would take credit for the success of the youth programs. I am sure they could each name many others that have contributed as much or more to the youth programs. Bottom line is, the coaches win with players, wherever the players come from. A coach can get hard work and good play out of talented players, but a coach can not manufacture talented players in a season. They play with what they have, granted some coaches can get more out of less talented teams than others. All championship teams have a certain amount of talented players, or they don't get to the last game. The school teams only benefit, with little or no contribution, other than the time the coaches may volunteer.

Bart82 · Post by **Bart82** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:51 pm

Knowlze, I don't disagree with anything that you just said. Willard Ikola, perhaps the most gracious man in hockey, was always quick to point out how he was the recipient of a great youth program. Edina still has a great youth program and with very little help from the high school staff - or so I've been told! But it was Ikola who helped to get that program started - yes, the youth program. No one can deny that. It's a fact. I don't believe that I ever linked the school district or the high school with named and unamed high school coaches. My main point was - I thought - rather fundamental. There are a lot of high school coaches that put a lot of hard work into the youth program - and there are many who do not. Truth is, that the main motivation for any coach - football, basketball, hockey, et. al - to work with the youth program isn't entirely altruistic; they want great players. However, if that "payoff"is no longer there, then what motivation does a public school coach have to work with the feeder system? Is the youth program better off without the high school coach? Maybe it is. I don't know. But before you want to leave the high school coach locked out of the boardroom take a real good look who at occupies those chairs. In terms of development that's a very real question that must be asked and it has ZERO to do with "private school phobia". Ikola had a vision that he brought to Edina. Saterdalen had a vision that he brought to Jefferson. There are others but those are the ones that I'm most familiar with. I don't bash Greg Trebil because as far as I'm concerned he put years of work in into youth hockey. But someone taught him to coach; by his own admission he never played the game. I wonder who taught him how to coach? Does anyone think that Sats had anything to do with it? Those who hate each other the most probably "loved" each other the most at one time. Enough of this - I've enjoyed the exchange. It's a new era for hockey. Time will tell if it's a better era.

SB24 · Post by **SB24** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:41 am

The vast majority of athletes at Catholic schools fall under 4. Play another sport if ya dont got what it takes to DangleMcFangle.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Winning Teams/Programs

Re: Z Driver

Myth perpetuation

Fact avoidance

Just tell us what they do

Re: Trebil incident, etc.

School not city

Re: Trebil incident, etc.

Still Waiting

Pathological

Ship ahoy

Re: Pathological

Re: Pathological

Great discussion.

This Thread

Re: This Thread

Re: This Thread

SB reply

Re: SB reply

Pathological Avoidance

I Hear Ya

Re: Pathological Avoidance

HS Support for the Jags/Spuds

Re: Pathological Avoidance

Re: Pathological Avoidance

Re: Ship ahoy