How not to win friends and influence people in WBL.

[buzzershot]

He wont play his Seniors last year so he just cuts them this year for Freshman! Man!

[Napalm187]

Maybe the freshman is/are better! You gotta do what's right for your team this year and two years from now. If a sr. and frosh are comparable in terms of that years impact, always go with the freshman! Build for the future, while being competitive in the present. Every college football & hockey team would do the same. HS coaches are getting smarter all the time. There is no loyalty anymore.

[MNHockeyFan]

There is no loyalty anymore.

Coaches do what they believe will help their team win, which improves their chance of keeping their jobs. They are not in the loyalty business.

[MNHockeyFan]

There is no loyalty anymore.

Coaches do what they believe will help their team win, which improves their chance of keeping their job. They are not in the loyalty business.

[Shinbone_News]

There is no loyalty anymore.

Coaches do what they believe will help their team win, which improves their chance of keeping their job. They are not in the loyalty business.

Ha ha ha.

"Loyalty" died with socialism and the USSR in about 1987. It's called a meritocracy: You gotta earn your own way in the old US of A. Why does this surprise anyone anymore? Like HockeyFan implies, there ain't gonna be a whole lot of loyalty shown from the AD's office (nor the parents) when the head coach drops five games before Christmas.

BTW, there are other ways to earn merit and insure making the team beyond skills. Like being an indispensable leader. E.g. Mike Eruzione.

Just sayin'

[BearsSensGophs]

lol he's building for the future, cause no matter what he does, he won't be leaving!

[zyzxx]

He wont play his Seniors last year so he just cuts them this year for Freshman! Man!

Can you list the HS coaches that prefer to play/keep their seniors over a younger player with similar talent? doesnt seem to be the "in" thing to do these days...

[stpaul]

Some detail would help. Were any seniors with varsity experience cut? How many freshman made the varsity?

[meridian90]

He wont play his Seniors last year so he just cuts them this year for Freshman! Man!

This is ridiculous to me. I am no Sager supporter, but at some point the "everyone gets a trophy" mentality needs to end, and the people that get left behind need to either work harder or live with it, parents of those kids included.

Coaches need to ask themselves one question: which kid gives me the better chance for success now and in the future? If it's the younger player, they make the team, if not then take the older player.

[pioneers]

Some detail would help. Were any seniors with varsity experience cut? How many freshman made the varsity?

1 Freshman 8 sophomores 3 juniors and 8 seniors

[Bluewhitefan]

He wont play his Seniors last year so he just cuts them this year for Freshman! Man!

This is ridiculous to me. I am no Sager supporter, but at some point the "everyone gets a trophy" mentality needs to end, and the people that get left behind need to either work harder or live with it, parents of those kids included.

Coaches need to ask themselves one question: which kid gives me the better chance for success now and in the future? If it's the younger player, they make the team, if not then take the older player.

Disagree. If the senior is better now (next year is irrelevant) then he should get the chance to play for his school over the freshamn/sophomore. That's what JV is for. Too many prima donna kids think they should get to play as youngsters just because they played on A teams all the way up. Often (not always) their bodies are not physically ready for the pounding. Very few freashman - maybe a dozen a year or so - are ready to make an impact. For the most part they should develop at JV. But now days they'll threaten to transfer instead holding the varsity coach hostage. More should be secure enough in their jobs to show them the door.

[inthetwine]

8 seniors seems like a pretty average number for most teams, that is usually about the number that white bear has.

[meridian90]

He wont play his Seniors last year so he just cuts them this year for Freshman! Man!

This is ridiculous to me. I am no Sager supporter, but at some point the "everyone gets a trophy" mentality needs to end, and the people that get left behind need to either work harder or live with it, parents of those kids included.

Coaches need to ask themselves one question: which kid gives me the better chance for success now and in the future? If it's the younger player, they make the team, if not then take the older player.

Disagree. If the senior is better now (next year is irrelevant) then he should get the chance to play for his school over the freshamn/sophomore. That's what JV is for. Too many prima donna kids think they should get to play as youngsters just because they played on A teams all the way up. Often (not always) their bodies are not physically ready for the pounding. Very few freashman - maybe a dozen a year or so - are ready to make an impact. For the most part they should develop at JV. But now days they'll threaten to transfer instead holding the varsity coach hostage. More should be secure enough in their jobs to show them the door.

If a senior is better than a freshman, yes you keep the senior. A freshman will be better off playing Bantams over JV anyway, since they get so many more games. As a sophomore though, if you are on the same skill level as a senior, I would take the sophomore.

My opinion at least

[observer]

Very few freashman - maybe a dozen a year or so - are ready to make an impact. For the most part they should develop at JV.

Agree. But, as meridian90 says, they should be playing bantam.

Doesn't belong on this topic since WBL only has one 9th grader and historically has had a good Bantam A team where most every varsity star got his start.

[Bluewhitefan]

Very few freashman - maybe a dozen a year or so - are ready to make an impact. For the most part they should develop at JV.

Agree. But, as meridian90 says, they should be playing bantam.

Doesn't belong on this topic since WBL only has one 9th grader and historically has had a good Bantam A team where most every varsity star got his start.

True, freshman should play Bantams if they can, and JV if they can't. Don't agree on sophomores - if they're not better than the senior, they should play JV. The problem at the big schools is the kids and the parents don't understand what JV is for, they think it's beneath their little superstar.

[observer]

In the metro U16 would be great if all the schools and youth associations agreed on how to use it. Instead of all sophopmores, not making varsity, playing U16 it seems the top ones make JV leaving little left for U16.

[almostashappy]

In the metro U16 would be great if all the schools and youth associations agreed on how to use it. Instead of all sophopmores, not making varsity, playing U16 it seems the top ones make JV leaving little left for U16.

So is this what you are suggesting?

1. Freshmen (bantam eligible) play bantams.
2. Freshmen (not bantam eligible) and sophomores either make varsity or play U16.
3. Juniors not making varsity play JV.
4. Seniors make varsity, or get cut and play Junior Gold.

This would reduce the amount of time that most players spend within the high school hockey program from 3 years to 2. I think that if you have good coaching at the U16 level, and there is a fair amount of coordination between the high school coach and U16 coaches when it comes to play certain systems or schemes, wouldn't be that big of a problem. It might also give those sophomores more ice time to develop (assuming that with all of the new U16 teams that they would play more of a bantam schedule (>35 games) than a JV schedule (25 games or less).

On the other hand, if most current JV teams are 50% sophomores, and you replace those 10th graders with juniors, then there are going to be that many more seniors that have to be cut the following year (unless you have a senior-only varsity roster year-after-year, and I don't see that happening anywhere).

[observer]

It's so difficult to generalize as each situation is different. But, setting aside the top 5% of players that is what I suggest. Currently it would only work in less than 20 youth hockey associations and high schools. They can't seem to get together and do this cooperatively so each is always left to guess what the other is doing. To benefit more kids the associations need more communication and coordination regarding their plans. Currently, I believe, most associations and high schools fill out U16 rosters after the JV roster which drops the U16 level below where it belongs.

The primary answer is all associations need to recruit more, better and harder to grow their associations. More new mites each year over the last.

[almostashappy]

Currently, I believe, most associations and high schools fill out U16 rosters after the JV roster which drops the U16 level below where it belongs.

I think you are right here. I also think that this is how it has to be, so long as MSHSL keeps a non-contact period in place before first day of high school practice/try-outs.

We already have this problem (to a lesser extent) with bantam-eligible freshmen who want to try out for varsity. Unless they are good at reading tea-leaves (or have some off-the-radar/record assurances from the high school coach), they try-out for Bantam A/AA in September then quit that Bantam A/AA team if they make Varsity/JV in November. That's not a good situation for either the kid, the high school coach, or the local association.