Minnetonka Bench Shortening

[PondHockeyChampion]

I traveled over to the cold and loud Pagel arena to witness the great game between EP and Tonka. It certainly lived up to it's billing and was a fun game to watch. It did not appear it was so much fun for the non-participating girls who rode the bench the entire second period and the entire third except one - two shifts. Is this the mentality of this Coach and a win at all cost attitude? Appears the move-in has taken a lot of valuable playing time from others. After seeing this game unfold, I do see the reason parents move to the privates if they can afford it and their girls wish to participate. If your not a top 6 forward or top 3 D in this system you should definitely look for other opportunities if you can afford it. All the arguments against Marshall seem unfounded when you watch what unfolds here with this Team. If you have a girl who wishes to play, let them play and participate in the big win and have the satisfaction and fun helping their teammates. It is funny how the AD every year stands infront of the parents and talks about participation and the value of sports. If this is the value you are teaching by playing two lines and a win at all costs attitude?

There seems to be lots of accolades towards this Coach and their Team. I saw EP doing the same thing, but not even close to what this Coach's bench shortening starting the second and into the third. I guess if you win State playing 10 girls you should be proud of the way you instilled the values of Teamwork and everyone counts. Has the Coach been successful, absolutely. But does he win the right way and is he respected by all the girls in the program on how he handles questions regarding their roles?

Bash me all you want from all the others on this board, I am sure it will happen with this post, but the attitude by individuals who are supposed to be mentors and leaders is disheartening. What is the message you are sending to the girl who rides the bench? What value and message are you sending that you are not good enough to be on the ice when it is an important game. If they are good enough to be on the Team, they are good enough to play. Will they win State, Probably if they continue to only play 10 girls in sections which I am sure they will do. Bash me all you want, but still disheartening to see girls working really hard not get a chance to shine.

Your next Hero may be the one sitting on the bench, but she never gets the chance to shine. Win as a Team and lose as Team, that is a valuable lesson.

[MN_Bowhunter]

This is the way varsity sports work. Deal with it. While Tonka is playing their 4th line I think they should play the worst goalie too, she's on the team right?

These kids that are the 3rd and 4th line, the backup goalie, 5th D, etc. need to know and accept their role. That is to be positive and help the team in whatever way they can. If it's not on the ice during games, it's literally everywhere else. Practice, locker room, school, THIS forum. If you can't accept your role, you should probably quit, rather than causing derision on the team right before sections.

To sum up. This isn't T-ball, everybody doesn't get a trophy, nobody is guaranteed playing time.

[goaline]

This is the way varsity sports work. Deal with it. While Tonka is playing their 4th line I think they should play the worst goalie too, she's on the team right?

These kids that are the 3rd and 4th line, the backup goalie, 5th D, etc. need to know and accept their role. That is to be positive and help the team in whatever way they can. If it's not on the ice during games, it's literally everywhere else. Practice, locker room, school, THIS forum. If you can't accept your role, you should probably quit, rather than causing derision on the team right before sections.

To sum up. This isn't T-ball, everybody doesn't get a trophy, nobody is guaranteed playing time.

I agree with Bowhunter, welcome to varsity athletics anywhere, anytime and with any sport -- this time of year especially, you play to win. Tonka coach often plays a deep bench and sometimes not!

[U10Father]

I'm sure when the kids collect their medals after winning the State Tournament, there are some which say "Except she really didn't play that much" on them.

With open enrollment and extremely loose interpretation of whatever rules there are, some people inevitably chase titles. And those families whose kids are adversely affected by move-ins can come up with some excuse ("bullying", whatever) to move if THEY want. I'm not necessarily happy about the way it works, but it's like complaining when the sun comes up in the east every morning. It's just the way things are.

The High School Coach's job is to win. That's pretty much requirement 1.

[luckyEPDad]

The High School Coach's job is to win. That's pretty much requirement 1.

Wow, that is wrong in almost every way I can think of. Playing hard to win is important, actually winning, not so much. Things happily coincide with my daughter at EP right now, but the important things she's getting from hockey have nothing to do with winning. It is a crummy world you live in and for that I feel terribly sorry. Glad I don't reside there.

[Tigers33]

The game between Minnetonka and Eden prairie was for the conference championship so yeah it doesn't surprise me they were trying to win.

I have watched this team quite a few times and typically they play 3 lines. However in girls hockey there are LOTS of teams that shorten their bench. Very common in girls hockey to play 6 forwards and 4 defenseman.

The guy who started this post should send his kid to breck. Breck won the state championship with a kid that NEVER left the ice. She played all 51 minutes of hockey.

[Tigers33]

So ep dad I will assume you watched the ep/dodge county game...was Rasmussen going out every 3 shifts the whole game. Doubt it, right?

Also in the Ep/tonka game pondhockeychampionship were you watching the EP bench too. My guess is Boyle was going every other shift all game. I would also guess dahlquist got lots of ice time. Or did you just watch the Tonka bench for some reason.

[EricKnutsen]

This coach is highly credible. I personally know he treats his players fair and does his best for the TEAM. If it means playing the top players in tough games/situations, that is good coaching at the high school level (especially when playing a section rival close to the end of the season). Be thankful your coach is committed!

[36Guy]

[quote="PondHockeyChampion"]I traveled over to the cold and loud Pagel arena to witness the great game between EP and Tonka. It certainly lived up to it's billing and was a fun game to watch. It did not appear it was so much fun for the non-participating girls who rode the bench the entire second period and the entire third except one - two shifts. Is this the mentality of this Coach and a win at all cost attitude? Appears the move-in has taken a lot of valuable playing time from others. After seeing this game unfold, I do see the reason parents move to the privates if they can afford it and their girls wish to participate. If your not a top 6 forward or top 3 D in this system you should definitely look for other opportunities if you can afford it. All the arguments against Marshall seem unfounded when you watch what unfolds here with this Team. If you have a girl who wishes to play, let them play and participate in the big win and have the satisfaction and fun helping their teammates. It is funny how the AD every year stands infront of the parents and talks about participation and the value of sports. If this is the value you are teaching by playing two lines and a win at all costs attitude?

There seems to be lots of accolades towards this Coach and their Team. I saw EP doing the same thing, but not even close to what this Coach's bench shortening starting the second and into the third. I guess if you win State playing 10 girls you should be proud of the way you instilled the values of Teamwork and everyone counts. Has the Coach been successful, absolutely. But does he win the right way and is he respected by all the girls in the program on how he handles questions regarding their roles?

Bash me all you want from all the others on this board, I am sure it will happen with this post, but the attitude by individuals who are supposed to be mentors and leaders is disheartening. What is the message you are sending to the girl who rides the bench? What value and message are you sending that you are not good enough to be on the ice when it is an important game. If they are good enough to be on the Team, they are good enough to play. Will they win State, Probably if they continue to only play 10 girls in sections which I am sure they will do. Bash me all you want, but still disheartening to see girls working really hard not get a chance to shine.

Your next Hero may be the one sitting on the bench, but she never gets the chance to shine. Win as a Team and lose as Team, that is a valuable lesson.[/quote

Nice first post!!!

First, if you were at the EP game our bench ran short...nothing like EP's, they had multiple players that took 20 second rests and were back our there. Somethings tells me I will be chasing you around the blog as you continue to change your "name"!!

Something tells me by your first post you and Puckdaddy know each other!...No?? Of course not!

[Froggy Richards]

Yep, that's Varsity Sports. Coach decides who plays and when, Period. They are under no obligation whatsoever to do it any differently. Save these debates for the Youth side.

[Newly1234]

So ep dad I will assume you watched the ep/dodge county game...was Rasmussen going out every 3 shifts the whole game. Doubt it, right?

Also in the Ep/tonka game pondhockeychampionship were you watching the EP bench too. My guess is Boyle was going every other shift all game. I would also guess dahlquist got lots of ice time. Or did you just watch the Tonka bench for some reason.

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

Why are people going after the Tonka coach? Is it bitter parents who's kids don't play?

Second the comment about how hard the girls worked that didn't play, how do you know they work hard? Are you at practice every day? Maybe there was a reason the coach didn't play them, and unless you are in the lockerroom you have no idea what those reasons are.

[Defensive Zone]

I traveled over to the cold and loud Pagel arena to witness the great game between EP and Tonka. It certainly lived up to it's billing and was a fun game to watch. It did not appear it was so much fun for the non-participating girls who rode the bench the entire second period and the entire third except one - two shifts. Is this the mentality of this Coach and a win at all cost attitude? Appears the move-in has taken a lot of valuable playing time from others. After seeing this game unfold, I do see the reason parents move to the privates if they can afford it and their girls wish to participate. If your not a top 6 forward or top 3 D in this system you should definitely look for other opportunities if you can afford it. All the arguments against Marshall seem unfounded when you watch what unfolds here with this Team. If you have a girl who wishes to play, let them play and participate in the big win and have the satisfaction and fun helping their teammates. It is funny how the AD every year stands infront of the parents and talks about participation and the value of sports. If this is the value you are teaching by playing two lines and a win at all costs attitude?

There seems to be lots of accolades towards this Coach and their Team. I saw EP doing the same thing, but not even close to what this Coach's bench shortening starting the second and into the third. I guess if you win State playing 10 girls you should be proud of the way you instilled the values of Teamwork and everyone counts. Has the Coach been successful, absolutely. But does he win the right way and is he respected by all the girls in the program on how he handles questions regarding their roles?

Bash me all you want from all the others on this board, I am sure it will happen with this post, but the attitude by individuals who are supposed to be mentors and leaders is disheartening. What is the message you are sending to the girl who rides the bench? What value and message are you sending that you are not good enough to be on the ice when it is an important game. If they are good enough to be on the Team, they are good enough to play. Will they win State, Probably if they continue to only play 10 girls in sections which I am sure they will do. Bash me all you want, but still disheartening to see girls working really hard not get a chance to shine.

Your next Hero may be the one sitting on the bench, but she never gets the chance to shine. Win as a Team and lose as Team, that is a valuable lesson.

I have coached for 37 years and playing time for high school athletes that I would consider your second tier player have shrunk substantially. The price to win at all cost is very evident in most high school sports at this day and age. Why? You can probably name ten reasons and they would all be correct. You can read a number of sports medicine articles on playing time for high school athletes and each article says the same thing...coaches need to play everyone. "Beyond the Pond" (KFAN Radio) just had a segment on; Why coaches play or do not play all athletes on their team?...This was great too listen to. Mike Max (sports announcer on WCCO) had a prep TV show from "Positive Coaching Alliance". The main premise of this show was to educate high school coaches on changing their philosophy on how the treat the first, second, third, forth, and fifth string players equally. Not necessarily on playing time, but getting all players involved in a matter so everyone feels like they are part of the team. Every coach should watch this, it is was very good.

[FishEye]

Defensive Zone

Good Post I like your line "Positive Coaching Alliance". Nice, truly, thank you for sharing.

Not only should coaches coach to win, but they are also there for a positive part or these girls lives. Some of them will in contact with each other for 4 years. That is a long time to be positive OR negative to them.

I will always remember what a coach said to my daughter, and her line mates in the locker room, if front of the whole team.
"If someone asked me why I played on the third line, I would tell them because we don't have a fourth" This coach was and still is a teacher at the school. How do you think he made them feel as part of the TEAM?
It's not hard to get the whole team involved in some part of a game.
Funny thing is about this team and coaches, they have had very good teams, but never have made it past sections to state. Because they shorten the bench at section time, all the other coaches in the section know how to coach against them, and put together a game plan to beat them.
When they lost recently in the section finals, with 4 D1 players on the team. How most ex players and parents were happy to see them lose. That is wrong and shows a bad environment.

During the season, if you don't want to, or need to win the conference. Those games really mean very little, so why not try to get more players involved and put them in situations where they could show what they could do. Build some confidence, it's easy for coaches to take a small group of very good players and play them all game. Much of those players development was built in off season, away from these coaches. But, the really good coaches will see, or try to see, something in more players, and teach them to be better players. Not sit on the bench during games, or during practice when the 8-10 players also get 90% of practice time.

This is just a different way to look at this, I know many out there agree, or disagree. This is JMHO.

[PondHockeyChampion]

I traveled over to the cold and loud Pagel arena to witness the great game between EP and Tonka. It certainly lived up to it's billing and was a fun game to watch. It did not appear it was so much fun for the non-participating girls who rode the bench the entire second period and the entire third except one - two shifts. Is this the mentality of this Coach and a win at all cost attitude? Appears the move-in has taken a lot of valuable playing time from others. After seeing this game unfold, I do see the reason parents move to the privates if they can afford it and their girls wish to participate. If your not a top 6 forward or top 3 D in this system you should definitely look for other opportunities if you can afford it. All the arguments against Marshall seem unfounded when you watch what unfolds here with this Team. If you have a girl who wishes to play, let them play and participate in the big win and have the satisfaction and fun helping their teammates. It is funny how the AD every year stands infront of the parents and talks about participation and the value of sports. If this is the value you are teaching by playing two lines and a win at all costs attitude?

There seems to be lots of accolades towards this Coach and their Team. I saw EP doing the same thing, but not even close to what this Coach's bench shortening starting the second and into the third. I guess if you win State playing 10 girls you should be proud of the way you instilled the values of Teamwork and everyone counts. Has the Coach been successful, absolutely. But does he win the right way and is he respected by all the girls in the program on how he handles questions regarding their roles?

Bash me all you want from all the others on this board, I am sure it will happen with this post, but the attitude by individuals who are supposed to be mentors and leaders is disheartening. What is the message you are sending to the girl who rides the bench? What value and message are you sending that you are not good enough to be on the ice when it is an important game. If they are good enough to be on the Team, they are good enough to play. Will they win State, Probably if they continue to only play 10 girls in sections which I am sure they will do. Bash me all you want, but still disheartening to see girls working really hard not get a chance to shine.

Your next Hero may be the one sitting on the bench, but she never gets the chance to shine. Win as a Team and lose as Team, that is a valuable lesson.

I have coached for 37 years and playing time for high school athletes that I would consider your second tier player have shrunk substantially. The price to win at all cost is very evident in most high school sports at this day and age. Why? You can probably name ten reasons and they would all be correct. You can read a number of sports medicine articles on playing time for high school athletes and each article says the same thing...coaches need to play everyone. "Beyond the Pond" (KFAN Radio) just had a segment on; Why coaches play or do not play all athletes on their team?...This was great too listen to. Mike Max (sports announcer on WCCO) had a prep TV show from "Positive Coaching Alliance". The main premise of this show was to educate high school coaches on changing their philosophy on how the treat the first, second, third, forth, and fifth string players equally. Not necessarily on playing time, but getting all players involved in a matter so everyone feels like they are part of the team. Every coach should watch this, it is was very good.

Thanks for the great perspective Defensive, I love on the pond and will need to podcast as I missed today's show. My thoughts revolve around the higher caliber Teams like the Gophers women, U18 Nationals, even the Olympics. Do these Teams only roll two lines against Canada or Wisconsin? In the bigger schools, Tonka, EP, Way, Edina are you saying the is no depth in girls hockey? The majority of these schools 3rd line and so called roll players could be a another school's 1st or 2nd line. These are very competitive HS athletes and should be treated as a competitive athlete, boy or girl, does not matter. How many Super Bowls, big games, have been decided by the roll player?

"Coaches are really the most important and influential individuals in youth and high school hockey. The head coach is responsible for creating the atmosphere for the players and parents. It does take a courageous individual to lead people in a direction that might be considered different than others. It takes a committed coach to ensure that every player on the team gets the opportunity to learn, develop and play.
Good coaches will work hard with the lower-skilled players to bring them up to the level of the other players. Lazy coaches simply shorten their bench and take the easy route. In the end, short benches will work on the scoreboard about 50 percent of the time, but at season’s end, very rarely will the strategy work as the participating players are tired, maybe injured and the rest of the kids not really part of the team.
Having to play several games over a playoff weekend and using a short bench approach is a quick road to elimination as several teams found out over the years when playing against my teams. I see this happen at the high school level also. Team means everybody; win, lose, tie together. At the end of the day, it is just a game.
Does it take courage to do the right thing? Not really. It simply means understanding what is really important and in hockey participation – learning, fun and playing the game are what matters to kids.
See you around the rink ...."

[allhoc11]

This is not a surprising thread from the "trophy generation", I miss the days when playing time was earned and not just given. Here is some recent history to help put the state of the game into perspective.

Seeding at the State tourney has been in place for 6 years, since this thread is about AA schools lets look at the champions from those 6 years.

5 of 6 Champions in the seeding era were the #1 seed
#1 seed has reached the championship game every year
The lone winner that wasn't a #1 seed was a #2 seed
Of the 12 teams to reach the final in 6 years only two have been lower than the #2 seed, both were #3 seeds
The coach in question in this thread has won 3 of the 6 titles, and played a rather short bench in each of those seasons including a multiple overtime game where the 3rd line and 4th D didn't touch the ice in the OT's, and they still managed to win the championship game the next day.

If a program is serious about winning a championship every game matters, players need to earn playing time, if you are looking for equal playing time I'd say look into 19U options, or club teams not Varsity athletics.

[luckyEPDad]

So ep dad I will assume you watched the ep/dodge county game...was Rasmussen going out every 3 shifts the whole game. Doubt it, right?

Also in the Ep/tonka game pondhockeychampionship were you watching the EP bench too. My guess is Boyle was going every other shift all game. I would also guess dahlquist got lots of ice time. Or did you just watch the Tonka bench for some reason.

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

Why are people going after the Tonka coach? Is it bitter parents who's kids don't play?

Second the comment about how hard the girls worked that didn't play, how do you know they work hard? Are you at practice every day? Maybe there was a reason the coach didn't play them, and unless you are in the lockerroom you have no idea what those reasons are.

[luckyEPDad]

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

EP plays three forward lines with the first to getting roughly equivalent ice time (so that makes 6 forwards). The third line gets about half the playing time of the other two, most of it in the first two periods (on average that makes 7.5 forwards, not 5). Swing players get playing time in blowouts or during the last few minutes when the lead is two or more goals.

From what I see that is pretty common. Minnetonka stands out because they never bring any swing players and it makes their bench look short to begin with. I cannot believe the Tonka coach is stupid enough to only play his first two lines. After all he is winning because the Tonka youth association decrees that all players get equal playing time. A policy directly responsible for his three state titles.

[PondHockeyChampion]

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

EP plays three forward lines with the first to getting roughly equivalent ice time (so that makes 6 forwards). The third line gets about half the playing time of the other two, most of it in the first two periods (on average that makes 7.5 forwards, not 5). Swing players get playing time in blowouts or during the last few minutes when the lead is two or more goals.

From what I see that is pretty common. Minnetonka stands out because they never bring any swing players and it makes their bench look short to begin with. I cannot believe the Tonka coach is stupid enough to only play his first two lines. After all he is winning because the Tonka youth association decrees that all players get equal playing time. A policy directly responsible for his three state titles.

Third stringers - also know as roll players. They are the players who come through in the big games. Keep them on the bench and do not allow them to play in the big games. That is what a number of posters are saying. Only the top players should play and get the majority of ice time. Based on that logic the Patriots should never have allowed this player to play since he was undrafted and not considered a top player. Their coaches must know something and actually coach and develop all their players so they can put them in a position to win the biggest game on the world's biggest stage. Case closed.

undrafted rookie cornerback Malcolm Butler came up with the play of all plays: An interception at the goal line as the Seahawks were on the verge of a game-winning score.

Who is Butler? An undrafted free agent out of West Alabama, Butler was a surprise story in training camp to make the final roster. He wasn't a big part of the initial game plan in Super Bowl XLIX but came on as a replacement for slot man Kyle Arrington in the third quarter and played the game of his life. Butler is a great all-around story. He was working at Popeye's after getting kicked out of college at one point.

[Newly1234]

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

EP plays three forward lines with the first to getting roughly equivalent ice time (so that makes 6 forwards). The third line gets about half the playing time of the other two, most of it in the first two periods (on average that makes 7.5 forwards, not 5). Swing players get playing time in blowouts or during the last few minutes when the lead is two or more goals.

From what I see that is pretty common. Minnetonka stands out because they never bring any swing players and it makes their bench look short to begin with. I cannot believe the Tonka coach is stupid enough to only play his first two lines. After all he is winning because the Tonka youth association decrees that all players get equal playing time. A policy directly responsible for his three state titles.

Okay, we must have watched different games. I saw the 3rd line out maybe twice in the 1st and 2nd periods. Second my point about the 5 forwards is that they have 5 very talented forwards then there is a large drop to number 6-9. Just my opinion after watching a couple games, so I understood why he would short the bench. Not saying I agree with doing it, just understand why he does it.

[RailingWizardofOZ]

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

EP plays three forward lines with the first to getting roughly equivalent ice time (so that makes 6 forwards). The third line gets about half the playing time of the other two, most of it in the first two periods (on average that makes 7.5 forwards, not 5). Swing players get playing time in blowouts or during the last few minutes when the lead is two or more goals.

From what I see that is pretty common. Minnetonka stands out because they never bring any swing players and it makes their bench look short to begin with. I cannot believe the Tonka coach is stupid enough to only play his first two lines. After all he is winning because the Tonka youth association decrees that all players get equal playing time. A policy directly responsible for his three state titles.

Third stringers - also know as roll players. They are the players who come through in the big games. Keep them on the bench and do not allow them to play in the big games. That is what a number of posters are saying. Only the top players should play and get the majority of ice time. Based on that logic the Patriots should never have allowed this player to play since he was undrafted and not considered a top player. Their coaches must know something and actually coach and develop all their players so they can put them in a position to win the biggest game on the world's biggest stage. Case closed.

undrafted rookie cornerback Malcolm Butler came up with the play of all plays: An interception at the goal line as the Seahawks were on the verge of a game-winning score.

Who is Butler? An undrafted free agent out of West Alabama, Butler was a surprise story in training camp to make the final roster. He wasn't a big part of the initial game plan in Super Bowl XLIX but came on as a replacement for slot man Kyle Arrington in the third quarter and played the game of his life. Butler is a great all-around story. He was working at Popeye's after getting kicked out of college at one point.

How much playing time did he log prior to the injury? If he is considered #2 on the depth chart, that would equate let's say a #2 forward or d........you're referring to a #7,8,9,10,11,12 forward and or #5,6,7,8 d in your post regarding 3rd & 4th line. So would those same smart NE coaches share that time with those players under him as well? Not saying 3rd liners should never play, just questioning your comparison.

[RailingWizardofOZ]

You are correct , EP plays only 4 D, 6 F, and after watching Tonka game and Edina game, the top line gets lots of ice time. I think all coaches do this in tight games, based on talent. From what I obsevred EP has only 4 D and 5 forward, so understandable that in order to win games he shortens the bench. And yes I said 5 forwards.

EP plays three forward lines with the first to getting roughly equivalent ice time (so that makes 6 forwards). The third line gets about half the playing time of the other two, most of it in the first two periods (on average that makes 7.5 forwards, not 5). Swing players get playing time in blowouts or during the last few minutes when the lead is two or more goals.

From what I see that is pretty common. Minnetonka stands out because they never bring any swing players and it makes their bench look short to begin with. I cannot believe the Tonka coach is stupid enough to only play his first two lines. After all he is winning because the Tonka youth association decrees that all players get equal playing time. A policy directly responsible for his three state titles.

Third stringers - also know as roll players. They are the players who come through in the big games. Keep them on the bench and do not allow them to play in the big games. That is what a number of posters are saying. Only the top players should play and get the majority of ice time. Based on that logic the Patriots should never have allowed this player to play since he was undrafted and not considered a top player. Their coaches must know something and actually coach and develop all their players so they can put them in a position to win the biggest game on the world's biggest stage. Case closed.

undrafted rookie cornerback Malcolm Butler came up with the play of all plays: An interception at the goal line as the Seahawks were on the verge of a game-winning score.

Who is Butler? An undrafted free agent out of West Alabama, Butler was a surprise story in training camp to make the final roster. He wasn't a big part of the initial game plan in Super Bowl XLIX but came on as a replacement for slot man Kyle Arrington in the third quarter and played the game of his life. Butler is a great all-around story. He was working at Popeye's after getting kicked out of college at one point.

How much playing time did he log prior to the injury? If he is considered #2 on the depth chart, that would equate let's say a #2 forward or d........you're referring to a #7,8,9,10,11,12 forward and or #5,6,7,8 d in your post regarding 3rd & 4th line. So would those same smart NE coaches share that time with those players under him as well? Not saying 3rd liners should never play, just questioning your comparison.

[Tigers33]

First your comparison was to the college and Olympic players...now you are jumping to the New England patriots. This is like comparing apples to oranges and apples to chicken. You are making no sense what so ever.

My question to you...why is this such a sensitive subject? Were you the 3rd or 4th liner in HS? You don't make your first post about a game that the conference championship was on the line and question the coaching. It's personal for you for some reason.

[PondHockeyChampion]

EP plays three forward lines with the first to getting roughly equivalent ice time (so that makes 6 forwards). The third line gets about half the playing time of the other two, most of it in the first two periods (on average that makes 7.5 forwards, not 5). Swing players get playing time in blowouts or during the last few minutes when the lead is two or more goals.

From what I see that is pretty common. Minnetonka stands out because they never bring any swing players and it makes their bench look short to begin with. I cannot believe the Tonka coach is stupid enough to only play his first two lines. After all he is winning because the Tonka youth association decrees that all players get equal playing time. A policy directly responsible for his three state titles.

Third stringers - also know as roll players. They are the players who come through in the big games. Keep them on the bench and do not allow them to play in the big games. That is what a number of posters are saying. Only the top players should play and get the majority of ice time. Based on that logic the Patriots should never have allowed this player to play since he was undrafted and not considered a top player. Their coaches must know something and actually coach and develop all their players so they can put them in a position to win the biggest game on the world's biggest stage. Case closed.

undrafted rookie cornerback Malcolm Butler came up with the play of all plays: An interception at the goal line as the Seahawks were on the verge of a game-winning score.

Who is Butler? An undrafted free agent out of West Alabama, Butler was a surprise story in training camp to make the final roster. He wasn't a big part of the initial game plan in Super Bowl XLIX but came on as a replacement for slot man Kyle Arrington in the third quarter and played the game of his life. Butler is a great all-around story. He was working at Popeye's after getting kicked out of college at one point.

How much playing time did he log prior to the injury? If he is considered #2 on the depth chart, that would equate let's say a #2 forward or d........you're referring to a #7,8,9,10,11,12 forward and or #5,6,7,8 d in your post regarding 3rd & 4th line. So would those same smart NE coaches share that time with those players under him as well? Not saying 3rd liners should never play, just questioning your comparison.

My comparison, I guess you do not understand the NFL draft. He was undrafted which basically would equate to being below any 3rd or 4th liner. He was below 7 rounds of drafted players on the depth chart. His coaches had the guts to put him in the biggest game, at the biggest play. It's called coaching and developing every player. And allowing them to play in the big games. Or you can take the easy way out and just play six.

[Newly1234]

First your comparison was to the college and Olympic players...now you are jumping to the New England patriots. This is like comparing apples to oranges and apples to chicken. You are making no sense what so ever.

My question to you...why is this such a sensitive subject? Were you the 3rd or 4th liner in HS? You don't make your first post about a game that the conference championship was on the line and question the coaching. It's personal for you for some reason.

I am guessing that his/her daughter was one of the players on the skipper bench.

[RailingWizardofOZ]

Third stringers - also know as roll players. They are the players who come through in the big games. Keep them on the bench and do not allow them to play in the big games. That is what a number of posters are saying. Only the top players should play anmajority of ice time. Based on that logic the should never have allowed this player to play since he was undrafted and not considered a top player. Their coaches must know something and actually coach and develop all their players so they can put them in a position to win the biggest game on the world's biggest stage. Case closed.

undrafted rookie cornerback Malcolm Butler came up with the play of all plays: An interception at the goal line as the Seahawks were on the verge of a game-winning score.

Who is Butler? An undrafted free agent out of West Alabama, Butler was a surprise story in training camp to make the final roster. He wasn't a big part of the initial game plan in Super Bowl XLIX but came on as a replacement for slot man Kyle Arrington in the third quarter and played the game of his life. Butler is a great all-around story. He was working at Popeye's after getting kicked out of college at one point.

How much playing time did he log prior to the injury? If he is considered #2 on the depth chart, that would equate let's say a #2 forward or d........you're referring to a #7,8,9,10,11,12 forward and or #5,6,7,8 d in your post regarding 3rd & 4th line. So would those same smart NE coaches share that time with those players under him as well? Not saying 3rd liners should never play, just questioning your comparison.

My comparison, I guess you do not understand the NFL draft. He was undrafted which basically would equate to being below any 3rd or 4th liner. He was below 7 rounds of drafted players on the depth chart. His coaches had the guts to put him in the biggest game, at the biggest play. It's called coaching and developing every player. And allowing them to play in the big games. Or you can take the easy way out and just play six.

Has nothing to do with understanding the draft, its flawed logic. I see in the sections topic that Eastridge has a home section game this week. Maybe Coach Yeo will be there and you can pass your logic on to him. They are still in need of some depth at goalie and maybe they can save some cap space by him swinging by the rink for one of the arena's early mornings open hockey sessions. I'm sure there will be one of those diamonds in the rough or the next "hero" playing there.