Longer season and periods proposed

[kniven]

I agree with you wetP. The rich will always get better no matter the situation. The less fortunate, small town A hockey will suffer more. AA programs playing A hockey will dominate even more. Elite league has pretty much lost all credibility with me. And A programs playing AA high school can’t keep up. This would surely contribute the Bemidji’s and Roseau’s and Cloquet programs to opt down.

[zooomx]

I agree with you wetP. The rich will always get better no matter the situation. The less fortunate, small town A hockey will suffer more. AA programs playing A hockey will dominate even more. Elite league has pretty much lost all credibility with me. And A programs playing AA high school can’t keep up. This would surely contribute the Bemidji’s and Roseau’s and Cloquet programs to opt down.

In the end, we are talking high school hockey. It is not MSHSL's job to prepare our athletes for pro sports. It is a high school league sport. Let the few dozen players go play elsewhere. We still have a great product with the depth of our talent. Kids are going to leave regardless of these small changes. They are leaving for reasons other than just # of games or length of periods. If was ice time as the issue, they have avenues to get more games in before and after the season and during summer. They leave because someone convinced them that the grass is greener somewhere else (and often it is).

As a father of two 3 sport athletes, I do not care to see the season lengthened or periods longer. Why should the other 95% of the players suffer because the handful of high end families want more. They have gotten more their whole athletic careers. The rest of the STUDENT-athletes are already stressed out trying to knock out their coursework during intense sports seasons. Academics first - or did we forget this?

[Jeffy95]

I agree with you wetP. The rich will always get better no matter the situation. The less fortunate, small town A hockey will suffer more. AA programs playing A hockey will dominate even more. Elite league has pretty much lost all credibility with me. And A programs playing AA high school can’t keep up. This would surely contribute the Bemidji’s and Roseau’s and Cloquet programs to opt down.

In the end, we are talking high school hockey. It is not MSHSL's job to prepare our athletes for pro sports. It is a high school league sport. Let the few dozen players go play elsewhere. We still have a great product with the depth of our talent. Kids are going to leave regardless of these small changes. They are leaving for reasons other than just # of games or length of periods. If was ice time as the issue, they have avenues to get more games in before and after the season and during summer. They leave because someone convinced them that the grass is greener somewhere else (and often it is).

As a father of two 3 sport athletes, I do not care to see the season lengthened or periods longer. Why should the other 95% of the players suffer because the handful of high end families want more. They have gotten more their whole athletic careers. The rest of the STUDENT-athletes are already stressed out trying to knock out their coursework during intense sports seasons. Academics first - or did we forget this?

Very good points. Nothing has to change. The MSHSL doesn't care about any of this. Even if they did, they would probably have to pretend they didn't. Either way, kids don't leave because of too few games. I agree, let em go if they want.

[WarmUpTheBus]

Slightly off topic but sometimes adding game, extending the periods and lengthening the season isn't even enough to keep kids. Shattuck Prep does all that and recently lost a Gopher recruit to the USHL midseason.

[yesiplayedhockey]

Bottom line is lots of people like myself just enjoy watching High School hockey. I don't think adding 3 minutes to a period is the answer but certainly adding 5-10 games could make the product better.

My one worry is some schools could schedule these additional games against weaker opponents (which doesn't do anyone any good.) There are already a handful of AA teams today with weak schedules.

Question is, would this just pad their win total even more OR would more games allow them the chance to play these added games against the tougher teams?

Thoughts?

[SCBlueLiner]

I agree with you wetP. The rich will always get better no matter the situation. The less fortunate, small town A hockey will suffer more. AA programs playing A hockey will dominate even more. Elite league has pretty much lost all credibility with me. And A programs playing AA high school can’t keep up. This would surely contribute the Bemidji’s and Roseau’s and Cloquet programs to opt down.

In the end, we are talking high school hockey. It is not MSHSL's job to prepare our athletes for pro sports. It is a high school league sport. Let the few dozen players go play elsewhere. We still have a great product with the depth of our talent. Kids are going to leave regardless of these small changes. They are leaving for reasons other than just # of games or length of periods. If was ice time as the issue, they have avenues to get more games in before and after the season and during summer. They leave because someone convinced them that the grass is greener somewhere else (and often it is).

As a father of two 3 sport athletes, I do not care to see the season lengthened or periods longer. Why should the other 95% of the players suffer because the handful of high end families want more. They have gotten more their whole athletic careers. The rest of the STUDENT-athletes are already stressed out trying to knock out their coursework during intense sports seasons. Academics first - or did we forget this?

Agree with all this but you also have to consider that the State Tournament is the Golden Goose to the MSHSL and brings in a lot of revenue. If more and more non-HS opportunities proliferate and more of the best players leave because those avenues become the pathway to college hockey then the HS tournament will eventually be diminished.

You have to pay attention to these things, consider the needs of these players, and keep HS hockey a viable path. High school hockey used to be big in Massachusetts. It was usurped because it ceased to be the pathway to the next levels.

[elliott70]

When I was with the elite league and project prep as its forerunner the kids I talked to in the league were excited about the league. When asked about kids leaving and the league keeping them the usual answer was 'nothing could keep them' they thought that was their best choice to get to where they wanted to go.

Obviously everyone is different. I think (again MO) there is pressure from college, juniors to get these kids more games. It would be nice to accommodate them but at what cost. I think (again My opinion) most kids are going to leave once they have gone through all the options. Hopefully they do that, go through the options, talk to a lot of people, and weigh advantage against what they lose.

If they decide its the best for them, then goodbye and good luck.

So, my vote, no, maybe add one or two games if possible but don't infringe on the fall and spring sports.

[elliott70]

Agree with all this but you also have to consider that the State Tournament is the Golden Goose to the MSHSL and brings in a lot of revenue. If more and more non-HS opportunities proliferate and more of the best players leave because those avenues become the pathway to college hockey then the HS tournament will eventually be diminished.

You have to pay attention to these things, consider the needs of these players, and keep HS hockey a viable path. High school hockey used to be big in Massachusetts. It was usurped because it ceased to be the pathway to the next levels.

I agree, to the extent you can afford to do it. Things change, some things die off or adapt in a different form. Love the state tournament but that has changed over the years.

Wish I had a crystal ball and a magic wand.

In 1987 I told a good friend who had played in the state tourney, D1 ad some pro, that in 10 years it would be a lot different. Things I predicted then have come to be, but he state tourney is still here and it is still good.

Hopefully the people in charge put a lot of thought into their decisions.

[zooomx]

I agree with you wetP. The rich will always get better no matter the situation. The less fortunate, small town A hockey will suffer more. AA programs playing A hockey will dominate even more. Elite league has pretty much lost all credibility with me. And A programs playing AA high school can’t keep up. This would surely contribute the Bemidji’s and Roseau’s and Cloquet programs to opt down.

In the end, we are talking high school hockey. It is not MSHSL's job to prepare our athletes for pro sports. It is a high school league sport. Let the few dozen players go play elsewhere. We still have a great product with the depth of our talent. Kids are going to leave regardless of these small changes. They are leaving for reasons other than just # of games or length of periods. If was ice time as the issue, they have avenues to get more games in before and after the season and during summer. They leave because someone convinced them that the grass is greener somewhere else (and often it is).

As a father of two 3 sport athletes, I do not care to see the season lengthened or periods longer. Why should the other 95% of the players suffer because the handful of high end families want more. They have gotten more their whole athletic careers. The rest of the STUDENT-athletes are already stressed out trying to knock out their coursework during intense sports seasons. Academics first - or did we forget this?

Agree with all this but you also have to consider that the State Tournament is the Golden Goose to the MSHSL and brings in a lot of revenue. If more and more non-HS opportunities proliferate and more of the best players leave because those avenues become the pathway to college hockey then the HS tournament will eventually be diminished.

You have to pay attention to these things, consider the needs of these players, and keep HS hockey a viable path. High school hockey used to be big in Massachusetts. It was usurped because it ceased to be the pathway to the next levels.

I get what you are saying, but it just seems odd to me that we are talking fairly dramatic changes that will affect 100% of the participants but are being driven by the top 3-5% of them. The 3 sport athletes (which USA and MN Hockey claim they want) will be further pressured to drop down to one sport. What does this do to the smaller school who need the football and baseball players to play hockey just to field a team?? What will this do to the school districts that are fighting budget issues?? What will this do to the compressed ice time?? If high school uses more ice, it will impact the youth programs who will have their ice further compressed. People on this thread actually think we can get longer periods of Pee Wees and Bantams??? If this goes through, you will be practicing waaaay later, more early morning practices, shorter games, shorter practice etc.

On top of that if you have serious academic coursework, which my skaters do, you are taking away even more study time. I have seen hockey players dang near have nervous breakdowns trying to balance the commitment of hockey with school. Will we start losing players who are academically advanced? In outstate, most away games require multiple hours on the bus + 5-6 hours at the rink (JV and Varsity games). They leave school early, get home at midnight. Up again at 6am for school. Not good for academics as it is. All this to try to potential sway 5-10 kids not to go somewhere else to play. A lot of impact on everyone to hopefully benefit a very small minority.

[yesiplayedhockey]

um....If Minnesota Hockey REALLY wanted all kids to play 3 sports, they wouldn't be loading up on their Fall and Spring Tier 1 programs

[elliott70]

um....If Minnesota Hockey REALLY wanted all kids to play 3 sports, they wouldn't be loading up on their Fall and Spring Tier 1 programs

I agree and vote accordingly (and speak accordingly).

The Fall stuff we have generally avoided in D16 (help those that want to do it, but do not promote it beyond what we have to).

The spring stuff does not bother me quite as much just because of our usually crummy springs up in the north country.

[zooomx]

um....If Minnesota Hockey REALLY wanted all kids to play 3 sports, they wouldn't be loading up on their Fall and Spring Tier 1 programs

That's my point. We hear quite often that a balanced, well rounded athlete will yield a better player in the end, but the actions of these organizations do not back up the words. IMO, some reasons Minnesota always yielded talent in the past is that our kids played hockey outside for fun (where creativity is born), most of our kids used to be 3 sport, well rounded athletes, and you did not have to be rich to play. All 3 of these advantages we once had are slowing being diminished as we react to what the rest of the country is doing. I am not saying that we shouldn't react and adjust... it is just a shame we feel the need to. I definitely don't know the solution, but it is a shame it's changing more and more to year round, checkbook hockey.

[yesiplayedhockey]

You could take that argument and expand on it 10 fold including

Number games they play in relation to practices

All the hockey schools sprouting up

All the private lessons kids are taking nowadays (which I think is really hurting kids creativity)

Athletes are athletes. You can spend all the money and time but it may not be enough (although in some cases it will)

Let your kid have a life. Focus on family, faith and education. Anything else is a bonus. If they have it, they will find it.

Do I wish hockey would go back to a winter sport- yes
Do I wish places like Shattuck didn't exist - Yes
Do I wish hockey was more affordable- of course
Do I see this becoming more and more a rich mans sport - you bet I do

Can we control any of these? No...

Again my preference has always been a community based model where kids are playing with their schoolmates instead of entrepreneurs making money off everyone by "selling the dream"....and by selling more, more, more

I get why Minnesota hockey jumped into the Tier 1 business. If they hadn't, that money would be going into someone else's pocketbook and at least Minnesota hockey can now 'control' some of the programs. So in many ways I don't blame them for talking out of both sides of their mouth. We are lucky to have them as a resource. I just hope they they keep to the basics of what made Minnesota the best state to grow up playing hockey - Neighborhood hockey..

[goldy313]

I think the MSHSL should change the class system to allow for schools that want more games to do so and those that don't to stay that way without being at a disadvantage.......

Class AA would be for schools to have 30-35 games, they start earlier and end later. The summer contact period remains intact or is lengthened.

Class A would be for schools that play 20-25 games, the season remains the same length, and there is either no summer contact period or a much more limited period.

I don't think lengthening the season is economically feasible for a large number of schools. If you do it for the boys you have to do it for the girls which just increases the cost.