Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

evegoe
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:20 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by evegoe » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:49 am

yesiplayedhockey wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:44 pm
Tap the number of games Bantams can play at around 60 (and 3 or 4 tournaments). More practices

Tell Minnesota hockey to try to eliminate some of the High Performance stuff in the spring and summer so kids can truly attempt to play a 2nd sport (Hard close all Minnesota Hockey sanctioned events in June and July for all kids under bantams)

Educate ALL city owned facilities that these kids hanging out in the rink are a good thing. (I don't know how many times I see kids getting yelled at by the zamboni guy.... for just being a kid)...We want kids hanging in rinks, stick handling and shooting pucks with their buddies. Not chased away like they are felons.
=D>

blueblood
Posts: 2389
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 8:36 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueblood » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:09 am

I like it yesIplayed =D>
Play Like a Champion Today

StanleyCup55
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:36 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by StanleyCup55 » Tue Mar 26, 2019 9:34 am

yesiplayedhockey wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:44 pm

Neck guards mandated all districts (it may be a rule already)

Figure out a long range plan to get the middle and lower income families back into hockey...

Tell Minnesota hockey to try to eliminate some of the High Performance stuff in the spring and summer so kids can truly attempt to play a 2nd sport (Hard close all Minnesota Hockey sanctioned events in June and July for all kids under bantams)

Educate ALL city owned facilities that these kids hanging out in the rink are a good thing. (I don't know how many times I see kids getting yelled at by the zamboni guy.... for just being a kid)...We want kids hanging in rinks, stick handling and shooting pucks with their buddies. Not chased away like they are felons.
=D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

blueblood
Posts: 2389
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 8:36 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueblood » Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:26 pm

Here's one for you - Why does Tier 1 start in August? Move that out to September like the Elite League.
Play Like a Champion Today

bardown27
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by bardown27 » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:41 am

Looks like age classification is changing to June 1 for the 2020-2021 season:

https://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_ar ... ow/1034528

HawkAA
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 10:28 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by HawkAA » Sat Jul 20, 2019 11:09 pm

bardown27 wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:41 am
Looks like age classification is changing to June 1 for the 2020-2021 season:

https://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_ar ... ow/1034528
Interested in seeing what this changes...my son is a June 23 birthday. He will continue to play w his grade so hes not hosed when high school hockey becomes an option...so. it will not change anything for at least 1 player! LOL

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:53 am

Every thing sent to me on here is now on the agenda for the district directors meeting in September.
All directors have been copied on these requests.

blueline_6
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueline_6 » Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:21 am

elliott70 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:53 am
Every thing sent to me on here is now on the agenda for the district directors meeting in September.
All directors have been copied on these requests.
Thank you! I'd be really interested to hear the discussions on guidelines for team declarations and what to do with the B levels. Unfortunately a trip to Biwabik in September just isn't gonna work. Please update here after the meeting.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:43 am

blueline_6 wrote:
Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:21 am
elliott70 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:53 am
Every thing sent to me on here is now on the agenda for the district directors meeting in September.
All directors have been copied on these requests.
Thank you! I'd be really interested to hear the discussions on guidelines for team declarations and what to do with the B levels. Unfortunately a trip to Biwabik in September just isn't gonna work. Please update here after the meeting.
Will do.

It should be noted three (maybe 4) proposals to change AA regions have been advanced. and will be up for discussion - at this time I don't see a vote as it is not been widely distributed.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:01 am

bardown27 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 2:00 pm
bring back icing on the PK (at least for bantam level, especially Bantam AA)
face-offs automatically to defensive zone of team taking penalty like HS (at least for bantam level, especially Bantam AA))
all boardings, checking from behinds, and head contacts should be auto-5. youth hockey refs are afraid to call the 5 min major and default to 2/10.
District Director response
This would require a change at USAH.
If enough people propose it they may consider it but not likely.
MH to change would require a special request and at this time Hockey Ops Committee is not willing to propose it.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:04 am

blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:42 pm
1) Regarding B level hockey:
Recognize two levels of B, call them BB/B if you want to follow AA/A. Or, conversely, tell districts and associations to stop doing B1/B2 and only declare AA/A/B/C.

2) Regarding C level hockey:
Create regional/state tourneys for Peewee and Bantam C. This might create a little more motivation for some associations to declare C teams. There are associations that declare their bottom team at B1 so that they "have the chance to go to state" only to watch that team have such a poor season that they don't even qualify for district playoffs. Plus, why do we assume kids at the C level don't love the game as much or don't want a full-fledged post-season? C is a travelling level of hockey, it is not house hockey.


Basically I'm looking for an outcome where there are regional/state tourneys for every MN Hockey recognized level.
C level is primarily a metro thing.
Metro directors are not currently willing to take this on HOWEVER:
Classification is being looked at and another level may be established which will allow for this, but things move slowly so don't expect for two years.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:06 am

The Exiled One wrote:
Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:12 pm
zooomx wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:50 am
blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:42 pm
1) Regarding B level hockey:
Recognize two levels of B, call them BB/B if you want to follow AA/A. Or, conversely, tell districts and associations to stop doing B1/B2 and only declare AA/A/B/C.

2) Regarding C level hockey:
Create regional/state tourneys for Peewee and Bantam C. This might create a little more motivation for some associations to declare C teams. There are associations that declare their bottom team at B1 so that they "have the chance to go to state" only to watch that team have such a poor season that they don't even qualify for district playoffs. Plus, why do we assume kids at the C level don't love the game as much or don't want a full-fledged post-season? C is a travelling level of hockey, it is not house hockey.


Basically I'm looking for an outcome where there are regional/state tourneys for every MN Hockey recognized level.
Would love to see regional/state tourneys for the B2 and/or C teams. However, class designations somehow need to be monitored and/or spelled out better. I could see associations dropping a legit B1 team down to B2 or C so they can chase a trophy. I could see a big can of worms being opened.
MWS coach wrote:
Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:27 pm
Rogers PWA should have no doubt been AA, you are correct, D10 is terrible at declaring teams at the right level. Interesting tidbit, the team Rogers beat in regional final, Spring Lake Park is also a HS AA program. Not what A level should be in youth.
I have a proposal that somewhat addresses all of these issues. I have it written up in a format that could be formally presented to Minnesota Hockey right now, but I don't think the old guard running MH are ready to seriously consider it.

Short version is that we should stop classifying top--->down from AA--->C and instead classify bottom--->up from 1--->5. The proposal goes into way more detail than that with various issues and how relabeling would address them. It also gives Minnesota Hockey a roadmap on how to implement the plan. Simply, they'd just relabel existing Minnesota Hockey sanctioned state and regional tournaments and call them "Level 5", "Level 4", and "Level 3". This would both serve as a guide to districts and associations as well as somewhat forcing their hand.

I expect this proposal would receive massive push back. Sadly, I expect most of the push back to come from parents who want to continue claiming their kid plays on the "AA team" or the "A team" because it sounds better than the "Level 5 team" or the "Level 4 team".

I'd be happy to share the entire proposal with anybody who is interested in exploring this idea. For anybody who wants to criticize it, that's your right, but I won't be engaging in purely negative discourse in a public forum. Feel free to PM me either way.
Your proposal was well received and is part of discussion moving forward.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:08 am

blueblood wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2019 5:14 pm
Calling icing on penalty kills is a joke.

I understand the intent of the rule is to create puck possession, but from my observations at the Bantam A and AA South regional, the coaches are not buying into that theory as all teams looked to ice the puck and take a face-off over risking puck possession and it wasn't even close.

Bantams should be playing hockey similar to MSHSL regulations.

Will that be addressed Mr. E.?
Adapting high school rules especially for bantams was mentioned but again rule changes come from USAH every two years.
It is not likely they will change.
Hockey OPs is not ready to take on special rules for one level or classification so for now it is a no go.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:17 am

yesiplayedhockey wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:44 pm
Get rid of the no icing on penalties rule (pee wee and bantams)
See above

Mandate all AA teams must roster 15 skaters
Directors did not like the idea as much discrepancy across the board etc...

Tap the number of games Bantams can play at around 60 (and 3 or 4 tournaments). More practices
Review of games played by the top 20 teams or so showed only 1 team playing above 60 games.
So no need to do something at this time.

Neck guards mandated all districts (it may be a rule already)
50-50 on this as some experts say the danger created is worse than the protective side. I am not an expert.

Take away all icing calls for squirts (Forces these younger kids to always hustle down the ice)
See above

1:30 penalties for all games that have 12- 15 minute periods (this will lead to more ice time for the bottom kids)
MH rule book already calls for this (D16 plays 17 minutes so I don't follow what may actually happen elsewhere.)

Figure out a long range plan to get the middle and lower income families back into hockey...
This created some buzz and excitement and is being carried forward to look at.

Tell Minnesota hockey to try to eliminate some of the High Performance stuff in the spring and summer so kids can truly attempt to play a 2nd sport (Hard close all Minnesota Hockey sanctioned events in June and July for all kids under bantams)
Hockey Ops is evaluating all programs to determine what changes need to be adjusted to better accommodate all programs.
Right now it is difficult to get in the required number of games to qualify for nationals so shortening the season will likely not happen.


Educate ALL city owned facilities that these kids hanging out in the rink are a good thing. (I don't know how many times I see kids getting yelled at by the zamboni guy.... for just being a kid)...We want kids hanging in rinks, stick handling and shooting pucks with their buddies. Not chased away like they are felons.
NOt willing to take this on.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:19 am

blueblood wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:26 pm
Here's one for you - Why does Tier 1 start in August? Move that out to September like the Elite League.
Again it starts earlier to get the required number of games in.

The Exiled One
Posts: 1756
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:34 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by The Exiled One » Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:05 pm

elliott70 wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:06 am
Your proposal was well received and is part of discussion moving forward.
Honestly surprised, but glad to hear it.

Let me know if you think MH would like to hear from me, but I don’t need to champion this idea if someone from MH wants to take up the mantle.

blueline_6
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueline_6 » Mon Sep 23, 2019 3:52 pm

Thanks for bringing all of this to the MH Board and for the feedback. Much appreciated!

The Exiled One
Posts: 1756
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:34 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by The Exiled One » Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:36 pm

elliott70 wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:06 am
Your proposal was well received and is part of discussion moving forward.
Please let me know if this issue is further addressed at the winter meeting. I'm curious to see what becomes of it. Thanks.

elliott70
Posts: 13495
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Tue Jan 14, 2020 2:51 pm

I think it went to committee (hockey ops) and not sure what is happening.
I should get an agenda soon and I might know before I get down there.

goldy313
Posts: 3350
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by goldy313 » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:38 pm

In Rochester for youth football if you are on the free/reduced lunch program we “rent” helmets and shoulder pads for a nominal fee that is returned in full with the return of the equipment. We also lower the sign up costs to something like $10 from $120. We hope the long term benefits outweigh the initial costs......plus charging those who can afford it an additional $5 goes pretty much unnoticed.

Our numbers are still dropping but not due to economic concerns.

Puck8
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:31 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by Puck8 » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:02 am

I'm a bit late on this, but some ideas:

1) Implement touch-up offside at all levels. Too much time is wasted on a rule that isn't even present at the higher levels. The idea that it forces teams to regroup and learn puck control is moot. That is necessary with touch up as well, and I would argue that touch up requires even more discipline and hockey sense. Assuming each team has 5 automatic offsides per game and 20 seconds are wasted for the face-off, that's about 3.5 minutes they could be skating.

2) Icing - Something needs to change. If the puck is within the defensive players reach, goes through their legs or over their stick without being touched, or the D-man is pinching, should not be icing. Way too many icing calls per game due to a D-man not handling an errant pass or clearing attempt. If there are 3 of these per game (which is way low) and it's 30 seconds to get the face off done, that's another 3 minutes of wasted time that they could be skating.

3) Periods - We do not need 3 periods at the youth level. There isn't enough strategy to discuss with Squirts and PW's that require 2 breaks. Go with 2 halves and save at least 3 more minutes.

Totaled up, these could add close to 10 minutes of game play to every game. When you only have 1 hour for game time, we should be focusing on how to keep the game flowing so there is more play time for the players.

yesiplayedhockey
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:33 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by yesiplayedhockey » Mon Jan 27, 2020 2:59 pm

Puck8

I like a lot of your ideas...especially going to two halves

As far as the icing....I'm all in favor of banning icing all together at the squirt level. Keep the kids moving/hustling

THE ONLY reason changing the icing and offsides rule may not work is sometimes a whistle is the only way to get some of the kids off the ice...So we need whistles otherwise the top kids may not ever never come off. You'd like to think this is manageable by the coaches but I have a feeling to many will just let certain kids stay out. How often do you truly see a wholesale change at the squirt level...Line changes at that level more often than not, only occur when there's a whistle.

I would also vote for one minute penalty like you see in some of the HP stuff.. Let's be honest, at the squirt level there are just as many shorthanded goals as there are PP goals...Having a PP is only a slight advantage at that level. So by limiting it to one minute, the bottom kids don't get shorted even more playing time.

Little things the refs can do to speed up the game (every minute counts)
1. Make all of them have an extra puck in there pocket so they're not skating around handing pucks off to one another all the time
2. Really try to limit the "loose puck battle" penalties....
3. Politely ignore those coaches that need a "definition" on every single call. I'm yet to see a ref change his mind or give the coach that next call based on the coach employing some degree of psychology to his argument (especially when it's obvious coaches are stalling)
4. Make sure every rink's scorekeeper area has clear, easy to read instructions on how to set up a clock. I see this way to often 2-3 minutes of time wasted just adding something as simple as a penalty.... Whoever invents an easier way to run and manage these clocks could be rich

Puck8
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:31 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by Puck8 » Mon Jan 27, 2020 10:41 pm

Yes -

All good ideas you added. Good point on the whistles for changes but perhaps change one or the other (icing or offside) for squirts and both for PW on up. Seem like easy changes that can add a lot of ice time to every game.

Wise Old Man
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 8:11 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by Wise Old Man » Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:14 am

Puck8, as a current board member and player and coaching development committee member of a larger northern association, as well as the head coach of a Pee Wee B team, I have to take exception with much of what you propose. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but, most of your proposals seem aimed at reducing the "dead time" in youth games played under a strict time limit. Guess what, we don't have that issue in most of the outstate. It's obviously why metro teams enjoy traveling to our tournaments. So, no offense but, most of us in the outstate get a bit cynical when metro people/leaders propose or get Minnesota Hockey to make or change rules that generally only benefit people in the metro. For instance, the absolute worst rule change in the last 30 years that significantly and negatively affected the core of our "community based" model is Minnesota Hockey's Board choosing to change the eligibility rule from a strict "play where you live" to, "play where you live OR play in the association located in the geographic area of the school you attend". The greatest example of unintended (or heck, maybe even intended) consequences is the monster it created in Hermantown. Are you aware -- and Elliot can confirm this -- that rule was enacted about 10 years ago based on a survey where only 7% of respondents replied that they favored the change? What happened to the concept that the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"? (and no, don't get me started on our country's current political leadership in that respect :roll: ). Having said that, allow me to comment specifically on some of the ideas you raise.

1) Implement touch-up offside at all levels. Too much time is wasted on a rule that isn't even present at the higher levels. The idea that it forces teams to regroup and learn puck control is moot. That is necessary with touch up as well, and I would argue that touch up requires even more discipline and hockey sense. Assuming each team has 5 automatic offsides per game and 20 seconds are wasted for the face-off, that's about 3.5 minutes they could be skating.

There's actual research that USA Hockey did prior to enacting this change that definitively proves it actually does improve puck handling/decision-making/regrouping skills at those levels, especially if coaches actually spend some time coaching it in practice. With all due respect, how can you say that having a player simply dump a puck back deep into the attacking zone without having to think about or consider where his teammates are or what his opponents are doing requires more discipline and hockey sense versus, having to first assess the situation in a moment about where his teammates are, whether he can or can't dump the puck in if he wants to -- meaning, are his teammates on or offside -- all the while having to probably skate backwards while handling the puck AND being pressured by an opponent? I'm sorry but, my 45 plus years as a H.S., USHL, DIII college player/college coach/administrator/official at the youth,high school, collegiate, and professional levels tells me your logic doesn't fly.

2) Icing - Something needs to change. If the puck is within the defensive players reach, goes through their legs or over their stick without being touched, or the D-man is pinching, should not be icing. Way too many icing calls per game due to a D-man not handling an errant pass or clearing attempt. If there are 3 of these per game (which is way low) and it's 30 seconds to get the face off done, that's another 3 minutes of wasted time that they could be skating.

The current rule is already interpreted so that if the puck IS ALONG THE ICE when it passes within the normal reach/effort of a defensive player and the player doesn't play the puck, then icing is waved. However, any puck that is shot in the air OR is traveling along the ice BUT bounces over a defending player's stick when that player makes the required effort to attempt to play the puck, then icing is still in effect as the onus for icing always falls on the team that iced the puck. And, that rule will certainly never change at the high school level and above, nor do I ever see USA Hockey allowing that change at the national level. If true, do you really think it makes any sense for Minnesota to adopt a rule that is opposite of how players will have to play under that same rule when they get to high school, juniors, or college? And no, I don't want to hear about the rule Minnesota has whereby the short-handed team is still called for icing at the Bantam level and below because it's very likely USA Hockey adopts that nationally, along with the Federation and NCAA. Also, a point regarding your comment about players "stepping up" on a player as a possibly playable puck goes past both players. Again, the onus is always on the team initiating the puck down the ice. Now, if the puck passes the player "stepping up" right along the ice and within normal reach, then yes, that icing should be waived. However, again, if the puck is bouncing or is in the air at the moment it passes the player "stepping up", the same interpretation applies and the fact the player "steps up" has no bearing on the official's decision to call icing. Obviously, since this particular situation requires greater judgment from the officials and, since youth officials tend to have the greatest variance in experience and ability, especially at the Squirt and Pee Wee levels, you will never achieve the level of consistent and accurate application as any of would prefer.

3) Periods - We do not need 3 periods at the youth level. There isn't enough strategy to discuss with Squirts and PW's that require 2 breaks. Go with 2 halves and save at least 3 more minutes.

If Minnesota Hockey wants to give districts the option to do this, especially for league play, I don't see any significant issues with it.

Totaled up, these could add close to 10 minutes of game play to every game. When you only have 1 hour for game time, we should be focusing on how to keep the game flowing so there is more play time for the players.

First, at the Squirt level, we never have an issue playing three, 12 minute stop time period games in under an hour. No, we don't flood between any of the periods. Nor do we have any issues finishing any level of pee wee game with three 15 minute stop time periods with a single flood between the 2nd and 3rd periods in under 90 minutes. I get it, there's limited ice availability in the metro. So, your choices are a hard time limit that probably allows for better practice times for everyone else but, frustrates everyone during the games that are played, or....you can always move to an outstate community where your player never has any time limits for games 8)

defense
Posts: 1311
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: right here

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by defense » Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:37 pm

Wise Old Man wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:14 am
Puck8, as a current board member and player and coaching development committee member of a larger northern association, as well as the head coach of a Pee Wee B team, I have to take exception with much of what you propose. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but, most of your proposals seem aimed at reducing the "dead time" in youth games played under a strict time limit. Guess what, we don't have that issue in most of the outstate. It's obviously why metro teams enjoy traveling to our tournaments. So, no offense but, most of us in the outstate get a bit cynical when metro people/leaders propose or get Minnesota Hockey to make or change rules that generally only benefit people in the metro. For instance, the absolute worst rule change in the last 30 years that significantly and negatively affected the core of our "community based" model is Minnesota Hockey's Board choosing to change the eligibility rule from a strict "play where you live" to, "play where you live OR play in the association located in the geographic area of the school you attend". The greatest example of unintended (or heck, maybe even intended) consequences is the monster it created in Hermantown. Are you aware -- and Elliot can confirm this -- that rule was enacted about 10 years ago based on a survey where only 7% of respondents replied that they favored the change? What happened to the concept that the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"? (and no, don't get me started on our country's current political leadership in that respect :roll: ). Having said that, allow me to comment specifically on some of the ideas you raise.

1) Implement touch-up offside at all levels. Too much time is wasted on a rule that isn't even present at the higher levels. The idea that it forces teams to regroup and learn puck control is moot. That is necessary with touch up as well, and I would argue that touch up requires even more discipline and hockey sense. Assuming each team has 5 automatic offsides per game and 20 seconds are wasted for the face-off, that's about 3.5 minutes they could be skating.

There's actual research that USA Hockey did prior to enacting this change that definitively proves it actually does improve puck handling/decision-making/regrouping skills at those levels, especially if coaches actually spend some time coaching it in practice. With all due respect, how can you say that having a player simply dump a puck back deep into the attacking zone without having to think about or consider where his teammates are or what his opponents are doing requires more discipline and hockey sense versus, having to first assess the situation in a moment about where his teammates are, whether he can or can't dump the puck in if he wants to -- meaning, are his teammates on or offside -- all the while having to probably skate backwards while handling the puck AND being pressured by an opponent? I'm sorry but, my 45 plus years as a H.S., USHL, DIII college player/college coach/administrator/official at the youth,high school, collegiate, and professional levels tells me your logic doesn't fly.

2) Icing - Something needs to change. If the puck is within the defensive players reach, goes through their legs or over their stick without being touched, or the D-man is pinching, should not be icing. Way too many icing calls per game due to a D-man not handling an errant pass or clearing attempt. If there are 3 of these per game (which is way low) and it's 30 seconds to get the face off done, that's another 3 minutes of wasted time that they could be skating.

The current rule is already interpreted so that if the puck IS ALONG THE ICE when it passes within the normal reach/effort of a defensive player and the player doesn't play the puck, then icing is waved. However, any puck that is shot in the air OR is traveling along the ice BUT bounces over a defending player's stick when that player makes the required effort to attempt to play the puck, then icing is still in effect as the onus for icing always falls on the team that iced the puck. And, that rule will certainly never change at the high school level and above, nor do I ever see USA Hockey allowing that change at the national level. If true, do you really think it makes any sense for Minnesota to adopt a rule that is opposite of how players will have to play under that same rule when they get to high school, juniors, or college? And no, I don't want to hear about the rule Minnesota has whereby the short-handed team is still called for icing at the Bantam level and below because it's very likely USA Hockey adopts that nationally, along with the Federation and NCAA. Also, a point regarding your comment about players "stepping up" on a player as a possibly playable puck goes past both players. Again, the onus is always on the team initiating the puck down the ice. Now, if the puck passes the player "stepping up" right along the ice and within normal reach, then yes, that icing should be waived. However, again, if the puck is bouncing or is in the air at the moment it passes the player "stepping up", the same interpretation applies and the fact the player "steps up" has no bearing on the official's decision to call icing. Obviously, since this particular situation requires greater judgment from the officials and, since youth officials tend to have the greatest variance in experience and ability, especially at the Squirt and Pee Wee levels, you will never achieve the level of consistent and accurate application as any of would prefer.

3) Periods - We do not need 3 periods at the youth level. There isn't enough strategy to discuss with Squirts and PW's that require 2 breaks. Go with 2 halves and save at least 3 more minutes.

If Minnesota Hockey wants to give districts the option to do this, especially for league play, I don't see any significant issues with it.

Totaled up, these could add close to 10 minutes of game play to every game. When you only have 1 hour for game time, we should be focusing on how to keep the game flowing so there is more play time for the players.

First, at the Squirt level, we never have an issue playing three, 12 minute stop time period games in under an hour. No, we don't flood between any of the periods. Nor do we have any issues finishing any level of pee wee game with three 15 minute stop time periods with a single flood between the 2nd and 3rd periods in under 90 minutes. I get it, there's limited ice availability in the metro. So, your choices are a hard time limit that probably allows for better practice times for everyone else but, frustrates everyone during the games that are played, or....you can always move to an outstate community where your player never has any time limits for games 8)
On touch up off sides I have to agree Wise old man. To me it is not a big deal if it is in effect or not, but the game changes some if it is in effect. When touch up off sides is in effect, a team can continuously dump the puck in and tag up, dump and chase dump and chace etc. If touch up is not in effect, a team is forced to re group, play in the neutral zone more, practice more puck possession skills. In all actuality having no touch up off sides forces more of the players to actually have a larger impact on their shift potentially. As a d man in youth hockey with touch up off sides, especially against a stronger team, a habit formed to just dump the puck back in. In non touch up I would have been forced to handle the puck more if I let it escape the zone by a foot. I would have been forced to back up with it and find a teammate in the neutral zone instead of just flinging it back in. However, having the ability to dump and chace with delayed off side in effect can be used very effectively in wearing an opponent down physically and mentally. The game changes for sure.

Post Reply