Freddy,
And how would that improve the program and youth hockey in MN?
Edina Tryouts... Here's What's Wrong With Youth Hockey
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
This has drifted to the genetics of players since it all relates to what team they make. It comes up because if Johnny does not make the A team, all is lost, what will we do. This has drifted because parents think if their #16 plays with #75, Johnny is doomed to play Junior Gold.
No matter what you do, parents are going to complain! If you have 2 or 3 A teams in the large associations, the top kid's parents complain that they are getting diluted and their son's accomplishments are not properly noted. You also have #46 parents complaining that they should have been #45. The thread started with what is wrong with youth hockey, and the answer is parents! It is also what is right about youth hockey. Parents are the key to making this a great experience for the kids.
The moral of the story is the parents have to let the kids have fun, and do not place an emphasis on what team the kids make. Tell them to do their best, have fun, and don't worry if you are on a C team or A team.
I also think the thought of adjusting the number of A, B1, B2, and C teams each year is a good idea. Some associations would be getter off playing B1 instead of A, or B2 instead of B1. Others have the numbers and skill to field 2-3 A teams and several B1 teams. I think associations should be happy with a 60-70% winning percentage. Any higher and the kids are not properly challenged, significantly lower, and the kids are overmatched.
Kids need to stay involved. Andrew Alberts gets cut from the EP high school team, matures late, and is in the NHL. Dustin Penner never gives up and is in the NHL. Most importantly, kids who stay involved, regardless of level, play as adults in the various leagues and have a blast. Hockey can be a lifetime activity as long as you do not burn out at a young age.
No matter what you do, parents are going to complain! If you have 2 or 3 A teams in the large associations, the top kid's parents complain that they are getting diluted and their son's accomplishments are not properly noted. You also have #46 parents complaining that they should have been #45. The thread started with what is wrong with youth hockey, and the answer is parents! It is also what is right about youth hockey. Parents are the key to making this a great experience for the kids.
The moral of the story is the parents have to let the kids have fun, and do not place an emphasis on what team the kids make. Tell them to do their best, have fun, and don't worry if you are on a C team or A team.
I also think the thought of adjusting the number of A, B1, B2, and C teams each year is a good idea. Some associations would be getter off playing B1 instead of A, or B2 instead of B1. Others have the numbers and skill to field 2-3 A teams and several B1 teams. I think associations should be happy with a 60-70% winning percentage. Any higher and the kids are not properly challenged, significantly lower, and the kids are overmatched.
Kids need to stay involved. Andrew Alberts gets cut from the EP high school team, matures late, and is in the NHL. Dustin Penner never gives up and is in the NHL. Most importantly, kids who stay involved, regardless of level, play as adults in the various leagues and have a blast. Hockey can be a lifetime activity as long as you do not burn out at a young age.
-
skillbuilder
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:52 pm
skillbuilder: First of all, I have NEVER been a part of a hockey board and would NEVER want to be. That statement alone proves how lost you are in regards to this issue. Sadly, you don't see the excuses you are making. There are many people in life that will always look for an excuse. We all know where they end up!
You use the same aristocratic propaganda they use so I just assumed if it looked like a duck? You are not privy to the specific real issues we personally have in play here so your judgement of me is reckless and unwaranted. When you've walked in our shoes you can speak your opinion like it's fact. You can certainly respond to this post but you will get no further responses from me as your vanilla view of this has been made clear and lacks relevancy.
You use the same aristocratic propaganda they use so I just assumed if it looked like a duck? You are not privy to the specific real issues we personally have in play here so your judgement of me is reckless and unwaranted. When you've walked in our shoes you can speak your opinion like it's fact. You can certainly respond to this post but you will get no further responses from me as your vanilla view of this has been made clear and lacks relevancy.
-
frederick61
- Posts: 1039
- Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:54 pm
-
O-townClown
- Posts: 4422
- Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:22 pm
- Location: Typical homeboy from the O-Town
Amen, brother
Sorno, you and I think alike. I will add, however, that it is easy to talk about what 'should' be and then some situations come up that aren't easy to handle. Everyone wants to do the right thing, but nobody can agree on what that is.
Two Squirt A teams in Edina, or one?
Out-of-season all-star teams or not, so Johnny can do other things?
You get my point.
Kids are all different. What is great for some isn't needed for others and might destroy the rest. I'm thinking of something like the Minnesota Made hyper-competitive teams. Since we probably don't know which kids fall into each category until they try it there will continue to be some bad experiences, and there will continue to be kids that come through that program that get drafted into the NHL.
Following an age group for several years would make a great documentary. From 4th to 11th grade or something.
Two Squirt A teams in Edina, or one?
Out-of-season all-star teams or not, so Johnny can do other things?
You get my point.
Kids are all different. What is great for some isn't needed for others and might destroy the rest. I'm thinking of something like the Minnesota Made hyper-competitive teams. Since we probably don't know which kids fall into each category until they try it there will continue to be some bad experiences, and there will continue to be kids that come through that program that get drafted into the NHL.
Following an age group for several years would make a great documentary. From 4th to 11th grade or something.
Edina Tryouts
Hockey has a tendency to bring out the best in all of us 
-
toomanystitches
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 10:06 am
-
skillbuilder
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:52 pm
Many of the posts continue to talk in terms of 2 A teams and clubs that want to win will not embrace that. Not to beat a dead horse but a post I started last December is still a plausible option to satisfy many. It's currently on page 8 about ten down and is called developing skill sets. In a nut shell how about A1,A2,B1,B2,B3,C1 C2... A club like Edina could have one of each and begin doubling or tripling up at B2 or B3. It would give # 16 and others the chance to play a higher level brand of hockey and keep the level of skill in a very tight range developing more bubble kids. Associations with smaller head counts would fore go A1 hockey (per MN Hockey maybe) and could skip other levels based on a mathmatical formula that would tell clubs where they should field teams. There could be exceptions for past performance (ie. Iron Range) like soccer does it.
In addition the redistricting topic always at the top of this forum has great ideas that could tie into this including a recent posting about reduced districts and a Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest boundary idea where teams could choose appropriate opponents from broad areas.
There are solutions that will make the outburst Edina saw less likely if we commit to finding them, accept some compromises, and move past selfish entitlement for the good of a substantially larger group of kids in the middle.
In addition the redistricting topic always at the top of this forum has great ideas that could tie into this including a recent posting about reduced districts and a Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest boundary idea where teams could choose appropriate opponents from broad areas.
There are solutions that will make the outburst Edina saw less likely if we commit to finding them, accept some compromises, and move past selfish entitlement for the good of a substantially larger group of kids in the middle.
-
Can't Never Tried
- Posts: 4345
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:55 pm
How would this prevent the person who's child did not make the A1 team react any different?skillbuilder wrote:Many of the posts continue to talk in terms of 2 A teams and clubs that want to win will not embrace that. Not to beat a dead horse but a post I started last December is still a plausible option to satisfy many. It's currently on page 8 about ten down and is called developing skill sets. In a nut shell how about A1,A2,B1,B2,B3,C1 C2... A club like Edina could have one of each and begin doubling or tripling up at B2 or B3. It would give # 16 and others the chance to play a higher level brand of hockey and keep the level of skill in a very tight range developing more bubble kids. Associations with smaller head counts would fore go A1 hockey (per MN Hockey maybe) and could skip other levels based on a mathmatical formula that would tell clubs where they should field teams. There could be exceptions for past performance (ie. Iron Range) like soccer does it.
In addition the redistricting topic always at the top of this forum has great ideas that could tie into this including a recent posting about reduced districts and a Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest boundary idea where teams could choose appropriate opponents from broad areas.
There are solutions that will make the outburst Edina saw less likely if we commit to finding them, accept some compromises, and move past selfish entitlement for the good of a substantially larger group of kids in the middle.
So would the A2 team play other A1 teams?
Or do they only play other A2 teams? which of course would now be the new B1 team with a fancy A name
I have a couple more questions,
How many B1 teams went undefeated last year? were they big program teams that only field a single A team? If they were, shouldn't they win every game if they were so close to the top 15 skaters?
The way I see it, is you take your top # of players and they're "A players", then the #'s below that you have determined thru a substancial break point in tryouts to form a number of B1 teams, these are equally divided, and so on with B2.
Oh yeah that's how they do it now.
-
skillbuilder
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:52 pm
Example: Edina's A2 peewee team would play EP's second 15 (their A2) or Kennedys top 15 as they would not have an A1 based on competitiveness ie. numbers. The A2 team in Edina would play 2-3 of the teams the A team plays now (Kennedy Shakopee etc.) The difference is 15 kids at a time. The alternative is 4-6 equal B teams like it is now and that serves only the top 15 and no one else. Even a B2 kid in this structure is playing with and against kids of similar skill. This is how the most natural development occurs.
The idea is A's can play A's; b's etc....Can't Never Tried wrote:How would this prevent the person who's child did not make the A1 team react any different?skillbuilder wrote:Many of the posts continue to talk in terms of 2 A teams and clubs that want to win will not embrace that. Not to beat a dead horse but a post I started last December is still a plausible option to satisfy many. It's currently on page 8 about ten down and is called developing skill sets. In a nut shell how about A1,A2,B1,B2,B3,C1 C2... A club like Edina could have one of each and begin doubling or tripling up at B2 or B3. It would give # 16 and others the chance to play a higher level brand of hockey and keep the level of skill in a very tight range developing more bubble kids. Associations with smaller head counts would fore go A1 hockey (per MN Hockey maybe) and could skip other levels based on a mathmatical formula that would tell clubs where they should field teams. There could be exceptions for past performance (ie. Iron Range) like soccer does it.
In addition the redistricting topic always at the top of this forum has great ideas that could tie into this including a recent posting about reduced districts and a Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest boundary idea where teams could choose appropriate opponents from broad areas.
There are solutions that will make the outburst Edina saw less likely if we commit to finding them, accept some compromises, and move past selfish entitlement for the good of a substantially larger group of kids in the middle.
So would the A2 team play other A1 teams?
Or do they only play other A2 teams? which of course would now be the new B1 team with a fancy A name
I have a couple more questions,
How many B1 teams went undefeated last year? were they big program teams that only field a single A team? If they were, shouldn't they win every game if they were so close to the top 15 skaters?
The way I see it, is you take your top # of players and they're "A players", then the #'s below that you have determined thru a substancial break point in tryouts to form a number of B1 teams, these are equally divided, and so on with B2.
Oh yeah that's how they do it now.
But the assn has ID a team as at the top, or next group, or next group.
That way a Buffalo A2 team can test their medal(metal??) against an Edina A1 team.
MN Hockey is looking at these variables as I type.
Will it fix Mr NHLer from Edina going off the deep end???
Probably not, but MAY be of help.
Apparently Mr. NHLer skipped the HEP class.
-
Can't Never Tried
- Posts: 4345
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:55 pm
So now what your saying is that (hypothetically) Kennedy does not have an A1 team based on competitiveness, who decided this? their board?skillbuilder wrote:Example: Edina's A2 peewee team would play EP's second 15 (their A2) or Kennedys top 15 as they would not have an A1 based on competitiveness ie. numbers. The A2 team in Edina would play 2-3 of the teams the A team plays now (Kennedy Shakopee etc.) The difference is 15 kids at a time. The alternative is 4-6 equal B teams like it is now and that serves only the top 15 and no one else. Even a B2 kid in this structure is playing with and against kids of similar skill. This is how the most natural development occurs.
Do you think that the board or membership is going to say "we're not going to have a top level team" because they can only field 3 teams at each level? when Edina or EP can field 5, I don't think so.
I see how it works, A's play A's etc. but I don't believe that only the top 15 develop, and I think you'll see the same problems with A1 and A2 as you do with A to B1 etc.
Unless you make the top team, I guess it's just not good enough.
-
frederick61
- Posts: 1039
- Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:54 pm
Re-stating the questions: how would opening the large associations so that more of their in-house players could play traveling improve the large associations program? And how would that improve youth hockey? I see a number of posts speculating what could be done by modifying various levels. But the question asked by TriedThat2 why do anything? Of what value would that be to the association and or to youth hockey in general. These are tough questions to answer.TriedThat2 wrote:Freddy,
And how would that improve the program and youth hockey in MN?
For the first question, I believe the association needs to do something to sustain interest that otherwise will be lost by the association being forced to select kids too soon in their development. By providing more competitive opportunity, it keeps more kids and parents interested longer in the program allowing for player development and delays having to select top players. More players playing competitively mean stronger teams at every level and that gets more kids interested in playing.
As to improving youth hockey, if the bulk of the kids are "in-house" as squirts and peewees, which the large numbers imply, they can only play "in-house" competition inside or outside their association. If more kids from large programs can compete at the A or B levels, the competition raises the skill levels of all kids within the association and all kids OUTSIDE the association that play them. I see this every year at the peewee A and peewee B1 levels. At the start of the year, certain teams dominate based on their skill levels being tuned by summer hockey. At the end of the season, that gap is narrowed by the teams they easily beat earlier in the season.
-
skillbuilder
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:52 pm
Quote From CNT: So now what your saying is that (hypothetically) Kennedy does not have an A1 team based on competitiveness, who decided this? their board?
Do you think that the board or membership is going to say "we're not going to have a top level team" because they can only field 3 teams at each level? when Edina or EP can field 5, I don't think so.
I see how it works, A's play A's etc. but I don't believe that only the top 15 develop, and I think you'll see the same problems with A1 and A2 as you do with A to B1 etc.
Unless you make the top team, I guess it's just not good enough.
^
It would be for us but I can't speak for others. No plan satisfies everyone. As far as Kennedy I use them as an example not in a derogatory way as I have several of there top peewee A players on my summer team and they will all tell you being beaten by Edina by 8 goals isn't fun but playing B1 as it is today isn't good enough so they endure it. MN Hockey would probably need to put restrictions on A1 based on size, history of success and maybe some other criteria and take it out of the boards hands in order to create parody. I know that sounds unfair but it's unfair to make Edina play an opponent below their level as well. Why does one fairness issue outway the other. Everyone has their selfish needs and it makes change difficult. Parents and administrators need to put the kids first but it won't happen without a fight I'm sure.
Do you think that the board or membership is going to say "we're not going to have a top level team" because they can only field 3 teams at each level? when Edina or EP can field 5, I don't think so.
I see how it works, A's play A's etc. but I don't believe that only the top 15 develop, and I think you'll see the same problems with A1 and A2 as you do with A to B1 etc.
Unless you make the top team, I guess it's just not good enough.
^
It would be for us but I can't speak for others. No plan satisfies everyone. As far as Kennedy I use them as an example not in a derogatory way as I have several of there top peewee A players on my summer team and they will all tell you being beaten by Edina by 8 goals isn't fun but playing B1 as it is today isn't good enough so they endure it. MN Hockey would probably need to put restrictions on A1 based on size, history of success and maybe some other criteria and take it out of the boards hands in order to create parody. I know that sounds unfair but it's unfair to make Edina play an opponent below their level as well. Why does one fairness issue outway the other. Everyone has their selfish needs and it makes change difficult. Parents and administrators need to put the kids first but it won't happen without a fight I'm sure.
-
carpenterguy
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 7:55 am
This reminds me of a tryout situation years ago. My child was cut and I was there to pick him up from the arena. Of course there was a parent shooting his mouth off about politics and the like. He stated, "They had their team picked before tryouts even started!" I chimed in and said, "I guess you had yours picked as well?" The silence in the room was priceless!!skillbuilder wrote:skillbuilder: First of all, I have NEVER been a part of a hockey board and would NEVER want to be. That statement alone proves how lost you are in regards to this issue. Sadly, you don't see the excuses you are making. There are many people in life that will always look for an excuse. We all know where they end up!
You use the same aristocratic propaganda they use so I just assumed if it looked like a duck? You are not privy to the specific real issues we personally have in play here so your judgement of me is reckless and unwaranted. When you've walked in our shoes you can speak your opinion like it's fact. You can certainly respond to this post but you will get no further responses from me as your vanilla view of this has been made clear and lacks relevancy.
Last edited by carpenterguy on Wed Oct 24, 2007 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
murraychadwick
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:25 am
I put the blame soley on USA/MN Hockey on this one, why do we need to regulate 8 and 9 year olds? (the simpe answer is $$$) At that age every kid should play house hockey. Putting such an emphisis on winning at that age is beyond stupid and has nothing to do with developing kids rather it has to do with developing parents ego's. If you're that into hockey as a parent at that age you need help, I sure hope you're at least that much into math, science, and reading because that's what kids really need to succeed.
-
Hockeyguy_27
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm
I agree in principle with what you're saying but there is a value associated with what traveling hockey entails. In my opinion there is far too much emphasis placed upon winning especially at the young ages. When kids are 9-10 allow them to develop, learn and enjoy the game.goldy313 wrote:I put the blame soley on USA/MN Hockey on this one, why do we need to regulate 8 and 9 year olds? (the simpe answer is $$$) At that age every kid should play house hockey. Putting such an emphisis on winning at that age is beyond stupid and has nothing to do with developing kids rather it has to do with developing parents ego's. If you're that into hockey as a parent at that age you need help, I sure hope you're at least that much into math, science, and reading because that's what kids really need to succeed.
Goldy,goldy313 wrote:I put the blame soley on USA/MN Hockey on this one, why do we need to regulate 8 and 9 year olds? (the simpe answer is $$$) At that age every kid should play house hockey. Putting such an emphisis on winning at that age is beyond stupid and has nothing to do with developing kids rather it has to do with developing parents ego's. If you're that into hockey as a parent at that age you need help, I sure hope you're at least that much into math, science, and reading because that's what kids really need to succeed.
I do not follow the logic that it is MN Hockey's fault and correlating it to $.
Yes, these kids pay MN Hockey $10 each. MN Hockey regulations are to de-emphasize games, travel, competition at the mite level.
I am not saying you ar wrong, but do NOT see what can be changed at the State level to change what parents are doing at the Mite level in the off-season or away from MN Hockey.
Can you help me see it better?
Either here, PM, email or phone me.
Thanks,
Mark Elliott
-
skillbuilder
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:52 pm
It's the parents that want to walk down the traveling hockey path more and more. MN Hockey can't control them and shouldn't be expected to. We have nobody to blame but ourselves.elliott70 wrote:Goldy,goldy313 wrote:I put the blame soley on USA/MN Hockey on this one, why do we need to regulate 8 and 9 year olds? (the simpe answer is $$$) At that age every kid should play house hockey. Putting such an emphisis on winning at that age is beyond stupid and has nothing to do with developing kids rather it has to do with developing parents ego's. If you're that into hockey as a parent at that age you need help, I sure hope you're at least that much into math, science, and reading because that's what kids really need to succeed.
I do not follow the logic that it is MN Hockey's fault and correlating it to $.
Yes, these kids pay MN Hockey $10 each. MN Hockey regulations are to de-emphasize games, travel, competition at the mite level.
I am not saying you ar wrong, but do NOT see what can be changed at the State level to change what parents are doing at the Mite level in the off-season or away from MN Hockey.
Can you help me see it better?
Either here, PM, email or phone me.
Thanks,
Mark Elliott
carpenterguy wrote:skillbuilder wrote:carpenterguy wrote:I have had many years of involvement in hockey. Is there some politics in hockey? Yes! There is in every walk of life. However, some on here like the last post will always have this as their "EXCUSE". All each individual kid can do is work hard and overcome any so called obstacles in his way.
There are many excuse makers in the world but I've never considered myself one. I sometimes hear comments like that and it's generally from connected people who try to deflect the real issue. Based on Edina and other big clubs having one A team, they are choosing winning over developing more kids. How is that an excuse. Since my son and I continue to fight through the obstacles by creating or locating other developmental oportunities, we are not using it as an excuse but motivation to succeed despite the adversity. I actually like the character and toughness I see him gaining through this challenge and we are making progress. "He" has goals and I would like to see him acheive them but goals are dangerous when you do enough to reach them but someone steals them through unsavory means. He will become an A player if he keeps working and there is no excuse for that to not occur. However, playing on an association A team is not up to him and thats simply a fact not an excuse
Your post is full of excuses! If your son is good enough he will reach his goals.
Carpenter...unfortunately, many who are not good enough reach their goals regardless....there is always two sides to every coin and there is nothing wrong with creating a scenario where favors are made much more difficult to come by...
It's about being decent and fair...not about deciet and mumbo jumbo. Want your answer...ask the Edina..or any board for that matter to bring in a 3rd Party Evaluation Team and then when they say no after they scramble for excuses....then ask em what they are afraid of....I think we all know...
Unfortunately, while I see your point... it again does nothing to help solve a problem that everyone seems to agree happens. In my book..if there is a problem and you cannot provide a solution...then it is probably prudent to keep your opinion to yourself.
"Be a teammate first"
-
carpenterguy
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 7:55 am
HOFam'r wrote:I have provided a solution, but many are incapable of handling the solution. It's quite simple! Life is tough and adults need to grow up and realize it's just a game. Show your child love and support, and when things don't go well for him or her show them the proper way to respond.carpenterguy wrote:skillbuilder wrote:
Your post is full of excuses! If your son is good enough he will reach his goals.
Carpenter...unfortunately, many who are not good enough reach their goals regardless....there is always two sides to every coin and there is nothing wrong with creating a scenario where favors are made much more difficult to come by...
It's about being decent and fair...not about deciet and mumbo jumbo. Want your answer...ask the Edina..or any board for that matter to bring in a 3rd Party Evaluation Team and then when they say no after they scramble for excuses....then ask em what they are afraid of....I think we all know...
Unfortunately, while I see your point... it again does nothing to help solve a problem that everyone seems to agree happens. In my book..if there is a problem and you cannot provide a solution...then it is probably prudent to keep your opinion to yourself.
Solution: Parents relax and enjoy life! Teach your children that life isn't always fair, but winners don't make excuses!!
-
O-townClown
- Posts: 4422
- Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:22 pm
- Location: Typical homeboy from the O-Town
Fair & Balanced
Sorno, your post is accurate, but I would like to add...sorno82 wrote:Kids need to stay involved. Andrew Alberts gets cut from the EP high school team, matures late, and is in the NHL. Dustin Penner never gives up and is in the NHL. Most importantly, kids who stay involved, regardless of level, play as adults in the various leagues and have a blast. Hockey can be a lifetime activity as long as you do not burn out at a young age.
BOTH THOSE GUYS ARE SIX-FOOT FOUR!
There aren't late-bloomer stories for average (for a male that's 5'10"?) or small guys.
Rambling on
I am sure there are. Those are extreme examples of kids who as 16 year olds, were told they were done with anything other than recreational hockey. They found a way to stay involved, and eventually made it to the NHL. I played against a chubby kid from Winnipeg as a kid, and he did not show a lot of promise as a youth, but Brett Hull score a few goals as an adult.
I played summer league with a guy who played at Vermont. He kept on telling me of these two French guys who had a ton of skill, but may never make it because they were small. Perron and St. Louis were there names, and we know now that Martin St. Louis was undrafted, overlooked, and written off because of his size, but he is now a NHL MVP. Brandon Bocheski still can't skate according to some people, and didn't make an A team until bantams.
The summer beer league I was in at one time had a lot of existing NHL and college players in it, along with minor leaguers and usa born European leaguers. The NHL players were not alway the most skilled. They had great sticks and moved the puck well, but they had their flaws also.
Making it isn't everything. There are a lot of ex-D1 players out there who are putting the work boots on. They only knew hockey, and when that was over, they had to go out in the real world without an adequate education. They play the beer leagues, then get up in the morning wishing they would have taken advantage of their educational opportunities. I have a friend who played in the NHL, has a ring, but he seems bored with life.
My best sport was football and was exposed to the college athletic atmosphere through that sport. It is not exactly what I want my child to experience. Lots of great talent gets squandered, and then what does that person do? All they know is that sport, and when it is taken away, they are lost.
Kids need balance. Kids should play multiple sports, get involved in music, art, boy scouts etc. They need to find their way, and we as parents need to make sure they have that opportunity without our undo influence on what we want. Making it to the big leagues does not mean that they are successful, but rather if they can make a positive contribution to society, then I will be happy as a parent.
I played with two guys in college who have Superbowl rings. One continued his education and is now an executive in the NFLPA, the other was busted in a drug sting and is facing jail time. One took advantage of his opportunity when sports was over, the other was lost.
Let kids be kids. There is not always gold at the end of the rainbow.
I played summer league with a guy who played at Vermont. He kept on telling me of these two French guys who had a ton of skill, but may never make it because they were small. Perron and St. Louis were there names, and we know now that Martin St. Louis was undrafted, overlooked, and written off because of his size, but he is now a NHL MVP. Brandon Bocheski still can't skate according to some people, and didn't make an A team until bantams.
The summer beer league I was in at one time had a lot of existing NHL and college players in it, along with minor leaguers and usa born European leaguers. The NHL players were not alway the most skilled. They had great sticks and moved the puck well, but they had their flaws also.
Making it isn't everything. There are a lot of ex-D1 players out there who are putting the work boots on. They only knew hockey, and when that was over, they had to go out in the real world without an adequate education. They play the beer leagues, then get up in the morning wishing they would have taken advantage of their educational opportunities. I have a friend who played in the NHL, has a ring, but he seems bored with life.
My best sport was football and was exposed to the college athletic atmosphere through that sport. It is not exactly what I want my child to experience. Lots of great talent gets squandered, and then what does that person do? All they know is that sport, and when it is taken away, they are lost.
Kids need balance. Kids should play multiple sports, get involved in music, art, boy scouts etc. They need to find their way, and we as parents need to make sure they have that opportunity without our undo influence on what we want. Making it to the big leagues does not mean that they are successful, but rather if they can make a positive contribution to society, then I will be happy as a parent.
I played with two guys in college who have Superbowl rings. One continued his education and is now an executive in the NFLPA, the other was busted in a drug sting and is facing jail time. One took advantage of his opportunity when sports was over, the other was lost.
Let kids be kids. There is not always gold at the end of the rainbow.