Brainerd vs Little Falls 1-17-08

great hockey mind · Post by **great hockey mind** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:59 pm

speaking from past experience, Brainerd has good numbers at the ice mite- mite levels, and Squits for the most parts. One of the problems I see is all- travel Squits. The parents want it, but if you ask the kids they want to play and touch the puck. Why not have one travel team and the rest in-house, where the travel team still participate. In my opinion, you want to keep all the players, because kids change year to year. The in-house team still could play little falls- Peq. lakes. I do agree losing Henry as a Bantam A coach is a loss. The kids need to learn skills and have fun. How could it be fun to travel 60+ miles play a game and not touch the puck. How are you going to get better. All hockey all the time is not a good idea for most kids, kids have to be kids and play all sports. What Brainerd needs is better athelets participating in hockey.

otter4 · Post by **otter4** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:02 pm

btownbombers wrote:I just think that the program really needs to get on the same page at every level from squirts on up. Maybe not as complex in squirts but the bantam team should be running the same system as the high school team.

That would work if both coaches bought into the same system. From what I saw, Henry's system was very different from the HS.

great hockey mind · Post by **great hockey mind** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:09 pm

you can have the best systems in the world- you still need the horses. A good hockey player can play any system the coach wants.

dralr · Post by **dralr** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:22 pm

to lampthelight- do not downplay the importance of "peewee level of play"". You can have all the razzle dazzle you want but the teams that play solid fundemental hockey will be the winner- as witnessed by the success of Roseau's program. The Dicky Johnson coached pee-wees are the envy of most programs- success really boils down to the basics at any level.
signed- old guy not from ram country

lampthelight · Post by **lampthelight** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:58 pm

dralr wrote:to lampthelight- do not downplay the importance of "peewee level of play"". You can have all the razzle dazzle you want but the teams that play solid fundemental hockey will be the winner- as witnessed by the success of Roseau's program. The Dicky Johnson coached pee-wees are the envy of most programs- success really boils down to the basics at any level.
signed- old guy not from ram country

I didn't mean to downplay the fundamentals that are in the Pee-Wee Level of Play, I think fundamentals and team play are the two most important things in winning hockey.

Also, I agree with all of you who have said that Henry was a big loss to the Brainerd program. He was a very good coach, however, because the Bantam's and High School teams were not on the same page as far as their philosophy, a lot of Henry's coaching went out the window when the players got into Ty's system.

otter you are exactly right. Henry's system and Ty's system are very different.

btownbomber you are catching my drift completely on having the same system taught at every level. Start it simple and then add more to it as the players move up the ranks, by the time they reach varsity the players should know exactly what they are doing in it.

4theloveofthegame · Post by **4theloveofthegame** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:10 am

Mite-dad wrote:
I thought Sperl should have stopped Olson's goal. It looked like he had a [b]clear look[/b] at it from my angle. It was a rocket though. Like I said, he was an impressive looking player out there.

I saw a whole bunch of traffic in front, and i'm almost positive Sperl was screened, and with a ripper like that, a little screen was all it took

dadoc · Post by **dadoc** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:10 am

Interesting posts regarding Brainerd's lack of consistency from the Bantam program to the Varsity level. So why would it have been different? Would the Brainerd Varsity boys have been better prepared if the Bantam coach would have complied and prepared them for the Varsity concept? Who is in charge of the youth program and why would they allow this inconsistency if it stood the chance of hurting the kids? Is it really different or do certain people only think it is because they like one coach over the other? Or, is it perceived as different because someone's kid played more at one level than another? Kind of like peeling an union, it's one layer after another. And, like peeling an union, somewhere along the line there will be needless tears especially since we are being so critical of a kids game!

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:58 am

dadoc wrote:Interesting posts regarding Brainerd's lack of consistency from the Bantam program to the Varsity level. So why would it have been different? Would the Brainerd Varsity boys have been better prepared if the Bantam coach would have complied and prepared them for the Varsity concept? Who is in charge of the youth program and why would they allow this inconsistency if it stood the chance of hurting the kids? Is it really different or do certain people only think it is because they like one coach over the other? Or, is it perceived as different because someone's kid played more at one level than another? Kind of like peeling an union, it's one layer after another. And, like peeling an union, somewhere along the line there will be needless tears especially since we are being so critical of a kids game!

I couldn't agree more but a program still does need to have the same outlook and plan for their kids. It is the job of the High School coach to make sure everyone is on the same page regarding what type of players the program would like to produce. Yes, top players will be able to play any system but the role players need to have the correct coaching to supplement the potential D1 level players. I haven't seen enough of the Brainerd youth program to say anything about it but the little falls program does a good job from Couture down to the mite coaches i was disappointed to see our bantam coach start coaching the junior team in Little Falls. I also hope that John Hanowski will continue to coach even after his kids are done playing youth hockey.

otter4 · Post by **otter4** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:07 pm

dadoc wrote:Interesting posts regarding Brainerd's lack of consistency from the Bantam program to the Varsity level. So why would it have been different? Would the Brainerd Varsity boys have been better prepared if the Bantam coach would have complied and prepared them for the Varsity concept? Who is in charge of the youth program and why would they allow this inconsistency if it stood the chance of hurting the kids? Is it really different or do certain people only think it is because they like one coach over the other? Or, is it perceived as different because someone's kid played more at one level than another? Kind of like peeling an union, it's one layer after another. And, like peeling an union, somewhere along the line there will be needless tears especially since we are being so critical of a kids game!

Ask the kids how different the HS is from Henry's. Anyone who has watched both Henry's teams and the HS will readily see it. That makes it a tough transition for the sophmore's entering the HS program. I'm not judging either system, but they definitely are different! It would be helpful for the Bantams to be more on page with the high school, but the Bantam coach has to back it. Maybe that was one reason he left?

Indians forever · Post by **Indians forever** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:28 pm

I was at that game and to me it looked like Little Falls was ready to play. Nice Job Flyers.

HighinFly · Post by **HighinFly** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:38 pm

regarding the goal that was not counted, looked like it was across the goal line, but the ref was sitting in the corner when the play was right in front of the net and he should have been right there behind the net to make the correct call, but it did not hurt the outcome of the game

GopherPuckPlayer · Post by **GopherPuckPlayer** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:17 pm

[quote="btownbombers"]I dont know Henry at all but from what I have heard from several sources is that he is the best coach that BAHA has had in several years. I will agree with lampthelight though that beyond him the youth level is lacking good coaches. Its not that the coaches dont put in the effort with the kids its just that they may be lacking hockey experience or systems knowledge. Like I said in an earlier post I could count on one hand the number of parents of kids on teams I played on who actually played or knew anything about hockey. The ones that did for the most part werent volunteer coaches either. I just think that the program really needs to get on the same page at every level from squirts on up. Maybe not as complex in squirts but the bantam team should be running the same system as the high school team. Also the PeeWees should be getting a pretty good dose of the same thing. Maybe going to hockey camp all summer long burns these kids out and in the second half they are either all sick of hockey or are ready to move onto the next sport. Just a thought.[/quote

LITTLE FALLS WON LEAVE IT AT THAT!

Morris Wanchuk · Post by **Morris Wanchuk** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:18 am

otter4 wrote:
dadoc wrote:Interesting posts regarding Brainerd's lack of consistency from the Bantam program to the Varsity level. So why would it have been different? Would the Brainerd Varsity boys have been better prepared if the Bantam coach would have complied and prepared them for the Varsity concept? Who is in charge of the youth program and why would they allow this inconsistency if it stood the chance of hurting the kids? Is it really different or do certain people only think it is because they like one coach over the other? Or, is it perceived as different because someone's kid played more at one level than another? Kind of like peeling an union, it's one layer after another. And, like peeling an union, somewhere along the line there will be needless tears especially since we are being so critical of a kids game!
Ask the kids how different the HS is from Henry's. Anyone who has watched both Henry's teams and the HS will readily see it. That makes it a tough transition for the sophmore's entering the HS program. I'm not judging either system, but they definitely are different! It would be helpful for the Bantams to be more on page with the high school, but the Bantam coach has to back it. Maybe that was one reason he left?

And Henry won how many section 7 quarterfinal games?

I believe the thread is brd vs little falls not brd vs brd.
Lee should lock this up long ago but enjoys watching the bickering. Had barnyard beat east he would have locked this thread before a polish flopped on the ice. Experience equals composure. Havent seen any of those qualities in this thread. Congrats to LF on a good win ( a first this year) and barnyard should learn from it and move on. Its crazy when fans or former players trash the program before the season is over. Loyalty is a big word, but means more in other places. You cant sell a postage stamp if nobody buys into the postal system. -NUTS

joester · Post by **joester** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:24 pm

I believe beating Rochester Lourds was a pretty big win for the Flyers also

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:45 pm

Morris Wanchuk wrote:
otter4 wrote:
dadoc wrote:Interesting posts regarding Brainerd's lack of consistency from the Bantam program to the Varsity level. So why would it have been different? Would the Brainerd Varsity boys have been better prepared if the Bantam coach would have complied and prepared them for the Varsity concept? Who is in charge of the youth program and why would they allow this inconsistency if it stood the chance of hurting the kids? Is it really different or do certain people only think it is because they like one coach over the other? Or, is it perceived as different because someone's kid played more at one level than another? Kind of like peeling an union, it's one layer after another. And, like peeling an union, somewhere along the line there will be needless tears especially since we are being so critical of a kids game!
Ask the kids how different the HS is from Henry's. Anyone who has watched both Henry's teams and the HS will readily see it. That makes it a tough transition for the sophmore's entering the HS program. I'm not judging either system, but they definitely are different! It would be helpful for the Bantams to be more on page with the high school, but the Bantam coach has to back it. Maybe that was one reason he left?

And Henry won how many section 7 quarterfinal games?

I believe the thread is brd vs little falls not brd vs brd.
Lee should lock this up long ago but enjoys watching the bickering. Had barnyard beat east he would have locked this thread before a polish flopped on the ice. Experience equals composure. Havent seen any of those qualities in this thread. Congrats to LF on a good win ( a first this year) and barnyard should learn from it and move on. Its crazy when fans or former players trash the program before the season is over. Loyalty is a big word, but means more in other places. You cant sell a postage stamp if nobody buys into the postal system. -NUTS

Don't you believe there is any loyalty in Brainerd or are most Brainerd fans fair weather fans. I know you're not cause you're at every home game prolly cause you have to be but who's loyalty are you questioning? Fans? Players? Coaches? Arena Staff?

It seems like this game is gonna be a wake up call for the warriors.

Morris Wanchuk · Post by **Morris Wanchuk** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:12 am

darkdemon wrote: Don't you believe there is any loyalty in Brainerd or are most Brainerd fans fair weather fans. I know you're not cause you're at every home game prolly cause you WANT to be but who's loyalty are you questioning? Fans? Players? Coaches? Arena Staff? It seems like this game is gonna be a wake up call for the warriors.

It seems like losing to Little Falls in January dont mean kraut. I never brought up loyalty or this thread would be seven pages long. Just mentioned that the threads title was brd vs LF. The topic seemed to stray towards the we hate the coach and hockey camp sucks angle. Sorry I was so cryptic the first time. The posted solutions may be in the mirror or not. But potshots at people that are working hard to do the best they can is grandstanding, and at the least foolish.

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:55 am

Morris Wanchuk wrote:
darkdemon wrote: Don't you believe there is any loyalty in Brainerd or are most Brainerd fans fair weather fans. I know you're not cause you're at every home game prolly cause you WANT to be but who's loyalty are you questioning? Fans? Players? Coaches? Arena Staff? It seems like this game is gonna be a wake up call for the warriors.
It seems like losing to Little Falls in January dont mean kraut. I never brought up loyalty or this thread would be seven pages long. Just mentioned that the threads title was brd vs LF. The topic seemed to stray towards the we hate the coach and hockey camp sucks angle. Sorry I was so cryptic the first time. The posted solutions may be in the mirror or not. But potshots at people that are working hard to do the best they can is grandstanding, and at the least foolish.

Boo hoo

Notice how quiet the boys from Brainerd got? Syd you still owe me or are you just milkin it in that quiet office in your big green chair?

btownbombers · Post by **btownbombers** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:47 pm

The team isnt doing good so people are a little down. First off Im not getting on the coaches backs here and Im not saying that hockey camp is a bad thing!!

Im not sure where MO Wanchuk is getting this from. My post about hockey camp was more of a joke since in Brainerd you are expected to go to hockey camp or you dont play, it is a threat every year that I have heard. It was sarcasm with maybe a shot of truth to it when I wrote the statement about hockey camp burning the players out midseason. As everyone knows there has been an ongoing trend in Brainerd for about the last 4 years where the teams traditionally do great for the first half and sizzle in the second. Its like clockwork. If I could bet in Vegas on it I would be rich. Not saying that it is anyones fault. If anything I think it is the program as a whole that is to blame. Say what you want Mo but the result is the same every year!! Part of being a fan is complaining when the team is doing bad. Its just like every fan in Minnesota never getting to high on the Vikes cuz in the end they let us down. We get a glimmer of hope every year and then it all falls apart. Brainerd is much the same. All the Brainerd fans get cocky talk there team up and in the end people like Boblee, or GR19 get the last laugh cuz we blow it in the second half. I for one dont know the answer to why Brainerd is a typically poor second half team. I dont know any conclusive answers. Since Mo seems to be a know it all on this "bored" maybe he can enlighten all of us. Mo why are Brainerd fans down on this team and as you say down on the coach? There must be a reason!!!!! If it isnt the coaching, and it isnt the program coming up, and it isnt the players getting burnt out then what the H E double hockey sticks is it!!! I know it must be the fans getting down on the team and the coaches when things arent going well!! Give me a break!!! Anyone who seems to know it all can reply to this not just MO

lampthelight · Post by **lampthelight** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:25 am

Morris Wanchuk wrote: And Henry won how many section 7 quarterfinal games?

Yep: Eigner 1 Henry 0. You got us there MO... Congrats

Maybe they should've given Henry a shot... Ty was 1-8 in the first round.

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:35 am

Brainerd only beat a sub-par team last night by one goal. Wow this team has really gone downhill. Yeah its a win but Sartell isn't a very good team looks like da warriors have thrown in the towel after the Little Falls loss.
Brd-3
Sartell-2

Seriously it should have been Brainerd by 5 at least

ap4mvp · Post by **ap4mvp** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:40 am

darkdemon wrote:Brainerd only beat a sub-par team last night by one goal. Wow this team has really gone downhill. Yeah its a win but Sartell isn't a very good team looks like da warriors have thrown in the towel after the Little Falls loss.
Brd-3
Sartell-2

Seriously it should have been Brainerd by 5 at least

da warriors were sick from all that cake they been eating. That's why they didn't play that well

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:22 pm

ap4mvp wrote:
darkdemon wrote:Brainerd only beat a sub-par team last night by one goal. Wow this team has really gone downhill. Yeah its a win but Sartell isn't a very good team looks like da warriors have thrown in the towel after the Little Falls loss.
Brd-3
Sartell-2

Seriously it should have been Brainerd by 5 at least
da warriors were sick from all that cake they been eating. That's why they didn't play that well

Or have they been eatin too much crow

I was hoping to catch Roseau when they come to the B-town but I think i'll catch um in st. cloud, The tigers won't be sick so they'll prolly play the Rams tougher than the cake-eaters

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:42 pm

Where did the boo boys from the B-town go especially you Syd you still owe me from our little wager for this game and i need the $$$$$

darkdemon · Post by **darkdemon** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:55 am

Come on Syd get out of your big green chair. Or just turn it to the computer and log on cause in your sea of tears

you knew that I was right the whole time.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Brainerd vs Little Falls 1-17-08

Who will win

puke blah I hate dis place

Re: puke blah I hate dis place

Re: puke blah I hate dis place

Re: puke blah I hate dis place

Re: puke blah I hate dis place