Flin Flon Bomber wrote:I apologize for the spelling error. I respect your opinion, however, I don't believe I am off the mark. Why should youth programs develop kids who are leaving for private schools? One metro suburb does it right by not allowing kids who are leaving on a A team. I wish they all would do that.
Why should it matter? they're youth programs to serve youth of the community? and I'm pretty sure to be a (501C3) non profit, I believe that this is against the requirements of that code, not to discriminate on any basis.
This is just wrong if they are doing that, what less pride would a youth program have in developing a great player regardless of where he went to school?
Flin Flon Bomber wrote:I apologize for the spelling error. I respect your opinion, however, I don't believe I am off the mark. Why should youth programs develop kids who are leaving for private schools? One metro suburb does it right by not allowing kids who are leaving on a A team. I wish they all would do that.
Why should it matter? they're youth programs to serve youth of the community? and I'm pretty sure to be a (501C3) non profit, I believe that this is against the requirements of that code, not to discriminate on any basis.
This is just wrong if they are doing that, what less pride would a youth program have in developing a great player regardless of where he went to school?
Not entirely sure, but my understanding of non-discriminating requirement of a 501c3 is an actual clause. However, I believe that as long as there is a spot for individuals to play there is no requirement that they be allowed to play on an associations "A" team. Therefore, if they are placed on a "B" or a "C" team than the requiement is met.
I don't want to get into the argument of that being right or wrong, but I believe all requirements are met by providing a place to play.
"I've never seen a dumb-bell score a goal!" ~Gretter
Flin Flon Bomber wrote:I apologize for the spelling error. I respect your opinion, however, I don't believe I am off the mark. Why should youth programs develop kids who are leaving for private schools? One metro suburb does it right by not allowing kids who are leaving on a A team. I wish they all would do that.
Why should it matter? they're youth programs to serve youth of the community? and I'm pretty sure to be a (501C3) non profit, I believe that this is against the requirements of that code, not to discriminate on any basis.
This is just wrong if they are doing that, what less pride would a youth program have in developing a great player regardless of where he went to school?
Not entirely sure, but my understanding of non-discriminating requirement of a 501c3 is an actual clause. However, I believe that as long as there is a spot for individuals to play there is no requirement that they be allowed to play on an associations "A" team. Therefore, if they are placed on a "B" or a "C" team than the requiement is met.
I don't want to get into the argument of that being right or wrong, but I believe all requirements are met by providing a place to play.
Yeah that sounds right, but if that's the way they do things I'd say they moved to, or are living in the wrong town. Very lame
Flin Flon Bomber wrote:I apologize for the spelling error. I respect your opinion, however, I don't believe I am off the mark. Why should youth programs develop kids who are leaving for private schools? One metro suburb does it right by not allowing kids who are leaving on a A team. I wish they all would do that.
Why should it matter? they're youth programs to serve youth of the community? and I'm pretty sure to be a (501C3) non profit, I believe that this is against the requirements of that code, not to discriminate on any basis.
This is just wrong if they are doing that, what less pride would a youth program have in developing a great player regardless of where he went to school?
Not entirely sure, but my understanding of non-discriminating requirement of a 501c3 is an actual clause. However, I believe that as long as there is a spot for individuals to play there is no requirement that they be allowed to play on an associations "A" team. Therefore, if they are placed on a "B" or a "C" team than the requiement is met.
I don't want to get into the argument of that being right or wrong, but I believe all requirements are met by providing a place to play.
I'm not an attorney but believe if a player deserving of playing A hockey was discriminated against because of a board policy preempting private school kids from making an A level team, that board would be asking for trouble and would most likely be sued and lose.
I'm pretty anti-private, but preventing kids from having opportunities on a bantam team becuase they're going to a private school goes too far for me. That's just not right.
Just because a team is great in Bantams doesn't mean they will do really well later on. Ep in bantams seems to be more developed than every other team, and just man handle kids due to the fact they are bigger and stronger. Things change as all other teams catch up throughout the high school years. Yes, they will be a good team but saying they will win a state championship 2 years before is a little too much. Keep in mind they have lost Meyers and Patterson to Benilde, and Meyers played a huge hand in winning the State Tournament as Bantams. I don't know if the team can stick together without losing players to juniors and whatnot but we shall see.
selloutcrowd99 wrote:Just because a team is great in Bantams doesn't mean they will do really well later on. Ep in bantams seems to be more developed than every other team, and just man handle kids due to the fact they are bigger and stronger. Things change as all other teams catch up throughout the high school years. Yes, they will be a good team but saying they will win a state championship 2 years before is a little too much. Keep in mind they have lost Meyers and Patterson to Benilde, and Meyers played a huge hand in winning the State Tournament as Bantams. I don't know if the team can stick together without losing players to juniors and whatnot but we shall see.
I don't know what EP bantam a team you watched this year, but they were far from big and strong. To the contrary, the were small and tremendously skilled. I see it going the other way, I see their lack of size being a hinderence at the high school level. Now can that change over the next three years...of course, but that remains to be seen. I also agree that losing Meyer to Benilde will be the biggest hurdle to overcome. Ford is ok, but he isn't going to win many games on his own.
Again, look at Centennial, they have been pretty good in bantams the last several years and their HS team hasn't been guarenteed at the big show. I bet the good ones of the group are gone by the time they are seniors.
"I've never seen a dumb-bell score a goal!" ~Gretter
Irish11 wrote:EP could undefeated and yet the fans still wouldn't show up, Why don't any students support the hockey team? When Rosemount played them, I swear we had more fans than they did, and it was senior night!!
Yes, the EP game student section is no where comparable. Too big of school. They can't even get a band in attendence.
rbkhockeyman2070 wrote:wannagototherink I like you have to say, I also agree with you when you stated that their school is based around football and thats because the AD is Mike Grant, ( the head coach for FB.) With that I would like to see Nohl Rahn and Lacombe be coaches sense they are very similiar.
The reason i beilive teams have great success in bantams but not highschool is because of privite schools.
Edina has also had great success in bantams and highschool, so I think things can change and have Ep become a powerhouse, with or without a new coach.
Mike Grant could care less about EP hockey, it all about football here. He is not the god that everyone thinks he is.
Doglover wrote:Many good points. I think Chris Lacombe is a big reason EP has had so much success. He has good players and even a few really good players, but from what I've heard he really prepares his team to win state - not just make it there. With all the EP Bantam A's staying (with the exception of Bullock whom they'll miss), I think their HS team should be strong in the next few years. Good point about the AD and football though. Hadn't considered that angle. It would be interesting to watch EP HS hockey success if Lacombe took over the program. I've also heard the current coach is a good guy though.
Flim Flam - your post was way off topic and it's "their" not "there". I sure hate the bad grammar on this board. Just for the record, I think many private schools would love to develop their own youth teams - especially at the Bantam level. I know several good private school kids who have gotten cut by their Bantam A coaches since they were not going to the local, public HS. It's definitely a complicated issue.
These kids win inspite of Coach Smith's overraction. Every game has different kids playing with each other. It is what have you done for me recently. He disrupts any kind of continutly, and quickly changes lines to get results, rather than let kids play with each other to get a feel for each. He is not a good game coach. Look at teams like Edina, Beniilde and so on that had kids playing on the same line and have an understanding of their tendencies. At least they got to State. Lacombe is a game by game coach and quickly adapts to game situations. Who would want him as a coach.
okay, wanna know the main reason that those teams had success in bantams and not high school? in bantam regions there is a thing called the back door... you can afford to lose a game. TWO teams come out of each region instead of one from each section. so it is a totally different ball game. centennial i dont think has ever out right won the region in those many years they have gone to the bantam state (if it were the same rules for bantams as it was for high school, they never would been to state). in 06 when they won state, they played edina in the regional final to go to the tourny and lost. but they got a second chance and found themselves on top. so i have to say that the main reason for all the youth success of teams is their is more room for error.
Centennial gets to the Bantam state tourney via the back door??
The research I have says that they played 2 section teams in a region final in ten years
Beating teams like Edina, Wayzata, Duluth E, White Bear Lake, Eden Prairie...all in the name of getting to State. I am sorry Junior but it is much tougher than beating Rogers, Champlin Park, Blaine who has had little or no success against the youth level squad. So you tell me how that is more room for error?
How is losing to Edina in the final of regions and then playing the next best team in the state White Bear to just get there more room for error? By the way they found themselves on top? The beat the top 5 teams in the state in route to that championship. Are you a high school coach?
No high school coach has a path to state like youth teams traditionally have.