How much is enough?

auld_skool · Post by **auld_skool** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 3:37 pm

According to My Hockey Rankings the White Bear Lake Bantam A team has played at least 73 games and scrimmages this season. Does anyone besides me find this a little bit over the top? Check it out for yourself:

http://www.myhockeyrankings.com/view_20 ... ?a=b&v=166

Fire and Ice · Post by **Fire and Ice** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:20 pm

No. Let them do what they think is the right thing by their program. You do what you want.

northwoods oldtimer · Post by **northwoods oldtimer** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:59 pm

The late great Ted Brill would sometimes play 80 a season.

hawkhockey · Post by **hawkhockey** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:29 pm

that must be one reason why white bear lake parents make a $1800 down payment before their player leaves the arena after tryouts.

Fire and Ice · Post by **Fire and Ice** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 6:54 am

Are they complaining?

3GoonsWest · Post by **3GoonsWest** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:40 am

A couple more and they may have cracked the top 10

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:21 am

This website shows the team ranked 95 played 18 games.

Does anyone besides me find this 'a little under the bottom'?

mngopherfan · Post by **mngopherfan** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 1:19 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:This website shows the team ranked 95 played 18 games.

Does anyone besides me find this 'a little under the bottom'?

Some teams do not report scores and dont care about rankings...

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:12 pm

True. Why would a team report 18 scores, but not the rest?

Air Force 1 · Post by **Air Force 1** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 6:09 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:True. Why would a team report 18 scores, but not the rest?

This particular team probably didn't report any, their opponents probably did and the game shows up for both teams.

WayOutWest · Post by **WayOutWest** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:51 am

auld_skool wrote:According to My Hockey Rankings the White Bear Lake Bantam A team has played at least 73 games and scrimmages this season. Does anyone besides me find this a little bit over the top? Check it out for yourself:

http://www.myhockeyrankings.com/view_20 ... ?a=b&v=166

Yep.
According to USA Hockey officials, the optimal practice to game ratio should be 2-1. Did that WBL team hold 146 practices, this season?
Doubtful.
I'd say they are playing too much and practicing too little.
Bad balance, anyway.

Tenoverpar · Post by **Tenoverpar** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:05 am

Has anyone from this allegedly overplaying White Bear Bantm A team added anything to this conversation or is this just a bunch of haters from bad programs taking cheap shots for their own agenda?

If you look at the White Bear schedule (thank you for the link WayOut)
they played 6 or so weekends with 4 or more games, looks like tournaments. The season is about 165 days long from October to mid March, if they practiced 3 times a week, there's actually enough days to complete ample practices (3 x 22.5 weeks = 67.5 days of practice + 72 games = 139.5 days of hockey in a 165 day period)

Fire and Ice · Post by **Fire and Ice** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:12 am

What do the USA and MN officials know?

Do they coach? Chances are no and they administrate from a chair.

WayOutWest · Post by **WayOutWest** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:44 am

Tenoverpar wrote:The season is about 165 days long from October to mid March, if they practiced 3 times a week, there's actually enough days to complete ample practices (3 x 22.5 weeks = 67.5 days of practice + 72 games = 139.5 days of hockey in a 165 day period)

That wouldn't satisfy the USA Hockey guideline of 2-1 practices over games. It's not even 1-1.

Regardless.........no bother on my end. I was just responding to the question of whether or not it seemed like too many games.

Judging by the numbers, and using the USA Hockey guideline, I concluded that it was.

I have no skin in the WBL bantam realm. They could play 200 games, for all I care.

WayOutWest · Post by **WayOutWest** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:47 am

Fire and Ice wrote:What do the USA and MN officials know?

Do they coach? Chances are no and they administrate from a chair.

I believe the Minnesota Hockey coach in chief IS the Providence High School head coach. So, to answer your question, yes.

AND, he (Hal Tearse) is one of the biggest proponents of the 2-1 practice to game schedule, for optimal player development.

gohawk4 · Post by **gohawk4** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:53 am

WayOutWest wrote:
Fire and Ice wrote:What do the USA and MN officials know?

Do they coach? Chances are no and they administrate from a chair.
I believe the Minnesota Hockey coach in chief IS the Providence High School head coach. So, to answer your question, yes.

AND, he (Hal Tearse) is one of the biggest proponents of the 2-1 practice to game schedule, for optimal player development.

Hal never followed the 2-1 practice to game ratio when he was coaching youth hockey. He also complains about shortening a bench, but anyone that has coached or played against one of his teams knows that he is as bad as the rest. 5 minute shifts for the 1st line, 15 second shifts for the 3rd line.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:23 am

WBL is certainly not the only bantam program in Minnesota that will play over 70 games this year. This is bantam A, not mites.

I've not seen specifics on the 2-1 ratio. Would 70 games (3 X 15 minute periods = 45 min) be satisfied with 70 1.5 hour practices? If a game lastst 1.5 hours, 70 games is 105 hours; 2-1 would be 210 hours of practice or 105 2-hour practices?

If they waited until October to begin practices (unlikely), they were likely on the ice 5-6, or even 7, days a week. 30 of the 105 accounted for. The remaining 75 practices over the remaining 21 weeks would be 3-4 practices per week for a bantam A team. Certainly not unlikely.

I don't know of any programs out there that consistently tear up the competition at the squirt level, then plays 50+ peewee games, then 70+ bantam games - and gets killed as bantam As. There are plenty of examples of programs that play a lot of games and practice at or very near (tough to plan on going to state under MN and VFW) the recommendation, and put out a very successful program. The high schools are also often very successful, and the kids that are successful at higher levels are very often from these programs.

There are also plenty of examples of programs that play 24 games and practice twice a week as bantam As, and the program they put out...not so much.

Fire and Ice · Post by **Fire and Ice** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:56 am

Does that make Hal right because he is the MN Coach in Chief?

Look at the past Bantam A champions and I will guarantee they all play over 65 a year and practice every chance they get.

Night Train · Post by **Night Train** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:10 am

A couple of things. There's a picture of a State champion Johnson Bantam A team, from the 70s?, at Phalen Arena, and their record was like 75-5-2. So Bantam A teams were playing as many as 80 games in the 70s. Things are entirely different today. That team probably should have adhered to the 2-1 ratio. Today's top Bantam A teams, and players, skate all year. I know Bantam A teams where every player is on a AAA team in the summer. Other kids train (development) 50-60 hours during the off season. They train and practice a lot. So when a Bantam A team is formed in October they're ready to go, been skating all summer. Had a 5-15 hour warm-up before tryouts. Kids like games. Top bantam A teams have amazingly skilled players with thousands of hours of practice and development. So I agree with an earlier poster, let the associations figure out what is best for their kids at each level.

3GoonsWest · Post by **3GoonsWest** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:48 am

mngopherfan wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:This website shows the team ranked 95 played 18 games.

Does anyone besides me find this 'a little under the bottom'?
Some teams do not report scores and dont care about rankings...

They're playing Bantam A hockey in Minnesota and don't care about rankings? Maybe if someone cared a little about the rankings, they wouldn't be sitting at #95. Ask any of the kids on the team, I'll bet they care.

MoveYourFeet · Post by **MoveYourFeet** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:21 am

If the WBL bantams pay only $1800 and if you add the 5 tournaments the cost is about $2k per family. When you divide the $2K by lets given them 295 - 300 hours that equates to $6- 7 and hour per kid for ice. That is cheap, who is moving to WBL now???

I am sure my numbers are not as accurate but from a view looks like a nice deal for the Bantams and Mites subsidise the rest. No different from any other association.

Let the kids play, who cares. 1-1 , 2-1 ratio, it is what the association wants.

______________

I cant fight this feeling any longer!

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:37 pm

3GoonsWest Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:48 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mngopherfan wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:
This website shows the team ranked 95 played 18 games.

Does anyone besides me find this 'a little under the bottom'?

Some teams do not report scores and dont care about rankings...

They're playing Bantam A hockey in Minnesota and don't care about rankings? Maybe if someone cared a little about the rankings, they wouldn't be sitting at #95. Ask any of the kids on the team, I'll bet they care.

I'll bet the parents used to care, as well. I'll bet when those parents were young and naive, the board members read an article by an expert that said it was all about fun, not about competition. I'll bet the program development folks then loaded up on pom-pom-pull-away at the expense of cross-over drills. The team selectors then decided that all 5th graders should make the Squirt A team, leaving all 4th graders on the B team. It's not about winning it's about development and fun. Everyone got a medal.

However, when they moved to peewees, suddenly it was about winning. The kids wanted to win, the parents wanted them to win, but along the way they forgot to work on the things that allow them an opportunity to win.

Judgeandjury · Post by **Judgeandjury** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:37 pm

The real question should be: How did the WBL Bantam A's do this year with all that ice time?
They might be making up for the lack of section and state championships at the high school level. Never know?

I agree let them do what they want.

hawkhockey · Post by **hawkhockey** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:09 pm

MoveYourFeet wrote:If the WBL bantams pay only $1800 and if you add the 5 tournaments the cost is about $2k per family. When you divide the $2K by lets given them 295 - 300 hours that equates to $6- 7 and hour per kid for ice. That is cheap, who is moving to WBL now???

I am sure my numbers are not as accurate but from a view looks like a nice deal for the Bantams and Mites subsidise the rest. No different from any other association.

Let the kids play, who cares. 1-1 , 2-1 ratio, it is what the association wants.

______________

I cant fight this feeling any longer!

thats just the down payment. they make another $1800 payment sometime during the year.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

How much is enough?

How much is enough?

80 games

Re: How much is enough?

ask

Re: ask

WHAT A SAVINGS!

Re: WHAT A SAVINGS!