Two St. Cloud Teams on Probation

RLStars · Post by **RLStars** » Tue May 12, 2009 8:47 am

DMom wrote:
gdahl wrote:limiting the amount of hockey akid can play is ridiculous....the more you play the better you get. With that said games only is bad....I think a better balance is two practices for every one game...especially now with the trend going to four game minimum weekend tourneys. So if you play a four game weekend tourney you need to practice 12 times during the week..that is not going to happen.....
i'm about to start working on tournaments for next season, perhaps you could send me a list of those four game minimum tournaments? Thanks.

I see the trend going to more and more three game minimum for the same fees.

That sounds like AAA tournaments, not MN youth hockey tournaments. I've also read that in most European conrties, they don't play an organized game until the players are around 13 years old.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Tue May 12, 2009 9:28 am

USA Hockey published a report on a trip made to Russia. It is easy to find and important to read in its entirety, rather than having someone pick and choose sound bites for you to suit their own needs. Playing games at 13 was NOT part of that report.

RLStars · Post by **RLStars** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:04 am

InigoMontoya wrote:USA Hockey published a report on a trip made to Russia. It is easy to find and important to read in its entirety, rather than having someone pick and choose sound bites for you to suit their own needs. Playing games at 13 was NOT part of that report.

From the report:

Summary of game to practice ratios for 2008:
This may vary slightly from club to club. The following is an attempt to summarize the fourclubs we visited.
Birth year (age) – games per season – practice/training information per week
2003 (5) – No games – skate 3-4 times per week
2002 (6) – No games – skate 4-5 days; 1-2 off-ice sessions
2001 (7) – 10-15 games – practice 5 days; 2 to 3 off-ice sessions
2000 (8) – 15-20 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1999 (9) – 20-30 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1998 (10) – 30-35 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1997 (11) – 40 games – practice 5 days; 3 office sessions
1996 (12) – 45 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1995 (13) – 45 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1994 (14) – 45-60 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1993 (15) – 45-60 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1992 (16) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions
1991 (17) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions
1990 (18) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions

• Tactics and systems are not introduced in Russian hockey until age 14.

play4fun · Post by **play4fun** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:21 am

RLStars wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:USA Hockey published a report on a trip made to Russia. It is easy to find and important to read in its entirety, rather than having someone pick and choose sound bites for you to suit their own needs. Playing games at 13 was NOT part of that report.
From the report:

Summary of game to practice ratios for 2008:
This may vary slightly from club to club. The following is an attempt to summarize the fourclubs we visited.
Birth year (age) – games per season – practice/training information per week
2003 (5) – No games – skate 3-4 times per week
2002 (6) – No games – skate 4-5 days; 1-2 off-ice sessions
2001 (7) – 10-15 games – practice 5 days; 2 to 3 off-ice sessions
2000 (8) – 15-20 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1999 (9) – 20-30 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1998 (10) – 30-35 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1997 (11) – 40 games – practice 5 days; 3 office sessions
1996 (12) – 45 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1995 (13) – 45 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1994 (14) – 45-60 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1993 (15) – 45-60 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1992 (16) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions
1991 (17) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions
1990 (18) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions

• Tactics and systems are not introduced in Russian hockey until age 14.

Tactics and systems aren't required to play games. I've seen lots of games that are proof of that.

Looks like they start playing official games at the age of 7. Maybe they keep scores a couple of years earlier than we do?

Also, it looks like their 6 year olds skate as much or more than our squirts. No wonder there's a difference in skill level.

RLStars · Post by **RLStars** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:24 am

It had been awhile since I read this article, so I was paraphrasing from memory. Here is an article by Hal Tearse that was published in Lets Play Hockey:

If Playing Games made us Better We would be the Best

Even as the snow flies and District playoffs are about to start many are turning their thoughts to hockey after the regular season. The calls are already being made to fill out the rosters of AAA teams and other leagues that operate in the spring, summer and fall months. Parents of younger players are concerned their kids will fall behind their group and feel pressured to participate.

Last week the father of an 8 year old player emailed me about power skating and wondered how to fit it in with his AAA team, Mash team, and Showcase team. The lad also plays baseball. Without discussing the relative merits of the programs (not including the baseball part) it seems that this is an example of what we are facing today. These offseason leagues will often take precedence over the in season sports, especially if it is a practice to be missed. My advice to the father was for his son to play baseball, period.

Let us review the relative merits and value of playing games versus a good skill development program or just an old-fashioned practice session.

First of all we need to outline the actual amount of time spent on the ice during a one-hour game. For most youth levels the average player spends only 12 minutes actually playing. We also know through various studies done at the Olympics and Tier 1 National Youth Tournaments last year that the best players average about 1 minute of actually touching the puck during a game. For the average youth player it is closer to 30 seconds. Let us assume that you can manage to play another 30 games in the off- season. That equals a total of 6 hours of ice time and 15 minutes of handling a puck. Let’s not even discuss the cost per minute played or the time spent traveling, sometimes out of the country, to these games. Many families are spending several thousand dollars a year in the off- season leagues, which consist of mostly games. Games are the least effective development tool and most expensive per minute for time on the ice.

Now let’s compare the average STP summer program or similar camp. For an average cost of $375-500 the players get 30 hours of ice time, 60 hours of off ice training and 3-5 games at the end of the program. Add to that lots of time for spring, fall and summer sports, and you have a happy and well-rounded youngster.

The best skilled players in the world today are coming mostly from Europe where they focus on fun and skill development at early ages. The league play as we know it does not even begin until the mid teens. We continue to ignore the facts that playing more games and practicing occasionally is self-defeating and a contradiction to what we say we want for our children.

So what should a youth player do in the off-season if he/she wants to improve?

1) Enjoy the rest of the season
2) Participate in other sports and activities in the off season
3) Participate in hockey skill development activities. STP, power skating
programs, Acceleration Minnesota, and hockey camps are good options.
4) Play roller hockey with your friends.
5) Shoot 100 pucks a day at your home goal. Stickhandle on your own.

The off-season league are fun and are not necessarily detrimental to players unless they rely on them for skill development and replace the skill acquisition programs. It is then you maybe exchanging fun today for lack of success in the future.

Have a great off-season
Hal Tearse
USA Hockey, Minnkota Associate Head Coach
Originally published in Let’s Play Hockey

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:31 am

InigoMontoya wrote:"Failure to comply will result in sanctions against the respective Association as determined by MH."

The district is part of MH and determines the fine/sanctions etc.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:36 am

boardmember wrote:
western wrote:They way I understand it, the fines are imposed against both the team and the association. I think it is about $500 per game that is gone over and can't remember if it is $500 each against the team and the association for each game that you go over. Something to that effect.

Also, I have heard that it is EVERY squirt team in St. Cloud that will be on probation for this, not just the team that committed the infraction. Don't know if all SCYHA girls teams will be on probation, but I think so.

Who has the power to impose the fines? The District and MN Hockey?
Does this not alarm or bother others?

A State level youth hockey monolopy, would allow their District level ( Non profit entity) youth hockey orginization, to fine, collect money, from a community based youth ( Non Profit) hockey Association, made up of volunteers, community members, parents because a particular team did not follow the guidelines / and played too much hockey! I can see a slap on the wrist, tournament limits, no district tournament but monetary fines?

From Mn Hockey Youth rules:

H. SQUIRT HOCKEY – MH strongly encourages the skill development of all players especially at the entry levels. Therefore, the following is effective for the squirt level.
1. No league standings shall be kept.
2. Limit games (league/ tournament/exhibition games) to a maximum of 35 per season. Each game played in a tournament shall be counted as one game. Controlled scrimmages count toward the total of 35, but must meet the definition of a controlled scrimmage as outlined in the paragraph in the Playing Rules section entitled "Exhibition Games and Controlled Scrimmages."
3. A three to one practice to game ratio shall be supported by all associations.
4. A and B squirts must be allocated an equal quality and number of ice hours.
5. The above policies will be monitored by each local association and district. Failure to comply will result in sanctions against the respective Association as determined by MH.
6. There shall be no region or state tournaments at the squirt level

Where are the fines and sanctions when the Squirt and U10 levels dont get 105 practices to their 35 games "3 to 1 ratio"??

Good questions....
Should USAH tell the locals how to run mites,as in , use blue pucks?
Should MH tell local assn how to run squirts, # of games, # of practices?

How about limiting bantams to 35 games?

Where should the line be drawn between rules to protect, rules to keep a level playing field and rules to develop?

You people need to be at the state board meetings.

Pens4 · Post by **Pens4** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:47 am

RLStars wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:USA Hockey published a report on a trip made to Russia. It is easy to find and important to read in its entirety, rather than having someone pick and choose sound bites for you to suit their own needs. Playing games at 13 was NOT part of that report.
From the report:

Summary of game to practice ratios for 2008:
This may vary slightly from club to club. The following is an attempt to summarize the fourclubs we visited.
Birth year (age) – games per season – practice/training information per week
2003 (5) – No games – skate 3-4 times per week
2002 (6) – No games – skate 4-5 days; 1-2 off-ice sessions
2001 (7) – 10-15 games – practice 5 days; 2 to 3 off-ice sessions
2000 (8) – 15-20 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1999 (9) – 20-30 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1998 (10) – 30-35 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1997 (11) – 40 games – practice 5 days; 3 office sessions
1996 (12) – 45 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1995 (13) – 45 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1994 (14) – 45-60 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1993 (15) – 45-60 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions
1992 (16) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions
1991 (17) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions
1990 (18) – 45-60 games – 2 practices per day 5 times per week; 5 off-ice sessions

• Tactics and systems are not introduced in Russian hockey until age 14.

Interesting information. There was a team of 12 year olds that toured Canada in 1990 called the Druzhba 78's. They were and still are considered the best youth hockey team ever assembled. That year they came over and played the best Bantam, Tier II Junior, and Major JuniorA teams across Canada. They played 34 games in 40 nights and tied one game. Over the next 5 years (ages 12-17) they only lost 5 games while winning 335.

Sounds like they discovered a recipe for success??? Google this team and their then and current program coach Ivan Provilov. Read a little about the brutalistic tactics he used to mold the perfect players and team. Find out that this team, filled with "Gretzky-Like" players, succeeded in placing one NHL player (Danius Zubrus). There is a book written by a canadian author Walter Grot called the "Reign of Fear"....I highly recommend it as a resource of what not to do with your kids as a coach or a parent.

I am not sure what the perfect formula is of games, practices & dryland. But I am sure that USA Hockey, Russia or anybody else for that matter, has not figured it out either.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:03 pm

2000 ( – 15-20 games – practice 5 days; 3 off-ice sessions

It would seem that if they are playing 20 games as mites, they are NOT waiting until they are 13 before they play their first game.

The league play as we know it does not even begin until the mid teens.

They played 34 games in 40 nights and tied one game.

If these 12 year olds are playing 34 games in 40 nights, I don't think all the rest of Europe is sitting on their hands until they're old enough to drive.

I apologize if I don't offer the required reverence for the former Minnkota Associate Head Coach. I'm sure he's a great guy, probably has a World's Best G'pa mug on his desk. I think that many of his published works have taken bits and pieces of source information and arrived at conclusions with which not everyone would agree if presented with the whole body of work. Often (not always) the publication includes general rhetoric around pulling on the reigns. I presume this is in response to the couple (or even couple dozen) programs that may exceed what is healthy in hockey development. However, the ironic result is: 1) those particular programs are often loaded with folks who've played and/or coached at higher levels - the 14 year NHL veteran reads it, agrees or disagrees, then goes forward with what he knows to be the right way to coach kids; 2) the associations who aren't lucky enough to have a parent with such experience (often smaller, often without rich tradition) don't know any better than to cut out the article, frame it, and nail it to the wall in the arena - they pull back on the reigns and the bantam A team plays 24 games and practices twice a week; the younger kids get even less of both.

western · Post by **western** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:35 pm

Some of you are missing the point. Who cares whether they play 10 games, 20 or 30 as squirts (God forbid they should play 40 or 50). The point is what is the practice to game ratio. If they are going to play 20 games, 80 practices should be the cornerstone of their year and their learning and development. You do not develop skating skills, shooting skills or puckhandling skills by playing regulations games. There is no substitute for practice, and that's a fact. Read the books "Outliers" and "Talent is Overrated" and then tell me performances or games mean more than practice.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Tue May 12, 2009 3:01 pm

western, I don't think anybody disagrees with you. One of the posts that you said was wrong, wrong, wrong I think you misunderstood a bit. I think the poster was including practice and games when he said 'play'.

My comments were strictly tangental. So many 'facts' are offered up, it'd be nice to know where some of them are coming from. For example, where is the information regarding European players practicing 6-7 days per week? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, I'd just like to read it.

Outliers - statistics can be used to prove most anything you like - correlation does not equal causation.
Talent is Overrated - I read this article from Fortune; I think Blatherwick had a link. I don't disagree. Was Tiger a multi-sport athlete?

Pens4 · Post by **Pens4** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:11 pm

[quote=You do not develop skating skills, shooting skills or puckhandling skills by playing regulations games. There is no substitute for practice, and that's a fact. Read the books "Outliers" and "Talent is Overrated" and then tell me performances or games mean more than practice.[/quote]

I have not read the books mentioned...I'm guessing I probably won't but I do completely agree with you on practice for development of skills. There is no magical formula for practice-game ratio. Back when MN Hockey was looking at putting limits on PW a& BTN levels I sent a quick note comparing the game schedule of the group of kids at Eden Prairie who are year ahead of my son. They are a group that have won a peewee, two Bantam and now a HS championship. That group average probably 65-75 games a year. Their practice ratio couldn't have been close to 2-1 ratio given a 160 day season. My sons group following them played fewer games and practiced more because that was their need....no magical formula.

Where people lose me is when they think practice is more important than games. The only thing...I repeat...the only thing practice is good for is to help you perform better in games. This cannot be disputed. Anyone who thinks skill development is the ultimate goal does not need to ever join a team....they can just skate faster & shoot harder down at the park by themselves.

3GoonsWest · Post by **3GoonsWest** » Tue May 12, 2009 5:28 pm

Where people lose me is when they think practice is more important than games. The only thing...I repeat...the only thing practice is good for is to help you perform better in games. This cannot be disputed. Anyone who thinks skill development is the ultimate goal does not need to ever join a team....they can just skate faster & shoot harder down at the park by themselves.[/quote]

Yeah, but look on the bright side. They don't have to worry about hurting anyone's feelings when they run up the score against the tires and cones.

western · Post by **western** » Tue May 12, 2009 7:53 pm

I'm not sure if Tiger was multi sports. I am one of those people who would love kids playing two or three sports such as a Joe Mauer or a Wayne Gretzky, but I also understand there are kids who really want to play one sport. I had one of those. I wish he would have played something besides hockey in high school, but that's all he wanted to do.

The only thing I know for sure about Tiger is that I'm certain he has hit more golf balls on the range and chipping, pitching and putting areas than he ever has during all his rounds of golf by an astronomical number.

If you read the article on talent, no need to read the book, same thing just more in depth, though very interesting.

western · Post by **western** » Tue May 12, 2009 8:01 pm

By the way, practice is more important than games for developing skills --that's what I'm saying. Practice drives performance. The less you do, the less effective you'll be. Of course it is to enhance performance. That's true whether you're a musician, athlete, painter, speechmaker, whatever.

gdahl · Post by **gdahl** » Tue May 12, 2009 10:46 pm

I would like to clarify my post regarding the 2 practices to one game ratio. I admit It would most likely be better to have a higher practice to game ratio for skill development IF the coaches are competent and teach. Here is the two examples that I drew on for seeking a 2 to on 1. I spoke to two parents at a recently held AAA tourney and asked them how their winter association season was. They responded pretty good...the kids did well...and improved. I asked what their record was? They said they did not know....but they played about fifty games and there record was above five hundred. They stated that they played in nine tournaments over the winter season. This is for a Squirt A season. My next question was what was their practice to game ratio? The answer...about 5 to 1...That is five games to one practice. The reason being this team relied exclusively on outdoor ice for practices and they had a very bad year for outdoor ice....too cold or too warm. Now to 2nd example which is my own kids squirt A team. We too had trouble with and almost exclusively relied on outdoor ice for practice. The team played 34 gamesand probably had 30 to 40 practices for about a 1 to one ratio...so you can see how I would have loved to a see a two practice to one ratio and that may be more realistic. Now let us do some math on how feasible a three practice to one game ratio would be at the squirt level with a 35 game schedule. I am first going to assume a four month season of November, December, January, and February with a total of 120 days to skate. With a 3 to 1 ratio and 35 games 105 practices are needed. So we need to fit 140 games/practices into 120 days. Assuming we double up on games on the weekends...the kids would still need to be skating every single day. Now what about bad outside ice days? Or if you schedule 105 indoor practices for a squirt team what is the cost to participate going to be? Yes I agree more practices and less games is important. But to be realistic a 2 to 1 ratio is what most could expect.

iwearmysunglassesatnight · Tue May 12, 2009 11:13 pm

well said duckquackboogey

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Wed May 13, 2009 7:21 am

There is no magical formula for practice-game ratio. Back when MN Hockey was looking at putting limits on PW a& BTN levels I sent a quick note comparing the game schedule of the group of kids at Eden Prairie who are year ahead of my son. They are a group that have won a peewee, two Bantam and now a HS championship. That group average probably 65-75 games a year. Their practice ratio couldn't have been close to 2-1 ratio given a 160 day season. My sons group following them played fewer games and practiced more because that was their need....no magical formula.

My guess would be that their practice to game ratio, when considering camps/clinics and AAA development over a 12 month period, was probably pretty respectable. That combined with practices nearly every day in October would have them prepared to hit the game schedule with a pretty decent individual skill level. The 1-1 or 2-1 ratio during the season would allow the coaches time to maintain the skills players are executing well, while taking time to also concentrate on improvement opportunities that show themselves in game situations.

Most kids from the twin cities, Duluth, and Fargo/Moorhead playing at the A, and even B1, level would be similar. Fortunately (though some (maybe most) will disagree) these opportunities have been spreading through the outer ring suburbs and into towns close enough for parents to carpool kids up to an hour (or more) and into pockets like St Cloud and Bemidji. Unfortunately ice is expensive, summer ice probably more so, and a good portion of the state chooses not to make it.

Some options?:

Leave no child behind. 1) Find the money and expertise to give every MN kid the same opportunities that the kids mentioned above are getting. 2) Put restrictor plates on programs that are successful and anchors on kids that are improving, so the rest don't fall behind.

Accept the dichotomy. Kids that don't want to play at that level are not required to work that hard; if you just want to be able to play tennis competently into you 70s and don't want to win the state high school tournament, then don't hit balls inside during the winter - nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately kids wanting to compete at a high level but born into a 3rd world hockey town will have a much, much harder go of it; not impossible, but much harder than a kid who has smooth ice and a plethora of qualified coaches waiting to help him all summer; a kid with a lake in his town can swim like a fish all summer, but without an indoor pool is at a disadvantage to kids able to choose that option in the winter.

Hockey programs that are looking to improve are not going to try to reinvent the wheel. They are going to pattern themselves after programs that have shown success. Apparently with Roseau as an exception, these programs tend to have kids developing during the off season, and they tend to play a lot of games during the regular season.

RLStars · Post by **RLStars** » Wed May 13, 2009 7:40 am

gdahl wrote:I would like to clarify my post regarding the 2 practices to one game ratio. I admit It would most likely be better to have a higher practice to game ratio for skill development IF the coaches are competent and teach. Here is the two examples that I drew on for seeking a 2 to on 1. I spoke to two parents at a recently held AAA tourney and asked them how their winter association season was. They responded pretty good...the kids did well...and improved. I asked what their record was? They said they did not know....but they played about fifty games and there record was above five hundred. They stated that they played in nine tournaments over the winter season. This is for a Squirt A season. My next question was what was their practice to game ratio? The answer...about 5 to 1...That is five games to one practice. The reason being this team relied exclusively on outdoor ice for practices and they had a very bad year for outdoor ice....too cold or too warm. Now to 2nd example which is my own kids squirt A team. We too had trouble with and almost exclusively relied on outdoor ice for practice. The team played 34 gamesand probably had 30 to 40 practices for about a 1 to one ratio...so you can see how I would have loved to a see a two practice to one ratio and that may be more realistic. Now let us do some math on how feasible a three practice to one game ratio would be at the squirt level with a 35 game schedule. I am first going to assume a four month season of November, December, January, and February with a total of 120 days to skate. With a 3 to 1 ratio and 35 games 105 practices are needed. So we need to fit 140 games/practices into 120 days. Assuming we double up on games on the weekends...the kids would still need to be skating every single day. Now what about bad outside ice days? Or if you schedule 105 indoor practices for a squirt team what is the cost to participate going to be? Yes I agree more practices and less games is important. But to be realistic a 2 to 1 ratio is what most could expect.

Nearly 1.5 times as many games played then the MN Hockey maximum. Who is policing this team in that district?

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Wed May 13, 2009 11:12 am

Good questions....
Should USAH tell the locals how to run mites,as in , use blue pucks?
Should MH tell local assn how to run squirts, # of games, # of practices?

How about limiting bantams to 35 games?

Where should the line be drawn between rules to protect, rules to keep a level playing field and rules to develop?

You people need to be at the state board meetings.

Here's an idea: if you find a rule important enough to include in the MNH handbook, then enforce the rule; if you're not going to enforce a rule, then take it out.

I think that may work better than picking and choosing whom gets punished and whom is above the law.

What is the point of "you people" being at the state board meeting, working your butt off to get a rule changed, then having MNH, the districts, and affiliates continue to behave in whatever way they choose?

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu May 14, 2009 9:35 am

InigoMontoya wrote:
Good questions....
Should USAH tell the locals how to run mites,as in , use blue pucks?
Should MH tell local assn how to run squirts, # of games, # of practices?

How about limiting bantams to 35 games?

Where should the line be drawn between rules to protect, rules to keep a level playing field and rules to develop?

You people need to be at the state board meetings.
Here's an idea: if you find a rule important enough to include in the MNH handbook, then enforce the rule; if you're not going to enforce a rule, then take it out.

I think that may work better than picking and choosing whom gets punished and whom is above the law.

What is the point of "you people" being at the state board meeting, working your butt off to get a rule changed, then having MNH, the districts, and affiliates continue to behave in whatever way they choose?

Because 'you people' have good ideas and are vocal.
Because 'you people' can, could, should be in a position to make the ruel change and make sure it is changed.

D16 has a rule, it is called 'common sense and communication'.
My job as director is to know the handbook.
The local associations job is to know how to get a hold of me.
The local assn has a question about a rule they communicate to me and I find a way to make what they want to do work within the framework of the handbook and our district P&P manual.

D16 is probably the most odd man out district in the state and what we do may not be appropriate or workable in the metro, but bottom line everywhere should be what is best for the kids and then what is best for the kid.

I know it sounds simple but it should be; it is just a game for kids. For that small % that have an opportunity it gets a little deeper, but for the vast majority KIS'S'.

And I don't like fines.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Thu May 14, 2009 10:44 am

D16 has a wise and benevolent leader. Would that there were eleven more.

summer · Post by **summer** » Fri May 15, 2009 7:05 am

western wrote:The more you play the better you get?

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Overwhelming evidence shows this is bunk. The more games vs. practice, the LESS kids develop. The more practice they have, the MORE they develop. Look at all the research. Europeans have about a 6 or7 practice to game ratio. Where are the most talented players coming from? Europe

The average youth player touches the puck about a minute or so in an entire game. How is he or she going to get better at t his rate. Good practices expotentially multiply this. This is a good policy and must be even more strongly enforced. A practice to game ratio of 3 to one isn't even enough if we hope to develop better players.

I know this is true, but it only works when there are truely qualified coaches running the practices that can make it fun, keep the kids interested, go at game speed, where it does get them to develop. I have seen too many years where the coaches run endless boring drills that look meaningless when you see how they play! I have often wished my kid's teams could practice with the "good" teams they play, so they could learn how to play!

zippitydoda · Post by **zippitydoda** » Fri May 15, 2009 2:59 pm

Back to this whole St. Cloud probation thing. The way I understand it, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the squirt coach who committed the offense is a long time board member and is a vice president or some such bigwig. I also understand the new president who was a VP was on that team, as were two other board members.

Shouldn't someone know the rules and be paying attention? Good Lord, where does the buck stop?

silentbutdeadly3139 · Post by **silentbutdeadly3139** » Fri May 15, 2009 3:58 pm

zippitydoda wrote:Back to this whole St. Cloud probation thing. The way I understand it, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the squirt coach who committed the offense is a long time board member and is a vice president or some such bigwig. I also understand the new president who was a VP was on that team, as were two other board members.

Shouldn't someone know the rules and be paying attention? Good Lord, where does the buck stop?

yep. BOTH current VP's were Head coach and assistant coach of that team according to the website. Some other names of team members and coaches looks suspiciously like board member names. I'm guessing they knew EXACTLY what they were doing but decided to ask for forgiveness rather than permission.