Thunderbird77 wrote:Unfortunately, the try-out process does not evaluate how hard working a player is. if "hardworking" equals deserving, than the evaluation process does fall short. The try-out process does attempt to evaluate skill, speed and hockey sense.
I also know of no college coaches (at least for girls) that are attending U12 games to determine who they will be recruiting 6 years later. They do come to Minnesota High School games. They do monitor Minnesota High School stats.
D1 coaches also are not easily fooled. Girls that are promoted beyond their ability level are not generally recruited by D1 coaches. The coaches watch their recruits play -- in many games and many different settings. Of the three players on my daighter's U12 team whose fathers promoted them and insured they were on every Select team, one will play D1 next year, one may play D3 next year (not totally sure) and one quit the sport after her sophmore year and no one missed her.
You are missing the point; or perhaps I am so unclear that my point makes no sense.
I am talking "opportunity" for development and competition [and yes, now to be seen by college coaches]. Most players will get better if they get to compete against better competition. My guess is you go back to look at IceCats or Blades or Whitecaps from u-12 or u-14 and here four or five years later, all of the same girls still play together now; they play with and against each other at every opportunity. And there are lots of deserving girls [and I am not just saying hardworking here; girls who are just as fast and strong and smart and whatever] that rarely if ever get those opportunities.
Goodness, I never suggested college coaches are scouting u-12s; I believe, from what I have seen for many years now, that some parents are better clued in how the game or system works and they've positioned their daughters with the top players at an early age; some parents do not know the system and their daughters [this is true in boys hockey as well] end up being behind and ultimately ignored by the decision makers at most every step of the way. I am quite confident there is little to distinguish many of the players in relation to speed, strength and rink sense except for the top top girls who are so obviously better players than everyone [i'm thinking like 15 maybe 20 players at any given birth year or grade level]; after that top group it is pretty much a crap shoot to distinguish talent levels. Except............., some girls get labeled as Advanced and other don't; and it seems to me that these labels stick.
Again, outside of those top top 15 players, you will never convince me that even the college opportunity, D1 and D3, is going to be based on very subjective criteria. Again, the subjective nature of the labeling goes back to when these players are pretty young.
Holy smokes, I've spent way too much time on this subject and I promise I will not post anything for a long long time.
And in the end, it is really fun to watch all these young women competing in this cool game. Next year's senior class will be pretty exciting.