Bernie selling the Farm?

[SECoach]

I have no disagreement with most of what you say. ADM is certainly not the definitive method. It has no track record and may be a complete disappointment. It is simply the method that USA Hockey has chosen to develop and use for it's members. If you look at any country that is currently placing a high number of players into the NHL you will see a country that has implimented a development model that is used by that countries hockey players. Their players do not develop their own model along the way and if they do, it is within the framework of that model. Take a look at the number of youth hockey players in Sweden versus the number of Swedish players in the NHL. They are doing something right. What USA Hockey has done is study these for many years and use proven science to develop a plan that they believe will work in our country with our demagraphics. Is is perfect? Not a chance. Is a consistant method that is practiced by the whole better than everyone going their own way? It depends on what your opinion of better is but i would say significantly more effective and will yield better results. Like it or not the people and organizations that have developed this are experts. You may be an expert as well and i respect your knowledge and opinions but I personally will put more weight in an organization that has made this a goal and spent thousands and thousands of hours researching, developing, and implimenting this.

By the way for the NHL to thrive they need more American players. They fully and totally support and have assisted in researching, creating, and implimenting the ADM.

One of this countries greatest attributes is that anyone can choose to go their own way. Lots of folks on this board have their rightful opinions to how best to develop hockey players in the US. I happen to believe very few have decades of research behind them and the primary mission of their existence to develop the game of hockey and our countries hockey players. I choose to buy into and be a supportive part of it. Others are more than free to go another way. I'd look at the Easton Cup thread carefully before i decide to go another way though. Just my opinion.

[SECoach]

I guess i'm not finished yet.

Since the topic of this thread is the Minnesota Made program let me tell you how i think our conversation relates to it. First off, Minnesota Made very closely models the ADM. High degree of skill development at young ages. I won't argue that and i believe they do a great job of this.

In my mind the part where it separates is not even the responsibility of Minnesta Made. I also agree that you and i can both identify who the top 12 year olds are and if they physically and mentally mature and alot of other cards fall into place they might become elite players.

The part that many parents advocate that differs from the ADM is what you do with that 12 year old. ADM would suggest that year round training is appropriate and beneficial to a 16 or 17 year old but is will actually harm the development of a 12 year old. The problem is that when a parent sees that their child is a step above the others, or want them to be, too many push the player to develop, develop, develop. This comes at the expense of free time, other sports which help improve an athletes overall athleticism, overuse injuries, burnout, etc. Solid research says that if you take this route with a 12 year old you will not gain an elite hockey player from it. USA Hockey has its National Development Program in Ann Arbour. I promise you they will not be setting up a program for 12 year olds any time soon. Minnesota Made is a business with profit as their primary objective, or at least it should be. Offering year round training is something they need to do and should do. Because of this too many parents take advantage of everything rather than limit it to a reasonable amount. Not all, but some. They also get into verbal sparring matches that are pretty heated over which 2000 born teams and players are the top. I just don't think this is in line with developing an elite player. It's more inline with developing a disfunctional kid. Ya i know you will say i should raise my own kids and not worry about yours, but sorry, that's my job.

As i said in a previous post. I have very few issues with Minnesota Made. I do have a problem with the fanatical parents that hide behind the statement that their kid wants to play hockey 24/7/365. Not all but many will end up sorely disappointed when their solid 12 year old turns 16 and tells them that he's just not that into it.

[Doglover]

Great discussion gentlemen and I find myself agreeing with both of you on many points. Don't have the right answer but I think it's buried in both your comments. Thanks for the discussion - one of the better ones I've seen lately on here and definitely far better than the Easton thread - ouch.

[slapshot445]

bernie is broke in case all of you didn't know that, he is millions of dollars in debt, and by the way to all of u mm parents bernie does nothing special the only reason he has sent kids to the nhl is he was the first coach to take on the idea of ruining a kids life so they might have a shot of making it to the NHL, I know many kids who have done his program for many years and now hate hockey because they are "burned out".

[muckandgrind]

bernie is broke in case all of you didn't know that, he is millions of dollars in debt, and by the way to all of u mm parents bernie does nothing special the only reason he has sent kids to the nhl is he was the first coach to take on the idea of ruining a kids life so they might have a shot of making it to the NHL, I know many kids who have done his program for many years and now hate hockey because they are "burned out".

I'm no fan of Bernie, but if you think he was the "first" coach to act this way, than you have never been across the border to our north. In Canada, there are THOUSANDS of Bernie McBains. Bernie is a good drill coach, but he is awful at connecting with kids. There is a reason why he is losing player after player. Last year, the 95 Machine team split on him...this year, the top players are defecting from the 96 Machine and it will continue on and on. Parents look to be finally waking up and saying "enough is enough, we don't want our kids treated that way".

[thunderwolf]

I'm no fan of Bernie, but if you think he was the "first" coach to act this way, than you have never been across the border to our north. In Canada, there are THOUSANDS of Bernie McBains. Bernie is a good drill coach, but he is awful at connecting with kids. There is a reason why he is losing player after player. Last year, the 95 Machine team split on him...this year, the top players are defecting from the 96 Machine and it will continue on and on. Parents look to be finally waking up and saying "enough is enough, we don't want our kids treated that way".

Not sure what parts of Canada you are talking about but in general the youth programs in Canada are much more politically correct and place a great emphasis on participation rather than winning. Not to say there aren't coaches who don't follow the development model developed by Hockey Canada, but I get the impression there is much more emphasis on development models like Bernie's in the US.

[muckandgrind]

I'm no fan of Bernie, but if you think he was the "first" coach to act this way, than you have never been across the border to our north. In Canada, there are THOUSANDS of Bernie McBains. Bernie is a good drill coach, but he is awful at connecting with kids. There is a reason why he is losing player after player. Last year, the 95 Machine team split on him...this year, the top players are defecting from the 96 Machine and it will continue on and on. Parents look to be finally waking up and saying "enough is enough, we don't want our kids treated that way".

Not sure what parts of Canada you are talking about but in general the youth programs in Canada are much more politically correct and place a great emphasis on participation rather than winning. Not to say there aren't coaches who don't follow the development model developed by Hockey Canada, but I get the impression there is much more emphasis on development models like Bernie's in the US.

I'm talking about all parts of Canada where 14 year olds get drafted by Bantam teams in other towns and are forced to leave home at a young age to move in with billets.

Ever heard of the name David Frost???

[thunderwolf]

I'm no fan of Bernie, but if you think he was the "first" coach to act this way, than you have never been across the border to our north. In Canada, there are THOUSANDS of Bernie McBains. Bernie is a good drill coach, but he is awful at connecting with kids. There is a reason why he is losing player after player. Last year, the 95 Machine team split on him...this year, the top players are defecting from the 96 Machine and it will continue on and on. Parents look to be finally waking up and saying "enough is enough, we don't want our kids treated that way".

Not sure what parts of Canada you are talking about but in general the youth programs in Canada are much more politically correct and place a great emphasis on participation rather than winning. Not to say there aren't coaches who don't follow the development model developed by Hockey Canada, but I get the impression there is much more emphasis on development models like Bernie's in the US.

I'm talking about all parts of Canada where 14 year olds get drafted by Bantam teams in other towns and are forced to leave home at a young age to move in with billets.

Ever heard of the name David Frost???

Kids in Canada don't go into any kind of true draft until after their 15 year old year when they are eligible for the junior draft. Very few leave town until they are 17, not a whole lot different than going to a US college.

Having said that, I did acknowledge that there are a few coaches who don't follow HC development model. David Frost hardly equals "thousands". From what I have seen a much greater emphasis is placed on winning on US players, at least at the younger levels.

[manchild]

Slappy,

You know not what you are talking about. They just hired two more people in the last two weeks. The rink is doing well. I just got an e-mail that they have completely filled the Choice league. That's 23 Mite and squirt teams.

It does not sould like they hurting and you don't hire people if you are broke. People said that he would go under inside of six month and 3 years later the rink is still open.

Seeing how this was your first post you would think that you would want say something just a little bit more meaningful.

[muckandgrind]

Not sure what parts of Canada you are talking about but in general the youth programs in Canada are much more politically correct and place a great emphasis on participation rather than winning. Not to say there aren't coaches who don't follow the development model developed by Hockey Canada, but I get the impression there is much more emphasis on development models like Bernie's in the US.

I'm talking about all parts of Canada where 14 year olds get drafted by Bantam teams in other towns and are forced to leave home at a young age to move in with billets.

Ever heard of the name David Frost???

Kids in Canada don't go into any kind of true draft until after their 15 year old year when they are eligible for the junior draft. Very few leave town until they are 17, not a whole lot different than going to a US college.

Having said that, I did acknowledge that there are a few coaches who don't follow HC development model. David Frost hardly equals "thousands". From what I have seen a much greater emphasis is placed on winning on US players, at least at the younger levels.

You're wrong. 14 year olds who have completed their first year of Bantams are eligible for the Bantam draft in Canada. Juniors comes after Bantams, but I'm sure you already know that. And this doesn't even take into considerations all of the AAA clubs formed where you have kids younger than 14 leaving home to play hockey.

David Frost was just a single example, and while thousands may have been a slight exageration, there are certainly HUNDREDS of coaches in Canada in operate the way Bernie does. Heck, Bernie's not even alone in this country.

[thunderwolf]

Kids in Canada don't go into any kind of true draft until after their 15 year old year when they are eligible for the junior draft. Very few leave town until they are 17, not a whole lot different than going to a US college.

Having said that, I did acknowledge that there are a few coaches who don't follow HC development model. David Frost hardly equals "thousands". From what I have seen a much greater emphasis is placed on winning on US players, at least at the younger levels.

You're wrong. 14 year olds who have completed their first year of Bantams are eligible for the Bantam draft in Canada. Juniors comes after Bantams, but I'm sure you already know that. And this doesn't even take into considerations all of the AAA clubs formed where you have kids younger than 14 leaving home to play hockey.

David Frost was just a single example, and while thousands may have been a slight exageration, there are certainly HUNDREDS of coaches in Canada in operate the way Bernie does. Heck, Bernie's not even alone in this country.

In Ontario players enter the junior draft after their minor midget year (15 year olds). In western Canada they enter the draft after their 14 year old Bantam year but are not eligible to join their Junior team until they are 16. Midget hockey follows bantam hockey in Canada. Bantam 13-14, midget 15-17, juniors can play anytime after they turn 16, but very few play before they are 17-18. All must play one year of midget, most play at least two years of Midget.

There are some exceptions. Tier two junior leagues allow AAA midget teams to play in their leagues and some will allow underage (15 year olds). This was the case with David Frost. These leagues do not hold drafts. Many recruit players through affiliations with Major Junior Leagues. Still, permission must be received by the player's minor hockey associations to allow a player to play junior hockey as a 15 year old. In the case of these players, they are not forced to play anywhere. this is usually a case of an overzealous parent who feels his/her child is too good for midget hockey and pressures their association to free the child for junior.

[thunderwolf]

Just to show two extreme examples, Sidney Crosby attended Shattuck because Hockey Canada would not allow him to play junior as a 15 year old. Rather than playing another year of Midget he attended SSM.

John Tavares did play as a 15 year old after his parents obtained permission from Hockey Canada to allow for early acceptance.

[slapshot44]

[quote="manchild"]Slappy,

You know not what you are talking about. They just hired two more people in the last two weeks. The rink is doing well. I just got an e-mail that they have completely filled the Choice league. That's 23 Mite and squirt teams.

It does not sould like they hurting and you don't hire people if you are broke. People said that he would go under inside of six month and 3 years later the rink is still open.

Seeing how this was your first post you would think that you would want say something just a little bit more meaningful.[/quote]



If ithe rink is doing so well then where is that third rink that we have been waiting for for three years?

[Doglover]

Maybe the two guys they just hired will build it?

[boardmember]

If ithe rink is doing so well then where is that third rink that we have been waiting for for three years?

Slappy,

When the rink opened in 2006, unemployment was under 5%, stock market was at all time highs, house values were peaking, banks were giving away money.

Today, unemployment 10%, stock market down 30%+, banks failing, property values down, USA in a recession. Government giving away borrowed money on pork.

Its a smart business decision not to borrow $4M+ ( guessing) to build a third rink and have to make those payments and taxes. Business always want to grow, expand. Its chosing the timing that will make or break you.

BTW, what kind of business do you operate?

[CoachCleats]

If ithe rink is doing so well then where is that third rink that we have been waiting for for three years?

Slappy,

When the rink opened in 2006, unemployment was under 5%, stock market was at all time highs, house values were peaking, banks were giving away money.

Today, unemployment 10%, stock market down 30%+, banks failing, property values down, USA in a recession. Government giving away borrowed money on pork.

Its a smart business decision not to borrow $4M+ ( guessing) to build a third rink and have to make those payments and taxes. Business always want to grow, expand. Its chosing the timing that will make or break you.

BTW, what kind of business do you operate?

With all due respect, if your portfolio is down 30%, do you feel qualified to be giving investment advice?

[hockey relic]

Between all the new rinks in the area and the economy (possibly less hockey players/customers), MM is smart to move slowly on expansion.