Jeopordizing one age group to help another

[tiger2009]

Wondering if any one has any advice for me? My daughter will be a first year U10 this fall. Last year our only U10 was a B team that apparently did well enough to force our "smaller" association in to having an U10A team this year. The problem is that they are pulling up 4-6 returning U10 up to fill a U12B team leaving a VERY weak forced "A" team that will have long and unsuccesful season. Question: Would it be more beneficial to have our daughter play on the B team that will be able to compete or the A team that will be very discouraging for all. She is not an "A" player this year, but will be with the moveups. In all honesty, even without the moveups this U10A team would have a tough road. 2 "B" is obviously the best scenario, but apparently not being allowed by the district. Basically, our association is shooting 1 horse (U10) to save another (U12) which I don't think is good for our particular girls program.

[observer]

What a mess. Certainly a parent behind that wheel. Development occurs when players play with a group with the approximate same level. I do know some districts force the top team to be A which is a mistake especially if there's declining numbers. That rule should be changed, by the Districts that use it, immediately. You end up with 3 A level players and 12 B-C level players on an A team. Go to any tournament with true A teams and they'll get smoked. Girls should generally play with their designated age group too. It's unfortunate for the A level girls to have to skate on a B team but that's what the community has. In the metro the A girls would/should/can be waived to a neighboring Association that fields an A team with A level girls. It's tricky in out state when the closest Association is 50 miles away.

The borrowing from Peter to pay Paul is a house of cards that tumbles through the entire association. No one has success or fun, at any level, and you turn girls off to the game.

Focus on recruiting 30 new 4-5 year old girls a year. Ultimately that gives you 60 at each level, enough for 4 teams. Build a strong U8 and U10 organization moving forward. Your recruiting slumped and it's costing these older girls right now. You're not helping one by hurting the other, both will be hurt. Against solid competition the U10s will be overpowered by actual U12 players. Keep the 10s together (and you need 30 of them so you can have two teams) and focus on the future.

[observer]

By the way, I simply can't stress the importance of recruiting enough. 12 and 13 year olds don't fall from trees. You either have them as 5 year olds or you never will. There is not a single more important function at 90% of the Associations in the State than attracting the next bunch. Associations, make sure you have a large, and hyper-active, recruiting committee before anything else. Nothing is more important for the future health of your Association. Otherwise the number problem will repeat itself year after year.

[royals dad]

Observer - I completely agree on the importance of recruiting and having a pipline to support age and ability levels through an association. However the reality is often that either by thier associations own hand or by the demographics and sports landscape of an area this not often possible. The distance from St Lois Park to Edina might be just a few miles but the ability to get 60 players in to U8 is light years apart.

For this parent I think fixing the association probably is not an option for this upcomming season. Girls hockey parents will face this same dilema over the entire state this year. Unfortunatley I don't think there is an easy answer for them. If an association that has 5 A level players and 10 B level players forms a B team, the power associations will cry foul (the true B team argument that will start on the forum next month) if they field an A team those same power associations will run up huge scores while the 2nd and 3rd lines are out on the ice. When they field A teams they will most likley only be able to do so by pulling up kids from the younger ages. That puts parents into the above dilema.

Tiger2009 - My advice is to try and find a good fit for your daughter and don't worry about the association for now. Look at the coaches and other players but also be realistic about your daughters ability. IMO try and find the team where she will skate at a competetive level with the team and the teams they play. This might mean play up or you might choose to stay at the age appropriate level. That may tick off some people in the association but it is the right thing to do. I believe it is best when the players have a line that is at a similar development level and they play against like teams. It seems however there a few girls winter teams that are top to bottom realtivley equal in development stage.

At the same time durring the season volunteer with the association board and do everything posible to recruit and build the traditions that will keep kids coming in. If you have a small school district, low or low middle income demographic, or a strong local Basketball/Volleyball tradition you will always be skating uphill.

Good Luck this season with whatever yo decide to do.

[redarmydad]

I agree with royals dad on the fact that there is an unfortunate side to this great sport for some associations. But if you are in love with this game then it is up to you to help spawn the next generation of hockey loving kids. Everyone will run into the same problem at there perspective levels, but if they ignore the problem and only focus on there own kid then how will the problem ever get solved. I say become the voice at your association board meetings who is preaching recruitment, get involved, ask questions. Yes try and help your daughter to find the right fit but don't ignore the problem with low numbers. it takes a community to breed a strong program, why do you think edina has great numbers? It is not because of the money, they have an entire community of support. they have families who are hurting but they find a way through sponsorship, scholarship programs for youth hockey and fund raising. And they have enthusiastic and passionate people who are involved in the recruitment process. So observer is 100% correct and we all have to contribute and do our part or we will be not just witness to the demise of our or other girls programs, but partly to blame. I agree with royals dads advice about finding the right fit for your daughter and looking at coaching and lines of equal talent. I find if you throw a a kid who is a true A skater on a line with some lower level skaters, she ends up doing all the work and the lower level kids stop skating as soon as she touches the puck.

[hemiman]

Tiger,
I am going to assume you are up in Princeton. It sounds like you have enough girls to form two teams at the u10 level. If that is the case, than there should be an A and a B team. Alot of times, it might work out to form teams, to move kids up. Say there are 30 girls who are u10 elidgible, make two teams w/ 13 skaters and a goalie and move up the stronger players. I live in the metro area and thats how we usually do it. My daughter has been asked to move up twice, I leave it up to her.
I have watched my kid play A and B hockey. At the B level, I didnt enjoy watching them lose to smaller communities, who only field a B team. For the most part, these B teams had 4-5 A level players, and the coaches knew it and those 4-5 girls played most of the game, if it was close.
I bet if you look at State Champs at the B level, most will be from smaller communities. Because they generally have a B team w/ A players on it. Thats just a numbers game and thats the way it is.
My point is, if you can field 2 teams there should be an A and a B. I think we had 27 girls try out last year at my daughter's level. We made an A and a B team. I bet we could have done real well w/ 2 B teams. So our numbers were down, but being a metro area we fielded a team at each level. Unlike Mahtomedi who only fields B teams.

[royals dad]

I bet if you look at State Champs at the B level, most will be from smaller communities.

Its funny with all the whining on the forum about this over the last few years no one every mentions that 12U B is the only level an outstate girls team has ever won.

Small associations should build thier teams based on what they think is best for thier players development. That might mean bringing 3 or 4 A level players to a B team but that is better in many cases than 10 or 12 B players on an A team.

[nmnhockeydad]

In some instances, "B" teams are formed because geography dictates it. If a"A" team has to travel 2 1/2 hours to play "A" Hockey or an "A" team needs to travel to play that team, it becomes logistically impossible. Some of you make it sound as if teams are being formed to win the state tournament.

[girlshockeyrocks]

I agree on the recruiting. You have a tough situation.

here's a few thoughts:

Find out what is driving the girls moving up. Are they being nudged? 10Us at 12U level is very tough. There is a huge physical difference. You could even challenge the moveup policy. If you have a girls coordinator who sees the big picture, he/she should not allow these moveups, especially in the year you are being forced to 10A.

At 12U, the girls are huge (many near full grown) and their long arms and legs and sticks are very effective against skilled 10U players - meaning the girls that moved up will not play very realistic hockey. It'd be like me skating against 8ft players. Point is, if one or two of these players change their mind and stay 10U, maybe they all do.

Good luck and I hope it works out.