GMANDAD wrote:
How many Minnesota hockey players would be lost if AAA was allowed in the winter along with Assocication hockey?
Probably the majority of an associations Bantam A, Peweee A, Squirt A rosters + some B1 players if those players would choose AAA over Association hockey
I believe the question was posed for how many kids would simply not play hockey at all in a winter AAA senario vs how many would jump to AAA.
To answer that question, I would say half of the current families would drop out under AAA. I'd also bet that up to 25% are at the brink of dropping hockey right now.
Snowmass wrote:Association hockey is so political VS our AAA experiences.
And if Minnesota did go AAA during the winter season, how long would it take for your enjoyable AAA experience to turn into what you do not enjoy about your current association? My guess is not long.
LOL. Good point (kind of). I suppose a certain percentage of AAA organizations have issues as do a certain percentage of regular associations. Maybe if both went year round and everyone had a choice would be the way to go. Some folks could go AAA only and some could go standard association only would be the way to roll???? Seems silly that AAA has to stop between Sept-ish and late March-ish. I guess it is what it is and as long as it's hockey and the kid(s) have fun it's all good.
Snowmass wrote:
$10-$15K/year? WHAT. That's because of all the travel involved. MN has so much in state talent that the only travel we need to do is for fun or maybe a single trip to Chicago or Canada. Those CA and Michigan teams have to travel weekly or monthly for any competition. AAA (atleast our experience) has so much less politics and BS. Plus longer games, tag up off sides etc... For the FUN factor (which it should be about) AAA beats organization hockey hands down. Think of all the silly rules/regulations/BS we put up with in a typical organization.
Let me guess, you are a person that complains on the sidelines about your association and likely have never stepped up to offer your time, thoughts, talents, etc. Correct?
Why would Michigan kids have to travel any more or less than Minnesota kids? That makes no sense at all.
Like I indicated, AAA hockey is a great supplement. Minnesota would lose thousands of hockey players in this state if you go AAA all year long.
That would be due to cost.
How many Minnesota hockey players would be lost if AAA was allowed in the winter along with Assocication hockey?
I don't understand your sentence.
Why would they be lost? Maybe they will use bread crumbs to find their way home ..........
Snowmass wrote:Association hockey is so political VS our AAA experiences.
And if Minnesota did go AAA during the winter season, how long would it take for your enjoyable AAA experience to turn into what you do not enjoy about your current association? My guess is not long.
Check out this thread: http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21087 Look at the prices they are quoting for High School hockey. Rochester high schools are around $210 a season. I think the Pennsylvania prices is driven by AAA cost structures. 10 years ago I had some friends that came up from Texas AAA where they paid $10k+ per kid.
Snowmass wrote:Association hockey is so political VS our AAA experiences.
And if Minnesota did go AAA during the winter season, how long would it take for your enjoyable AAA experience to turn into what you do not enjoy about your current association? My guess is not long.
Check out this thread: http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21087 Look at the prices they are quoting for High School hockey. Rochester high schools are around $210 a season. I think the Pennsylvania prices is driven by AAA cost structures. 10 years ago I had some friends that came up from Texas AAA where they paid $10k+ per kid.
Could be private rinks as well (not sure). I was in Chicago a couple of years ago. Hourly ice time rate was signficantly higher than our community rinks. Skate sharpening was $7 per pair at that same rink.
I'm not sure about private rinks in Penn. Definitely have them in Mass. MnMade, St Thomas, Blake, and Shattuck are among the few privates around here. Rochester ice is around $155/hr but going up every year. The taxpayers are footing the bill for our H/S players. They get 1.25-1.5 hr on ice practices and JV/Varsity games lock up the rink for about 5 hrs a night.
Rocket78 wrote:I'm not sure about private rinks in Penn. Definitely have them in Mass. MnMade, St Thomas, Blake, and Shattuck are among the few privates around here. Rochester ice is around $155/hr but going up every year. The taxpayers are footing the bill for our H/S players. They get 1.25-1.5 hr on ice practices and JV/Varsity games lock up the rink for about 5 hrs a night.
MnMade rink is privately owned. I believe the others are owned by their schools and likely had significant contributions to build them.
The Chicago rink I was referring to was owned by a private party.
Certainly our current hockey culture is not perfect. Consider the number of community rinks (indoor & outdoor) that are available to our youth and older hockey players like me. If that unique hockey culture wasn't created long ago would we have as many of those rinks and opportunities today? I would argue that we wouldn't even be close to the same number of facilities.
Interesting how that same culture and opportunity helped create some high draft picks this year and many college bound players.
Be wary of what may be on the other side of the fence. In this case, the grass is greener on our side.
I see that happening in 2-3 years
AAA is exploding and More teams are showing up EVERY Summer....
I would put money on that NOT happening.
What is the purpose of going AAA "in season"? Spending thousands more for a sport that is already expensive? Pushing athletes away because families can't afford the costs of playing the greatest sport there is? Herb Brooks wanted to broaden the pyramid and allow more kids to play the game of hockey. Apparently, you want to turn the pyramid upside down.
Minnesota is unique at the youth and high school levels. Our systems offer an opportunity for a broad base of kids to play competitive hockey.
In Chicago, California, Arizona, etc. AAA hockey costs families anywhere from 10 to 15K per kid annually. That's ice time, paid coaches, etc. That doesn't include family travel. Add that to the AAA budget you already lay out. How many people can swing that?
I think AAA hockey is a good supplement for those families and players that are looking for additional competitive play in the "off-season". I hope those same families allow their kids to play other sports. At the end of the day, there are only a handful of kids each year from the state of Minnesota that will play D1 hockey. There will only be 2 to 3 kids each year from Minnesota that will ever play in the NHL.
$10-$15K/year? WHAT. That's because of all the travel involved. MN has so much in state talent that the only travel we need to do is for fun or maybe a single trip to Chicago or Canada. Those CA and Michigan teams have to travel weekly or monthly for any competition. AAA (atleast our experience) has so much less politics and BS. Plus longer games, tag up off sides etc... For the FUN factor (which it should be about) AAA beats organization hockey hands down. Think of all the silly rules/regulations/BS we put up with in a typical organization.
There isn't a hockey family in Colorado, Arizona, Illinois, or Seattle that wouldn't give their right arm to have 20 quality oppents within a 15 mile radius of their house. I grew up playing minor hockey in for a club in Belmont CA and we lived over an hour away from the rink in San Jose. Travel was scarey...To Sacramento, Berkley, Santa Rosa, Marin County all to play average teams on terrible rinks. Those same teams now hop on the plane or drive 20 hours to play quality opponents.
Even with their fanatical developement programs those "Super AAA Programs" still can come close to overall quality and depth and "Balance of life" our kids have playing in the MN hockey environment. If you think your kid has out-skilled the state of MN then your free to fly out to Detroit and get an apartment for the Compuware Season. In the meantime, until you know what it is like to spent 10 days on the road playing hockey...be careful what you wish for.
breakout wrote:
I would put money on that NOT happening.
What is the purpose of going AAA "in season"? Spending thousands more for a sport that is already expensive? Pushing athletes away because families can't afford the costs of playing the greatest sport there is? Herb Brooks wanted to broaden the pyramid and allow more kids to play the game of hockey. Apparently, you want to turn the pyramid upside down.
Minnesota is unique at the youth and high school levels. Our systems offer an opportunity for a broad base of kids to play competitive hockey.
In Chicago, California, Arizona, etc. AAA hockey costs families anywhere from 10 to 15K per kid annually. That's ice time, paid coaches, etc. That doesn't include family travel. Add that to the AAA budget you already lay out. How many people can swing that?
I think AAA hockey is a good supplement for those families and players that are looking for additional competitive play in the "off-season". I hope those same families allow their kids to play other sports. At the end of the day, there are only a handful of kids each year from the state of Minnesota that will play D1 hockey. There will only be 2 to 3 kids each year from Minnesota that will ever play in the NHL.
$10-$15K/year? WHAT. That's because of all the travel involved. MN has so much in state talent that the only travel we need to do is for fun or maybe a single trip to Chicago or Canada. Those CA and Michigan teams have to travel weekly or monthly for any competition. AAA (atleast our experience) has so much less politics and BS. Plus longer games, tag up off sides etc... For the FUN factor (which it should be about) AAA beats organization hockey hands down. Think of all the silly rules/regulations/BS we put up with in a typical organization.
There isn't a hockey family in Colorado, Arizona, Illinois, or Seattle that wouldn't give their right arm to have 20 quality oppents within a 15 mile radius of their house. I grew up playing minor hockey in for a club in Belmont CA and we lived over an hour away from the rink in San Jose. Travel was scarey...To Sacramento, Berkley, Santa Rosa, Marin County all to play average teams on terrible rinks. Those same teams now hop on the plane or drive 20 hours to play quality opponents.
Even with their fanatical developement programs those "Super AAA Programs" still can come close to overall quality and depth and "Balance of life" our kids have playing in the MN hockey environment. If you think your kid has out-skilled the state of MN then your free to fly out to Detroit and get an apartment for the Compuware Season. In the meantime, until you know what it is like to spent 10 days on the road playing hockey...be careful what you wish for.
Voice of reason from someone that has been there and done that.
While I was jogging today I thought about this topic. Our states unique hockey culture spawned one of the most well attended and anticipated high school championship tournaments in the nation. The high school hockey tournament brings in + 100,000 people to St. Paul annually. Herb Brooks loved playing in the state tournament because he played with his neighborhood buddies. Novel idea for the "State of Hockey".
Elitist within the state like to think that by narrowing the pyramid of participation that the sport will benefit and that is just not so. The game has diminished greatly and I am talking about it from a pure team perspective soley on economics over the years. Anytime programs lose their prime athletes to other sports due to cost the game at large suffers. When I hear folks mention that they wish they could play check book hockey year round and what a shame it is to go back to association hockey well frankly that just ticks me off. With such a cavalier statement you denegrate everything that is good about this volunteer entity that exists in the state and pay disrespect to a whole lot of great athletes, coaches, volunteers that have filled the ranks for many, many years. I agree, it (association hockey) is not perfect and surely nothing in this life is but considering the alternative of AAA is a short sighted step into ruining the sport that has benefited kids collectivley around this state. What is great about it you ask. Well a kid from Roseau can develop just as well as a kid from Edina different paths, different philosophy, different socio-economics but those kids can collectively succeed in a great game which simply benefits them in the adult world. To short change kids to benefit a few is mind boggeling at best.
To short change kids to benefit a few is mind boggeling at best.
Are you talking about Association or AAA hockey? Unfortunately, not everyone has the luxury of an association that is remotely functional.
I don't necessarily think year-round AAA hockey is the answer, but sometimes it's good to rattle the cage in an attempt to wake up the occupants. It's too bad that MN/USA hockey has perpetuated the "squeeky wheel gets the grease" culture ie. participation rule, coaches wearing helmets, etc. This too will have to run it's course and hopefully a better product will be the result.
When I hear folks mention that they wish they could play check book hockey year round [/quote]
Old Timer .. I think that the term check book hockey is a little overused. If you check into the cost of Association hockey the same rule applies.. The days of a stocking cap, choppers, and newspaper shin pads are gone! Kids today will not practice on lake ice at 20 below. If AAA hockey offers something that people want, then it will flourish. If not ..we can all go back to the good old days.
NW OT,
I appreciate the spirit of what you're saying, but I think the nostalgia clouds your view of what is happening in the state. Roseau can compete with Edina, Eden Prairie, Wayzatta, et. al., and that's great, but they and a handful of others are a huge exception to the rule. Using Roseau as an example is not representative of the base of the pyramid.
At tournament time, there will be post after post regarding entire districts (and possibly even an entire region) that shouldn't be allowed to play MNH A hockey because they are so bad. What is the system providing these kids? They stink, the team stinks, the association stinks, the district stinks, the region stinks. The game is already suffering; more importantly the kids are suffering. What are you and your precious Minnesota Hockey model doing for them?
[I had the experience of coaching a small association team 40 years ago. This team had great success against mighty odds. How did we do this ? Just like all small associations, we had the same kids for their whole youth hockey experience!! In todays large metro associations it seems to me it would be impossible to skate the same 15 kids for 9 years. The AAA summer model is a good way to address the needs of all the kids that don't make the Assoc. A team for whatever reason. The Minnesota hockey model is not much better than it was 40 years ago... All you guys my age have to get your head out of the mists of yesterday, and see the problem for what it is. Not what you wish it to be ...
breakout wrote:
Let me guess, you are a person that complains on the sidelines about your association and likely have never stepped up to offer your time, thoughts, talents, etc. Correct?
Why would Michigan kids have to travel any more or less than Minnesota kids? That makes no sense at all.
Like I indicated, AAA hockey is a great supplement. Minnesota would lose thousands of hockey players in this state if you go AAA all year long.
That would be due to cost.
How many Minnesota hockey players would be lost if AAA was allowed in the winter along with Assocication hockey?
I don't understand your sentence.
Why would they be lost? Maybe they will use bread crumbs to find their way home ..........
northwoods oldtimer wrote:Elitist within the state like to think that by narrowing the pyramid of participation that the sport will benefit and that is just not so. The game has diminished greatly and I am talking about it from a pure team perspective soley on economics over the years. Anytime programs lose their prime athletes to other sports due to cost the game at large suffers. When I hear folks mention that they wish they could play check book hockey year round and what a shame it is to go back to association hockey well frankly that just ticks me off. With such a cavalier statement you denegrate everything that is good about this volunteer entity that exists in the state and pay disrespect to a whole lot of great athletes, coaches, volunteers that have filled the ranks for many, many years. I agree, it (association hockey) is not perfect and surely nothing in this life is but considering the alternative of AAA is a short sighted step into ruining the sport that has benefited kids collectivley around this state. What is great about it you ask. Well a kid from Roseau can develop just as well as a kid from Edina different paths, different philosophy, different socio-economics but those kids can collectively succeed in a great game which simply benefits them in the adult world. To short change kids to benefit a few is mind boggeling at best.
Agree ... especially the check book hockey cause many times its ALL check book hockey. I pay MORE for my association hockey than i do the supposed "check book" hockey.
GMANDAD wrote:
How many Minnesota hockey players would be lost if AAA was allowed in the winter along with Assocication hockey?
I don't understand your sentence.
Why would they be lost? Maybe they will use bread crumbs to find their way home ..........
Which word did you not understand?
I comprehend every word, your sentence makes no sense. How many hockey players would be lost? You may want to plug in a few more words to make a point.
To short change kids to benefit a few is mind boggeling at best.
Are you talking about Association or AAA hockey? Unfortunately, not everyone has the luxury of an association that is remotely functional.
I don't necessarily think year-round AAA hockey is the answer, but sometimes it's good to rattle the cage in an attempt to wake up the occupants. It's too bad that MN/USA hockey has perpetuated the "squeeky wheel gets the grease" culture ie. participation rule, coaches wearing helmets, etc. This too will have to run it's course and hopefully a better product will be the result.
Your association is a volunteer association. You probably have great ideas. Step up and offer your time. Just a thought.
InigoMontoya wrote:NW OT,
I appreciate the spirit of what you're saying, but I think the nostalgia clouds your view of what is happening in the state. Roseau can compete with Edina, Eden Prairie, Wayzatta, et. al., and that's great, but they and a handful of others are a huge exception to the rule. Using Roseau as an example is not representative of the base of the pyramid.
At tournament time, there will be post after post regarding entire districts (and possibly even an entire region) that shouldn't be allowed to play MNH A hockey because they are so bad. What is the system providing these kids? They stink, the team stinks, the association stinks, the district stinks, the region stinks. The game is already suffering; more importantly the kids are suffering. What are you and your precious Minnesota Hockey model doing for them?
Roseau is an prime example of the base. They create a community hockey culture.
You may want to look into some prozac after typing that last paragraph. Do you routinely spread that kind of joy?
I am not a fan of USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey for that matter however I am a fan of community based hockey and the local association made up of volunteers and the coaches that contribute a great deal of time to the sport we all have grown to love in this great state. I do believe that the triple A programs have their place but to run year long in spite of community based programs, not in favor. Here in the north most communities are losing their best (1,2 or 3) athletes to other sports due to cost in any given birth year. Going triple A year round would only escalate the process. I know that in our small program up here if you want change you can simply garner some votes and run for office as the board votes on new positions each April both annually and semi annually based on position. Edina, Roseau, Duluth East. Moorhead all run great programs based on numbers and a good spirit of volunteerism. In Edina the spirt of Willard Ikola lives on as they have the highest percentage of kids playing the sport. Roseau is a great example simply because the entire population of 2,758 supports the community based model. I know if things are tough in your current program, lend a hand to make it better. Good volunteers can make a big difference in a program.
Why would they be lost? Maybe they will use bread crumbs to find their way home ..........
Which word did you not understand?
I comprehend every word, your sentence makes no sense. How many hockey players would be lost? You may want to plug in a few more words to make a point.
Hey BO, you of all people should understand. It was in response to your own quote. "Minnesota would lose thousands of hockey players in this state if you go AAA all year long."
Why would you lose any players if you have AAA in the winter along with association hockey?
northwoods oldtimer wrote:I am not a fan of USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey for that matter however I am a fan of community based hockey and the local association made up of volunteers and the coaches that contribute a great deal of time to the sport we all have grown to love in this great state. I do believe that the triple A programs have their place but to run year long in spite of community based programs, not in favor. Here in the north most communities are losing their best (1,2 or 3) athletes to other sports due to cost in any given birth year. Going triple A year round would only escalate the process. I know that in our small program up here if you want change you can simply garner some votes and run for office as the board votes on new positions each April both annually and semi annually based on position. Edina, Roseau, Duluth East. Moorhead all run great programs based on numbers and a good spirit of volunteerism. In Edina the spirt of Willard Ikola lives on as they have the highest percentage of kids playing the sport. Roseau is a great example simply because the entire population of 2,758 supports the community based model. I know if things are tough in your current program, lend a hand to make it better. Good volunteers can make a big difference in a program.
I agree with northwoods. Community based hockey in the winter with our State High School hockey tournament in March and then AAA hockey in the sprint/summer/fall. Best of both worlds. If you talk to scouts, they love the MN model and the idea that kids can grow up playing with their friends and classmates and the whole community rallies. Cities like Edina, Duluth, Moorhead and Roseau and more recently Minnetonka and EP just to name a couple, have that deep tradition that it's tough to understand if you haven't experienced it. AAA hockey is great but it's just not the same and it will run out even more quality players due to cost. Travel expenses have to be added in to your team costs and they would be incredibly high for year round AAA. Grass is not always greener so be careful what you wish for. And for the record - also not a fan of USA Hockey or MN Hockey but the great tradition continues in spite of them.
northwoods oldtimer wrote:I am not a fan of USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey for that matter however I am a fan of community based hockey and the local association made up of volunteers and the coaches that contribute a great deal of time to the sport we all have grown to love in this great state. I do believe that the triple A programs have their place but to run year long in spite of community based programs, not in favor. Here in the north most communities are losing their best (1,2 or 3) athletes to other sports due to cost in any given birth year. Going triple A year round would only escalate the process. I know that in our small program up here if you want change you can simply garner some votes and run for office as the board votes on new positions each April both annually and semi annually based on position. Edina, Roseau, Duluth East. Moorhead all run great programs based on numbers and a good spirit of volunteerism. In Edina the spirt of Willard Ikola lives on as they have the highest percentage of kids playing the sport. Roseau is a great example simply because the entire population of 2,758 supports the community based model. I know if things are tough in your current program, lend a hand to make it better. Good volunteers can make a big difference in a program.
I agree with northwoods. Community based hockey in the winter with our State High School hockey tournament in March and then AAA hockey in the sprint/summer/fall. Best of both worlds. If you talk to scouts, they love the MN model and the idea that kids can grow up playing with their friends and classmates and the whole community rallies. Cities like Edina, Duluth, Moorhead and Roseau and more recently Minnetonka and EP just to name a couple, have that deep tradition that it's tough to understand if you haven't experienced it. AAA hockey is great but it's just not the same and it will run out even more quality players due to cost. Travel expenses have to be added in to your team costs and they would be incredibly high for year round AAA. Grass is not always greener so be careful what you wish for. And for the record - also not a fan of USA Hockey or MN Hockey but the great tradition continues in spite of them.
I could not agree with you more, great post and I'm glad to hear there are still normal old school hockey minds alike out there!!!
northwoods oldtimer wrote:I am not a fan of USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey for that matter however I am a fan of community based hockey and the local association made up of volunteers and the coaches that contribute a great deal of time to the sport we all have grown to love in this great state. I do believe that the triple A programs have their place but to run year long in spite of community based programs, not in favor. Here in the north most communities are losing their best (1,2 or 3) athletes to other sports due to cost in any given birth year. Going triple A year round would only escalate the process. I know that in our small program up here if you want change you can simply garner some votes and run for office as the board votes on new positions each April both annually and semi annually based on position. Edina, Roseau, Duluth East. Moorhead all run great programs based on numbers and a good spirit of volunteerism. In Edina the spirt of Willard Ikola lives on as they have the highest percentage of kids playing the sport. Roseau is a great example simply because the entire population of 2,758 supports the community based model. I know if things are tough in your current program, lend a hand to make it better. Good volunteers can make a big difference in a program.
I agree with northwoods. Community based hockey in the winter with our State High School hockey tournament in March and then AAA hockey in the sprint/summer/fall. Best of both worlds. If you talk to scouts, they love the MN model and the idea that kids can grow up playing with their friends and classmates and the whole community rallies. Cities like Edina, Duluth, Moorhead and Roseau and more recently Minnetonka and EP just to name a couple, have that deep tradition that it's tough to understand if you haven't experienced it. AAA hockey is great but it's just not the same and it will run out even more quality players due to cost. Travel expenses have to be added in to your team costs and they would be incredibly high for year round AAA. Grass is not always greener so be careful what you wish for. And for the record - also not a fan of USA Hockey or MN Hockey but the great tradition continues in spite of them.
I could not agree with you more, great post and I'm glad to hear there are still normal old school hockey minds alike out there!!!
Ditto That and Amen....We have the best of both worlds.
Doglover wrote:
I agree with northwoods. Community based hockey in the winter with our State High School hockey tournament in March and then AAA hockey in the sprint/summer/fall. Best of both worlds. If you talk to scouts, they love the MN model and the idea that kids can grow up playing with their friends and classmates and the whole community rallies. Cities like Edina, Duluth, Moorhead and Roseau and more recently Minnetonka and EP just to name a couple, have that deep tradition that it's tough to understand if you haven't experienced it. AAA hockey is great but it's just not the same and it will run out even more quality players due to cost. Travel expenses have to be added in to your team costs and they would be incredibly high for year round AAA. Grass is not always greener so be careful what you wish for. And for the record - also not a fan of USA Hockey or MN Hockey but the great tradition continues in spite of them.
I could not agree with you more, great post and I'm glad to hear there are still normal old school hockey minds alike out there!!!
Ditto That and Amen....We have the best of both worlds.
Okay to Ditto but get the facts of the Ditto correct. Hour for Hour of training, our families positive AAA experiences cost the same or less then association hockey. Community hockey is great but PLEASE PEOPLE stop assuming AAA is more expensive. The cost for AAA hockey varies greatly!
