Age change in Minnesota Hockey?

[InigoMontoya]

I don't have a kid born in June, so this change wouldn't drastically affect my kid directly. There is a chance that one of those kids will remain in his 3rd year at his current level, and bump my kid from a team he wants to make; if my kid wants to make that team, then he'll need to get better to have a chance to play with another one of his classmates. There is a chance that a team he plays against will have a 3rd year kid; then my kid's team will need to get better.

All that said, I personally don't care if they move the date or not; however, some have made a decent case for why they should move the date to 6/1, and some of those arguing against have taken to attacking the parents (and the kids who had no vote in the matter) for decisions they made when the kid had just turned 5. And, YES, declaring that those kids have been held back for a mental or physical advantage is insinuating that the parents have cheated.

[spin-o-rama]

Inigo,
no one has accused anyone of violating the spirit of the rules, let alone outright breaking of the rules.
I am an advocate for a 9/1 date because it keeps the age gap the smallest for those who start school at age 5 and want to play with their grade. They are already the youngest. Why make them younger?

[dakotakid]

I have three boys playing and three very different birthdays feb,late june and Dec. 1. As you can see all have issues with ether summer or winter hockey. There is no perfect answer. What I dont get is a 12 month cycle is 12 months no matter if you start jan1 or july1 If you start jan1 could'nt you just have two years play together 98,97 and 96,95 it would be the same in the end. My son who is late june started school when he was six like most summer birthdays. So he is a seventh grader playing first year Bantams with 8th and 9th graders and will have to play HS hockey in 9th grade.

[Pioneerprideguy]

Dakotakid,
If the date moved to June 1, your 8th grader would have the ability to play another year of bantams...he would not be forced to. If for some reason, he did not make the high school team, he would have another year of development in the association. Seems like a positive thing.

[spin-o-rama]

So he is a seventh grader playing first year Bantams with 8th and 9th graders and will have to play HS hockey in 9th grade.

Hard to tell intonation of printed words. It sounds like you don't like that your 7th grade son has to play bantams and playing HS hockey in 9th grade is a bad thing in your mind. Will you clarify?

[dakotakid]

So he is a seventh grader playing first year Bantams with 8th and 9th graders and will have to play HS hockey in 9th grade.

Hard to tell intonation of printed words. It sounds like you don't like that your 7th grade son has to play bantams and playing HS hockey in 9th grade is a bad thing in your mind. Will you clarify?

He is a good 7th grader and if he was playing pee wee A as a second year he would be one of the best players on the team. As a first year bantam he is average. And as a 9th grader I can't see him making varsity. When playing with his class mates he is very good, and probably will make varsity as a 10th grader.

[Pioneerprideguy]

Dakota...check your messages.

[zyzxx]

Elliot- any updates on this topic after the meeting last week?

[spin-o-rama]

So he is a seventh grader playing first year Bantams with 8th and 9th graders and will have to play HS hockey in 9th grade.

Hard to tell intonation of printed words. It sounds like you don't like that your 7th grade son has to play bantams and playing HS hockey in 9th grade is a bad thing in your mind. Will you clarify?

He is a good 7th grader and if he was playing pee wee A as a second year he would be one of the best players on the team. As a first year bantam he is average. And as a 9th grader I can't see him making varsity. When playing with his class mates he is very good, and probably will make varsity as a 10th grader.

Thanks for the feedback. It is clear that you are not complaining, but realize that ideal outcomes are not possible in every scenario.

If your son was a star player (Bjugstad, Ness, Finley) then the June birthday would not be an issue and you would be playing varsity next year. It appears that your son would be a 2nd year A player leader if the oldest of the 12 month cycle, but as the youngest is an average first year. There are lots of us in a similar situation - or who can only dream our kids were that good . What are your plans for next season? JV, U16, JrG? How do you forsee that helping/hindering your son's preparation for a push at varsity in 2 years?

Your son appears to be a perfect example of whom the move to 6/1 is supposed to serve. However, an expansion of U16, etc may be a better move to catch not only those who aren't yet ready for varsity, but those who are perennially just below that upper level. I fear that a move to 6/1 will create a bigger drop in June-Aug born players who start school at age 5 and who's parents want them to play with their grade. Long before bantams, we may lose a bunch of B & C players because of the huge age gaps of 25-27 months and thus the size/injury fears that will exist. This could happen at Peewees due to checking all the way down to not even giving hockey a try at mites.

I believe the expansion of MH hockey programs for the post bantam age kids and a move to a 9/1 age cutoff is the best solution to attract and retain kids.

The star players will be fine under any situation.

Dakota Kid - Best of luck to your son next year and beyond.

[keepmeoutofit]

if all sports moved to having the same cutoff as school, it might, over time reduce the number of kids being held back in the first place.
minnesota and texas are the only states i've every been in that answer the question "how old is your son" with "he's in the eight grade".

[greybeard58]

The meeting is this weekend.

[elliott70]

Elliot- any updates on this topic after the meeting last week?

it is on the agenda for this weekend
my guess is that it will come to a vote for june 1 cut-off and that it will pass barring some major argument against

[fleury]

Changing to June 1st is a joke. Yes I have a May birthday child. None of the arguments to change the date make sense to me. Lets just play by birth year then.

Guess i will hold my May child back so maybe people will vote to change the date to May 1st.

I really hope this does not pass but does not sound like that is the case.

[Buck50]

Changing to June 1st is a joke. Yes I have a May birthday child. None of the arguments to change the date make sense to me. Lets just play by birth year then.

Guess i will hold my May child back so maybe people will vote to change the date to May 1st.

I really hope this does not pass but does not sound like that is the case.

Give me a break...the kids should play with their classmates.

[fleury]

June 1 is the new cutoff date to start school? Give me a break..

[Pioneerprideguy]

It's all about numbers. 10 yrs ago, the data showed that using the July 1 date would allow the majority of kids to play with their classmates, so MN hockey made that move. The data in the last few years shows that June 1st makes more sense. The trend shows that more parents are opting to have their kids enter 1st grade at age 6 rather than age 5. More parents have the income to pay for daycare and may feel like their 5 yr old may not be ready to start 1st grade. Not an athletic issue, but an education/maturity issue. All the data shows that a June 1 date will benefit the majority of kids involved in MN Hockey. Some kids who have a June b-day, may opt up to play with their current classmates, rather than play a 3rd yr at a specific level. That will be allowed.

[council member retired]

[quote="fleury"]June 1 is the new cutoff date to start school? Give me a break..[/quote]

Theo, did I read that you signed with Edmonton? Or it Marc-Andre?

[WhosPuckIsItAnyways?]

my guess is that it will come to a vote for june 1 cut-off and that it will pass barring some major argument against

Very small change. Very big improvement. Good synergy.

Gives 1 in 12 kids playing Minnesota Hockey the same options as the other summer birthdays and ensure all kids have the option of playing bantam hockey in grade 9.

Helps many. Hurts no one.

[spin-o-rama]

my guess is that it will come to a vote for june 1 cut-off and that it will pass barring some major argument against

Very small change. Very big improvement. Good synergy.

Gives 1 in 12 kids playing Minnesota Hockey the same options as the other summer birthdays What option is that? Currently, late start kids born in July and August don't have options. and ensure all kids have the option of playing bantam hockey in grade 9. What about May late starts? The only way to guarantee this is to have youth levels defined by grade.

Helps many. The move would "help" only June late starts. That is less than 1/12 of kids. That isn't many. Hurts no one. How about the kids who are regular start June-Aug birthdays and want to play with their grade. They originally were extra young. Now they are an extra month younger. This can hurt MH numbers as those kids either drop out well before bantams because size-wise they are behind or don't even take up hockey to at all.

There is no perfect answer. Quit selling this as such.

I hope MH is doing a better job of researching this decision than they did with the participation rule.

[council member retired]

[quote="spin-o-rama"][quote="WhosPuckIsItAnyways?"][quote="elliott70"]my guess is that it will come to a vote for june 1 cut-off and that it will pass barring some major argument against[/quote]

Very small change. Very big improvement. Good synergy.

Gives 1 in 12 kids playing Minnesota Hockey the same options as the other summer birthdays [color=red]What option is that? Currently, late start kids born in July and August don't have options.[/color] and ensure all kids have the option of playing bantam hockey in grade 9. [color=red]What about May late starts? The only way to guarantee this is to have youth levels defined by grade.[/color]


Spin

Those kids DO have a choice. They can choose to play with the MN hockey age classification or they can choose to play UP with their classmate peers. The majority of those associations allow an automatic choice to the player. The others have some sort of approval by a member of the program, being however the particular assoc has their policy written. Out of over 130 associations, 1 single association does not allow move ups, under 1%. They do have a choice. They also are making that choice for the most part, to play with their peers.

This will be an exciting meeting, and I look forward the productivity accomplished this weekend. Exciting time to be a part of the program.

[spin-o-rama]

a kid born 7/1/98-8/31/98, who started K at age 6, is in 5 grade. What choice does he have besides 2nd year squirts?
It's the kid with the same birthday, but is 1 grade ahead that has the choice, but it's a more disadvantageous one. Play with your grade and be extra young (beyond 12 months) or play down and have only 1 year of bantam competition before the traditional 10 grade HS career.

[keepmeoutofit]

why do so many have a problem with kids playing with kids their own age.

rolling over, walking, talking, reading, writing, even dating and sex have everything to do with age not grade.

if it is so important for kids to play with people in their class, send them to class with people their age

[Pioneerprideguy]

why do so many have a problem with kids playing with kids their own age.

rolling over, walking, talking, reading, writing, even dating and sex have everything to do with age not grade.

if it is so important for kids to play with people in their class, send them to class with people their age

That's part of the basis for making the change. More kids are starting 1st grade at age 6, especially those with summer b-days with a large number occuring in June. Thus, they are in class with people their own age, but because of the June b-day, they get bumped out of it in the sport of hockey. That data supports the proposed move to June 1st. Take the emotions out & do what the information says is the best thing to do for the majority of kids involved. Many people are hoping MN Hockey votes yes on Sunday.

[greybeard58]

The July 1 date was researched when USA Hockey went back to the Jan 1 date. Mn Hockey went from Sept 1 date to July 1 when USA Hockey went to the July 1 date.

On another subject talking about data,where is it and just what are the numbers that would be affected by a June 1 date???

[Pioneerprideguy]

The data was presented & discussed at length with the MN Hockey Comittitee. Based on the information, they decided to recommend the change to the District Directors & the Board this weekend. I don't have all the specific numbers/percentages, but the information made a strong case for the change and the positive effects it will have.