Age change in Minnesota Hockey?

[Wildcathcky]

Any update on whether MN hockey approved the age change at this weekend's meeting?

[TriedThat2]

They were never going to vote on a change this weekend.

[spin-o-rama]

Any update on whether MN hockey approved the age change at this weekend's meeting?

Minnesota Hockey Age Classification Change Update
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_art ... r_id=80568

[Pioneerprideguy]

Any update on whether MN hockey approved the age change at this weekend's meeting?

Minnesota Hockey Age Classification Change Update
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_art ... r_id=80568

The page is blank......

[valleyball]

minnesotahockey.org

The Minnesota Hockey Age Classification was discussed at the Minnesota Hockey Summer Board Meeting on June 26th and 27th. The basis of the Planning Committee discussions was the recently conducted survey that involved parents of Minnesota Hockey players with June birthdates. In the next step of the evaluation process the District Directors will send a second survey to their constituent associations. This Data will come back to the Planning Committee for discussion and possible recommendation at the Minnesota Hockey Fall Board Meeting in September. If any action is taken, it will not be effective until the 2011-12 season at the earliest.

Please direct any questions or comments to your District Director.

What is being considered?

Currently the Age Classification year is from July 1st – June 30th. The original change being considered was to adopt a June 1st – May 31st Age Classification year. There are several reasons to consider this change, most notably the large numbers of players with June birthdates that delay entry into Kindergarten and thus end up playing hockey every other year with players that are ahead of them by one – two grades in school. There are approximately 4000 Minnesota Hockey players with June birthdates.

There were a variety of opinions when the cut-off date was discussed at the recent Minnesota Hockey Summer Board Meeting. There were supporters for moving to June 1, leaving it as-is at July 1, going back to the Minnesota Department of Education cut-off of Sept. 1, and using the USA Hockey age cut-off of January 1 (calendar years).

The intent of the second survey is to gather real data and feedback about what individual associations feel the age cut-off should be. This information will help guide the Board of Directors in their decision making process.

[Pioneerprideguy]

How/when does this all end up?

[valleyball]

The Board can't support June 1. They realize it redefines who is born late in the competiton year. June 1 only shifts the effects of relative age and they don't have just cause to suport it.

[Pioneerprideguy]

Then why is the issue still on the table?

[welders]

Then why is the issue still on the table?

This issue is still on the table because there are several board members who still favor a move to June 1 and several more who are undecided. Lets face it, our youth hockey associations are the feeder system for MN high school hockey. High school hockey is the end of the line for over 90% of these kids. How can anyone be against a substantial number of late entry June birthdate kids playing with the same age group that they will ultimately play with in high school? As it stands now, these late entry June birthdate kids will be forced out of their youth hockey association in 9th grade. Their friends and classmates will still be playing Bantams. Some of these 9th graders may play High School JV, while others might not have a place to play and quit hockey. Then in 10th grade, the ones who stuck it out will FINALLY be permanently reunited with their friends and classmates for their last three years of high school hockey. A change to June 1 would keep these kids together from kindergarten to 12th grade, just as we already do for July and August birthdates.

Some will say "why not make it May 1". The answer is because the number of delayed kindergarten entries drastically drops for bithdates before June 1. It is the summer birthdates (after school is out) that are most likely to delay entry.

The Board can't support June 1. They realize it redefines who is born late in the competiton year. June 1 only shifts the effects of relative age and they don't have just cause to suport it.

It isn't about redefing who is born late in the competition year. It IS about aligning these late entry June kids with the other players in their grade from kindergarten to 12th grade. It seems there are way too many selfish parents worried about who will gain an advantage and who won't.

valleyball,

Are you in favor of a substantial number of late entry June birthdate kids being forced out of their youth hockey association in 9th grade. You might ask "what is substantial?". We know it's at least 30%. If you take 30% of the 4000 June birthdates in MN Hockey youth associations that leaves you with 1200 of our current members that won't be able to play Bantam hockey when they reach 9th grade. Are you for that?

[Task Force 34]

Is it really that hard to make this change? Many kids in smaller associations will be forced out of hockey to the extent the high school program does not have a JV or Junior Gold Program. Come on MN Hockey - Do the right thing - The facts support the change. This has been discussed for over 5 years. Get it done!!!

[spin-o-rama]

valleyball,

Are you in favor of a substantial number of late entry June birthdate kids being forced out of their youth hockey association in 9th grade. You might ask "what is substantial?". We know it's at least 30%. If you take 30% of the 4000 June birthdates in MN Hockey youth associations that leaves you with 1200 of our current members that won't be able to play Bantam hockey when they reach 9th grade. Are you for that?

No one is missing out on playing Bantam hockey. All kids are eligible to play 2 years of Bantams.

[timcorbin21]

[quote="welders"][quote="Pioneerprideguy"]Then why is the issue still on the table?[/quote]

It seems there are way too many selfish parents worried about who will gain an advantage and who won't.
?[/quote]

Please remember that parents that delayed kindergarten for their child were hoping to gain an advantage for their son. so whos being selfish
they didnt have to delay kindergarten

if its importent to play bantams in 9th grade start the kids when they're 5 instead of waiting a year.

[welders]

valleyball,

Are you in favor of a substantial number of late entry June birthdate kids being forced out of their youth hockey association in 9th grade. You might ask "what is substantial?". We know it's at least 30%. If you take 30% of the 4000 June birthdates in MN Hockey youth associations that leaves you with 1200 of our current members that won't be able to play Bantam hockey when they reach 9th grade. Are you for that?

No one is missing out on playing Bantam hockey. All kids are eligible to play 2 years of Bantams.

spin-o-rama,

You are right. Late entry June birthdate kids would play Bantams in 7th and 8th grade with kids one and two grades ahead of them. Are you saying you have no problem with June bdays having no association hockey (or possibly no hockey at all) in 9th grade while July and August bdays play Bantam hockey in 9th grade? YES or NO

[Task Force 34]

Hockey was the last thing we were thinking about when we delayed enrolling our son in school. I'd be surprised if many were that purposeful in their decision making process.

[welders]

Please remember that parents that delayed kindergarten for their child were hoping to gain an advantage for their son. so whos being selfish
they didnt have to delay kindergarten

if its importent to play bantams in 9th grade start the kids when they're 5 instead of waiting a year.

I hope that by saying "hoping to gain an advantage" you are refering to mentally, physically, socially, academically, etc. Yes, it is better to start ahead than behind. Now if you really think that all or even most of the parents of the current 1000-1500 late entry June birthdate kids kept them back to gain an advantage in hockey or other sports, you are either extremely cynical or just a complete fool. Most of these parents didn't even know if their kid would play hockey when attending K and K1 screening at age 4. And how many of those parents knew the cutoff date was July 1? Why would the July and August parents still hold their kids back? They already made the cutoff. And then to tell parents of June birthdate kids that they had better start their kids in kindergarten right after they turn 5 if they want to their kid to play Bantams in 9th grade, just shows a total ignorance of the issue.

Even one of your previous posts supports the very reason to change to a June 1 cutoff. Were all of those parents in your community hoping to gain an advantage in hockey?

our community has delayed kindergarten for 25% of the student population. virtually all kids born june through august and most born in may.

[thespellchecker]

Then why is the issue still on the table?

It seems there are way too many selfish parents worried about who will gain an advantage and who won't.
?

Please remember that parents that delayed kindergarten for their child were hoping to gain an advantage for their son. so whos being selfish
they didnt have to delay kindergarten

if its importent to play bantams in 9th grade start the kids when they're 5 instead of waiting a year.

God bless America, your vote is just as important.

[StayAtHomeD]

Sounds like typical Minnesota blockheadedness to me.

[Pioneerprideguy]

Does anyone know the steps taken by MN Hockey when they moved the registration date to July 1 approx 10 yrs ago? Was a committee formed...were surveys sent out...were local associations involved...or did the board just look at the issue and make a change?

I appreciate the board taking their time in gathering the information and trying to allow everyone a voice, but just wondering if this is how the process was conducted that got us to July 1.

[greybeard58]

I will repeat again, USA Hockey changed from Jan 1 to July 1 and also changed the year. Minn figured after the years if being younger than USA Hockey with the Sept 1 birthday that they would for peace move to July 1.
There was a survey done of how many players would be affected by the same committee when USA went back to Jan 1 and Min stayed with July 1.
Again it was USA Hockey that came up with the July 1 birthday.
As for why it is still alive, the board members that might want the change are on the committee in charge and while they have this as an issue,this gives them the excuse to be busy rather than look at other issues that would benefit all of Mn Hockey.

[Pioneerprideguy]

Greybeard,

Are you in favor of the rule change, and why?

[council member retired]

[quote="greybeard58"]I will repeat again, USA Hockey changed from Jan 1 to July 1 and also changed the year. Minn figured after the years if being younger than USA Hockey with the Sept 1 birthday that they would for peace move to July 1.
There was a survey done of how many players would be affected by the same committee when USA went back to Jan 1 and Min stayed with July 1.
Again it was USA Hockey that came up with the July 1 birthday.
As for why it is still alive, the board members that might want the change are on the committee in charge and while they have this as an issue,this gives them the excuse to be busy rather than look at other issues that would benefit all of Mn Hockey.[/quote]

Thats pretty bold statement. Perhaps more focus on D10?

[black sheep]

I hope that by saying "hoping to gain an advantage" you are refering to mentally, physically, socially, academically, etc. Yes, it is better to start ahead than behind. Now if you really think that all or even most of the parents of the current 1000-1500 late entry June birthdate kids kept them back to gain an advantage in hockey or other sports, you are either extremely cynical or just a complete fool. Most of these parents didn't even know if their kid would play hockey when attending K and K1 screening at age 4.

So why change???...if they don't care...we don't care!!!!

Of course they are trying to gain an advantage....

the bigger problem here is the education system is making K into 1st grade. the rate of delayed entry is increasing every year...we used to color and nap and drink milk...now they read books do math and drink lattes...

[spin-o-rama]

No one is missing out on playing Bantam hockey. All kids are eligible to play 2 years of Bantams.

spin-o-rama,

You are right. Late entry June birthdate kids would play Bantams in 7th and 8th grade with kids one and two grades ahead of them.

Playing against a kid a few grade levels ahead yet the same age is intimidating? Look out for the kid who started school at age 4 and then skipped a grade. It's a sure sign of a physical mismatch. How about the majority of June born kids that would have to either play against kids over 2 years older or not play with their classmates?

Are you saying you have no problem with June bdays having no association hockey (or possibly no hockey at all) in 9th grade while July and August bdays play Bantam hockey in 9th grade? YES or NO

Why the importance of playing Bantams in 9th grade? If you feel so strongly about that, petition MH to define playing level by grade. Then all 9th graders will be bantam eligible. MH divides the levels by age. Most June born kids are bantam eligible in 9th grade. The rule change would further disadvantage June-Aug regular start kids and help only a few. MH would better serve the membership by expanding post bantam age hockey options. This would serve kids well into and past the freshman and sophomore years.

[spin-o-rama]

Now if you really think that all or even most of the parents of the current 1000-1500 late entry June birthdate kids kept them back to gain an advantage in hockey or other sports, you are either extremely cynical or just a complete fool. Most of these parents didn't even know if their kid would play hockey when attending K and K1 screening at age 4. And how many of those parents knew the cutoff date was July 1? Why would the July and August parents still hold their kids back? They already made the cutoff. And then to tell parents of June birthdate kids that they had better start their kids in kindergarten right after they turn 5 if they want to their kid to play Bantams in 9th grade, just shows a total ignorance of the issue.

Parents who choose to delay their child's K entrance know that their kid will not be in the normal K age group. They may not have checked the age cutoff dates for all potential activities their child may participate in, but they know that age based activities may preclude their kids from participating with classmates.

[greybeard58]

Pioneer Pride,
At first I was for no change, but now in order I believe that Sept.1 with a birth year change so Mn would be younger than USA Hockey (as it was before the change to July 1) would be my first choice as the majority of players would be playing with their grade and as for the others who either start early or delay that is their choice. Number 2 is to leave the date at July 1 and my third is to use the USA Hockey date Jan. 1.
CMR,
I would rather have the planning committee of Mn Hockey looking at ways to make the sport grow rather than shrink in the Minneapolis and St Paul area and also state wide. Some of the items on their agenda in the past have been either minority driven such as age change to June 1 with numbers used that were not accurate and also failing to follow the direction given them, the residency change which took how long to get to pass and then was to complicated and needed to be changed and then the time on the one site state tournament. The problem for years was that on this committee there was not one person who actually had to enforce the rules and changes they proposed.
As for more focus on D10 maybe the planning committee should focus on what the District Directors are telling them instead of trying to impose either theirs or minority based ideas. Remember the 12 District Directors do not have a majority of votes to either pass or deny items.
Also remember the 35 game cap for Squirt/Girls 10 came from this committee and the scrimmage games to count were also added by this committee.