Lets Change the Youth Program to Boys

[funmom]

I think they should be seperated at the older ages. I also think they should seperate programs because it seems the girls always want rules changed in our association . I think if you want to play hockey then everybody should play by the same rules boy and girls!

[muckandgrind]

I have no problem with girls playing with boys in association hockey at the minmite, mite and squirt levels. I do think once you get to Pee Wee's with the checking and potential, size, strength etc.. issues you do need to be careful in the decision making process of where certain girls play. I am not saying by any means that girls can't play on pee wee teams, they absolutely can and some eveen thrive but some don't. Know the ability and personality type of your own daughter is all I am saying, most areas anymore have girls teams with in reach for pee wee aged girls and older.

Girls, for the most part, hit puberty before boys. So many 12 year old girls are bigger and more physically developed than 12 year old boys.....Boys generally catch up and pass the girls around 14 years old.

I understand the whole "girls hit puberty first" thing. However athletically, even though the girls hit puberty first, the boys start to pull away athletically around 10 or 11. Not just in hockey but in all sports. Yes there are exceptions to every rule and I don't support a rule blatantly separating the two, but the fact is most boy athletes are faster and stronger and more agressive than the girls as early as 10 or 11. I see it in soccer, basketball, hockey just about every sport where they play together at early ages. One quick example, my son is 10, there is an 11 year old girl who is jsut an exceptional hockey player. Through mites and even the first year of squirts she looked better than my son, she even played Tier 1 winter hockey with boys last winter. Then this summer they were in a camp together, she no longer had that edge, depsite playing Tier 1 an dmy son only playing association and spring hockey and it wasn't because she wasn't still good it was just that my son had closed the gap almost purely based on the physical so to speak. Just my two cents

....and THAT'S what I'm talking about: "The Exception to the Rule". A girl who is heads and shoulders better than most other girls, should have the opportunity to try out for a youth "A" team....with the caveat being that if they don't make that "A" team, then they must play with the girl's program....not with the youth "B" or "C" teams.

[JSR]

Girls, for the most part, hit puberty before boys. So many 12 year old girls are bigger and more physically developed than 12 year old boys.....Boys generally catch up and pass the girls around 14 years old.

I understand the whole "girls hit puberty first" thing. However athletically, even though the girls hit puberty first, the boys start to pull away athletically around 10 or 11. Not just in hockey but in all sports. Yes there are exceptions to every rule and I don't support a rule blatantly separating the two, but the fact is most boy athletes are faster and stronger and more agressive than the girls as early as 10 or 11. I see it in soccer, basketball, hockey just about every sport where they play together at early ages. One quick example, my son is 10, there is an 11 year old girl who is jsut an exceptional hockey player. Through mites and even the first year of squirts she looked better than my son, she even played Tier 1 winter hockey with boys last winter. Then this summer they were in a camp together, she no longer had that edge, depsite playing Tier 1 an dmy son only playing association and spring hockey and it wasn't because she wasn't still good it was just that my son had closed the gap almost purely based on the physical so to speak. Just my two cents

....and THAT'S what I'm talking about: "The Exception to the Rule". A girl who is heads and shoulders better than most other girls, should have the opportunity to try out for a youth "A" team....with the caveat being that if they don't make that "A" team, then they must play with the girl's program....not with the youth "B" or "C" teams.

I do not disagree with you that they should be given the option. I do think they shoudl eb careful in their consdieration is all I am saying.

[muckandgrind]

I understand the whole "girls hit puberty first" thing. However athletically, even though the girls hit puberty first, the boys start to pull away athletically around 10 or 11. Not just in hockey but in all sports. Yes there are exceptions to every rule and I don't support a rule blatantly separating the two, but the fact is most boy athletes are faster and stronger and more agressive than the girls as early as 10 or 11. I see it in soccer, basketball, hockey just about every sport where they play together at early ages. One quick example, my son is 10, there is an 11 year old girl who is jsut an exceptional hockey player. Through mites and even the first year of squirts she looked better than my son, she even played Tier 1 winter hockey with boys last winter. Then this summer they were in a camp together, she no longer had that edge, depsite playing Tier 1 an dmy son only playing association and spring hockey and it wasn't because she wasn't still good it was just that my son had closed the gap almost purely based on the physical so to speak. Just my two cents

....and THAT'S what I'm talking about: "The Exception to the Rule". A girl who is heads and shoulders better than most other girls, should have the opportunity to try out for a youth "A" team....with the caveat being that if they don't make that "A" team, then they must play with the girl's program....not with the youth "B" or "C" teams.

I do not disagree with you that they should be given the option. I do think they shoudl eb careful in their consdieration is all I am saying.

I agree. If a girl can be challenged by playing with other girls, then that's where she should be. But if she is good enough where the only challenge she can get is by playing with the top boys, then THAT's where she should be.

[passthepuck99]

What I think a lot of people don't understand about girls hockey in a small association is this: top end talented girls should be allowed to play at their skill level. That is usually only found in the youth program ( btw it is not called boys for a reason). In a small association with limited female hockey players you can have a team ranging from C level players on up to A level players. Ask any Squirt A or PeeWee A player or parent how they would feel having 2-3 C level players put on their team. Why should we force top end girls into the same situation? I agree that in order for girls hockey to be successful girls should play with girls but in a small association, those top end girls waive out or play in the youth program. Allowing them to play in the youth program at least keeps them in their home association. I have a daughter in a small association who is playing with the girls. She got lucky in that there are enough girls at her age level to field a team that will at least be able to hold their own at the A level.

[JSR]

What I think a lot of people don't understand about girls hockey in a small association is this: top end talented girls should be allowed to play at their skill level. That is usually only found in the youth program ( btw it is not called boys for a reason). In a small association with limited female hockey players you can have a team ranging from C level players on up to A level players. Ask any Squirt A or PeeWee A player or parent how they would feel having 2-3 C level players put on their team. Why should we force top end girls into the same situation? I agree that in order for girls hockey to be successful girls should play with girls but in a small association, those top end girls waive out or play in the youth program. Allowing them to play in the youth program at least keeps them in their home association. I have a daughter in a small association who is playing with the girls. She got lucky in that there are enough girls at her age level to field a team that will at least be able to hold their own at the A level.

We ar ein a small association, my son is an A player. The last two seasons we have played on teams that have a few A players at the top, a handful of B players in the midle and 3 to 4 C players. It is difficult for both the A player parents AND the C player parents. It's ough for the A kids because they aren't surrounded by their peers so they aren't challenged the way they should be and often get labeled as puck hogs even though they are not, they just don't have teammates who can keep up with them. it's tough for the C players because they basically never see the puck in a game so their parents egt frustrate dover that. I feel for what you are saying. But you try and make the best of it for the kids.