NO CHECKING UNTILL BANTAMS

[itsjustkidshockey]

Okay - Now that I'm on my soapbox, I think it's time to to leave MM Hockey and the Fire alone. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of either program, but they do provide OPTIONS for parents - whether we like it or not. Something MN Hockey does not.

If you don't like their programs, don't support them. Take that a step further and don't scrimmage them. But please stop bashing them for providing parents the opportunity to push their kids as they see fit.

I don't see any threads condemning parents for putting kids in Montessori schools, it's okay to send kids to private schools, why not be able to send kids to other options than the monopoly of MN Hockey?

I support community based hockey - I think it's great that communities can build the infrastructure for kids to play and use that as a tool to further enhance their communities offerings. However, MN hockey is skating on thin ice if they think that they can hold onto their control if they keep oiling the few squeaky wheels.

Let them play hockey. We lost a kid to Shattuck and good luck to him - I hope he really goes a long way. We miss him locally but that's the choice we all make as parents and thankfully there are choices available.

After all... It's just kids hockey

[NSHA Rules]

Talked to a rep with USA Hockey and he said the are NOT eliminating checking. He said they are trying to write a rule that would eliminate the big blow up checks. He said they want to get the kids to play the puck while playing the body which would eliminate checks with the intent to injure.

He also said that they would like to see body contact in mites, like rub outs and angling.

Really good to hear!

[itsjustkidshockey]

MHC - Yes my kid can skate. He's one of the fastest on the STMA team, 3rd leading scorer, and plays both D and F.

However, refs have continually commented that they need to call a penalty because he's SO MUCH BIGGER than than the kid he hit.

Is that fair?

Evolution is supposed to advance society to develop competitive tiers for all involved. My kids would love to play opponents the same size and skill level, why not offer multiple levels as they do in wrestling or boxing so that the playing field is leveled?

[MN_Hcky_Coach]

If your kid is that big and has skills that is great, remember everyone will catch up in size as the years go on, so remind him to develop his skills and he will be just fine.

You hit the nail on the head. Rules to evolve the game can be implemented but if they are not properly enforced the principles will fail. It is very difficult for squirt and peewee refs to properly enforce the rule. Many of these officials have poor judgement for the rule book and the purpose of the rules, instead they call things as written and we know that the written rules leave room for judgement.

There are other options for your son, early move up, Tier 1 hockey, Shattuck, etc. Other than that, as a peewee, he could take the time to focus on the most important part of the game at that level, skill development, and learn to use his size to dangle or protect the puck from smaller competitors.

I remember watching Dave Tenabe? as an A peewee. He was 6'0 190 playing against kids ranging from 5'2-5'8. When he wanted he would skate end to end, draw a crowd, protect the puck and then dish to one of the 4 open guys on the ice. His WB team was one of the best A peewee teams of all time (they also had a Roed and a Connelly on the team).

I'm just saying that skill development is the most important thing, especially if a kid is bigger than everyone else. Let's face it, if a kid is bigger and stronger, he wants to play that game and at the peewee level, they really need to be developing skills or they will get passed by when the rest of the world grows.

[itsjustkidshockey]

MHC - I agree 100%. I have twins and talk to them on a regular basis that they need to continue to develop their skills. They will get caught in size but have the advantage of being big early.

As a dad, I can never envision a time that I would send my kids away to Shattuck or JR's even if they were good enough - which they're not. However, that doesn't mean they should lose a competitive advantage due to their size - they aren't blowing kids up with hits, they're just big.

Skills are #1, teamwork is #2, and physical intimidation is #3.

It is hockey after all - not dance.

[InigoMontoya]

We call this the "Pussifaction of America"

IJKH, you had me at "Hello"...

MHC - I agree 100%.

...and then you kissed MHC right on the lips.

[O-townClown]

Talked to a rep with USA Hockey and he said the are NOT eliminating checking. He said they are trying to write a rule that would eliminate the big blow up checks. He said they want to get the kids to play the puck while playing the body which would eliminate checks with the intent to injure.

He also said that they would like to see body contact in mites, like rub outs and angling.

Really good to hear!

Thanks for sharing.

When I spoke to the ADM guy from USA Hockey it was explained and made sense.

When we speak to or read a post from someone that hasn't they have an alarmist reaction that this is just wrong, wrong, wrong. And to make sure their voice is heard there are vehement objections to the 'wussification of today's youth' or whatever logic leap they want to make.

The folks at USA Hockey want kids to understand from age 7 that they can and should use their body to win pucks. How is this a bad thing?

As I mentioned earlier, change the thread title to PHYSICAL PLAY FOR MITES!!! and the reactions aren't the same.

The folks in Colorado Springs have a very hard time getting their message out. They tell 100 people and those folks then distort it to 10,000 who then repeat things to a million. With a story to correct 999,900 times they decide to share less information. HPC, checking, and more.

[greybeard58]

If USA Hockey is serious about making a change,it probably will be discussed at their meeting in Florida in January. Since the USA Hockey is before the winter Mn Hockey meeting anything discussed at the USA Hockey meeting will be reported there. Place date and times are on the Mn web site.

In short get off of your backsides and attend the Winter Mn Hockey meeting not only on Sunday but Friday night and saturday. There is where your voice can be heard and remember to be polite works better to get the point across. Maybe if you attend some issues will be cleared up. Best way to find something out is to go directly to the source.

[InigoMontoya]

If USA Hockey is serious about making a change,it probably will be discussed at their meeting in Florida in January. Since the USA Hockey is before the winter Mn Hockey meeting anything discussed at the USA Hockey meeting will be reported there. Place date and times are on the Mn web site.

In short get off of your backsides and attend the Winter Mn Hockey meeting not only on Sunday but Friday night and saturday. There is where your voice can be heard and remember to be polite works better to get the point across. Maybe if you attend some issues will be cleared up. Best way to find something out is to go directly to the source.

How'd that work out for those that took your advice and attended the meeting about school v. house?

[Bronc]

If USA Hockey is serious about making a change,it probably will be discussed at their meeting in Florida in January. Since the USA Hockey is before the winter Mn Hockey meeting anything discussed at the USA Hockey meeting will be reported there. Place date and times are on the Mn web site.

In short get off of your backsides and attend the Winter Mn Hockey meeting not only on Sunday but Friday night and saturday. There is where your voice can be heard and remember to be polite works better to get the point across. Maybe if you attend some issues will be cleared up. Best way to find something out is to go directly to the source.

I am all for the creating the mite experience, I am also for strict enforcement of head contact, shots in the back that can be avoidable, blatant charging, etc.

Big hits - Be very leary! If a clean ck is clean then how hard it is should not be material if it is not a charge. Are we going to start measuring and weighing kids so differences do not exist.

I feel for bigger skilled players who put any ck on smaller players it will be even worse than today. How many times are we in the stands now going: Why was that a penalty? And the consensus is was a big guy vs little guy call by the ref.

[O-townClown]

NPC, I like your ideas. I'm a communication guy. This much I'll tell you: in my role I've tried to be visible with open communication. And I regret it completely.

Here's why. By trying to explain things it just opens up dialog with those that don't really care...they just want to do what they want to do. In general, people are closed-minded and resist change. So now by opening up communication you really just create a lot of agro. I'm not saying this is right or how it should be, just how things often are.

Greybeard is right. You don't have to blast him for it. People complain that things are done without their input. They should then take time to be heard.

I'm very interested in the USA Hockey meetings this month. I'm planning to attend some. Chances are an edict will be handed down and this won't be up for a vote where all registered families get a voice.

Despite opposition, the game will survive. I think it will be improve. If it is wrong, USA Hockey will change back. Minnesota has AA and A HS hockey now, and the world still spins and the game is still played.

MSHSL made the chance and there is better hockey now in outstate small towns, so I guess it has worked. My point is that some things change and we can roll along.

[Ugottobekiddingme]

If USA Hockey is serious about making a change,it probably will be discussed at their meeting in Florida in January. Since the USA Hockey is before the winter Mn Hockey meeting anything discussed at the USA Hockey meeting will be reported there. Place date and times are on the Mn web site.

In short get off of your backsides and attend the Winter Mn Hockey meeting not only on Sunday but Friday night and saturday. There is where your voice can be heard and remember to be polite works better to get the point across. Maybe if you attend some issues will be cleared up. Best way to find something out is to go directly to the source.

Now for a short reality check here GB58. Not all of us can make it. Some of us work. Others of us go to school. Some of us do both. Some of us spend our time and money chasing kids around the state playing hockey and stuff and just don't have time (or money). Some of us don't live close to the meeting and have other stuff to do. All us have a stake in it. Getting the info out back in the day where you seem to live involved writing, printing, mailing, and etc. Expensive and wasteful. Now it involves a person who is already there sitting behind a computer I helped to buy them doing stuff on my behalf. Will I always like it? No. Will I try to understand it? Sure. Will I have a thought on the topic? Maybe maybe not. Will seeing and learning more about what is going on make me a better informed person who might or might not get more involved in the process? Probably. Does it scare the crap out of the people who want to run it "my way or the highway"? Yup.

The thing that you fail to understand is that a lot of us probably agree with you all lots of the time. We will also help to promote your ideas to the less involved people within our associations. In case you haven't noticed, most of the muck that is raked around the rink is by those less involved people because they don't know what is going on. Some of us might see something or have some experience that might make your ideas better or help you to sell your ideas better. We want you to succeed. We like hockey. We like having our kids doing something. We hate the discontent, back biting, rumor mongering, infighting, back stabbing, and etc that goes on. Some of us start the season loving hockey and end up the season hating it. Saying things like "I can't wait for this year to end, between the parents, their kids and the constant stress I am not sure it is worth it." Then we come back next year hoping it will be better..........

If it is too much work to send out an email every once and awhile and your stock answer is to go to the meeting maybe you need to get a little bit more up to date. In this day and age information usually flows freely both ways. There is thing thing that Al Gore invented called the internet. He (I assume) also invented this thing called email. They are free and easy to send. The hardest part of it is getting the email addresses to send them to, we gave you ours already, for free. You have this thing called a computer, sort of like a typewriter except that you don't have to whack the heck out of the E key to get an E to appear. They have computers, we bought lots of them for them and they all have the latest and greatest software, also paid for by us.

Now, does it make sense for me to take a day off of work and then tack on another weekend away from my home and family to drive for a few hours to go to a meeting for three days where I might or might not learn anything? Should I spend what will probably be a grand total of $500 dollars between food, gas, hotel room and etc to go to this meeting? Or should the people who are putting on the meeting, who work for me, who are paid for by my dollars, who are managing a "project" for me, send me out an email every once and awhile to let me know what they are up to? For free.

Come down out of the tower, GB58. Join us in 2010. Crawl down off of your high horse, push your glasses up so you are not looking down your nose at us and put away the condescending attitude. Relive back in the day with your buddies around the fire at night, this ain't back in the day, this is now. We send and receive information via emails all the time. It makes us betting informed which might or might not be a good thing.

Post of the year ending 2010.. ..lets look forward to 2011 allowing the silent majority a voice towards a new direction within MN Hock. Get the politics out before we lose "kids hockey" in Minnesota....

OTC...go to Disneyworld...we don't need your ADM model or no checking to set our program behind 20 years...go ahead and attend the meetings for MH Hock but make sure you represent yourself as the clown from O-town.

[spin-o-rama]

NPC, I'm curious if you have sent emails to MH people or will you set fire to that suggestion as well? The board and the DDs all have contact info on the website.

Lots of people complain about the government. It's kind of ironic to hear people complain who also admit they don't vote.

[O-townClown]

OTC...go to Disneyworld...we don't need your ADM model or no checking to set our program behind 20 years...go ahead and attend the meetings for MH Hock but make sure you represent yourself as the clown from O-town.

I will obviously not be attending as a representative for Minnesota Hockey.

[Deep Breath]

Judging by the way Team Canada slapped the Americans all over the ice last night, not only should they not be thinking about eliminating checking until bantams, they should be looking into introducing it at the squirt level. Does anybody know if Team USA got the memo before last night's "game" that checking was, in fact, allowed at the Jr. Championships? Holy cripes, it was like watching the Gophers play hockey.

[jBlaze3000]

Judging by the way Team Canada slapped the Americans all over the ice last night, not only should they not be thinking about eliminating checking until bantams, they should be looking into introducing it at the squirt level. Does anybody know if Team USA got the memo before last night's "game" that checking was, in fact, allowed at the Jr. Championships? Holy cripes, it was like watching the Gophers play hockey.

Lol....

[zooomx]

Judging by the way Team Canada slapped the Americans all over the ice last night, not only should they not be thinking about eliminating checking until bantams, they should be looking into introducing it at the squirt level. Does anybody know if Team USA got the memo before last night's "game" that checking was, in fact, allowed at the Jr. Championships? Holy cripes, it was like watching the Gophers play hockey.

So, now that the Team Russia beat Canada with that dreaded finesse game should we outlaw checking through high school? Just sayin'

I really think this is all about protecting the kids. I understand that you can argue either side with very valid points. Like most topics in the world today, nobody wants to take an honest look at someone elses opinion. I would agree that in a perfect world all coaches would teach kids early and often how to give and receive a proper check. Unfortunately, there are waayyy too many coaches who are more about winning meanlingless Pee Wee games than truly developing hockey players and watching out for the kids.

Yes, it is a shame that USA hockey may outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level. I personally would rather not see this happen as I love watching a good, physical hockey game at any level. Unfortunately, once again, some bad eggs (and there are more than a few) have ruined it for everyone else. Everyone is quick to jump USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey, but how many coaches and associations have truly looked into the mirror to see if we are part of the problem. We are all quick to turn our heads to some of these crazy hits, until it is our own kid laying on the ice.

Funny thing is, if they do outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level, how many Pee Wee coaches will totally neglect teaching the skill to set the boys up for Bantams.

I think it is breaks down to a simple question. Do we want to grow the sport both locally and internationally? Or do we want to go back to the days when hockey was clearly a fringe sport? With the data being presented to them, USA Hockey is obviously choosing the first question to answer.

[Bronc]

Judging by the way Team Canada slapped the Americans all over the ice last night, not only should they not be thinking about eliminating checking until bantams, they should be looking into introducing it at the squirt level. Does anybody know if Team USA got the memo before last night's "game" that checking was, in fact, allowed at the Jr. Championships? Holy cripes, it was like watching the Gophers play hockey.

So, now that the Team Russia beat Canada with that dreaded finesse game should we outlaw checking through high school? Just sayin'

I really think this is all about protecting the kids. I understand that you can argue either side with very valid points. Like most topics in the world today, nobody wants to take an honest look at someone elses opinion. I would agree that in a perfect world all coaches would teach kids early and often how to give and receive a proper check. Unfortunately, there are waayyy too many coaches who are more about winning meanlingless Pee Wee games than truly developing hockey players and watching out for the kids.

Yes, it is a shame that USA hockey may outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level. I personally would rather not see this happen as I love watching a good, physical hockey game at any level. Unfortunately, once again, some bad eggs (and there are more than a few) have ruined it for everyone else. Everyone is quick to jump USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey, but how many coaches and associations have truly looked into the mirror to see if we are part of the problem. We are all quick to turn our heads to some of these crazy hits, until it is our own kid laying on the ice.

Funny thing is, if they do outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level, how many Pee Wee coaches will totally neglect teaching the skill to set the boys up for Bantams.

I think it is breaks down to a simple question. Do we want to grow the sport both locally and internationally? Or do we want to go back to the days when hockey was clearly a fringe sport? With the data being presented to them, USA Hockey is obviously choosing the first question to answer.

I do not believe nor do most on this board believe by taking cking out of the game at PW's you will grow it.

This is purely to try and throw one more buffer up for a defense in litigation, but then they will sue you for something else.

These are the same people that sue when they spill their hot coffee in the drive through.

Have the no ck leagues taken off and caused assoc to dwindle? I believe not.

I believe this will cause numbers to drop not increase, put the US and its players at a very competitive disadvantage and instead of promoting hockey in the US it will die off and the slight momentum gained will snowball downhill.

[observer]

Funny thing is, if they do outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level, how many Pee Wee coaches will totally neglect teaching the skill to set the boys up for Bantams.

Canada does a better job in a couple of regards. They teach more before use. The day they can check, or use a slapshot, a lot of training has already been done so they're proficient at it the first day. We wait until the first day of PeeWee practice to work on checking or the slapshot. Time should be spent on both at Squirts so the first day the player becomes a PeeWee he's already proficient.

[hockeyfan74]

I would like to know why people think Russia plays only a finesse style of hockey. Has anyone ever seen Ovechkin - I would say he combines the physical and finesse game pretty well. To me there seems to be a misconception that you can't be a skilled and physical hockey player. My older boy played against two Russian players this summer - They live in California, but their dad's are form Russia and played hockey in Russia. Unbelievably skilled players, but also both very physical. I asked them a lot of questions about their development vs. ours and I can tell you based of what I have been told by District Members relaying why USA and Mn hockey have made a lot of the changes they have, more specifically at the younger ages it is a bunch of BS. So why should I believe the crap they are saying now? As I have said many times to me it is not about the BIG hits, but more about angling and separating the opposing player form the puck. I still believe this move will slow done the development of players not make it better. If approved it will be a mistake. Why not form two leagues - One that allows checking to start at squirts and one that allows checking to start at bantams. Let's then take a look ten years later and see what league is developing better hockey players. Even though the US lost to Canada in the Semi-finals this year they have had a lot of success recently at the worlds and I bet those kids played games at mites and checked at pee-wee's.

[InTheKnow]

If this passes like I think it will. It will be interesting to see how many girls will play pee-wee's instead of U12.

[old goalie85]

Why would you even split them up?????? It will turn into u12boys/girls hockey.

[InTheKnow]

Why would you even split them up?????? It will turn into u12boys/girls hockey.

Good point. But they call it U12 YOUTH hockey.

[the_juiceman]

Judging by the way Team Canada slapped the Americans all over the ice last night, not only should they not be thinking about eliminating checking until bantams, they should be looking into introducing it at the squirt level. Does anybody know if Team USA got the memo before last night's "game" that checking was, in fact, allowed at the Jr. Championships? Holy cripes, it was like watching the Gophers play hockey.

So, now that the Team Russia beat Canada with that dreaded finesse game should we outlaw checking through high school? Just sayin'

I really think this is all about protecting the kids. I understand that you can argue either side with very valid points. Like most topics in the world today, nobody wants to take an honest look at someone elses opinion. I would agree that in a perfect world all coaches would teach kids early and often how to give and receive a proper check. Unfortunately, there are waayyy too many coaches who are more about winning meanlingless Pee Wee games than truly developing hockey players and watching out for the kids.

Yes, it is a shame that USA hockey may outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level. I personally would rather not see this happen as I love watching a good, physical hockey game at any level. Unfortunately, once again, some bad eggs (and there are more than a few) have ruined it for everyone else. Everyone is quick to jump USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey, but how many coaches and associations have truly looked into the mirror to see if we are part of the problem. We are all quick to turn our heads to some of these crazy hits, until it is our own kid laying on the ice.

Funny thing is, if they do outlaw checking at the Pee Wee level, how many Pee Wee coaches will totally neglect teaching the skill to set the boys up for Bantams.

I think it is breaks down to a simple question. Do we want to grow the sport both locally and internationally? Or do we want to go back to the days when hockey was clearly a fringe sport? With the data being presented to them, USA Hockey is obviously choosing the first question to answer.

probably the same numbers of coaches who teach it at Squirts

[nahc]

If one wants to make a real meaningful change to speed the game up and go more smoothly, add the "touch up" rule to youth hockey. Changing the age of checking, not alowing icing during a penalty, etc truly take away from the game.......just my opinion.......