Minnesota Hockey board meeting...

[elliott70]

Starting tonight at 6:30
Saturday 8 am to ???
Sunday all morning....

stop and say Hi
I will buy coffee, lunch or dinner....

Marriott West
junction of 169 and 394

[Cdale]

Is this the meeting to vote on the age change proposal that was discussed a few months ago? And will we now have finalization of the peewee checking proposed change? Or are both these done?
thanks

[elliott70]

Is this the meeting to vote on the age change proposal that was discussed a few months ago? And will we now have finalization of the peewee checking proposed change? Or are both these done?
thanks

Age change was voted on at the last meeing - retain current age cut-off.

Checking vote is at the USA Hockey meeting in July in Colorado.

It will be a topic of discussion at 2 (or more) committee meetings on Saturday.

[nahc]

Elliott thank you for the great job you do on the board!!

[elliott70]

Elliott thank you for the great job you do on the board!!

Your welcome.

[JSR]

Hey guys, I was wondering how Minnesota Youth Hockey was proceeding with the new USA Hockey ADM recommendations for Mite age kids.

I live in southren Wisconsin and we have 16 Youth Hockey Associations between our county and the one adjacent to us. All sixteen associations have made the collective decision to no longer have Mite full ice hockey. All U8 (aka mite age kids) will now only be able to play small area and cross ice games. Full ice hockey will not start until First year squirt. If a mite age family feels a kid is advanced enough, and the coaches also agree, to play Squirt hockey then the kid can tryout for squirts but otherwise they will have to play cross ice (or hopefully other small area games) until they reach Squirt age.

Personally I am on the fence on this. On the one hand there are a TON of kids who are not ready to play full ice hockey that go out for mites anyway and in small associations these kids play mites even though they can't even skate. So I sort of like this idea fromt he aspect that small area games are better skill developers for kids. On the flip side there are some kids that are good skaters, and will have the ability and want to play full ice hockey but maybe aren't physically big enough or mentally mature enough to play with the squirts. USA Hockey's ADM is pushing this and WAHA bascially forced this on us and our Region (sort of like your districts) also bought in hence this is what we have to do starting next year.

So was wondering if MN Hockey was talking about this and what the thoughts were and do you see any changes coming on this topic?

[O-townClown]

JSR:

I have been very interested in seeing how other areas are handling Red, White & Blue.

Pittsburgh has an interesting phase-in approach.

2011-12: 2003s have choice to play Squirts
2012-13: 2004s can play Squirts provided they have gone through a season of RW&B
2013-14: all 2005s will play RW&B

This way the people who start their kids in hockey now know that it just is that way (crossice).

I really like this approach and feel it gives some parents the chance to do what they think is right during a transition. Personally, a high-level crossice game for 8-year-olds is awesome to see.

[InigoMontoya]

[quotePersonally, a high-level crossice game for 8-year-olds is awesome to see.[/quote]

Awesome: inspiring awe.
Awe: an overwhelming feeling of reverence, admiration, fear, etc., produced by that which is grand, sublime, extremely powerful, or the like.

I do not think it means what you think it means.

[TTpuckster]

JSR:

I have been very interested in seeing how other areas are handling Red, White & Blue.

Pittsburgh has an interesting phase-in approach.

2011-12: 2003s have choice to play Squirts
2012-13: 2004s can play Squirts provided they have gone through a season of RW&B
2013-14: all 2005s will play RW&B

This way the people who start their kids in hockey now know that it just is that way (crossice).

I really like this approach and feel it gives some parents the chance to do what they think is right during a transition. Personally, a high-level crossice game for 8-year-olds is awesome to see.

This sounds like a very good strategy.

[O-townClown]

I do not think it means what you think it means.

Prepare to die.

[Ugottobekiddingme]

I do not think it means what you think it means.

Prepare to die.

That's a first from a "clown"....my unborn children will think twice before participating in hockey activities but 2-12 is starting to look realistic...

[JSR]

JSR:

I have been very interested in seeing how other areas are handling Red, White & Blue.

Pittsburgh has an interesting phase-in approach.

2011-12: 2003s have choice to play Squirts
2012-13: 2004s can play Squirts provided they have gone through a season of RW&B
2013-14: all 2005s will play RW&B

This way the people who start their kids in hockey now know that it just is that way (crossice).

I really like this approach and feel it gives some parents the chance to do what they think is right during a transition. Personally, a high-level crossice game for 8-year-olds is awesome to see.

That is an interesting approach. Wish we'd been able to hash around ideas like that. The only part of this i truly do not like is the fact that they seem so dead set on cross ice being the game they use. There are a dozen fantastic small area games that are fun and great for development. You can choose to keep score or not keep score. Lots of different options. I just don't see why "cross ice" has to be the only idea used.

[TriedThat2]

Mark,
What was the attitude of all regarding the proposal to remove checking at the PW level?

[silentbutdeadly3139]

JSR:

I have been very interested in seeing how other areas are handling Red, White & Blue.

Pittsburgh has an interesting phase-in approach.

2011-12: 2003s have choice to play Squirts
2012-13: 2004s can play Squirts provided they have gone through a season of RW&B
2013-14: all 2005s will play RW&B

This way the people who start their kids in hockey now know that it just is that way (crossice).

I really like this approach and feel it gives some parents the chance to do what they think is right during a transition. Personally, a high-level crossice game for 8-year-olds is awesome to see.

That is an interesting approach. Wish we'd been able to hash around ideas like that. The only part of this i truly do not like is the fact that they seem so dead set on cross ice being the game they use. There are a dozen fantastic small area games that are fun and great for development. You can choose to keep score or not keep score. Lots of different options. I just don't see why "cross ice" has to be the only idea used.

It isn't, why can't you use cross ice games along with whole ice games ... will they fine/suspend/scold you if you add/compliment with full ice games?

In short what happens if you don't follow there plan to the letter?

[elliott70]

Mark,
What was the attitude of all regarding the proposal to remove checking at the PW level?

Most rural districts were 100% against.
Some metro districts were 100% against.
Some had mixed reactions, but not all have put the same effort into gathering data as D16 and hae been instructed to do so.

VP's and other non-youth hockey members were mostly supportive.

General feeling is that USAH is going to go ahead with it.

[elliott70]

JSR:

I have been very interested in seeing how other areas are handling Red, White & Blue.

Pittsburgh has an interesting phase-in approach.

2011-12: 2003s have choice to play Squirts
2012-13: 2004s can play Squirts provided they have gone through a season of RW&B
2013-14: all 2005s will play RW&B

This way the people who start their kids in hockey now know that it just is that way (crossice).

I really like this approach and feel it gives some parents the chance to do what they think is right during a transition. Personally, a high-level crossice game for 8-year-olds is awesome to see.

That is an interesting approach. Wish we'd been able to hash around ideas like that. The only part of this i truly do not like is the fact that they seem so dead set on cross ice being the game they use. There are a dozen fantastic small area games that are fun and great for development. You can choose to keep score or not keep score. Lots of different options. I just don't see why "cross ice" has to be the only idea used.

It isn't, why can't you use cross ice games along with whole ice games ... will they fine/suspend/scold you if you add/compliment with full ice games?

In short what happens if you don't follow there plan to the letter?

Nothing.

[silentbutdeadly3139]

That is an interesting approach. Wish we'd been able to hash around ideas like that. The only part of this i truly do not like is the fact that they seem so dead set on cross ice being the game they use. There are a dozen fantastic small area games that are fun and great for development. You can choose to keep score or not keep score. Lots of different options. I just don't see why "cross ice" has to be the only idea used.

It isn't, why can't you use cross ice games along with whole ice games ... will they fine/suspend/scold you if you add/compliment with full ice games?

In short what happens if you don't follow there plan to the letter?

Nothing.

Problem solved ... use USAHA as recommendation and do what you believe is best for your assoc.

[JSR]

That is an interesting approach. Wish we'd been able to hash around ideas like that. The only part of this i truly do not like is the fact that they seem so dead set on cross ice being the game they use. There are a dozen fantastic small area games that are fun and great for development. You can choose to keep score or not keep score. Lots of different options. I just don't see why "cross ice" has to be the only idea used.

It isn't, why can't you use cross ice games along with whole ice games ... will they fine/suspend/scold you if you add/compliment with full ice games?

In short what happens if you don't follow there plan to the letter?

Nothing.

I should clarify. We can do whatever we want as an assocaiton on our practice ice. However, all of the associations in our Region are adopting this "model" so we cannot compliment with full ice games because we'l have nobody to play a full ice game against unless we were to drive four hours and frankly not going to do that. The Region is setting up the "league" and they are setting it up as a cross ice league. So either we play cross ice if we want to play against other organizations or we don't play games at all and we're too small down here to really have an in house league. The fact is kids like games and they like playing against other teams. Cross Ice against other assoications is better than nothing but again there are other styles that could be used. I feel like the folks who are pushing everything in the guise of the ADM model don't actually understand it. We have parents whose only exposure to hockey is that they are parents of 5 year old cross icers right now sitting in on these meetigns and speaking for us, I've tried everyway I know how to try and help and educate but I can't seem to get a seat on the board (not part of the "club" I guess) and the parents who are invited don't know anything but also don't want to be educated either. Very frustrating

[O-townClown]

JSR, worth pointing out that these know-nothing parents of crossice 5-year-olds have come to agreement with the definitely-know-a-lot people that support Red, White & Blue.

The know-somethings in the middle are where you find the most resistance. Ditto the treatment of checking.

[JSR]

JSR, worth pointing out that these know-nothing parents of crossice 5-year-olds have come to agreement with the definitely-know-a-lot people that support Red, White & Blue.

The know-somethings in the middle are where you find the most resistance. Ditto the treatment of checking.

O-Town, you need to reread my comments above. I know ALOT about the ADM and the red, white and blue system for mites. I also have seen, and helped run more variations of small area games than you probably ever knew existed. If you read what I stated above you would see that I think small area games are fantastic for development. I like that mites aren't being forced into full ice games where the development is small and usually for only few kids.

The point you obviously missed is the fact that the ADM and the Red, White and Blue model don't specifcally advocate cross ice only. They advocate small area games LIKE cross ice. There is a broader spectrum of small area games in addition to cross ice that can be used. Cross Ice is fine and can be used but how about ALSO using some of the other half dozen or more small area games that are in many cases more fun than cross ice, better for development for more advanced mites and help promote other areas of development. Your missing the point big time here in that what I am arguing against is the fact that the "know nothings" basically only know about cross ice so that is the one they are forcing down our throats. I want them to open their eyes to the other games that can be offered so that we can truly develop what is intended not just the very small part that was grasped on to.

[MN_Hcky_Coach]

I watched 2 mite full ice games this past Saturday and could easily count 3-4 players each shift that did not touch the puck and were not close to the play. The biggest reasons were the 6 dads on the ice pushing kids around so they spread out more and yelling for kids to "play position."

Now, both these games involved a 10 minute warm up with some skating and 3 15 minute running time periods with shift changes every 1.5 minutes. In between shifts, the dads made the kids line up for a face off that I counted to take between 20-25 seconds, then the puck was dropped.

So with 10 kids on each team (2 lines), each skater got 22.5 minutes of theoretical game time, minus the (low end) 20 seconds to set up a face off, 20 seconds x 15 game shifts = 5 minutes, so each player only realistically got 17.5 minutes of game time + 10 minute warm up. In summary, out of 60 minute block of ice, each mite (6-8) yr old got 27.5 minutes of ice time, with the other more than half of the hour waisted standing around or sitting on the bench. At $170/hour of ice and the fact that many of these kids lack strong skating skills, was this really worth it?

[MrBoDangles]

I watched 2 mite full ice games this past Saturday and could easily count 3-4 players each shift that did not touch the puck and were not close to the play. The biggest reasons were the 6 dads on the ice pushing kids around so they spread out more and yelling for kids to "play position."

Now, both these games involved a 10 minute warm up with some skating and 3 15 minute running time periods with shift changes every 1.5 minutes. In between shifts, the dads made the kids line up for a face off that I counted to take between 20-25 seconds, then the puck was dropped.

So with 10 kids on each team (2 lines), each skater got 22.5 minutes of theoretical game time, minus the (low end) 20 seconds to set up a face off, 20 seconds x 15 game shifts = 5 minutes, so each player only realistically got 17.5 minutes of game time + 10 minute warm up. In summary, out of 60 minute block of ice, each mite (6-8) yr old got 27.5 minutes of ice time, with the other more than half of the hour waisted standing around or sitting on the bench. At $170/hour of ice and the fact that many of these kids lack strong skating skills, was this really worth it?

Playing cross ice with 2 line (6 players).... yes. Playing cross ice with 3 lines (9 player teams)....... probably not. 60% cross ice, 40% full ice would probably be the least I would want to go on full ice. How much will be lost by not letting them see a little about how a full game feels? It's like kids that always play 2on2 half court basketball being told to go in and play 5on5 fullcourt TEAM basketball...... They will be lost. There ARE huge benefits from cross ice games, but why does USA Hockey all of a sudden feel that everything is wrong and go all and none. I wonder about these folks..........

[silentbutdeadly3139]

I watched 2 mite full ice games this past Saturday and could easily count 3-4 players each shift that did not touch the puck and were not close to the play. The biggest reasons were the 6 dads on the ice pushing kids around so they spread out more and yelling for kids to "play position."

Now, both these games involved a 10 minute warm up with some skating and 3 15 minute running time periods with shift changes every 1.5 minutes. In between shifts, the dads made the kids line up for a face off that I counted to take between 20-25 seconds, then the puck was dropped.

So with 10 kids on each team (2 lines), each skater got 22.5 minutes of theoretical game time, minus the (low end) 20 seconds to set up a face off, 20 seconds x 15 game shifts = 5 minutes, so each player only realistically got 17.5 minutes of game time + 10 minute warm up. In summary, out of 60 minute block of ice, each mite (6-8) yr old got 27.5 minutes of ice time, with the other more than half of the hour waisted standing around or sitting on the bench. At $170/hour of ice and the fact that many of these kids lack strong skating skills, was this really worth it?

I'm guessing but many of the same 3-4 kids wouldn't touch the puck in a cross ice game unless you remove many players who then would be watching a cross ice game. But I bet they still liked playing a game ... unless mom and dad remind them how little they touch the puck.

Like everything too much of anything is bad and variety is the best. IMHO mix in full ice and cross ice so they can learn all aspects AND prepare for squirts.

As for your count of minutes. That would apply to all hockey games at all ages ... do you wanna do away with all games ? i'm thinking not.

[Little King]

[quote="silentbutdeadly3139/

I'm guessing but many of the same 3-4 kids wouldn't touch the puck in a cross ice game unless you remove many players who then would be watching a cross ice game. But I bet they still liked playing a game ... unless mom and dad remind them how little they touch the puck.

Like everything too much of anything is bad and variety is the best. IMHO mix in full ice and cross ice so they can learn all aspects AND prepare for squirts.

As for your count of minutes. That would apply to all hockey games at all ages ... do you wanna do away with all games ? i'm thinking not.

You could have 3-4 cross ice games going on one sheet, compared to 1 on full ice. Therefore, at 4 on 4 cross ice, times 3 games going at once = 24 kids on the ice at once, compared to only 12 in a full ice game, assuming 5 on 5 plus goalies. Now factor in that mite teams ( in my assoc) have about 12 players per team. Now you can get 4 teams on 1 hour of ice, and even if all they did was play cross ice for an hour, each kid would be going every other shift. Can you really ask for anything more?

I'm not saying it's the end all say all, but I will say that I am sold on the idea.

Like someone said in another thread.... Should we have our 6-8 year olds playing baseball on 90 foot bases, and pitching from MLB mounds??? Is there a FEW kids that could do this? Probably, but would not be good for the majority of the players. And for the kids that might be able to play on the longer bases, are they REALLY going to get any worse by playing with everyone else, on shorter bases?

this can be directly related to the checking debate. Some say kids aren't physically ready to check as pee wee's? But some of you think that 6-8 year olds are menally developed enough to know how to run a forecheck, and go to their "positions" on a break out? Let's give them the tools, then we can show them how to use them.

[Bronc]

Mark,
What was the attitude of all regarding the proposal to remove checking at the PW level?

Most rural districts were 100% against.
Some metro districts were 100% against.
Some had mixed reactions, but not all have put the same effort into gathering data as D16 and hae been instructed to do so.

VP's and other non-youth hockey members were mostly supportive.

General feeling is that USAH is going to go ahead with it.

So 99.99% against (funny how VP's and non you members supportive so they are more intelligent on the good for the game then those participating) and they are moving forward(?) Way to support your membership.

How arrogant!!! --- And they ask for our support and monies, I assume Minnesota Hockey has a plan to not follow.