Playing with the boys

[MNHockeyFan]

Good off-season topic. Wondering what forum readers think, one way or the other:

http://www.mndaily.com/2011/03/09/playing-boys

Girls’ and womens’ hockey has exploded over the past 20 years, but are our players any better?

By Ashley Bray

Two weeks ago my hometown high school girls hockey team made their first appearance in the state tournament. The Rosemount Irish were looking good, led by a powerful first line. Unfortunately the Irish were slaughtered by Edina in the first round. However, seeing them make it that far got me thinking about my childhood experience with hockey.

When I was a kid there were basically two options in my hometown for girls interested in hockey. They could play ringette, — where a rubber ring is pushed around by a bladeless stick — or play on a boys team.

My parents were iffy about their daughter playing on a boys team. Instead I played ringette. It wasn’t until I was 14 that my coach, who also coached hockey, convinced me to join the high school’s girls hockey program.

I spent four years in that program. Players came and went, but there always seemed to be the same gap in abilities.

There were girls that were really good, almost all of who had grown up playing on boys teams.

There were girls that were good, some of who had played with the boys.

And then there was everyone else who had never played with boys.

Today it is rare for girls to have to play on boys’ teams. In the past 20 years the sport has exploded in popularity. In 2010, USA Hockey, the governing body of hockey in the U.S., recorded over 61,500 registered female players, an increase of more than 55,000 since 1990.

While this growth in numbers has undoubtedly been a wonderful opportunity for thousands of girls, I can’t help but wonder if the sport is losing something when girls no longer play on boys teams.

Admittedly, the feminist within me scowls at the thought. Arguably, however, the top women hockey players grew up playing on boys teams.

Take the Gophers’ Natalie Darwitz, for example, who played from 2002-05 and is Minnesota’s all-time scoring leader with 246 goals. Her line mates, Kelly Stephens and Krissy Wendell, are also in the top four. At the time this line was arguably the most deadly in the country. It was a team that won back-to-back national championships and boasted several Olympians.

Last year, as Darwitz was preparing to lead Team USA to the medal round of the Winter Olympics, a Mpls.St.Paul Magazine reporter called her a “female Wayne Gretzky.”

All three of these Olympians played on boys teams until high school.

I do not believe that such a feat is impossible for a player who has never played with boys, but statistics don’t lie.

Gigi Marvin, who played with the Gophers from 2005-09 is the fifth all-time scoring leader. She played with the boys in Warroad until age 10.

Ronda Curtin – 1999-03. Sixth all-time Gopher’s scoring leader with 167 goals. She also played on several boys teams

Before the 2006 Olympic Winter games in Torino, USA Today.com hosted a live chat between Darwitz, Stephens and fans. When asked their opinions about girls playing on boys teams, both women said they were in favor of it.

“We are both big fans of growing up and playing with boys,” the transcript reads. “If your daughter is good enough to play with the boys, then why switch over to girls?”

Maybe women’s hockey is still too new to see if solely girl teams develop all-star players like these. I hope the sport continues to grow and we see more great hockey like this. Additionally, I would like to see it from girls who grew up playing with just the girls.

[northwoods oldtimer]

I can honestly tell you that there is NOT one girl that could or should play against boys past pee wee age. They would get killed on Varsity and College ice. This topic is hillarious!!

[jumpstart]

I can honestly tell you that there is NOT one girl that could or should play against boys past pee wee age. They would get killed on Varsity and College ice. This topic is hillarious!!

The topic isn't whether a girl hockey player should play with the boys past the pee wee age, it is a discussion about the development of girls who grow up playing with girls from day one as opposed to those who started playing with the boys at an early age [or something like that]. if you have some input in that discussion, let's hear it. Otherwise, why don't you do us all a favor and go back to the boy's forum ... or better yet, go back to the north woods.

[Red Ice]

No doubt the speed n skill of the boys will help a young girl improve. I would guess all the Olympic (Canadian n USA) girls played on boys teams growing up. But these are the best of the best and I don't know how an "average" girl would do. It has to be fun for the girl if she needs more competition vs playing with her peers?

[hockeya1a]

No doubt the speed n skill of the boys will help a young girl improve. I would guess all the Olympic (Canadian n USA) girls played on boys teams growing up. But these are the best of the best and I don't know how an "average" girl would do. It has to be fun for the girl if she needs more competition vs playing with her peers?

I have seen Girls play Boys thru Peewee and they were not necessarily any better than there counterparts that played girls only, I believe having girls play at the higher level can be good but it can be damaging too! I think if you gave girls the same intensity filled practice as the boys you would have better girl players too, But i think it also has to do with the girls!

[PoniesDad45]

When my son was a Squirt, the best player on our team was a girl.

We don't know what happened to her or where she ended up, but my son and his friends will always remember that in Squirts year #1, a red haired girl was the MAN!

BTW, I didn't intend to lurk on this forum, I chose the wrong drop down but found this topic kinda cool

[FIRE*ON*ICE]

I think you might be surprised at the talent coming up over the next few years. These girls can PLAY and the depth on these teams is increasing. I do see top girls on these teams I think when you have a GOD given talent, you'll shine with the girls and/or boys. I played with the boys through squirt "A" as a kid because there was no girls hockey teams at the time. I was just as good as any of those boys but it was because of my natural ability and I don't feel it had anything to do with who I played with. I agree that at the pee wee and bantam level the boys are way stronger and it gets really rough but there are still girls who could hang in there with the boys. They may not stand out but they could hang! When some of the top girls in the past played with the boys and moved to girls, there was very little competition on the girls side and now times have changed! Don't get me wrong, those top girls definately have GOD given talent but the competition is different now on the girls side.

[InigoMontoya]

I have seen Girls play Boys thru Peewee and they were not necessarily any better than there counterparts that played girls only

When the high school tryouts were held the next year, the girls that played on the peewee A team were not any better than the girls that played on the 12UA team? This doesn't seem to mesh with the posts that say girls need to play 14U, because 12U does not prepare them for high school which is much faster and rougher.

[TeamFirst]

I think if girls can play PeeWee's It can help teach them to play with there head up and can help them become better playmakers. I think Amanda Trunzo, Alex Nelson, Rachael Bona,& Casey Hirsch all played boys peewee A's

[FIRE*ON*ICE]

I think if girls can play PeeWee's It can help teach them to play with there head up and can help them become better playmakers. I think Amanda Trunzo, Alex Nelson, Rachael Bona,& Casey Hirsch all played boys peewee A's

Look at Hanna Brandt...Never played with the boys.

[PWD10]

Good off-season topic. Wondering what forum readers think, one way or the other:

Today it is rare for girls to have to play on boys’ teams.

I think maybe for Minnesota girls her information is correct. I however know of other states where there may only be a single or maybe two girls 12U teams in the whole state. This is in a state with a population of over 9 million. Nearly double that of Minnesota. Furthermore I know of whole states which don't have a highschool girls hockey team. There are a plethora of areas where kids drive many many hours just to practice on a girls team as that is their closest option.

[allhoc11]

La Cresent HS boys team has two girls on their squad, and it looks like the goalie did ok for them.

http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/team_instanc ... ason=27330

[joehockey]

I think if I were a Dad of a young girl hockey player here in MN again I would have my daughter try to play some more of both - starting at the park or pond jumping in the game with everyone else.

Boys play at a higher intensity than many girls teams (just think of what you saw in the boys and girls State Tournaments) building the need to move create time and space - Bona, Hirsch, T. Press (Ramsey maybe) all played boys along the way. Summer hockey teams, hockey camps or better 3x3 leagues would be a great experience for girls to play with boys but still have the social aspect of girls hockey where they build love of the game.

My daughter is out east playing in college now. In practice they have a group of coolege men (6-7) who practice with them to push the practice speed - many women's D1 basketball teams I think do the same. Both the US and CDN Olympic Teams played Men's/HS/Midget/Junior Teams at that level.

There are many creative solutions this is not an either or question especial in MN where we have so many programs and options at least in the Metro area. Remember the key is making sure your daughter is always having fun - play it like a game - your job as a parent is to make sure at the end of every season they had a blast and want to keep playing....if not they won't have success but more they will not keep playing.

[OntheEdge]

I think if girls can play PeeWee's It can help teach them to play with there head up and can help them become better playmakers. I think Amanda Trunzo, Alex Nelson, Rachael Bona,& Casey Hirsch all played boys peewee A's

Look at Hanna Brandt...Never played with the boys.

Today, I think that in Minnesota you will find lots of examples of girls that never or hardly ever played with boys. Most girls that do play with boys stop after the Squirt level. Its rare nowadays but there are some that play beyond Squirts. IMO, girls that are talented will do well whether they grow up playing with girls or boys. I think in Darwitz' day it was almost impossible to find good hockey in girls hockey but now things have changed and the girls game is very good and getting better every year. I think the girls game and boys game are different games and girls that switch from one to the other have an adjustment period of 1-2 years. What I don't like is when a girl switches from the boys game to the girls game and people believe that she is automatically a better hockey player than her teammates just because she played with the boys. I'm really tired of asking someone if they think X is a good player and they don't talk about her hands, skating, vision, etc. The response is "Well she played with the boys" like it is some kind of gold standard. Everyone talks about the good players that played with the boys but I know girls that played with the boys at the Peewee level that didn't even make the Varsity team.

Bottom line is I don't think anyone can definitively prove that not playing with girls and only playing with the boys was the dominant factor for making a player good. Let parents choose what they deem best for their daughter but lets stop this nonsense where we elevate the status of a player just because she once played with the boys. I think it demeans girls hockey.

[hockeyheaven]

Experience has shown to me that in the end… playing with boys does not necessarily give those players any real advantage in the development of skills over those who played exclusively with girls… Quality instruction, strong competition, athletic ability and the player’s desire to excel is a far greater factor…in my opinion that is. My daughter will be a senior next year and has only played with and against girls. During her time playing… there is not a single player that I know of (and I believe I have seen most if not all of the top players) that who had initially played with boys… now demonstrates superior skills to those girls who did not. The evolution of Select tournaments, CODP, OS and now Fhit create a competitive training situation to where I don’t feel girls have to compete against boys to develop their skills to their optimal performance.

I will never forget an exchange I had several years ago with a parent of a player participating at one of these Selects tournaments. This person was going on how she didn’t know how her daughter was going to adapt to playing with girls after only playing with boys to this point (small community with no girl’s program). “I’m sure she will spend most of her time in the box” and “I hope she can adjust to the slower less intense speed of the game” where just a few of her comments. Naturally curious I made a point to watch this player over the course of the weekend. Nice player… but far from the dominate one that I had been lead to believe. After the event had concluded I spotted this person on the way out and just had to get her impression… let’s just say the arrogant manner she so predominantly displayed was most noticeably absent…and she left with this almost mystified expression. The pioneers may have needed to play with boys to find real competition…but that would not be necessary today…in my opinion that is

[InigoMontoya]

Just to offer a bit of perspective. Yes, girls hockey has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go. There were, what, 52 or 54 14U teams this year, compared to how many bantam teams, 300+? In most areas those with hockey knowledge would rather coach a peewee B team than a 12UA team. In many areas more than half of the girls at the 12U level didn't play 8U. It is awesome that Edina, Wayzata, Centenial, etc. are getting huge numbers of girls that play a high level of hockey - much of the rest of the state is still lagging behind.

[OntheEdge]

Just to offer a bit of perspective. Yes, girls hockey has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go. There were, what, 52 or 54 14U teams this year, compared to how many bantam teams, 300+? In most areas those with hockey knowledge would rather coach a peewee B team than a 12UA team. In many areas more than half of the girls at the 12U level didn't play 8U. It is awesome that Edina, Wayzata, Centenial, etc. are getting huge numbers of girls that play a high level of hockey - much of the rest of the state is still lagging behind.

You are absolutely correct. Girls hockey has a long way to go, especially outside the Metro. Getting more girls to play hockey is important to the health of the sport. You can say that without the "those with hockey knowledge..." comment implying girls hockey is inferior. So I know a lot of knowledgeable hockey people that would rather coach and do coach a U12A team for various reasons. It doesn't mean either is better or worse. It's just a preference.

[OldGirlsCoach]

I have my level 5 USA hockey coaching certification, and i would rather have a group of girls willing to learn stick handling and passing, rather than having a group of boys that feel that these things aren't something they need to learn or improve on. Ask any of the coaches that just finished the U14A tournament that had several games go into multiple overtimes, and wonder....gee i would rather be coaching boys.

[Pens4]

Just to offer a bit of perspective. Yes, girls hockey has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go. There were, what, 52 or 54 14U teams this year, compared to how many bantam teams, 300+? In most areas those with hockey knowledge would rather coach a peewee B team than a 12UA team. In many areas more than half of the girls at the 12U level didn't play 8U. It is awesome that Edina, Wayzata, Centenial, etc. are getting huge numbers of girls that play a high level of hockey - much of the rest of the state is still lagging behind.

Interesting point. The true test of depth and quality of competition is how many of the 90 Bantam A teams actually compete against the big boys? The answer is about 20 of them. The 14A's have about eight.

Watered down numbers do not equate to quality. What was more competitive...the original six or the current number of NHL teams? The growth of the game comes through the growth of talent, not numbers.

It will be interesting to hear the board discuss this topic if the peewee's move to no-check and have to learn what it feels like to have the puck for more than three seconds without dumping it in. They might just find out that what the NHL has learn...puck pocession is fun and good hockey.