Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
BlackTape- Honest question. To answer your question my son is a second year Peewee.BlackTape wrote:What does moving or open enrolling have to do with recruiting?
Did your kid get bumped off an "A" team by an outsider?
I forgot to add. You know as well as I do these kids get recruited to play. Mostly by other parents and even some coaches.BlackTape wrote:What does moving or open enrolling have to do with recruiting?
Did your kid get bumped off an "A" team by an outsider?
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
Interesting topics ... though the subject line is a bit confusing.Irish wrote:There were a number of kids that moved associations this season for Educational reasons
1) What impact did these players have on the overall success of the team?
2) Do kids really need to go and play for stronger programs to become better players?
I heard there were a couple kids that moved to new associations only to become major head aches in the end. I'm still shocked that parents are moving kids in youth hockey to stronger programs.
You would not hear me naming who, and that is the ethnics here. But the point to make here is that there is winner and loser, or at least appears winner and loser. Got to be a tough decision for the family who moved, and a bad taste in the mouth for those who are involuntarily affected.hocman wrote:What team are you talking about?
You're probably right, but when I think of the stronger hockey programs in the metro are any of them poor academic schools? I don't think so.This is nuts! wrote:I bet no one can give an example of a Hockey player moving from a strong hockey program to a weaker one for "better Acedemics"
Agreed, but if you are good enough, there is a long list of college and NHL players that came from very weak programs...jBlaze3000 wrote:You're probably right, but when I think of the stronger hockey programs in the metro are any of them poor academic schools? I don't think so.This is nuts! wrote:I bet no one can give an example of a Hockey player moving from a strong hockey program to a weaker one for "better Acedemics"
I think the school you go to matters more if you are trying to get an athletic scholarship versus an academic one.
Reedy (Bantam) I believe peewee too. to Prior lake. two kids from eastview one went to apple valley and one to Apple valley. (Peewee) I'm pretty sure that eastview is one of the best schools in the state. Burnsville AV and Prior lake? not so much.57special wrote:This is probably stating the obvious, but most people I know that open enroll do it for educational reasons. That is not to say that some don't do it for athletics also. Hopkins for basketball is an obvious example.
Does anyone have an example of someone open enrolling to a school with poorer educational standards than the one they left?
Bravo!!!Outoftowner wrote:I think it does matter. If you are a good player on a bad team, you will not be pushed to excel. For example; if you can give half effort in practice and still succeed then the likelihood of you giving full effort and improving is highly reduced. Being surrounded by better players produces natural competitiveness in competitive people. A good player will need to work to stay good.
Now that's just for individual skill development.
Learning the game is also better accomplished with players that can think, move the puck, execute a proper forecheck, cycle the puck etc... Playing with creative, well skilled players allows a good player to learn this type of play. A good player playing with lesser skilled, less creative players will have a more difficult time learning the finer points of the game. Also the speed and quickness needed to play at a higher level will be missing in practice situations. Most teams practice more then they play, so high speed quality ice time is reduced if a good player is practicing with lesser skilled team mates.
If you are in association where they cant even breakout properly, how will a player ever gain experience with a proper breakout. The same for a proper forecheck or neutral zone regroup.
Good players can become great players with proper coaching and good and great players around them.
Take a look at the D1 commitments this year. The vast majority are great players playing on great teams. It would seem statistically the best players played on a good hockey team. Great players coming from poor hockey associations is more the exception then the rule.
My kids spend the off season skating with higher skilled players then their association team mates. They are learning the game outside the association, but cannot execute the things they are learning in our association with the quality of players we have.
Therefore, I'd love to move them into an association with like skilled, like committed players and quality coaches. Why should the need to leave their friends in school just to play quality hockey? Every player should be free to find the most appropriate hockey they can. Forcing people to actually open enroll or move is asinine in my opinion. I completely understand why people would do it, but shocked that parents are forced to such an extreme just to find good hockey. MN hockey needs to start supporting the individual players and promote freedom in the sport of hockey. If an association sucks, why make potentially great hockey players suffer under incompetent and poorly run, unsuccessful programs?
/rant/
Our team made a great run in the district tournament. We needed to win one more game.Outoftowner wrote:I think it does matter. If you are a good player on a bad team, you will not be pushed to excel. For example; if you can give half effort in practice and still succeed then the likelihood of you giving full effort and improving is highly reduced. Being surrounded by better players produces natural competitiveness in competitive people. A good player will need to work to stay good.
Now that's just for individual skill development.
Learning the game is also better accomplished with players that can think, move the puck, execute a proper forecheck, cycle the puck etc... Playing with creative, well skilled players allows a good player to learn this type of play. A good player playing with lesser skilled, less creative players will have a more difficult time learning the finer points of the game. Also the speed and quickness needed to play at a higher level will be missing in practice situations. Most teams practice more then they play, so high speed quality ice time is reduced if a good player is practicing with lesser skilled team mates.
If you are in association where they cant even breakout properly, how will a player ever gain experience with a proper breakout. The same for a proper forecheck or neutral zone regroup.
Good players can become great players with proper coaching and good and great players around them.
Take a look at the D1 commitments this year. The vast majority are great players playing on great teams. It would seem statistically the best players played on a good hockey team. Great players coming from poor hockey associations is more the exception then the rule.
My kids spend the off season skating with higher skilled players then their association team mates. They are learning the game outside the association, but cannot execute the things they are learning in our association with the quality of players we have.
Therefore, I'd love to move them into an association with like skilled, like committed players and quality coaches. Why should the need to leave their friends in school just to play quality hockey? Every player should be free to find the most appropriate hockey they can. Forcing people to actually open enroll or move is asinine in my opinion. I completely understand why people would do it, but shocked that parents are forced to such an extreme just to find good hockey. MN hockey needs to start supporting the individual players and promote freedom in the sport of hockey. If an association sucks, why make potentially great hockey players suffer under incompetent and poorly run, unsuccessful programs?
/rant/
Irish wrote:Our team made a great run in the district tournament. We needed to win one more game.Outoftowner wrote:I think it does matter. If you are a good player on a bad team, you will not be pushed to excel. For example; if you can give half effort in practice and still succeed then the likelihood of you giving full effort and improving is highly reduced. Being surrounded by better players produces natural competitiveness in competitive people. A good player will need to work to stay good.
Now that's just for individual skill development.
Learning the game is also better accomplished with players that can think, move the puck, execute a proper forecheck, cycle the puck etc... Playing with creative, well skilled players allows a good player to learn this type of play. A good player playing with lesser skilled, less creative players will have a more difficult time learning the finer points of the game. Also the speed and quickness needed to play at a higher level will be missing in practice situations. Most teams practice more then they play, so high speed quality ice time is reduced if a good player is practicing with lesser skilled team mates.
If you are in association where they cant even breakout properly, how will a player ever gain experience with a proper breakout. The same for a proper forecheck or neutral zone regroup.
Good players can become great players with proper coaching and good and great players around them.
Take a look at the D1 commitments this year. The vast majority are great players playing on great teams. It would seem statistically the best players played on a good hockey team. Great players coming from poor hockey associations is more the exception then the rule.
My kids spend the off season skating with higher skilled players then their association team mates. They are learning the game outside the association, but cannot execute the things they are learning in our association with the quality of players we have.
Therefore, I'd love to move them into an association with like skilled, like committed players and quality coaches. Why should the need to leave their friends in school just to play quality hockey? Every player should be free to find the most appropriate hockey they can. Forcing people to actually open enroll or move is asinine in my opinion. I completely understand why people would do it, but shocked that parents are forced to such an extreme just to find good hockey. MN hockey needs to start supporting the individual players and promote freedom in the sport of hockey. If an association sucks, why make potentially great hockey players suffer under incompetent and poorly run, unsuccessful programs?
/rant/
The team we lost to had two really good players that just moved in this year. One of the two players was from our association.
You can imagine how happy our parents were to see this player move on to regions while our kids are getting ready for summer sports.
Keep in mind when people move their kids for selfish reasons it effects a lot of people.
What's interesting about this player that moved from our association is the fact that he's a cancer for their team. Great player! Doesn't want to pass or play as a team. He was sat on multiple occasions, but is very well coached by his dad to skate the puck and score goals. How sad is it that a parent has to tell his kid to be a puck hog and not pass. How selfish is that? I see it all the time. The dad or mom will try to fit in, but in most cases they're watching the game alone giving hand signals or coaching behind the glass. I thought this would all go away in Peewee's but it's bad as ever. I give the coaches the green light to suspend any player that doesn't want to listen.[/quot
Thats pretty cowardly calling out a 12 year old and his familly, Irish its sour grapes for you and yourr CC team. Enjoy your your summer, your just a sour guy and pretty much gutless . You know the unspoken rules , maybe you didn`t name him but you might as well. Why don`t you tell us who you are and then we could respect your point of view, but to sit behind a computer and hide is shameful. Your pathetic.
