Short Bench

[JSR]

how do you confront and stop coaches who insist on using short benches

So after 2 pages of discussions I think warmskins intent is finally revealed:

"How do I prevent the coaches from short benching li'l warmskin?"

You could see that coming. Which team does he play for? OMG PWAA or the EP BAA?

hockeytweet, what about the coach who short benched 10 players in the first period, skating only 5 players for 12 of the 15 minute FIRST PERIOD, the other 10 players got a combined 3 minutes in the first..... Your telling me 10 players did something worth getting benched for, for that length of time in the first period of an otherwise meaningless November game???... for the record I spoke to one of the players and asked what happened, his response was "The coach didn't tell us why we sat, we assume it's because he didn't think we could win if we played" ..... sorry guys I personally tell my son to talk to his coach if he wants to get better and if he wants to earn more playing time, I coach and I know how I like things approached and I know how th ekids should approach them but there are SOME coaches that frankly just shouldn't be allowed on a bench and you honestly cannot deal with those coaches in a reasonable manner usually, it just doesn't work, they need to be removed from the bench.... I don't think coaches that extreme are common but they are out there never the less

[bestpopcorn]

Roll em untill mid-late Jan. Then shorten "as needed". PP/SH/EN/Last 2min. of game/period. Pee-wees on up, not squirts.

I like this strategy.... I mean seriously, what are you really gaining by shorting a bench in November????

Shorten as needed for what? In MN youth every league game counts whether played in November or January.

Not a fan of short benches, just don't understand this argument.

For most teams only about 1/3 of the games they play are league games. I have heard of coaches that play more to win in these games. How about that idea?

[warmskin]

Certainly coaches need to be good communicators to their players and parents but this is not always the case. I have seen reduced playing time retribution to a player because parents asked about a coaching style involving their child. There is sometimes a fine line of communicating to coaches.
I wish some coaches would step back and take a deep breath and realize this is only youth hockey.

[greybeard58]

Coaches are also teachers. You teach and work on the skills in practice and games are the test and also a good way to challenge a player. Hockey is a game of mistakes and it is hard to correct the mistakes a player needs corrected if the player rarely sees the ice.

On the article from Mn Hockey considering who wrote it I find the contents amusing, to bad he did not coach like he preaches.

[gorilla1]

Best,

The league games in D6 this year at the AA level really don't mean anything more than other games. D6 has decided to do away with district playoffs at the AA level so there is no more significance to these games as the others. The FPP means virtually nothing to most teams at this level as well. Sometimes you really have to wonder who thinks these things up.

[SCBlueLiner]

Certainly coaches need to be good communicators to their players and parents but this is not always the case. I have seen reduced playing time retribution to a player because parents asked about a coaching style involving their child. There is sometimes a fine line of communicating to coaches.
I wish some coaches would step back and take a deep breath and realize this is only youth hockey.

I wish most parents would step back and take a deep breath and realize this is only youth hockey.

[Whopper2]

right. everyone gets equal time .dont care about winning no need to pratice. dont want to hurt any feelings.just go out have fun it doesnt matter its only youth hockey.then be suprised when you get to highschool and you dont make the team and your parents think you got screwed

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

I definitely see both sides of this argument. The truth is every coach for every team has a different philosophy, and it will surely vary year to year. Hopefully you know something going in.
I will mention, however, that many associations have written policies included in the by-laws which specifically address and prohibit short benching. The most recent board I was on said equal playing time all levels except in last 3 minutes or OT.

[JSR]

right. everyone gets equal time .dont care about winning no need to pratice. dont want to hurt any feelings.just go out have fun it doesnt matter its only youth hockey.then be suprised when you get to highschool and you dont make the team and your parents think you got screwed

Always has to be someone who takes things to a ridiculous extreme.... I still haven't gotten an answer to my question above.... You want to be ridiculous about one hypothetical extreme but what about the REAL LIFE exact scenario I quoted above, again things don't have to be exactly equal but they should be fair and they should have definitive reasoning and communication behind them, none of which occurred above... sometimes certain coaches don't belong coaching either.....

[bestpopcorn]

right. everyone gets equal time .dont care about winning no need to pratice. dont want to hurt any feelings.just go out have fun it doesnt matter its only youth hockey.then be suprised when you get to highschool and you dont make the team and your parents think you got screwed

Always has to be someone who takes things to a ridiculous extreme.... I still haven't gotten an answer to my question above.... You want to be ridiculous about one hypothetical extreme but what about the REAL LIFE exact scenario I quoted above, again things don't have to be exactly equal but they should be fair and they should have definitive reasoning and communication behind them, none of which occurred above... sometimes certain coaches don't belong coaching either.....

Agree. If you think the coach shouldn't drop F bombs you obviously don't want to keep score. No nuance at all.

[Tigers33]

I apologize if this was already mentioned. I am being lazy and didn't want to read the entire thread. My thoughts are squirts/U10 and all A/B/C hockey should be fair and equal. However at the Bantam AA/u14 and peewee AA/u12 things might start to change a little, nothing crazy though cause it is still about development.

Two comments:
1 - does the kid with the bad attitude, ad bad work ethic get to always play far too at those higher levels cause we all know there is 1-3 on each team. So that has to come into play. Right?
2 - AAA hockey is what has brought us to this fair play question. Think of what AAA is like and then bring that to the association season. All about winning at AAA. Right?

[57special]

It's not all about winning at the AAA level. It's a business. If a player doesn't get any playing time for a certain team, he won't re-up the next year, and the AAA team will be out cash.


It's simple, guys. You pick a player, you play him. Otherwise you refund part of his $$. Exceptions can be made for bad behaviour (at all levels), which can include profanity, poor sportsmanship, stealing, insolence, excessive penalties,etc.

I can also see exceptions being made at the higher levels during State playoffs in the last few minutes or during PK or PP. Having said that, here's a story I heard this summer.

Last year's Orono PWA coach made it to the finals, beating favored Edina, amongst others. He didn't shorten his bench, even during PP/PK and OT.
He lost in OT during the finals against Minneapolis, I believe? Some parents in the Association were unhappy with his coaching in that game because he refused to shorten his bench near the end of regulation or in OT.

To me, he's a hero.

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

[JSR]

It's not all about winning at the AAA level. It's a business. If a player doesn't get any playing time for a certain team, he won't re-up the next year, and the AAA team will be out cash.


It's simple, guys. You pick a player, you play him. Otherwise you refund part of his $$. Exceptions can be made for bad behaviour (at all levels), which can include profanity, poor sportsmanship, stealing, insolence, excessive penalties,etc.

I can also see exceptions being made at the higher levels during State playoffs in the last few minutes or during PK or PP. Having said that, here's a story I heard this summer.

Last year's Orono PWA coach made it to the finals, beating favored Edina, amongst others. He didn't shorten his bench, even during PP/PK and OT.
He lost in OT during the finals against Minneapolis, I believe? Some parents in the Association were unhappy with his coaching in that game because he refused to shorten his bench near the end of regulation or in OT.

To me, he's a hero.

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Nice.... Like I said, a really good coach knows how to pick his team and knows how to make sure everyone is able to be involved without raising any major problems with parents.... when it's so overt that you notice it when it's not even your kid, to me it's a telling sign that something is wrong

also, my oldest plays bantam minor Tier 1 AAA in Illinois. I'm not saying there is exact equal playing time but the playing time seems to be pretty fair and the coach uses creativity to keep the playing time as level as possible. Not everyone gets a PP in certain games but they might get ecxtra PK work or 5on5 work if they don't get PP time or he gets them an extra shift or two in teh next game if he feels they got a little shorted in the previous game. They are highly about developing withint he team. I do know of plenty of AAA teams who are all about winning and short the bench big time but it is not all of them, I don't think it's even a majority

[Froggy Richards]

It's not all about winning at the AAA level. It's a business. If a player doesn't get any playing time for a certain team, he won't re-up the next year, and the AAA team will be out cash.


It's simple, guys. You pick a player, you play him. Otherwise you refund part of his $$. Exceptions can be made for bad behaviour (at all levels), which can include profanity, poor sportsmanship, stealing, insolence, excessive penalties,etc.

I can also see exceptions being made at the higher levels during State playoffs in the last few minutes or during PK or PP. Having said that, here's a story I heard this summer.

Last year's Orono PWA coach made it to the finals, beating favored Edina, amongst others. He didn't shorten his bench, even during PP/PK and OT.
He lost in OT during the finals against Minneapolis, I believe? Some parents in the Association were unhappy with his coaching in that game because he refused to shorten his bench near the end of regulation or in OT.

To me, he's a hero.

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Okay, Devil's Advocate here..... Say he did shorten his bench at the end of regulation and/or overtime and they won the State Championship. How many of the kids who missed a shift or two would be unhappy with that outcome?

[/quote] The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?[/quote]
Doesn't your story contradict this statement? He didn't win.

[JSR]

It's not all about winning at the AAA level. It's a business. If a player doesn't get any playing time for a certain team, he won't re-up the next year, and the AAA team will be out cash.


It's simple, guys. You pick a player, you play him. Otherwise you refund part of his $$. Exceptions can be made for bad behaviour (at all levels), which can include profanity, poor sportsmanship, stealing, insolence, excessive penalties,etc.

I can also see exceptions being made at the higher levels during State playoffs in the last few minutes or during PK or PP. Having said that, here's a story I heard this summer.

Last year's Orono PWA coach made it to the finals, beating favored Edina, amongst others. He didn't shorten his bench, even during PP/PK and OT.
He lost in OT during the finals against Minneapolis, I believe? Some parents in the Association were unhappy with his coaching in that game because he refused to shorten his bench near the end of regulation or in OT.

To me, he's a hero.

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Okay, Devil's Advocate here..... Say he did shorten his bench at the end of regulation and/or overtime and they won the State Championship. How many of the kids who missed a shift or two would be unhappy with that outcome?

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?[/quote]
Doesn't your story contradict this statement? He didn't win.[/quote]

My son's team won a state championship when he was a squirt (Yes we have state titles as squirts here....). Our bench took a bench minor for too many men toward the end of the game with about a minute left. The coach put the "weakest" skater in the box to serve the bench minor (he was one of three kids who contributed to the bench minor mind you) and he called time out for a 60 second rest so that he could put the best four players on the ice for the final minute to help try and preserve the win. It is important to know there had been ZERO short shifting or bench shortening to that point, not during that game, not during the entire 40 game season, just the final 63 seconds of the state championship game (the associations first, and to date, only state title) that is it, literally.... The team won, and most were super excited, but you'd have thought they lost the way the parent of the player who got put in the box acted (why was it my boy, etc... etc....) and another player was crying because he didn't get his last shift of the game..... So yea, they care about playing not winning when they are young

[Froggy Richards]

It's not all about winning at the AAA level. It's a business. If a player doesn't get any playing time for a certain team, he won't re-up the next year, and the AAA team will be out cash.


It's simple, guys. You pick a player, you play him. Otherwise you refund part of his $$. Exceptions can be made for bad behaviour (at all levels), which can include profanity, poor sportsmanship, stealing, insolence, excessive penalties,etc.

I can also see exceptions being made at the higher levels during State playoffs in the last few minutes or during PK or PP. Having said that, here's a story I heard this summer.

Last year's Orono PWA coach made it to the finals, beating favored Edina, amongst others. He didn't shorten his bench, even during PP/PK and OT.
He lost in OT during the finals against Minneapolis, I believe? Some parents in the Association were unhappy with his coaching in that game because he refused to shorten his bench near the end of regulation or in OT.

To me, he's a hero.

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Okay, Devil's Advocate here..... Say he did shorten his bench at the end of regulation and/or overtime and they won the State Championship. How many of the kids who missed a shift or two would be unhappy with that outcome?

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Doesn't your story contradict this statement? He didn't win.[/quote]

My son's team won a state championship when he was a squirt (Yes we have state titles as squirts here....). Our bench took a bench minor for too many men toward the end of the game with about a minute left. The coach put the "weakest" skater in the box to serve the bench minor (he was one of three kids who contributed to the bench minor mind you) and he called time out for a 60 second rest so that he could put the best four players on the ice for the final minute to help try and preserve the win. It is important to know there had been ZERO short shifting or bench shortening to that point, not during that game, not during the entire 40 game season, just the final 63 seconds of the state championship game (the associations first, and to date, only state title) that is it, literally.... The team won, and most were super excited, but you'd have thought they lost the way the parent of the player who got put in the box acted (why was it my boy, etc... etc....) and another player was crying because he didn't get his last shift of the game..... So yea, they care about playing not winning when they are young[/quote]

Your example is about Squirts though. So far nobody has disputed that they should play equally all the time. Most of the conversation here is on PW and Bantam A/AA.

But it would be interesting to ask that kid today who was crying if he would trade the State Championship for that final shift that he missed.

[JSR]

Okay, Devil's Advocate here..... Say he did shorten his bench at the end of regulation and/or overtime and they won the State Championship. How many of the kids who missed a shift or two would be unhappy with that outcome?

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Doesn't your story contradict this statement? He didn't win.

My son's team won a state championship when he was a squirt (Yes we have state titles as squirts here....). Our bench took a bench minor for too many men toward the end of the game with about a minute left. The coach put the "weakest" skater in the box to serve the bench minor (he was one of three kids who contributed to the bench minor mind you) and he called time out for a 60 second rest so that he could put the best four players on the ice for the final minute to help try and preserve the win. It is important to know there had been ZERO short shifting or bench shortening to that point, not during that game, not during the entire 40 game season, just the final 63 seconds of the state championship game (the associations first, and to date, only state title) that is it, literally.... The team won, and most were super excited, but you'd have thought they lost the way the parent of the player who got put in the box acted (why was it my boy, etc... etc....) and another player was crying because he didn't get his last shift of the game..... So yea, they care about playing not winning when they are young[/quote]

Your example is about Squirts though. So far nobody has disputed that they should play equally all the time. Most of the conversation here is on PW and Bantam A/AA.

But it would be interesting to ask that kid today who was crying if he would trade the State Championship for that final shift that he missed.[/quote]

Fair enough.... but again what about my siutation above where 10 kids played 3 minutes of a 15 minute period in the first period.... there was no title on the line and it was Pee Wee's..... (p.s. that team still lost that game 8-4..... as a side note)... no one seems to want to touch that one???

[@hockeytweet]

I stand beside my original response--at the PWAA/BAA level, I think it is a matter of how much sitting occurs, and the game circumstance.

In D3, where I see a lot of hockey, there are few teams that go to the absurd level of benching, that JSR described (with 10 players being shorted) in my 6-7 years of watching various teams. JSR-what you describe in wrong. But it's so obviously wrong too. Several posts have better examples of "gray area". That is good discussion.

I also see a lot of crossover D3/D6 games, and you just don't see the short benching in the 1st or 2nd period at the BAA level. I'm sorry you just don't.

But you will see sitting in the 3rd period of tight games, PP/PK, and in tournaments.

And parents will get angry when it happens, and when it doesn't happen. With a team of 15-17 parents, you will never find 100% unity

[JSR]

I stand beside my original response--at the PWAA/BAA level, I think it is a matter of how much sitting occurs, and the game circumstance.

In D3, where I see a lot of hockey, there are few teams that go to the absurd level of benching, that JSR described (with 10 players being shorted) in my 6-7 years of watching various teams. JSR-what you describe in wrong. But it's so obviously wrong too. Several posts have better examples of "gray area". That is good discussion.

I also see a lot of crossover D3/D6 games, and you just don't see the short benching in the 1st or 2nd period at the BAA level. I'm sorry you just don't.

But you will see sitting in the 3rd period of tight games, PP/PK, and in tournaments.

And parents will get angry when it happens, and when it doesn't happen. With a team of 15-17 parents, you will never find 100% unity

I am ok with using it situationally in certain games as long as it doesn't get out of hand and as long as the coach some how tries to "right it" with future games or future shifts in less detrimental situations so that it mostly washes out by seasons end. I have NEVER been unhappy with a coach who does not utilize it as a strategy, win or lose. The kids are there and if their attitude is good and there is no discipline problem they are working hard and should get their ice time too. I am with someone above who said if you need to short the bench that much then maybe your team shouldn't have that many skaters on it. Why have 15 if your only using 12....... Myabe it creates room for another full team if you trickle it down to all teams, depending on how large your association is. .... side note on this, super proud of our association, we had 33 squirts this year and they opted for THREE teams. 10 skaters and a goalie for each squirt team. TOns of playing time, tons of fun, less "diversity" from top kid to bottom kid, it's been an absolute blast and the kids are really developing across the board. So sad to me when I see places that opt for two teams with those numbers

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

It's not all about winning at the AAA level. It's a business. If a player doesn't get any playing time for a certain team, he won't re-up the next year, and the AAA team will be out cash.


It's simple, guys. You pick a player, you play him. Otherwise you refund part of his $$. Exceptions can be made for bad behaviour (at all levels), which can include profanity, poor sportsmanship, stealing, insolence, excessive penalties,etc.

I can also see exceptions being made at the higher levels during State playoffs in the last few minutes or during PK or PP. Having said that, here's a story I heard this summer.

Last year's Orono PWA coach made it to the finals, beating favored Edina, amongst others. He didn't shorten his bench, even during PP/PK and OT.
He lost in OT during the finals against Minneapolis, I believe? Some parents in the Association were unhappy with his coaching in that game because he refused to shorten his bench near the end of regulation or in OT.

To me, he's a hero.

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Okay, Devil's Advocate here..... Say he did shorten his bench at the end of regulation and/or overtime and they won the State Championship. How many of the kids who missed a shift or two would be unhappy with that outcome?

The name of this "loser"? Rob McClanahan(sp?). Think he might know a thing or two about hockey, and what it takes to win?

Doesn't your story contradict this statement? He didn't win.[/quote]

My son's team won a state championship when he was a squirt (Yes we have state titles as squirts here....). Our bench took a bench minor for too many men toward the end of the game with about a minute left. The coach put the "weakest" skater in the box to serve the bench minor (he was one of three kids who contributed to the bench minor mind you) and he called time out for a 60 second rest so that he could put the best four players on the ice for the final minute to help try and preserve the win. It is important to know there had been ZERO short shifting or bench shortening to that point, not during that game, not during the entire 40 game season, just the final 63 seconds of the state championship game (the associations first, and to date, only state title) that is it, literally.... The team won, and most were super excited, but you'd have thought they lost the way the parent of the player who got put in the box acted (why was it my boy, etc... etc....) and another player was crying because he didn't get his last shift of the game..... So yea, they care about playing not winning when they are young[/quote]



I agree in general with where most of this post has agreed. No short benches unless your backs against the wall in a big game.
HOWEVER, it's never too early to teach the concept of team first. Do I want my kid sat in the last minute of a championship? Of course not. But I hope he knows why he's sitting. Both so that it motivates him to want to work to be that go to player in the last minute. But also so he recognizes that the coach has to think about the team as a whole. All season all game? No. But that's not what we are talking about.
When crappy scorekeepers and refs don't get the numbers right and your kid doesn't get credit for his goal or assist, do you run down to amend the record? When my kid hears someone else's name announced for his goal or gets a penalty that wasn't his, sucks but it is what it is. I tell him every time as long as your TEAM got credit, all good. (This happens WAY more than you'd think. Your kid ever get credit for a goal or called on a penalty incorrectly? Maybe when he wasn't even on the ice?)
If my kid was crying about not playing the last shift after we won the state title.... I think I would leave the rink and not return.
I thank God every season I'm not the coach.

[hocmom]

"IF you pick the player, you play him"

I agree.

In Southern MN there are many towns that field only 1 bantam team. No one picks the team, it just is.

We have had several players that have decided to start as bantams, joining our A team.

I don't think anyone would disagree that there are times when this new kid shouldn't be tossed on the ice, except maybe his mom.

[JSR]

In D3, where I see a lot of hockey, there are few teams that go to the absurd level of benching, that JSR described (with 10 players being shorted) in my 6-7 years of watching various teams. JSR-what you describe in wrong. But it's so obviously wrong too. Several posts have better examples of "gray area". That is good discussion

.

LOL.... obvious to everyone except that coach. He still coaches and he still maintains he did nothing wrong and he'd do it again.....

[SCBlueLiner]

"IF you pick the player, you play him"

I agree.

In Southern MN there are many towns that field only 1 bantam team. No one picks the team, it just is.

We have had several players that have decided to start as bantams, joining our A team.

I don't think anyone would disagree that there are times when this new kid shouldn't be tossed on the ice, except maybe his mom.

I was waiting for this scenario to show up. Totally agree with hocmom. How fair is it to those kids who have been working for 8-9 years on their hockey abilities only to have a 1st year kid show up in BANTAMS, or even PEE WEES and expect equal time? In this situation, and I've dealt with it, equal time is out the window and we begin the discussion about balancing the team's needs with the individual's. The 1st year kid didn't earn his way onto the team, the coach didn't choose him (actually the coach has no choice), the player is just there.

[Ugottobekiddingme]

This topic deserves discussion and direction but the first question is: What is a short bench? This doesn't exist in many other sporting activities because the individual has to perform within his/her role as it relates to the position played. As a coach, outside of hockey, I can rotate multiple players within positions that have a better outcome for the "team". The "short bench" typically attached to the hockey game strategy usually consist of players designated as "the tag alongs", family of players, or coaches kid just happy to be on that AA/A team without any real relevance to team production. Many will protect any justification or relevance of their placement to protect the team and their ultimate mission. Many will accept the coaches kid or chosen few getting unlimited time shifts to be allowed on the team. This is not youth hockey development at any level or the ability of coaches to develop youth to understand future life lessons...its obstruction of sporting growth for children. The short bench needs to be explained more so everyone understands its meaning within hockey.

[hockeygoof1]

IMHO, this game is not about the kids. 90 percent of it is the fathers reliving their underachieving youth. Not all fathers, but the vast majority. I saw someone wrote down that if a kid isn't seeing enough playing time, to ask to be moved down a level. That made me laugh. Most fathers would never permit that. Somehow this game has been taken away from the kids. It's not even about them anymore. It's purely about the dads. We're not talking about high school hockey. We're talking about association hockey. Yes, at the upper levels with five minutes to go in a game down by one or two goals, sure, try to win. When you're short shifting in the first period, the coach should be flogged. That is flat out wrong. I'd also be willing to bet that in most cases, not all, the coach's kid is the benefactor of the short shifting or the long shifts. I'm not talking about summer "AAA" hockey, I'm talking association hockey. Hey, you join a summer team, all bets are off. They can do whatever they want. That's private business. Association is not. Association is supposed to be for the community.

I've seen enough crap in this sport that makes me almost sick to my stomach. It's all in the name of winning, even if the team sucks. Coaches have way too much control over some of the teams and answer to no one.

Sports have come a long way since I was a kid. Notice I didn't say it was good, it's just different. If I had to do it over again, I don't believe I'd let my kids play hockey. There are some great people involved in the sport. I've met some wonderful people and coaches, but for some reason when the "hockey switch" gets turned on, they go berzerk. I do put 90 percent of the blame on fathers trying to grab the "ring" using their kid. I've seen long friendships between grown men end because of this game. One is the coach and isn't playing the other kid enough, or something similar.

When I was younger (I'm not that old) we played sports that went with the season. Maybe, if you were one of the lucky ones, you went to a hockey camp in the summer. But now it's hockey, hockey, hockey. I think in the long run it will have the reverse effect and people will start moving away from it. Things tend to go in cycles. About 6-10 years ago, when summer hockey really started taking off, everyone wanted to join. Now there's been so much bad talk about it, it will turn the other way. I wish Minnesota would open up their rules. If your kid is truly a gifted kid, there ought to be some type of league your kid can play in during the winter to play with other elite kids. You try out, you make the team. It's about development and winning. A league that is bigger than the teams at MN Made. Then, if the coaches want to sit kids in the first period in place of their son or their neighbor's son, more power to them. If your kid is elite, you go play in this league and all bets are off and I'll shut up. The association kids can be left to play hockey on a somewhat equal footing.

Until then, it's association hockey where my $1,500 is just as good as your $1,500, and the last time I checked, no association team in Minnesota has appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated.

There, now it's time for the 90 percent to light me up. Flame on.