The Largest Prep Hockey Message Board Community on the Web
https://www.ushsho.com/forums/
Hear, hear!icnet01 wrote:here hereroyals dad wrote: I think what you see as a step forward would be a big step back. As has been said many times before the grass is not greener on the other side of the border. If MM is such a better product why is it so hard to just turn your back on Minn Hockey and go there?
HM87 You're losing focus on the issue with emotion. One side of the issue you have associations who have participants who are missing practices and games because they belong to another LEAGUE (key word). It's very diffucult to run a successful team when kids aren't showing up for practices and in some cases games, and I argue it's not fair to the other kids who aren't playing in two leagues. The other side of the issue deals with, according to the lawsuit, revenue lost due to a breach of antitrust codes. I did not personally say MM sued because of MONEY, MM said that when they filed suit. When you say it's about the kids and you blame D6, you have to step back and think. D6 put in a rule to help other KIDS affected by others choosing to play both and miss team practices, while MM is, by their own words, choosing lost revenue as the most important principle in bringing the lawsuit. If you look at this from the angle of just let the kids play, then you must side on D6's arguement, because it was done with the kids and families in mind and not about MONEY. In the end it will come down to what it was all about at the beginning...Make a "Choice", play in one league or the other.HockeyMom87 wrote:We could've avoided this all by not having a rule. Why does District 6 care if the kids are doing something else? Judging from the comments - you all think this is about association hockey vs. MM. What an unfortunate circumstance. The point is Hewitt shouldn't even tried to legislate his personal views this way. But - I imagine all you people have been doing this so long that this doesn't seem weird to you. It seems very weird to me. Even if there is insurance (and the insurance companies are nuts if they don't put limits on directors going off half-cocked on their own - no wonder premiums are so high - thank you gentlemen), the point is that this is directing everyone's attention away from children and hockey (and children's love of hockey) and into litigation. Win or lose - district 6 has FAILED already. You've missed the point. District 6 could've prevented this by passing a rule saying that you cannot have more than 3 unexcused absenses. MM can avoid the rule by creating a religious-based league and calling it a church activity. Schools cannot be associated with groups that discriminate on religious bases and I'm guessing, MN Hockey would back down as soon as they lost the ability to control high school hockey. Maybe time to form a brand new league to deal with hockey in the State of MN. I would've found a more creative way around the rule. The point is some kids need other CHOICES - MM provides that. The two could be mutually compatible if we didn't have male egos involved. The two together could've helped all kids and fostered MN as the hockey state. Instead - we get a control pissing match. All MN Hockey officials should retire. Way too old and way too stuck in their thinking for creative resolutions if this is the type of rule they support. It is so offensive on a variety of levels - anti-trust is just the legally most sustainable grounds. I am appalled and MN Hockey has lost a lot of my respect. Their position at MN Hockey isn't to put forth their personal views. They have a fiduciary duty to hockey - and they blew it over their jealously over MM, apparent hatred of BM, closed-mindedness that theirs is the only correct way, and the assumption that they have to control everyone to "win." The emotions run so high on this that everyone gets off point. Should've had a mediator long ago.You are all missing the point.
mkpfb wrote:You tell me where my kid will get better training and I will sign them up tomorrow.
Please elaborate. Sounds like sour grapes. Where's your home association? Most if not all associations in MN are growing in numbers.hockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. You are absolutely correct that some of the names on your list have a great track record. It's not a secret that MM trains kids through the PeeWee level and then they will typically move on to other elite teams and or their associations. I guess that I shouldn't assume that everyone understands the MM business model like you do. When talking Mite - PeeWee level training A-C it doesn't get better then MM right now and I don't see it changing anytime in the near future. I will argue with anyone that the 98 & 99 Boys Machine teams are the best AAA teams in MN at their level and top 5 in the country. Remember that the majority of the players on both teams have trained for at least 3-4 years at MM together and that is why they are as good as they are. The same will go for the other Machine teams behind them. I will not argue that the Blades right now have the longest history of producing D1 players because they have been around longer..Today the Machine are better and the 99 Blades avoid the Machine at all cost
Association hockey as a whole in MN is declining and in my home association we are losing kids at a rapid pace. Association hockey is now secondary to AAA hockey and I believe that it will continue to move that way. D6 is not helping things.
Derek Forbert 1st roundhockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. You are absolutely correct that some of the names on your list have a great track record. It's not a secret that MM trains kids through the PeeWee level and then they will typically move on to other elite teams and or their associations. I guess that I shouldn't assume that everyone understands the MM business model like you do. When talking Mite - PeeWee level training A-C it doesn't get better then MM right now and I don't see it changing anytime in the near future. I will argue with anyone that the 98 & 99 Boys Machine teams are the best AAA teams in MN at their level and top 5 in the country. Remember that the majority of the players on both teams have trained for at least 3-4 years at MM together and that is why they are as good as they are. The same will go for the other Machine teams behind them. I will not argue that the Blades right now have the longest history of producing D1 players because they have been around longer. Today the Machine are better and the 99 Blades avoid the Machine at all cost.
Association hockey as a whole in MN is declining and in my home association we are losing kids at a rapid pace. Association hockey is now secondary to AAA hockey and I believe that it will continue to move that way. D6 is not helping things.
Absolutely. Great hockey players are being developed all over the state. Spending your $ at MM is no guarantee that your kid will go anywhere let alone the NHL.MrBoDangles wrote:Derek Forbert 1st roundhockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. You are absolutely correct that some of the names on your list have a great track record. It's not a secret that MM trains kids through the PeeWee level and then they will typically move on to other elite teams and or their associations. I guess that I shouldn't assume that everyone understands the MM business model like you do. When talking Mite - PeeWee level training A-C it doesn't get better then MM right now and I don't see it changing anytime in the near future. I will argue with anyone that the 98 & 99 Boys Machine teams are the best AAA teams in MN at their level and top 5 in the country. Remember that the majority of the players on both teams have trained for at least 3-4 years at MM together and that is why they are as good as they are. The same will go for the other Machine teams behind them. I will not argue that the Blades right now have the longest history of producing D1 players because they have been around longer. Today the Machine are better and the 99 Blades avoid the Machine at all cost.
Association hockey as a whole in MN is declining and in my home association we are losing kids at a rapid pace. Association hockey is now secondary to AAA hockey and I believe that it will continue to move that way. D6 is not helping things.
Nick Bjugstad 1st round
Tyler Pitlick 1st pick of the 2nd round
Brock Nelson 1st round
Mark Alt 1st round
How did all of the top NHL draft picks do it not going to the "Made". Strange how all of these boys were raised north of Mpls/St. Paul..???
You might want to stop drinking the Jimmy Jones........
Boy, you must have hit the kool-aid hard before writing this one. Not to get off topic, but 98 and 99 Machine teams best in the state and top 5 in the country? To put that in perspective, what "Real" tourney did the 99's win this year? The only tourney worth the entrance fee was Chicago and what happened when you faced top quality teams throughout the US? Yes, you were driving home on Sunday and not playing. When a parent starts exclaiming their kids team as being the best in MN and top team in the nation red flags go way up and it's time for that parent to step back and take a reality check...HR87 this is your time to step back and quickly take an antidote for the orange and now the black kool-aid.hockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. You are absolutely correct that some of the names on your list have a great track record. It's not a secret that MM trains kids through the PeeWee level and then they will typically move on to other elite teams and or their associations. I guess that I shouldn't assume that everyone understands the MM business model like you do. When talking Mite - PeeWee level training A-C it doesn't get better then MM right now and I don't see it changing anytime in the near future. I will argue with anyone that the 98 & 99 Boys Machine teams are the best AAA teams in MN at their level and top 5 in the country. Remember that the majority of the players on both teams have trained for at least 3-4 years at MM together and that is why they are as good as they are. The same will go for the other Machine teams behind them. I will not argue that the Blades right now have the longest history of producing D1 players because they have been around longer. Today the Machine are better and the 99 Blades avoid the Machine at all cost.
Association hockey as a whole in MN is declining and in my home association we are losing kids at a rapid pace. Association hockey is now secondary to AAA hockey and I believe that it will continue to move that way. D6 is not helping things.
HockeyDad41 wrote:Absolutely. Great hockey players are being developed all over the state. Spending your $ at MM is no guarantee that your kid will go anywhere let alone the NHL.MrBoDangles wrote:Derek Forbert 1st roundhockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. You are absolutely correct that some of the names on your list have a great track record. It's not a secret that MM trains kids through the PeeWee level and then they will typically move on to other elite teams and or their associations. I guess that I shouldn't assume that everyone understands the MM business model like you do. When talking Mite - PeeWee level training A-C it doesn't get better then MM right now and I don't see it changing anytime in the near future. I will argue with anyone that the 98 & 99 Boys Machine teams are the best AAA teams in MN at their level and top 5 in the country. Remember that the majority of the players on both teams have trained for at least 3-4 years at MM together and that is why they are as good as they are. The same will go for the other Machine teams behind them. I will not argue that the Blades right now have the longest history of producing D1 players because they have been around longer. Today the Machine are better and the 99 Blades avoid the Machine at all cost.
Association hockey as a whole in MN is declining and in my home association we are losing kids at a rapid pace. Association hockey is now secondary to AAA hockey and I believe that it will continue to move that way. D6 is not helping things.
Nick Bjugstad 1st round
Tyler Pitlick 1st pick of the 2nd round
Brock Nelson 1st round
Mark Alt 1st round
How did all of the top NHL draft picks do it not going to the "Made". Strange how all of these boys were raised north of Mpls/St. Paul..???
You might want to stop drinking the Jimmy Jones........
In the time that my son has been skating at Minnesota Made for Choice League and summer hockey, I don't think I have ever met anyone who expected that their kid would become some kind of superstar or be guaranteed a D1 scholarship just because they were writing a check to Bernie.
Most were like me in that we were looking for a higher level of skating development for our kid than our association could provide. Most also had their kids skating in both association and choice with no real issues. I can't speak for all of the teams, but on ours if you missed a practice or game no one said anything. Also, like me, most parents were looking forward to going back to their association for their kid's squirt season.
This D6 rule is much ado about nothing. The only kids that are going to fall in this rule pool are 8 teams worth of squirt skaters. Of those I bet less than 3 per team would even attempt doing both. Only one person I have spoken with has said they might do both.
.[/quote]To have a lawsuit over this is dumb
Now I've heard everything. HD41 calling BM dumb. Maybe he's starting to see the light like most people eventually do.
High Off The Glass wrote:MM like any dynamic organization of its kind can't really be labeled the way people here try to. There are too many good things going on to label it a disease and there are too many crappy things to label it perfect. Anyone who is reasonable would agree.HockeyDad41 wrote:Absolutely. Great hockey players are being developed all over the state. Spending your $ at MM is no guarantee that your kid will go anywhere let alone the NHL.MrBoDangles wrote: Derek Forbert 1st round
Nick Bjugstad 1st round
Tyler Pitlick 1st pick of the 2nd round
Brock Nelson 1st round
Mark Alt 1st round
How did all of the top NHL draft picks do it not going to the "Made". Strange how all of these boys were raised north of Mpls/St. Paul..???
You might want to stop drinking the Jimmy Jones........
In the time that my son has been skating at Minnesota Made for Choice League and summer hockey, I don't think I have ever met anyone who expected that their kid would become some kind of superstar or be guaranteed a D1 scholarship just because they were writing a check to Bernie.
Most were like me in that we were looking for a higher level of skating development for our kid than our association could provide. Most also had their kids skating in both association and choice with no real issues. I can't speak for all of the teams, but on ours if you missed a practice or game no one said anything. Also, like me, most parents were looking forward to going back to their association for their kid's squirt season.
This D6 rule is much ado about nothing. The only kids that are going to fall in this rule pool are 8 teams worth of squirt skaters. Of those I bet less than 3 per team would even attempt doing both. Only one person I have spoken with has said they might do both.
.[/quote]To have a lawsuit over this is dumb
Now I've heard everything. HD41 calling BM dumb. Maybe he's starting to see the light like most people eventually do.
As my kids get older and more involved, I recognize that I too have changed my opinions on some things and some of my beliefs have been challenged. I doubt that I am seeing the light as HOTG would view seeing the light, but I do see the cracks in the veneer at MM. It's not perfect, but it still has some pretty good stuff to offer.
So am I. All of those organization I mentioned have helped more players advance to D1 whether you count the last year, the last three years, the last five years or the last twenty years.hockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. .
Help me out here? Lets take the Machine 97's 98's and 99's...Tellme howmany do not play in D6 in the Off season (association hockey the way you talk) Most of the 97s were Edina? EP? and other d6 players were they not? do't know much about the 98s but in looking at their roster I see a few notable d6 names. 99's same holds true..I see Mishbash Gnske Reedy and verious other names that have not been strictly tutored by BM. So as everyone else states Take a step back from the cool aide and realize that the $$$ drives the bus over there. BTW I am still waitig on a predction list of kids that are going to make the leap from Choice league to Peewee A first year that was promised in the brochure.....hockeyrocks87 wrote:mkpfb - I'm talking today not 10 - 20 yrs ago. You are absolutely correct that some of the names on your list have a great track record. It's not a secret that MM trains kids through the PeeWee level and then they will typically move on to other elite teams and or their associations. I guess that I shouldn't assume that everyone understands the MM business model like you do. When talking Mite - PeeWee level training A-C it doesn't get better then MM right now and I don't see it changing anytime in the near future. I will argue with anyone that the 98 & 99 Boys Machine teams are the best AAA teams in MN at their level and top 5 in the country. Remember that the majority of the players on both teams have trained for at least 3-4 years at MM together and that is why they are as good as they are. The same will go for the other Machine teams behind them. I will not argue that the Blades right now have the longest history of producing D1 players because they have been around longer. Today the Machine are better and the 99 Blades avoid the Machine at all cost.
Association hockey as a whole in MN is declining and in my home association we are losing kids at a rapid pace. Association hockey is now secondary to AAA hockey and I believe that it will continue to move that way. D6 is not helping things.
I CAN confirm it, I just saw it on ESPN's Sportscenter.HockeyMom87 wrote:Just got a call from my radio guy who's monitoring this. Word on the street is that 3 Fire kids who thought they couldn't play and would have had to return to association hockey left Minnesota. 2 for Florida and one for some other state. This is akin to what D6 is doing. Anyone able to confirm this?
Great, now I got Michelle Tafoya pissed at me!HockeyMom87 wrote:OMG! It is clear this topic sparks controversy. I agree with HD41 - stupid to get into a lawsuit over this. Waste of money and time and energy that we all could devote to kids' hockey. However, I blame the district - not MM. District 6 could've avoided a lawsuit by having a rule that players who miss 3 or more times for unexcused absences are benched for a game or other period. Certainly deals with the issue of having your skaters miss for something else when their team relies on them. Certainly - the rule is clear. Certainly doesn't put unchecked power into the hands of some director. Accomplishes the goal just fine. District 6 wanted a pissing match - and from the comments here - my viewpoint on that is solidified. I keep hearing it is about the kids. Give me a break - not a chance. This was about District 6 getting upset that kids were skating at MM. MM had an idea to do things differently - in their opinion better - and give skaters an option. It is the American way and there isn't anything wrong with it. Love them or hate them (and it is apparent people have strong feelings), the decision rests with individual families.
BadgerBob - every comment you've made has been filled with hyperbole, name-calling, lack of factual basis, and unwarranted and baseless conclusions. There is a stereotype out there about hockey players - that being they aren't too bright. I'm guessing you were a hockey player. That being said - if you knew what I did for a living - you'd know that most of my professional career has been devoted to mens' rights, so your comment that I'm a manhater actually made me LOL, along with everyone in my office. Jilted and bitter? I can assure you I've never been jilted a day in my life and am currently happily married. These types of comments are what some men do when strong women disagree with them - just call them man-haters, jilted, etc. I don't work in radio - but I know a lot of men that do at a station that is devoted to sports in the metro area. When I ran your comments by them - their response is that you're trying to imply I'm fat and ugly so I hate men because they hate me - and they laughed at you. As one said - "He's obviously never seen you!" Let's stick to the issues instead of personal attacks.GreatOne99 - your comments about me and hockeyrocks87 are funny - if you read my comments, I didn't even agree with him. Did you actually read what I wrote?
It has been confirmed, O Town Clown is on the recruiting trail. Looks like Florida is going to become the new "State Of Hockey"........... I got a call from my network lady.HockeyMom87 wrote:Just got a call from my radio guy who's monitoring this. Word on the street is that 3 Fire kids who thought they couldn't play and would have had to return to association hockey left Minnesota. 2 for Florida and one for some other state. This is akin to what D6 is doing. Anyone able to confirm this?
Pics pleaseHockeyMom87 wrote:OMG! I As one said - "He's obviously never seen you!"
I guess I don't get it. If there are no "rosters" and it is not a "league," what is the big deal -- and consequently what will be the leg they stand on to "bust you" for some sort of violation if you play at MM? Also, how unfair would it be for MN Hockey to pass something and expect the people who are already signed up to just say -- uh, see ya to their $. Everyone knows BM doesn't give refunds for ANY reason. To me, MN Hockey has no right to tell these people that they have to make a choice retroactively.TriedThat2 wrote:I see from the agenda on MN Hockey's website; that the Board will be considering a multi league player participation rule. So apparrently, Hewitt is no longer thrown under the bus. With the approval of this new rule, I would assume, that MN Hockey is taking the same stance that Mr. Brad did.
I had heard that the rules committee was going to bring this forward, and looks as though they will.
And the radio sports guys didn't go postal on you that you need to go to a high end professional coach with your 9 year old for an additional 8 hours of ice a week over the 8 he already skates. Or that a 35 game 7 month season isn't enough for the boy? Not sure which station that could be KFAN and ESPN host would have ripped into you if you were a caller and WCCO hosts would have been napping at the time of your posts.HockeyMom87 wrote:OMG! It is clear this topic sparks controversy. I agree with HD41 - stupid to get into a lawsuit over this. Waste of money and time and energy that we all could devote to kids' hockey. However, I blame the district - not MM. District 6 could've avoided a lawsuit by having a rule that players who miss 3 or more times for unexcused absences are benched for a game or other period. Certainly deals with the issue of having your skaters miss for something else when their team relies on them. Certainly - the rule is clear. Certainly doesn't put unchecked power into the hands of some director. Accomplishes the goal just fine. District 6 wanted a pissing match - and from the comments here - my viewpoint on that is solidified. I keep hearing it is about the kids. Give me a break - not a chance. This was about District 6 getting upset that kids were skating at MM. MM had an idea to do things differently - in their opinion better - and give skaters an option. It is the American way and there isn't anything wrong with it. Love them or hate them (and it is apparent people have strong feelings), the decision rests with individual families.
GreatOne99 - your comments about me and hockeyrocks87 are funny - if you read my comments, I didn't even agree with him. Did you actually read what I wrote?
BadgerBob - every comment you've made has been filled with hyperbole, name-calling, lack of factual basis, and unwarranted and baseless conclusions. There is a stereotype out there about hockey players - that being they aren't too bright. I'm guessing you were a hockey player. That being said - if you knew what I did for a living - you'd know that most of my professional career has been devoted to mens' rights, so your comment that I'm a manhater actually made me LOL, along with everyone in my office. Jilted and bitter? I can assure you I've never been jilted a day in my life and am currently happily married. These types of comments are what some men do when strong women disagree with them - just call them man-haters, jilted, etc. I don't work in radio - but I know a lot of men that do at a station that is devoted to sports in the metro area. When I ran your comments by them - their response is that you're trying to imply I'm fat and ugly so I hate men because they hate me - and they laughed at you. As one said - "He's obviously never seen you!" Let's stick to the issues instead of personal attacks.
