High end professional coach? Are we talking about the same guy here? He played JV hockey and learned to coach inbetween fares at the taxi stand.royals dad wrote:And the radio sports guys didn't go postal on you that you need to go to aHockeyMom87 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.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.high end professional coach with your 9 year old
I don't really care what you look like or if you hate men, the problem with your posts is the fact that you think that being in two leagues at once in the same sport is a good idea for a squirt age players or that some one old enough to have a squirt age players uses LOL and OMG from a full keyboard. Really how long does it take to type "oh my god", my teenage daughter laughed out loud when I showed her your typing, she shook her head and said "yea old people".
District 6 New Rule involving playing hockey only with Dist
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
High Off The Glass
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:50 am
-
hockey_is_a_choice
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:48 am
This is getting out of hand . . . . Remember Rodney King from the LA riots. "People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along? Can we get along? Can we stop making it, making it horrible for the [people who want to over legislate youth hockey] and the kids?...It’s just not right. It’s not right. It’s not, it’s not going to change anything. We’ll, we’ll get our justice....[We'll start sending our kids to the Florida Everblades '98 team because the '98 Fire disbanded]. Please, we can get along here. We all can get along. I mean, we’re all stuck here for a while. Let’s try to work it out. Let’s try to beat it. Let’s try to beat it. Let’s try to work it out."
I doubt Rodney King played hockey, but, in his drug-induced state of mind, his message was powerful.
This is crazy. Minnesota Hockey, you have bigger problems to worry about than adopting a STUPID rule that is divisive. Spend your time figuring out how to make hockey affordable for the masses. The folks who want to spend extra money on hockey or offer extra ice time to their kids are not your problem--they will send their kids to Florida, Canada, or Europe; they will find ways to put their kids on the ice away from association hockey. The very thought that we are losing some of our best youth hockey players to Florida because of Minnesota Hockey's rigid approach to youth hockey is RIDICULOUS. It's YOUTH hockey for heaven's sake.
Who cares if the Jones family's kid skates for Edina and he also skates in MM's supplemental Peewee League or the Made's Squirt Choice League? That's their prerogative as a family. Frankly, I won't object if tier one hockey is allowed in Minnesota. My son plays hockey because he loves the game. He doesn't care if a Machine or Blade kid is playing for the Fire or some other tier one program. With or without a Blade or Machine kid on his association team, my son will have fun.
Face it, some people have more money than other people. People choose to spend their money differently. People choose to raise their kids differently. Yes, I'm sure a couple of kids missed a game or two because of skating in one of MM's leagues, but I know a peewee A goalie who didn't show up for a tournament last season because he went ice fishing with his dad. The coach stepped forward and addressed the situation, not the District. Are MinnHock and its affiliates going to adopt a rule that says no ice fishing, snowmobiling, skiing or snowboarding in the winter because it interferes with association hockey? No! Why not? Because you can't address every problem with more rules.
It is irrelevant whether or not you like BM. It is irrelevant whether or not BM is a bully. It is irrelevant whether or not BM offers good programs or good coaching. MinnHock and affiliates, your job is not to start a war with BM. Your job is not to save kids from their overzealous parents. Your job is to offer opportunities to play hockey, not restrict kids' opportunities to skate in more than one venue. Stop using the kids as pawns in your war against a man who is equally as stubborn as those of you who are charged with promoting hockey.
STOP THE MADNESS!!
I doubt Rodney King played hockey, but, in his drug-induced state of mind, his message was powerful.
This is crazy. Minnesota Hockey, you have bigger problems to worry about than adopting a STUPID rule that is divisive. Spend your time figuring out how to make hockey affordable for the masses. The folks who want to spend extra money on hockey or offer extra ice time to their kids are not your problem--they will send their kids to Florida, Canada, or Europe; they will find ways to put their kids on the ice away from association hockey. The very thought that we are losing some of our best youth hockey players to Florida because of Minnesota Hockey's rigid approach to youth hockey is RIDICULOUS. It's YOUTH hockey for heaven's sake.
Who cares if the Jones family's kid skates for Edina and he also skates in MM's supplemental Peewee League or the Made's Squirt Choice League? That's their prerogative as a family. Frankly, I won't object if tier one hockey is allowed in Minnesota. My son plays hockey because he loves the game. He doesn't care if a Machine or Blade kid is playing for the Fire or some other tier one program. With or without a Blade or Machine kid on his association team, my son will have fun.
Face it, some people have more money than other people. People choose to spend their money differently. People choose to raise their kids differently. Yes, I'm sure a couple of kids missed a game or two because of skating in one of MM's leagues, but I know a peewee A goalie who didn't show up for a tournament last season because he went ice fishing with his dad. The coach stepped forward and addressed the situation, not the District. Are MinnHock and its affiliates going to adopt a rule that says no ice fishing, snowmobiling, skiing or snowboarding in the winter because it interferes with association hockey? No! Why not? Because you can't address every problem with more rules.
It is irrelevant whether or not you like BM. It is irrelevant whether or not BM is a bully. It is irrelevant whether or not BM offers good programs or good coaching. MinnHock and affiliates, your job is not to start a war with BM. Your job is not to save kids from their overzealous parents. Your job is to offer opportunities to play hockey, not restrict kids' opportunities to skate in more than one venue. Stop using the kids as pawns in your war against a man who is equally as stubborn as those of you who are charged with promoting hockey.
STOP THE MADNESS!!
How is is it that the D6 rule prevents families from making a choice to play for MM? It seems just the opposite is true. D6 is saying play for them if you want to, but not for both. Any parent can choose to go to MM. The consequence is you can not play D6.
The right to choose does not mean the right to choose without consequences.
If you choose MM you play by their rules and if you choose to play D6 you play by their rules. If you choose to play MM, then no D6. If you choose to play Machine, then no missing practice.
The right to choose does not mean the right to choose without consequences.
If you choose MM you play by their rules and if you choose to play D6 you play by their rules. If you choose to play MM, then no D6. If you choose to play Machine, then no missing practice.
-
HockeyMom87
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:43 pm
"Go postal on me?" Are you kidding? Calm down and get your panties unbunched. Still missing the point - not for D6 to decide. You're arguing if it is a good idea and that is up to parents - not associations and you failed to respond to the issue. Name calling again.
Maybe the answer is for MM to call it a clinic - or have kids use aliases - or call it a club and you can pay an entrance fee. Then the district can send out its spies to find out who is violating. Then they can sue to have MM disclose the real names. Ought to be interesting. Maybe we can be like the military and go to a "Don't ask and don't tell" policy. Seems a lot easier than going through all this.
I still think there's a purpose for both (for some kids) - maybe not at the same time and I agree that doing two full-time leagues would be difficult. That is, unless you are on a girls U8 team and only get 2-3 hours of ice a week anyway because MN Hockey obviously isn't concerned about a real issue like that. There are some U8 girls that could use an additional league because there's no room for them with the Squirt A and Pee Wee A boys teams practicing 10 hours a week. (Yes - Badger - before you start I do have a boy playing on those teams).
Maybe the answer is for MM to call it a clinic - or have kids use aliases - or call it a club and you can pay an entrance fee. Then the district can send out its spies to find out who is violating. Then they can sue to have MM disclose the real names. Ought to be interesting. Maybe we can be like the military and go to a "Don't ask and don't tell" policy. Seems a lot easier than going through all this.
I still think there's a purpose for both (for some kids) - maybe not at the same time and I agree that doing two full-time leagues would be difficult. That is, unless you are on a girls U8 team and only get 2-3 hours of ice a week anyway because MN Hockey obviously isn't concerned about a real issue like that. There are some U8 girls that could use an additional league because there's no room for them with the Squirt A and Pee Wee A boys teams practicing 10 hours a week. (Yes - Badger - before you start I do have a boy playing on those teams).
-
hockey_is_a_choice
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:48 am
Are you sure you want to force kids to choose between association hockey and MM type programs?mkpfb wrote:How is is it that the D6 rule prevents families from making a choice to play for MM? It seems just the opposite is true. D6 is saying play for them if you want to, but not for both. Any parent can choose to go to MM. The consequence is you can not play D6.
The right to choose does not mean the right to choose without consequences.
If you choose MM you play by their rules and if you choose to play D6 you play by their rules. If you choose to play MM, then no D6. If you choose to play Machine, then no missing practice.
Are you absolutely sure that BM hasn’t set a trap for MinnHock?
Be careful what you ask for—you might get it.
MM won’t go away. BM is a businessman and he knows there are parents who would prefer to have their kids skate in year-round AAA hockey. If the District 6 rule is upheld and eventually adopted by MinnHock, then kids will have to choose between private programs and association hockey. The gauntlet will be thrown down. The other private AAA programs such as the Blades, the Icemen, STE, Easton, Reebok National, Magicians, etc., may find it beneficial to offer programs year-round, if MinnHock forces kids to choose between association hockey and skating for their favorite AAA team. The kids on those teams and their parents may decide it is best to continue their team’s AAA program and tournaments year-round, thus skipping association hockey all together.
Is this what you want? Are you prepared to live with the consequences? AAA hockey teams and privately run tournaments are a dime a dozen in the summer in the metro area. If MinnHock forces kids to choose, I believe you will see a proliferation of year-round AAA teams. If you force kids to choose, associations will suffer even more than they suffer if a kid skips a practice to skate elsewhere. Could MinnHock's stubborness lead to its own demise? I hope not. This is the State of hockey. Let's protect our legacy through forward-thinking.
Interesting article today in Minnpost.com
http://tinyurl.com/mnmade
As I have stated before, any District 6 association could create their own attendance rule to deal with a kid playing MN Made and association; and that this would have been the best way to deal with this and avoid a lawsuit. In fact, all D6 associations agreeing in concert to attendance policies would have been the way to handle this.
I think this is a losing battle in court and the money wasted by MN Hockey paying for attorneys as a result of this could have provided full ride scholarships to some inner city kids to play the game. My bet, before this is done, $50 - $80k will be spent on attorneys. Probably not the best way to spend our dues.
If an association team has set up attendance rules, a kid playing association and MM forfeits their dues if they want to put MM first. I do not see supplemental skating outside of an attendance policy as being any different than playing hoops, skiing, swimming, or underwater basket weaving. You can't dictate what people can freely do with their money.
http://tinyurl.com/mnmade
As I have stated before, any District 6 association could create their own attendance rule to deal with a kid playing MN Made and association; and that this would have been the best way to deal with this and avoid a lawsuit. In fact, all D6 associations agreeing in concert to attendance policies would have been the way to handle this.
I think this is a losing battle in court and the money wasted by MN Hockey paying for attorneys as a result of this could have provided full ride scholarships to some inner city kids to play the game. My bet, before this is done, $50 - $80k will be spent on attorneys. Probably not the best way to spend our dues.
If an association team has set up attendance rules, a kid playing association and MM forfeits their dues if they want to put MM first. I do not see supplemental skating outside of an attendance policy as being any different than playing hoops, skiing, swimming, or underwater basket weaving. You can't dictate what people can freely do with their money.
-
BadgerBob82
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am
Hockeymom87:
You're a smart girl, first impressions are lasting. Your first post on the topic sealed it for me.
Show this post to your radio friends. They will LOL! Hopefully in front of your face so you get the full effect!
Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:10 pm Post subject: District 6 Rule A/K/A "The Abusive Husband Rule"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK hockey fanatics. I'm a hockey Mom because my kids love hockey. I was never a hockey fanatic before this. I do have to say, however, that I am appalled by the District 6 Rule. Here are some issues it raises:
1. I refer to it as the "Abusive Husband Rule." I'm sure it was drafted by a man. Why is it that men think they can strong-arm people to stay with them? Women leave men because they are bad husbands. Kids leave hockey associations because they are inferior. Women are killed every day because their partner would rather see them dead than with another man. Apparently - because the district director - "in HIS sole discretion" can suspend a kid for the rest of the season if he or she is in another league. REALLY? I want to know if any women had input into this.
2. I am just as focused on my childrens' education as I am their hockey endeavors. I am appalled that some of the people writing on these boards cannot spell. Perhaps you should spend more time helping your children with their homework instead of coming up with crazy rules.
3. Who wrote the rule? Who voted on the rule?
4. When the district gets sued, who is paying for the lawyers? Did the drafters educate their members of district 6 beforehand? Did the members of district 6 have information about this? Was it done behind the scenes?
5. It seems to me this rule hurts only the good players. Most alternative leagues have try outs. If you are an average player, you really wouldn't make some of these other league try-outs. Thus, it will disproportionately be applied to the better players. This means, in the end, the district loses its best players if it is actually enforced.
6. Is the director trying to SCARE people into staying in district 6? Who is this MAN? I assume he is single because no smart woman would have anything to do with such a control freak.
7. What happens when the district is sued. Will the lawyers pierce the corporate veil with actions outside the scope of the director's authority? I hope so - then the director can be held personally liable for all attorney fees and costs - easily in the 6 digits!
8. What are they really trying to accomplish? Hand cuffs it looks like. Yippy - instead of trying to find a way to keep good players and improve associations - they punish those that want more. Great - let us have a district where kids can rise to the top level of mediocrity!
9. What if there is a church league? Doesn't this punish those for practicing their religion? Hmmmmm - violation of constitutional rights.
10. This also hurts boys more than girls so it discriminates on gender in practice. I have yet to see an association that gives the girls an equal shake despite Title VII. (And I have a boy and girl so I have seen both).
11. Where are checks and balances? The director has sole authority over violations. No where in our society do we give this kind of authority. What if the director suffers from mental health problems? Will it be a position requirement that all directors submit to MMPIs prior to taking the post? What if they are a drug abuser - will there be a rule that no consumption of drugs and alcohol during their post? Will they be subject to random UIs? What if they are a sex offender or a pedophile? What if they are a wife beater? Sounds expensive to really enforce the way it should be to ensure appropriate person is in the position.
12. What if there are disparities in enforcement? How is overseen? What are the ramifications to violations on the director's part?
There are a lot of questions that aren't addressed. It sounds like someone made a rule without thinking things through. That is usually the actions of very immature or unintelligent people. I'm glad I am not in District 6. Not only would my association be subject to heavy legal fees but I would fear the leadership consists of cavemen. NICE! Good luck district 6.
You're a smart girl, first impressions are lasting. Your first post on the topic sealed it for me.
Show this post to your radio friends. They will LOL! Hopefully in front of your face so you get the full effect!
Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:10 pm Post subject: District 6 Rule A/K/A "The Abusive Husband Rule"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK hockey fanatics. I'm a hockey Mom because my kids love hockey. I was never a hockey fanatic before this. I do have to say, however, that I am appalled by the District 6 Rule. Here are some issues it raises:
1. I refer to it as the "Abusive Husband Rule." I'm sure it was drafted by a man. Why is it that men think they can strong-arm people to stay with them? Women leave men because they are bad husbands. Kids leave hockey associations because they are inferior. Women are killed every day because their partner would rather see them dead than with another man. Apparently - because the district director - "in HIS sole discretion" can suspend a kid for the rest of the season if he or she is in another league. REALLY? I want to know if any women had input into this.
2. I am just as focused on my childrens' education as I am their hockey endeavors. I am appalled that some of the people writing on these boards cannot spell. Perhaps you should spend more time helping your children with their homework instead of coming up with crazy rules.
3. Who wrote the rule? Who voted on the rule?
4. When the district gets sued, who is paying for the lawyers? Did the drafters educate their members of district 6 beforehand? Did the members of district 6 have information about this? Was it done behind the scenes?
5. It seems to me this rule hurts only the good players. Most alternative leagues have try outs. If you are an average player, you really wouldn't make some of these other league try-outs. Thus, it will disproportionately be applied to the better players. This means, in the end, the district loses its best players if it is actually enforced.
6. Is the director trying to SCARE people into staying in district 6? Who is this MAN? I assume he is single because no smart woman would have anything to do with such a control freak.
7. What happens when the district is sued. Will the lawyers pierce the corporate veil with actions outside the scope of the director's authority? I hope so - then the director can be held personally liable for all attorney fees and costs - easily in the 6 digits!
8. What are they really trying to accomplish? Hand cuffs it looks like. Yippy - instead of trying to find a way to keep good players and improve associations - they punish those that want more. Great - let us have a district where kids can rise to the top level of mediocrity!
9. What if there is a church league? Doesn't this punish those for practicing their religion? Hmmmmm - violation of constitutional rights.
10. This also hurts boys more than girls so it discriminates on gender in practice. I have yet to see an association that gives the girls an equal shake despite Title VII. (And I have a boy and girl so I have seen both).
11. Where are checks and balances? The director has sole authority over violations. No where in our society do we give this kind of authority. What if the director suffers from mental health problems? Will it be a position requirement that all directors submit to MMPIs prior to taking the post? What if they are a drug abuser - will there be a rule that no consumption of drugs and alcohol during their post? Will they be subject to random UIs? What if they are a sex offender or a pedophile? What if they are a wife beater? Sounds expensive to really enforce the way it should be to ensure appropriate person is in the position.
12. What if there are disparities in enforcement? How is overseen? What are the ramifications to violations on the director's part?
There are a lot of questions that aren't addressed. It sounds like someone made a rule without thinking things through. That is usually the actions of very immature or unintelligent people. I'm glad I am not in District 6. Not only would my association be subject to heavy legal fees but I would fear the leadership consists of cavemen. NICE! Good luck district 6.
-
BadgerBob82
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am
I believe USA Hockey and MN Hockey allow a player to be rostered on only one team at a time? I assume MM is not affiliated with USA Hockey? Even the MN High School rules allow player to be rostered only on one team during the season? I don't think MM has a strong argument as the team roster rules are long established at all levels.
By all accounts, MM provides good coaching and strong focus on skill development. The D6 rule allows players to do clinics, private coaching sessions, etc. So I fail to see how the D6 ruling hurts players, parents or MM? Then can skate 7 days a week at the Breakfast Club, private tutor sessions, etc. Just can't play on another team in another league during the season.
As for the attorney fees. USA Hockey, MN Hockey, Districts and Associations, referees, coaches, managers, players pay their dues and are covered by insurance policies provided by USA Hockey. That doesn't make it "free", but insurance is purchased as a safety net for the worst case scenario. Frivolous lawsuits are a daily occurence. I wonder if BM is receiving pro-bono attorney work in exchange for "free hockey" for Jr?
By all accounts, MM provides good coaching and strong focus on skill development. The D6 rule allows players to do clinics, private coaching sessions, etc. So I fail to see how the D6 ruling hurts players, parents or MM? Then can skate 7 days a week at the Breakfast Club, private tutor sessions, etc. Just can't play on another team in another league during the season.
As for the attorney fees. USA Hockey, MN Hockey, Districts and Associations, referees, coaches, managers, players pay their dues and are covered by insurance policies provided by USA Hockey. That doesn't make it "free", but insurance is purchased as a safety net for the worst case scenario. Frivolous lawsuits are a daily occurence. I wonder if BM is receiving pro-bono attorney work in exchange for "free hockey" for Jr?
-
BadgerBob82
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am
SWPrez: Attendance rule? The article states BM's position as he and D6 are competing for players to join their leagues? Choose one or the other NOT both.
You think an NFL player could also play in the CFL? How about a HS player playing Jr A at the same time?
This lawsuit is stupid! Choose one league of the other to play for the season.
You think an NFL player could also play in the CFL? How about a HS player playing Jr A at the same time?
This lawsuit is stupid! Choose one league of the other to play for the season.
-
Benito Juarez
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:26 am
Disagree Badger Bob. If my kid wanted to play in both leagues, I should have a right to have him play in both - no different than if he was participating in any other structured extracurricular. If my association or team coach has set up a policy that attendance comes first to the association team over other extracurriculars, then the consequences of suspension are known if a kid wants to participate on a MM team in front of their association team. Pretty simple and accomplishes the same thing without attracting attorneys and lawsuits.BadgerBob82 wrote:I believe USA Hockey and MN Hockey allow a player to be rostered on only one team at a time? I assume MM is not affiliated with USA Hockey? Even the MN High School rules allow player to be rostered only on one team during the season? I don't think MM has a strong argument as the team roster rules are long established at all levels.
By all accounts, MM provides good coaching and strong focus on skill development. The D6 rule allows players to do clinics, private coaching sessions, etc. So I fail to see how the D6 ruling hurts players, parents or MM? Then can skate 7 days a week at the Breakfast Club, private tutor sessions, etc. Just can't play on another team in another league during the season.
As for the attorney fees. USA Hockey, MN Hockey, Districts and Associations, referees, coaches, managers, players pay their dues and are covered by insurance policies provided by USA Hockey. That doesn't make it "free", but insurance is purchased as a safety net for the worst case scenario. Frivolous lawsuits are a daily occurence. I wonder if BM is receiving pro-bono attorney work in exchange for "free hockey" for Jr?
The potential implications of the District 6 rule goes beyond this pissing match between MM and D6. It sets bad precedent for all of Minnesota Hockey. In Minneapolis, there is non-USA hockey affiliated park board hockey that kids can play to supplement their association hockey. In Saint Paul, there is the non-USA hockey affiliated Catholic School League chock full of association hockey players.
Both of these provide kids the opportunity to play hockey with school or neighborhood buddies outside of association hockey. Though they do not lie in D6, it becomes a slippery slope if Minnesota Hockey is involved and wants to shut down Minnesota Made and not any other alternative, non-USA Hockey affiliated leagues where kids are rostered.
Perhaps if the D6 rule restricted all extra curriculars - joining a basketball team, a ski team, a band, theater, etc. they would have a better leg to stand on. But, targeting a supplemental program that competes is asking for a lot of legal fees. Win or lose, it isn't worth the battle and spending of our dues when this could have been accomplished through simple individual association attendance policies requiring the association team to come first.
-
High Off The Glass
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:50 am
You have the RIGHT for your kid to play hockey or not. If you CHOOSE to play hockey, in this case in D6, then you obligated to play under the rules set by that particular organization, if you don't like those particular set of rules you have the RIGHT to leave and go play for another league, in this case MM. You DON'T have the right to choose which rules will play under, and which rules you won't. The key words in your arguement is SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAM, MM's choice league is not defined as a supplemental program, it's by their own words, a LEAGUE.SWPrez wrote:Disagree Badger Bob.BadgerBob82 wrote:I believe USA Hockey and MN Hockey allow a player to be rostered on only one team at a time? I assume MM is not affiliated with USA Hockey? Even the MN High School rules allow player to be rostered only on one team during the season? I don't think MM has a strong argument as the team roster rules are long established at all levels.
By all accounts, MM provides good coaching and strong focus on skill development. The D6 rule allows players to do clinics, private coaching sessions, etc. So I fail to see how the D6 ruling hurts players, parents or MM? Then can skate 7 days a week at the Breakfast Club, private tutor sessions, etc. Just can't play on another team in another league during the season.
As for the attorney fees. USA Hockey, MN Hockey, Districts and Associations, referees, coaches, managers, players pay their dues and are covered by insurance policies provided by USA Hockey. That doesn't make it "free", but insurance is purchased as a safety net for the worst case scenario. Frivolous lawsuits are a daily occurence. I wonder if BM is receiving pro-bono attorney work in exchange for "free hockey" for Jr?If my association or team coach has set up a policy that attendance comes first to the association team over other extracurriculars, then the consequences of suspension are known if a kid wants to participate on a MM team in front of their association team. Pretty simple and accomplishes the same thing without attracting attorneys and lawsuits.If my kid wanted to play in both leagues, I should have a right to have him play in both - no different than if he was participating in any other structured extracurricular.
The potential implications of the District 6 rule goes beyond this pissing match between MM and D6. It sets bad precedent for all of Minnesota Hockey. In Minneapolis, there is non-USA hockey affiliated park board hockey that kids can play to supplement their association hockey. In Saint Paul, there is the non-USA hockey affiliated Catholic School League chock full of association hockey players.
Both of these provide kids the opportunity to play hockey with school or neighborhood buddies outside of association hockey. Though they do not lie in D6, it becomes a slippery slope if Minnesota Hockey is involved and wants to shut down Minnesota Made and not any other alternative, non-USA Hockey affiliated leagues where kids are rostered.
Perhaps if the D6 rule restricted all extra curriculars - joining a basketball team, a ski team, a band, theater, etc. they would have a better leg to stand on. But, targeting a supplemental program that competes is asking for a lot of legal fees. Win or lose, it isn't worth the battle and spending of our dues when this could have been accomplished through simple individual association attendance policies requiring the association team to come first.
-
spin-o-rama
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:30 pm
I have a non-compete agreement at work. I can't moonlight in the same industry. However, this situation is different. D6 is not paying the players. Also, D6 & MH enjoy monopolistic benefits. Government owned rinks give 1st choice of ice to MH associations, often at a loss. Do the differences preclude the D6 non-compete stance?
Bernie originally said the Choice league was designed to prepare mites to make the Squirt A team when they returned to their association. The next year he started the Choice Squirt league for those graduating mites. D6 is banning players from participating in external hockey leagues. Will they stay true to their word or will clinics and outdoor hockey or even more activities also be restricted?
We as Americans don't like being told what to do. Common sense says this should be a non-issue. Why would someone sign up for 100+ hours of MM squirts and 100+ hours of MH squirts? Yet people do. Part of the price of freedom of choice is that some people will do nutty things.
Perhaps there should be some restrictions, but it could easily get out of hand. If the answer is an attendance policy, what will be the required attendance? Will you risk being kicked off the team for attending a music lesson, church service or scout meeting instead of being at the all important MH event? It's important to show commitment to the team, it's also important to be involved in a variety of activites. Right now there is a fuzzy line. Should there be a hard line? Where should it be drawn?
Bernie originally said the Choice league was designed to prepare mites to make the Squirt A team when they returned to their association. The next year he started the Choice Squirt league for those graduating mites. D6 is banning players from participating in external hockey leagues. Will they stay true to their word or will clinics and outdoor hockey or even more activities also be restricted?
We as Americans don't like being told what to do. Common sense says this should be a non-issue. Why would someone sign up for 100+ hours of MM squirts and 100+ hours of MH squirts? Yet people do. Part of the price of freedom of choice is that some people will do nutty things.
Perhaps there should be some restrictions, but it could easily get out of hand. If the answer is an attendance policy, what will be the required attendance? Will you risk being kicked off the team for attending a music lesson, church service or scout meeting instead of being at the all important MH event? It's important to show commitment to the team, it's also important to be involved in a variety of activites. Right now there is a fuzzy line. Should there be a hard line? Where should it be drawn?
So the kids in the PW Supplemental League are fine, because MM used the word supplemental in the title? Or not fine because that group is listed under the "Choice League" tab. Clearly at 3-4 hours a week, the PW's are doing supplemental training vs. the more time intense Mite and Choice "programs." But really, if it was just about wording, there a million ways to do it differently. In the end, this should be easy enough for BM to get around. I think part of it is the principle. And excluding abusive or dangerous situations, I say parents don't need to be told how to allocate their childrens time.You have the RIGHT for your kid to play hockey or not. If you CHOOSE to play hockey, in this case in D6, then you obligated to play under the rules set by that particular organization, if you don't like those particular set of rules you have the RIGHT to leave and go play for another league, in this case MM. You DON'T have the right to choose which rules will play under, and which rules you won't. The key words in your arguement is SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAM, MM's choice league is not defined as a supplemental program, it's by their own words, a LEAGUE.
-
spin-o-rama
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:30 pm
The D6 homepage says that:
If this is the legal counsel D6 is receiving, they are in trouble.
The MH rest rule says:** Mites are not included but must follow the MN Hockey rest rules between events.
The MH rule covers teams, not individuals. And if MH extends it to individuals, there are now problems with the supposedly ok hockey clinics because they can easily be considered practices.Team Rest - Teams shall not participate in more than two (2) on-ice activities per day, nor shall they
participate in more than one tournament at a time (no overlapping days). On-ice activities include games,
exhibition games and/or practices. There shall be a minimum of three (3) hours between on-ice activities
on the same day and ten (10) hours between on-ice activities on consecutive days. The time is from the
end of one on-ice activity to the beginning of the next.
If this is the legal counsel D6 is receiving, they are in trouble.
-
hockeyrocks87
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:07 pm
-
HockeyDad41
- Posts: 1238
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:40 pm
Enforcing the rest rule would be a nightmare.spin-o-rama wrote:The D6 homepage says that:The MH rest rule says:** Mites are not included but must follow the MN Hockey rest rules between events.The MH rule covers teams, not individuals. And if MH extends it to individuals, there are now problems with the supposedly ok hockey clinics because they can easily be considered practices.Team Rest - Teams shall not participate in more than two (2) on-ice activities per day, nor shall they
participate in more than one tournament at a time (no overlapping days). On-ice activities include games,
exhibition games and/or practices. There shall be a minimum of three (3) hours between on-ice activities
on the same day and ten (10) hours between on-ice activities on consecutive days. The time is from the
end of one on-ice activity to the beginning of the next.
If this is the legal counsel D6 is receiving, they are in trouble.
Solving all of hockey's problems since Feb 2009.
-
hockeyrocks87
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:07 pm
Road Rage - The PW supplemental League is supplemental because there is a lack of ice time available for a full PW league. Why do you think the city of Edina fights MM so hard about allowing BM to put in a 3rd sheet of ice. Can you imagine the haters that would come out of the woodwork if BM got a 3rd sheet of ice. What it tells you is that they are on top because there are many people out there that fight hard to try to beat them down. The fact that people are constantly worried about what MM does and bash them proves that they are on top. It's when people don't talk about you is when it's time to worry.
-
Ugottobekiddingme
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:53 pm
Association verses MM hockey is always a hot topic but recent changes to D6 by-laws have given a new perspective to this conversation. I'm not going to get deep into the legality of this discussion because my opinion doesn't have relevance but I am going to ask why key issues are not included in the discussion....like
1. Why is the question not be addressed as to why many are leaving association hockey in poor economic times and forking over 4 times the registration costs? Have people realized that the social network mainframe within association hockey doesn't offer the abilility for improvement and advancement? Or are people just throwing their hard earned money away??
2. Choose is a lame point offered by previous posters. If hockey participants had the option, they would choose to be evaluated "correctly" and play within a community organized event that offers the ability to advance their skills towards a game not obstructed by association managed politics and not regulated by useless and senseless rules by MN hockey.
3. The ugly truth of the D6 by-laws bring into account the status of 501(C) status. How can a non-profit community group regulate who can participate within a community offered program and what limitations are being imposed on participants? This could get more interesting IMO.
4. The last time I looked a youth program was designed to give all kids an opportunity to participate and enjoy the game of hockey. Would anyone like to explain why we need to make it difficult to play a kids sporting event?
HIAC and Hockmom....great posts....you're keeping the regime association monarchs on their toes.
1. Why is the question not be addressed as to why many are leaving association hockey in poor economic times and forking over 4 times the registration costs? Have people realized that the social network mainframe within association hockey doesn't offer the abilility for improvement and advancement? Or are people just throwing their hard earned money away??
2. Choose is a lame point offered by previous posters. If hockey participants had the option, they would choose to be evaluated "correctly" and play within a community organized event that offers the ability to advance their skills towards a game not obstructed by association managed politics and not regulated by useless and senseless rules by MN hockey.
3. The ugly truth of the D6 by-laws bring into account the status of 501(C) status. How can a non-profit community group regulate who can participate within a community offered program and what limitations are being imposed on participants? This could get more interesting IMO.
4. The last time I looked a youth program was designed to give all kids an opportunity to participate and enjoy the game of hockey. Would anyone like to explain why we need to make it difficult to play a kids sporting event?
HIAC and Hockmom....great posts....you're keeping the regime association monarchs on their toes.
-
High Off The Glass
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:50 am
City of Edina fighting hard? There are many reasons BM can't build his third sheet, one of them being a lack of parking available on the site which would be in violation of city codes established long before BM decided to build. Lack of available funding being another, and so on...Who would "hate" BM if another sheet of ice was build? The one thing that separates MM from others is their belief everyone is out to get them (conspiracy theorists, ie, City of Edina is out to get BM). Lastly, who is worried about what MM does? To me, BM is more worried about what D6 is doing hence the lawsuit.hockeyrocks87 wrote:Road Rage - The PW supplemental League is supplemental because there is a lack of ice time available for a full PW league.What it tells you is that they are on top because there are many people out there that fight hard to try to beat them down. The fact that people are constantly worried about what MM does and bash them proves that they are on top. It's when people don't talk about you is when it's time to worry.Why do you think the city of Edina fights MM so hard about allowing BM to put in a 3rd sheet of ice. Can you imagine the haters that would come out of the woodwork if BM got a 3rd sheet of ice.
-
Ugottobekiddingme
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:53 pm
-
BadgerBob82
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am
kiddingme:
1: I think alot of people have more money than brains. They are afraid their kid will "fall behind". You're tipping your hand on the old politics and "social network mainframe" restrict kids' advancement. So, take your $4,000 ball and go home?
2. Again with the politics and not being evaluted "correctly". Yes, little Jonny made the "B" team because the 15 kids that made the "A" team were worse than Jonny. Politics, none of that going on in places where check cashing is the key to team placement.
3. I don't think MM hockey players are a protected class under discrimination laws? Now if D6 made a rule that no black, jewish kids with gay parents could join, I would agree with you. Also, the D6 rule doesn't say you can play if you play with MM. Just during the hockey season, can only play on one team in one league.
4. D6 has open arms to all players within their geographic area that want to play hockey. Where's the problem caused by this rule?
Your list of 4 rhetorical questions were fun.
1: I think alot of people have more money than brains. They are afraid their kid will "fall behind". You're tipping your hand on the old politics and "social network mainframe" restrict kids' advancement. So, take your $4,000 ball and go home?
2. Again with the politics and not being evaluted "correctly". Yes, little Jonny made the "B" team because the 15 kids that made the "A" team were worse than Jonny. Politics, none of that going on in places where check cashing is the key to team placement.
3. I don't think MM hockey players are a protected class under discrimination laws? Now if D6 made a rule that no black, jewish kids with gay parents could join, I would agree with you. Also, the D6 rule doesn't say you can play if you play with MM. Just during the hockey season, can only play on one team in one league.
4. D6 has open arms to all players within their geographic area that want to play hockey. Where's the problem caused by this rule?
Your list of 4 rhetorical questions were fun.
-
royals dad
- Posts: 432
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:41 pm
Ugottobekidding,
1. Why is the question not be addressed as to why many are leaving association hockey in poor economic times and forking over 4 times the registration costs? Have people realized that the social network mainframe within association hockey doesn't offer the ability for improvement and advancement? Or are people just throwing their hard earned money away??
a. It could be that they have bought the BS that USA/MH/Assoc Hockey has not moved forward in 40 years and thus is old fashioned and out of date.
b. It could be that they have been sold that if they follow this path from an early age the son/daughter will be a D1/NHL player (when you get paid back)
c. It could be they feel the pressure to make sure their child keeps up with other high squirt achievers.
d. It could be a status symbol.
e. It could be by cutting out the middle and low ability kids a coach can structure a practice plan on skills that are above the typically accepted plan for the age group.
f. It could be that the practice plans MM has developed are actually able to take a player of lower ability and transform them into one of the best in the state leading to a future of high achievement on and off the ice.
g. Or it could be some or all of the above.
2. Choose is a lame point offered by previous posters. If hockey participants had the option, they would choose to be evaluated "correctly" and play within a community organized event that offers the ability to advance their skills towards a game not obstructed by association managed politics and not regulated by useless and senseless rules by MN hockey.
a. There is no question here, I disagree with your point, if you think anarchy is a good thing I think you’re a bit off. You can’t have a system that serves the needs of many people of different skill levels and backgrounds without some order and rules. You don’t get that without some politics. This has been true for 3000 years.
3. The ugly truth of the D6 by-laws bring into account the status of 501(C) status. How can a non-profit community group regulate who can participate within a community offered program and what limitations are being imposed on participants? This could get more interesting IMO.
a. I think you might be kidding with this one, there are many participation rules that have been in place at the national, region, district, and assoc level. You cant take your player from one association to another without following the rules that govern participation. Granted this rule is a little different but to suggest they have no right to make participation rules because they are non profit is silly.
4. The last time I looked a youth program was designed to give all kids an opportunity to participate and enjoy the game of hockey. Would anyone like to explain why we need to make it difficult to play a kids sporting event?
a. If you sign up for your squirt goalie for an assoc team and MM, then about Christmas time the player tells Mom and Dad that I have more fun with my teammates at MM. Which is understandable as the association team is struggling in a highly competitive district and it is a small assc. Mom and Dad decide to focus on the MM team and stop showing up at most of the association games and practices. Now you have the assoc team left without a goalie most skates. Had they made the choice of MM in the first place the assoc team could have found a goalie to move up or in to play for that team. That is what I understand to be the reason for the need to make a choice and play in one hockey league per season. An attendance rule would have to lump the other hockey in with music, scouts, religion...I would hate to see that happen.
1. Why is the question not be addressed as to why many are leaving association hockey in poor economic times and forking over 4 times the registration costs? Have people realized that the social network mainframe within association hockey doesn't offer the ability for improvement and advancement? Or are people just throwing their hard earned money away??
a. It could be that they have bought the BS that USA/MH/Assoc Hockey has not moved forward in 40 years and thus is old fashioned and out of date.
b. It could be that they have been sold that if they follow this path from an early age the son/daughter will be a D1/NHL player (when you get paid back)
c. It could be they feel the pressure to make sure their child keeps up with other high squirt achievers.
d. It could be a status symbol.
e. It could be by cutting out the middle and low ability kids a coach can structure a practice plan on skills that are above the typically accepted plan for the age group.
f. It could be that the practice plans MM has developed are actually able to take a player of lower ability and transform them into one of the best in the state leading to a future of high achievement on and off the ice.
g. Or it could be some or all of the above.
2. Choose is a lame point offered by previous posters. If hockey participants had the option, they would choose to be evaluated "correctly" and play within a community organized event that offers the ability to advance their skills towards a game not obstructed by association managed politics and not regulated by useless and senseless rules by MN hockey.
a. There is no question here, I disagree with your point, if you think anarchy is a good thing I think you’re a bit off. You can’t have a system that serves the needs of many people of different skill levels and backgrounds without some order and rules. You don’t get that without some politics. This has been true for 3000 years.
3. The ugly truth of the D6 by-laws bring into account the status of 501(C) status. How can a non-profit community group regulate who can participate within a community offered program and what limitations are being imposed on participants? This could get more interesting IMO.
a. I think you might be kidding with this one, there are many participation rules that have been in place at the national, region, district, and assoc level. You cant take your player from one association to another without following the rules that govern participation. Granted this rule is a little different but to suggest they have no right to make participation rules because they are non profit is silly.
4. The last time I looked a youth program was designed to give all kids an opportunity to participate and enjoy the game of hockey. Would anyone like to explain why we need to make it difficult to play a kids sporting event?
a. If you sign up for your squirt goalie for an assoc team and MM, then about Christmas time the player tells Mom and Dad that I have more fun with my teammates at MM. Which is understandable as the association team is struggling in a highly competitive district and it is a small assc. Mom and Dad decide to focus on the MM team and stop showing up at most of the association games and practices. Now you have the assoc team left without a goalie most skates. Had they made the choice of MM in the first place the assoc team could have found a goalie to move up or in to play for that team. That is what I understand to be the reason for the need to make a choice and play in one hockey league per season. An attendance rule would have to lump the other hockey in with music, scouts, religion...I would hate to see that happen.
-
old goalie85
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm
-
hockeydad11
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:21 pm
The word is that the case has been moved to Federal Court. This will be very expensive for both parties. Minnesota Hockey will pay for this out of pocket because they have a very high deductible.
Brad Hewitt will cost every player in the state $$$ because he wanted to go after Bernie. All he had to do is make an attendance rule rather than trying to tell people what they can do with their free time. Same result and cost nothing.
Brad Hewitt will cost every player in the state $$$ because he wanted to go after Bernie. All he had to do is make an attendance rule rather than trying to tell people what they can do with their free time. Same result and cost nothing.