HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

I think something like MN Selects (4 regions) shows the challange for the Northern or any outstate kids. Basically the North gets everything North of I94 for MN Selects or Super Series events. And they need this area to compete with the Metro area populations. Cutting that to three expands it even more.

So if they used a similar region plan for HPC that will create a significant challenge for those kids depending on practice schedules games etc...

Will USA hockey set up HPC centers, similar to what they do in Ann Arbor with the NDTP? Billet kids?

What age are the HPC's starting at?

royals dad wrote:

O-townClown wrote:

old goalie85 wrote:I can't afford my five hockey players. Why would I be interested in paying for someone from Edina's kid????????? Yea right !!!!! People have lost their minds, I thinks the idea of choice is fine!! But we should pay our own way..........You want your kid to fly around the country playing hockey thats cool with me. You pay for it.....

Old, I think HPC will be subsidized by the NHL grant money.

Hockey in the U.S. has a pay-to-play mentality, so I think you're safe. Club soccer, on the other hand, seems to be run much differently. Coaches are paid. A recreational base in essence is taxed to reduce the burden borne by those who actually receive the training.

Who funds the kids in NDP, they have ice every day, professional coaches, trainers, meals, travel world wide, and nice equipment. I don't think they bring in any significant gate revenue. I have never researched it but have always thought that at least some of the funding comes from player and coach annual dues, is that incorrect?

Well, the players at the NTDP are not paying it. They do get corporate contributions, but the rest of the money for everything that USA Hockey does comes from the $30 every registered player pays them, just like the added $10 funds Minnesota Hockey. So I don't think it is too much of a stretch that either USA Hockey or Minnesota Hockey will raise that by say $5-$10 per player to help fund the HPC teams.

royals dad wrote:

O-townClown wrote:

old goalie85 wrote:I can't afford my five hockey players. Why would I be interested in paying for someone from Edina's kid????????? Yea right !!!!! People have lost their minds, I thinks the idea of choice is fine!! But we should pay our own way..........You want your kid to fly around the country playing hockey thats cool with me. You pay for it.....

Old, I think HPC will be subsidized by the NHL grant money.

Hockey in the U.S. has a pay-to-play mentality, so I think you're safe. Club soccer, on the other hand, seems to be run much differently. Coaches are paid. A recreational base in essence is taxed to reduce the burden borne by those who actually receive the training.

Who funds the kids in NDP, they have ice every day, professional coaches, trainers, meals, travel world wide, and nice equipment. I don't think they bring in any significant gate revenue. I have never researched it but have always thought that at least some of the funding comes from player and coach annual dues, is that incorrect?

Manufacturers have been sending the boys tons of equipment in hopes of them wearing their line.

I'm not sure if they get part of the revenue at the USHL games..

I think it will be paid for by the NHL through USA Hockey.

Once a super talented kid reaches Bantam minor he can make an HPC, This means he doesn't need to be rich to get his shot at the big time.

Logic says money talks and every thing else walks. The NHL is not a charitable institution, they do however have a problem feeding high quality players into the system as the league continues to expand. .

So how about this? ADM from mites to bantam paid for by you. 4 years HPC (bantam/midget) paid for by USA Hockey ...

USHL just as it is for 3 years Then a shot at the NHL.

Everybody else Association, High School, NAHL, college. then the draft. Opinions??

Quasar wrote:I think it will be paid for by the NHL through USA Hockey.

Once a super talented kid reaches Bantam minor he can make an HPC, This means he doesn't need to be rich to get his shot at the big time.

Logic says money talks and every thing else walks. The NHL is not a charitable institution, they do however have a problem feeding high quality players into the system as the league continues to expand. .

So how about this? ADM from mites to bantam paid for by you. 4 years HPC (bantam/midget) paid for by USA Hockey ...

USHL just as it is for 3 years Then a shot at the NHL.

Everybody else Association, High School, NAHL, college. then the draft. Opinions??

USA Hockey will subsidize some of the showcases but the HPCs themselves will hire coaches, rent ice, and collect revenue just like they do now. The questions and answers below are from the HPC FAQ section. All this is hypothetical as last I heard the whole HPC portion was on indefinite hold due to the trouble with implementation. That may be old info, I heard it last summer.

How much of the money will go to fund HPCs?

None of the money will go directly to the teams. The money will go toward subsidizing operational expenses of the showcases (Entry fees, ice time, officials, etc.), thus saving the clubs and hopefully families on the expense side of participating.



What are the approx. costs per player for the HPCs?

Our goal is to not increase current cost to the players and provide increased value for what they are currently paying. In fact, our goal is to reduce operational expenses to the clubs that are passed along to the players and their families.

royals dad wrote:Who funds the kids in NDP, they have ice every day, professional coaches, trainers, meals, travel world wide, and nice equipment. I don't think they bring in any significant gate revenue. I have never researched it but have always thought that at least some of the funding comes from player and coach annual dues, is that incorrect?

Royals, that's a good point. I wasn't thinking about that. Florida alone has 9,000 registered players. Minnesota is around 50,000 I think. There are about 40 kids in the Development Program. It isn't a significant amount. At most a dollar per registered player.

I think the issue would be if each registered player in Minnesota were hit with a hidden surcharge of $50-100 with the money going to the HPC. I do not think that's the case.

My understanding is that the NHL money is going to be used to pay for a good portion of the HPC program.

longrebound wrote:USA Hockey will subsidize some of the showcases but the HPCs themselves will hire coaches, rent ice, and collect revenue just like they do now. The questions and answers below are from the HPC FAQ section. All this is hypothetical as last I heard the whole HPC portion was on indefinite hold due to the trouble with implementation. That may be old info, I heard it last summer.

How much of the money will go to fund HPCs?

None of the money will go directly to the teams. The money will go toward subsidizing operational expenses of the showcases (Entry fees, ice time, officials, etc.), thus saving the clubs and hopefully families on the expense side of participating.



What are the approx. costs per player for the HPCs?

Our goal is to not increase current cost to the players and provide increased value for what they are currently paying. In fact, our goal is to reduce operational expenses to the clubs that are passed along to the players and their families.

Long:

USA Hockey is going to run a pilot program for U13 (first-year Bantam) and U14 (second-year Bantam) teams this September. What I heard was 6-8 teams at 6-8 venues for a total of 48 1998 and 48 1997 teams.

Over the course of the weekend they will receive three games, some classroom, and education on fitness and nutrition.

This was announced at the Winter Meeting and I checked with our ADM rep two weeks ago and he said it is still on.

O-townClown wrote:

longrebound wrote:USA Hockey will subsidize some of the showcases but the HPCs themselves will hire coaches, rent ice, and collect revenue just like they do now. The questions and answers below are from the HPC FAQ section. All this is hypothetical as last I heard the whole HPC portion was on indefinite hold due to the trouble with implementation. That may be old info, I heard it last summer.

How much of the money will go to fund HPCs?

None of the money will go directly to the teams. The money will go toward subsidizing operational expenses of the showcases (Entry fees, ice time, officials, etc.), thus saving the clubs and hopefully families on the expense side of participating.



What are the approx. costs per player for the HPCs?

Our goal is to not increase current cost to the players and provide increased value for what they are currently paying. In fact, our goal is to reduce operational expenses to the clubs that are passed along to the players and their families.

Long:

USA Hockey is going to run a pilot program for U13 (first-year Bantam) and U14 (second-year Bantam) teams this September. What I heard was 6-8 teams at 6-8 venues for a total of 48 1998 and 48 1997 teams.

Over the course of the weekend they will receive three games, some classroom, and education on fitness and nutrition.

This was announced at the Winter Meeting and I checked with our ADM rep two weeks ago and he said it is still on.

From the winter meeting ADM report...

"we will also be attempting a small scale test on our high performance education program this fall. This will include participation by our NTDP and College Hockey, Inc. (CHI) (our NCAA Coaches). The plan is to run a single weekend event where we invite some regional bantam teams (to reduce travel expenses) and have those teams participate in two games, one practice, some off-ice testing and several presentations on elite athlete performance. The presentations would be done by CHI, and our ADM and NTDP
staffs on what it takes to be an elite athlete. This would provide parent education as well. We would also be including the participating bantam coaches in a workshop to help them become better at their craft. Our goals are to test the logistics of this type of event, help educate the participating players, parents and coaches as to what is important as they move forward along their own development pathways, and to collect data on some of our better players. We then hope to establish better direct communication with our player pool down the road."

O-townClown wrote:

longrebound wrote:USA Hockey will subsidize some of the showcases but the HPCs themselves will hire coaches, rent ice, and collect revenue just like they do now. The questions and answers below are from the HPC FAQ section. All this is hypothetical as last I heard the whole HPC portion was on indefinite hold due to the trouble with implementation. That may be old info, I heard it last summer.

How much of the money will go to fund HPCs?

None of the money will go directly to the teams. The money will go toward subsidizing operational expenses of the showcases (Entry fees, ice time, officials, etc.), thus saving the clubs and hopefully families on the expense side of participating.



What are the approx. costs per player for the HPCs?

Our goal is to not increase current cost to the players and provide increased value for what they are currently paying. In fact, our goal is to reduce operational expenses to the clubs that are passed along to the players and their families.

Long:

USA Hockey is going to run a pilot program for U13 (first-year Bantam) and U14 (second-year Bantam) teams this September. What I heard was 6-8 teams at 6-8 venues for a total of 48 1998 and 48 1997 teams.

Over the course of the weekend they will receive three games, some classroom, and education on fitness and nutrition.

This was announced at the Winter Meeting and I checked with our ADM rep two weeks ago and he said it is still on.

You would think that if it was going to happen in September you would have heard about it wouldn't you? Have any of the elite kids been tapped for this yet or will they pick a team to do this like the Machine or Blades.

dogeatdog1 wrote:You would think that if it was going to happen in September you would have heard about it wouldn't you? Have any of the elite kids been tapped for this yet or will they pick a team to do this like the Machine or Blades.

The event is program based. They will invite intact teams. The summer Select camp is the individual side of high-performance.

I figured no Minnesota teams will get invited, but you are correct they could include some off-season groups. Maybe I'm wrong.

O-townClown wrote:
I figured no Minnesota teams will get invited, but you are correct they could include some off-season groups. Maybe I'm wrong.

I think your right. I've also heard they are much more concerned with other areas of the country which are not as well developed as Minnesota.
I've been told that Minnesota will be on the back burner for the first program start ups. I guess it makes sense there are a number of teams, both in the associations, and the summer AAA that could just step in and play at the initial HPC level. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

The other reason no Minnesota off-season team will get invited is because they are not registered with USA Hockey. No way they bring in a team that doesn't play under their banner.

jpiehl wrote:The other reason no Minnesota off-season team will get invited is because they are not registered with USA Hockey. No way they bring in a team that doesn't play under their banner.

Good point...... What a mess

Quasar wrote:I think your right. I've also heard they are much more concerned with other areas of the country which are not as well developed as Minnesota.

I've been told that Minnesota will be on the back burner for the first program start ups. I guess it makes sense there are a number of teams, both in the associations, and the summer AAA that could just step in and play at the initial HPC level. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

I never sensed that USA Hockey is more concerned with other areas in any negative way. If you just meant it with no sinister connotation, then yes. It seems that USA Hockey is very pleased with Minnesota and the Minnesota affiliate.

O-townClown wrote:

Quasar wrote:I think your right. I've also heard they are much more concerned with other areas of the country which are not as well developed as Minnesota.

I've been told that Minnesota will be on the back burner for the first program start ups. I guess it makes sense there are a number of teams, both in the associations, and the summer AAA that could just step in and play at the initial HPC level. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

I never sensed that USA Hockey is more concerned with other areas in any negative way. If you just meant it with no sinister connotation, then yes. It seems that USA Hockey is very pleased with Minnesota and the Minnesota affiliate.

Not negative, not sinister, just the reality of Minnesota's place within USA hockey. I support USA hockey, and I support Minnesota hockey.
love the game, and believe it or not everyone involved in it.

PS: BO, I hope you're feeling the lake effect soon!!

Some results of the Wisconsin new budget process made the news this past week. One thing became apparent that shows how things can be corrupted. Under the existing Teacher’s Union bargaining agreement, the school districts had to buy medical insurance from the WEA Trust, a company created by the Teacher’s Union. The WEA Trust had told the school districts that the WEA Trust had to raise their medical insurance rates in the new budget cycle.

With the new state law eliminating the collective bargaining agreement, the WEA Trust was forced to compete for a school districts business. They reduced their rates and the school districts became more solvent.

USA Hockey does something similar as the WEA Trust. They own the insurance coverage and make the cost of the insurance part of the fee each player pays when they register on line. The insurance company was created by USA Hockey and I believe goes by the name HARP. The same potential corrupting ingredients exist in USA Hockey that exists in the Wisconsin Teacher’s Union.

USA Hockey tout’s the ADM model, but for Minnesota, it is a marginal program at best. I have watched the ADM model bore the hell out of mite aged kids as Saturday after Saturday they go out and effectively practice and then have to watch their older siblings actually play games. The ADM design maximizes ice time which is tough to come by in most states, but not in Minnesota.

It is time that Minnesota Hockey goes its own way and strike deals with neighboring states to form a regional hockey association. After all, USA Hockey’s charter is national hockey and most of that occurs at the Bantam level or above. With the Olympics going professional, their national role is minimal.

USA policies hurt Minnesota Hockey. It is a system designed for “Little Caesar” hockey and has resulted in an ugly “semi-professional” approach to peewee hockey where good players constantly jump ship to search for good competition. Some finally come to Minnesota to play association hockey.

It is time to leave USA Hockey. We don’t need it and it hurts Minnesota Hockey numbers especially in tough times.

frederick61 wrote:Some results of the Wisconsin new budget process made the news this past week. One thing became apparent that shows how things can be corrupted. Under the existing Teacher’s Union bargaining agreement, the school districts had to buy medical insurance from the WEA Trust, a company created by the Teacher’s Union. The WEA Trust had told the school districts that the WEA Trust had to raise their medical insurance rates in the new budget cycle.

With the new state law eliminating the collective bargaining agreement, the WEA Trust was forced to compete for a school districts business. They reduced their rates and the school districts became more solvent.

USA Hockey does something similar as the WEA Trust. They own the insurance coverage and make the cost of the insurance part of the fee each player pays when they register on line. The insurance company was created by USA Hockey and I believe goes by the name HARP. The same potential corrupting ingredients exist in USA Hockey that exists in the Wisconsin Teacher’s Union.

USA Hockey tout’s the ADM model, but for Minnesota, it is a marginal program at best. I have watched the ADM model bore the hell out of mite aged kids as Saturday after Saturday they go out and effectively practice and then have to watch their older siblings actually play games. The ADM design maximizes ice time which is tough to come by in most states, but not in Minnesota.

It is time that Minnesota Hockey goes its own way and strike deals with neighboring states to form a regional hockey association. After all, USA Hockey’s charter is national hockey and most of that occurs at the Bantam level or above. With the Olympics going professional, their national role is minimal.

USA policies hurt Minnesota Hockey. It is a system designed for “Little Caesar” hockey and has resulted in an ugly “semi-professional” approach to peewee hockey where good players constantly jump ship to search for good competition. Some finally come to Minnesota to play association hockey.

It is time to leave USA Hockey. We don’t need it and it hurts Minnesota Hockey numbers especially in tough times.

I think Minnesota hockey could stand on it's own. The question I have is how would it work? Would we have Midget level hockey? Would we set up a schedule that would let kids play the amount of games necessary to compete at the national level once they left Minnesota? Would we set up our own Junior system that would be equal to the USHL? Like it or not USA hockey provides for more than insurance, but I agree it has become just another profit center for them. I think Minnesota hockey should seriously evaluate all avenues open to them with the goal of improving hockey for everyone playing the game. From Mites to grandpas.
In my opinion this would have to include the very few at the top... They need a place to compete and grow as well as the average A player
Perhaps if Minnesota hockey opened up a little the best of both worlds could be achieved. Hard questions I know.
You have great insight into the critical age group. I for one would be interested in your ideas about how this could work

frederick61 wrote:Some results of the Wisconsin new budget process made the news this past week. One thing became apparent that shows how things can be corrupted. Under the existing Teacher’s Union bargaining agreement, the school districts had to buy medical insurance from the WEA Trust, a company created by the Teacher’s Union. The WEA Trust had told the school districts that the WEA Trust had to raise their medical insurance rates in the new budget cycle.

With the new state law eliminating the collective bargaining agreement, the WEA Trust was forced to compete for a school districts business. They reduced their rates and the school districts became more solvent.

USA Hockey does something similar as the WEA Trust. They own the insurance coverage and make the cost of the insurance part of the fee each player pays when they register on line. The insurance company was created by USA Hockey and I believe goes by the name HARP. The same potential corrupting ingredients exist in USA Hockey that exists in the Wisconsin Teacher’s Union.

USA Hockey tout’s the ADM model, but for Minnesota, it is a marginal program at best. I have watched the ADM model bore the hell out of mite aged kids as Saturday after Saturday they go out and effectively practice and then have to watch their older siblings actually play games. The ADM design maximizes ice time which is tough to come by in most states, but not in Minnesota.

It is time that Minnesota Hockey goes its own way and strike deals with neighboring states to form a regional hockey association. After all, USA Hockey’s charter is national hockey and most of that occurs at the Bantam level or above. With the Olympics going professional, their national role is minimal.

USA policies hurt Minnesota Hockey. It is a system designed for “Little Caesar” hockey and has resulted in an ugly “semi-professional” approach to peewee hockey where good players constantly jump ship to search for good competition. Some finally come to Minnesota to play association hockey.

It is time to leave USA Hockey. We don’t need it and it hurts Minnesota Hockey numbers especially in tough times.

So, let me get this straight ...

You are against a captive insurance approach even though you really don't know how it works or that it costs less than $2 per year for members (try googling captive insurance). You hate the ADM Model because the young kids don't play enough games even though the focus of ADM for ages 6-9 is fun, competitive games in practice. You say USA Hockey panders to the Little Caesars model even though they really wish that everyone would do it like Minnesota. They openly state that Massachusetts hockey has been ruined by moving away from the community model. Finally, you totally misstate USA Hockey's mission with regards to youth hockey.

Nobody knows better than USA Hockey, how good we have it here. A kid that joins Little Caesars (or Honeybaked, Pittsburgh Hornets, Westchester Express, etc) as a Squirt Major and stays with them through Midgets will spend $40K plus travel. As stated in a different thread, Moorhead had four kids play in the NHL last year and they probably spent about $1000 apiece on their entire childhood hockey experience. They most likely did not play any Squirt travel hockey and no summer AAA hockey. ADM is not a perfect approach but at least there is some blueprint for development rather than the loudest guy in the room getting his way just because he played "D1" back in the day.

The National Governing Body for the sport of ice hockey has 600,000 members, annual revenue of $34,000,000, and net assets (a/k/a "owner's equity") of a million bucks. Deferred revenue of $9 million at the start of hockey season (Sept. 1st) means they collect a bunch of annual fees with knowledge they'll be spent as earned over the course of the year.

I guess you could make a case for reducing the $30 annual registration fee, but why do that considering the entity doesn't have a lot of money?

For comparison, I looked at a couple random NGBs to see their figures. USA Cycling has 66,800 licenses sold for last year (members?). Net assets ("owner's equity" is $11 million, revenue is also $11 million.

The USTA has 700,000 members. It costs about $40 annually for an adult and $20 for a child.

It is hard to tell how solvent the insurance carrier is. Are you suggesting they have somehow created an "off the books" entity that hides a substantial amount of money? Maybe they do. Insurers have large reserve requirements and maybe it would be better not to self-insure.

When I look at numbers like this, it seems USA Hockey (or other NGBs) could only go a year without charging to register before they'd be out of business. Maybe they have too many costly programs and costly staff and need to do less, not more.

Wow, well said Long.

Quasar wrote:

frederick61 wrote:Some results of the Wisconsin new budget process made the news this past week. One thing became apparent that shows how things can be corrupted. Under the existing Teacher’s Union bargaining agreement, the school districts had to buy medical insurance from the WEA Trust, a company created by the Teacher’s Union. The WEA Trust had told the school districts that the WEA Trust had to raise their medical insurance rates in the new budget cycle.

With the new state law eliminating the collective bargaining agreement, the WEA Trust was forced to compete for a school districts business. They reduced their rates and the school districts became more solvent.

USA Hockey does something similar as the WEA Trust. They own the insurance coverage and make the cost of the insurance part of the fee each player pays when they register on line. The insurance company was created by USA Hockey and I believe goes by the name HARP. The same potential corrupting ingredients exist in USA Hockey that exists in the Wisconsin Teacher’s Union.

USA Hockey tout’s the ADM model, but for Minnesota, it is a marginal program at best. I have watched the ADM model bore the hell out of mite aged kids as Saturday after Saturday they go out and effectively practice and then have to watch their older siblings actually play games. The ADM design maximizes ice time which is tough to come by in most states, but not in Minnesota.

It is time that Minnesota Hockey goes its own way and strike deals with neighboring states to form a regional hockey association. After all, USA Hockey’s charter is national hockey and most of that occurs at the Bantam level or above. With the Olympics going professional, their national role is minimal.

USA policies hurt Minnesota Hockey. It is a system designed for “Little Caesar” hockey and has resulted in an ugly “semi-professional” approach to peewee hockey where good players constantly jump ship to search for good competition. Some finally come to Minnesota to play association hockey.

It is time to leave USA Hockey. We don’t need it and it hurts Minnesota Hockey numbers especially in tough times.

I think Minnesota hockey could stand on it's own. The question I have is how would it work? Would we have Midget level hockey? Would we set up a schedule that would let kids play the amount of games necessary to compete at the national level once they left Minnesota? Would we set up our own Junior system that would be equal to the USHL? Like it or not USA hockey provides for more than insurance, but I agree it has become just another profit center for them. I think Minnesota hockey should seriously evaluate all avenues open to them with the goal of improving hockey for everyone playing the game. From Mites to grandpas.
In my opinion this would have to include the very few at the top... They need a place to compete and grow as well as the average A player
Perhaps if Minnesota hockey opened up a little the best of both worlds could be achieved. Hard questions I know.
You have great insight into the critical age group. I for one would be interested in your ideas about how this could work

While some sit and criticise, others get involved, go to work, and get the job done. There are many working very hard to provide the best hockey experience possible for our kids. Working with Minnesota Hockey, as an affiliate of USA Hockey. Giving input, rolling up their sleeves, and walking the talk. Leaving USA Hockey? I think not. Getting involved to improve USA Hockey? Absolutely. Thanks for giving the ADM and long term development a fair shot.

[quote="SECoach"While some sit and criticise, others get involved, go to work, and get the job done. There are many working very hard to provide the best hockey experience possible for our kids. Working with Minnesota Hockey, as an affiliate of USA Hockey. Giving input, rolling up their sleeves, and walking the talk. Leaving USA Hockey? I think not. Getting involved to improve USA Hockey? Absolutely. Thanks for giving the ADM and long term development a fair shot.

I think what frederick61 has brought up is on many peoples minds. I’m sure he is only trying to make Minnesota hockey stronger. I think that because of his tireless involvement in peewee hockey he probably knows more Minnesota hockey parents than most people posting on this forum. USA hockey provides little more to Minnesota hockey than insurance, and in the case of the ADM , guidance. Because of the structure of Minnesota hockey there is little more that they can do. Coach, it is the people like you and Frederick that will determine what Minnesota hockey will look like in the future. I know that there are many posters to this forum that have agendas. They like to shoot everything down before it can germinate, or at the least before there are too many points of view expressed. But we all know there are many sides to all problems. Insurance is not a big deal. It can be provided many ways for as low a cost as USA hockey. The AAU does a good job of providing insurance to other sports. Now, before anyones head explodes, I’m not suggesting AAU for Minnesota hockey. It is interesting that there is a small movement toward the AAU, but Minnesota hockey can do this all by itself.
The problem as I see it is the absolute resistance to programs like the winter choice programs popping up all over the place. If Minnesota hockey would just remove the residence requirements, and allow for some level of midget hockey, I think most of the perceived problems talked about on this forum would disappear.
There are a lot of people that have invested a lot of time in Minnesota hockey, Myself included, that feel they have the right to make their opinion known. Because of informed, reasonable people like you, the discussion will continue to move forward. The ADM is a development approach that gives us a basis for discussion, not much more. We were doing these things years ago on all that free ice.
It is as frederick observed an attempt to maximize the use of ice sheets. USA hockey does not have the answers for Minnesota. You, and frederick, Mr Bo Dangles, HD41, Spin-O-rama etc etc.. Have the answer. All you gotta do is keep talking!

Quasar wrote:[quote="SECoach"While some sit and criticise, others get involved, go to work, and get the job done. There are many working very hard to provide the best hockey experience possible for our kids. Working with Minnesota Hockey, as an affiliate of USA Hockey. Giving input, rolling up their sleeves, and walking the talk. Leaving USA Hockey? I think not. Getting involved to improve USA Hockey? Absolutely. Thanks for giving the ADM and long term development a fair shot.

I think what frederick61 has brought up is on many peoples minds. I’m sure he is only trying to make Minnesota hockey stronger. I think that because of his tireless involvement in peewee hockey he probably knows more Minnesota hockey parents than most people posting on this forum. USA hockey provides little more to Minnesota hockey than insurance, and in the case of the ADM , guidance. Because of the structure of Minnesota hockey there is little more that they can do. Coach, it is the people like you and Frederick that will determine what Minnesota hockey will look like in the future. I know that there are many posters to this forum that have agendas. They like to shoot everything down before it can germinate, or at the least before there are too many points of view expressed. But we all know there are many sides to all problems. Insurance is not a big deal. It can be provided many ways for as low a cost as USA hockey. The AAU does a good job of providing insurance to other sports. Now, before anyones head explodes, I’m not suggesting AAU for Minnesota hockey. It is interesting that there is a small movement toward the AAU, but Minnesota hockey can do this all by itself.
The problem as I see it is the absolute resistance to programs like the winter choice programs popping up all over the place. If Minnesota hockey would just remove the residence requirements, and allow for some level of midget hockey, I think most of the perceived problems talked about on this forum would disappear.
There are a lot of people that have invested a lot of time in Minnesota hockey, Myself included, that feel they have the right to make their opinion known. Because of informed, reasonable people like you, the discussion will continue to move forward. The ADM is a development approach that gives us a basis for discussion, not much more. We were doing these things years ago on all that free ice.
It is as frederick observed an attempt to maximize the use of ice sheets. USA hockey does not have the answers for Minnesota. You, and frederick, Mr Bo Dangles, HD41, Spin-O-rama etc etc.. Have the answer. All you gotta do is keep talking!

And Minnesota Hockey does a fantastic job of working in the best interests of Minnesota kids while being an affiliate of USA Hockey. USA Hockey does a great job of providing Minnesota Hockey with resources and guidance, while supporting Minnesota Hockey in its efforts to provide services that are unique to our state of hockey. To suggest that Minnesota break from USA Hockey is rediculous and uniformed.

SECoach wrote:

Quasar wrote:[quote="SECoach"While some sit and criticise, others get involved, go to work, and get the job done. There are many working very hard to provide the best hockey experience possible for our kids. Working with Minnesota Hockey, as an affiliate of USA Hockey. Giving input, rolling up their sleeves, and walking the talk. Leaving USA Hockey? I think not. Getting involved to improve USA Hockey? Absolutely. Thanks for giving the ADM and long term development a fair shot.

I think what frederick61 has brought up is on many peoples minds. I’m sure he is only trying to make Minnesota hockey stronger. I think that because of his tireless involvement in peewee hockey he probably knows more Minnesota hockey parents than most people posting on this forum. USA hockey provides little more to Minnesota hockey than insurance, and in the case of the ADM , guidance. Because of the structure of Minnesota hockey there is little more that they can do. Coach, it is the people like you and Frederick that will determine what Minnesota hockey will look like in the future. I know that there are many posters to this forum that have agendas. They like to shoot everything down before it can germinate, or at the least before there are too many points of view expressed. But we all know there are many sides to all problems. Insurance is not a big deal. It can be provided many ways for as low a cost as USA hockey. The AAU does a good job of providing insurance to other sports. Now, before anyones head explodes, I’m not suggesting AAU for Minnesota hockey. It is interesting that there is a small movement toward the AAU, but Minnesota hockey can do this all by itself.
The problem as I see it is the absolute resistance to programs like the winter choice programs popping up all over the place. If Minnesota hockey would just remove the residence requirements, and allow for some level of midget hockey, I think most of the perceived problems talked about on this forum would disappear.
There are a lot of people that have invested a lot of time in Minnesota hockey, Myself included, that feel they have the right to make their opinion known. Because of informed, reasonable people like you, the discussion will continue to move forward. The ADM is a development approach that gives us a basis for discussion, not much more. We were doing these things years ago on all that free ice.
It is as frederick observed an attempt to maximize the use of ice sheets. USA hockey does not have the answers for Minnesota. You, and frederick, Mr Bo Dangles, HD41, Spin-O-rama etc etc.. Have the answer. All you gotta do is keep talking!

And Minnesota Hockey does a fantastic job of working in the best interests of Minnesota kids while being an affiliate of USA Hockey. USA Hockey does a great job of providing Minnesota Hockey with resources and guidance, while supporting Minnesota Hockey in its efforts to provide services that are unique to our state of hockey. To suggest that Minnesota break from USA Hockey is rediculous and uniformed.

I'll go along with the ridiculous part of your comment. Your right It ain't gonna happen. The second part not so much.. Just because someone disagrees with your point of view doesn't make them uniformed.

Coach,
Here is an interesting link for you to explore. It is important to understand whats going on in the rest of the world...

http://hockeymichigan.org/index.php