HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

mnhcp wrote:Same can be said on the Girls side. Their 12UA team is crushing their opponents often having to hold back.

Edina easily could have had 2 top 10 12UA teams but instead chose to have 1 crushing 12UA team.

#1 Ranked in myhockeyrankings.com (#3 in LPH)

Their top 12UB is so outplaying the competition as well (#1 ranked). Also crushing their competition. In fact their #2 12UB is #4 ranked.

It's obvious that Edina's philosophy is completely different then say Wayzata. #1 at all cost is the Edina way.

"#1 at all cost " could be about alot of associations. Like the ones that field a B-1 team and no A team, shorten bench and they smoke everyone and think they are great....when they are not.

Perhaps an argument could be made for A1 and A2 teams in some associations, but two evenly split A teams doesn't seem fair to me. The #1 player should not have to play with the #30 ranked player, nothing against the kids, but the reality is some players are better then others and don't belong on the same team.

As for B players having no shot at Varsity is just dumb, I've coached B level hockey and currently a half a dozen of the former Peewee B players are 1st years on a D6 Bantam team. Even had a former PW C player, who now is on the Bantam A team as a 2nd year. Kids develop differently, just cause they don't make an "A" doesn't mean there fate is sealed for not making Varsity. The main reason kids that make "B" level don't improve is in actuality the result of their discruntled parents being toxic on their development and in correlation the player remains bitter all year and wastes a season of development.

Moot point probably as we experiment with AA and A next year at peewee and bantam. Recently I heard Wayzata folks say they actually love having two balanced A teams and it has provided coaches with a completely new scenario of having to lift the compete level of all their A players and put more skin in the game themselves. The two A teams apparently practice together quite often and have a unified coaching structure

Parents have been slow to warm to the idea of course, and hate not being in the (meaningless, IMHO) top 10 of various rankings -- and year-end tournaments will be a BIG test of resolve -- but everything I've heard has been positive and they seem committed to doing it again next year. (Two A teams plus one AA team??? That could get interesting. Maybe they'll just do that at squirts.)

There is high level of parity in the D3 A leagues this year, and for some bizarre reason, everybody seems to think that's great.

All in all there is something to be said for association LEADERSHIP and a vision for where an association ought to go vis-a-vis winning at all costs vs. broadening the development base.

gopherpuck22 wrote:Perhaps an argument could be made for A1 and A2 teams in some associations, but two evenly split A teams doesn't seem fair to me. The #1 player should not have to play with the #30 ranked player, nothing against the kids, but the reality is some players are better then others and don't belong on the same team.

.

The extremely large associations should run two A teams. I'm talking about the ones that have over 100 players trying out for any level. It creates some parity in hockey which makes things more exciting for everyone.

In Edina, the #30 ranked player could be the #5-#10 ranked player in a medium sized association, so yes, I think the #1 ranked would survive having to play with that #30 ranked player.

Should dominant high school programs field 2 Varsity teams so the smaller less competitive high schools can compete?

A lot of it has to do with the board, player development and coaching. The association my kid plays in is nowhere near the size of Edina or Wayzata, but has good non parent coaches throughout and a very organized and involved board. The result is teams that compete and/or beat year in and year out these so called "stacked" large assocation teams.

gopherpuck22 wrote:Should dominant high school programs field 2 Varsity teams so the smaller less competitive high schools can compete?

A lot of it has to do with the board, player development and coaching. The association my kid plays in is nowhere near the size of Edina or Wayzata, but has good non parent coaches throughout and a very organized and involved board. The result is teams that compete and/or beat year in and year out these so called "stacked" large assocation teams.

Of course not....but we're not talking HS Hockey, where the main focus is on winning. We're talking youth hockey, where the focus should be on fun and development.

The "stacked" associations, as you call them, have a clear advantage over the rest with the main reason being numbers. And whereas the largest associations with the most numbers are generally in the more affluent sections of town where there is a larger percentage of parents that can afford hockey are "competing" against others from the less afluent sections of town where demographics won't allow them to reach the same numbers. Sure, coaching and board leadership can help close the gap a bit, but numbers are the biggest factor when it comes to who dominates and who doesn't.

What's so wrong with giving some other programs a chance at sniffing a State tournament every now and again?

muckandgrind wrote:
What's so wrong with giving some other programs a chance at sniffing a State tournament every now and again?

State tournament berths are earned, not given. Please try not to discriminate against the kids who work their a$$es off to become good hockey players.

You imply that you would like to take their success away and "redistribute" it in the name of fairness. If the "have-nots" don't like their participation medals, tell them to work harder and "earn" a trophy.

Everybody, don't use the number excuse.

The reason some large associations develop some of the top end players is because their players work harder because they want to make the top team. Making the top team isn't the same challenge in a smaller association so some members slack on development a little. Remember, your player isn't competing with other players in your association he's competing with all the top players in his age group in the State. Or, the entire US. Make sure no one is working harder than your player or he will fall further behind instead of closing the gap.

muckandgrind wrote:The "stacked" associations, as you call them, have a clear advantage over the rest with the main reason being numbers. And whereas the largest associations with the most numbers are generally in the more affluent sections of town where there is a larger percentage of parents that can afford hockey are "competing" against others from the less afluent sections of town where demographics won't allow them to reach the same numbers.

I'm sure some folks up in Roseau could argue this point.

The Huge Hook wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:The "stacked" associations, as you call them, have a clear advantage over the rest with the main reason being numbers. And whereas the largest associations with the most numbers are generally in the more affluent sections of town where there is a larger percentage of parents that can afford hockey are "competing" against others from the less afluent sections of town where demographics won't allow them to reach the same numbers.

I'm sure some folks up in Roseau could argue this point.

Exceptions don't disprove the rule. Numbers usually rule...not all the time, but most of the time.

The Huge Hook wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:
What's so wrong with giving some other programs a chance at sniffing a State tournament every now and again?

State tournament berths are earned, not given. Please try not to discriminate against the kids who work their a$$es off to become good hockey players.

You imply that you would like to take their success away and "redistribute" it in the name of fairness. If the "have-nots" don't like their participation medals, tell them to work harder and "earn" a trophy.

I either mis-spoke, or you mis-read me. I'm not asking anyone to be given anything other than a legitimate shot at attaining a goal. The biggest associations are only "earning" their success because they have a larger pool of players by which they can get the best 15.

Are numbers the only factor? Of course not, but don't be delusional to think that Edina, Wayzata, Eden Prarie, Maple Grove, et al don't have a HUGE built-in advantage over everyone else.

observer wrote:Everybody, don't use the number excuse.

The reason some large associations develop some of the top end players is because they players work harder because they want to make the top team. Making the top team isn't the same challenge in a smaller association so some members slack on development a little. Remember, your player isn't competing with other players in your association he's competing with all the top players in his age group in the State. Or, the entire US. Make sure no one is working harder than your player or he will fall further behind instead of closing the gap.

Disagree for the most part. Simple statistics will tell you that the Top 15 ranked players out of 100 will, by and larger, be stronger than the Top 15 ranked players out of 30. The larger the available pool, the more cream that rises to the top.

muckandgrind wrote: The biggest associations are only "earning" their success because they have a larger pool of players by which they can get the best 15.

Doesn't every association have a "best 15"??? You completely discount the work the kids put into it.

Smaller associations (numbers wise) need to have Dad's get groups of kids together when they are very young and get them skating, having fun and improving instead of playing video games and watching TV.

muckandgrind wrote:

observer wrote:Everybody, don't use the number excuse.

The reason some large associations develop some of the top end players is because they players work harder because they want to make the top team. Making the top team isn't the same challenge in a smaller association so some members slack on development a little. Remember, your player isn't competing with other players in your association he's competing with all the top players in his age group in the State. Or, the entire US. Make sure no one is working harder than your player or he will fall further behind instead of closing the gap.

Disagree for the most part. Simple statistics will tell you that the Top 15 ranked players out of 100 will, by and larger, be stronger than the Top 15 ranked players out of 30. The larger the available pool, the more cream that rises to the top.

Using this logic, China should be beating India in every World Junior Championship game.

I for one actually think it's great that Edina has 1 A team at SQ and PW.

Having a "super" team in Minnesota actually benefits the other top 10 teams in the state as it exposes them to an ever higher level of play.

Plus it will give us bragging rights on the national stage sometime soon.

The Huge Hook wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

observer wrote:Everybody, don't use the number excuse.

The reason some large associations develop some of the top end players is because they players work harder because they want to make the top team. Making the top team isn't the same challenge in a smaller association so some members slack on development a little. Remember, your player isn't competing with other players in your association he's competing with all the top players in his age group in the State. Or, the entire US. Make sure no one is working harder than your player or he will fall further behind instead of closing the gap.

Disagree for the most part. Simple statistics will tell you that the Top 15 ranked players out of 100 will, by and larger, be stronger than the Top 15 ranked players out of 30. The larger the available pool, the more cream that rises to the top.

Using this logic, China should be beating India in every World Junior Championship game.

If China and India had an equally represented pool of athletes playing hockey, then yes they would!!

The Huge Hook wrote:

muckandgrind wrote: The biggest associations are only "earning" their success because they have a larger pool of players by which they can get the best 15.

Doesn't every association have a "best 15"??? You completely discount the work the kids put into it.

Smaller associations (numbers wise) need to have Dad's get groups of kids together when they are very young and get them skating, having fun and improving instead of playing video games and watching TV.

Not at all....but it doesn't take a genius to know that the larger the sample size of players, the deeper the talent will be at the top.

I won't discount effort of ANY kids in any association. It's just that you look at the State Tournament contenders year in and year out and it's generally the larger associations taking part. '

Looks at it the other way, how many and which of the large assocations (skaters with over 75+ kids trying out at any level) aren't in the top 20 of any rankings at the end of the most seasons?

I'll stick with the they're outworking you angle. All first graders are the same. Beyond genetics the ones that become better hockey players outwork the others. Top end players now come from all over the country and some don't have another player as good within 100 miles.

Make sure no association is outworking you. Run the same practices they do and your player can develop anywhere.

observer wrote:I'll stick with the they're outworking you angle. All first graders are the same. Beyond genetics the ones that become better hockey players outwork the others. Top end players now come from all over the country and some don't have another player as good within 100 miles.

Make sure no association is outworking you. Run the same practices they do and your player can develop anywhere.

Not all first graders are the same. Some are more genetically predisposed to be better athletes. The more people you put into a sample group, the more people you have that are predisposed to excel in any given activity.

Does this mean that good hockey players aren't found in smaller associations? Of course they are...but the teams in the smaller associations generally aren't as deep top to bottom as the larger associations because they don't have as large of a talent pool to draw from.

Again, simple statistics.

I personally think that AA and A is somewhat of a middle ground to this argument.

If all the BIG associations had equal teams and they were always top 20 but never top 3 I think that you would start to see more people trying to go play AAA during the regular season. The top kids at Edina don't want to play with the 30th best player at that age level or the kid doesn't care and the parent does but that is part of the equation with youth sports is parents have some say. Minnesota is so blessed to have competitive hockey so close to them if they start trying to make really good teams just above avg. those top players will seek to find alternatives and I think you would see AAA teams start up so that they will be able to play with other top players, that would not be good for youth hockey in MN as a whole.

Either way this is a good topic. I think it got more hits because the title has something with an Edina parent. haha.

So the larger assc. have more kids working hard thus Edina should be better than Pine City every year. No matter what drills/coaches/whatever Pine comes up with.

Why is it Edinas fault they are so good????? people move to Edina to be part of a top notch hockey program and just because they are good and beating your lesser teams you want to them to change. How about you ask your own associations to take responsibility of themselves and start teaching hockey

Thinking on this same line we should make the Machine Orange and the Blades split into lesser teams so they stop beating everyone.

this is the pussification of our world today........everyone gets a trophy and all the teams are the same. quit your crying and whining and deal with the fact that someone is better than you and its ok.

I'm shocked an Edina parent would make such a statement

They are so usually so honest, modest and kind hearted.

Maybe he is a move in from EP

hunting247 wrote: Why is it Edinas fault they are so good????? people move to Edina to be part of a top notch hockey program and just because they are good and beating your lesser teams you want to them to change. How about you ask your own associations to take responsibility of themselves and start teaching hockey

Thinking on this same line we should make the Machine Orange and the Blades split into lesser teams so they stop beating everyone.

this is the pussification of our world today........everyone gets a trophy and all the teams are the same. quit your crying and whining and deal with the fact that someone is better than you and its ok.

Well put!!!

hunting247 wrote: Why is it Edinas fault they are so good????? people move to Edina to be part of a top notch hockey program and just because they are good and beating your lesser teams you want to them to change. How about you ask your own associations to take responsibility of themselves and start teaching hockey

Thinking on this same line we should make the Machine Orange and the Blades split into lesser teams so they stop beating everyone.

this is the pussification of our world today........everyone gets a trophy and all the teams are the same. quit your crying and whining and deal with the fact that someone is better than you and its ok.

If this was an attempt at sarcasm, then you failed. If it's what you truly believe, then I really feel sorry for you.

I don't see any asking that everyone gets a trophy. What I think is that youth hockey would benefit by creating a system where there is some sort of parity based on the number of kids that try out at any given level. Little League has been doing this for years with their charter system, and I don't see anyone complaining about that.

If it's cool for you to see the same large associations at the top of the standings year in and year out, that's cool. To me, it's just become a big [YAWN]...and incredibly freakin' boring.

If you are someone who would actually choose to move their family to a location based solely on how competitive the youth hockey program is...then I TRULY feel sorry for you. You've seem to have lost all perspective.