HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD wrote:
Is it possible that USA Hockey rules are the reason? 2000s are bantams elsewhere.

USA Hockey rules do not prevent this.

Minnesota teams of 2000-01-02 are Bantam teams in the eyes of USA Hockey. Check a CyberSport generated 1-T. A team is the age of its oldest player.

The whole older-kids/no-boundaries argument has been beat to death. Teams form under different circumstances. However people feel won't change based on another post about the subject. We all have our opinion by now.

O-townClown wrote:

CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD wrote:
Is it possible that USA Hockey rules are the reason? 2000s are bantams elsewhere.

USA Hockey rules do not prevent this.

Minnesota teams of 2000-01-02 are Bantam teams in the eyes of USA Hockey. Check a CyberSport generated 1-T. A team is the age of its oldest player.

The whole older-kids/no-boundaries argument has been beat to death. Teams form under different circumstances. However people feel won't change based on another post about the subject. We all have our opinion by now.

Maybe the Clown can explain the flexible rules giving MN teams the ability to play tier 1 opponents outside the state of Minnesota. It's happening and although I'm not opposing, who is regulating established rules on the books? Is it USA Hock or MN Hock...or because there are similar members on each board of directors, does it even matter?

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:

O-townClown wrote:

CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD wrote:
Is it possible that USA Hockey rules are the reason? 2000s are bantams elsewhere.

USA Hockey rules do not prevent this.

Minnesota teams of 2000-01-02 are Bantam teams in the eyes of USA Hockey. Check a CyberSport generated 1-T. A team is the age of its oldest player.

The whole older-kids/no-boundaries argument has been beat to death. Teams form under different circumstances. However people feel won't change based on another post about the subject. We all have our opinion by now.

Maybe the Clown can explain the flexible rules giving MN teams the ability to play tier 1 opponents outside the state of Minnesota. It's happening and although I'm not opposing, who is regulating established rules on the books? Is it USA Hock or MN Hock...or because there are similar members on each board of directors, does it even matter?

It's easy. The district hosting the games probably sanctioned them as a Bantam non-checking event.

MrBoDangles wrote:

JSR wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote: Yep, very young last year when they went.

40 player, Superior, Wisconsin was the team when you brought up age structure.

Hope this helps you.

I think we're mixing our discussions a hair here, but if we want to get technical the 40 players at Superiors age level was in question when talking about a Madison Capitols 2001 team as I recall. That 2001 Cap team had like 25 players at it's tryout (and it's not because they didn't want more), so..... as I have said before, not all Tier 1 teams are these miraculous "all star" teams that you think they are when they are put together

You had to bring it up again just to be a smart arse. Get off your little age kick and we're all good.

You bring a lot of good info to the bored.... Stick to that instead.

No problem, I was thinking about it and really it's a pretty silly discussion anyway

Ugottobekiddingme wrote: Maybe the Clown can explain the flexible rules giving MN teams the ability to play tier 1 opponents outside the state of Minnesota. It's happening and although I'm not opposing, who is regulating established rules on the books? Is it USA Hock or MN Hock...or because there are similar members on each board of directors, does it even matter?

Ugotz, I'm not clear on rules in your Affiliate. I know Minnesota Hockey and the Districts within it have a lot of rules.

USA Hockey has few rules regarding play. If a team of Mite boys want to play a team of teenage girls it's probably okay.

O-townClown wrote:

Ugottobekiddingme wrote: Maybe the Clown can explain the flexible rules giving MN teams the ability to play tier 1 opponents outside the state of Minnesota. It's happening and although I'm not opposing, who is regulating established rules on the books? Is it USA Hock or MN Hock...or because there are similar members on each board of directors, does it even matter?

Ugotz, I'm not clear on rules in your Affiliate. I know Minnesota Hockey and the Districts within it have a lot of rules.

USA Hockey has few rules regarding play. If a team of Mite boys want to play a team of teenage girls it's probably okay.

Another loss of respect for USA hock with that example.

LOOK in the mirror at our hokey leaders in the usa for the kids and you will see why we get MOLD instead of GOLD

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:

O-townClown wrote:

Ugottobekiddingme wrote: Maybe the Clown can explain the flexible rules giving MN teams the ability to play tier 1 opponents outside the state of Minnesota. It's happening and although I'm not opposing, who is regulating established rules on the books? Is it USA Hock or MN Hock...or because there are similar members on each board of directors, does it even matter?

Ugotz, I'm not clear on rules in your Affiliate. I know Minnesota Hockey and the Districts within it have a lot of rules.

USA Hockey has few rules regarding play. If a team of Mite boys want to play a team of teenage girls it's probably okay.

Another loss of respect for USA hock with that example.

I think Otown used an extreme example but a semi true one. Here in Wisconsin there are not "tons" of girls teams so they often play "down" against boys teams for quality competition. For instance U12 girls teams will play tons of games against association Squirt teams here all the time. U12 would be pee wee aged playing squirt teams, and it's usually great games with on par compeition doing it that way. MN Hockeys rules are in some ways alot "stricter" and you have more rules in some ways than the rest of USA Hockey does, my guess is if MN Hockey and that teams district up there said you could do something then I doubt you will find another USA ockey area that would say no