MN Blades Mite Program

[royals dad]

It seems like D6 might be more worried that these two mite programs are a bit of a slippery slope that will lead to full year AAA. I doubt that they care if mites are skating in practices and clinics during the winter season but they care if they turn into a year round 2002 team. However, I also doubt that this is the end of what the Blades/MM would like to do more likely it is baby steps by the organizations towards year round birth year teams.

It all plays into the larger debate between the current system in Minnesota and what the rest of the country does. D6 just happens to have the home of both programs to close for comfort so they are dealing with it first.

I tend to fall into the camp that we are lucky to have the system we have and that year round AAA will set Minnesota hockey back but that it is probably inevitable that it happens.

[CRMiteHockey]

It seems like D6 might be more worried that these two mite programs are a bit of a slippery slope that will lead to full year AAA. I doubt that they care if mites are skating in practices and clinics during the winter season but they care if they turn into a year round 2002 team. However, I also doubt that this is the end of what the Blades/MM would like to do more likely it is baby steps by the organizations towards year round birth year teams.

It all plays into the larger debate between the current system in Minnesota and what the rest of the country does. D6 just happens to have the home of both programs to close for comfort so they are dealing with it first.

I tend to fall into the camp that we are lucky to have the system we have and that year round AAA will set Minnesota hockey back but that it is probably inevitable that it happens.

I decided to email the D6 director and asked him to take a look at this thread. I asked a question and a follow up question. Start at the bottom. Here are the emails and responses:

Sorry

Lawyers are not letting me pick and choose based on a fair non discriminatory process -
If the Mite is playing in a MH mite league that plays games they cannot play in another league

And I believe you about participation
But understand others have said the same and not followed through

What you play in Spring Summer and Fall is wide open

Brad



Brad Hewitt-RVP
PHH/First Fleet Corp
Cell- 952-250-6431

________________________________________
From:
To: Hewitt, Brad
Cc: peteskophammer@live.com <peteskophammer@live.com>; mevans3656@q.com <mevans3656@q.com>; jperry@compassgroupmn.com <jperry@compassgroupmn.com>
Sent: Sun Jul 18 09:56:21 2010
Subject: RE: High School Hockey Forum Request
Thanks Brad, I appreciate the quick response.

I have a more specific question, I hope you can also answer.

If my child is registered with the Choice League over at Minnesota Made at the mite level, and I also would like him to play for his association and I can work it out with the coach of his team, would that be acceptable? I recognize that at the Squirt and Pee Wee levels that this would not be practical, but in years past my boys have participated in both at the mite level with only minor conflicts. We have always taken the position that if a conflict arose with a game, the association would always win out.

Thanks again!

****



From: Hewitt, Brad [mailto:Brad.Hewitt@phh.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 8:21 AM
To: ********@comcast.net
Cc: peteskophammer@live.com; mevans3656@q.com; jperry@compassgroupmn.com
Subject: Re: High School Hockey Forum Request

Thanks *****
Glad to answer you question and as usual there is a mix of fact and fiction on the web

First off this does not impact any instructional clinics at all
It was crafted solely to protect the other kids on a team so we have
Lack of attendance hurting others

IE you play on a A or B team
It is having a bad year so player chooses to miss events to play other league games
Etc etc

It will be enforced for leagues only
At all levels (A player or not)

And a definition of a league is not hard - combination of games or scrimmages with practices
And the most important part is
If a player chooses to play
In another league they can and come back the following year or whenever they want - total freedom of choice

The other 16 players on a team have rights also
They signed up for Hockey believing
There was a commitment to this team by all, not a shared commitment

Call me anytime for questions
952-250-6431

Brad


Brad Hewitt-RVP
PHH/First Fleet Corp
Cell- 952-250-6431


----- Original Message -----
From: no-reply@tstmedia.com <no-reply@tstmedia.com>
To: Hewitt, Brad
Cc: *********@comcast.net <*********@comcast.net>
Sent: Sun Jul 18 08:26:57 2010
Subject: High School Hockey Forum Request

Email from ******* ********, *********@comcast.net
-----------------------------------------------------


Hi Brad,

I am wondering if you would be able to address a topic that has come up on a popular although vitriolic hockey forum recently.

Your response would be educational and appreciated. Thanks!

See you at the rink!

******* ********

Here is the link to the forum. Thanks again.

http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=23838




-----------------------------------------------------
This email has been sent from the following web page:
http://www.d6hockey.net/page/show/96173

[O-townClown]

Vitriolic?

Thanks for sharing. Hewitt seems far less evil in "person" than he's made out to be by some on this board!

Why not block out the other names since you did so with your own? Just a thought.

[CRMiteHockey]

Vitriolic?

Thanks for sharing. Hewitt seems far less evil in "person" than he's made out to be by some on this board!

Why not block out the other names since you did so with your own? Just a thought.

Yes vitriolic. At times anyway.

Instead of speculating I figured I would go to the source for the answer, I didn't block anyone elses name I guess because I figured their names are listed on the D6 website anyway.

[mnhockey2019]

Full disclosure -- I do not live in a D6 community, my Mite-aged son plays in the "league" that in my opinion is the focal point of the rule, and my son attends a private school, not located in the community that we live in.

The real question for D6 is what about other sports, which the rule ignores? If a kid is skiing or playing basketball, and chooses those activities over a D6 association's practice or game, the family/player have elected a different athletic activity over their hockey team, indicating a lack of commitment, yet according to the rule, there would be no penalty assessed since it is not another hockey "league". If the intent of the rule was to keep Pee Wees and Squirts in D6 programs, it should be limited to those levels. For Mites, the better players will drop out of their D6 programs and play in the "league" that they would be penalized for playing in, if they also played for their community based association. I have had conversations with several parents of high skill level Mites, who live in Eden Prarie and Edina, and none of their kids are playing for their associations this year (last year many of them played both community based hockey and in the "league"). In my opinion, this is going to drive the Mite aged kids that are currently the better players and more interested in skill development, to continue to look for non-traditional, non community based programs, where they can play with kids of similar skill levels and interest. Once gone from the community based program, will they be likely to come back?

At some point in time, someone will file a lawsuit regarding this, either a parent that wants their child to be able to play both community based hockey and play in the "league" that is the target of this rule, or the owner of the "league" itself. In my opinion, there are specific problems with the rule that could be interpreted to infringe on one's civil rights, i.e. Parent A's child can do two activities (community based hockey and participating on a ski team [based on an actual Edina family]), yet Parent B's child, who only plays hockey, cannot participate in another hockey activity that involves a team format and has games, if he/she plays community based hockey. Another interesting angle is how will the cities, that own the arenas that the associations play in, handle this limitation on their citizens, that pay tax dollars to support the arenas? There has historically been a blurred line (and I believe appropriately so) between the publicly owned arenas, and the non-profit, non-community owned associations, in that the cities provide preferential ice times to the associations, prior to opening ice times up to the general public. If I am limited to choosing between my community based organization or a separate "league", and I choose the separate "league", my ability to utilize a resource that I assist in paying for is hindered, and I am not being given equal access to that city asset.

If D6 is really worried about the "league" drawing its players away, they should design programs for the kids that want more ice time, and are currently more engaged in hockey than some of their peers. It is no fun for a kid, who is more interested in improving his/her hockey skills, who shows up on time and is ready at the start of the stated practice time, to wait until those less committed to their hockey development arrive late, and screw around on the ice, impeding the skill development of others. My experience with community based hockey, which is limited to my son's participation at the Mite level, is that it is designed to get kids exposed to hockey, build their basic skills, and move them onto Squirts. Many kids want more than that, and the community based organizations are not providing the more interested and skilled kids what they want. D6, and the other Districts, need to stop worrying about a "competitor" and start providing a robust hockey experience for ALL of their participants, and acknowledge that a "one size fits all" no longer works for everyone.

[murray]

thats why its called choice. have a great year.

[dzonecoverage]

Maybe just me, but isn't it a little questionable to post an email chain including a person's name/contact info/email etc. but remove your own?

[HockeyDad41]

Maybe just me, but isn't it a little questionable to post an email chain including a person's name/contact info/email etc. but remove your own?

Yeah, it's probably just you. Everyone knows who they (D6 officials) are anyway. I don't see a problem.

[O-townClown]

Maybe just me, but isn't it a little questionable to post an email chain including a person's name/contact info/email etc. but remove your own?

Yeah, it's probably just you. Everyone knows who they (D6 officials) are anyway. I don't see a problem.

That's okay, on the D6 website they posted the e-mail with their names blocked out and left his. Someone asked why they'd do that andk they said, "everyone knows he's just a pain in our rear anyway. I don't see a problem."










Kidding!

[CRMiteHockey]

I'm really very sorry.



I was just trying to help everyone understand the thought process. Leave it to the people here to ignore the message and kill the messenger.

Last post ever.

[dzonecoverage]

i doubt it

[O-townClown]

I'm really very sorry.

Leave it to the people here to ignore the message and kill the messenger.

Puh-leaze. Nobody has ignored the messenger, but it is also hard not to ignore how it was delivered. E-mails are often sent with a, possibly erroneous, expectation that they won't be forwarded or shared.

We all do appreciate your posts. No need to be so thin-skinned that a comment or a little poking fun upsets your day.

I'm caught in a something similar here. It would be really nice if concerned parties got all the information out in the open. I know your intentions here and certainly don't find fault.

Seriously, thanks for sharing the fact that District 6 isn't evil like people make them out to be.

[JSR]

I don't live in Minnesota, my son does not play Minnesota hockey in any district so obviously this rule has no effect on me, my family or my associaiton. So as a truly objective outsider I am curious to know what the response would be to the question of kids playing other sports. I mean if the response in the email is legitimate, that being that this rule was placed in effect to help encourage "committment" to the "team" etc.... then why does the rule not address playing other sports? I'm just curious.

[black sheep]

Full disclosure -- I do not live in a D6 community, my Mite-aged son plays in the "league" that in my opinion is the focal point of the rule, and my son attends a private school, not located in the community that we live in.

The real question for D6 is what about other sports, which the rule ignores? If a kid is skiing or playing basketball, and chooses those activities over a D6 association's practice or game, the family/player have elected a different athletic activity over their hockey team, indicating a lack of commitment, yet according to the rule, there would be no penalty assessed since it is not another hockey "league". If the intent of the rule was to keep Pee Wees and Squirts in D6 programs, it should be limited to those levels. For Mites, the better players will drop out of their D6 programs and play in the "league" that they would be penalized for playing in, if they also played for their community based association. I have had conversations with several parents of high skill level Mites, who live in Eden Prarie and Edina, and none of their kids are playing for their associations this year (last year many of them played both community based hockey and in the "league"). In my opinion, this is going to drive the Mite aged kids that are currently the better players and more interested in skill development, to continue to look for non-traditional, non community based programs, where they can play with kids of similar skill levels and interest. Once gone from the community based program, will they be likely to come back?

At some point in time, someone will file a lawsuit regarding this, either a parent that wants their child to be able to play both community based hockey and play in the "league" that is the target of this rule, or the owner of the "league" itself. In my opinion, there are specific problems with the rule that could be interpreted to infringe on one's civil rights, i.e. Parent A's child can do two activities (community based hockey and participating on a ski team [based on an actual Edina family]), yet Parent B's child, who only plays hockey, cannot participate in another hockey activity that involves a team format and has games, if he/she plays community based hockey. Another interesting angle is how will the cities, that own the arenas that the associations play in, handle this limitation on their citizens, that pay tax dollars to support the arenas? There has historically been a blurred line (and I believe appropriately so) between the publicly owned arenas, and the non-profit, non-community owned associations, in that the cities provide preferential ice times to the associations, prior to opening ice times up to the general public. If I am limited to choosing between my community based organization or a separate "league", and I choose the separate "league", my ability to utilize a resource that I assist in paying for is hindered, and I am not being given equal access to that city asset.

If D6 is really worried about the "league" drawing its players away, they should design programs for the kids that want more ice time, and are currently more engaged in hockey than some of their peers. It is no fun for a kid, who is more interested in improving his/her hockey skills, who shows up on time and is ready at the start of the stated practice time, to wait until those less committed to their hockey development arrive late, and screw around on the ice, impeding the skill development of others. My experience with community based hockey, which is limited to my son's participation at the Mite level, is that it is designed to get kids exposed to hockey, build their basic skills, and move them onto Squirts. Many kids want more than that, and the community based organizations are not providing the more interested and skilled kids what they want. D6, and the other Districts, need to stop worrying about a "competitor" and start providing a robust hockey experience for ALL of their participants, and acknowledge that a "one size fits all" no longer works for everyone.

All of this over mite hockey???? Really....Im soooooooo glad i dont live there

just have a couple practices a week and the let the good ones find some open ice time and go play and have fun...it cheaper & its the best learning tool available

drives me crazy how the "bad" kids are holding the good ones back...it does not happen.