Page 3 of 4
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:46 am
by CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD
Blackhawkfan wrote:CHI-TOWN HOCKEYDAD wrote:Outoftowner wrote:I like the idea of a AAA winter league. I feel we should be free to play wherever we want and find the best hockey that is appropriate for our child's interest and skill level.
It really sucks to be in an association that sucks and has no real desire to not suck. I shouldn't need to sell my house and move just to find better hockey for my kids.
Being from Chicago now living in MN, I can say from direct knowledge that what BHF has failed to mention is that Tier I elite hockey there is only for those wishing to spend upwards of $10k per annum to play. The Tier II clubs available at costs comparable (on the high end) to what we pay here, lack experienced trainers and offer a lower level of competition. Two weeks ago I was at a Suburban Chicago rink watching their club's group of top 10 year olds scrimmage. They level of play was akin to a good C or avg B2 team in the TC metro. I just returned from the squirt tournament in Fargo,
no Chicago Metro clubs attended.
I think everyone understands that there is a cost. There is a cost for everything in life. MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT IF MINNESOTA WAS SPLIT INTO PROGRESSIVE AND REGRESSIVE, THOSE THAT WANT TO PLAY PROGRESSIVE WILL HAVE TO PAY MORE THAN THE REGRESSIVES. BUT WITH THAT, THE REGRESSIVES SHOULD KEEP THEIR COMMENTS TO THEMSELVES AND LET AAA HOCKEY SUCCEED OR FAIL BASED ON A COST/BENEFIT RATIO . QUIT TRYING TO DEMEAN THOSE THAT WISH TO SEE A HIGHER LEVEL OF HOCKEY AND COMPETE ON THE LARGER STAGE. THOSE THAT BAD MOUTH AAA FEAR THAT THEIR ASSOCIATION MODEL WILL DRY UP AND GO AWAY. IF THAT BE THE CASE, THEN SO BE IT.....THE PEOPLE THEN HAVE MADE THEIR CHOICE. IF THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS THE "BE ALL, END ALL" THEN IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO STAND THE CHALLENGE OF AAA HOCKEY WITH IT'S BETTER DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT WON'T, THAT IS WHY THEY WISH TO BUILD AN "IRON CURTAIN" AROUND THE STATE. JUST LIKE THE SOVIETS!!!
I see your point and don't disagree wholly with your argument. I too am in favor of choice and also feel in some ways that our system does not provide options for many. Particularly those in associations that are managed to please the masses of mediocre talent at the expense of those with the drive and spirit to compete at a higher level.
However, many I speak to in Chicago wish they had the Cost/Benefit situation we have as compared to the one they experience.
But I believe what you are suggesting is that MN could be in a position to offer a hybrid with options to appease all. I do believe that a Tier I structure could be achieved at a lower cost in MN based upon the ice economic factors as well as reduced travel requirements to find competition.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:25 am
by Blackhawkfan
old goalie85 wrote:What kind of development do you get on the moon??? Progressive/Regressive??????
"Fish House" development........looking down a hole
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:49 am
by O-townClown
Ranting like a lunatic won't get you very far when the foundation of your argument is tenuous. Where will these progressive teams play, at the municipal rinks?
There is a huge barrier that you haven't addressed. I can just see the City Council meetings now. The Youth Hockey Association will go and ask for more prime ice hours.
"Why don't you have them right now? I though our rink WAS used for youth hockey."
"Your rink manager sold those to the outside hockey club."
"Well, that's okay. At least those kids live in our community. Right?"
"Actually none of them do."
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:23 pm
by old goalie85
Perfect. Sign up all five of mine.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:15 pm
by Blackhawkfan
O-townClown wrote:Ranting like a lunatic won't get you very far when the foundation of your argument is tenuous. Where will these progressive teams play, at the municipal rinks?
There is a huge barrier that you haven't addressed. I can just see the City Council meetings now. The Youth Hockey Association will go and ask for more prime ice hours.
"Why don't you have them right now? I though our rink WAS used for youth hockey."
"Your rink manager sold those to the outside hockey club."
"Well, that's okay. At least those kids live in our community. Right?"
"Actually none of them do."
Closed minded thinking......did you get hit in the head with a palm tree branch or a coconut.....probably both.
Privately owned rinks would house the progressive teams. Minnesota Made is ready and waiting......or haven't you heard of Minnesota Made? As soon as the Blades see's progressive hockey in the winter, they too will build their own rink. You will likely see associations either join the Progressive movement or lose their top players to the progressive teams. It is called the "domino effect". So then the "municipal" rinks will have to also change their model or die.
Do us all a favor, keep your nose in "Mickey Mouse" land and watch out for the coconuts, they can be deadly!
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:18 pm
by spin-o-rama
Blackhawk,
We are constantly turning down opportunities to skate more (and my kids skate a lot). There is no shortage of "progressive" development opportunities in MN. But you know that.
Perhaps you should try the Tier I billet thing for a year with your kid. Come back and give us a report of what it really is like on the outside.
I remember listening to a parent talk to an instructor about scheduling lessons. The instructor's offering of M-F evening and morning lessons were all turned down due to scheduling conflicts. The parent went away muttering about the lack of availability to skate. Perhaps your definition of progressive is similar to this parent's situation? Until it revolves around you, we must be in a regressive pattern?
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:44 pm
by Blackhawkfan
spin-o-rama wrote:Blackhawk,
We are constantly turning down opportunities to skate more (and my kids skate a lot). There is no shortage of "progressive" development opportunities in MN. But you know that.
Perhaps you should try the Tier I billet thing for a year with your kid. Come back and give us a report of what it really is like on the outside.
I remember listening to a parent talk to an instructor about scheduling lessons. The instructor's offering of M-F evening and morning lessons were all turned down due to scheduling conflicts. The parent went away muttering about the lack of availability to skate. Perhaps your definition of progressive is similar to this parent's situation? Until it revolves around you, we must be in a regressive pattern?
Thank you for you objective view and comments, it is refreshing to have someone with common sense.
We have done a form of the billet thing and it is from that experience that I am speaking. For more than 5 years we have experienced AAA hockey and have experienced hundreds of different teams in 25 + cities. We know what the hockey landscape is out there unlike those in Minnesota and say Orlando who profess to have all the answers.
It is clear from all the attacks to my post that they are threatened that there is a better option for Minnesota, but their fear is that things wouldn't be the same as it was for them when they were Pee Wee's.
Things need to change......or Minnesota won't be on the hockey map......to the regressives I say, go ahead and sucede.....build those walls, keep out reality, sounds like communism.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:03 pm
by black sheep
Blackhawkfan wrote:Things need to change......or Minnesota won't be on the hockey map......to the regressives I say, go ahead and sucede.....build those walls, keep out reality, sounds like communism.
why do things always have to end in communism.
IF...people take the time...USA hockey has TONS of information available to players, parents, & coaches. AND, every single MN player, parent & coach could benefit from that info IF, they used it.
The fact is too many of MN hockey pureists believe they already know everything there is to know about player development...and this knowledge is believed to be passed from generation to generation...and all things will end good.
Yes, you could still chase chickens, and beat meat like rocky did, or you could use the improved training & coaching techniques USA Hockey has to offer...
This same information that USA hockey makes available is what is allowing the game to GROW outside of the traditional powers of the snow belt.
Short version of a true story: Hockey coach in Canada writes a coaching and training book on hockey training development. The Canadien establishment scoffs at the notion of specialized training in favor of drinking more beer and skating. An upstart Russian coach comes to Canada to get information on how to start a hockey team and finds the book. Takes it back to Russia and builds a hockey super power.
When you start believing what you have is ALREADY the best, then somebody will begin to pass you by, history has proven that time and again.
Is USA or MN Hockey perfect...NO.
But if MN hockey were to seperate itself...there are a lot of resources and opprotunities lost. No coaching aides, no NDTP, no world juniors, no olympics for MN players. I'm not sure that is where we want to be.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:36 pm
by edgeless2
black sheep wrote:Blackhawkfan wrote:Things need to change......or Minnesota won't be on the hockey map......to the regressives I say, go ahead and sucede.....build those walls, keep out reality, sounds like communism.
why do things always have to end in communism.
IF...people take the time...USA hockey has TONS of information available to players, parents, & coaches. AND, every single MN player, parent & coach could benefit from that info IF, they used it.
The fact is too many of MN hockey pureists believe they already know everything there is to know about player development...and this knowledge is believed to be passed from generation to generation...and all things will end good.
Yes, you could still chase chickens, and beat meat like rocky did, or you could use the improved training & coaching techniques USA Hockey has to offer...
This same information that USA hockey makes available is what is allowing the game to GROW outside of the traditional powers of the snow belt.
Short version of a true story: Hockey coach in Canada writes a coaching and training book on hockey training development. The Canadien establishment scoffs at the notion of specialized training in favor of drinking more beer and skating. An upstart Russian coach comes to Canada to get information on how to start a hockey team and finds the book. Takes it back to Russia and builds a hockey super power.
When you start believing what you have is ALREADY the best, then somebody will begin to pass you by, history has proven that time and again.
Is USA or MN Hockey perfect...NO.
But if MN hockey were to seperate itself...there are a lot of resources and opprotunities lost. No coaching aides, no NDTP, no world juniors, no olympics for MN players. I'm not sure that is where we want to be.
Very valid points. I guess the issue I have is with the registration numbers we have, aren't we funding the majority of USA hockey? I would think the resources we contribute to USA hockey, if kept in-state, could be a bigger benefit to the majority vs. the few that benefit from NTDP, World Juniors, online coaching modules etc? I also don't see how pro athletes at the Olympic level would be affected.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:22 pm
by old goalie85
The Olympics wouldn't be effected. Mn kids turn down NDTP every year. We must have someone who could make a movie for us to watch.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:40 pm
by Royal24
A Little Birdie told me legendary trainer Jules Winfield is preparing to move his entire training operation to a Brand New Private Facility in Coon Rapids. If that indeed happens... Watch Out....
Jules Winfield Announcement.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHo0rJC5t-o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHo0rJC5t-o
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:08 pm
by O-townClown
Blackhawkfan wrote:Closed minded thinking......
So the person that knows both sides of the issue is 'closed minded' and the one that professes to be right and has all the answers is what?
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:53 pm
by edgeless2
O-townClown wrote:Blackhawkfan wrote:Closed minded thinking......
So the person that knows both sides of the issue is 'closed minded' and the one that professes to be right and has all the answers is what?
Yes
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:59 pm
by Ugottobekiddingme
O-townClown wrote:Ranting like a lunatic won't get you very far when the foundation of your argument is tenuous. Where will these progressive teams play, at the municipal rinks?
There is a huge barrier that you haven't addressed. I can just see the City Council meetings now. The Youth Hockey Association will go and ask for more prime ice hours.
"Why don't you have them right now? I though our rink WAS used for youth hockey."
"Your rink manager sold those to the outside hockey club."
"Well, that's okay. At least those kids live in our community. Right?"
"Actually none of them do."
Clown...I'm rewinding...be kind.
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:44 am
by Eagles93
USA Hockey fees will be $40 next year, meaning everyone in Minnesota will pay $50 to USA Hockey, including the $10 Minnesota Hockey affiliate fee. I think this will spark more debate than anything whether there is really any purpose/value in Minnesota players being part of USA Hockey.
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:31 pm
by QuackerTracker
USA Hockey to visit Capitol Hill
February 28, 2012
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- Dave Ogrean, executive director of USA Hockey, will be on Capitol Hill Wednesday (Feb. 29) to participate in a panel that will brief members of Congress, congressional staff and the news media, on the positive impact community-based hockey programs have on the development of essential life skills, character and academic success.
The briefing, which is sponsored by the Congressional Hockey Caucus and includes co-chairs Rep. Patrick Meehan (PA), Rep. Brian Higgins (NY), Rep. Lee Terry (NE) and Rep. Mike Quigley (IL), will begin at 2 p.m. EST in Room 2167 of the Rayburn Office Building in Washington, D.C.
Other panelists include Gary Bettman, commissioner of the National Hockey League; Ted Leonsis, chairman of Monumental Sports and Entertainment and the NHL's Washington Capitals; Ed Snider, chairman and founder of Comcast-Spectacor and the NHL's Philadelphia Flyers; and Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., the president and CEO of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund.
Luke Russert, congressional correspondent for NBC News, will moderate a panel discussion regarding grassroots youth hockey initiatives, cutting-edge curriculum and supplemental education programming designed to build character and academic skills for at-risk inner-city youngsters.
The NHL and the Thurgood Marshall College Fund will also make a special announcement during the event.
[/b]
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:45 pm
by muckandgrind
black sheep wrote:Blackhawkfan wrote:
But if MN hockey were to seperate itself...there are a lot of resources and opprotunities lost. No coaching aides, no NDTP, no world juniors, no olympics for MN players. I'm not sure that is where we want to be.
Are you sure that if Minnesota pulls out of USA Hockey that NDTP still wouldn't recruit Minnesota players? MN High School players aren't governed by USA Hockey, yet many still find their way to the NDTP. And how the heck would that fact keep MN players from playing in the Olympics?
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:08 pm
by dangle_snipe
Blackhawk fan is a yarn head checkbook hockey dad.
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:37 pm
by black sheep
muckandgrind wrote:black sheep wrote:Blackhawkfan wrote:
But if MN hockey were to seperate itself...there are a lot of resources and opprotunities lost. No coaching aides, no NDTP, no world juniors, no olympics for MN players. I'm not sure that is where we want to be.
Are you sure that if Minnesota pulls out of USA Hockey that NDTP still wouldn't recruit Minnesota players? MN High School players aren't governed by USA Hockey, yet many still find their way to the NDTP. And how the heck would that fact keep MN players from playing in the Olympics?
No of course I am not sure...
But our USA hockey fees in part fund programs like the NTDP, It would be logical that if one of the major contributing states like MN pulled its funding there is likely to be type of backlash.
The USA Hockey Mens National team is the team that plays in the Olympics, so again, if MN pulls it funding / support there would likely be some form of backlash.
So it would be reasonable that MN kids would be at a disadvantage for making or may be disallowed from competing in these events.
I think a better plan, would be for more people to be proactive in the policies that USA Hockey administers. It is easy to sit back and complain, but much more difficult to help find realistic solutions to help grow the game, not just in MN, but nationally.
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:42 pm
by spin-o-rama
edgeless2 wrote:I guess the issue I have is with the registration numbers we have, aren't we funding the majority of USA hockey?
MN has about 10% of USAh registrations. So, no, we aren't. Maybe you're looking at this from a different angle?
50,000 registered players X $40 is $2,000,000. Are we getting our $$$ worth? In some ways, yes. In others, no.
I could see the cost of hockey going up by more than $40/kid if MN went wild west, aka summer style.
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:43 pm
by edgeless2
spin-o-rama wrote:edgeless2 wrote:I guess the issue I have is with the registration numbers we have, aren't we funding the majority of USA hockey?
MN has about 10% of USAh registrations. So, no, we aren't. Maybe you're looking at this from a different angle?
50,000 registered players X $40 is $2,000,000. Are we getting our $$$ worth? In some ways, yes. In others, no.
I could see the cost of hockey going up by more than $40/kid if MN went wild west, aka summer style.
I stand corrected! Could you expand on some of the ways that we are benefitting for this 2mm? And why you would see fees going up? Insurance possibly?
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:19 pm
by Blackhawkfan
dangle_snipe wrote:Blackhawk fan is a yarn head checkbook hockey dad.
WOW.......your post says SO much about you, I am impressed. (yawn)!
Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:43 am
by BadgerBob82
BlackHawkFan: I am not shooting you down. But I would ask if you could explain your point of view? How old are you hockey player kids? Do you have one of more kids in hockey? Are they all elite level players? I assume you are doing private AAA hockey after "winter" association hockey? Do you think there is an "off-season" in hockey? Do you believe kids should be training during the "off-season" or should they be on the ice 12 months a year?
My only experience with private winter hockey AAA or Tier 1 programs is the WI FIRE. (Except the tournaments that had AAA/Tier 1 teams that my kids played in) I didn't think the FIRE model did much for the kids I knew that played there. They were all decent players before they went, and were decent players when they returned. None leap-frogged other decent players that remained in association hockey. But having a team with a very narrow talent range (meaning all were similarly good player) creates a good team. But the question is, does that equate to better development?
I also know a guy that moved from the Detroit area. His explaination of the private AAA/Tier 1 programs in the Detroit area sounds like a nightmare. But after watching an episode of "Dance Mom's" last night, I can see the similarities of parents of young "elite" hockey players.
Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:33 am
by observer
I used to tell a dad to stop worrying so much about his kid and make sure he's developing linemates and a couple of D too. So much is contingent on rounding up 8-10-12 3rd graders and not just your kid. A team like Eagan is a good example with a number of seniors, 6-8, that have skated at a high level since they were Squirts. Then you've got something. It's unfortunate so much of the system is contingent on a 2nd grade dad rounding up 15 kids but that's the way it is. It's the same in other sports too. I read about all these lonely superstars and the mistake made was not putting three of his buds under your wing too.
The other solution I've often stated is recruiting. 30 new mites a year.
Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:55 am
by MrBoDangles
observer wrote:I used to tell a dad to stop worrying so much about his kid and make sure he's developing linemates and a couple of D too. So much is contingent on rounding up 8-10-12 3rd graders and not just your kid. A team like Eagan is a good example with a number of seniors, 6-8, that have skated at a high level since they were Squirts. Then you've got something. It's unfortunate so much of the system is contingent on a 2nd grade dad rounding up 15 kids but that's the way it is. It's the same in other sports too. I read about all these lonely superstars and the mistake made was not putting three of his buds under your wing too.
The other solution I've often stated is recruiting. 30 new mites a year.
Great post!!