Lakeville North Varsity

[HockeyMom87]

HA! No nerve touched - just trying to stay on point with facts and not BS. Do a search on this forum for Lakeville Pride Rule. My understanding is that the P guy motioned on July 9, 2008 (check minutes from 7/9/08 and 9/10/08- they are on the web) to pass a rule - called the LAKEVILLE PRIDE RULE (funniest name ever - if you're proud why do you need to try to stop people from leaving). This rule basically said if you left the association for a season, when you came back you were not A team eligible for one season. (BTW - it was seconded by the Dad of a GIRL who played pee wee boys with a P son - just an interesting side fact). My understanding is that P was pissed that good players were leaving to go to the MN Made Choice league and several (4) kids left to play for the Wisconsin Fire (a tier 1 team). (Another interesting topic on this forum). P guy was pissed and wanted to "punish" them and make sure they didn't have options when they came back to "force" them to stay. Ultimately, they had to get lawyers involved (9/10/08 minutes). (Look at who the speakers were at the meeting and look at the line up at Shattuck now).

Point 1 - Mr. P did not want good kids leaving to go to other options and went through a lot of work to stop this. Now, he hand-picks a 9th grade kid from another school so his 3-son team is better. Seems highly hypocritical. He's perpetuating exactly what he attempted to stop. The kid that left his school to go to LV North was arguably the best kid for the other school.

Point 2 - Mr. P has been attempting to manipulate the players on his sons' teams for years - one way or another.

Point 3 - There is always controversy surrounding Lakeville hockey.

Point 4 - It could be argued that P's decision to propose the above rule was made solely to protect his own sons' teams since they were directly impacted each time there is controversy surrounding this guy. If true - it's a breach of fiduciary duty at the Board level and is a serious ethical offense. Consider that the costs of the attorney were born by the association - all families had to pay for these shenanigans.

Seems to me - all the kids P was trying to punish are flourishing - those kids that left are doing just fine and he wasn't able to punish them. He must've thought they'd be coming back - instead he just pushed them out for good and many are down at SSM. Hhhmmmm - makes you wonder. So where is LV at? They've pushed out so many good players that to have any real chance at a State HS Championship game, he's going to have to do exactly what he fought against in 2008 - bring in players from other associations - or the dream of having all 3 kids play at the state tournament gets toilet bowled.

What is even more interesting is that NO ONE calls this guy out for this conduct! No one even raises the issue at the Board level. Think of Jerry Sandusky at Penn State. Many people stayed quiet and allowed all of that to happen - because they wanted to win and many were afraid of the guy. P has everyone walking on egg shells and not one person brings it to the Board - but how can you - he's on it along with all his best friends and the parent of the transfer student.

I guess it is just another "Let boys be boys." Teams should be made by picking the best people and I am fine with people leaving to go to better teams. What I'm not fine with is playing both sides of the fence while you're on the Board and costing people money and not being upfront about things.

And STATS 81 - what do you mean I'm not fooling anyone. Who am I trying to fool and about what? Are you implying that I have a LV skater? Haha! Is that the best you've got? That I'm some pissed parent who's kid was affected by this. Not a chance. If my kid was impacted by this - I'd be down at the board and writing to the MSHSL filing complaints not writing on some forum. This is highly unethical behavior.

Or - is the best response that these kids are good hockey players? No one I talked to even suggested that the transfer student isn't a great player that is Varsity material. What was suggested is that the 3rd P might not be of that caliber. The point is P ran other players out of the system and his 9th grader likely wouldn't have made the team had he not ran others out of town. LV probably would've been a serious contender for state then - instead of the team that plays a weak schedule that goes to state with a losing record. Isn't anyone down in LV upset about this? Yes - the 3rd P can play - but compared to whom? Throw in the kids that left and are at SSM and others into the mix and it might be a really different line up. And - for fairness to all other skaters - why even hold try outs if you're taking people who didn't do the try out and have never skated for you. At least be honest with the poor kids who think they might have a chance and tell them one spot is already taken. It might be different if the player not going to try outs wasn't also a transfer student.

Also - isn't it a serious breach of rules for a HS coach to have any contact with players prior to try outs? How in the world did this Eigner know this kid was coming to put him on the roster? Clearly - the parents were highly involved and the kids trying out weren't told that one spot was already taken! The LV association rules address a bantam eligible player moving up to Varsity and provide a mechanism. It has to be requested by the HS coach and the HDC committee has to approve. P is the current VP of Development and the transfer student's Dad is Player Development coordinator. I presume they are on the HDC committee and they had to approve the request about their sons. Are there kids the HDC didn't approve? There's also specific rules about injuries preventing try outs. Were any of these procedures followed? The handbook was revised 11/21/13 - curious as to what those revisions were. Nothing in the agenda in the minutes about changing by-laws in prior 3 months. HHhhhmmmm.

The kids are probably good kids and for their sake - I hope their season goes well. The behavior of the adults smells funny and it a topic lots of people are talking about - seems worthy of discussion.

[east hockey]

Your reference/comparison to Jerry Sandusky is more than slightly over the top. It's borderline defamation of character.

This topic is done. Bring it up again at your risk.

Lee