The USA Hockey National tournament starts play on a Wednesday and on Saturday is the crossover game unless they have changed their format and the final game on Sunday. The team needs to be there on Tuesday so you are booking rooms for 5 nights plus food. From chatting with the Mn Teams that did participate in the Bantam nationals the trip was very expensive and did not match the State Bantam tournament.
If anyone is really serious about this get your proposal and present it to Mn Hockey, it is to late for this weekends meeting but you can try for the June meeting. Without their blessing nothing will happen.
AAA National Championships with MN in them.... a proposal!
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
Not true, not even close. The Texas 5A Division 1 championship had over 54,000 people in attendance, the 4A D1 had over 34,000. Over 3 days 9 games had a total attendance of over 200,000. The UIL (the Texas version of the MSHSL) showed all 9 championship games on Fox Sports SouthWest, hardly a KSTC in terms of viewership or broadcast area. http://highschoolsportsblog.dallasnews. ... ames.html/ Texas counts attendance, not tickets sold like the MSHSL and the over 200,000 is for the championships only, not the tournament.JSR wrote: But for the record "The Minnesota State High School Hockey Tournament is currently the largest state sports tournament in the United States in terms of viewing and attendance, beating both the Texas and Florida's State High School Football Tournament and the Indiana State High School Basketball Tournament", that is public factual record so I stand by my statement
If Wikipedia is your public factual record http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_schoo ... _Minnesota
then you have some problems as your bolded statment is from Wikipedia and even Wikipedia says "citation needed".
Honestly I don't care.... I didn't bring Texas football into this. If you go back and read my statements I said no one elses High School hockey tourney is as big as MN, and I said I don't even see attendance like that at football or basketball state tourneys (aka our WI tourneys aren't as big as MN's state high school hockey tourney.). Someone else brought those into the mix, I looked up some references to play ball with them, they've since deleted their posts, what can I say other than I honestly don't care because it has nothing to do with my OP, and doesn't do anything to refute what I originally posted about in my statements, it's a throw away to distract from the issue...goldy313 wrote:Not true, not even close. The Texas 5A Division 1 championship had over 54,000 people in attendance, the 4A D1 had over 34,000. Over 3 days 9 games had a total attendance of over 200,000. The UIL (the Texas version of the MSHSL) showed all 9 championship games on Fox Sports SouthWest, hardly a KSTC in terms of viewership or broadcast area. http://highschoolsportsblog.dallasnews. ... ames.html/ Texas counts attendance, not tickets sold like the MSHSL and the over 200,000 is for the championships only, not the tournament.JSR wrote: But for the record "The Minnesota State High School Hockey Tournament is currently the largest state sports tournament in the United States in terms of viewing and attendance, beating both the Texas and Florida's State High School Football Tournament and the Indiana State High School Basketball Tournament", that is public factual record so I stand by my statement
If Wikipedia is your public factual record http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_schoo ... _Minnesota
then you have some problems as your bolded statment is from Wikipedia and even Wikipedia says "citation needed".
Not to beat a dead horse.
Whether its this proposal, or another one, or more than one....
We had 40 +/- U 18s leave Minn last year. We will see how many this year.
The Elite League alone has not stopped this tide, but arguably has slowed the tide compared to what it otherwise would have been
So, whatever additional steps we can do to encourage our home grown talent to keep playing their hockey in state for as long as possible
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefit away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture.
Whether its this proposal, or another one, or more than one....
We had 40 +/- U 18s leave Minn last year. We will see how many this year.
The Elite League alone has not stopped this tide, but arguably has slowed the tide compared to what it otherwise would have been
So, whatever additional steps we can do to encourage our home grown talent to keep playing their hockey in state for as long as possible
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefit away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture.
-
Froggy Richards
- Posts: 623
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:15 am
I agree with you. But playing for a Tier 1 National Championship will do nothing in regards to keeping kids at home in MN. As has been stated repeatedly on this thread and all of the other threads discussing this topic, there is simply no interest.WestMetro wrote:Not to beat a dead horse.
Whether its this proposal, or another one, or more than one....
We had 40 +/- U 18s leave Minn last year. We will see how many this year.
The Elite League alone has not stopped this tide, but arguably has slowed the tide compared to what it otherwise would have been
So, whatever additional steps we can do to encourage our home grown talent to keep playing their hockey in state for as long as possible
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefit away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture.
We'll see, like I said earlier in the thread, I think you'll be surprised y the level of interest shown by the new generation. The generation that has literally grown up with hard core AAA spring and summer teams. A generation that is much more in tune with hockey outside your state boarders. I believe the "start" of this generation is next years incoming freshman class. I can believe there was not sufficient interest (I refuse to believe there was NO interest) to make this carry forward in the past and even the right now current Seniors and Juniors etc... but let's see what happens over the enxt couple of years. I mean you have more Pee Wee and Bantam players from MN than ever playing Tier 1 outside your boarders, it isn't just high schoolers anymore. You have the new Bantam Elite League invention, you have spring and summer programs literally everywhere, yea I bet there is alot more interest that you think with this new generation....Froggy Richards wrote:I agree with you. But playing for a Tier 1 National Championship will do nothing in regards to keeping kids at home in MN. As has been stated repeatedly on this thread and all of the other threads discussing this topic, there is simply no interest.WestMetro wrote:Not to beat a dead horse.
Whether its this proposal, or another one, or more than one....
We had 40 +/- U 18s leave Minn last year. We will see how many this year.
The Elite League alone has not stopped this tide, but arguably has slowed the tide compared to what it otherwise would have been
So, whatever additional steps we can do to encourage our home grown talent to keep playing their hockey in state for as long as possible
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefit away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture.
-
Froggy Richards
- Posts: 623
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:15 am
I don't disagree with anything you say about the new generation, I just don't see how that translates to interest in playing for a National Championship in April. Yes, kids in MN play AAA in the Spring and Summer, but I'm not sure what that has to do with playing one tournament in April? People play on those teams to get a whole offseason of development and fun in. Why would anyone want to spend a bunch of money to throw together a team for 3 weeks when their AAA teams are already practicing and playing? It really doesn't make any sense. I don't think there is any big mystery here, it's just not worth the time, money and effort.JSR wrote:We'll see, like I said earlier in the thread, I think you'll be surprised y the level of interest shown by the new generation. The generation that has literally grown up with hard core AAA spring and summer teams. A generation that is much more in tune with hockey outside your state boarders. I believe the "start" of this generation is next years incoming freshman class. I can believe there was not sufficient interest (I refuse to believe there was NO interest) to make this carry forward in the past and even the right now current Seniors and Juniors etc... but let's see what happens over the enxt couple of years. I mean you have more Pee Wee and Bantam players from MN than ever playing Tier 1 outside your boarders, it isn't just high schoolers anymore. You have the new Bantam Elite League invention, you have spring and summer programs literally everywhere, yea I bet there is alot more interest that you think with this new generation....Froggy Richards wrote:I agree with you. But playing for a Tier 1 National Championship will do nothing in regards to keeping kids at home in MN. As has been stated repeatedly on this thread and all of the other threads discussing this topic, there is simply no interest.WestMetro wrote:Not to beat a dead horse.
Whether its this proposal, or another one, or more than one....
We had 40 +/- U 18s leave Minn last year. We will see how many this year.
The Elite League alone has not stopped this tide, but arguably has slowed the tide compared to what it otherwise would have been
So, whatever additional steps we can do to encourage our home grown talent to keep playing their hockey in state for as long as possible
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefit away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture.
-
SCBlueLiner
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm
And in a few years after this new generation of players cycles through, and the tangible results of counting USHL spots rostered, D1 scholarships, and what players have gone on to the NHL are tabulated, and the results are the same as they were before, parents will be convinced it is not worth the time and money to ship their kids out of state for "hockey opportunities". If you are good enough scouts will find you, and if you are good enough in Minnesota scouts will definitely find you.JSR wrote:We'll see, like I said earlier in the thread, I think you'll be surprised y the level of interest shown by the new generation. The generation that has literally grown up with hard core AAA spring and summer teams. A generation that is much more in tune with hockey outside your state boarders. I believe the "start" of this generation is next years incoming freshman class. I can believe there was not sufficient interest (I refuse to believe there was NO interest) to make this carry forward in the past and even the right now current Seniors and Juniors etc... but let's see what happens over the enxt couple of years. I mean you have more Pee Wee and Bantam players from MN than ever playing Tier 1 outside your boarders, it isn't just high schoolers anymore. You have the new Bantam Elite League invention, you have spring and summer programs literally everywhere, yea I bet there is alot more interest that you think with this new generation....Froggy Richards wrote:I agree with you. But playing for a Tier 1 National Championship will do nothing in regards to keeping kids at home in MN. As has been stated repeatedly on this thread and all of the other threads discussing this topic, there is simply no interest.WestMetro wrote:Not to beat a dead horse.
Whether its this proposal, or another one, or more than one....
We had 40 +/- U 18s leave Minn last year. We will see how many this year.
The Elite League alone has not stopped this tide, but arguably has slowed the tide compared to what it otherwise would have been
So, whatever additional steps we can do to encourage our home grown talent to keep playing their hockey in state for as long as possible
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefit away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture.
Minnesota has a good thing going with its community based programs and high school hockey. Every other hockey playing state in the country looks on in jealousy at what Minnesota has going on in the winter and in the Spring/Summer hockey season. Why should Minnesota change to be like the rest of the country when the rest of the country wants to be Minnesota? Am I missing something here?
OK, if its not this proposal, then WHAT proposal, to solve the problem of 40 U18s leaving the state each year?? To reiterate......
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every U18 senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefits away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture? (OR, is there not a consensus that giving these benefits away is a problem?)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every U18 senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefits away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture? (OR, is there not a consensus that giving these benefits away is a problem?)
-
SCBlueLiner
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm
I just don't think there is any way MN HS hockey is going to compete with the USHL or even NAHL. If kids have the opportunity to play at that level, right or wrong for them, some are going to take that opportunity. I don't think the answer is to put together a Team Minnesota to play in one tournament at the end of the season. Yeah, 17-20 kids just went out and proved this state is the best. Whoopee. All this fuss over a small minority of players. Bet if you put this team together the same number of kids are still going to leave to play juniors because, well, the Anderson Cup, the Clark Cup, and the Robertson Cup are about 10000x greater than any U18 or U16 Tier 1 title you can win on an all-star squad, and the allure of playing at that level is too great.WestMetro wrote:OK, if its not this proposal, then WHAT proposal, to solve the problem of 40 U18s leaving the state each year?? To reiterate......
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every U18 senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefits away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture? (OR, is there not a consensus that giving these benefits away is a problem?)
You want to keep kids here and playing for their high school teams then you have to offer them something deeper and more meaningful. More games, better games, more competition, dynamic schedules, more and better coaching and not just for the top 20 or top 50, but for at least the top 100. How you do that is the question. More HS games. A longer season. Two seasons. National invitational tournaments. You tell me.
I don't know, keep plugging away with ideas, but the chance to play in one tournament is not going to keep kids home. This is more about a few people wanting to win a trophy to say Minnesota is the best, or rather, people from other areas of the country wanting a shot at Minnesota so they can say they truly are the best.
-
Froggy Richards
- Posts: 623
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:15 am
Obviously you're right. There may be reasons to do this but keeping kids home isn't one of them. Playing in this tournament wouldn't even factor into a kid's decision of whether or not to leave MN for a different opportunity. You're correct, so far the only interest I've heard in this is from people outside of MN. I'm not sure why. I don't think a team of MN's top 20 would even be tested in this tournament. Shattuck won the U18 and U14 again this year and there is no question the top 20 HS kids would easily beat Shattuck. Heck, Edina might have even beat Shattuck this year.SCBlueLiner wrote:I just don't think there is any way MN HS hockey is going to compete with the USHL or even NAHL. If kids have the opportunity to play at that level, right or wrong for them, some are going to take that opportunity. I don't think the answer is to put together a Team Minnesota to play in one tournament at the end of the season. Yeah, 17-20 kids just went out and proved this state is the best. Whoopee. All this fuss over a small minority of players. Bet if you put this team together the same number of kids are still going to leave to play juniors because, well, the Anderson Cup, the Clark Cup, and the Robertson Cup are about 10000x greater than any U18 or U16 Tier 1 title you can win on an all-star squad, and the allure of playing at that level is too great.WestMetro wrote:OK, if its not this proposal, then WHAT proposal, to solve the problem of 40 U18s leaving the state each year?? To reiterate......
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every U18 senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefits away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture? (OR, is there not a consensus that giving these benefits away is a problem?)
You want to keep kids here and playing for their high school teams then you have to offer them something deeper and more meaningful. More games, better games, more competition, dynamic schedules, more and better coaching and not just for the top 20 or top 50, but for at least the top 100. How you do that is the question. More HS games. A longer season. Two seasons. National invitational tournaments. You tell me.
I don't know, keep plugging away with ideas, but the chance to play in one tournament is not going to keep kids home. This is more about a few people wanting to win a trophy to say Minnesota is the best, or rather, people from other areas of the country wanting a shot at Minnesota so they can say they truly are the best.
-
SCBlueLiner
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm
-
WarmUpTheBus
- Posts: 816
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:24 pm
OK, are we then saying we've got to try to improve the NAHL Wilderness and Magician teams so they can move up to USHL status? ; and/or supplement with more such teams around the state? So the 40 +/- U 18s every year will at least stay within the state borders if they choose to opt out of their home H.S?
Again, I ask the question why we let this top Minn talent migrate out of state to Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, or downstate Illinois?
All that means is we cant watch them play, and our youth hockey investment in them is being exploited for profit in another state.
With our reputation and huge investment in time and rinks, we should be a big net importer of U 18 kids (and for that matter U25s amateur or semi pro,) and certainly should be able to find a solution so our homegrown top U18s feel they have no choice but to export out.
Again, I ask the question why we let this top Minn talent migrate out of state to Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, or downstate Illinois?
All that means is we cant watch them play, and our youth hockey investment in them is being exploited for profit in another state.
With our reputation and huge investment in time and rinks, we should be a big net importer of U 18 kids (and for that matter U25s amateur or semi pro,) and certainly should be able to find a solution so our homegrown top U18s feel they have no choice but to export out.
-
SCBlueLiner
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm
-
greybeard58
- Posts: 2569
- Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 11:40 pm
-
karl(east)
- Posts: 6480
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
Looks like the Vulcans folded in 2000: http://www.hockeydb.com/stte/twin-city- ... -8589.htmlWestMetro wrote:Last USHL team was Pre Wild era?
And here are your NAHL attendance numbers: http://www.hockeydb.com/nhl-attendance/ ... 9&sid=2014
It's not like there's some prohibition on USHL teams or more NAHL teams in the state. The NAHL is giving things a new run now with the Magicians and the Wilderness, but in the past, junior hockey just hasn't been economically viable in this state, and the early returns on the three newish NAHL teams are not great. There's a reason that most of these franchises are based out of small or mid-sized cities where there isn't much else in the way of hockey. The Twin Cities hockey market is pretty saturated, and most of the mid-sized cities that might be good candidates for the USHL have D-I programs. I suppose Rochester might be a place to try something, but between the Wild, 5 D-I programs, and high schools that have reasonably loyal followings, there aren't many hockey fans left to make more junior teams economically feasible.
Even so, though, the point of these junior leagues is that they aren't tied down by geography. At most, a USHL team in Minnesota might keep, what, 10 Minnesotans in the state, and that perhaps in some city far from their hometown?
My point: I don't think expanding junior leagues is the "answer" here.
Can anyone recall 20 years ago approx. how many H Schoolers were leaving HS early, and whether any of them played with Vulcans or their local Minnesota USHL predeccessors?
Also going back 20 years, how did we let the NTDP slip away from Minnesota in favor of Ann Arbor ?
Seems by that time, wasn't Michigan losing some of its historical youth/college hockey premier name recognition; and Ikola Brooks/Nanne/Russo were building momentum for Minnesota youth/college hockey on the national scene.
As far as the kids traveling back and forth for their visits to/from home, I wonder how many of them drive vs fly, such that Ann Arbor is better from a central location perspective. ( Nowadays, there are more kids from the south and west also )
I wonder how often the NTDP revisits the location question?
Also going back 20 years, how did we let the NTDP slip away from Minnesota in favor of Ann Arbor ?
Seems by that time, wasn't Michigan losing some of its historical youth/college hockey premier name recognition; and Ikola Brooks/Nanne/Russo were building momentum for Minnesota youth/college hockey on the national scene.
As far as the kids traveling back and forth for their visits to/from home, I wonder how many of them drive vs fly, such that Ann Arbor is better from a central location perspective. ( Nowadays, there are more kids from the south and west also )
I wonder how often the NTDP revisits the location question?
I see what you are saying but please note my proposal was NOT to just "get together 20 kids for a tournament. The idea is about development too. Whether it's the Elite League or whatever I am proprosing multiple teams (like 6 toSCBlueLiner wrote:I just don't think there is any way MN HS hockey is going to compete with the USHL or even NAHL. If kids have the opportunity to play at that level, right or wrong for them, some are going to take that opportunity. I don't think the answer is to put together a Team Minnesota to play in one tournament at the end of the season. Yeah, 17-20 kids just went out and proved this state is the best. Whoopee. All this fuss over a small minority of players. Bet if you put this team together the same number of kids are still going to leave to play juniors because, well, the Anderson Cup, the Clark Cup, and the Robertson Cup are about 10000x greater than any U18 or U16 Tier 1 title you can win on an all-star squad, and the allure of playing at that level is too great.WestMetro wrote:OK, if its not this proposal, then WHAT proposal, to solve the problem of 40 U18s leaving the state each year?? To reiterate......
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every U18 senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefits away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture? (OR, is there not a consensus that giving these benefits away is a problem?)
You want to keep kids here and playing for their high school teams then you have to offer them something deeper and more meaningful. More games, better games, more competition, dynamic schedules, more and better coaching and not just for the top 20 or top 50, but for at least the top 100. How you do that is the question. More HS games. A longer season. Two seasons. National invitational tournaments. You tell me.
I don't know, keep plugging away with ideas, but the chance to play in one tournament is not going to keep kids home. This is more about a few people wanting to win a trophy to say Minnesota is the best, or rather, people from other areas of the country wanting a shot at Minnesota so they can say they truly are the best.
, like the elite league and/or others, that would have close to a 100 kids involved all playing eachother and vying to get to the national tourney. I mean the pre tourney that decides who goes to nationals could be a huge draw in Mn just for that as folks go watch the "best players" in MN competing against eachother to go to nationals then that team competes against the rest of the country. This does not negate everything you said but does clarify that there is a bit more to my proposal than what you were portraying.Sorry Froggy but thi sis where you lose me and I find you a little comical in how much of a homer you are. It's true that MN produces a DEPTH of talent for D1 and the pros compared to other states. But as I have said before just because you can field 6 teams of that caliber of player does not mean that your "best 20" are so significantly better than the other 80 you are leaving at home that they will just destory everyone in their path. I mean is te Elite League results against Schattuck and others not enough evidence to prove that they absolutely would be tested... oh wait you are going to say the Elite league is not the best twenty... nope they aren't but if you've watched hockey over the years like I think you have then you know that cherry picking whoever you think are the best 20 doesn't mean the results will be significantly different. The other teams int he other states might not be able to field six teams worth of talent but the one team they do field absolutely can keep pace with your best 20Froggy Richards wrote:Obviously you're right. There may be reasons to do this but keeping kids home isn't one of them. Playing in this tournament wouldn't even factor into a kid's decision of whether or not to leave MN for a different opportunity. You're correct, so far the only interest I've heard in this is from people outside of MN. I'm not sure why. I don't think a team of MN's top 20 would even be tested in this tournament. Shattuck won the U18 and U14 again this year and there is no question the top 20 HS kids would easily beat Shattuck. Heck, Edina might have even beat Shattuck this year.SCBlueLiner wrote:I just don't think there is any way MN HS hockey is going to compete with the USHL or even NAHL. If kids have the opportunity to play at that level, right or wrong for them, some are going to take that opportunity. I don't think the answer is to put together a Team Minnesota to play in one tournament at the end of the season. Yeah, 17-20 kids just went out and proved this state is the best. Whoopee. All this fuss over a small minority of players. Bet if you put this team together the same number of kids are still going to leave to play juniors because, well, the Anderson Cup, the Clark Cup, and the Robertson Cup are about 10000x greater than any U18 or U16 Tier 1 title you can win on an all-star squad, and the allure of playing at that level is too great.WestMetro wrote:OK, if its not this proposal, then WHAT proposal, to solve the problem of 40 U18s leaving the state each year?? To reiterate......
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless whether you believe U18s are socially better off living at home and attending their home high school or not.....
.... Every U18 senior season playing USHL/NAHL/WHL/AAA outside of Minnesota, or every spring or summer partial USHL season outside of Minnesota, means two things for sure:
o Minnesotans generally cant watch our own kids play in person
o The economic activity generated by our youth hockey investment is not retained within Minnesota borders
Why must the State of Hockey give these benefits away to Iowa, Michigan, ND, or Illinois. Something wrong with this picture? (OR, is there not a consensus that giving these benefits away is a problem?)
You want to keep kids here and playing for their high school teams then you have to offer them something deeper and more meaningful. More games, better games, more competition, dynamic schedules, more and better coaching and not just for the top 20 or top 50, but for at least the top 100. How you do that is the question. More HS games. A longer season. Two seasons. National invitational tournaments. You tell me.
I don't know, keep plugging away with ideas, but the chance to play in one tournament is not going to keep kids home. This is more about a few people wanting to win a trophy to say Minnesota is the best, or rather, people from other areas of the country wanting a shot at Minnesota so they can say they truly are the best.
There is a huge difference between the USHL and NAHL as far as being granted a franchise. Remember to get a NAHL team you basically need to be able to sustain good attendance of about 800 fans per game so a nice decent average rink suffices and puts alot of towns in the mix for a franchise. Usuall blue collar towns with not much else to offer make the best NAHL towns.... The USHL is different, in order to be granted a franchise you have to have a stadium that seats I believe at minimum new franchises must seat 3,000 and be able to sustain those sized crowds or larger. The Chicago Steel's main home rink seats 2,600 but I believe they were granted a franchise before the new minimum rule was put in place but a good share of the stadiums seats 4,500 to 6,000+. So while cities like Austin or wherever might be doing well with their franchises it is not a deal where you can just go see if they can upgrade to the USHL, it is not about "talent on the ice" in that regard, it's about do you have the facilities and money to be aprter of the bigger product..... Two new franchises will enter the USHL this next season, one in Madison, WI (the old Madison Captiols USHL franchise is being revived) and the other one I think is going to be in Bloomington, IL or somewhere around there.... I think Bloomington will do well, I suspect Madison will fail once again due to similar things you guys posted about for MN, that being that USHL teams usually play on Friday and Saturday nights, well in Madison guess who else plays on Friday and Saturday nights, yep, the Badgers (and also High School hockey), so with all the hockey fans either at Badger games, their High School games, or their own games I am curious who is going to be left over to fill that 9,000 seat coliseum for those Captiol games????? >>>>>WestMetro wrote:OK, are we then saying we've got to try to improve the NAHL Wilderness and Magician teams so they can move up to USHL status? ; and/or supplement with more such teams around the state? So the 40 +/- U 18s every year will at least stay within the state borders if they choose to opt out of their home H.S?
Again, I ask the question why we let this top Minn talent migrate out of state to Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, or downstate Illinois?
All that means is we cant watch them play, and our youth hockey investment in them is being exploited for profit in another state.
With our reputation and huge investment in time and rinks, we should be a big net importer of U 18 kids (and for that matter U25s amateur or semi pro,) and certainly should be able to find a solution so our homegrown top U18s feel they have no choice but to export out.
The Rochester Mustangs used to get 2-4 high school kids each year. Educationally it was a racket and the kids weren't in school as much as they should have been to get the per pupil funding and to count as a day for attendance purposes. At the end the Rochester school board refused to give the kids credit for attendance they didn't earn and the kids weren't graduating on time. Kids quit coming to Rochester full time and did before and afters where they stayed at home, went to school, and just played on the weekends.
Minnesota is pretty strict on attendance, finding out schools falsify the documents to get the per pupil funding and graduation rates is an embarrassment to both the school and the team, not to mention how the state views it.
Now with online schooling maybe there can be a change. The Junior leagues say they emphasize school but that really hasn't been the case in the past.
Minnesota is pretty strict on attendance, finding out schools falsify the documents to get the per pupil funding and graduation rates is an embarrassment to both the school and the team, not to mention how the state views it.
Now with online schooling maybe there can be a change. The Junior leagues say they emphasize school but that really hasn't been the case in the past.
-
karl(east)
- Posts: 6480
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
Early departures, while not nonexistent, were rare until the late 90s. It was just a different world back then, and it's hard to compare things for any fruitful purpose.WestMetro wrote:Can anyone recall 20 years ago approx. how many H Schoolers were leaving HS early, and whether any of them played with Vulcans or their local Minnesota USHL predeccessors?
Also going back 20 years, how did we let the NTDP slip away from Minnesota in favor of Ann Arbor ?
Seems by that time, wasn't Michigan losing some of its historical youth/college hockey premier name recognition; and Ikola Brooks/Nanne/Russo were building momentum for Minnesota youth/college hockey on the national scene.
As far as the kids traveling back and forth for their visits to/from home, I wonder how many of them drive vs fly, such that Ann Arbor is better from a central location perspective. ( Nowadays, there are more kids from the south and west also )
I wonder how often the NTDP revisits the location question?
I don't know the whole history between Minnesota hockey and USA Hockey, but they've always had somewhat different priorities. The hockey needs of the rest of the country have usually been very different from those of Minnesota, so there just wasn't a lot of overlap in the thinking.
Herb Brooks hated the NTDP with a passion; he thought it was an awful use of resources to spend so much money on the top 20 or so players in an age group, especially after the Olympics went pro. (The original intent behind the NTDP was to build amateur Olympic teams, after all.) I don't think Minnesota had any interest in the program. For good or ill, we've always had our own way of doing things.
Like it or not, talented young hockey players are pretty much free agents now. People are going to move around, even across the country or to Canada, looking for the "best" opportunities.If you do want to stay put, though, the Minnesota model as it currently exists is probably the best option out there, unless you're fortunate enough to live in a city with a CHL team that wants you, or one of the two or three cities that has a good AAA team, a USHL team, and a D-I college. It is what it is. It's all market-driven, and while markets have obvious advantages, they aren't very friendly for people who want to stay in the same place.
-
puckbreath
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:08 pm
I've always agreed with this, and also, how it is completely unaccountable with regards to that money.karl(east) wrote:Early departures, while not nonexistent, were rare until the late 90s. It was just a different world back then, and it's hard to compare things for any fruitful purpose.WestMetro wrote:Can anyone recall 20 years ago approx. how many H Schoolers were leaving HS early, and whether any of them played with Vulcans or their local Minnesota USHL predeccessors?
Also going back 20 years, how did we let the NTDP slip away from Minnesota in favor of Ann Arbor ?
Seems by that time, wasn't Michigan losing some of its historical youth/college hockey premier name recognition; and Ikola Brooks/Nanne/Russo were building momentum for Minnesota youth/college hockey on the national scene.
As far as the kids traveling back and forth for their visits to/from home, I wonder how many of them drive vs fly, such that Ann Arbor is better from a central location perspective. ( Nowadays, there are more kids from the south and west also )
I wonder how often the NTDP revisits the location question?
I don't know the whole history between Minnesota hockey and USA Hockey, but they've always had somewhat different priorities. The hockey needs of the rest of the country have usually been very different from those of Minnesota, so there just wasn't a lot of overlap in the thinking.
Herb Brooks hated the NTDP with a passion; he thought it was an awful use of resources to spend so much money on the top 20 or so players in an age group, especially after the Olympics went pro. (The original intent behind the NTDP was to build amateur Olympic teams, after all.) I don't think Minnesota had any interest in the program. For good or ill, we've always had our own way of doing things.
Like it or not, talented young hockey players are pretty much free agents now. People are going to move around, even across the country or to Canada, looking for the "best" opportunities.If you do want to stay put, though, the Minnesota model as it currently exists is probably the best option out there, unless you're fortunate enough to live in a city with a CHL team that wants you, or one of the two or three cities that has a good AAA team, a USHL team, and a D-I college. It is what it is. It's all market-driven, and while markets have obvious advantages, they aren't very friendly for people who want to stay in the same place.
I bet it's books would be very interesting to say the least......