HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:10 am**

breakout wrote:
Can't Never Tried wrote:
breakout wrote: I am not sure if Minnesota Hockey will allow more than one A team. Can't think of any associations in the state that have more than one A team.
I thought St. Cloud had 2 A teams a fews years back I can't remember for sure but I think it was PW level...I'm sure someone will remember.
Yes, you are correct. St. Cloud supports 3 high schools.........correct? Of, course Lakeville has North and South now. Rochester supports 3 high schools. Not sure if the youth hockey & high school comparison is relevant. Didn't St. Cloud go back to one A team?

Personally, I have no problem with Edina fielding 2 squirt A teams if they are both competitive.

St. Cloud had two "A" teams at Bantams and Peewees and are back to one "A" team at bantams and peewee, and two squirt "A" teams this year.

The two "A" bantam teams didn't go over too well when the tried it becuase about 10 players opted to go HS rather then play on a weak bantam team. If they had only oine team that year, they would have been a top five team at bantams. Both teams struggled after the top bantam players moved up.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:17 am**

There should be no MN hockey problem fielding as many A teams as you want, the only problem I can see is the the Assoc. infighting that would occur, especially if you have players # 1-15 on one team then #16-30 on the 2nd etc. and the 2nd team beats the #1 team it causes all kinds of havoc...so the only way to prevent that is to say "we are having 2 A teams and we will draft or draw the top 30 players onto the 2 teams"
This way it's equal and prevents the upheaval in the case of an upset.

Now the other problem with that... is the fact that "A" travel teams are a competitive team..Yes, Yes.. I know, youth hockey is all developmental.
If you do it the way to prevent the infighting, you are not putting your best 15 players out there...and thus possibly giving up a chance for a title.
So that IMO is why most associations go with one A team and multiple B teams.

Thats how I see it...but I wear dark glasses

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:45 am**

I am still curious. Is there any reason why a large program couldn't split into two associations to allow more A level participation.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:16 am**

The restriction on an association fielding more than 1 A level team is done by the associations themselves. It would be a great advantage for the larger associations in the long run the field at least 2 A level squirt teams if the numbers are there.
Is it better for the players to have say 2 A peewee teams and have them play at better than a .500 record or have 1A and 3 B?
I know Edina is this thread,but they are not the only association that could field 2 A teams at the squirt level.
The biggest problem is the parents who want to have that 35-0 team at the squirt level. I believe this needs repeating in over 30 years of watching youth hockey there have been a number of players that stood out at the squirt level only to disappear by the time they were in high school and a larger number of B and C squirt players who grew and matured into really good players.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:21 am**

big associations like to be big. they like to win state championships. they want to win championships at the A level & they want to win them at the B level too. they will never split on their own & they will not create multiple A teams. it is about winning. period. let me say that again - it is about winning. period.

large associations believe that development occurs because kids are fighting for spots on A teams and working hard in the summer. there is no off-season for large association skaters. those that think large associations will have multiple A teams without a push from MN hockey are delusional.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:28 am**

frederick61 wrote:I am still curious. Is there any reason why a large program couldn't split into two associations to allow more A level participation.

It happens Anoka split a couple times...Champlin, Andover etc.
Elk River - Rogers
I'm sure there are a lot lot more.

But if you mean like one association becoming 2 of the same thing...that would be a lot of redundant effort...unless I'm just not catching what it is you mean here.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:35 am**

[quote="carpenterguy"]I have had many years of involvement in hockey. Is there some politics in hockey? Yes! There is in every walk of life. However, some on here like the last post will always have this as their "EXCUSE". All each individual kid can do is work hard and overcome any so called obstacles in his way.

There are many excuse makers in the world but I've never considered myself one. I sometimes hear comments like that and it's generally from connected people who try to deflect the real issue. Based on Edina and other big clubs having one A team, they are choosing winning over developing more kids. How is that an excuse. Since my son and I continue to fight through the obstacles by creating or locating other developmental oportunities, we are not using it as an excuse but motivation to succeed despite the adversity. I actually like the character and toughness I see him gaining through this challenge and we are making progress. "He" has goals and I would like to see him acheive them but goals are dangerous when you do enough to reach them but someone steals them through unsavory means. He will become an A player if he keeps working and there is no excuse for that to not occur. However, playing on an association A team is not up to him and thats simply a fact not an excuse

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:55 pm**

"Cant never tried" I do mean one association splitting and operating as two associations even though is resides in only one school district. If a program gets too large because of its success, shouldn't there be an alternative to allow it grow within the community. The program shouldn't be punished in effect by limiting development though limits on teams. I think growth is what we all would like to see. Unfortunately it is uneven. The rules tend to foster smaller programs to allow for growth. But shouldn't they also allow larger programs to split even if the community has only one school.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:42 pm**

frederick61 wrote:"Cant never tried" I do mean one association splitting and operating as two associations even though is resides in only one school district. If a program gets too large because of its success, shouldn't there be an alternative to allow it grow within the community. The program shouldn't be punished in effect by limiting development though limits on teams. I think growth is what we all would like to see. Unfortunately it is uneven. The rules tend to foster smaller programs to allow for growth. But shouldn't they also allow larger programs to split even if the community has only one school.

OK...How would you do that? who goes to which group? North - South split ? or something like that? it would be a bigger mess then you can imagine.
Not saying giving more opportunity isn't good... it is good.
The only way in my eyes to get more players playing A hockey is have more then one team...that will take lobbying of your Assoc. board...but then it's really not A hockey anymore is it.
It's been this way ever since I can remember....another thing is that if you screw with A hockey talent by diluting it you will just have more players opting for the AAA programs...so again you won't have A hockey but a new lesser A with some B players in it.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:41 pm**

To "Can't Never Tried", I still don't know if a large association could split if the association wanted to. If one could under the current rules, then Edina would have the option of forming two associations which I think could foster continuous interest and growth in Edina. If the rules forbid it, then I would pose the question, should the rules be changed.

As to how split an association, I would leave that to the association as long as they adopted a logical set of rules to balance the development. Some associations that split, kept the talent pool a A level to the top 30 players and let the coaches decide the teams the first few years. If it could be done, I would put the split association in a district that would be local and foster growth through competition and interest. For an Edina split teams, I would like to see them move into District 3 to balance competition with Wayzata. That potentially could allow teams like Cooper and Brooklyn Park to move to District 1 or District 2.

Finally, I believe that as competition grows, interests grow. Triple A teams are expensive, if the kids can play and compete within their local associations, the parents would favor the lower cost.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:00 pm**

frederick61 wrote:To "Can't Never Tried", I still don't know if a large association could split if the association wanted to. If one could under the current rules, then Edina would have the option of forming two associations which I think could foster continuous interest and growth in Edina. If the rules forbid it, then I would pose the question, should the rules be changed.

As to how split an association, I would leave that to the association as long as they adopted a logical set of rules to balance the development. Some associations that split, kept the talent pool a A level to the top 30 players and let the coaches decide the teams the first few years. If it could be done, I would put the split association in a district that would be local and foster growth through competition and interest. For an Edina split teams, I would like to see them move into District 3 to balance competition with Wayzata. That potentially could allow teams like Cooper and Brooklyn Park to move to District 1 or District 2.

Finally, I believe that as competition grows, interests grow. Triple A teams are expensive, if the kids can play and compete within their local associations, the parents would favor the lower cost.

I can hear the angry buzzing of the Hornets already

You would need a whole new deal, 501c3,Board of Directors, equipment, fundraising,(do they do that in Edina?)

it would be a cluster to the 10th power....good luck, but it won't happen.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:20 pm**

The above mentioned associations, Rogers, Andover and Champlin Park were formed because of a new High school being formed and the new associations formed were based on that high school attendance area. The associations that field 2 A level teams are probably the associations that cover one school district with at least 2 high schools.

While I would like to see the larger associations start to field more the a single A squirt team when possible. To split an association in a single school district does not make any sense as the boundaries of most associations in the state are either by school district or high school attendance area.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:21 pm**

Can't Never Tried wrote:
frederick61 wrote:"Cant never tried" I do mean one association splitting and operating as two associations even though is resides in only one school district. If a program gets too large because of its success, shouldn't there be an alternative to allow it grow within the community. The program shouldn't be punished in effect by limiting development though limits on teams. I think growth is what we all would like to see. Unfortunately it is uneven. The rules tend to foster smaller programs to allow for growth. But shouldn't they also allow larger programs to split even if the community has only one school.
OK...How would you do that? who goes to which group? North - South split ? or something like that? it would be a bigger mess then you can imagine.
Not saying giving more opportunity isn't good... it is good.
The only way in my eyes to get more players playing A hockey is have more then one team...that will take lobbying of your Assoc. board...but then it's really not A hockey anymore is it.
It's been this way ever since I can remember....another thing is that if you screw with A hockey talent by diluting it you will just have more players opting for the AAA programs...so again you won't have A hockey but a new lesser A with some B players in it.

Try promotion /relegation of teams like in soccer- if a team wins their district league and garners more than 75% of the points available they get promoted for the next season, Relegation happens if you are the bottom team and do not secure at least 25% of the possible district points available.

Not a perfect system but keeps level of play fairly high and doesn't let bad teams dilute a district for a very long period. It also rewards the clubs that have significant talent to develop

Just thinking out loud - there is no perfect system but this one gives you options

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:44 pm**

To "Can't Never Tried", do you really think it would take a whole new deal. If the powers that be in an "Edina" wanted to split; couldn't it be easy. The whole current Edina structure could be replicated and the revenues shared. The result would have resulted in 2 peewee A's and 5 peewee B's this year only one team would play towards the north and the other team toward the south. And next year they would have the ability to add teams. But I have to admit, I don't know what a 501c3 is. Sounds like a McCain/Feingold rule.

As to "greybeard58", I agree that most associations line-up with school boundaries. I think that is a good idea until the association through its own success becomes the "bottleneck" in player development. Imagine a peewee tryout with 400 kids; thats about 25 peewee teams. Unbelievable.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:07 pm**

Just out of curiosity.......how many kids usually attend Edina high school tryouts? This number could be an indicator as to how well their current youth program is developing kids......or not.....

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:42 pm**

skillbuilder wrote:
carpenterguy wrote:I have had many years of involvement in hockey. Is there some politics in hockey? Yes! There is in every walk of life. However, some on here like the last post will always have this as their "EXCUSE". All each individual kid can do is work hard and overcome any so called obstacles in his way.

There are many excuse makers in the world but I've never considered myself one. I sometimes hear comments like that and it's generally from connected people who try to deflect the real issue. Based on Edina and other big clubs having one A team, they are choosing winning over developing more kids. How is that an excuse. Since my son and I continue to fight through the obstacles by creating or locating other developmental oportunities, we are not using it as an excuse but motivation to succeed despite the adversity. I actually like the character and toughness I see him gaining through this challenge and we are making progress. "He" has goals and I would like to see him acheive them but goals are dangerous when you do enough to reach them but someone steals them through unsavory means. He will become an A player if he keeps working and there is no excuse for that to not occur. However, playing on an association A team is not up to him and thats simply a fact not an excuse

Your post is full of excuses! If your son is good enough he will reach his goals.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:23 pm**

Charliedog wrote:Just out of curiosity.......how many kids usually attend Edina high school tryouts? This number could be an indicator as to how well their current youth program is developing kids......or not.....

Statistically, there is attrition around 14 years of age for any sport.

As for Edina Varsity, they will be ranked either one or two going into the season. They have six Edina High School varsity kids in the Elite League. Seven if you count a kid that is playing at Benilde.

Looks like Edina is doing well in the development area lately. I stated lately, because they had some less then impressive years by Edina standards prior to this very successful athletic class that is now in high school.

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:04 am**

Blah, Blah, Blah! Facts are facts.

Take a look at the best hockey associations in the State of Minnesota. Regardless of how they did it. The same programs are continuously the better programs in the state.
If you're part of a weaker program. Go and take a look at the stronger programs and see how they develop the kids.

There is no way that Edina, Jefferson, Wayzata kids are all born natural hockey players. The programs develop these kids.

"Real hockey players aren't born, they're MADE" Famous writer

It all comes down to developing the kids in your local associations. If your associations aren't developing the kids. Then you're going to have weaker teams. It's all clear cut, very simple.
This is what you're seeing. Kids are leaving their programs to find alternative places to play. Develop, develop, develop. Repetition, repetition, repetition. It's called human nature. When any of us can get ahead by doing something. We do it. This is true in life. If you want to do good in school the kids study hard. Sometimes they do alternative schooling to get ahead or stay ahead. Human nature natural competition.

I know Blah, Blah, Blah. Honestly, why is it so hard?

PEACE!

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:00 am**

BoogeyMan wrote:Blah, Blah, Blah! Blah, Blah, Blah

You are making sense now

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:15 am**

Genetics have no influence

Human Nature?
develop and repetition
Sounds like the way rats and dogs are trained. Sounds like how artificial intelligence is programmed for robotics

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:04 am**

a huge part of developing hockey players are the parents. I here stuff like are you living through your kids on this board and all over the place. To me these are the clueless people. Parents have alot at stake here for all the time they put in with their child. hockey is very very competitive in this state. Skillbuilder was saying their favoritism theirs no question!!!! when you have 200 kids trying out for one a team in squirts how do you pick fifteen kids? after the top 6 or 7 its all whos your buddy. thats never gona change if you dont like it move...... where i live its not that hard we have around 30 at each level and its really down to the last 2 spots that are a toss up other than that its clear. The coaching is great here but what i see time and time again its the kids that the parents haul to the arena not just for practice but open hockey and play summer hockey that win out in the end. you have kids all they do is show up for practice all through youth hockey and then complain because a 10th grader beat them out as a senior for varsity. Well its all about who put the time and work into it. weather you like it or not that time and work comes from the parent too. Thats the reason people get emotional about all this crap. So if your a parent and little jonny wants it all you better be willing to put in the time and the money or your both gona be dissapointed but hey theirs always basketball.

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:34 am**

carpenterguy wrote:
skillbuilder wrote:
carpenterguy wrote:I have had many years of involvement in hockey. Is there some politics in hockey? Yes! There is in every walk of life. However, some on here like the last post will always have this as their "EXCUSE". All each individual kid can do is work hard and overcome any so called obstacles in his way.

There are many excuse makers in the world but I've never considered myself one. I sometimes hear comments like that and it's generally from connected people who try to deflect the real issue. Based on Edina and other big clubs having one A team, they are choosing winning over developing more kids. How is that an excuse. Since my son and I continue to fight through the obstacles by creating or locating other developmental oportunities, we are not using it as an excuse but motivation to succeed despite the adversity. I actually like the character and toughness I see him gaining through this challenge and we are making progress. "He" has goals and I would like to see him acheive them but goals are dangerous when you do enough to reach them but someone steals them through unsavory means. He will become an A player if he keeps working and there is no excuse for that to not occur. However, playing on an association A team is not up to him and thats simply a fact not an excuse

Your post is full of excuses! If your son is good enough he will reach his goals.
Carpenterguy, His goals are achievable but not if he's just good enough, but if he's way better than he should have to be. You can accept or reject that clarification but we've lived it. I'll take experience over theory any day. By the way, which hockey board are you a part of...

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:34 am**

tomASS wrote:Genetics have no influence

Human Nature?
develop and repetition
Sounds like the way rats and dogs are trained. Sounds like how artificial intelligence is programmed for robotics

I can't believe you would pull the genetics card. Genetically predisposed short slow kids with bad hands can get to the top with repetition, repetion, repetition..........develop, develop, develop

Season is on, hopefully the kids are out there working hard and having fun playing the great game of hockey with their friends regardless of where they are at.

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:10 am**

Great post Breakout...ditto, it's game time, so shut your traps and let's enjoy some hockey!!!

Posted: **Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:34 am**

jancze5 wrote:Great post Breakout...ditto, it's game time, so shut your traps and let's enjoy some hockey!!!

spot on!
and let those that have tried to improve association hockey development be the one's allowed to cast the first, second and third stones. Those choosing other means good luck in those ventures.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Edina Tryouts... Here's What's Wrong With Youth Hockey

Re: Edina Tryouts... Here's What's Wrong With Youth Hockey

yep

breakout

Re: breakout