HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Puckguy19 wrote:http://www.startribune.com/sports/preps/189905921.html

And lockdown in 3......2.....1......

Sad if that's the case. Reputable news source, no students named. Appears to be potential action taken by the youth hockey association, and parents that I am guessing know more about the situation than is being made public.

We'll keep it open for now. Is there any precedent for this sort of action--a youth association openly trying to make a statement about the HS coach? We could certainly discuss that angle without turning this thread into a rumor mill.

karl(east) wrote:We'll keep it open for now. Is there any precedent for this sort of action--a youth association openly trying to make a statement about the HS coach? We could certainly discuss that angle without turning this thread into a rumor mill.

Given the link between most high school programs and the youth association, it can't be seen as a positive. In addition to being the feeder program, many youth associations also allow for additional income through summer camps, clinics, etc. To see the proposed action of cutting off ties with the coach and players, certainly would make continuing in the position difficult. Can't think of an instance where this has occurred prior, but many youth associations have influence on a coaches longevity.

karl(east) wrote:We'll keep it open for now. Is there any precedent for this sort of action--a youth association openly trying to make a statement about the HS coach? We could certainly discuss that angle without turning this thread into a rumor mill.

Interesting...

School districts and youth hockey associations are separate entities so I'm not sure any vote by one can be anything more than ceremonial. That said depending on how the school district is set up in regards to how it handles coaches it could be significant. Remember how the Randy Schmitz deal went down at Lakeville where some youth hockey parents got the school board to do what the AD wouldn't do. There have been a number if similar cases from Duluth East, to White Bear Lake, to Owatonna with differing results but in each case disgruntled parents made a stink and it made news.

Interesting....suppose the union plays a role. Thanks for posting link to article.

goldy313 wrote:School districts and youth hockey associations are separate entities so I'm not sure any vote by one can be anything more than ceremonial. That said depending on how the school district is set up in regards to how it handles coaches it could be significant. Remember how the Randy Schmitz deal went down at Lakeville where some youth hockey parents got the school board to do what the AD wouldn't do. There have been a number if similar cases from Duluth East, to White Bear Lake, to Owatonna with differing results but in each case disgruntled parents made a stink and it made news.

I'd say the difference would be a youth hockey association taking action on behalf of its member, rather than a group of parents complaining. First time I can recall an association, through its board, taking formal action, if they choose to.

I am confused by the high schools response to the event. I am even more confused by the parents of the 13. It must not be as bad as it sounds. After the suspension "Crimson players hit the ice without helmets to cheers and applause from the crowd." Quote from the Trib.

13 guys get suspended. 13 show up to play at the end of their suspensions. Not one parent decided that maybe little Johnny Superstar should take a break and maybe get some extra diversity training?

The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

bestpopcorn wrote:I am confused by the high schools response to the event. I am even more confused by the parents of the 13. It must not be as bad as it sounds. After the suspension "Crimson players hit the ice without helmets to cheers and applause from the crowd." Quote from the Trib.

13 guys get suspended. 13 show up to play at the end of their suspensions. Not one parent decided that maybe little Johnny Superstar should take a break and maybe get some extra diversity training?

The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

Agreed, after listening to the administration and coach describe it as the most difficult incident they had faced, I thought there may be some parental intervention. Really dismayed by the "boys will be boys" quote quoted by one mom in the Strib.

bestpopcorn wrote:I am confused by the high schools response to the event. I am even more confused by the parents of the 13. It must not be as bad as it sounds. After the suspension "Crimson players hit the ice without helmets to cheers and applause from the crowd." Quote from the Trib.

13 guys get suspended. 13 show up to play at the end of their suspensions. Not one parent decided that maybe little Johnny Superstar should take a break and maybe get some extra diversity training?

The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

So coaches are responsible for the actions of their players 24-7... and will be held accountable.....what are parents for?

bestpopcorn wrote:I am confused by the high schools response to the event. I am even more confused by the parents of the 13. It must not be as bad as it sounds. After the suspension "Crimson players hit the ice without helmets to cheers and applause from the crowd." Quote from the Trib.

13 guys get suspended. 13 show up to play at the end of their suspensions. Not one parent decided that maybe little Johnny Superstar should take a break and maybe get some extra diversity training?

The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

Either this is a whole lot to do about nothing and OMGYHA has an ax to grind (or some of it's folks, and that would not be unusual) with Maple Grove and the coach.

Or much more, but because minors the school and coaches cannot discipline further nor reveal more.

With that said, if it is truly a deviant act, you would think some parents would stand up and had additiional consequences for the hockey player(s) rather than just the minimum/maximum the shcool could/can enforce.

Parents know what happened......maybe the Youth Board should have a vote of no confidence possibly in the parents, but then again maybe they are on the youth board pushing for this vote, that would be quite the conspiracy huh......

So coaches are responsible for the actions of their players 24-7... and will be held accountable....

No. Should they ever?

bestpopcorn wrote:The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

Were there charges pressed? Any one arrested? What laws were broken?

Puckguy19 wrote:
I'd say the difference would be a youth hockey association taking action on behalf of its member, rather than a group of parents complaining. First time I can recall an association, through its board, taking formal action, if they choose to.

Just got off the phone with my brother who lives in MG and is actually on the board. He said the Star Tribune clearly is on a mission with Stefano. They make the most of a lot of miss information in the article. According to him, this is primarily ONE guy on the board who loves to get his name in the paper. At this point this is not a board sanctioned action and according to the bro, they are really hot this guy leaked his intentions as the board's to the paper. Allegedly the guy was point blank told no by an OMGHA committee discussing the situation. He said OMGHA has rules to deal with such behavior which everyone in the association signs every year. Ironically the guy behind the leak is a criminal defense attorney that defends some incredibly yucky people.

Anyway, you can't make a motion outside an actual board meeting, so there are NO motions before the board.

RUKidding wrote:

Puckguy19 wrote:
I'd say the difference would be a youth hockey association taking action on behalf of its member, rather than a group of parents complaining. First time I can recall an association, through its board, taking formal action, if they choose to.

Just got off the phone with my brother who lives in MG and is actually on the board. He said the Star Tribune clearly is on a mission with Stefano. They make the most of a lot of miss information in the article. According to him, this is primarily ONE guy on the board who is on a loves to get his name in the paper. At this point this is not a board sanctioned action and according to the bro, they are really hot this guy leaked his intentions as the board's to the paper. Allegedly the guy was point blank told no by an OMGHA committee discussing the situation. Ironically the guy behind the leak is a criminal defense attorney that defends some incredibly yucky people.

Anyway, you can't make a motion outside an actual board meeting, so there are NO motions before the board.

Thanks for the information. Should make for an interesting meeting, or at least it will be put to rest.

DrGaf wrote:

bestpopcorn wrote:The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

Were there charges pressed? Any one arrested? What laws were broken?

I have penalized my own children at times when they have not been arrested...

I am trying to imagine my wife's demeanor as Johnny explains to her what he did of "that" nature that warranted a 4 game suspension. But then, we come from conservative Lutheran background. The school suspension would be the least of my kids concern. He would just try to survive...

Again, there must be more here. It can't be as bad as what it sounds like or more would be happening... Right?

That said, in my time as a hockey parent I have seen some parents work really hard to get Johnny Superstar back on the ice when it seemed to me that Johnny should have spent some extra time at home. Wax on, Wax off... etc.

Most of us here are hearing everything second hand with no concrete evidence of what occurred within this incident. Stefano indicated this is the worst time of his 32 years of coaching. With that said, the coach of any team has the ability to suspend any player longer than what the policy states given that it is on a consistent basis. If, the situation was at all that bad as he stated, did he or did he not discuss this with the AD to put additional suspensions in place? I know coaches from different High Schools that have stated any athlete that receives any suspension for grades, behavior, alcohol etc. he will automatically double the suspension period dictated by the governing body. Yes, it will be interesting to see what comes with this within the OMGYHA.

bestpopcorn wrote:

DrGaf wrote:

bestpopcorn wrote:The action of the youth board makes more sense to me. It makes me think maybe I am not a lone lunatic moralist.

Were there charges pressed? Any one arrested? What laws were broken?

I have penalized my own children at times when they have not been arrested...

I am trying to imagine my wife's demeanor as Johnny explains to her what he did of "that" nature that warranted a 4 game suspension. But then, we come from conservative Lutheran background. The school suspension would be the least of my kids concern. He would just try to survive...

Again, there must be more here. It can't be as bad as what it sounds like or more would be happening... Right?

That said, in my time as a hockey parent I have seen some parents work really hard to get Johnny Superstar back on the ice when it seemed to me that Johnny should have spent some extra time at home. Wax on, Wax off... etc.

Punish your kid as you see fit, that is what parenting is about.

Don't tell "me" how to punish mine. Not yours, the coaches, or my association's business.

***DrGaf is in no way affiliated in anyway with OMGYHA or the Maple Grove HS hockey program. To DrGaf's knowledge, he does not know anyone involved in this situation either. To be frank, DrGaf doesn't like Maple Grove

blueliner5 wrote:Most of us here are hearing everything second hand with no concrete evidence of what occurred within this incident. Stefano indicated this is the worst time of his 32 years of coaching. With that said, the coach of any team has the ability to suspend any player longer than what the policy states given that it is on a consistent basis. If, the situation was at all that bad as he stated, did he or did he not discuss this with the AD to put additional suspensions in place? I know coaches from different High Schools that have stated any athlete that receives any suspension for grades, behavior, alcohol etc. he will automatically double the suspension period dictated by the governing body. Yes, it will be interesting to see what comes with this within the OMGYHA.

I don't think this is a question if the punishment was enough....if parents think it should be harsher have them institute their own penalty to their kid. I think the question should be how can a coach be responsible for the actions of their players away from the rink? If that is the case, who the hell would want to coach? I think this is the parents with the attitude that "my kid is perfect, and if he screws up it has to be someone else's fault".

I know a coach that lost his high school position due to a hazing incident that happened away from his control. People said he promoted an atmosphere of bad behavior, not respect and discipline. Inappropriate jokes, etc.

Maybe the hazing was the last straw.

A few years ago Bemidji State hockey player got into some trouble.
At the youth hockey level we made a similar statement regarding the beaver men's hockey players being involved with the youth teams.
Until everything was settled we thought it would be in the best interest of the CHILDREN to be disassociated with the older players.

Once everything was determined and over, we went back to allowing some of the college players out to practice with the kids.

I am not sure if this is the same thing, but if so, it is the smart thing to do until you know what is going on.

"Punish your kid as you see fit, that is what parenting is about.

Don't tell "me" how to punish mine. Not yours, the coaches, or my association's business."

Agree.

There were a few times years back that I wondered about participating at all. My son played with a guy that could not behave. Not a few smokes or some chew, harder worse things. He would be suspended then reinstated, it seemed like over and over, I know it was not. Finally he did not get back in, dad never quit trying to convince the AD.

I always wondered about the eligibility rules. It is OK to father a child, just don't smoke afterward. As a father I would rather deal with the smokes.

Sometimes the rules just don't fit the crime. I would imagine there is no rule to fit this particular event perfectly.

elliott70 wrote:A few years ago Bemidji State hockey player got into some trouble.
At the youth hockey level we made a similar statement regarding the beaver men's hockey players being involved with the youth teams.
Until everything was settled we thought it would be in the best interest of the CHILDREN to be disassociated with the older players.

Once everything was determined and over, we went back to allowing some of the college players out to practice with the kids.

I am not sure if this is the same thing, but if so, it is the smart thing to do until you know what is going on.

There is a difference between a coach and college hockey players....just look at the North Dakota team....I wouldn't want my young kids to be hangin with that.