Tryouts

nahc · Post by **nahc** » Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:41 am

A lot of associations have completed, or are currently conducting tryouts for all levels. How has the process gone this year?

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Mon Oct 13, 2014 12:06 pm

I would like to hear comments from those whose kids made the upper team and still think the process was flawed.

boomerang · Post by **boomerang** » Mon Oct 13, 2014 12:54 pm

You will never please everyone with the tryout process.

The numbers make it nearly impossible for it to be perfect because you will never have the perfect mix of players register. For example, if you typically have enough for two teams, A and C, you won't be lucky enough to have 16 A kids and 16 C kids sign up. You'll have some that are Bs and probably one or two that could play AA. Those numbers scale, so someone will always be unhappy. There are kids who tank tryouts but skate well all season and kids who shine at tryouts and then are just blah during the season. You could go on and on. Doesn't matter if somone inside picks the teams or outside. There will always be kids who are a judgement call, and humans make mistakes sometimes.

It's youth hockey. The level of play does not preclude future greatness. Puberty changes everything anyway.

Nevertoomuchhockey · Post by **Nevertoomuchhockey** » Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:02 pm

My daughter made the top team, but FOR SURE there were the typical political and unfair components. Practices such as:
1) coach picks (especially for kids who didn't get picked for top teams and got on because dad is coach)
2) policy that second year players on top teams previous year are only trying out as a "formality," then replacing them with 1st year players after evals
3) seeing the coaches, board members, and "independent evaluators" breaking bread together (beer) after tryout sessions
4) not letting a kid (or 3 from same team) get a waiver to play elsewhere because the association says it is offering an AA or A level, then not actually having that level
5) my personal favorite - the sons and one daughter of the board members ALL make top level team. Only half qualified and that's on their BEST DAY

These are just the issues that have been substantiated. Not even addressing the rumor mill.
Like I said, my daughter is where she is supposed to be. I tell my buddies whose kids either were treated unfairly or perceived to be treated unfairly - it's a short season. Get your player invested in developing himself on and off the ice and you can make up for the development he's missing with the older team and come back even stronger at tryouts the following season.

If you don't have the time or checkbook for that, hopefully you can finagle your way onto the board or bench! Sure wouldn't be the first time a dad (or mom) selflessly volunteered to coach or got on the association board for their personal agenda.

(P.S. I don't disagree with #2, just that if that's what is said will happen, then that should actually happen. #4 is for sure a case by case do or don't. But again, shouldn't come as a surprise a week after tryouts!)
(P.P.S. I know I am jaded. Skeptical and sarcastic. But not mad at it.)

SimplyPut · Post by **SimplyPut** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 7:56 am

2 day tryout with unbiased evaluators who only know tryout committee kids. then split into to A / B / C Pools. Is 2 days enough time to split approx. 60 kids? or better stated 2 days to split player 20 from 21? players #20 and #21 in separate pools. or player 45 from 46.

also closed tryouts what are they hiding?

Daulton21 · Post by **Daulton21** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:12 am

I always wonder why the tryout process seems to change each year in our association. how about a little consistency? if people knew each year what to expect it would make things a lot easier. they may not like it but they know what it is. I do not like that I have a cop sits on my corner where the speed changes from 55 down to 35, but he's consistent so everyone obeys the traffic signs. Also I've never really heard a good reason why tryouts are closed? I've heard that a kid may get more nervous with mom or dad are watching. hmm? so as a coach do we expect mom and dad to not come to the games? if there is a character issue correct it. most parents know where their kid sits. if there a bubble player other things may come into the final selections. for instance: 2nd year over 1st year, size, Grit, positional needs, parent issues. so on and so forth. Typically I do not see a kid not selected tear up the league they were placed on.

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 9:19 am

Daulton21 wrote:I always wonder why the tryout process seems to change each year in our association. how about a little consistency? if people knew each year what to expect it would make things a lot easier. they may not like it but they know what it is. I do not like that I have a cop sits on my corner where the speed changes from 55 down to 35, but he's consistent so everyone obeys the traffic signs. Also I've never really heard a good reason why tryouts are closed? I've heard that a kid may get more nervous with mom or dad are watching. hmm? so as a coach do we expect mom and dad to not come to the games? if there is a character issue correct it. most parents know where their kid sits. if there a bubble player other things may come into the final selections. for instance: 2nd year over 1st year, size, Grit, positional needs, parent issues. so on and so forth. Typically I do not see a kid not selected tear up the league they were placed on.

Closed tryouts are to make it easier on the volunteers. (Coaches, Evaluators, Board Members, etc.) Tough for people to legitimately complain if they didn't see the tryouts. Cuts down on a lot of e-mails, phone calls and complaints post-tryout. The kids getting distracted/nervous with Mom and Dad excuse is often used because it's really the only thing people might buy as legit. The reality is that it has nothing to do with it.

57special · Post by **57special** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 9:22 am

I'm in favor of open tryouts. Makes it harder to justify bad picks, though it still happens.

I think the Edina Bantams in general are going to have a tougher time in general due to talent leaving and puzzling player decisions. AA team will be OK due to one spectacular first year talent (IMO he's good enough to play Edina Varsity already, but it won't happen)and a few very good ones, but it could've been stronger.

They are going to be small at the A and B1 levels.

Ironically, one of the worst decisions involved a board member's son who DIDN'T make the level he should have.

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:55 am

Board tainted tryouts make a few assumptions.

1 - That the try out judges care a wit about what the board wants. In most cases these are volunteers reluctantly agreeing to do a job that no one else wants. You must also assume that they are liars.

2 - That your board is united and can get the liars to do what they want. In many cases a youth board is comprised of several groups that hate each others guts... Oh yeah, and the board members are liars too.

3 - In cases where coaches are involved you assume that the coach will knowingly choose players that will not win. Keep in mind that this same coach will be accused of wanting "only to win" after just a couple games. Oh, and he is a liar too.

4 - The underlying assumption is that your judges, coaches and board members are all liars. All of them?

Personally I prefer open tryouts mostly because I like to watch moms freak. I do understand the reason to close them. We had a heck of time keeping parents from screaming at their kids to get the lead out, etc. We even had one fellow video tape the whole thing to prove that his kid should have been the upper goalie. The tape only proved that the kid couldn't stop a beach ball... Dad disagreed.

NLHockey · Post by **NLHockey** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 12:01 pm

Froggy Richards wrote:
Daulton21 wrote:I always wonder why the tryout process seems to change each year in our association. how about a little consistency? if people knew each year what to expect it would make things a lot easier. they may not like it but they know what it is. I do not like that I have a cop sits on my corner where the speed changes from 55 down to 35, but he's consistent so everyone obeys the traffic signs. Also I've never really heard a good reason why tryouts are closed? I've heard that a kid may get more nervous with mom or dad are watching. hmm? so as a coach do we expect mom and dad to not come to the games? if there is a character issue correct it. most parents know where their kid sits. if there a bubble player other things may come into the final selections. for instance: 2nd year over 1st year, size, Grit, positional needs, parent issues. so on and so forth. Typically I do not see a kid not selected tear up the league they were placed on.
Closed tryouts are to make it easier on the volunteers. (Coaches, Evaluators, Board Members, etc.) Tough for people to legitimately complain if they didn't see the tryouts. Cuts down on a lot of e-mails, phone calls and complaints post-tryout. The kids getting distracted/nervous with Mom and Dad excuse is often used because it's really the only thing people might buy as legit. The reality is that it has nothing to do with it.

Closed tryouts are a gutless manuever by a gutless board. If you believe in your process, you have nothing to hide. If your process is fair, be accountable. It's a few weeks a year that people will complain, then it settles down...grow a pair and deal with it. For crying out loud, if you have no problem charging the obscene amount hockey costs, you should feel ridiculous telling people they can't watch their kid tryout and parents should expect no less. And before you all get your shorts in a wad, I have been a parent (kids on B teams some years and A teams others)and I have been a board member and i can tell you closed tryouts have never been a topic under consideration and we got through the complaining over the years just fine.

Defensive Zone · Post by **Defensive Zone** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 12:08 pm

Froggy Richards wrote:
Daulton21 wrote:I always wonder why the tryout process seems to change each year in our association. how about a little consistency? if people knew each year what to expect it would make things a lot easier. they may not like it but they know what it is. I do not like that I have a cop sits on my corner where the speed changes from 55 down to 35, but he's consistent so everyone obeys the traffic signs. Also I've never really heard a good reason why tryouts are closed? I've heard that a kid may get more nervous with mom or dad are watching. hmm? so as a coach do we expect mom and dad to not come to the games? if there is a character issue correct it. most parents know where their kid sits. if there a bubble player other things may come into the final selections. for instance: 2nd year over 1st year, size, Grit, positional needs, parent issues. so on and so forth. Typically I do not see a kid not selected tear up the league they were placed on.
Closed tryouts are to make it easier on the volunteers. (Coaches, Evaluators, Board Members, etc.) Tough for people to legitimately complain if they didn't see the tryouts. Cuts down on a lot of e-mails, phone calls and complaints post-tryout. The kids getting distracted/nervous with Mom and Dad excuse is often used because it's really the only thing people might buy as legit. The reality is that it has nothing to do with it.

I would have to respectfully disagree. Like I have said before, opening tryouts to the parents forces the association to have their house in order. In the years I have coached, I have seen three to four very questionable-tainted tryouts. But that is three to four too many. Open tryouts will help keep some of the dishonesty out of the evaluation process. Just my thoughts.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 12:48 pm

4 - The underlying assumption is that your judges, coaches and board members are all liars. All of them?

Yes.

I am envious of you and others that have a board made up of benvolent leaders. It must be wonderful existing in such a utopia - I mean it, really wonderful. For some, however, it is possible for the judges, coaches, and board members to all be liars because they are all the same people, or related to the people, or high school buddies with the people, or sleeping with the people. Some people in this world are just lovely do-gooders; others are horrible, terrible people that work their butts off to wedge themselves into a position of authority over you and your kids. A board may fall along the spectrum from ultra-angel to infra-lucifer.

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 1:17 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:
4 - The underlying assumption is that your judges, coaches and board members are all liars. All of them?
Yes.

I am envious of you and others that have a board made up of benvolent leaders. It must be wonderful existing in such a utopia - I mean it, really wonderful. For some, however, it is possible for the judges, coaches, and board members to all be liars because they are all the same people, or related to the people, or high school buddies with the people, or sleeping with the people. Some people in this world are just lovely do-gooders; others are horrible, terrible people that work their butts off to wedge themselves into a position of authority over you and your kids. A board may fall along the spectrum from ultra-angel to infra-lucifer.

So you agree that in order for a tryout to be truly tainted a good number of the people involved have to be liars?

OldManRiver · Post by **OldManRiver** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 1:59 pm

I've been an outside evaluator for a handful of associations, and I've never had a run-in with the "infra-lucifer" type Inigo describes - but at the same time, I've never been around when the scores are compiled. I have a feeling that is when a person's true character would be revealed - especially if you have skin in the game.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 2:39 pm

Hypothetically, there really don't need to be that many in kahootz. A bantam coach that heads the development committee asks his brother to run the evaluation. The board president may be in a position scratch the coach's back some day, so the prez's kid makes the team. Who is going to question? If requested, the eval scores won't have names on it, somebody will point to a score and say 'this is the kid'. Nobody is planning to rob a casino here, just smash and grab and intimidate the patrons.

edgeless2 · Post by **edgeless2** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 6:58 pm

It would be an interesting study to see how many parents of bubble kids run for board positions vs. parents of kids who know they are top 5-10. I'm sure there is some correlation there. I'm not a big conspiracy theorist, but seems to always be some grumbling around the rink about, this kid made this team because he is so and so. After 15 years of tryouts it can't be some coincidence, but that being said, squeaky wheel gets the grease. And closed tryouts are a joke, can't put lipstick on that pig.

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:41 am

On of my sons played rather consistently on B teams. That is where he belonged. BTW... I was board president.

On these teams there was always a group that thought their kids belonged at the higher level. They were convinced that the tryouts were rigged.

Funny thing is that our B teams were never that good. I can't imagine how bad they would have been had we not had all of the A level players on the team.

There is always that kid that everyone agrees could have played up, maybe... I have never seen a kid on the B team that belonged on one of the top lines a A.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:44 am

Have you ever been standing at the rink, when one of your buddies from summer hockey walks up and says, see if you can guess which of our players is the board member's kid?

silentbutdeadly3139 · Wed Oct 15, 2014 11:16 am

bestpopcorn wrote: There is always that kid that everyone agrees could have played up, maybe... I have never seen a kid on the B team that belonged on one of the top lines a A.

Lucky you. Have you ever seen a kid on the A team that looks out of place, doesn't touch the puck much but has same last name as coach while there is a kid on the B team that also looks out of place because he doesn't seem challenged enough ?

I've seen it, heard it. funny things happen.

stromboli · Post by **stromboli** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:53 am

InigoMontoya wrote:Have you ever been standing at the rink, when one of your buddies from summer hockey walks up and says, see if you can guess which of our players is the board member's kid?

Twice. So far I'm two for two on my guesses.

steelheader · Post by **steelheader** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 8:30 pm

The title of this thread should be "B level parents complain here..."

edgeless2 · Post by **edgeless2** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:10 pm

steelheader wrote:The title of this thread should be "B level parents complain here..."

Are parents of A, B, and C level players allowed to comment on this thread?

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:50 am

steelheader wrote:The title of this thread should be "B level parents complain here..."

..."and A level parents tired of watching President Anklebender's kid crashing into the boards because he can't turn or stop, complain over there..."

silentbutdeadly3139 · Post by **silentbutdeadly3139** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:39 pm

steelheader wrote:The title of this thread should be "B level parents complain here..."

Perhaps "A" level player parents would just like to see some integrity in the process to place kids at the proper level.

stromboli · Post by **stromboli** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:48 pm

steelheader wrote:The title of this thread should be "B level parents complain here..."

Sorry, but both of my older kids are playing varsity and my youngest is a mite at the made. No placement envy or complaints here, but feel free to paint with as broad of a brush as you'd like. It's all meant in good fun for most.