Combined JV Teams?

[hshockeyfan91]

I thought I read somewhere that there are some joint JV teams in places where the Varsity teams are separate. However, someone told me that the MSHSL rule is that you can do a coop of Varsity and JV, but that you can't have separate Varsity teams and a combined JV.

So, I'm a little confused. Bottom line, are there any joint JV teams out there where the Varsity teams still skate as separate teams?

For schools without a JV team, a joint JV team would give girls a place to develop, and still be able to move up to the Varsity during the season if there were injuries, etc.

[ghshockeyfan]

I was told years ago that this was illegal, but I know LV did it last year and I hear another LC group is doing it this year. Not sure if LV is still doing it.

Bottom line, my understanding is based on old info. that may be outdated. If teams are doing it, it must be legit, and would be another good option, although I don't know how this would work in that could either V pull up a player from the other school if they are on the co-op JV??? I doubt it, but...

[SEhockeyDAD]

Rochester co-oped JV, for at least last year and the year before. When neither team had its own JV, it was a real nice opportunity for the girls at the end of the bench. Would someone know why it shouldn't be allowed?

[nijo6]

I am new to this site as someone who posts....... after viewing this particular post i thought i would weigh in on it... What are the ages of these girls that are playing on jv??? it seems to me that the youth teams are not getting devolped for girls hockey yet... true or no??

[MNHockeyFan]

I am new to this site as someone who posts....... after viewing this particular post i thought i would weigh in on it... What are the ages of these girls that are playing on jv??? it seems to me that the youth teams are not getting devolped for girls hockey yet... true or no??

The ages of JV players range all the way from 7th to 12th grade. Most programs do not have enough skaters to field both a quality JV team and a good U14A team, so yes you do have many situations where they essentially "compete" for the better younger players, which ends up hurting the local youth program. If there were more girls playing hockey, you wouldn't have this situation. In boys hockey there are more numbers, and there are very few kids (7th-9th graders) who are eligible to play Bantam who know they have a chance to make their high school varsity game, so most kids complete their two years of Bantams. With girls, the odds of making the varsity team as an 8th or 9th grader are much better, so there is a greater pull in this direction and it can leave the local U14 programs, especially the smaller ones, short of players (which is why you see a lot of teams joining one another to field a coop team).

Another issue here is that some local youth programs have rules that say that once you try out for a varsity high school team you are ineligible to play youth hockey for that year. This makes it tough because the high school tryouts are usually held after the youth program tryouts. This creates a dilemna for those younger players who believe they have a legitimate shot to make the varsity team, but end up getting cut and then have no other option but to play JV, when possibly they could be better served by playing on their local U14A team. Some programs purposely delay their youth tryouts until after their high school holds their's, which I think is better for the kids as they are given a clear choice of JV or U14.

One observation that I have is that the quality of JV hockey has improved tremendously over the past few years. It used to be where if you skate up and down the rink you could make the majority of the JV teams out there, but this is no longer the case in many programs. In my opinion if the coaching is there players can develop at least as well as by playing U14 - they will in many cases be playing with and against older, more experienced girls that are physically stronger.

I think it should be all up to the individual to make the choice of where they want to play, and they should consider where they will improve the most, whether or not they want to be in the same locker room with much older girls, and most importantly where they think they will have the most fun playing hockey.

[ghshockeyfan]

Well said, but there is truly one additional consideration in smaller communities. We need a place to play within each community typically to keep many post-U14 kids playing that wouldn't seek out another district or multi-community co-op to continue to play hockey. Meaning, we need JV in many communities as much as many despise it as it is the one opportunity that keeps kids playing that may otherwise quit due to logistics/costs associated with youth co-op opportunties.

Let's be honest. This dilemma is likely one of the greatest long-term challenges facing G HS & youth hockey. While great progress has been made, I fear that there is never going to be that perfect solution for all re: youth U12/U14/U16/U19 & JV HS Hockey. The setup that has evolved is tough, but it allows the flexibility to accomodate the greatest amount of programs state-wide and also the greatest amount of players in a community usually. The one group that gets hurt by this are those kids that have nowhere to play if HS JV is the only option and they are OE's or private's in 7th & 8th grade. They then must seek out youth co-op or waivers as they may not have the HS option in their home community.

Back to the purpose of this thread, if the opportunity exists to co-op JV only, this needs to be more openly communicated by the MSHSL as this is another tool that could be better utilized if it truly exists. I consider myself semi-knowledgable about MSHSL hockey & rules, and if I don't know for certain that this is a possibility, then I don't know that many other coaches do either - although I could be wrong...

[Charliedog]

Is it possible that some of the Girls' hockey programs should simply NOT field a JV team. I know of more than one program where year after year, every girl who attends tryouts make at least the JV team.

[ghshockeyfan]

It sounds like a simple question, but there isn't a uniform answer as it depends on each program. If a JV has all U14 eligible kids, maybe you field a U14 instead of JV, but what if half those kids are logging periods+ at V and/or what if there are kids that aren't U14 eligible that would otherwise not play hockey w/o JV?

these, along with many, many other considerations must be taken into consideration. For a while I was very anti-JV, but then when I've seen what I have about what considerations need to be made when making this decision, it kind of makes me realize that there isn't one uniform answer for all communities statewide.

The only reason that I can see fielding an all-U14 eligible JV is to get the HS subsidy and not have to pay $1000+ per player to play youth?

[lcdad2]

I was told years ago that this was illegal, but I know LV did it last year and I hear another LC group is doing it this year. Not sure if LV is still doing it.

Bottom line, my understanding is based on old info. that may be outdated. If teams are doing it, it must be legit, and would be another good option, although I don't know how this would work in that could either V pull up a player from the other school if they are on the co-op JV??? I doubt it, but...

Lakeville is still doing this, however the Vs only pull up players from their own pool. In other words, North can only pull up JV players from North.

[ghshockeyfan]

I was told years ago that this was illegal, but I know LV did it last year and I hear another LC group is doing it this year. Not sure if LV is still doing it.

Bottom line, my understanding is based on old info. that may be outdated. If teams are doing it, it must be legit, and would be another good option, although I don't know how this would work in that could either V pull up a player from the other school if they are on the co-op JV??? I doubt it, but...

Lakeville is still doing this, however the Vs only pull up players from their own pool. In other words, North can only pull up JV players from North.

This makes sense in many ways. I hope that the MSHSL gives more clairity and promotes this as a viable option moving forward.

[gopher25]

It would be nice if minnesota hockey/mshsl could find a way for U14 players to play both JV and U14 game schedule. It would help high schools and the youth hockey movement. Right now there are just too many young kids forced to play with 18 year olds becuase there arent' enough options out there.

I don't know how could do the same thing with Varsity programs though...

[ghshockeyfan]

It would be nice if minnesota hockey/mshsl could find a way for U14 players to play both JV and U14 game schedule. It would help high schools and the youth hockey movement. Right now there are just too many young kids forced to play with 18 year olds becuase there arent' enough options out there.

I don't know how could do the same thing with Varsity programs though...

This is the single biggest issue that I see for G Hockey. Meaning, the U14/U12 JV/V scenario (let's face it, U16 & U19 aren't standard options besides some great efforts to create these co-op opportunities).

I don't know if I'd term the current scenario as "forced" as there are options. Let's face it though, both sides (JV/V vs Youth) supporters will go after one another with a long list of pros & cons that truly each family must really investigate in their own specific setting/community. It's easy to throw around a bunch of stereotypes & generalities, but until you speak with the youth assn & HS coach you really don't know (in your own specific community) as to how these things really work.

I've long been concerned about this issue (HS vs Youth) and often hoped for some perfect solution, but I don't know that what we have now isn't best as it evolved into what was needed to allow for the most communities to even have girls hockey be it HS, JV, V, U19/U16/U14, etc., etc.

Back to the topic of this thread though... Co-op JV's are another option that could be better used if there was more info. available about this option.

[hockeyrube7]

It would be nice if minnesota hockey/mshsl could find a way for U14 players to play both JV and U14 game schedule. It would help high schools and the youth hockey movement. Right now there are just too many young kids forced to play with 18 year olds becuase there arent' enough options out there.

I don't know how could do the same thing with Varsity programs though...

This is the single biggest issue that I see for G Hockey. Meaning, the U14/U12 JV/V scenario (let's face it, U16 & U19 aren't standard options besides some great efforts to create these co-op opportunities).

I don't know if I'd term the current scenario as "forced" as there are options. Let's face it though, both sides (JV/V vs Youth) supporters will go after one another with a long list of pros & cons that truly each family must really investigate in their own specific setting/community. It's easy to throw around a bunch of stereotypes & generalities, but until you speak with the youth assn & HS coach you really don't know (in your own specific community) as to how these things really work.

I've long been concerned about this issue (HS vs Youth) and often hoped for some perfect solution, but I don't know that what we have now isn't best as it evolved into what was needed to allow for the most communities to even have girls hockey be it HS, JV, V, U19/U16/U14, etc., etc.

Back to the topic of this thread though... Co-op JV's are another option that could be better used if there was more info. available about this option.

Simple thought here, and I know many will hate this idea, but simply do not allow 7th and 8th graders to make varsity, on any program, even if it hurts. It might hurt certain programs in the short term, but would make U14 much more popular, and thus developement better, along with participation. And/or put U14 back to U15, to help the cause. A good percentage of girls don't join hockey until later, say around 10 to 15 years old, fall in love with the sport. If they could join at youth and develope prior to HS, this may help developement over all, and create the "Broader Base" effect.

The other part of this is the HS and youth programs need to work more closely together, and do less "Head bashing"!! Stop with all the "Secrets", promote "ALL" the pro's and con's of both HS and Youth, and let the families make their own choices from there!

[gopher25]

I totally agree that it would take something drastic by the MSHSL to stop 7th and 8th graders playing. I just can't imagine a parent wanting their child in that environment. I coach all levels during the summer and its amazing how different the conversations are in the locker rooms. However, most parents think that varsity is such a huge accomplishment and get caught up in the limelight of it I am not 100% convinced that this is the best thing for the players development anyway. I also believe putting a 7th grader or 8th grader on varsity takes someone's spot and might make it unable for them to play as most associations do not have a U19 program. In a growing sport we need to provide as much opportunity as possible.

One of my players from the past told me that if she could do it all over she would have played U14 with her friends instead of doing 4th line varsity/1st line JV her 8th grade season. She realized that she would be in the exact same spot as an 11th grader(1st or 2nd line) as she is now but maybe would have had one more year of "less pressure hockey". If I could lobby for one thing it would be for us to go to the wisconsin system and keep high school sports only open to high school players.

If this did happen I would then lobby for minnesota hockey to loosen up their waiver rules at the U14 levels to ensure communities are providing ample and adequate opportunity to play at the proper level. Right now we have a lot of mixed talent U14 teams, which isn't good for the kids either. IF you didn't have as strtict waiver rules it might promote players playing at the right levels instead of playing JV or Varsity at a young age. AT least until we get up there with the associations having enough for a U14 A and U14 B team.

This is a subject I feel extremely passionate about as I have seen some awesome U12 age groups ripped apart over the past 4-5 years. If you watch the boys state tournament you always year about how they were doing as bantams and peewees, becuase good age groups that are successful breed success if they stay together. That will help grow the sport more than accepting transfers and winning a state championship with half of your team from different schools.

[ghshockeyfan]

Simple thought here, and I know many will hate this idea, but simply do not allow 7th and 8th graders to make varsity, on any program, even if it hurts. It might hurt certain programs in the short term, but would make U14 much more popular, and thus developement better, along with participation. And/or put U14 back to U15, to help the cause. A good percentage of girls don't join hockey until later, say around 10 to 15 years old, fall in love with the sport. If they could join at youth and develope prior to HS, this may help developement over all, and create the "Broader Base" effect.

Simple, but anything that states - never/always always scares me a bit at first. I fear the loss of HS funding for teams that have to co-op or go away altogether would be another tough battle that we don't need to fight again if #'s again approach warranting teams. On the flip side, it would be great to make the base so much wider, and I've long said that ideally this would be the case (9th-12th only on HS teams). I will argue though that I'm not sold on girls starting older as the sport is so expensive at that point for beginners as a result of U15 like hockey coming back?

The other part of this is the HS and youth programs need to work more closely together, and do less "Head bashing"!! Stop with all the "Secrets", promote "ALL" the pro's and con's of both HS and Youth, and let the families make their own choices from there!

Agreed 100%.

[ghshockeyfan]

I totally agree that it would take something drastic by the MSHSL to stop 7th and 8th graders playing. I just can't imagine a parent wanting their child in that environment. I coach all levels during the summer and its amazing how different the conversations are in the locker rooms. However, most parents think that varsity is such a huge accomplishment and get caught up in the limelight of it I am not 100% convinced that this is the best thing for the players development anyway. I also believe putting a 7th grader or 8th grader on varsity takes someone's spot and might make it unable for them to play as most associations do not have a U19 program. In a growing sport we need to provide as much opportunity as possible.

One of my players from the past told me that if she could do it all over she would have played U14 with her friends instead of doing 4th line varsity/1st line JV her 8th grade season. She realized that she would be in the exact same spot as an 11th grader(1st or 2nd line) as she is now but maybe would have had one more year of "less pressure hockey". If I could lobby for one thing it would be for us to go to the wisconsin system and keep high school sports only open to high school players.

If this did happen I would then lobby for minnesota hockey to loosen up their waiver rules at the U14 levels to ensure communities are providing ample and adequate opportunity to play at the proper level. Right now we have a lot of mixed talent U14 teams, which isn't good for the kids either. IF you didn't have as strtict waiver rules it might promote players playing at the right levels instead of playing JV or Varsity at a young age. AT least until we get up there with the associations having enough for a U14 A and U14 B team.

This is a subject I feel extremely passionate about as I have seen some awesome U12 age groups ripped apart over the past 4-5 years. If you watch the boys state tournament you always year about how they were doing as bantams and peewees, becuase good age groups that are successful breed success if they stay together. That will help grow the sport more than accepting transfers and winning a state championship with half of your team from different schools.

I think there are some stereotypes here about HS participation at a young age that should always be considered. I will say that I wouldn't be so quick to say "all HS hockey is bad for all 7th & 8th grade kids" however. As stated above, get all the facts, ask the right questions, etc., etc. I know there was an earlier thread that addressed this too, and it had some good suggestions about which quesitons to ask the HS coaches, etc., etc. Bottom line, do your homework about the options available. Whatever you do, don't fall for the sweeping statements and get sucked in by the complaints of some as many of the positives aren't as loud as the complaints obvioulsy. I'm going to be very clear here that HS hockey may well NOT be the best choice for every 7th & 8th grader in every community, but there are some sitautions that may not be as bad as those that are commonly referenced in this discussion... Again, do your homework and don't believe everything you hear either!

Also - I'm sure I'd be on here saying the opposite too if it was said that all 7th & 8th graders should play HS... I just don't think that all/every considerations allow for different situations... The goal is to give the most kids the opportunity (& desire) to play, and to make rules that are too tough to eliminate options that are needed just isn't what's best in my mind...

[hockeyrube7]

Exactly! And this OE/transfer ruling is not going to help any, but rather hurt the situation even more so.

[MNHockeyFan]

The goal is to give the most kids the opportunity (& desire) to play, and to make rules that are too tough to eliminate options that are needed just isn't what's best in my mind...

Perfectly said and I couldn't agree more. Let individuals make the decisions they think are best for them. They won't always make the RIGHT choice, but as ghs says encourage them to thoroughly investigate their options so at least it's an INFORMED decision.

[xk1]

Given the choice of shelling out over $1k for U14 vs $200 for HS/JV the "informed" decision will almost always be HS. I always liked the policy that stated if a youth eligible player can make the first or second line of the Varsity squad then they should play HS, otherwise another year of U12/14 is better for the kid IMHO.

[ghshockeyfan]

Given the choice of shelling out over $1k for U14 vs $200 for HS/JV the "informed" decision will almost always be HS. I always liked the policy that stated if a youth eligible player can make the first or second line of the Varsity squad then they should play HS, otherwise another year of U12/14 is better for the kid IMHO.

I agree, but again not sure that that rule is anything but limiting... Also, so much of this is a social thing even for some of the better players, that groups of kids tend to migrate in a flock/pack to the next level I've found. Rules tend to break groups up more than anything.

[MNHockeyFan]

Given the choice of shelling out over $1k for U14 vs $200 for HS/JV the "informed" decision will almost always be HS. I always liked the policy that stated if a youth eligible player can make the first or second line of the Varsity squad then they should play HS, otherwise another year of U12/14 is better for the kid IMHO.

The difference in cost may or may not be the most important issue and this is certainly something each family needs to consider. Whether or not the player makes the 1st, 2nd or 3rd line is up to the coach, and the coach should be able to move players around on the different lines as he or she looks for chemistry or balance or whatever on each line, without regard to a player's age or grade. I don't see the logic of imposing a 1st or 2nd line rule on a player which IMO is an unnecessary restriction (and imposes the much higher cost on the family which may be a strain on them financially, especially if there are younger brothers and sisters playing youth hockey.

[hockeyrube7]

I agree, but again not sure that that rule is anything but limiting... Also, so much of this is a social thing even for some of the better players, that groups of kids tend to migrate in a flock/pack to the next level I've found. Rules tend to break groups up more than anything.

Great point, and maybe that needs to be more pronounced in the "Informed Opinion". I've seen a few youth programs with a future, torn apart over trying to win at youth vs developement and team play. Fact is, this has destroyed the future of the HS program for the most part. The few "Top Dogs" in the program are doing well, and the others are all suffering, and the HS team struggles to even compete. Sound familiar to anyone?

[xk1]

Sitting on the bench for the entire year is not a good way to develop 7-8th graders. If they don't have the skills to skate with the Varsity the practices suffer for the whole team. The point of the restiction is to limit varsity teams to varsity level players and to give the less skilled 8th grader a chance to play where they can be successful. GHS should know this well as he had many players in this position that ended up wasting a year when they could have played U15 and been ready for HS hockey when they reached 9th grade. He also had 3 players that did make the first 2 lines and were ready for HS. He attempted to get those players in the right place (U15) but the parents refused. A policy such as this makes it easuer for the coach to do what he knows is best.

Sometimes, maybe 1 in 20, the HS has a good JV coach and the ice time to develop the 7-8th graders on JV. If you notice I never used the term "rule" but rather "policy" just for that reason.

As far as monry goes most associations have a way of helping out.

[hockeyrube7]

Doesn't this kind of decision go in to the same kind of effect as does for OE/Private? By this I mean, dollars is a thought, does my kid like the kids she's with, can she make 1st 2 lines, will she get the play time, do I want her around these kids, so on and so no. It all comes down to a personal decision, and for some it works out very well, and for some it doesn't. We all make choices, and whats right for ones kid may not be right for another. With that said, I have never been for one side or another on OE, but I am begining to believe more now than ever, OE needs to be left alone, aren't we limiting them enough already?

[xk1]

I see your point, I was just commenting on how I think the U14 vs JV thing might be handled. The usual problem comes when you get more than 17 players and less than say 25. If there is a youth option the player is better off at U12 or 14. If not, what do you do with them? In boys you would simply be cut but girls seem to handle this differently.