Another Article on parents

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

Post Reply
greybeard58
Posts: 2150
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 11:40 pm

Another Article on parents

Post by greybeard58 » Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:49 am

Just because hockey is not covered in this article, it does bring up interesting points

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/28 ... y#continue


Pushy sports parents often end up as the losers

Article by: DANIELLE BRAFF , Chicago Tribune
Updated: December 8, 2014 - 3:02 PM

Putting too much pressure on your kids to excel at athletics can backfire.




Youth sports long have been seen as a ticket to a college scholarship, and as college costs go ever higher, many parents are putting more pressure on their children to snag some of that cash.

“It’s become a win-at-all-costs culture,” said Jason Sacks, executive director of the Positive Coaching Alliance, a nonprofit organization founded at Stanford University.

As the stakes grow, parents push harder, sending their kids to sports camps and buying them the newest gear — expenses that up the ante and make the parents even more focused on their youngsters’ success.

In the end, it’s the children who are the ones losing, according to Sacks. Seventy percent of children drop out of sports by age 13, and a big reason is that their parents are putting too much pressure on them.

“Parents are putting in all this money and time,” he said, “and they think that if they put it all in, they’ll see a light at the end of the tunnel in the form of a college scholarship.”

There’s a balance between encouraging a child’s athletic interests and stressing him or her out by becoming a second coach. Some coaching associations are encouraging parents to take a gentler role in the hope that children will be happier and healthier team players.

In a July study published in the Journal of Physical Activity & Health, researchers interviewed children who played organized soccer and found that having fun was the primary reason for their participation. Other top reasons included learning and improving, developing team friendships and participating in team rituals.

Winning ended up way down the list. Out of 81 determinants that make playing sports enjoyable, the children rated winning 48th, said Amanda Visek, lead author of the study and associate professor of sports psychology at the George Washington University in Washington, D.C.

“While surprising, this is positive,” she said. “Sports by definition includes competition, and the outcome of a competition results in winning and losing. But the findings from our study highlight that the fun experience is not determined by the end result of a game but rather by the process of physically engaging in the game.”

Parents still can be highly involved with a child’s team without pressuring or pushing, said Wendy Grolnick, co-author of “Pressured Parents, Stressed-out Kids: Dealing With Competition While Raising a Successful Child” and a professor of psychology at Clark University in Massachusetts. In fact, it’s when they find balance that their children are most likely to enjoy sports and to persist at them.

“Being involved is great, but it is important to do so in a way that is not pressuring,” Grolnick said. “I like to say that parents should be just behind the child, matching their level of interest to that of the child.”

Those interests should not be marred by whether your child won or lost a game, said Alan Goldberg, a Massachusetts-based sports psychology consultant and author of “This Is Your Brain on Sports.” Instead, parents should give consistent support regardless of the outcome of the game, he said, because the actual outcome isn’t important to the child.

Be of good cheer

“Most parents lose sight of that,” he said. “You want to go to your kid’s games, to enjoy the experience, to cheer for them and for every one of their teammates and to be a good role model.”

Many parents push their children too much, thinking they are doing the right thing when, in fact, they are causing damage, Goldberg said. They’re creating performance problems that can be avoided if they simply stay quiet and calm and happily cheer on their little athlete from the sidelines, he explained.

It’s especially important to show the right level of support after the game if your child loses or doesn’t do as well as he or she envisioned, said Bruce Brown, co-founder of Proac tive Coaching, a company based in Washington state that coaches other coaches.

Brown, who has coached football, baseball, volleyball and basketball, always asked his players what their best and worst memories were so he could continue what he was doing right and fix what he was doing wrong. Consistently, he found that their worst memories had nothing to do with him; it happened during the car ride home after practice or a game, when their parents would grill them about their performance.

“What they really need is time and space,” Brown said. “The more competitive the kid, the more time and space they need.”

Parents also should be alert to signs of emotional strain such as headaches, stomachaches and fatigue that might be indications that it’s time to re-evaluate whether the sport is too stressful, Grolnick said. This would be a good time to sit down with a child to see if he or she wants to cut back or switch to a different team or league.

After all, it’s supposed to be fun.

InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:42 am

I've always thought this had more to do with activities consolidation than it did with overbearing parents. So 2 minutes of unscientific statistics calls BS on the 70% stat (don't get me wrong, I love the PCA). The other BS in this article is provided by authors pushing their books.

Roughly 48 mill kids age 6-17; gives us roughly 4 million kids at each age.
As many as 75 percent of kids play a youth sport; gives us roughly 3 million at each age.
The first website giving number of kids playing HS sports said 7.3 mill; roughly 1.8 per age.
If 1.8 are still playing, then only 1.2 quit playing - that is a 40% loss, not 70%.

The baseball program may lose 70%, the lacrosse program may lose 70%, the golf program may lose 70%, the track team may lose 70%; but I'd say a bunch of those kids quit one or two (or three) in chosing the one sport they'll play for that season. Throw in the kids that quit a sport to concentrate on dance or piano or church group, and even more are accounted for. Then there are the kids that just aren't very well equipped for a particular sport - I was not an overbearing track parent, but unfortunately for my kids, I passed along the 'slow gene', which made them not very successful.

boomerang
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:28 pm

Post by boomerang » Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:02 am

Agree. Mine tried every sport and activity known to man through his elementary years, mostly to figure out what he liked best and what he was best at. He dropped tae kwon do because after advancing a bit, he found it got too serious for him, for example. Same with a lot of other sports.....as the kids got older, more was expected of them, and it just gets to be too much to do everything for "fun." If he had time, he would still be participating in football, cross country, basketball, lacrosse, soccer, and track. Unfortunately, hockey is his first love, and he has to miss too much of the other stuff, so those coaches "punish" him for missing a practice, and it becomes not fun. There are also not enough hours in the day, and it's a scheduling thing. I don't care if he doesn't letter in cross country or football and track, but he does, and it was made clear to him they would not award him the letter for missing the last two or the first two meets/games, so he gave those sports up to be as successful as he can at one. He's still pissed he felt he had to choose a favorite, and it was the coaches and other kids that drove him to choose. Not me.

frozenponds
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:24 pm

Post by frozenponds » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:01 pm

[quote="boomerang"]Agree. Mine tried every sport and activity known to man through his elementary years, mostly to figure out what he liked best and what he was best at. He dropped tae kwon do because after advancing a bit, he found it got too serious for him, for example. Same with a lot of other sports.....as the kids got older, more was expected of them, and it just gets to be too much to do everything for "fun." If he had time, he would still be participating in football, cross country, basketball, lacrosse, soccer, and track. Unfortunately, hockey is his first love, and he has to miss too much of the other stuff, so those coaches "punish" him for missing a practice, and it becomes not fun. There are also not enough hours in the day, and it's a scheduling thing. I don't care if he doesn't letter in cross country or football and track, but he does, and it was made clear to him they would not award him the letter for missing the last two or the first two meets/games, so he gave those sports up to be as successful as he can at one. He's still pissed he felt he had to choose a favorite, and it was the coaches and other kids that drove him to choose. Not me.[/quote]
Nice post, interesting perspective.

sinbin
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:12 pm

Post by sinbin » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:38 pm

One issue the original post didn't touch on is even getting into top notch colleges, much less earning scholarships. The ivy's and similar want students who can help them, whether it be in athletics, arts, or other disciplines. Unfortunately, straight A's, APs, and perfect exam scores are not enough; they need more. In addition, they don't offer athletic or academic scholarships, but need-based grants. So, in a similar fashion, for this group of students, who do well athletically and academically, but are not elite athletes, there is pressure on them as well (perhaps not quite as much as the elite athlete - actual or perceived - though).

Agree that pressure can be intense and much well-intended "support" can easily go awry. In the long run, let the kid find his/her passion on his/her own.

Nevertoomuchhockey
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:59 pm

Post by Nevertoomuchhockey » Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:13 pm

I feel that I need to state the obvious here - "need based grants" are predicated upon a dozen factors, including but not limited to academic and athletic success. Recruiters are competing for the best student athletes, and "need" is an intangible that is overwhelmingly flexible.

MN privates offering "need based grants" are ABSOLUTELY taking in to account what the AD, coach, director, principal have to say about the students role in the school community. Be it raising average test scores or fielding more competitive sports teams.

To throw out the "needs based" and "no academic or athletic $" argument implies that wealthy families don't get D1 money.

SCBlueLiner
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm

Post by SCBlueLiner » Wed Dec 17, 2014 9:14 am

D3 schools, while they don't give out "athletic" scholarships per se, give out scholarships for athletes all the time, regardless of need. If you are being recruited to a D3 school, you have good grades, and you will be an asset to the team and to the school as a whole there will be "scholarship" money available even if your family can "afford" college.

At a lot of these D3 schools where the enrollment is in the 1200 or so range the athletes (male & female) make up a good percentage of the student body. Honestly, it is kind of rare for somebody to attend a D3 school and not be involved in an extra curricular activity whether it be athletics, band, theatre, student government, etc, etc.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Wed Dec 17, 2014 2:10 pm

SCBlueLiner wrote:D3 schools, while they don't give out "athletic" scholarships per se, give out scholarships for athletes all the time, regardless of need. If you are being recruited to a D3 school, you have good grades, and you will be an asset to the team and to the school as a whole there will be "scholarship" money available even if your family can "afford" college.

At a lot of these D3 schools where the enrollment is in the 1200 or so range the athletes (male & female) make up a good percentage of the student body. Honestly, it is kind of rare for somebody to attend a D3 school and not be involved in an extra curricular activity whether it be athletics, band, theatre, student government, etc, etc.
I believe you when you say scholarship money is available for athletes etc.... However your other statement I have never seen evidence of. Maybe it depends on where you are from but most of my friend and many others I know went to D3 schools and none played sports or were involved in any extra curricular activities and none of the people they hung around with were either (I was the exception in my group of friends in that I went D1 and played a sport). Then again we have very good academic D3 schools here in WI (ie UW-Whitewater is nationally rated for their business school) and maybe we are the anomaly nationally, the point being I'd never heard that or even thought that til you just brought it up and I personally have no evidence that I have seen that supports that. :/

InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya » Wed Dec 17, 2014 4:34 pm

Then again we have very good academic D3 schools here in WI
We wouldn't know anything about that here in MN; we only have schools like Carleton and Macalester...

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:05 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:
Then again we have very good academic D3 schools here in WI
We wouldn't know anything about that here in MN; we only have schools like Carleton and Macalester...
Alex, I will take "Colleges no one has ever heard of outside of Minnesota for $1,000"...... :lol: :lol: J/k ... relax it's a joke

elliott70
Posts: 14003
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Post by elliott70 » Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:03 pm

JSR wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:
Then again we have very good academic D3 schools here in WI
We wouldn't know anything about that here in MN; we only have schools like Carleton and Macalester...
Alex, I will take "Colleges no one has ever heard of outside of Minnesota for $1,000"...... :lol: :lol: J/k ... relax it's a joke
He killed your father, draw the sword.....

InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya » Thu Dec 18, 2014 7:15 am

Without the football team, nobody has heard of UW-Whitewater.

Just a quick search of US News, not perfect at all, but easily accessible, shows a national ranking of liberal arts colleges:
#8 Carlton
#24 Macalester
St Olaf also hits the list prior to Wisconsin schools, Lawrence U and Beloit (which quite honestly, is mostly an Illinois school).
The top 100 contains no more WI, but also has Gustavus, St Johns and St Bens.

Whitewater is not a liberal arts college, but I did find them in the midwest regional rankings, where they ranked #48, behind Eau Claire and La Crosse - also behind Hamline, St Catherine, Bethel, Augsburg, St Scholastica, and UMD.

Even people from the east recognize that Minnesotans are wicked smaht.

silentbutdeadly3139
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:50 pm

Post by silentbutdeadly3139 » Thu Dec 18, 2014 8:38 am

JSR wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:
Then again we have very good academic D3 schools here in WI
We wouldn't know anything about that here in MN; we only have schools like Carleton and Macalester...
Alex, I will take "Colleges no one has ever heard of outside of Minnesota for $1,000"...... :lol: :lol: J/k ... relax it's a joke
Elliot70 wrote:He killed your father, draw the sword.....
InigoMontoya wrote:Without the football team, nobody has heard of UW-Whitewater.

Just a quick search of US News, not perfect at all, but easily accessible, shows a national ranking of liberal arts colleges:
#8 Carlton
#24 Macalester
St Olaf also hits the list prior to Wisconsin schools, Lawrence U and Beloit (which quite honestly, is mostly an Illinois school).
The top 100 contains no more WI, but also has Gustavus, St Johns and St Bens.

Whitewater is not a liberal arts college, but I did find them in the midwest regional rankings, where they ranked #48, behind Eau Claire and La Crosse - also behind Hamline, St Catherine, Bethel, Augsburg, St Scholastica, and UMD.

Even people from the east recognize that Minnesotans are wicked smaht.
Ever notice how you come across somebody once in a while you shouldn’t have f’ed with? That’s me. — Gran Torino and InigoMontoya

SCBlueLiner
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm

Post by SCBlueLiner » Thu Dec 18, 2014 8:46 am

JSR wrote:
SCBlueLiner wrote:D3 schools, while they don't give out "athletic" scholarships per se, give out scholarships for athletes all the time, regardless of need. If you are being recruited to a D3 school, you have good grades, and you will be an asset to the team and to the school as a whole there will be "scholarship" money available even if your family can "afford" college.

At a lot of these D3 schools where the enrollment is in the 1200 or so range the athletes (male & female) make up a good percentage of the student body. Honestly, it is kind of rare for somebody to attend a D3 school and not be involved in an extra curricular activity whether it be athletics, band, theatre, student government, etc, etc.
I believe you when you say scholarship money is available for athletes etc.... However your other statement I have never seen evidence of. Maybe it depends on where you are from but most of my friend and many others I know went to D3 schools and none played sports or were involved in any extra curricular activities and none of the people they hung around with were either (I was the exception in my group of friends in that I went D1 and played a sport). Then again we have very good academic D3 schools here in WI (ie UW-Whitewater is nationally rated for their business school) and maybe we are the anomaly nationally, the point being I'd never heard that or even thought that til you just brought it up and I personally have no evidence that I have seen that supports that. :/
There are a lot of small D3 schools across the upper midwest with enrollments around 1200-1500. In those schools, the entire athletic dept can be 300 or so athletes which makes up a quarter of the entire student body. Then add in activities such as band, music, art, theatre, student government, professional organizations, it adds up fast and over half the entire student body is involved in something. Think of it the same way you think of a small town high school, you'll see football players performing in the band at halftime, it takes everybody in the school involved in multiple activities to keep things going.

UW-Whitewater is not the typical D3 school with an enrollment of over 10,000. The typical D3 school has a much, much smaller enrollment.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:08 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:Without the football team, nobody has heard of UW-Whitewater.

Just a quick search of US News, not perfect at all, but easily accessible, shows a national ranking of liberal arts colleges:
#8 Carlton
#24 Macalester
St Olaf also hits the list prior to Wisconsin schools, Lawrence U and Beloit (which quite honestly, is mostly an Illinois school).
The top 100 contains no more WI, but also has Gustavus, St Johns and St Bens.

Whitewater is not a liberal arts college, but I did find them in the midwest regional rankings, where they ranked #48, behind Eau Claire and La Crosse - also behind Hamline, St Catherine, Bethel, Augsburg, St Scholastica, and UMD.

Even people from the east recognize that Minnesotans are wicked smaht.


I was just having a bit of fun but if you really want to go there...... Drill further and you will see on those same rankings that UW-L, UW-EC UW-W, UW-SP, UW-St, UW-O, UW-RF, UW-GB & UW-PL are ranked #4, #6, and #12, #13, #17, #19, #19 (tied), #22, & #24 respectively for public schools, with UMD chiming in at #8 and Winona at #16, Mankato #19 (tied) and no other MN schools in the top 25
(the point being comparing private liberal arts schools to public regional universities is like comparing apples and oranges, even comparing private schools is tough because small privates emphasize different things in what they want from their experience, academically, socially etc..., ranking those schools is useless if you ask me)...

Also to say Beloit is "mostly and Illinois school" is absurd considering the entire campus is in the state of Wisconsin and only slightly less than 25% of the student population currently is from Illinois. It is a WI school thank you very much....

It is interesting to note in this discussion that in 2011-’12, about 10,500 Wisconsin students attended public universities and technical colleges in Minnesota, while about 14,500 Minnesota students enrolled in Wisconsin’s state schools under the Minnesota-Wisconsin Interstate Tuition Reciprocity Agreement. In other words a lot more MN kids are seeking a WI education than the other way around... just sayin....

But ultimately this is all nonsense because the only ranking that really matters is that the University of Wisconsin (Badgers) ranks #47 amongst national universities and the University of Minnesota (Gophers) ranks #71....
:lol: :lol: :lol: :wink:

Froggy Richards
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:15 am

Post by Froggy Richards » Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:53 pm

JSR wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:Without the football team, nobody has heard of UW-Whitewater.

Just a quick search of US News, not perfect at all, but easily accessible, shows a national ranking of liberal arts colleges:
#8 Carlton
#24 Macalester
St Olaf also hits the list prior to Wisconsin schools, Lawrence U and Beloit (which quite honestly, is mostly an Illinois school).
The top 100 contains no more WI, but also has Gustavus, St Johns and St Bens.

Whitewater is not a liberal arts college, but I did find them in the midwest regional rankings, where they ranked #48, behind Eau Claire and La Crosse - also behind Hamline, St Catherine, Bethel, Augsburg, St Scholastica, and UMD.

Even people from the east recognize that Minnesotans are wicked smaht.


It is interesting to note in this discussion that in 2011-’12, about 10,500 Wisconsin students attended public universities and technical colleges in Minnesota, while about 14,500 Minnesota students enrolled in Wisconsin’s state schools under the Minnesota-Wisconsin Interstate Tuition Reciprocity Agreement. In other words a lot more MN kids are seeking a WI education than the other way around... just sayin....


That's because the admission standards are higher in MN. You forgot to include the rest of the info from the article. 31,476 Wisconsin High School graduates applied to MN state schools and technical colleges in 2011-2012, but only 10,500 were accepted. 16,324 MN kids who couldn't get accepted in MN applied to WI schools. Of those, 14,500 were accepted.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:05 pm

Froggy Richards wrote:
JSR wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:Without the football team, nobody has heard of UW-Whitewater.

Just a quick search of US News, not perfect at all, but easily accessible, shows a national ranking of liberal arts colleges:
#8 Carlton
#24 Macalester
St Olaf also hits the list prior to Wisconsin schools, Lawrence U and Beloit (which quite honestly, is mostly an Illinois school).
The top 100 contains no more WI, but also has Gustavus, St Johns and St Bens.

Whitewater is not a liberal arts college, but I did find them in the midwest regional rankings, where they ranked #48, behind Eau Claire and La Crosse - also behind Hamline, St Catherine, Bethel, Augsburg, St Scholastica, and UMD.

Even people from the east recognize that Minnesotans are wicked smaht.


It is interesting to note in this discussion that in 2011-’12, about 10,500 Wisconsin students attended public universities and technical colleges in Minnesota, while about 14,500 Minnesota students enrolled in Wisconsin’s state schools under the Minnesota-Wisconsin Interstate Tuition Reciprocity Agreement. In other words a lot more MN kids are seeking a WI education than the other way around... just sayin....


That's because the admission standards are higher in MN. You forgot to include the rest of the info from the article. 31,476 Wisconsin High School graduates applied to MN state schools and technical colleges in 2011-2012, but only 10,500 were accepted. 16,324 MN kids who couldn't get accepted in MN applied to WI schools. Of those, 14,500 were accepted.


Actually logic would dictate that just based on numbers that the WI admissions for the state schools would be harder for WI kids to get into, hence a lot more WI kids applying to MN and the reason a higher percentage of MN kids got in compared to applied is because only the best of the best bother applying because they know they won't get in otherwise.... That said again you can't compare privates to state schools and we have a lot more state schools in WI and you have a lot more privates in MN. and of the two "big" universities, it's common knowledge that UW-Madison has the third toughest admission standards in the big Ten right behind Northwestern and Michigan... so.... :wink:

Froggy Richards
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:15 am

Post by Froggy Richards » Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:18 pm

JSR wrote:
Froggy Richards wrote:
JSR wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:Without the football team, nobody has heard of UW-Whitewater.

Just a quick search of US News, not perfect at all, but easily accessible, shows a national ranking of liberal arts colleges:
#8 Carlton
#24 Macalester
St Olaf also hits the list prior to Wisconsin schools, Lawrence U and Beloit (which quite honestly, is mostly an Illinois school).
The top 100 contains no more WI, but also has Gustavus, St Johns and St Bens.

Whitewater is not a liberal arts college, but I did find them in the midwest regional rankings, where they ranked #48, behind Eau Claire and La Crosse - also behind Hamline, St Catherine, Bethel, Augsburg, St Scholastica, and UMD.

Even people from the east recognize that Minnesotans are wicked smaht.


It is interesting to note in this discussion that in 2011-’12, about 10,500 Wisconsin students attended public universities and technical colleges in Minnesota, while about 14,500 Minnesota students enrolled in Wisconsin’s state schools under the Minnesota-Wisconsin Interstate Tuition Reciprocity Agreement. In other words a lot more MN kids are seeking a WI education than the other way around... just sayin....


That's because the admission standards are higher in MN. You forgot to include the rest of the info from the article. 31,476 Wisconsin High School graduates applied to MN state schools and technical colleges in 2011-2012, but only 10,500 were accepted. 16,324 MN kids who couldn't get accepted in MN applied to WI schools. Of those, 14,500 were accepted.


Actually logic would dictate that just based on numbers that the WI admissions for the state schools would be harder for WI kids to get into, hence a lot more WI kids applying to MN and the reason a higher percentage of MN kids got in compared to applied is because only the best of the best bother applying because they know they won't get in otherwise.... That said again you can't compare privates to state schools and we have a lot more state schools in WI and you have a lot more privates in MN. and of the two "big" universities, it's common knowledge that UW-Madison has the third toughest admission standards in the big Ten right behind Northwestern and Michigan... so.... :wink:


I actually made all of that up. I can't believe you guys are having this conversation. Who cares?

jackstraw
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 12:58 pm

Post by jackstraw » Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:35 pm

The numbers that matter for a hockey forum: MN - 11th, WI - 57th. Or we could go with MN 9-4-1 and WI 1-10-1.

InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya » Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:45 pm

Penn State is ranked higher than Bucky.

InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya » Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:09 pm

I can't believe you guys are having this conversation. Who cares?
There isn't anybody talking about anything else on here.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:46 pm

jackstraw wrote:The numbers that matter for a hockey forum: MN - 11th, WI - 57th. Or we could go with MN 9-4-1 and WI 1-10-1.
You are absolutely right, lets stick to numbers that matter in hockey and not this nonsense!

National championships won:
UW=6
UM-5

:o :D

MWS coach
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:31 am

Post by MWS coach » Sun Dec 21, 2014 7:45 pm

J how is your pro team doing?

Didn't a Madison Capitals team play in the Spirit of Duluth Tournament at PW level?
Majority of players that won championships for Bucky were developed in cheddar land right?

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Mon Dec 29, 2014 5:11 pm

MWS coach wrote:J how is your pro team doing?

Didn't a Madison Capitals team play in the Spirit of Duluth Tournament at PW level?
Majority of players that won championships for Bucky were developed in cheddar land right?
- We have one of the most successful AHL teams in the league, but a conglomerate of politics involving the proximity of the Blackhawks and Wild along with the WI Badgers and the AHL Jr Admirals make it so we will likely never get an NHL franchise... which is fine with me

- I have no idea if one did or not. My son's aren't Pee Wee aged

- I don't know the history on all the championships but the last one they won in the 2005-06 season the team was made up of
- 13 WI kids
- 4 MN kids
- 2 CA kids
- and 1 each from Canada and a couple other states
So yes the majority of the kids who won the Badgers last title were developed right here in cheddar land.... I can't speak to the 90s titles or before since I don't feel like researching it. Feel free though :D

On a related note, this years team (one of the worst in Badger history) has a roster with some of the fewest WI born players we've ever had (only eight) interestingly enough..... :idea: :?: :arrow:
:wink:

Post Reply