Leadership's role in promoting girl's hockey

[OntheEdge]

OntheEdge,

Great points but there are other reasons that girls play boys hockey. My daughter played on boys teams solely so we could have two kids on the same team (her brother is a year younger). Every other year she played girls hockey. She has played girls HS since 8th grade.

Where I might disagree with you somewhat....I don't think the girls programs offer as much outside of the large metro programs. Often times you will find B level hockey (there simply aren't any A teams nearby) and the teams have everything from A level skaters to beginners. In those situations, for the A level player, I'm not sure that playing girls hockey is the best for the league, team or the individual player.

I enjoy your thoughts, I'm just not sure it's a one size fits all world out there.

As I stated there are exceptions, the most plausible is that there isn't a equivalent girls program offered. However, if there is an equivalent girls program I believe in the interests of "Leadership in Promoting..." as this thread is entitled, the Leaders will work hard to make girls hockey stronger. The one aspect I didn't mention is relationships. Girls that have played together for years develop chemistry on and off the ice. When a girl snubs them to play with the boys and all of sudden when it gets too rough in the upper level and goes back to the girls what do you think happens? Do the girls that have been together forever embrace the new player who was too good for them before and might take one of their friends spots? I'm sure that it depends on the girl and the situation but I don't think its a good start for a new teammate.

Again, good points. I really don't know of any girl who opted for the boys program who was snubbing her friends, I think it has more to do with where their development is and what works best for their individual family....and I think thats ok! Regarding girl players who have returned to the girls program, I have found the opposite true. Most players (except possibly the displaced one) welcome all players who can help build a stronger team.

BTW, I have a younger daugther who has played exclusively on girls teams and that is working well for her. The best player on her team played two years of squirt A's and now will be playing her second year of U12A, I think she has been well received.

As I stated before, there are exceptions to every situation. I'm happy that your younger daughter is playing on the girls side. I hope she has fun and flourishes. And thank you for your comments.

[Hux]

This topic has been addressed ad nauseaum but since you bring it up...
Parents want strong women's hockey but parents want to get an developmental advantage by putting their daughters in boys hockey. First of all there is no proof that playing boys hockey makes a girl a better player. In my observations over the years, the girls that return from the boys program are good skaters but the get too many penalties, need to get better at stickhandling and shooting. It usually takes such girls a year or two to adjust. The girls game and boys game are different games. Talent is talent and I think the girls that play boys would get just as much from the girls game with the addition of some good offseason clinics.

I think it depends on the girl, not the team she is playing on. I have seen some girls be perimeter players on boys teams, and I have seen others who take it straight down the pike. Some learn to dangle and others learn to bang. And sometimes the girls teach the boys about dangling and banging. My Squirt D team wasn't overly physical, until I had need to use three of my U10 girls to fill in when we were short. The forward came out of the corner with the puck every time, and the two D had no problem taking the body at the blue line or in front of the net. And when one of the opposition decided to hack at my niece when she tied up the puck, it was the two girls who were on the ice who came in dropped the kid while the three boys stood around.

Additionally, how do we make the girls program stronger and more competitive if a large number of good players keep playing boys hockey. If playing with boys is so much better then maybe we should just get rid of the girls hockey program and girls and boys can compete together. In other words, go back to how it was prior to 1992. The parents that put their daughters in boys hockey are doing it for developmental purposes. I keep hearing stories of so and so who played boys hockey. Well most of those stories are about girls that played when there wasn't a girls program. If people truly want girls hockey to continue to grow and advance we will work to make the girls program better from within and not abandon it to the boys side until you feel your daughter has one up on the competition.

One of the things that drove me nuts for a few years was the insistence of many parents on having their kid play with the boys, rather than with the girls. It made it an absolute pain to put together a full roster, as we never seemed to be able to get more than 10 or 11.

However, nearly all of the girls who went the boys route were better skaters and players coming out of Learn To Play than those who opted for the U10 team. We would have 10 or 11 girls on the U10 full time, and then I would call over some of the Mite or Squirts to fill in if we were going to be short or I thought we would need some extra firepower to be competitive.

The result was most of the time we skated with 10 and a goalie, rather than a full bench. (I had 18 rostered including the Mites and Squirts, but never brought over more than two) As such those 10 saw a lot of ice time. More importantly they developed as a group that was relatively close in ability, rather than having a half dozen girls who were much better, resulting in the others being insecure or intimidated. (and I think girls are much more sensitive to peer equality than boys)

Granted, if we had all of the girls that played Mite or Squirt only play girls, we probably would have had enough for two teams at the U10 level, using 12 player rosters. However, this year we have a U12 team that has 14 girls. There are five others playing Pee Wee. If the U12 team was the only option I can guarantee that three or four of the 12s would not be playing. So if you want to talk about growing the game, you have to look at the opportunities that may well be opened up by not having those more advanced players currently in the boys ranks in the girls program.

[OntheEdge]

This topic has been addressed ad nauseaum but since you bring it up...
Parents want strong women's hockey but parents want to get an developmental advantage by putting their daughters in boys hockey. First of all there is no proof that playing boys hockey makes a girl a better player. In my observations over the years, the girls that return from the boys program are good skaters but the get too many penalties, need to get better at stickhandling and shooting. It usually takes such girls a year or two to adjust. The girls game and boys game are different games. Talent is talent and I think the girls that play boys would get just as much from the girls game with the addition of some good offseason clinics.

I think it depends on the girl, not the team she is playing on. I have seen some girls be perimeter players on boys teams, and I have seen others who take it straight down the pike. Some learn to dangle and others learn to bang. And sometimes the girls teach the boys about dangling and banging. My Squirt D team wasn't overly physical, until I had need to use three of my U10 girls to fill in when we were short. The forward came out of the corner with the puck every time, and the two D had no problem taking the body at the blue line or in front of the net. And when one of the opposition decided to hack at my niece when she tied up the puck, it was the two girls who were on the ice who came in dropped the kid while the three boys stood around.

Additionally, how do we make the girls program stronger and more competitive if a large number of good players keep playing boys hockey. If playing with boys is so much better then maybe we should just get rid of the girls hockey program and girls and boys can compete together. In other words, go back to how it was prior to 1992. The parents that put their daughters in boys hockey are doing it for developmental purposes. I keep hearing stories of so and so who played boys hockey. Well most of those stories are about girls that played when there wasn't a girls program. If people truly want girls hockey to continue to grow and advance we will work to make the girls program better from within and not abandon it to the boys side until you feel your daughter has one up on the competition.

One of the things that drove me nuts for a few years was the insistence of many parents on having their kid play with the boys, rather than with the girls. It made it an absolute pain to put together a full roster, as we never seemed to be able to get more than 10 or 11.

However, nearly all of the girls who went the boys route were better skaters and players coming out of Learn To Play than those who opted for the U10 team. We would have 10 or 11 girls on the U10 full time, and then I would call over some of the Mite or Squirts to fill in if we were going to be short or I thought we would need some extra firepower to be competitive.

The result was most of the time we skated with 10 and a goalie, rather than a full bench. (I had 18 rostered including the Mites and Squirts, but never brought over more than two) As such those 10 saw a lot of ice time. More importantly they developed as a group that was relatively close in ability, rather than having a half dozen girls who were much better, resulting in the others being insecure or intimidated. (and I think girls are much more sensitive to peer equality than boys)

Granted, if we had all of the girls that played Mite or Squirt only play girls, we probably would have had enough for two teams at the U10 level, using 12 player rosters. However, this year we have a U12 team that has 14 girls. There are five others playing Pee Wee. If the U12 team was the only option I can guarantee that three or four of the 12s would not be playing. So if you want to talk about growing the game, you have to look at the opportunities that may well be opened up by not having those more advanced players currently in the boys ranks in the girls program.

All valid points HUX but my concern is that if good players play with the boys and weaker players play with the girls the girls program will dwindle to what it was in the 70s and 80s (i.e. really just a novelty). I think that just like the boys the weaker girl players should play B or C and the good players should play A. Is the girls program going to be just for the weaker B or C players? I hope not. I want the girls program to flourish. In Minnesota, most of the good players continue to embrace the girls program but there are some that don't. Most players on HS rosters played girls hockey. I don't know if playing with the boys makes them better or if the girls that play with the boys are already good players (which was first, the chicken or the egg?). I think in order to make the girls program stronger and keep it growing we need the best players and best competition possible. My opinion is that a girl is a good player based on talent and drive, not based on who she plays with. I would guess that good players would develop equally under either program. I don't think this statement will ever be proved or disproved unless we can clone some players and make the clones play with the girls while the real player plays with the boys.

[hockeya1a]

Most players on HS rosters played girls hockey. I don't know if playing with the boys makes them better or if the girls that play with the boys are already good players (which was first, the chicken or the egg?). I think in order to make the girls program stronger and keep it growing we need the best players and best competition possible. My opinion is that a girl is a good player based on talent and drive, not based on who she plays with. I would guess that good players would develop equally under either program. I don't think this statement will ever be proved or disproved unless we can clone some players and make the clones play with the girls while the real player plays with the boys.

I have seen where two girls with about the same talent at squirt level,
one go to Girls U12 and one go PW boys, The following year the girl that went u12 had become a better player, the girl that played U12 I know had a better experience than the PW.

I do not think that girls that play with the boys are always better.
I agree with the above that a lot of it depends on the kid, and 9 times out of 10 they were a good player to begin with not to mention the are pushed differently by their parents.
If you really want the girls to play with more zest, then teach them that is how to play, they will learn.

[hockeygod]

In the past Girls played on Boys teams to get the coaching and the competition. There was a notion that was true in many cases that the boys teams had more ice time and better coaching. Some people still believe this to be true so they put their girls on the Boys teams hoping they will become better players because of the tougher competition. In reality the girls coaches have become just as good (and better in some cases) than the boys, the ice time has become more equal and girls can progress very quickly through their own programs because of the individual attention they can get from coaches, the ice time is available to girls more than ever because of the smaller rosters. Parents still remember when that wasn't true so they insist on their girls playing with the boys thinking it will give them some sort of an edge.

***Just and observation, the parents I see that are the most vocal and aggresive are the ones that have had there girls in a boys program for awhile.

[Silent But Deadly]

***Just and observation, the parents I see that are the most vocal and aggresive are the ones that have had there girls in a boys program for awhile.

You talking about me?

[hockeygod]

***Just and observation, the parents I see that are the most vocal and aggresive are the ones that have had there girls in a boys program for awhile.

You talking about me?

Not that there's anything wrong with being vocal if you don't mind the tag psycho dad, I don't mind you having it it's not all parents who had there girls playing with the boys that are psycho, but if there is a parent going nuts 9 times out of 10 their girls played boys hockey and the mom or dad picked up the yelling from that

[Knight7]

Not associations are created equal. We will may have as many as 3-4 girls playing PW in our association this year. They were 12A players' last season and this year there is no 12A or 14U program to play in. Could they play 12B, yes but why? 18 players, no dedicated goalie.
We tried to find an association that would take them to no avail. They just want to play and get better.

[hockeygod]

Not associations are created equal. We will may have as many as 3-4 girls playing PW in our association this year. They were 12A players' last season and this year there is no 12A or 14U program to play in. Could they play 12B, yes but why? 18 players, no dedicated goalie.
We tried to find an association that would take them to no avail. They just want to play and get better.

Playing with the boys seems to be the answer for your association right now. It's a viable solution for the girls to get competitive playing time

The bigger associations don't need it because they can field competiitve teams, but I can see a time in the near future where Minnesota will be Fielding some club teams similar to the east coast for the girls because of situations just like the one you described. As they get older the good girls will have more difficulty competing with the boys so it would be nice to an alternative for them rather than going to a B team or playing with the boys.

[OntheEdge]

Not associations are created equal. We will may have as many as 3-4 girls playing PW in our association this year. They were 12A players' last season and this year there is no 12A or 14U program to play in. Could they play 12B, yes but why? 18 players, no dedicated goalie.
We tried to find an association that would take them to no avail. They just want to play and get better.

Playing with the boys seems to be the answer for your association right now. It's a viable solution for the girls to get competitive playing time

The bigger associations don't need it because they can field competiitve teams, but I can see a time in the near future where Minnesota will be Fielding some club teams similar to the east coast for the girls because of situations just like the one you described. As they get older the good girls will have more difficulty competing with the boys so it would be nice to an alternative for them rather than going to a B team or playing with the boys.

I agree HockeyGod. We continue to have growing pains in girls hockey and in certain situations there is no choice but to play with the boys. I hope that one day it isn't the case.

[kwjm]

Some are saying it is okay for a girl to play on a boys team in certain situations. However, others want to change the rules and not allow girls on a boys team. If the rules are changed and those girls are not allowed on a boys team in certain situations, those girls will likely quit or play on a AAA team. How will that help "build the girls program"? I'd like to see girls hockey continue to get better, but punishing a few of the best girls by forcing them on an inferior girls team is not the solution.

[hockeygod]

Personally I hate seeing girls on boys teams I hate how their treated by some players, I hate having to see them dress in different locker rooms I hate a lot about that situation.

What I hate more is that some girls would not have the opportunitty to play otherwise. If we are to build the sport of hockey in Minnesota, for Girls and Boys, we have to ensure that everyone has a chance to play and enjoy the game of hockey. IF girls have to play on a boys team or they need to play for a different area to make this happen, then that's what has to be done.

I don't like seeing it happen, but I will stand to the end for their right to do it. Were all entitled to equal and fair treatment.

[hockeypux99]

[OntheEdge]

Some are saying it is okay for a girl to play on a boys team in certain situations. However, others want to change the rules and not allow girls on a boys team. If the rules are changed and those girls are not allowed on a boys team in certain situations, those girls will likely quit or play on a AAA team. How will that help "build the girls program"? I'd like to see girls hockey continue to get better, but punishing a few of the best girls by forcing them on an inferior girls team is not the solution.

I'll refer to my earlier post. I think if the rule were changed to allow each association to pass a rule that girls have to play in the girls program unless there is not a girls team equivalent to a boys team being offered. I think each association should be able to assess their own situation. I would hope that most associations would pass such a rule because it could add a significant number of players to the girls program. For example, if an association doesn't have enough girls for an U12A team they could permit girls to tryout for the Peewee A team or even in some of the larger associations play Peewee B1 or even Peewee B in the smaller associatios. I see too many U10A and U12A teams weakened or not even formed because too many girls are going over to the boys side. As far as your comment about girls going to a AAA team I am not aware of any USA sanctioned winter AAA teams for girl youths (at least in the metro area). My understanding is that the Thoroughbreds and Shattuck are the only USA sanctioned AAA teams around and they both cater to high school level girls. If such a rule were passed I don't see how you would be punishing a girl and I think it would strengthen the girls program. Some parents might not like it. Its my experience that girls just want to play hockey and its the parents that make the decision to play boys or girls. You aren't punishing the girls but you are pushing the parents to what I think is the right decision for girls hockey as a whole.

[girlshockeycoach]

Bob Grandner at Champlin Park has quietly gone about working with the youth players and coaches throughout the year in the Champlin Park Youth Association with little or no recognition. He has monthly gatherings for the youth coaches to talk about everything from practices to concerns on how to handle players. He also requires his players to volunteer 8 hours during the season with the youth teams and makes a point to make each of the youth teams games or practices each month and talk to the kids. In addition, he does youth clinics in the spring and fall and does not receive any money for doing so.

He has increased the number of girls in the program tenfold and still has parents continually take shots at him on the high school side without realizing how much time and effort he puts into what truly is often a thankless job. No wonder many coaches don't stick around more than a few years.

[Rocket78]

Personally I hate seeing girls on boys teams I hate how their treated by some players, I hate having to see them dress in different locker rooms I hate a lot about that situation.

.

The official USA Hockey policy is to let one gender use the locker room while the other is outside. Then they switch so that the gender that dressed first goes out while the other is dressing. Then everyone comes together when all are dressed. You are supposed to alternate who goes first from one ice time to the next. Yes this will take some coordination. Referees are supposed to do this too if they have mixed genders. The girls are not supposed to be booted to a different room and if this is occuring somewhere they girls family can make an issue of it.

All of my sons had one or two girls on their teams until bantams but it managed to never be a real issue. I guess it depends on the individuals. My daughter would not be playing hockey if she had to be on a youth (traditional boys) team. We have a few girls (ahem, parents) that insist on playing on a youth team because Darwitz did. I suspect that Darwitz didn't have much choice. I can also tell you that these girls will never be a Darwitz.

[Central]

Back in her youth days our now adult daughter played on boys' teams for a couple years b-4 there was a girls' team and she dressed in the women's bathroom and then when the guys were dressed she would go in. She did not really think twice about it and back guess we did not either. The teammates all treated her like one of the guys on the bench and ice but she was a decent player so that helped I am sure. Other teams and their parents were not always so nice but if anything it made her stronger. She actually preferred the boys' game with checking but that is a whole other thread. She does still ref and they do alternate there in her experience.

[elliott70]

Tito Elumba, who now works in an official capacity at MN Hockey, was a one-man recruiting machine in Cottage Grove. I'm sure if you contacted him, he would have some good ideas.

The two big challenges are to make it affordable for more families. And to somehow convince the parents, who do not have a hockey background, to sign their kids up for hockey.

Tito was just made chairman of a MN Hockey girls committee subcommittee on recruitment.

[elliott70]

Does anybody have actual numbers on how many girls are in MN hockey over the last 10 years?

Carol Carlson, MInesota District USAHockey associate registrar has those numbers. Her email is on www.minnesotahockey.org

Wait a week or so as she just ahd back surgery a couple of days ago.

[xk1]

I think these numbers should be on the MN Hockey website so anyone can see them without having to email someone. In effect, these numbers are the stock ticker on how the organization is doing.

[elliott70]

Last year Edina had about 100 girls playing mites. This year my guess is that it will be in the 100-120 range.

The grade school weekly newsletter my kids come home with has blurbs about art classes, karate, swim club, soccer, and hockey signups. I also think we got a postcard. I haven't noticed any other recruiting efforts.

Edina does do its own mite league. They decided they could save money by not registering with usa/mn hockey and getting their own insurance. This has worked nicely for the roughly 400 mites they have. However, this year the 3rd year girls mites are registering with usa/mn hockey. Supposedly they need better competition and will be playing other communities. The decision is a surprise because it goes completely against the mite plan Edina has.

Interesting discussion. I think that Edina has been successful in growing their girls program for a number of reasons. Edina will have about 100 girl mites, 4 U10 teams, 4 U12 teams, 3 U14 teams, 2 U19 teams and probably 40-50 girls trying out for HS hockey this year.

First and foremost, the growth in girls hockey has snowballed because from grade school on girls know that its cool to play hockey in Edina. We advertise but probably not much more than other communities. In Edina, its a cultural thing. There are many parents that played hockey and they strongly encourage their girls to play. Also, for the girls of parents that have not played hockey there is pressure by girl friends and their parents to join in on the fun.

Edina's program flourishes due to a number of other factors. First of all, (Hux will like this) its Board spends just as much time promoting the girls program as the boys program. Both programs are treated almost equally. I think the girls program probably gets more attention since it has a "Girls Coordinator" and no such position exists for boys.

The girls program took off a few years ago when Edina instituted an all girls mite program. This was done for several reasons, a few of which were that the Board felt that girls would like to play on all girl teams and that girls could touch the puck more and not be intimidated by the boys.

Mites (girls and boys) were not registered to save money and since the numbers were there it was felt that Edina could create its own league of neighborhood teams without having to play outside the Edina boundaries. The upper girls mites were registered to give them a chance for more competition which hopefully would stop the tendency of some of the better girls from going over to the boys program.

In Edina there are still a few parents that believe that girls playing in the boys program will make them a better hockey player. I don't think this notion is correct but that's my opinion. In my opinion, girls that play with the boys are playing a different style of hockey and its takes some time for them to adjust when they move to the girls program. People might disagree but I have observed that such girls need to work on stickhandling and shooting skills because they didn't have as many opportunities to shoot and stickhandle while playing with the boys. While there's no way to test this, I think girls talented enough to play with the boys would be just as good or better if they played with the girls since they would be able to shoot more and stickhandle more. I know that I'm opening a can of worms but its just my opinion. Reasonable people can disagree.

I think another way to grow girls hockey is to change the MH/USA hockey rule that requires an association to permit girls to play with the boys. A few years ago Edina was going to prohibit girls from playing in the boys program. Research was completed to see if it was possible. What we found out is that it isn't a legal problem (there is no discrimination law prohibiting such a rule) but MH/USA hockey has a rule that requires associations to permit girls to play with the boys. It appeared to us that the rule was put in place to give girls a chance to play hockey at a time when there weren't any girls hockey programs available. We didn't push it because it really wasn't a problem in Edina since most of our parents support the girls program and we have very few girls playing with the boys. However, we thought that preventing girls from playing with the boys would make us a leader in making girls hockey stronger statewide (in other words if we did this maybe others would follow our lead). We thought that if all communities passed such a rule, more girls would play girls hockey and the girls hockey program statewide would be stronger. I think the MH/USA rule could be modified to state that an association could prohibit girls from playing boys hockey only if there was an equivalent program offered for the girls. In other words, if there was a U12A team girls could be prohibited from playing Peewee A etc. As far as I know no such movement is in the making.

I'll stop now. Sorry for the length of this post but I love girls hockey and have thought alot about this. I don't know if I'm right or wrong but I think it merits discussion.

Edina has a girls coordinator? I know that there are girls and boys board liasons, commissioners, and even presidents. But I did not know of a girls position that had no boys equivalent. Pretty cool.

Should usa/MN hockey amend their rule of allowing girls to play with boys? It would be an interesting thread. I know that in some associations if a girl wants to play boys hockey she must make the A team or go back in the girls program.

USA Hockey has youth and girls programs.
There is no 'boys' program.
An association cannot force a girl to play in the girls program.
Not the right thing in my mind - the above method seems appropriate, but it is not enforceable.

[elliott70]

[quote="kwjm"]Why do we need to change the MN/USA hockey rules? Please help me understand how having a few girls playing on a boys team is hurting the overall girls program? I don't understand how a girl choosing to play on a team with teammates at her level (a boys A team) is all that different from a high-level boy choosing to play on an independent AAA team rather than an association team. And I don't hear a lot of people saying we should change the rules and prevent AAA teams.

Also, I don't hear complaints from the girls "left behind" on a girls team who get to touch the puck and play the game rather than watch as a much better player goes end to end without involving her teammates

If every association has 1-5 girls playing on boys teams, it can't hurt the girls program that much. What am I missing?[/quote]

There are a lot of programs where you take one girl out of the equation, it may mean no girls team. As stated by others, it is not a one scenario fits all type of problem.

[elliott70]

Some are saying it is okay for a girl to play on a boys team in certain situations. However, others want to change the rules and not allow girls on a boys team. If the rules are changed and those girls are not allowed on a boys team in certain situations, those girls will likely quit or play on a AAA team. How will that help "build the girls program"? I'd like to see girls hockey continue to get better, but punishing a few of the best girls by forcing them on an inferior girls team is not the solution.

This rule is not likely to be changed for some time.
It would not even be considered until July of 2009.

[elliott70]

I think these numbers should be on the MN Hockey website so anyone can see them without having to email someone. In effect, these numbers are the stock ticker on how the organization is doing.

You can request that be added to the MN Hockey web page.
Email Mark Jorgenson and if he can make it fit or has enough requests for it; he will add it.

[spin-o-rama]

I think these numbers should be on the MN Hockey website so anyone can see them without having to email someone. In effect, these numbers are the stock ticker on how the organization is doing.

2007 numbers are in the 2007 summer board meeting minutes.

You also might want to contact Lynn Olson who is the MH girls/womens rep.

lynnolson01@aol.com