Let's Play Hockey Article - In defense of Minneapolis Hockey

SWPrez · Post by **SWPrez** » Mon Apr 21, 2014 5:45 pm

Just saw this recent article from Let's Play Hockey ripping on Minneapolis Youth Hockey. The author of the article clearly didn't do much research and clearly does not understand the challenges in building a hockey program that provides opportunities for the recreational player and the elite player. As there are not many avenues for counterpoints to Let's Play Hockey articles...I will use this forum to stick up for Minneapolis hockey.

First, the article can be found here:
http://letsplayhockey.com/online-editio ... -plan.html

The author gets many things wrong. First, like most first ring suburbs, demographics have changed dramatically in the city of Minneapolis over the last fifty years. The economics of the game have also chased families away. The author holds up Roseau as a program that shows economics doesn't matter. It is well known that the rinks and hockey program are highly subsidized in Roseau by a very large local company.

Luverne is then brought up as a case in point. Luverne was great this year at the Class A high school level. 100% of their youth program feeds their high school team - resulting in the best kids from the youth program moving on to play for the local high school.

In 2004, Minneapolis Southwest had 190 players and Minneapolis Washburn had 210 players...for a total of 400 kids playing in the city. What the author doesn't cover is that 70-80% of those kids were private or parochial school kids – they were never going to play for Minneapolis high schools.

Over the last decade, and contrary to the author's statements, we rolled up our sleeves and made sure mite recruiting was the backbone of our organization. Yard signs, local paper ads, and more started building back numbers.

When Washburn and Southwest co-oped into the Minneapolis Storm – this gave us the ability to massively regrow our program. Now we could become a neighborhood partner with the public schools and send flyers in home in backpacks of every private, parochial, and public school kid in the southern half of the city. The result? We have been the fastest growing program in the state over the last decade - growing from 400 kids to 750 kids.....and of those 750 kids, 60% of them are public school kids who will play high school hockey for Minneapolis in the future. We invest almost $15,000 in recruiting each year in order to get more and more Mites/8u's. We have almost as many mites as Edina.

While some co-ops may or may not work...singling out Minneapolis as one that doesn't work is fiction. Our parents LOVE the Minneapolis Storm (yes, we have the usual perennial gripers like everywhere else, but our end of the year surveys show that our parents are overwhelmingly happy with what we are doing for kids in Minneapolis). Not only do we provide hockey experiences and community volunteering opportunities for kids, but we provide cultural experiences for our kids with our sister city in Sweden. If you are gaged towards building elite hockey players...yes, the Edina model is exceptional (I am a product of it and it has always been exceptional) – if you are gaged towards making sure all kids leave hockey one day as good players, good sportsmen, good community folks, and having a bigger world view...I would put Minneapolis up against any association.

Is it about “wins” as the author states? Heck no. It is about providing kids with the same opportunities for success as Edina....a program he cites as 'doing it right'. Since 1980, Minneapolis Southwest and Minneapolis Washburn were considered games where teams could rack up their goals and assist numbers...I don't think too many teams can say that anymore – and that's a good thing for Minneapolis kids and for Minnesota Hockey. As a board, Minneapolis Hockey is happy if our teams are .500, I don't think that can be said about many of the other 'jumbo programs' here in the Twin Cities where being highly competitive is paramount to the hockey experience. I am sure that District 3 mega associations Wayzata and Osseo/Maple Grove are pleased that our teams are in the district. I would hope Minnesota Hockey is pleased that we have brought hockey back in a city where it was thought to be dead just 15 years ago.

I can say that our rinks are very happy also. We have put in new training centers in them, scoreboards, and more. Ten years ago we were wondering how to pay our ice bills...today, with a much larger program we can make investments into our facilities.

Many of the author's other points do not apply to our program. At the end of the day, I proffer that Minneapolis Youth Hockey is the poster child for how to assess your demographics, develop smart alliances in the community, and how to successfully co-op a program that not only feeds our high school team, but also Benilde, Breck, Blake, Holy Angels, Providence, and Minnehaha Academy....not to mention transfers to public high school programs like Edina, Bloomington, and Saint Louis Park.

Is Minneapolis Youth Hockey perfect? No...but we do work hard to provide a product that the public will buy and we believe that we are doing a good job of that. The hockey world has changed over the last 50 years...Minneapolis has changed...the author should take note.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:47 am

SWPrez, I agree with you. As I read the article I wasn't thinking of Minneapolis and I don't think your association should have been used as an example. I think you face a special set of challenges there and I think you guys are doing great. Someday maybe Minneapolis hockey will grow to the point where it can spawn off into multiple associations and continue to grow.

I also agree with the original author, co-oping can be a crutch that will eventually lead to the demise of hockey in the towns that use it. I think his overall message is correct and something we can all agree with, grow from the bottom.

SWPrez · Post by **SWPrez** » Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:55 am

SCBL, agreed. We were the wrong target to throw under a bus for an article as we are what a succesful co-op should produce (more hockey players, players playing at their appropriate skill level, teams that compete at all levels, happy kids, and happy parents).

I also agree that the author has some good advice for building mite/8U levels. In fact, he talks about Minnesota Hockey's recruiting and retention program - a program that has tapped into what Minneapolis discovered a decade ago and that we have marketed aggressively to grow and keep kids in the game.

However, many of the solutions that are brought forth need volunteers to fulfill them....something anyone involved with youth sports knows....a few do 99% of the work and are spread too thin already.

Night Train · Post by **Night Train** » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:26 am

The author has his primary point backwards. By co-oping more kids are skating at the appropriate level and the teams have more success. This benefits recruiting as community members hear the teams are doing well as opposed to hearing stories of shrinking and poor performing teams which ultimately can speed demise.

Minneapolis Hockey is a model for others. SWPrez and their volunteers should be commended for their success over the last several years. From an almost dying association with zero girls teams and just 2 teams at boys squirt and peewee and a single bantam B/C team to the size they are today. The author would have been wise to write a different story about co-oping and specifically the Minneapolis Hockey success story.

Done right, co-oping can be a huge success story of growth and kids experiencing success that they would not have had otherwise.

Congrats SWPrez and Minneapolis Hockey!

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:00 pm

It's real easy to say, "grow your numbers!"

Very hard to do it.

Hockey is a sport with enormous challenges because of cost. The article pretty much assumes that away. No, it's a problem.

Edina? That's hardly an example of anything. Tons of people seek out Edina for its youth hockey and quality of schools. Quite the opposite for most other communities.

Keep what you are doing in Minneapolis. Without your efforts there'd probably be a lot fewer kids playing.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:25 am

Yea, the article ignores way to many "facts" and using one of the more affluent suburbs in MN as the "ideal" and then trying to compare it to internal Minneapolis ignores so many factors it's comical. The same thing happens on a micro basis down here in Madison, WI. 25 years ago Madison (the actual city) and it's associations and high schools were hockey "powers" in our state... but what's happened is everyone with means has migrated out fo the city to the suburbs. The "consequences" have been that the Madison associations by and large have shrunk, the high schools are no longer powers and in fact two did have to co-op with eachother, BUT we now have rinks in 6 suburbs that did not exist 25 years ago and tons of kids playing in those associations. The fact is that while Madison proper has shrunk in it's hockey numbers overall in Dane County (where Madison and it's suburbs reside) the numbers are WAY, WAY up compared to 25 years ago when Madison was a powerhouse. The average income inside the actual cities tends to be way lower than in the suburbs, other demograhpic and socioeconomic factors are at play as well... the fact is that you guys in Minneapolis are doing an outstanding job and seem to bedoign it the right way. This article is so far off base it's actually kind of ridiculous...

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:34 am

To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.

CommunityBased · Post by **CommunityBased** » Thu May 01, 2014 7:53 pm

SWPrez - Best post I have read this year. Keep up the great work.

observer · Post by **observer** » Thu May 01, 2014 9:01 pm

SCBlueLiner,

we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING.

Very interesting post and you're onto something big. When I was a kid it was natural for almost all kids to be involved in athletics. Today big percentages are not. Parents that were involved are more likely to have their kids involved. A lot of parents just aren't involving their kids for any number of reasons. Busy schedules, both working, transportation, time commitments, cost, injuries and more. I think it's better to have kids involved than not but obviously a lot don't feel the same.

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Fri May 02, 2014 8:15 am

SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.

Biggest Health and National Security Crisis our country has ever faced. In addition to the fact that it will cost us 100's of Billions of Dollars to treat all of the lazy obese people medically, right now only 30% of Military Aged males could pass the Army's fitness test and be eligible for service. Those are the kids who are active and play sports. Guess who gets drafted and who stays home?

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Fri May 02, 2014 8:42 am

Froggy Richards wrote:
SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.
Biggest Health and National Security Crisis our country has ever faced. In addition to the fact that it will cost us 100's of Billions of Dollars to treat all of the lazy obese people medically, right now only 30% of Military Aged males could pass the Army's fitness test and be eligible for service. Those are the kids who are active and play sports. Guess who gets drafted and who stays home?

Alot of those kids who don't do anything are not obese, though some are. They are all weak & soft, if you know what I mean. Never been pushed to excel. Not only is it a health and security risk but how how are we going to compete on an economic level as a nation with a generation of weak individuals?

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Fri May 02, 2014 9:12 am

SCBlueLiner wrote:
Froggy Richards wrote:
SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.
Biggest Health and National Security Crisis our country has ever faced. In addition to the fact that it will cost us 100's of Billions of Dollars to treat all of the lazy obese people medically, right now only 30% of Military Aged males could pass the Army's fitness test and be eligible for service. Those are the kids who are active and play sports. Guess who gets drafted and who stays home?
Alot of those kids who don't do anything are not obese, though some are. They are all weak & soft, if you know what I mean. Never been pushed to excel. Not only is it a health and security risk but how how are we going to compete on an economic level as a nation with a generation of weak individuals?

You're correct, not all of them. According to the CDC 33% of all children and adolescents are overweight or obese. This is just lazy parenting and completely preventable. Very sad when you think about it. The easy answer to your question is that we're not going to compete. The future is not bright in this country. The only thing that will save us is if we remain the most desirable country to immigrate to. If we can get the best and brightest from other countries we will have a chance.

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Sun May 04, 2014 1:13 pm

Alot of those kids who don't do anything are not obese, though some are. They are all weak & soft, if you know what I mean. Never been pushed to excel. Not only is it a health and security risk but how how are we going to compete on an economic level as a nation with a generation of weak individuals?

Is this satire?

I was a fat kid. I had no desire to participate in sports. My dad pushed a bit, he was the HS quarterback, but in the end he could not get it done. As an adult I finally started to get some exercise and while I am not running marathons I am in better shape than many of my peers. It is fun to see that jock from school with a bigger tank than me...

My older son decided to go out for hockey as a squirt. His younger brother followed. I was glad to see them go out because they would get some exercise and also gain the "work ethic, team work, fair play" stuff that I had always heard about. That was 20 years ago, now my youngest has one year left in HS.

It was a blast. They got in great shape. I have to say I have been repeatedly disappointed by the lack of some of the other stuff... teamwork, fair play, etc. I have to say that those kids that demonstrate the best behavior seem to come from parents that insist on it. I can't say the team/sport had anything to do with it.

How often do you hear about the police busting up a party and hauling away all the band geeks?

I think it is pretty clear that the future belongs to those with brains. My son once joked that he was always cautious to be nice to the geeks because at some point they will rule the world.

Of course these things are not mutually exclusive. Kids can do both.

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Tue May 06, 2014 5:49 pm

SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.

I don't buy what you're selling, you come off as a typical hockey parent in that it's easy to spend other peoples money, because you can afford it means others can too. For some people $100 is a lot of money. In many sports the sign up fee isn't the biggest issue, it's the travel, it's the time, it's the level of committment required, not to mention extra fees that pop up. In most, if not all sports, kids aren't able to just walk to and from practices and games anymore. It's nice when people sit up and point fingers and say lazy parents and spend their money and time for them.

In too many instances from the time kids first start any sport they're told either do this (which is addition to the regular season) or else you're kid won't make it, at that point you either have to buy wholly into the program or quit, there is no middle ground anymore. At our high school the only, and I mean the only sports growing are Track and Cross Country, not so ironically the only 2 sports without a youth league or prep component and along with football the only ones that aren't running year around or nearly year around. Football is hurting but concussions are playing a major part in the decline state and nationwide, not cost.

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Wed May 07, 2014 8:23 am

goldy313 wrote:
SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.
I don't buy what you're selling, you come off as a typical hockey parent in that it's easy to spend other peoples money, because you can afford it means others can too. For some people $100 is a lot of money. In many sports the sign up fee isn't the biggest issue, it's the travel, it's the time, it's the level of committment required, not to mention extra fees that pop up. In most, if not all sports, kids aren't able to just walk to and from practices and games anymore. It's nice when people sit up and point fingers and say lazy parents and spend their money and time for them.

In too many instances from the time kids first start any sport they're told either do this (which is addition to the regular season) or else you're kid won't make it, at that point you either have to buy wholly into the program or quit, there is no middle ground anymore. At our high school the only, and I mean the only sports growing are Track and Cross Country, not so ironically the only 2 sports without a youth league or prep component and along with football the only ones that aren't running year around or nearly year around. Football is hurting but concussions are playing a major part in the decline state and nationwide, not cost.

His example was 11/12 baseball. The time, travel and level of commitment that you refer to in that age group and that sport is about as minimal as you can get. If you can't sacrifice the bare minimum in time for your kids, then you shouldn't have kids.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Wed May 07, 2014 9:15 am

Froggy Richards wrote:
goldy313 wrote:
SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.
I don't buy what you're selling, you come off as a typical hockey parent in that it's easy to spend other peoples money, because you can afford it means others can too. For some people $100 is a lot of money. In many sports the sign up fee isn't the biggest issue, it's the travel, it's the time, it's the level of committment required, not to mention extra fees that pop up. In most, if not all sports, kids aren't able to just walk to and from practices and games anymore. It's nice when people sit up and point fingers and say lazy parents and spend their money and time for them.

In too many instances from the time kids first start any sport they're told either do this (which is addition to the regular season) or else you're kid won't make it, at that point you either have to buy wholly into the program or quit, there is no middle ground anymore. At our high school the only, and I mean the only sports growing are Track and Cross Country, not so ironically the only 2 sports without a youth league or prep component and along with football the only ones that aren't running year around or nearly year around. Football is hurting but concussions are playing a major part in the decline state and nationwide, not cost.
His example was 11/12 baseball. The time, travel and level of commitment that you refer to in that age group and that sport is about as minimal as you can get. If you can't sacrifice the bare minimum in time for your kids, then you shouldn't have kids.

Thank you Froggy, you are correct. The cost, travel, and level of commitment to play local town baseball and football is absolutely minimal. In a town of 10,000 people kids absolutely do ride their bikes to practice, and all over the rest of town all summer. The barriers to participate are very little and we are still having loads of trouble filling the teams.

The level of inactivity in our youth today is an issue. I hold the parents responsible as they are the decision makers in the household.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Wed May 07, 2014 10:28 am

goldy313 wrote:
SCBlueLiner wrote:To piggy back on this thread a little, cost is a challenge when it comes to hockey recruiting but it isn't the major challenge, IMO. I live in a smaller town and we are having issues with getting boys to do ANYTHING. My son has about 50 boys in his class, there is a core group of about 15 boys who go out for sports; football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, soccer, (we travel to a nearby town for hockey yet I've got 3 boys now from our small town playing the sport).

This spring we have barely scraped enough kids together to make an 11/12 baseball team. Cost is not an issue here, I was warned that it might be over $50 to play. I laughed, these folks have no idea how much we spend on hockey. I don't see money as a barrier to playing baseball, or $100 fee to play football, and we grant scholarships and, frankly, don't collect from parents who stiff us just so we have enough kids for the team. Only 7 kids going out for 6th grade basketball. Soccer, I don't know the numbers but I know the kids who play soccer and it comes from those same 15 kids who play the other sports.

This is an issue. 70% of these boys sitting at home doing nothing and parents who just let these kids sit around. I guess it's too much hassle to have your kids involved in any activities, much less one that takes the commitment hockey does.
I don't buy what you're selling, you come off as a typical hockey parent in that it's easy to spend other peoples money, because you can afford it means others can too. For some people $100 is a lot of money. In many sports the sign up fee isn't the biggest issue, it's the travel, it's the time, it's the level of committment required, not to mention extra fees that pop up. In most, if not all sports, kids aren't able to just walk to and from practices and games anymore. It's nice when people sit up and point fingers and say lazy parents and spend their money and time for them.

In too many instances from the time kids first start any sport they're told either do this (which is addition to the regular season) or else you're kid won't make it, at that point you either have to buy wholly into the program or quit, there is no middle ground anymore. At our high school the only, and I mean the only sports growing are Track and Cross Country, not so ironically the only 2 sports without a youth league or prep component and along with football the only ones that aren't running year around or nearly year around. Football is hurting but concussions are playing a major part in the decline state and nationwide, not cost.

I think you missed the part about "small town".... In the suburbs or city I might agree with you but in actual small towns you are off base. Kids in small towns can ride their bikes to practice and do so all the time in our town by the time they are 10 or 11 and older. The time committment for football is practically nothing (3 hours a week for 10/11 year olds, less for younger kids) and the cost is not prohibitive for anyone in our town (literally is nothing for parents with low incomes). For baseball if you are just on the inhouse team the time and money involved again are as minimal as you will find anywhere (a bit more if you want to play on the travel/tournament team and make it). So I am not buying what you are selling in this instance, just sounds like excuses

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Wed May 07, 2014 12:31 pm

Cutting to the chase...

Not signing your kids up for organized sports is bad parenting?

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Wed May 07, 2014 12:42 pm

bestpopcorn wrote:Cutting to the chase...

Not signing your kids up for organized sports is bad parenting?

Not ever signing them up for any sport ever, not even once at any age just so they can try something, anything..... Yes, bad parenting IMHO

To be clear I feel the same way about music/arts and "outside" academics as well. Kids should have to atleast try "something" once. They should all have to try some form of athletics once, they should have to atleast try some kind of instrument atleast once, they should have to read books outside of school atleast once in a great while OR have them try a science or math or language camp once, and they should have to try some form of art (painting, drawing, sculpting, bulding etc...) atleast once. Allow them to then stay with the things they enjoy and have a passion for. Allow other areas to slide into the abyss where appropriate... the point being, how can anyone become a well rounded, productive member of society without atleast being exposed to all that's out there atleast once

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Wed May 07, 2014 9:01 pm

I don't know. You only have to go back a generation or two and none of these things existed for many.

The whole chasing around doing this or that is very recent. I am not convinced we are better off.

ASmoothSheet · Post by **ASmoothSheet** » Thu May 08, 2014 8:08 am

JJ Watt on Hockey "I still love it to this day. Really, I had to quit. It was financial. I have two younger brothers and we were all playing on a travel team, and it was extremely expensive. My family is a middle class family. When I grew up and learned how much it actually cost for us to play hockey"

http://mmqb.si.com/2013/09/04/jj-watt-unplugged/

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Thu May 08, 2014 9:10 am

ASmoothSheet wrote:JJ Watt on Hockey "I still love it to this day. Really, I had to quit. It was financial. I have two younger brothers and we were all playing on a travel team, and it was extremely expensive. My family is a middle class family. When I grew up and learned how much it actually cost for us to play hockey"

http://mmqb.si.com/2013/09/04/jj-watt-unplugged/

Nobody will deny that hockey is expensive, but this discussion is about staying active and how there are a lot of sports/activities out there that are very affordable and don't take a huge time commitment from the parents. On a side note, I don't think traveling Canada and Germany to play Hockey is very necessary. They could have taken the money spent on that and played a few more years.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Thu May 08, 2014 9:15 am

bestpopcorn wrote:I don't know. You only have to go back a generation or two and none of these things existed for many.

The whole chasing around doing this or that is very recent. I am not convinced we are better off.

The doing things "intensely" all the time, the overlapping of all the sports or extracirriculars, and all the year round trainings etc... etc... is rather new and I agree, I am not sure we are better off.... The making them try different things and making them a well rounded person is old, old school. I am in my 40's and when I was a kid I tried baseball, gymnastics, BMX dirt track, football, wrestling, hockey, softball, soccer, basketball and golf (I eventually played D1 soccer). I also played the Viola and the guitar. I went to science camp once, I went to sleep away camp several times, I was in cub scouts and then boy scouts til 13 years old, and we did crud loads of art projects. I was never "overscheduled", my parents were middle class and hardly perfectionists, and none of that stuff ever overlapped. My parents just believed in continually having me try something atleast once til I found the thing(s) I loved, and they believed in Arts, Athletics and Academics, and believed all three were EQUALLY important to a developing young person, so I could choose what I wanted to do but I had to always being doing "something", no way could I just sit around all day playing video games or watching TV and that was in the 1970's and 1980's.... So that concept is not remotely new.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu May 08, 2014 9:53 am

Froggy Richards wrote:
ASmoothSheet wrote:JJ Watt on Hockey "I still love it to this day. Really, I had to quit. It was financial. I have two younger brothers and we were all playing on a travel team, and it was extremely expensive. My family is a middle class family. When I grew up and learned how much it actually cost for us to play hockey"

http://mmqb.si.com/2013/09/04/jj-watt-unplugged/
Nobody will deny that hockey is expensive, but this discussion is about staying active and how there are a lot of sports/activities out there that are very affordable and don't take a huge time commitment from the parents. On a side note, I don't think traveling Canada and Germany to play Hockey is very necessary. They could have taken the money spent on that and played a few more years.

The discussion started with recruiting more Mites to play hockey. I turned it on its head by commenting how difficult it is getting to recruit boys to get involved in sports. I used our local town baseball and football teams as an example and the almost 70% of boys in my son's 6th grade class that are not involved in any athletics at all. Things got sidetracked from there.

My original point was about hockey recruiting, since this a hockey forum. We can discuss the cost of hockey, the year round nature of it, the constant training, etc. as being reasons why the game doesn't grow (even if there are rec leagues, equipment rentals and everything else available to keep the costs down). My observation was how can we get kids to try hockey when we can't even get them to try anything? It becomes a very tough obstacle to overcome at that point.

DrGaf · Post by **DrGaf** » Thu May 08, 2014 10:14 am

ASmoothSheet wrote:JJ Watt on Hockey "I still love it to this day. Really, I had to quit. It was financial. I have two younger brothers and we were all playing on a travel team, and it was extremely expensive. My family is a middle class family. When I grew up and learned how much it actually cost for us to play hockey"

http://mmqb.si.com/2013/09/04/jj-watt-unplugged/

I never knew he skated ... just picturing him coming after Lucic makes my heart smile.