I've heard a rumor that the NDP will be run in the same manner as the boys next year (ie: Sections). Does anyone have any insight on this? Will this be run by the HS coaches? What was the reasoning behind this change?
It seems that by going to sections, that the stronger sections won't be able to send all of the girls that deserve to be there, and the weaker section will be able to send girls that don't belong.
Comments?
National Development Program
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
It will be done like the boys. By MSHSL sections with TBreds & SSM kids (I assume) assigned to certain sections. An A section would be paired with an AA to make 8 regions.
A TON of kids will go to the initial phase this way. It's still not an "Open" tryout as some may want, but if you think about it, nearly half the kids in the state playing HS V apparently will get an invite to the initial phase. 40 kids for 3 age classifications and 8 regions = 40*3*8=960 kids in the initial phase. Assume we have 128 teams in the state, that's about 8 kids per HS team.
Of course, I don't expect the Class A teams to send nearly as many (if any?) as the AA's. And, yes, there will be some sections even A & AA that are going to be no where near what others are as far as talent. Where this will get tricky is when you have such depth in some sections and not in others. The real winners here I believe are the kids that are in the weaker sections that never were looked at before that now have an outstanding shot in the initial phase that many better kids in better sections won't have. But, this is the same argument that we had about the 4 region setup too - that the last kid picked in one region may not be anywhere near as good as the last picked in another, etc. Of course, each region/section will always have this issue. But, we need to remember that the ultimate goal is to NOT miss anyone that belongs at NY and my guess is that this won't eliminate any of those candidates either initial phase wise anyway.
A TON of kids will go to the initial phase this way. It's still not an "Open" tryout as some may want, but if you think about it, nearly half the kids in the state playing HS V apparently will get an invite to the initial phase. 40 kids for 3 age classifications and 8 regions = 40*3*8=960 kids in the initial phase. Assume we have 128 teams in the state, that's about 8 kids per HS team.
Of course, I don't expect the Class A teams to send nearly as many (if any?) as the AA's. And, yes, there will be some sections even A & AA that are going to be no where near what others are as far as talent. Where this will get tricky is when you have such depth in some sections and not in others. The real winners here I believe are the kids that are in the weaker sections that never were looked at before that now have an outstanding shot in the initial phase that many better kids in better sections won't have. But, this is the same argument that we had about the 4 region setup too - that the last kid picked in one region may not be anywhere near as good as the last picked in another, etc. Of course, each region/section will always have this issue. But, we need to remember that the ultimate goal is to NOT miss anyone that belongs at NY and my guess is that this won't eliminate any of those candidates either initial phase wise anyway.
Hux wrote:
Does this mean it's the end of CODP as we know it? Or is that not part of the same 'process'?I've heard that the whole development process is about to undergo a sweeping "redesign" in the next six to eight months. I don't know the particulars, only that USA Hockey is looking at something along the lines of the Satellite Training Program found in Massachusetts.
I wouldn't think so, as CODP is separate from USA Hockey as part of the USOC. However, in discussions I had yesterday morning with Ron DeGregorio about getting one going in New England, he said that they were looking at getting that type of training program going across the board for all districts for both boys and girls so there would be some uniformity while opening things up to more players. Given that he was just back from Russia and was kind enough to call me first thing in the morning I didn't want to press him for details and take up any more of his time.Bensonmum wrote:Hux wrote:Does this mean it's the end of CODP as we know it? Or is that not part of the same 'process'?I've heard that the whole development process is about to undergo a sweeping "redesign" in the next six to eight months. I don't know the particulars, only that USA Hockey is looking at something along the lines of the Satellite Training Program found in Massachusetts.
He will be meeting with us within the next week, so I will see if I can get a more detailed explanation of where they are thinking about going in that regard. I will also try and get some answers on the insurance thing that has popped up in other threads.
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
MN has these STP programs too - really took off in late 90's & early 00's I believe with a big push in the G HS Coaches' Assn from what I recall?Hux wrote:I've heard that the whole development process is about to undergo a sweeping "redesign" in the next six to eight months. I don't know the particulars, only that USA Hockey is looking at something along the lines of the Satellite Training Program found in Massachusetts.
I had a long chat with Jack Blatherwick last Friday night when he was in town for the Level 4 clinic, and he said that his original intent for the CODP was that it would utilize a number of Satellites so that players would never be more than a 30-45 minute drive from a training center and program. It was his, and Herb Brooks,' vision that the central location would train coaches in dryland and S&C so that they could go out and do the same on their own. (And to a great extent OS, which BTW Jack had not heard of, is a product of that).ghshockeyfan wrote:MN has these STP programs too - really took off in late 90's & early 00's I believe with a big push in the G HS Coaches' Assn from what I recall?Hux wrote:I've heard that the whole development process is about to undergo a sweeping "redesign" in the next six to eight months. I don't know the particulars, only that USA Hockey is looking at something along the lines of the Satellite Training Program found in Massachusetts.
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
As I recall, there was a recipe or routine as well as basic needs (jerseys, etc.) supplied for a nominal fee to HS team coaches, others, that wanted to start a STP.Hux wrote:I had a long chat with Jack Blatherwick last Friday night when he was in town for the Level 4 clinic, and he said that his original intent for the CODP was that it would utilize a number of Satellites so that players would never be more than a 30-45 minute drive from a training center and program. It was his, and Herb Brooks,' vision that the central location would train coaches in dryland and S&C so that they could go out and do the same on their own. (And to a great extent OS, which BTW Jack had not heard of, is a product of that).ghshockeyfan wrote:MN has these STP programs too - really took off in late 90's & early 00's I believe with a big push in the G HS Coaches' Assn from what I recall?Hux wrote:I've heard that the whole development process is about to undergo a sweeping "redesign" in the next six to eight months. I don't know the particulars, only that USA Hockey is looking at something along the lines of the Satellite Training Program found in Massachusetts.
I'm stunned that Jack had not heard of OS. I still believe that the regional STP-like concern/vision is not paramount as far as the development of OS, but instead OS is simply an alternative offering that some believe is better than CODP. Of course others feel the opposite way too.
True, I think the girls realized they could make a very good living from it and took it from there. But I got the impression the idea that they were doing his type of training as a separate entity was part of his vision, though he was sorry to see that it was in direct competition with CODP. He had nothing but good things to say about Ms. Brodt and Ms. Curtin, and he hopes more people will follow that path and make CODP or OS training available in other areas.ghshockeyfan wrote:
I'm stunned that Jack had not heard of OS. I still believe that the regional STP-like concern/vision is not paramount as far as the development of OS, but instead OS is simply an alternative offering that some believe is better than CODP. Of course others feel the opposite way too.
-
finance_gal
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:58 pm
We went to the OS and the codp tryouts. Even thought they both appeared to be pretty good programs we chose OS because the girls putting togeather the program were more personable than the lady at CDOP who even though she seemed like a great hockey person, she was a little rough around the edges. We felt that our daughter would respond better to the Girls of OS. We haven't had any regrets as I'm sure the people who chose CDOP haven't had either. They are both great programs. They offer alot for the kids. But like everything else in life they will only get out of it what they put into it and there seemed to be quite a few kids that were very skilled but wouldn't push themselves any harder then they have to......
We also did the CODP and OS tryouts last year. If it helps anyone I will list the reasons we chose OS over CODP. First of all, my daughter and I loved the passion and dedication of Winny and Ronda and the rest of the Gopher women that help out. Second, even though my daughter is very committed to hockey training the OS program was more flexible. My daughter was scheduled for an academic camp that would have conflicted with CODP and we were told that it would be a problem. The people at OS allowed us to make up the missed clinic dates by participating in some of the other locations. And finally, I talked to many people that have participated in both programs. The people who only did CODP were passionate about the benefits of the program. The people who only participated in OS were just as passionate; however, it was interesting that the people that participated in both programs told me unequivocably that their daughters enjoyed OS much more and seemed to get just as much skill development out of the OS program.finance_gal wrote:We went to the OS and the codp tryouts. Even thought they both appeared to be pretty good programs we chose OS because the girls putting togeather the program were more personable than the lady at CDOP who even though she seemed like a great hockey person, she was a little rough around the edges. We felt that our daughter would respond better to the Girls of OS. We haven't had any regrets as I'm sure the people who chose CDOP haven't had either. They are both great programs. They offer alot for the kids. But like everything else in life they will only get out of it what they put into it and there seemed to be quite a few kids that were very skilled but wouldn't push themselves any harder then they have to......
I am endorsing OS but please don't think I'm trashing CODP. I'm sure CODP is a great program and many parents have had a lot of nice things to say about it but for my daughter's particular situation OS was a better fit.
This thread about the training options for some reason made me think about John Gagliardi's philosophy about coaching and off-season training.
A couple of his pearls. "No pain, no gain, you're insane if you believe that."
His practices involve 90 minutes of 11 on 11 touch football; the way most of the players have played since they were little kids tossing the football around in their backyard.
If the players mess up the play; he doesn't yell and scream at the players. The players are doing what they enjoy about football; they are running plays.
In the offseason, his advice is to just enjoy life; if you can be active in baseball or softball, that's great. Anything you enjoy, just do it. His players do not have a regimented weight-lifting and running program.
The emphasis on his practices is playing the game.
Hockey and football are a little like apples and oranges. However, I am not totally convinced that OS or CODP is of more benefit to a player than a couple sessions of pick-up hockey per week during the off season. A lot cheaper and I have never seen a player leave the ice unhappy after 60-90 minutes of pick-up hockey.
I realize this is somewhat heretical thinking in this age of specialized training. Just my two cents.
A couple of his pearls. "No pain, no gain, you're insane if you believe that."
His practices involve 90 minutes of 11 on 11 touch football; the way most of the players have played since they were little kids tossing the football around in their backyard.
If the players mess up the play; he doesn't yell and scream at the players. The players are doing what they enjoy about football; they are running plays.
In the offseason, his advice is to just enjoy life; if you can be active in baseball or softball, that's great. Anything you enjoy, just do it. His players do not have a regimented weight-lifting and running program.
The emphasis on his practices is playing the game.
Hockey and football are a little like apples and oranges. However, I am not totally convinced that OS or CODP is of more benefit to a player than a couple sessions of pick-up hockey per week during the off season. A lot cheaper and I have never seen a player leave the ice unhappy after 60-90 minutes of pick-up hockey.
I realize this is somewhat heretical thinking in this age of specialized training. Just my two cents.
The thing to remember is that every kid is different and they want and need different things, My daughter plays some pickup games in the summer and because of a bad experiance in hockey last year she most likely won't play hockey this winter, but she likes skating and enjoys playing hockey in pickup games. My neighbor girl has the same love for hockey but enjoys going to camps and clinics all summer long, she loves that and loves meeting players from all over the state. Then theres a girl who played with my daughter last year, she has a net in her driveway and fires 500 shots a day into the net...thats what she loves to do.....everyone has there own preferences and thats what makes us all individuals..CODP, OS, and NDP, there probly all great for some kids but people must remember that in girls hockey there is no one path to the promised land no matter what claims are made.
Well said. I agree 100%. There are some parents that push their kids too much and burnout occurs. There are some kids that want as much training that they can get and will push themselves to the limit. It depends on the individual kid (not the parent) on what is right for her.hockeygod wrote:The thing to remember is that every kid is different and they want and need different things, My daughter plays some pickup games in the summer and because of a bad experiance in hockey last year she most likely won't play hockey this winter, but she likes skating and enjoys playing hockey in pickup games. My neighbor girl has the same love for hockey but enjoys going to camps and clinics all summer long, she loves that and loves meeting players from all over the state. Then theres a girl who played with my daughter last year, she has a net in her driveway and fires 500 shots a day into the net...thats what she loves to do.....everyone has there own preferences and thats what makes us all individuals..CODP, OS, and NDP, there probly all great for some kids but people must remember that in girls hockey there is no one path to the promised land no matter what claims are made.
-
girlshockey
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 9:23 pm
GHS wrote:
A TON of kids will go to the initial phase this way. It's still not an "Open" tryout as some may want, but if you think about it, nearly half the kids in the state playing HS V apparently will get an invite to the initial phase.
It is a little scary when you state that nearly half the kids in the state will get an invite. Do you truly think that half the girls playing HS Varsity are Elite or Olympic calibre? The objective of the tryout is to find the best players to send to Lake Placid, not give everyone a tryout. Not to mention that when there were open tryouts years ago, players attended thinking the tryout would help them out and be seen, when all it did was bring down the remaining players on the ice playing with them on a line because they were not as talented. Since the girls will now be required to attend three different weekend tryouts as they pare down the numbers to the "51" in the final tryout, I personally think this is just another way to add more money to pay the coaches and evaluators, which is what happens on the boys side of the program. The girls program has run a pretty tight ship on expenses and the coaches and evaluators have been paid with a jacket or minimal dollars, but that will all change and the cost to the players will skyrocket.
Anyone know who the evaluators will be for the new format?
A TON of kids will go to the initial phase this way. It's still not an "Open" tryout as some may want, but if you think about it, nearly half the kids in the state playing HS V apparently will get an invite to the initial phase.
It is a little scary when you state that nearly half the kids in the state will get an invite. Do you truly think that half the girls playing HS Varsity are Elite or Olympic calibre? The objective of the tryout is to find the best players to send to Lake Placid, not give everyone a tryout. Not to mention that when there were open tryouts years ago, players attended thinking the tryout would help them out and be seen, when all it did was bring down the remaining players on the ice playing with them on a line because they were not as talented. Since the girls will now be required to attend three different weekend tryouts as they pare down the numbers to the "51" in the final tryout, I personally think this is just another way to add more money to pay the coaches and evaluators, which is what happens on the boys side of the program. The girls program has run a pretty tight ship on expenses and the coaches and evaluators have been paid with a jacket or minimal dollars, but that will all change and the cost to the players will skyrocket.
Anyone know who the evaluators will be for the new format?
-
girlshockey
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 9:23 pm
GHS wrote:
A TON of kids will go to the initial phase this way. It's still not an "Open" tryout as some may want, but if you think about it, nearly half the kids in the state playing HS V apparently will get an invite to the initial phase.
It is a little scary when you state that nearly half the kids in the state will get an invite. Do you truly think that half the girls playing HS Varsity are Elite or Olympic calibre? The objective of the tryout is to find the best players to send to Lake Placid, not give everyone a tryout. Not to mention that when there were open tryouts years ago, players attended thinking the tryout would help them out and be seen, when all it did was bring down the remaining players on the ice playing with them on a line because they were not as talented. Since the girls will now be required to attend three different weekend tryouts as they pare down the numbers to the "51" in the final tryout, I personally think this is just another way to add more money to pay the coaches and evaluators, which is what happens on the boys side of the program. The girls program has run a pretty tight ship on expenses and the coaches and evaluators have been paid with a jacket or minimal dollars, but that will all change and the cost to the players will skyrocket.
Anyone know who the evaluators will be for the new format?
A TON of kids will go to the initial phase this way. It's still not an "Open" tryout as some may want, but if you think about it, nearly half the kids in the state playing HS V apparently will get an invite to the initial phase.
It is a little scary when you state that nearly half the kids in the state will get an invite. Do you truly think that half the girls playing HS Varsity are Elite or Olympic calibre? The objective of the tryout is to find the best players to send to Lake Placid, not give everyone a tryout. Not to mention that when there were open tryouts years ago, players attended thinking the tryout would help them out and be seen, when all it did was bring down the remaining players on the ice playing with them on a line because they were not as talented. Since the girls will now be required to attend three different weekend tryouts as they pare down the numbers to the "51" in the final tryout, I personally think this is just another way to add more money to pay the coaches and evaluators, which is what happens on the boys side of the program. The girls program has run a pretty tight ship on expenses and the coaches and evaluators have been paid with a jacket or minimal dollars, but that will all change and the cost to the players will skyrocket.
Anyone know who the evaluators will be for the new format?
ghshockeyfan,
You are so right on the money. Everyone who complained this year will be sorry next year as it is hard to look good when the girls on your line can't catch or make a pass. At the top level you're only as good as your line mates and even the greatest player will look bad if she has no help. I thought other than 1or2 girls who I felt deserved to be there at phase 3 it was a very good tryout. Phase 1 all but 4 or 5 belonged. Phase 2 was great hockey.
As for girls being overlooked for phase 1. I believe that the girls who didn't get selected it was because of issues with their coach. You have to be a team player at the next level.
I also had someone tell me they felt Winny shouldn't have been a judge because of her OS ties. What a crock of crap if you ever were to talk to her you'd know this. She knows what to look for and would never pick a girl if she wasn't worthy. How do I know this? She didn't choose my daughter for one of her elite camps. She said she wasn't ready and she was right. I didn't agree but of course I'm her father and was wrong. What did it teach my daughter? To find the positive, Work even harder trying to reach her goals. Not blame someone else and of course life's tough sometimes.
Next year unless it's college coaches, Out of state graders or ghshockeyfan doing the grading it's going to be much much worse than this year.
You are so right on the money. Everyone who complained this year will be sorry next year as it is hard to look good when the girls on your line can't catch or make a pass. At the top level you're only as good as your line mates and even the greatest player will look bad if she has no help. I thought other than 1or2 girls who I felt deserved to be there at phase 3 it was a very good tryout. Phase 1 all but 4 or 5 belonged. Phase 2 was great hockey.
As for girls being overlooked for phase 1. I believe that the girls who didn't get selected it was because of issues with their coach. You have to be a team player at the next level.
I also had someone tell me they felt Winny shouldn't have been a judge because of her OS ties. What a crock of crap if you ever were to talk to her you'd know this. She knows what to look for and would never pick a girl if she wasn't worthy. How do I know this? She didn't choose my daughter for one of her elite camps. She said she wasn't ready and she was right. I didn't agree but of course I'm her father and was wrong. What did it teach my daughter? To find the positive, Work even harder trying to reach her goals. Not blame someone else and of course life's tough sometimes.
Next year unless it's college coaches, Out of state graders or ghshockeyfan doing the grading it's going to be much much worse than this year.
I agree 100% Melvin44. I've had the same experience with Winny and my daughter. I'm amazed at Winny and Ronda's ability to select girls for the appropriate level of their camps. I for one couldn't look at so many girls and be as accurate as these two women in assessing talent and I don't think there are many people out there that could do as good of a job.Melvin44 wrote: I also had someone tell me they felt Winny shouldn't have been a judge because of her OS ties. What a crock of crap if you ever were to talk to her you'd know this. She knows what to look for and would never pick a girl if she wasn't worthy. How do I know this? She didn't choose my daughter for one of her elite camps. She said she wasn't ready and she was right. I didn't agree but of course I'm her father and was wrong. What did it teach my daughter? To find the positive, Work even harder trying to reach her goals. Not blame someone else and of course life's tough sometimes.
-
Thunderbird77
- Posts: 134
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:01 pm
The comments about OS and Winny and Rhonda made by OnTheEdge and Melvin44 are right on. We have had similar experiences. As HUX pointed out, Jack Blatherwick may not have known the program name "OS Hockey", but he knows about Winny and Rhonda and sings their praises. He should. He worked with both of them directly when they were athletes in CODP and he was running the program. In this way, Jack has helped shape the OS training philosophies. The final testament I would give to OS and Winny and Rhonda is that I appreciate their goal to support players at every level of play in order to help every girl reach her maximum potential. It is not just about the elite players. Winny and Rhonda place girls where they belong and work with them to reach the next level, wherever that next level will be. That being said, there are programs that will appeal to the needs of the elite player, such as the upcoming OS prospects camp. We are very fortunate in Minnesota to have many alternatives for hockey training.
Lake Placid Summer 2007
USA Hockey is working on a new / revised website which is suffering some initial (hopefully) glitches here and there and is a little tricky to navigate / find information you may be looking for.
Some info that may be of interest to some here:
Rosters for the 2007 89/90 camp in Lake Placid
Team Green
G Rachel Weber 1
D Katie Daniels 2
D Pamela Zgoda 3
D Kailey Nash 4
D Shannon Reilly 5
D Lindsay Newman 6
D Lauren Brozowski 7
F Jamie Goldsmith 8
F Justine Fisher 9
F Maggie Giamo 10
F Kate Buesser 11
F Lauren Smith 12
F Melissa Feste 14
F Olivia Rork 15
F Allison Szlosek 16
F Melissa Kravich 17
G Lindsey Minton 30
Team Royal
G Kiera Kingston 1
D Krista Parran 2
D Kelly Seeler 3
D Kristen Jakubowski 4
D Olivia Jakiel 5
D Margaret Mickelson 6
D Ashley Wheeler 7
F Monique Weber 8
F Julie Hersey 9
F Aleca Hughes 10
F Adelle Calahan 11
F Alisa Harrison 12
F Hilary Knight 14
F Brigitte Cellino 15
F Danielle DiCesare 16
F Kaylee Keys 17
G Rebecca Ruegsegger 30
Team White
G Carly Dominick-Sobol 1
D Andrea Buono 2
D Katie Faucher 3
D Chelsea Young 4
D Anne Schleper 5
D Amber Yung 6
D Raylen Dziengelewski 7
F Bray Ketchum 8
F Abby Williams 9
F Sarah Erickson 10
F Jen Schoullis 11
F Kylee St. Arnauld 12
F Brittany Mills 14
F Carla Pentimone 15
F Alyssa Wohlfeiler 16
F MacKenzie Lee 17
G Caitlin Whitlock 30
Team Gold
G Nicole Parks 1
D Jamie Tuttle 2
D Teal Bishop 3
D Kelly Wild 4
D Kelly Salis 5
D Julianne Parker 6
D Meredith Bitterman 7
F Kelly Griffin 8
F Aly Zappen 9
F Alecia Anderson 10
F Margaret Chute 11
F Vanessa Worz 12
F Chelsea Rapin 14
F Casey Pickett 15
F Dawson Bancroft-Short 16
F Alyssa Zupon 17
G Lauren Arsenault 30
Team Purple
G Paige Keranen 1
D Ashley Holmes 2
D Natalia Ledesma 3
D Jessica Martino 4
D Jaclyn Daggit 5
D Diana Deer 6
D Kathryn Walker 7
F Geena Prough 8
F Kelly Horan 9
F Hayley Williams 10
F Mary Restuccia 11
F Brooke Ammerman 12
F Maggie Melberg 14
F Brittany Skudder 15
F Emily Vitale 16
F Maria Stoa 17
G Nicole Muske 30
Team Teal
G Teraysa White 1
D Brittany Lyons 2
D Alesha Wilt 3
D Anne Dronen 4
D Kelly Dimmen 5
D Ramey Weaver 6
D Brittany Carlson 7
F Alley Bero 8
F Danielle Welch 9
F Amanda Trunzo 10
F Kimberly Theut 11
F Heather Landry 12
F Kim Kowalczyk 14
F Erin Barley-Maloney 15
F Emily West 16
F Hayley Moore 17
G Paige Thunder 30
Team Orange
G Caroline Hu 1
D Stephanie Clegg 2
D Diana Karouzos 3
D Josephine Pucci 4
D Kirstin Peterson 5
D Kelly Lewis 6
D Bailey Lane 7
F Kelly Cooke 8
F Jenna Dancewicz 9
F Jocelyne Lamoureux 10
F Cierra Romaldo 11
F Lauren Hoffman 12
F Celia Colman-McGaw 14
F Kelsey Ketcher 15
F Nikki Ludwigson 16
F Ashley Cottrell 17
G Barbara Bilko 30
Team Red
G Alyssa Grogan 1
D Kristin Regan 2
D Amanda Castignetti 3
D Jacquie Pierri 4
D Jenna Hobeika 5
D Ann-Marie Elvin 6
D Ashlan Lambert 7
F Laura May 8
F Kelly Foley 9
F Corey Stearns 10
F Brookley Rogers 11
F Monique Lamoureux 12
F Kristi Kehoe 14
F Kelley Steadman 15
F Lauren Greer 16
F Kate Bacon 17
G Ashley Drop 30
Some info that may be of interest to some here:
Rosters for the 2007 89/90 camp in Lake Placid
Team Green
G Rachel Weber 1
D Katie Daniels 2
D Pamela Zgoda 3
D Kailey Nash 4
D Shannon Reilly 5
D Lindsay Newman 6
D Lauren Brozowski 7
F Jamie Goldsmith 8
F Justine Fisher 9
F Maggie Giamo 10
F Kate Buesser 11
F Lauren Smith 12
F Melissa Feste 14
F Olivia Rork 15
F Allison Szlosek 16
F Melissa Kravich 17
G Lindsey Minton 30
Team Royal
G Kiera Kingston 1
D Krista Parran 2
D Kelly Seeler 3
D Kristen Jakubowski 4
D Olivia Jakiel 5
D Margaret Mickelson 6
D Ashley Wheeler 7
F Monique Weber 8
F Julie Hersey 9
F Aleca Hughes 10
F Adelle Calahan 11
F Alisa Harrison 12
F Hilary Knight 14
F Brigitte Cellino 15
F Danielle DiCesare 16
F Kaylee Keys 17
G Rebecca Ruegsegger 30
Team White
G Carly Dominick-Sobol 1
D Andrea Buono 2
D Katie Faucher 3
D Chelsea Young 4
D Anne Schleper 5
D Amber Yung 6
D Raylen Dziengelewski 7
F Bray Ketchum 8
F Abby Williams 9
F Sarah Erickson 10
F Jen Schoullis 11
F Kylee St. Arnauld 12
F Brittany Mills 14
F Carla Pentimone 15
F Alyssa Wohlfeiler 16
F MacKenzie Lee 17
G Caitlin Whitlock 30
Team Gold
G Nicole Parks 1
D Jamie Tuttle 2
D Teal Bishop 3
D Kelly Wild 4
D Kelly Salis 5
D Julianne Parker 6
D Meredith Bitterman 7
F Kelly Griffin 8
F Aly Zappen 9
F Alecia Anderson 10
F Margaret Chute 11
F Vanessa Worz 12
F Chelsea Rapin 14
F Casey Pickett 15
F Dawson Bancroft-Short 16
F Alyssa Zupon 17
G Lauren Arsenault 30
Team Purple
G Paige Keranen 1
D Ashley Holmes 2
D Natalia Ledesma 3
D Jessica Martino 4
D Jaclyn Daggit 5
D Diana Deer 6
D Kathryn Walker 7
F Geena Prough 8
F Kelly Horan 9
F Hayley Williams 10
F Mary Restuccia 11
F Brooke Ammerman 12
F Maggie Melberg 14
F Brittany Skudder 15
F Emily Vitale 16
F Maria Stoa 17
G Nicole Muske 30
Team Teal
G Teraysa White 1
D Brittany Lyons 2
D Alesha Wilt 3
D Anne Dronen 4
D Kelly Dimmen 5
D Ramey Weaver 6
D Brittany Carlson 7
F Alley Bero 8
F Danielle Welch 9
F Amanda Trunzo 10
F Kimberly Theut 11
F Heather Landry 12
F Kim Kowalczyk 14
F Erin Barley-Maloney 15
F Emily West 16
F Hayley Moore 17
G Paige Thunder 30
Team Orange
G Caroline Hu 1
D Stephanie Clegg 2
D Diana Karouzos 3
D Josephine Pucci 4
D Kirstin Peterson 5
D Kelly Lewis 6
D Bailey Lane 7
F Kelly Cooke 8
F Jenna Dancewicz 9
F Jocelyne Lamoureux 10
F Cierra Romaldo 11
F Lauren Hoffman 12
F Celia Colman-McGaw 14
F Kelsey Ketcher 15
F Nikki Ludwigson 16
F Ashley Cottrell 17
G Barbara Bilko 30
Team Red
G Alyssa Grogan 1
D Kristin Regan 2
D Amanda Castignetti 3
D Jacquie Pierri 4
D Jenna Hobeika 5
D Ann-Marie Elvin 6
D Ashlan Lambert 7
F Laura May 8
F Kelly Foley 9
F Corey Stearns 10
F Brookley Rogers 11
F Monique Lamoureux 12
F Kristi Kehoe 14
F Kelley Steadman 15
F Lauren Greer 16
F Kate Bacon 17
G Ashley Drop 30
-
HockeyFan55
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:47 pm
A couple more comments...
Regarding Winny evaluating: She's one of the fairest people I've run across. She risked the vindictive parent that won't send their kids back because she didn't send them off to Phase 3.
Regarding the new format for next year: I can't believe that this is for anything other than money and the fact that those running it can strut around. People may not agree with the way it was run in the past, but I'll be suprised if if the new crew will be as efficient as the old.
Regarding the new format for next year: I can't believe that this is for anything other than money and the fact that those running it can strut around. People may not agree with the way it was run in the past, but I'll be suprised if if the new crew will be as efficient as the old.
-
girlshockey
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 9:23 pm
The evaluation staff was predominately D3 coaches in the past or individuals involved with USA Hockey/Minnesota Hockey coaching programs. In addition, USA Hockey has asked that past or present National Team players participate where available. D1 coaches cannot evaluate because of NCAA compliance issues. I hope that whoever is in charge of the NDP process next year will continue to use the D3 coaching staff for their evaluators. The high school coaches should not make the final choices because of their conflict of interest. The cost of the NDP tryout process will be more expensive for the girls next year in order to pay the stipends of the individuals involved in the process. They wanted it to mirror the boys side of the program which has charged the higher fees and paid their staff for years. If you have questions on how this process if going to be held, contact Mike MacMillan or Barry Ford from Minnesota Hockey. Their contact information is listed on the Minnesota Hockey web site at www.minnesotahockey.org.
As I understand it there are no compliance issues for coaches when involved in NGB development events. Mass Hockey used BC's assistant (now Head Coach) Katie King, as well as BU assistants Kerstin Matthews and Erika Silva as part of the "Festival" evaluations to decide the NDC participants from the district.
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
My understanding is that D1 coaches can't be involved in any evaluation process like/during NDP timeframe used in MN?Hux wrote:As I understand it there are no compliance issues for coaches when involved in NGB development events. Mass Hockey used BC's assistant (now Head Coach) Katie King, as well as BU assistants Kerstin Matthews and Erika Silva as part of the "Festival" evaluations to decide the NDC participants from the district.
I think this may be the piece of the D1 NCAA guidelines that says they can coach but not help evaluate?
PG 121/122 - http://www.ncaa.org/library/membership/ ... manual.pdf
13.11.3.3 State, Regional, National or International Training Programs. Participation by an
institution’s athletics department staff member in recognized state, regional, national or international
training programs or competition organized and administered by the applicable governing
body or athletics authority shall not be considered tryouts. A member institution’s coaching
staff member may not participate only in noncoaching activities (e.g., consultant, on-site coordinator,
participant selection), except as provided in Bylaws 13.11.3.3.1, 13.11.3.3.2 and
13.11.3.3.3. (Revised: 1/9/96, 11/10/97)
13.11.3.3.1 United States Junior National Teams — Basketball. A coaching staff member
who is a member of an official committee of USA Basketball may be involved in noncoaching
activities (e.g., participant selection, on-site evaluation) involving prospective basketball student-
athletes participating on United States Junior National team(s). (Adopted: 4/26/01)
13.11.3.3.2 Coach/Prospective Student-Athlete Competition. It is permissible for an institution’s
coach to participate with or against prospective student-athletes in recognized state,
regional, national or international training programs or competition, provided the competition
is regularly scheduled under the authority of an outside sports organization and both the coach
and the prospective student-athlete are eligible to enter the competition.
13.11.3.3.3 Administration of “State Games.” A member institution serving as the site of
“state games” is permitted to involve its staff members in the administration of the event but
may not be involved in the selection or assignment of participants and coaches participating in
the event. (Adopted: 1/10/91)