Tier 1

MoreCowBell · Post by **MoreCowBell** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:21 am

Any truth to the rumor that Lakeville Hockey Associations Board voted to disallow players that played Tier 1 (Fire) from rejoining the association.

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:38 am

I highly doubt they could do that and keep their non-profit status.

nhl'er · Post by **nhl'er** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:54 am

True, but they voted that when/if they return the highest level that they can play at is the 'B" level for the 1st season they return.

hockey talkie · Post by **hockey talkie** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:57 am

That is a nasty thing to do. It'll be funny when their B teams are better than their A teams.

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:10 pm

Not nasty........ stupid..and I'll say right now this is a grown ups problem, or should I say not so grown up

Why would they feel that they should punish a kid for playing a game, because it wasn't on their team?
Boy you big tough board members are really teaching these kids a lesson.
Get over yourselves and let kids do what they want, if they were good enough to play on the fire, then I would think if it's truly about hockey and not egos he'd be a welcome addition.....good gawd!! shame on you people!

jancze5 · Post by **jancze5** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:29 pm

This action is a total outright JOKE. Period. If you're in the Lakeville association and have that much hatred for a stupid hockey program you're a complete idiot. It's a flippin hockey program, that's it. The board is totally abusing their power because of what happened with the 93 group last year.

TRYOUTS: what is supposed to happen in assocation hockey is every member of that community has the guarantee to play on a hockey team. Tryouts are held and the best group of players are selected to the A team with a few exceptions for political picks. B teams, C teams, blah blah blah. Everyone pays their money. The kids play and grow up together.

Does anyone know the name of the person who decided to recommend this? I would personally like to take any former FIRE players from Lakeville to his house and have him explain to these 9,10,11,12,13,14 year olds kids why he hates the FIRE so much and why they should be treated this way...

mnhcp · Post by **mnhcp** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:39 pm

So is it specifically Tier I or was it broadened to include other provisions such as Mn Made Choice Leagues?

nhl'er · Post by **nhl'er** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:43 pm

As I understand it, they didn't call out any particular program, so it would likely apply to MM as well.

spin-o-rama · Post by **spin-o-rama** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:53 pm

CNT, well said!

What an abuse of monopolistic power. This is their conclusion instead of improving their program and making it so a kid won't want to leave? I can just hear it at that board meeting. "Fear of the power of this board will keep the association members from leaving." Way to make the kids feel welcome.

Boy am I glad that I don't live in Lakeville.

spin-o-rama · Post by **spin-o-rama** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:32 pm

Apparently, Minnetonka discussed the same thing at their most recent board meeting. http://www.tonkahockey.org/agenda.html Anyone know of their decision?

This is interesting because D6 came out last year and said that a kid couldn't be prohibited from playing MM choice and D6 mites. How can they be discussing a more prohibitive policy?

pucks are funny · Post by **pucks are funny** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:52 pm

I heard it does not take effect until the 2009-2010 season, furthermore mite age players are not included. There has been discussion at district levels on how associations can implement this. Does anyone know if district 8 or mn hockey will stop this?

nahc · Post by **nahc** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:42 pm

I heard the Lakeville vote was 7-6 with 1 member obstaining.

Interesting that a topic of this importance wasn't even listed on the aganda for the evening. Pretty typical for the Lakeville board. Why would they want parent association involvement........they obviously know exactly what all 900 member families of the organization think....BTW, the board does not allow open discussion from "guests". Guests get a whole 5 minutes prior to any board discussion for topics that are important to that particular association member. Friends tell me there are very few non-board members at the meetings since there is 0 chance for input and nobody has any idea what will be discussed......

My sources also tell me there are some very good people on the board but they don't carry the power......Just like Elliott on the MN board......

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:48 pm

nahc wrote:I heard the Lakeville vote was 7-6 with 1 member obstaining.

Interesting that a topic of this importance wasn't even listed on the aganda for the evening. Pretty typical for the Lakeville board. Why would they want parent association involvement........they obviously know exactly what all 900 member families of the organization think....BTW, the board does not allow open discussion from "guests". Guests get a whole 5 minutes prior to any board discussion for topics that are important to that particular association member. Friends tell me there are very few non-board members at the meetings since there is 0 chance for input and nobody has any idea what will be discussed......

My sources also tell me there are some very good people on the board but they don't carry the power......Just like Elliott on the MN board......

This is exactly what will encourage Tier 1 to develop here in MN.
The Assoc. attitude of give us your $ and we'll tell you what's best for you, and you'll like it or else mentality has got to be reeled in.

DuckDuckQuackQuack · Post by **DuckDuckQuackQuack** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:08 pm

Can't Never Tried wrote:
nahc wrote:I heard the Lakeville vote was 7-6 with 1 member obstaining.

Interesting that a topic of this importance wasn't even listed on the aganda for the evening. Pretty typical for the Lakeville board. Why would they want parent association involvement........they obviously know exactly what all 900 member families of the organization think....BTW, the board does not allow open discussion from "guests". Guests get a whole 5 minutes prior to any board discussion for topics that are important to that particular association member. Friends tell me there are very few non-board members at the meetings since there is 0 chance for input and nobody has any idea what will be discussed......

My sources also tell me there are some very good people on the board but they don't carry the power......Just like Elliott on the MN board......
This is exactly what will encourage Tier 1 to develop here in MN.
The Assoc. attitude of give us your $ and we'll tell you what's best for you, and you'll like it or else mentality has got to be reeled in.

CNT- I like what I'm reading. I'm not sure where its coming from but I like it.

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:17 pm

DuckDuckQuackQuack wrote:
Can't Never Tried wrote:
nahc wrote:I heard the Lakeville vote was 7-6 with 1 member obstaining.

Interesting that a topic of this importance wasn't even listed on the aganda for the evening. Pretty typical for the Lakeville board. Why would they want parent association involvement........they obviously know exactly what all 900 member families of the organization think....BTW, the board does not allow open discussion from "guests". Guests get a whole 5 minutes prior to any board discussion for topics that are important to that particular association member. Friends tell me there are very few non-board members at the meetings since there is 0 chance for input and nobody has any idea what will be discussed......

My sources also tell me there are some very good people on the board but they don't carry the power......Just like Elliott on the MN board......
This is exactly what will encourage Tier 1 to develop here in MN.
The Assoc. attitude of give us your $ and we'll tell you what's best for you, and you'll like it or else mentality has got to be reeled in.

CNT- I like what I'm reading. I'm not sure where its coming from but I like it.

It's coming from the fact that we hear about to many associations that are not using the board to direct hockey operations, but are dictating who does what and when, and far to many personal issues.
Each year should be a clean slate when tryouts start, if you register you have all the same rights that year as anyone else who pays the fee's regardless of what they did before, as long as they are within the natural boundaries of that association they should be treated as equal.

hockey_is_a_choice · Post by **hockey_is_a_choice** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:28 pm

If the Lakeville board did vote to discriminate against kids who skated elsewhere and the Association actually enforces the Board's decision, I encourage anyone adversely affected by the decision to review Lakeville's by-laws. Chances are the Board's decision runs afoul of a by-law or two, including the nonprofit mission statement of the Lakeville association. If the by-laws have been violated, you can file a formal complaint with the Minnesota Attorney General's Office. The complaint form can be found on line at: http://www.ag.state.mn.us/ElectronicFor ... ntForm.pdf

On the upside, votes like Lakeville's will speed up the inevitable--year-round AAA hockey in Minnesota. Thank you Lakeville!!

buttend · Post by **buttend** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:52 pm

jancze5 wrote: Does anyone know the name of the person who decided to recommend this? I would personally like to take any former FIRE players from Lakeville to his house and have him explain to these 9,10,11,12,13,14 year olds kids why he hates the FIRE so much and why they should be treated this way...

The North SQ A team is losing 4 kids to the 98 Fire. This heavy loss was too much for the new SQ A coach to bear.

Who lobbied the board for support and presented this proposal?

2008/09 Sq A Coach North who also happens to be
Mite Director ( Board Position) who also happens to
Run a Summer AAA Program called the MN Edge who also happens to be
an Owner of Lakeville HDC ( Hockey Development Center)

http://www.lakevillehockey.org/cgi-bin/ ... y=1&id=555
http://www.lakevillehockey.org/Board.html
http://www.hdc-totalhockey.com/about_us/hdc_owners

Section Three of the Lakeville Hockey handbook, Directors Responsibility

"Serve the entire LHA membership fairly and without prejudice for your own children or friends."

Lakeville Hockey better raise its registration fees to boost their legal budget. Someone will be challenging this discrimination policy.

Nice work by the 7 Board Members who voted "Yes" on this proposal! Boy you sure showed those 9,10,11 and 12 year old kids and parents whose really in charge didnt you! Don't mess with the "knee jerk seven"!

keepyourheadup · Post by **keepyourheadup** » Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:01 pm

Without question a ridiculously stupid decision. Many in the Lakeville hockey circles will tell you this was aimed at one family in particular. Past roster decisions set up one group to be really stung by a player moving to the fire last year. Put all their eggs in one basket so to speak. Hopefully the board can get past what happened last year and see the folly in such an idiotic rule. I'm a big supporter of the current system and have also felt the frustration of watching a nice group of kids/team be dismantled. I can't see where penalizing an 8 year old because your cheesed off at his parents makes much sense.

DuckDuckQuackQuack · Post by **DuckDuckQuackQuack** » Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:31 pm

Hockey is great!

misspacman · Post by **misspacman** » Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:32 pm

Is Minnesota Made your answer to all your problems Quacker? If your son is having problems in soccer, do you send him to Minnesota Made? If you are having problems with work, do you run to Minnesota Made? One final thing, Quacker you are passing judgment by assuming that every child who leaves their association WILL be a better player when they return. That's arrogant. Does anyone have any reasons stated by the board members as to why the penalty?

Jimbo99 · Post by **Jimbo99** » Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:02 pm

No one should lose any sleep over who leaves or who comes back. There are 100 different reasons involved in those decisions. To each their own. If they leave after tryouts? That's a different story. Penalties should apply.

tomASS · Post by **tomASS** » Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:43 pm

Lakeville parents send your kids to Minnesota made to play in the Choice Mite league.

misspacman- Why does it concern you where other kids play hockey? Are you really concerned where other parents kids play hockey? Why?

two quotes, same person

DuckDuckQuackQuack · Post by **DuckDuckQuackQuack** » Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:48 am

Brilliant. Just brilliant. Bravo............

misspacman · Post by **misspacman** » Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:40 am

Quote:
Lakeville parents send your kids to Minnesota made to play in the Choice Mite league.

Quote:
misspacman- Why does it concern you where other kids play hockey? Are you really concerned where other parents kids play hockey? Why?

two quotes, same person

_________________
looks, swim & quacks like a duck it must be a duck

I think that Minnesota hockey has only said that the players must be accepted back. They left it up to the association as to how "they will be placed."

trademerightfreakinnow · Sat Jul 19, 2008 10:16 am

I have long been an observer of this blog, after hearing about the latest bone headed move by the Lakeville board I felt compelled to add my two cents.

LHA has an opportunity to become a strong hockey community based on participants, wealth, 4 rinks and a really commited group of volunteers. My concern is that this will never happen because the board continues to rule with an iron fist and you have to be "one of boys" to be heard.

This latest vote on AAA was supposedly meant to instill greater pride in our association??? I did not realize you can force pride!? What happened to "build it and they will come"?

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Tier 1

Tier 1

Joke

Tier 1

Re: Tier 1

Re: Tier 1

Re: Tier 1

Re: Joke

tier 1