Another discussion on Tier 1 AAA teams

[O-townClown]

Muck, you're asking the same question again. Do you not like the answer? What could it hurt? Read above.

Who said anything about adding one or two Tier I teams? If Tier I is allowed I'm guessing you'd have almost a dozen at most ages in the first year. Not sure Minnesota Hockey can sanction just one or two. If they did, we aren't helping all these disenchanted players, are we?

[54fighting]

Flatontheice-

Does my 12 year old know what is best for him, maybe, maybe not. But I can tell you that he knows what is more fun. And isn't that what youth hockey and youth sports in general are supposed to be all about.

You say that AAA/Tier 1 is not needed in the metro area. What about a very high end Bantam player who happens to live in an area where there is no A team option. He plays in the summer on a Blades type team but then is forced by MN Hockey to go back to an association that skates a B bantam team as it's top level. Most of the kids at tryouts will be putting on their skates for the first time since last winter. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but how do you get those two groups to mesh. Is it fun for the upper level kid to have to practice and run drills with kids who don't even listen to the coach? On the other hand is it fair to expect kids who are not as into hockey to put the same amount of effort into it?

An AAA/ Tier 1 option in the metro area may not be needed but it would sure be a nice option for kids that are in a situation like that.

O-Town-
You say that is is MN Hockey's job to look out for every kid. In the above scenerio what do you think MN Hockey should do? Just curious. Maybe there are answers to this issue without going to a Tier 1 type situation.

[flatontheice]

Flatontheice-

Does my 12 year old know what is best for him, maybe, maybe not. But I can tell you that he knows what is more fun. And isn't that what youth hockey and youth sports in general are supposed to be all about.

You say that AAA/Tier 1 is not needed in the metro area. What about a very high end Bantam player who happens to live in an area where there is no A team option. He plays in the summer on a Blades type team but then is forced by MN Hockey to go back to an association that skates a B bantam team as it's top level. Most of the kids at tryouts will be putting on their skates for the first time since last winter. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but how do you get those two groups to mesh. Is it fun for the upper level kid to have to practice and run drills with kids who don't even listen to the coach? On the other hand is it fair to expect kids who are not as into hockey to put the same amount of effort into it?

An AAA/ Tier 1 option in the metro area may not be needed but it would sure be a nice option for kids that are in a situation like that.

O-Town-
You say that is is MN Hockey's job to look out for every kid. In the above scenerio what do you think MN Hockey should do? Just curious. Maybe there are answers to this issue without going to a Tier 1 type situation.

Fair enough. But how are you sure you son would make a Tier one team in minnesota if it were open to everyone. I am also certain that becuase you are his father, the real separation in skill from he and his teammates in the winter is not that wide. Challenge him to win the state tournament at the B level then. If he is that good, he should be able to bring his team a long way. Pull up some stories on Nate Dey..it may help you to find some perspective.

[spin-o-rama]

Once again, m&g, what would it help? Your "let 'em eat cake" attitude toward those left over after Tier I does its skimming is very evident that you have no concern for the benefit of the whole.
And don't give us the "only 15 players per level" bit. You have stated before that you want many teams per level.
People, please remember that MH is to promote hockey for MN kids. Have you looked at Shattuck's roster? Less than 25% of the kids are from MN.

Can Tier I be done in MN and still keep the community tradition that so many people love alive and well? Maybe, maybe not. I am open to hearing some good solutions. The snake oil is getting old.

[54fighting]

Flat-
First off my son is no longer in the youth hockey ranks. He never skated for the Blades and no I am not sure he would have made a Tier 1 team had it been offered. My point was MN Hockey does not always offer an option for kids in those types of scenerios.

As for Nate Dey, refresh my memory, wasn't his story that he never made an A team in youth hockey. If that is the case, and I may be wrong, that is not the same thing as not being offered an A team at all. That just means he used the fact that he was not selected as motivation and made himself better. He had kids in his association to push him to get better. Not the same thing at all, in fact it may be an argument towards the other side. Without kids at your level or above, who is there to push you to be the best player that you can be?

[flatontheice]

Flat-
First off my son is no longer in the youth hockey ranks. He never skated for the Blades and no I am not sure he would have made a Tier 1 team had it been offered. My point was MN Hockey does not always offer an option for kids in those types of scenerios.

As for Nate Dey, refresh my memory, wasn't his story that he never made an A team in youth hockey. If that is the case, and I may be wrong, that is not the same thing as not being offered an A team at all. That just means he used the fact that he was not selected as motivation and made himself better. He had kids in his association to push him to get better. Not the same thing at all, in fact it may be an argument towards the other side. Without kids at your level or above, who is there to push you to be the best player that you can be?

True...but he made it to the next level playing b and c youth hockey.

[muckandgrind]

Flatontheice-

Does my 12 year old know what is best for him, maybe, maybe not. But I can tell you that he knows what is more fun. And isn't that what youth hockey and youth sports in general are supposed to be all about.

You say that AAA/Tier 1 is not needed in the metro area. What about a very high end Bantam player who happens to live in an area where there is no A team option. He plays in the summer on a Blades type team but then is forced by MN Hockey to go back to an association that skates a B bantam team as it's top level. Most of the kids at tryouts will be putting on their skates for the first time since last winter. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but how do you get those two groups to mesh. Is it fun for the upper level kid to have to practice and run drills with kids who don't even listen to the coach? On the other hand is it fair to expect kids who are not as into hockey to put the same amount of effort into it?

An AAA/ Tier 1 option in the metro area may not be needed but it would sure be a nice option for kids that are in a situation like that.

O-Town-
You say that is is MN Hockey's job to look out for every kid. In the above scenerio what do you think MN Hockey should do? Just curious. Maybe there are answers to this issue without going to a Tier 1 type situation.

Fair enough. But how are you sure you son would make a Tier one team in minnesota if it were open to everyone. I am also certain that becuase you are his father, the real separation in skill from he and his teammates in the winter is not that wide. Challenge him to win the state tournament at the B level then. If he is that good, he should be able to bring his team a long way. Pull up some stories on Nate Dey..it may help you to find some perspective.

In the smaller associations, the separation can indeed be very wide because the pool of players to choose from isn't very large. The larger associations (75+ players at each level) generally don't have that issue.

[O-townClown]

Flatontheice-
O-Town-
You say that is is MN Hockey's job to look out for every kid. In the above scenerio what do you think MN Hockey should do? Just curious. Maybe there are answers to this issue without going to a Tier 1 type situation.

5, I've posted my opinion quite a bit. Summary - I'm aware of the scenario you mentioned and have not argued that it doesn't happen. However, I think Minnesota Hockey needs to determine how many kids aren't being served in aggregate and estimate the negative consequences that will arise.

Let's say the hypothetical 'underserved star player' is in Detroit Lakes, Fergus Falls, or Crookston. If this potential Tier I program practices two nights a week in St. Cloud it doesn't help him. If it practices on weekends in Thief River Falls and is expecting to play games in Detroit, Ontario, and Chicago his parents might nix the idea over cost. How do we know these problems are going to be solved?

Finally, the whole "it's just a choice" and that "choice is the American way" is not accurate at all. We don't have the choice for community-based hockey where I live because there isn't as much participation. I wish it were like the Twin Cities where 'travel hockey' means most games are 15 minutes away and virtually all are within 30. Instead we have Mites regularly going 2-4 hours to find a game. If I had my choice it would be for my son to play in a hockey program like you'd find in Michigan, Minnesota, and Massachusetts.

[jancze5]

Fredflinstone

Did you NOT read my post or just NOT comprehending that in order for AAA teams to survive they need feeder systems. They need Tier II hockey in order to sustain. THere's a reason there's a pyramid in hockey.

You could put the entire Atlantic Youth Hockey League between Anoka and Brainerd. That's about 16 AAA organizations who are fed by each states Tier 2 league. In Detroit they have the Little Caesars hockey league, Tier 2, that feeds into the Detroit teams. Nobody in the country plays a schedule close to the league in MWEHL. They go to Toronto (shorter than driving to the cities from Moorhead), down to Chicago and play at home.

In a AAA system, if they didn't play AAA, they'd play at home with their association. Are you just that ignorant or what.

[FREDFLINTSTONE]

jnazie,

Not sure you read mine. I read your post. I just like the Minnesota community based hockey better. Who supports AAA teams other than parents? I watch our communities peewee A and B, Bantam A and B games when ever possible. I have no desire to watch two AAA teams play. I am starting to see your point that we should have AAA as an option, if no other purpose to get the disgruntled, rif raf out of the system.

[Rocket78]

jnazie,

Not sure you read mine. I read your post. I just like the Minnesota community based hockey better. Who supports AAA teams other than parents? I watch our communities peewee A and B, Bantam A and B games when ever possible. I have no desire to watch two AAA teams play. I am starting to see your point that we should have AAA as an option, if no other purpose to get the disgruntled, rif raf out of the system.

Yubba Dubba Doo!!!!

[O-townClown]

jnazie,

Not sure you read mine. I read your post. I just like the Minnesota community based hockey better. Who supports AAA teams other than parents? I watch our communities peewee A and B, Bantam A and B games when ever possible. I have no desire to watch two AAA teams play. I am starting to see your point that we should have AAA as an option, if no other purpose to get the disgruntled, rif raf out of the system.

Actually, Jancze is on record for saying that he doesn't think Minnesota should move to in-season Tier I.

He shares his experiences with Tier I hockey on the board and I think that's a good thing. My sense is that he feels it gets unfairly trashed by its opponents. Credit him for this...he at least sees both sides of the issue.

[5thgraders]

It has? Who is Minnesota Hockey behind? Ontario? By some measures it has always been 'behind' Ontario. By most of those same measures it has actually caught up.

Minnesota Hockey is not behind. Enlighten me.[/quote]

Green Bay which is in Wisconsin Beats the #1 ranked Pee Wee A Wayzata.

Green Bay is a mid level Tier 1 team. The proof is happening on the ice,
we do nothing but sit back and stay stagnant in terms of hockey development vs recreational hockey. Nobody has called for our
great recreational hockey system to be overhauled. It is a great
choice for many wonderfull kid's to have the chance to play the
game with friends and classmates.

Minnesota Hockey needs to step up and do what is right for this whole
Developmental vs Recreational topic. Instead the topic vanishes out of
mid air because they do not wish to hear it or accept it. Face it and fix it
after all it is for the kid's. Recreational hockey is not the best thing for
certain kid's hockey development. It is now time to put politics and egos
aside and do what is best for hockey in Minnesota. It is almost 2010 now.

What has Minnesota Hockey done to keep up with the changing times.

Jancze feelings might have changed if his boy had no tier 1 option to put
his boy on the path to Shattuck ask Jancze why his boy is not playing with
his friends at a Mn High School ? Because he is playing Tier 1

[hockeyboys]

5th grader:

your argument that because a mid level AAA team beat the #1 ranked minnesota team means that MN is not developing players is simply bogus. The only point you made was that a team voted #1 by a bunch of amature rankers got beat by some AAA team. There is no correlation between the outcome of this game and development of individual players.

Just because this team beat Wayzata, does not mean WI is developming more and better players than MN. It just means all their best players are on several AAA teams, whereas MN does not have all star teams during the winter season.

[5thgraders]

I never said that Mn isn't developing some pretty good players they are.
I was just trying to say that they could be developing them even better.
You really should get outside of your little fishbowl and see some of the
sharks that are swimming the waters.

[puckfan]

Wow the GB program has one team that beat Wayzata, that means abandon ship and change everything Minnesota.

[Chaos777]

Wow the GB program has one team that beat Wayzata, that means abandon ship and change everything Minnesota.

Minnesota needs a change. They need to change the rule that says no one can sanction AAA Winter Teams during the regular season. Minnesota is the only state that still has a rule against the sanctioning of winter season AAA teams.

This needs to change.

Tier 1 AAA hockey offers some of the best development and competition for youth hockey in the nation. The Wisconsin Fire, which is like someone earlier in the thread said, is almost completely comprised of Minnesotans. Just take a look at the competition and development that those players receive, even despite the bans Minnesota has on Tier 1 AAA hockey.

A lot of the best youth players in the nation develop and compete at Tier 1 AAA hockey. The LA Selects, Detroit Honeybaked, Team Illinois, as well as the more local Wisconsin Fire have some of the best youth players in the nation, however, unlike Minnesota, California, Illinois, and Michigan don't have statewide bans on teams like the Fire.

I think from a developmental standpoint, that a change needs to be made in Minnesota.

[5thgraders]

Nobody said anything about jumping off the ship.

We are just stating the obvious that you might want to put a motor on it.

We are still pushing through the water with our paddlewheel.

[O-townClown]

1. Green Bay is a mid level Tier 1 team.
2. The proof is happening on the ice,
3. Nobody has called for our great recreational hockey system to be overhauled.
4. Minnesota Hockey needs to step up and do what is right for this whole
Developmental vs Recreational topic.
5. Instead the topic vanishes out of mid air because they do not wish to hear it or accept it.
6. Face it and fix it after all it is for the kid's.
7. Recreational hockey is not the best thing for certain kid's hockey development.
8. It is now time to put politics and egos aside and do what is best for hockey in Minnesota. It is almost 2010 now.
9. What has Minnesota Hockey done to keep up with the changing times.

1. I sure don't think so. They are ranked #13 of 103 teams in their category. Isn't mid-level 41 through 62? They are a very good Tier I team, ranked ahead of Compuware, Honeybaked, and Little Caesar's.
2. Proof of what? Minnesota turns out far more college players than any other state. How are kids not being developed? I sure don't see proof.
3. Actually, many people have called for changes. I don't know if they qualify as an overhaul.
4. Yes they do! Oh wait, they actually have done it already. At least in the eyes of many. There are almost as many PW A teams in Minnesota as there are 1996 Tier I teams in the rest of the country. Doing what's right to develop kids pre-puberty can mean making sure as many are playing as possible.
5. Seems like the topic comes up a lot on this board.
6. Fix what? I haven't seen a problem identified. Unless, of course, you mean the fact that Green Bay sent a team that won a Minnesota tournament. If that's a problem, yes...changes need to be made to make sure the hardware stays home. Not sure what any of this has to do with kids. Seems like it is for adults.
7. True, which is why virtually everyone serious about the game plays organized hockey. There aren't many stories of guys like Craig Sarner, who made the silver medal 1972 Olympic team despite not playing on a team until Bantams.
8. The only ego I see right now is yours, and it is a bit bruised because the Green Bay Gamblers won a Minnesota tournament with a strong field. How many kids are playing on other teams in Green Bay, by the way? And how are their needs being met? Is the rest of the hockey rubbish or do they have a slew of AA teams? I know their participation has to be low compared to places of comparable size in Minnesota.
9. I can't say Minnesota Hockey gets the credit, but certainly the HS League has done a ton. Kids are allowed to play more games, longer games, and can participate out of season in Junior hockey or the fall Elite League. If kids in Minnesota were underserved it was post-puberty. Can't really say that now with all the choices.

Yet another story. My friend the NHL scout calls Sunday to tell me about a kid. 10th grade he doesn't make Varsity. 11th grade he does. By 12th grade he's gone because he's too good. Doesn't make a USHL roster, but he's playing Junior hockey closer to his home in New England. An absolute beast, he's certain to be drafted, possibly in the first three rounds. Let's get this straight...two years ago he can't make an ordinary HS team and now he's got scouts talking. I don't see how you have these stories if you fluff guys like this out at 12 years old.

What is the standard by which you want to measure development? Early season results from 12-year-olds, or players in college or the NHL draft? Do baseball guys measure development at the LLWS? The answer is no, as they really don't start watching kids in the U.S. until they are 16 or so. 12 is too young to know how good players will be. Even so, Minnesota has as many good 12 year olds too.

A quick look at the NFL quarterbacks last weekends show plenty that 'developed' despite not playing on the best college team. Cassel was a backup, Kurt Warner played at Northern Iowa...a school in the same class as T. Jackson's team I think. Where's Chris Leak, starter on the Gators National Championship team? Oh, he was rostered in Canada but didn't play.

Still want to see proof that kids aren't being developed as fast.

[5thgraders]

OtownClown

1 the 13th ranking is skewed due to loss of 96 fire they get mahl top seed
2 college and Nhl are two different animals
3 nobody said anything or cares about a complete overhaul
4 But they need to see that the kid's are playing at the right level
5 Then why was it pulled ?
6 It is all about being challenged and playing at a level that promotes that
7 so you lied when you said we do not have a problem
8 My ego want's to do what is best for Mn Hockey and Florida hockey also
9 This is the youth forum not the high school quit getting them intertwined

[muckandgrind]

1. Green Bay is a mid level Tier 1 team.
2. The proof is happening on the ice,
3. Nobody has called for our great recreational hockey system to be overhauled.
4. Minnesota Hockey needs to step up and do what is right for this whole
Developmental vs Recreational topic.
5. Instead the topic vanishes out of mid air because they do not wish to hear it or accept it.
6. Face it and fix it after all it is for the kid's.
7. Recreational hockey is not the best thing for certain kid's hockey development.
8. It is now time to put politics and egos aside and do what is best for hockey in Minnesota. It is almost 2010 now.
9. What has Minnesota Hockey done to keep up with the changing times.

1. I sure don't think so. They are ranked #13 of 103 teams in their category. Isn't mid-level 41 through 62? They are a very good Tier I team, ranked ahead of Compuware, Honeybaked, and Little Caesar's.
2. Proof of what? Minnesota turns out far more college players than any other state. How are kids not being developed? I sure don't see proof.
3. Actually, many people have called for changes. I don't know if they qualify as an overhaul.
4. Yes they do! Oh wait, they actually have done it already. At least in the eyes of many. There are almost as many PW A teams in Minnesota as there are 1996 Tier I teams in the rest of the country. Doing what's right to develop kids pre-puberty can mean making sure as many are playing as possible.
5. Seems like the topic comes up a lot on this board.
6. Fix what? I haven't seen a problem identified. Unless, of course, you mean the fact that Green Bay sent a team that won a Minnesota tournament. If that's a problem, yes...changes need to be made to make sure the hardware stays home. Not sure what any of this has to do with kids. Seems like it is for adults.
7. True, which is why virtually everyone serious about the game plays organized hockey. There aren't many stories of guys like Craig Sarner, who made the silver medal 1972 Olympic team despite not playing on a team until Bantams.
8. The only ego I see right now is yours, and it is a bit bruised because the Green Bay Gamblers won a Minnesota tournament with a strong field. How many kids are playing on other teams in Green Bay, by the way? And how are their needs being met? Is the rest of the hockey rubbish or do they have a slew of AA teams? I know their participation has to be low compared to places of comparable size in Minnesota.
9. I can't say Minnesota Hockey gets the credit, but certainly the HS League has done a ton. Kids are allowed to play more games, longer games, and can participate out of season in Junior hockey or the fall Elite League. If kids in Minnesota were underserved it was post-puberty. Can't really say that now with all the choices.

Yet another story. My friend the NHL scout calls Sunday to tell me about a kid. 10th grade he doesn't make Varsity. 11th grade he does. By 12th grade he's gone because he's too good. Doesn't make a USHL roster, but he's playing Junior hockey closer to his home in New England. An absolute beast, he's certain to be drafted, possibly in the first three rounds. Let's get this straight...two years ago he can't make an ordinary HS team and now he's got scouts talking. I don't see how you have these stories if you fluff guys like this out at 12 years old.

What is the standard by which you want to measure development? Early season results from 12-year-olds, or players in college or the NHL draft? Do baseball guys measure development at the LLWS? The answer is no, as they really don't start watching kids in the U.S. until they are 16 or so. 12 is too young to know how good players will be. Even so, Minnesota has as many good 12 year olds too.

A quick look at the NFL quarterbacks last weekends show plenty that 'developed' despite not playing on the best college team. Cassel was a backup, Kurt Warner played at Northern Iowa...a school in the same class as T. Jackson's team I think. Where's Chris Leak, starter on the Gators National Championship team? Oh, he was rostered in Canada but didn't play.

Still want to see proof that kids aren't being developed as fast.

While I wish you were correct on this point, you aren't. Junior scouts and college coaches start watching kids and monitoring their progress at the ripe old ages of 13 and 14 (Bantam age) regularly these days. In fact, just recently, I was approached by a certain USHL scout who wanted to collect information about a couple of 1st year Bantams on our team (13 year old kids).

Another example...Dave Hakstol (UND Coach) was kind enought to give a tour of their facility to a 1995 AAA team playing in a tournament in Grand Forks last summer. One of the parents asked the question: "At what age do you start looking at players you may want to recruit"...His answer (paraphrase): "13-14 years old, I'm ashamed to say". He followed that up with the reason being that most other coaches are doing it, so he is forced to as well. He was also careful to point out that he (or his staff) don't necessarily talk to the kids or their families at these young ages, but they are definitely scouting them and following their progress.

It's just a fact, for every "elite" 13 year old player, there is a file with their name on it sitting on scouts and coaches desks.

[hockeyboys]

5th graders - i think you and your motor are a bit overboard on this topic. MN does an unbelievable job with development. The problem may be the definition of development. Should the system be designed to develop the greatest number of NHL draft picks? to develop HS players? To develop national champion Peewee players? To get the greatest number of players invited to the NTDP? Is development simply the ability to keep the most number of players giving a yearly registration fee to USA Hockey? What is it? And this is not a criticism of anyone. We just talk about development on this bored all the time - but not always comparing apples to apples. I'm not sure of what the definition of development should be. In MN, without AAA winter hockey, and therefor greatly reduced costs to players, comparing most of these areas, MN compares extremely favorable to the Nation. So what exactly do you believe is not being developed? What is the gain from AAA hockey?

I really don't think AAA hockey is the answer. I have met a lot of people who were in the AAA system in other parts of the country, moved here, and could not believe the superiority of hockey in MN from top to bottom, and without the travel and expense. Remember - AAA programs often cost as much as $15,000 - and that does not even include all the travel expenses. So, if we think AAA is going to develop more players - that is not the case - it may in fact be a lot more like check book hockey than anyone anticipates.

Someone needs to find a solution to players in associations that don't have the appropriate level of team they can play for. And not have to go through the pain of trying to get waivers. There has to be another answer.

I'll give my opinion - and i have to admit - i don't have solutions - elliot can let us know what MN hockey is doing to address these issues:

The best way to develop all players is to have them practice and compete with similar athletes. That goes for A to C players. C players are going to develop faster by competing with other C players - and perhaps a step up. But, the do not develop as fast by putting a C player on an A team. Hurts both the A players and the C players. In places like Edina, Lakeville, WBL, etc. this is not an issue. There are enough players in the pool so everyone is getting challenged with like skilled players. The problem is what about those smaller associations who don't field teams at all levels? What are those players supposed to do? I know of some who have gone to the fire, some who have waived to other associations. And others who have been denied waivers. This problem absolutely hurts the development of all the players involved.

[O-townClown]

While I wish you were correct on this point, you aren't. Junior scouts and college coaches start watching kids and monitoring their progress at the ripe old ages of 13 and 14 (Bantam age) regularly these days. In fact, just recently, I was approached by a certain USHL scout who wanted to collect information about a couple of 1st year Bantams on our team (13 year old kids).

Another example...Dave Hakstol (UND Coach) was kind enought to give a tour of their facility to a 1995 AAA team playing in a tournament in Grand Forks last summer. One of the parents asked the question: "At what age do you start looking at players you may want to recruit"...His answer (paraphrase): "13-14 years old, I'm ashamed to say". He followed that up with the reason being that most other coaches are doing it, so he is forced to as well. He was also careful to point out that he (or his staff) don't necessarily talk to the kids or their families at these young ages, but they are definitely scouting them and following their progress.

It's just a fact, for every "elite" 13 year old player, there is a file with their name on it sitting on scouts and coaches desks.

Muck, good points. I think pre- and post-puberty are completely different animals. While some 12-year-old monsters have gone through an early puberty, it is easier to look at them compared to others at 15. I saw the two Gulf Coast Flames teams last year at the AA level. One won nationals and the other took their lumps. A few of the skilled players on the lesser team were good enough to play on the better one, but it appeared the coach selected the biggest ones exclusively. Pee Wees is where it starts. By the time you are through Bantams most kids have had the growth spurt associated with puberty.

Your 13/14 year old kids may have folders, but remember that while over half the team from the TPH Thunder (a Tier I team based in three Southeastern states playing almost all their games in Ontario, Detroit, and Chicago) were on a USHL "Watch List" because they were visible, a comparable Minnesotan toiling in obscurity has at least an equal chance to make a USHL roster.

Hakstol coaches a high-end D1 program. His team will face, and often lose to, teams like Mankato or Omaha that don't land the kids that were garnering attention so young. I don't dispute that a folder is kept, but merely want to point out that a lot changes in six years and success at 14 isn't an absolute predictor of success at 20.

Junior scouts definitely look at Bantams, because they need them just a few years after. That said, this Green Bay tournament victory is at the Pee Wee level.

Good points, Muck. Doesn't affect my opinions on development of youth hockey players. It is hard to go unnoticed. If kids like Rocket Kokas and Itan Chavira have an internet buzz and earn chances to advance anyone can if they play well enough.

[O-townClown]

5th graders - i think you and your motor are a bit overboard on this topic. MN does an unbelievable job with development. The problem may be the definition of development. Should the system be designed to develop the greatest number of NHL draft picks? to develop HS players? To develop national champion Peewee players? To get the greatest number of players invited to the NTDP? Is development simply the ability to keep the most number of players giving a yearly registration fee to USA Hockey? What is it? And this is not a criticism of anyone. We just talk about development on this bored all the time - but not always comparing apples to apples. I'm not sure of what the definition of development should be.

Boys, good post. 5th doesn't like the way it is. When asked for specifics it is a moving target. Our best PW teams didn't beat Green Bay so players are not being developed. Shown mountains of evidence that colleges have more Minnesotans than players from any other state he'll imply the state is holding kids back from NHL glory.

On a thread about development I mentioned that Minnesota does a great job post-puberty and he says don't mix HS hockey and youth. Okay, but I'm spinning now because I can't tell if he's talking about failure to develop champion PW teams or NHL players...or something in between.

5th doesn't like the way it is and doesn't care that his stance for change lacks proof that the whole will be better off as a result. (Conversely, I can't prove that it would be worse.)

He resurrected a three-month old thread and somehow thought a Gambler win at a Minnesota tournament would be the tide-turner. Oh yeah, gotta offer Tier I now.

[Marty McSorely]

Gent's lets get it right.

AAA for any kid under 16 is senseless and way to costly for most of us in Minnesota. Until a kid learns about grades, girls and drugs (high school) their career path is just a figment of imagination.

For kids 16 and older I think AAA is an option but to spendy for those it needs to serve. In the smaller schools where talent is short it would be nice for a kid to opt to AAA but the logistic (mentioned in earlier posts) make this prohibitive.