Cross Ice for under 8

[HockeyDad41]

I recently read that it has been recommended that under 8 kids play their games cross ice instead of full ice. It sounds like many associations will be adopting this model.

Any comments?

[muckandgrind]

I completely agree with this. No reason for mites to be playing full ice games on a regular basis....maybe one or two games using the full sheet, but thats about it.

They should be playing more 3 on 3 cross ice games. Less space requires more creativity.

[IcePick]

From what I understand, last winter Edina purchased ice for thier mite program from Hat Trick Hockey (two new 3x3 size rinks in SLP). I thought this was a great idea, but I later heard there were many complaints from the parents because they wanted the larger ice. Does anybody know if this is true? Or is there more to the story? Also, a recent thread on this board expressed discontent with the Blades Mite program for using small ice at the same facility and "not disclosing it". Why is there resistance to small ice for younger skaters? Soccer, lacrosse, football and other sports all use shorter fields for younger kids. I can't imagine, for instance, six year olds playing on a 100 yard football field. What am I missing?

[DMom]

From what I understand, last winter Edina purchased ice for thier mite program from Hat Trick Hockey (two new 3x3 size rinks in SLP). I thought this was a great idea, but I later heard there were many complaints from the parents because they wanted the larger ice. Does anybody know if this is true? Or is there more to the story? Also, a recent thread on this board expressed discontent with the Blades Mite program for using small ice at the same facility and "not disclosing it". Why is there resistance to small ice for younger skaters? Soccer, lacrosse, football and other sports all use shorter fields for younger kids. I can't imagine, for instance, six year olds playing on a 100 yard football field. What am I missing?

Great point. I can just imagine the same 6-8 year olds trying to play baseball with 90 foot bases or playing baseball with 10 foot hoops!!

[HockeyDad41]

Also gives those kids who are just a little bit slow or behind a chance to touch the puck. I think that when the coaches balance the players and go with a 3 on 3 or a 4 on 4 format it is a great deal. Nothing frustrates the kids more than never touching the puck and even if they don't score a goal if they are touching it you can make it a very positive experience. Who ever came up with the idea of cross ice needs to be patted on the back and told great job.

I think it's a pretty good idea. As well as the weaker kids touching the puck more, the stronger kids will develop skills needed in small spaces.

How do you deal with the parent that somehow thinks little Johnny is taking a step backwards since last year he skated "full ice"?

[muckandgrind]

Also gives those kids who are just a little bit slow or behind a chance to touch the puck. I think that when the coaches balance the players and go with a 3 on 3 or a 4 on 4 format it is a great deal. Nothing frustrates the kids more than never touching the puck and even if they don't score a goal if they are touching it you can make it a very positive experience. Who ever came up with the idea of cross ice needs to be patted on the back and told great job.

I think it's a pretty good idea. As well as the weaker kids touching the puck more, the stronger kids will develop skills needed in small spaces.

How do you deal with the parent that somehow thinks little Johnny is taking a step backwards since last year he skated "full ice"?

You tell that parent to get a clue. Because if they truly believe their kid is taking a step backward, they don't know what they're talking about.

[goaliewithfoggedglasses]

From what I understand, last winter Edina purchased ice for thier mite program from Hat Trick Hockey (two new 3x3 size rinks in SLP). I thought this was a great idea, but I later heard there were many complaints from the parents because they wanted the larger ice. Does anybody know if this is true? Or is there more to the story? Also, a recent thread on this board expressed discontent with the Blades Mite program for using small ice at the same facility and "not disclosing it". Why is there resistance to small ice for younger skaters? Soccer, lacrosse, football and other sports all use shorter fields for younger kids. I can't imagine, for instance, six year olds playing on a 100 yard football field. What am I missing?

Edina went almost exclusively to Hat Trick last year, and yes many parents were not pleased. The problem was not the small sheets, it's that they scheduled the small sheets as if they were full sheets. Almost every practice was shared, and when you get 30 kids and 4 - 6 coaches on a small sheet there is not a lot of room left to skate. Games are fine, but 2 cross ice games on a full sheet is much more efficient than one game on a small sheet. You get much more actual ice time on the full sheet, and it's not like it costs twice as much, maybe a third more.

[JSR]

From what I understand, last winter Edina purchased ice for thier mite program from Hat Trick Hockey (two new 3x3 size rinks in SLP). I thought this was a great idea, but I later heard there were many complaints from the parents because they wanted the larger ice. Does anybody know if this is true? Or is there more to the story? Also, a recent thread on this board expressed discontent with the Blades Mite program for using small ice at the same facility and "not disclosing it". Why is there resistance to small ice for younger skaters? Soccer, lacrosse, football and other sports all use shorter fields for younger kids. I can't imagine, for instance, six year olds playing on a 100 yard football field. What am I missing?

Edina went almost exclusively to Hat Trick last year, and yes many parents were not pleased. The problem was not the small sheets, it's that they scheduled the small sheets as if they were full sheets. Almost every practice was shared, and when you get 30 kids and 4 - 6 coaches on a small sheet there is not a lot of room left to skate. Games are fine, but 2 cross ice games on a full sheet is much more efficient than one game on a small sheet. You get much more actual ice time on the full sheet, and it's not like it costs twice as much, maybe a third more.

This makes sense. I wouldn't like that either.

I love 3on3, but to me the better game is the check up style or tournament style 3on3 instead of cross ice. I like that game better because the kids cannot "take a break" like they can in corss ice, in tourney style they have to break the puck out, control it, check up at the blue line and bring it back in and they have to do it fast. It still has all the great qualities of being able to use smaller areas, you can have two games goign at once, the goalies get a great work out and see tons of shots. I have been pushing the idea that this style of 3on3 is what should eb palyed by mites and maybe even first year squirts almost exclusively. Ideally you can have 26 skaters and 2 goalies going hard for an hour having a ball and your developing everyone not jsut the top 3 or 4 guys on the team and everyone gets to play alot more and alot harder than they do in full ice. AND, frankly, you can do this in house without needing to travel to other associations to get good games which also helps with alot of thigns from ice time management, to overall cost to playing time etc... etc....

[muckandgrind]

From what I understand, last winter Edina purchased ice for thier mite program from Hat Trick Hockey (two new 3x3 size rinks in SLP). I thought this was a great idea, but I later heard there were many complaints from the parents because they wanted the larger ice. Does anybody know if this is true? Or is there more to the story? Also, a recent thread on this board expressed discontent with the Blades Mite program for using small ice at the same facility and "not disclosing it". Why is there resistance to small ice for younger skaters? Soccer, lacrosse, football and other sports all use shorter fields for younger kids. I can't imagine, for instance, six year olds playing on a 100 yard football field. What am I missing?

Edina went almost exclusively to Hat Trick last year, and yes many parents were not pleased. The problem was not the small sheets, it's that they scheduled the small sheets as if they were full sheets. Almost every practice was shared, and when you get 30 kids and 4 - 6 coaches on a small sheet there is not a lot of room left to skate. Games are fine, but 2 cross ice games on a full sheet is much more efficient than one game on a small sheet. You get much more actual ice time on the full sheet, and it's not like it costs twice as much, maybe a third more.

This makes sense. I wouldn't like that either.

I love 3on3, but to me the better game is the check up style or tournament style 3on3 instead of cross ice. I like that game better because the kids cannot "take a break" like they can in corss ice, in tourney style they have to break the puck out, control it, check up at the blue line and bring it back in and they have to do it fast. It still has all the great qualities of being able to use smaller areas, you can have two games goign at once, the goalies get a great work out and see tons of shots. I have been pushing the idea that this style of 3on3 is what should eb palyed by mites and maybe even first year squirts almost exclusively. Ideally you can have 26 skaters and 2 goalies going hard for an hour having a ball and your developing everyone not jsut the top 3 or 4 guys on the team and everyone gets to play alot more and alot harder than they do in full ice. AND, frankly, you can do this in house without needing to travel to other associations to get good games which also helps with alot of thigns from ice time management, to overall cost to playing time etc... etc....

I would agree with you if we're talking about Squirts and above....But 8 and under shouldn't really be focusing on breaking the puck out just yet, IMO. They need to be focusing on individual skills (skating and stickhandling), because if you can't do those well, you won't be able to break the puck out.

[HockeyDad41]

Also gives those kids who are just a little bit slow or behind a chance to touch the puck. I think that when the coaches balance the players and go with a 3 on 3 or a 4 on 4 format it is a great deal. Nothing frustrates the kids more than never touching the puck and even if they don't score a goal if they are touching it you can make it a very positive experience. Who ever came up with the idea of cross ice needs to be patted on the back and told great job.

I think it's a pretty good idea. As well as the weaker kids touching the puck more, the stronger kids will develop skills needed in small spaces.

How do you deal with the parent that somehow thinks little Johnny is taking a step backwards since last year he skated "full ice"?

You tell that parent to get a clue. Because if they truly believe their kid is taking a step backward, they don't know what they're talking about.

I would agree that some parents may need some convincing, but how do we get them to "see the light" as opposed to "bend them to our will"?

[JSR]

Edina went almost exclusively to Hat Trick last year, and yes many parents were not pleased. The problem was not the small sheets, it's that they scheduled the small sheets as if they were full sheets. Almost every practice was shared, and when you get 30 kids and 4 - 6 coaches on a small sheet there is not a lot of room left to skate. Games are fine, but 2 cross ice games on a full sheet is much more efficient than one game on a small sheet. You get much more actual ice time on the full sheet, and it's not like it costs twice as much, maybe a third more.

This makes sense. I wouldn't like that either.

I love 3on3, but to me the better game is the check up style or tournament style 3on3 instead of cross ice. I like that game better because the kids cannot "take a break" like they can in corss ice, in tourney style they have to break the puck out, control it, check up at the blue line and bring it back in and they have to do it fast. It still has all the great qualities of being able to use smaller areas, you can have two games goign at once, the goalies get a great work out and see tons of shots. I have been pushing the idea that this style of 3on3 is what should eb palyed by mites and maybe even first year squirts almost exclusively. Ideally you can have 26 skaters and 2 goalies going hard for an hour having a ball and your developing everyone not jsut the top 3 or 4 guys on the team and everyone gets to play alot more and alot harder than they do in full ice. AND, frankly, you can do this in house without needing to travel to other associations to get good games which also helps with alot of thigns from ice time management, to overall cost to playing time etc... etc....

I would agree with you if we're talking about Squirts and above....But 8 and under shouldn't really be focusing on breaking the puck out just yet, IMO. They need to be focusing on individual skills (skating and stickhandling), because if you can't do those well, you won't be able to break the puck out.

It's not a true breakout the way you are thinking, and I agree. This games focus is skill work and skating and puck touches just like cross ice, it just adds a dimension that gets them moving faster while they are doing that and moving out of and reentering a zone so it more accurately reflects the real full ice game once they reach that level but it actually forces them to work harder on skating and stick handling than cross ice does, IMO and you can't be lazy in this game where I think you can be lazy in cross ice. Cross ice is great for minimites etc... this game is more appropriate for full fledged mites and squirts IMO. If you've seen the game played you would know what I mean.

[LesHabs]

EP has had their mites almost exclusively over at Velocity Hockey (small rink) for a few years now. I agree at this age level, the smaller rink is the way to go. You can augment this with a regulation size game now and then, but better skills will be developed on the smaller rink.

[old goalie85]

If you take 10 pro hockey players and put on the ice, and look at the space they cover[ size, speed, ect] Then take 10 mites cross ice I bet you will find it is the same.

[brickhouse19]

I do not disagree that from a development standpoint that cross-ice is probably better for the mites. However, I think that USA/Minnesota Hockey needs to keep in mind that when working with kids this young fun and the kids enjoyment has to be a consideration. My kid is a mite and he has played cross-ice games and full-sheet games. Based on my experience every kid in the lockerroom looks forward to the "real" games on the full-sheet of ice. Even if there is no development occuring, which I doubt, the cross-ice games are worth it if it gets these young players excited about playing hockey. If you take all the fun out of hockey for these young players you will not accomplish your stated goal of growing the sport.