SnowedIn wrote:Shinbone_News wrote:JSR wrote:
Wow, what an interesting article. What did I say about adapting/changing or dying earlier. AAU doesn't have to listen to MN HOckey or USA Hockey, get enough people involved and AAU could just go and do what we've been discussing/debating without any need for proposals etc...... I think you are seeign in MI because I think they have an extreme to one side of the fence in that state with their structure, hoenstly I could see this happeneing in MN because it is also an extreme case only toward a different side of the fence. Want to keep AAU out of MN, better start thinking of ways to change and adapt...... just saying....
Not sure you read the whole article. E.G.::::
We find a disturbing trend in Michigan. Too many young players have come into our sport only to leave a few years later. We’ve lost over 13,000 youth players during the past 10 years (that’s one-third). Some are the most advanced and some the least advanced.
Why are we losing so many players! I would suggest that some of the causes are; restrictive District rules, a lack of parity at almost every level, high costs, denial of and the over emphasis upon creating elite athletes and elite teams while ignoring those seeking simple recreation.
My emphasis. Yes, Minnesota should look to Michigan (and Massachusetts and New York and Illinois and Wisconsin) for an answer!!!!
AAU has emerged in MI as an alternative BECAUSE of tier 1's insidious effect on community based hockey, as a way to keep hockey local and affordable and approachable for non-elite players.
Last thing I'll say on this thread: If a Tier 1 choice means that much to you, go ahead and move (or start saving for Shattuck). Last I heard, the Interstates are open for business, even to Very Talented Hockey Parents.
Your NHLer will pay you back for all the time and $$$$ spent, I'm sure.
Good of you to cherry pick your favorite quotes but you missed a few:
Quotes on District Rules:
"we don’t plan to restrict players from participating wherever they choose."
"Clearly, there isn’t anything wrong with having Districts for the purposes of Playoffs. However, Districts shouldn’t prohibit players from participating closer to home or with their cousins, neighbors or school-mates."
"Similarly, players with extraordinary skills should be free to play at an appropriate competition level, regardless where those opportunities are centered." ------kind of like how Tier 1 is set up to have the elite play against elite regardless of boundaries. The rest can play against players of like ability in association so they can better improve against like competition-------
Quotes on Parity of Play which supports elite players playing with elite, average with average and novice with novice because nobody benefits from mixing them:
"What we should really be working towards in Michigan youth hockey is providing opportunities for all, while at the same time trying to achieve a degree of parity at each level of play. There should be a place for the advanced players to be challenged by advanced competition. There should also be a place for those just starting out, those who maybe aren’t as advanced or may merely want to play with their friends.
We all need to be challenged in order to grow. When we have teams or programs lacking in parity then our young athletes don’t grow as they should. It can be argued that many adults spend too much time trying to create elite athletes and are ignoring kids who merely wish to play. For example, Michigan is completely upside-down with far more Travel and our House programs are almost non-existent.
However, it can also be argued that the worst thing we can do to young athletes is to create a one-size-fits-all program, which forces advanced players and beginners into the same programs. Truly advanced players should be competing against others of similar ability. A system allowing extremely advanced players and teams to compete against those just beginning or severely lacking in skills helps no players. The advanced don’t progress and get cocky because they aren’t challenged. The less advanced players get frustrated because they are in way over their head. And we see players of all skill levels leaving our sport."
--------we already have association hockey to capture the tier 2 level hockey with a lot of kids in it (with the only problem being that you get cornholed with a coach for better or worse). we don't have non-districted hockey for the elite athletes of which there may only be a few give or take on each A team. That's what tier 1 does - best players no boundaries-------
A no-brainer concept, very successful all over north america and will not hurt association or highschool hockey.
