Who will be tranfering schools next year?

brickwall33 · Post by **brickwall33** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:51 pm

OK I know this was a rumor before and was silenced, but supposidly the Tartan coaches were overheard by a Strauss employee that Cary Wood may be transfering to Hill. From what I heard the parents are denying it, but the kid is saying he is leaving? This may be a crock of @#%$, but if true could mean big things for the Pioneers.

Hillfan · Post by **Hillfan** » Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:03 pm

Well latest I heard was Cary Wood skated once with the Hill kids in their summer program. I believe it was either last week or the start of this week, not sure which one.....

MNBigDawg · Post by **MNBigDawg** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:20 pm

I find it funny that you 2 are the ones stirring the pot about Wood. Hillfan...you better jump on Wood's jock right now. Just as you did while switching your allgiance on every H-M goalie last year. First you were a Dawson fan...then became a Scott fan...then Little Phillipi was your boy. Good support for your team...but if these people are your "friends", you should stick with them. Good luck to Coach Lechner if he doesn't get Wood (no play on words intended). He will be stuck with an undersized Sophomore as his only experienced goalie left in the program.

Hillfan · Post by **Hillfan** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 1:41 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>First you were a Dawson fan...then became a Scott fan...then Little Phillipi was your boy<hr></blockquote> Umm, was? I always have been and always will be fans of those 3 guys. These are the real guys, and when did I ever say that I was all happy about Wood coming over? I really could care less because I'd like to see guys like Dawson and Flip and even McEnaney get chances instead of a goalie transfering over and taking their playing time. But if it happens, then it happens.

MNBigDawg · Post by **MNBigDawg** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:04 pm

hillfan....you couldn't care less if you get Wood? You should be sayin your prayers, son. I will remember that comment if he transfers and leads you to state...I guarantee you will be all over this board bragging him up. I will also remember your statement if Phillipi bombs and you are complaining about the goalies being the only weak link. Bottom line is....if they don't get Wood, next year is going to be a lot like last year....Phillipi is still too small and young...and Dawson, Scott and McEnany are either pissed or long gone.

Hillfan · Post by **Hillfan** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 10:05 pm

Well obviously with Wood's state tournament experience and skill, he'd be a really nice guy to have. But I'm not giving up on Dawson or Flip or McEnaney. Last year was probably not the right move to bring Flip up. It was way to tough to try and rely on a freshman to take you to state. I wish Scott could have played, but things didn't work out, and that stunk. Flip is now a sophomore, and he'll get some more experience in. I'm not sure who will make it between Dawson and McEnaney, but I really believe that McEnaney could do a nice job. If Dawson makes it, then he'll need a big rebound year from last year.

John04 · Post by **John04** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:52 am

I think its a shame that a goaltender with a good reputation as a solid player needs to transfer. This is what is killing high school hockey. All of a sudden we are suppossed to believe that Woods wants a catholic education at about the same time as many of Tartans good players have graduated. Way to go high school league for making these things possible.

hockeydad · Post by **hockeydad** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:08 am

blame doesn't fall on the MSHSL. they're trying to restrict the transfers. The legislature is the one that OK'd open enrollment, which lead to more and more transfers without people moving. And open enrollment wouldn't apply here anyway, since Hill Murray is a private school. My guess is there have always been transfers. I remember in the 80s when I taught at a small school near Austin, I was told that in the 50s and 60s, The good, young basketball players would go to school in that town as freshmen and sophomores and play basketball on varsity, then transfer to Austin and play there as juniors and seniors. That was back in the days of one class, and Austin was the dominant team in basketball in that area.

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:58 am

True, there has been, always will be, players that transfer. I disagree that transfers have increased since open enrollment. I think we have just hear more about it now, since the legislation. Blame does fall on the MSHSL for trying to restrict transfers. They will never be fair, and accordingly should just stay out of it. They can't restrict public to private transfers. By trying to restrict public to public transfers, they are unintentionally supporting public to private transfers. No need to regulate this, this is America. Nobody gets harmed when players transfer, only hurt feelings.

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:42 am

No one gets harmed... How about the Hill goalie who now will sit on the bench so Wood can play? How about Tartan who loses a good player? How about the fact that "superteams", where up to 25% of the roster is open enrollee's, now make section tournments a joke? How about that attandance in dropping at all high school events because there is no longer any sense of community? Maybe you're not harmed Knowlze but to say nobody is....... It's the only place any where at any level of athletics where a player can go from one team to another with no release or compensation. A squirt can't go from Jefferson to Kennedy with out a release or moving. No one says he can't go to school in Apple Valley though....For a change MAHA may have it right.

puckhead89 · Post by **puckhead89** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:01 am

I think Goldy has ya there. Transfers are having a negative impact, even though there are those out there who believe transfers are good for great hockey. But, once again the intent behind the transfer rule likely didn't anticipate the abuse (for lack of a better term) that is sees today...so much so that the whole thing should be re-evaluated. But then, how do you change it? When it comes time for a change, then the cry will be why should I not be able to transfer when last season, so and so did? High school coaches will cry out also...yes, they will. Unfortuantely it has become a can of worms, no matter which way you try to open the can.

Kodiak · Post by **Kodiak** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:04 am

It's up to parents and student athletes to clean this situation up. I'd like to see kids stay in their community, show pride in their program, and, if they're good enough, turn a bad team into a good team. Unfortunately, too many kids transfer for strictly athletic reasons so they can play for a team that has already been established, thus stepping on the toes of at least one kid who should be playing for his home school (you can't tell me that Beggs won't be taking playing time from some other kid, who thought he had a shot at #1 goalie at AV... just an example, not a shot at Beggs and his family). Anyway, it's just the way it's working now... it's been like this for years (kids from Virginia playing for Duluth East in the 90's).

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:58 pm

Depends on your definition of harm, and how the situation is viewed. Should players be expected to compete for positions on a team, or are they entitled to their position? The existing Hill goalie(s) have the opportunity to practice with a top goaltender, to learn from, and compete against, to push them to get better. What about the opportunity for Tartans goalies? Their hard work and competition against Wood is paying off, it is their opportunity now. The section tournaments are still the best hockey, probably better than ever. Attendance may be dropping for HS regular season sports in general, for various reasons, but it is not because a few players transfer. With regard to community, if the team competes there is community spirit, if they don't, there isn't. Tournament attendance is at an all time high. Finally, there is also no reason to restrict a squirt from playing in the association the family chooses. The association board should not pretend to know what is best for any family. Rather than restricting player movement, the energy can be better spent on improving the quality of the association's program. And no, MAHA does not have this one right either.

puckhead89 · Post by **puckhead89** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:17 pm

This will be a topic to which a consensus will never be attained, but, quite honestly, is becoming more irritating to me as these posts progress. As to the youth hockey associations' restrictions on player movement from boundary to boundary: This concept was, in part,to allow kids to play together from little on up creating an atomosphere of stronger team, not only skills but more passionate play due to team comradeship, better hockey, etc. I have never been one to be critical of those families who feel they need to do what is best for their child, but I am becoming weary of the number of transfers occurring.....and the repeat transfer athletes. I think from what I have seen in these posts, the number of kids potentially transferring this year seems larger than ever...and some are transferring from already rich hockey programs. As to the difference between "earning" or being "entitled" to a spot on a team, you have struck a nerve with me here. An athlete should always be required to earn his spot, never be entitled to it. Not to dig at any athlete who transfers, but do you really think there isn't discussion on the athlete's transfer with the head coach or other power before the transfer is enacted? Please. To say that bringing in Wood or whomever will make the goalies from that team work harder and smarter...perhaps...but the odds are just as likely it will cause bitterness, tension, and disenchantment to some hard workers who will now be looked over. You cannot possibly say it won't. Section Tournaments: Great hockey, but I would still like to see true teams....I guess I could see true teams, I just can't see them play at the state tournament anymore. High school hockey is what it is....but I am not sure I can wholly support the evolution of transfers as customary practice.

hillhockey · Post by **hillhockey** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:06 pm

So there is truth to the rumor he's goin to hill? Not trying to stir the pot anymore, but some of the recent posts make it seem like this is really happening, and I didnt find a confirmation by any poster to incite those remarks (But i must say that there were a lot of good points made, goldy, youre one of them)

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:56 pm

I know nothing what so ever of Wood transferring, I was just using that as an example. I apologize if anyone took at as he was going to Hill-Murray. Every year at this time (summer) the rumor mill heats up, we'll all just have to wait until after Labor Day to see who really ends up where.

sickofhockeyparents · Sun Jul 24, 2005 12:58 am

The saddest part about all of this, is that a player that has possibly come through the program from mites and played with his friends, dreamed about playing varsity with his friends, and then another player comes in and takes that kids spot just like that. Where is the dedication from the kid that is transferring and what about the kid who has dedicated his time, respect, love of the game to the coaches and school and gets to ride the pine. How can coaches and ad's do that to kids? I know that there are schools out there that are not taking open enrollments. They tell them they can come,but the kids that have come through the program get to play. And parents, what are you thinking. If you are good enough, no matter where you play, believe me they will find you. It is sad to see this sport going down the drain because of some parents, coaches and athletic directors so hell bent on winning. It is sick and needs to be stopped. MSHSL needs to step in and put a stop to this now

Knowlze · Post by **Knowlze** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:09 am

........and all ice rinks are going to melt, and there will never be hockey again. Calm down, this isn't that large of a problem. I will reiterate, after all the emotion and feelings and dreams and community spirit are strippped from this issue, the question remains: Should players be expected to compete for a position on teams each year, or are they entitled to a position because they have been on the team in previous years? If you believe they should compete, you probably welcome open enrollment/transfers. If you believe that kids are entitled, you probably fear it. Competition makes all who compete better, and what is the downside of improvement?

Finn70 · Post by **Finn70** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:17 am

The people who complain about a transfer taking a spot that some other kid who has been in the local system would have had seem to want to coddle high schoolers a bit too much. First of all, in the real world, there is always a risk of somebody coming along and passing you by. Just because you have been with an organization for a while won't mean you are immune to having an outsider come along and get a spot you coveted. That is LIFE. Yeah, it is disappointing but if you want to prepare a kid for the real world, you can't protect them from such situations forever. Second, it is up to the kids to push themself to improve to be their best and beat out any newcomer. Just as it is for adults, if you want to keep being successful, you can't rest on your laurels and just expect that because you are the local guy, you can just kick back and not have to continue to try to excel. Yes, some kids will get beat out anyway because they may have a highly talented kid transfer into their system. But it should be seen as a chance to push yourself to greater heights. Not sulk and yell out "woe is me". If a kid transfers into a local school and he beat out my kid for a spot, I'd use it as an opportunity to help teach my son one of life's lessons. I wouldn't have him sit there and wallow in self pity and blame the system. That would only set him up to be a loser that doesn't take any responsibility for his own situation.

puckhead89 · Post by **puckhead89** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:32 am

Finn, I totally agree with you on the work ethic issue. However, the transfer issue can be simplified into 2 primary concerns: 1. In the perfect world, all athletes need to earn their position on a team...but in reality, does the transferee, who is transferring to play hockey and is a name that has success attached with it, have to earn a spot on the new team or is HE entitled to it? 2. Dream teams, as Goldy suggested, may well eliminate other teams from seeing state tourney competition. I don't happen to be with the "woe is me" camp, never have been, never will be. I stand by work ethic, which is precisely why I think transfers will become a bigger problem, if it hasn't already.

hockeydad · Post by **hockeydad** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:51 pm

quote: does the transferee, who is transferring to play hockey and is a name that has success attached with it, have to earn a spot on the new team or is HE entitled to it? Of course he's not entitled to a spot on the team. But as a student in the school, he is entitled to an opportunity to earn a spot on that team.

puckhead89 · Post by **puckhead89** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:46 pm

Let's hope that would be the case.........

Gray Mullet · Post by **Gray Mullet** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:24 am

You guys who trumpet open enrollment like it is some kind of "God" given right which extolls the virtue of a free market could be right but the problem of open enrollment can cut both ways. It all depends on how you look at things. Personally since we are talking about young kids still in their formative years I personally think that development is paramount and teaching the love for the game is far more important than winning at all cost. Those steps for development these days are being eclipsed, as just win mentality and open enrollment feed the machine of some programs. It is not a huge problem but you guys trumpet having the kids work harder to gain the spot. Well that has merit but kids may very well bust their hump and still get replaced by a blue chipper in a school or program who bend their very rules to bring in the blue chip stud. The best things adults could teach kids is the love of the game, hard work and good character and sports should cover building those qualities in a kid quite well. The best thing adults can offer kids is instilling these qualities as the measure of a good coach and program is if and when these same kids are out coaching and playing still when they are in their 30' and 40's thus passing on the great game of hockey. With open enrollment, triple A All Star Elite Super Mites, and all the other check book crap one can throw money at, it is a wonder kids still want to play and still love playing. Glad to know there are still programs and coaches which instill a vision which is clearer than the win at all cost crowd.

Chico · Post by **Chico** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:33 am

Back to the comment that MAHA or what is now Minnesota Hockey, should not stand in the way of letting youth players transfer to whatever program they think best fits their little Johnny or the parent ego, is totally off track. The transfer issue should not ruin what should be a pure level playing in your community environment. If you want to play across town with a powerhouse peewee team, then put up a for sale sign on your house if you cannot obtain the proper waiver from your local association. Too many are on the "fast-track" in hockey and many times that player will suffer burnout or will just never make it. Sorry, just had to respond. Enough on the youth level. As far as H.S. players transferring from program to program, in my opinion it does not help instill true dedication to your local community, freinds, and possibly beyond. There have been several players that have stuck it out with their local high schools and have done just fine in college and even making it to the NHL, and some may have never played in the state H.S. tourney. In the end, many are just out making a buck living a normal life. Yes, it is good to instill a solid work ethic early in life to work for what you want, but to throw your hands up in the air when things may not be going great and jump ship what does that instill? Everything has a cycle, and sometimes you can get caught in a cycle that you may not like. Deal with it. If you honestly think about it, is it proper for a transfer to come into a new program and just take a spot? What if that player does come in and that team still does not make the big show, was it worth it? Does that coach sleep well at night? And will that player try to move again? We all know when this happens these players know they will get whatever playing minutes they desire to keep them happy. Now what about that player that may get cut or reduced, he has to deal with this situation in a different way, the problem is he or she is still just a kid. This debate could go on for ever, just my 2 cents on the subject.

MNPuckster27 · Post by **MNPuckster27** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:58 pm

If it is indeed him, Cary Wood himself has been an occaisional poster on this board and said after last season that he will return to Tartan and is one of the captains for next years' team. Then again, it could very easily be someone posing as him..... Even as a Hill fan who would enjoy watching Wood play for the Pioneers i'd have to say he should stay at Tartan. His name is already out to scouts as being one of the top goalies in the state, so he will have plenty of opportunities to move on from high school hockey without having to go to a school with a better hockey program to finish his high school career.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Who will be tranfering schools next year?

Transfers

Re: Transfers

Wood

Re: Wood

wood

Wood

Woods

transfer

transfer

Re: transfer

Re: transfer

Transfers

Harm

Re: Harm

Wood

Re: Wood

Transfers

sick of hockey parents!

Re: Transfers

Re: Transfers

transfers

Re: transfers

Open Enrollment

Re: Transfers

Wood To Hill