I have no doubt that Gentry is operating within the guidelines/rules of the MDE and the MSHSL. As I said previously, I give Gentry credit for making the jump to AA as soon as they're able. It proves that the school and the coaching staff "get it". However, as others have pointed out, very few schools have a rink either on-campus or close buy where they could replicate what Gentry is doing with regards to the mid-day, pre-practice ice. Although I don't doubt that the average kid is only skating 2-3 days a week on the extra ice, it still adds up to a significantly greater total of in-season practice time compared to the average high school program. Will others possibly try to copy the program? Maybe. And, like others have also said, to this point we haven't seen other sport specific schools like Gentry forming.
Puck, let me ask you this. If the kids/players that choose Gentry weren't able to skate/practice any more than any other school's players could, would they still choose Gentry? Because for me, that's the big differentiator between Gentry and other options at the high school level. I'm sure the perception of the potential coaching quality between Gentry's staff and a player's normal options for schools would be a factor as well. Not to mention the possible ability to play on a team with higher level players and against better competition. Let's face it, it's the exact same reasons why some of our top players choose to play juniors or go to the NTDP in their 11th or 12th grade years.
And that's why I don't agree with what Gentry is doing at the high school level in our state. I disagree strongly with Schotzy when he states that the "Minnesota model" -- the community based model -- isn't being threatened. If the model is still so healthy, why is the gap between the "haves" and "have nots" getting wider and wider each year? Westy is right in that the teams in our state are now tiered between three different levels. And, if we/the MSHSL don't start addressing the reasons why the gaps are widening so much, in 20 years we'll have a third less teams playing at the high school level than we do now. Along with a pretty poorly attended state tournament because it will be the same 16 teams playing in it every year.
We absolutely need to strengthen the traditional community based, play where you live (or pay to go to a private school) model. If these kids/parents want the opportunity to have all of that extra practice time during the season, then either go play juniors or, play at the Tier I or Tier II U18 or U16 levels. I honestly don't have any problems with how and what Gentry is doing. I just strongly believe they shouldn't be allowed to do so in the MSHSL. And no, they aren't the same as "normal" private school. I'm not a fan of private schools who can draw kids from a large metro area or, even statewide playing in class A. But, at least they aren't able to offer (or haven't as of yet) a possible extra 100 plus hours of ice during the season/school year. I also disagree with Puck about the extent of how many kids are doing significant, third party, in season training. I'm sure that at most of the traditional "hockey power" schools in the Twin Cities metro, there are a significant number of kids doing a little of it in season. But not to the degree you seem to think. Certainly not 100 plus hours worth. Nor am I aware of very many players doing third party training at the smaller outstate schools. Thus, the ice time difference is far from a "red herring"...
![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
As I said earlier as well, Minnesota Hockey hasn't helped either. They need to go back to the traditional "play where you live" eligibility rule. We are losing way too many youth teams in the smaller communities that are within a 30-45 minute drive of a larger metro area. In turn, that's what driving so many of the co-ops we've seen established at the high school level the last 10-15 years. If you want to play somewhere else, then either move into that association's boundary, or petition the district director if you feel your player has a unique and justifiable reason to be allowed to change associations. If parents think their home association is lacking in either coaching or facilities or competition or whatever, then making it almost impossible to leave should motivate them to increase the level and quality of their involvement. Which in turn will make their association much stronger if enough parents feel the same way.
Finally, in regards to the Massachusetts discussion... As I've said previously, I've been very fortunate to have been able to make this game we all love my full time avocation for 30 years. And, I've literally traveled to and spent time in, 28 different states and one province. I've also been very fortunate to have developed relationships with hundreds -- yes, HUNDREDS
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)