HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

The Exiled One wrote:

2nd string wrote:Could someone explain to me why Ness isn't taking the heat that Lee has taken, don't come with he did it the right way. bottom line is he still had a year of eligability left. He left early also, just playing in a different leauge.
Now as far as I am conserned age limits are set for a reason, I believe the body development of these idividauls that leave early are in jeapordy when playing against kids that are 22 years of age. Heck take a look one day at a 22 year old and an 18 year old. Even a year can be a huge difference on kids at this stage of their lives.
This is what I mean about kids leaving early, injury risk are much higher. Now you might argue that the Canadians always do it with some sucsess, but look at there high school leauges, don't here much about them do we. I guess I am getting of track here, I dont' understand, the difference in the two I see it as the same.
But in the end I wish them both good luck in their futures and I hope everyone else does to. It is their decisions and I guess we have to live with it whether or not we agree.

Do you do any research before you post? Ness has been a year behind his age group since kindergarden. Care to guess how old he was when he graduated high school? That's right... he was 18!! If he had not "left early", he would have been 19 when he graduated.

That being said, I'm not from Roseau and I'm a college fan before I'm a high school fan, so I have no problem with Lee leaving to improve his game either.

I don't care how old he is. the fact is that mom and dad held him back from entering school at a young age. and he still had a year of eligability left. plus with his size i would think it would be in his best interest to stay and turn into a man and then move on. I know you will come back with some witty remark but you summed it up you are not from Roseau so you do not understand the situation and the hockey tradition here in Roseau. Yes I do admit it hurts loosing a couple of top noch players, but guess what Roseau always survives and we have some great players coming up to fill shoes. That being said, it is up in the air weather these players are improving there games. The question is and in my opinion at this stage in the game there is a reason that a player is suppose to have a certain amount of years at a single level. Yes maybe in some cases the players will do fine. But as far as I am conserned the player should be required to stay at that level until they have completed the years set. to be eligible for the next, wheather it be high school to college or college to nhl. Just my opinion.

Ness had absolutely nothing left to prove at Roseau. Rather than have sour grapes over a situation like his, you should appreciate that your local system helped him achieve some great things and wish him well as he moves on to higher levels of play. After all, he is representing your hometown no matter where he goes.

If he had returned for another year rather than accelerating his education to finish ASAP, he would have completely wasted a year of development time. Like it or not, there are a small percentage of players that simply outgrow the high school level and need to move on. The same thing can be said for certain players at the college hockey level. You can't expect some of these guys to sit around and spin their wheels on a level they have already proven themselves at just to make you happy.

2nd string wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:

2nd string wrote:Could someone explain to me why Ness isn't taking the heat that Lee has taken, don't come with he did it the right way. bottom line is he still had a year of eligability left. He left early also, just playing in a different leauge.
Now as far as I am conserned age limits are set for a reason, I believe the body development of these idividauls that leave early are in jeapordy when playing against kids that are 22 years of age. Heck take a look one day at a 22 year old and an 18 year old. Even a year can be a huge difference on kids at this stage of their lives.
This is what I mean about kids leaving early, injury risk are much higher. Now you might argue that the Canadians always do it with some sucsess, but look at there high school leauges, don't here much about them do we. I guess I am getting of track here, I dont' understand, the difference in the two I see it as the same.
But in the end I wish them both good luck in their futures and I hope everyone else does to. It is their decisions and I guess we have to live with it whether or not we agree.

Do you do any research before you post? Ness has been a year behind his age group since kindergarden. Care to guess how old he was when he graduated high school? That's right... he was 18!! If he had not "left early", he would have been 19 when he graduated.

That being said, I'm not from Roseau and I'm a college fan before I'm a high school fan, so I have no problem with Lee leaving to improve his game either.

I don't care how old he is. the fact is that mom and dad held him back from entering school at a young age. and he still had a year of eligability left. plus with his size i would think it would be in his best interest to stay and turn into a man and then move on. I know you will come back with some witty remark but you summed it up you are not from Roseau so you do not understand the situation and the hockey tradition here in Roseau. Yes I do admit it hurts loosing a couple of top noch players, but guess what Roseau always survives and we have some great players coming up to fill shoes. That being said, it is up in the air weather these players are improving there games. The question is and in my opinion at this stage in the game there is a reason that a player is suppose to have a certain amount of years at a single level. Yes maybe in some cases the players will do fine. But as far as I am conserned the player should be required to stay at that level until they have completed the years set. to be eligible for the next, wheather it be high school to college or college to nhl. Just my opinion.

First of all, lets quit talking about Ness' size. There will be nutrition and weight room consultants working with Aaron and I wouldn't be surprised to see him put on 15 lbs. his freshmen year. The gopher program will be much more intense and comprehensive than anything the Ram hockey team can do for him.

Secondly, you are suggesting the overhaul of a secondary education program in a state which has already gone through serious overhauls to be an equitable system for everyone. If the University of Minnesota, the NCAA clearinghouse, and Roseau High School are satisfied with Ness meeting his graduation requirements, he has graduated. Even without graduating, it was always up to Ness to use his high school eligibility. The rules were set up to keep kids from staying in high school, not for those motivated enough to finish early.

Lastly, I grew up in Roseau, so I kind of have an idea of the tradition of all the community, not just the hockey program. I have no doubt the Ness family, the coaches, and the RHS administration collectively discussed the best possible course of action for the individual student.

By the way, I am more concerned if you were able to slip through RHS without learning to spell. You would be of the very few.

i think people are clueless to the time,training and dedication that these players put in. the time and money that the parents have invested. when you reach a certain point its no longer about high school hockey and more about reaching a personal objective. that is left to the people who have put everything into it to decide.. its pathetic to listen to people who are A. clueless B. never was or never could C. still thinking about how it was 20 years ago. minnesota high shool hockey is not the pinical people in 08! its a great league but if you need to ramp up a notch to move on you do it. saying anything negative about lee or ness in this situation see A,B, and C.

2nd string wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:

2nd string wrote:Could someone explain to me why Ness isn't taking the heat that Lee has taken, don't come with he did it the right way. bottom line is he still had a year of eligability left. He left early also, just playing in a different leauge.
Now as far as I am conserned age limits are set for a reason, I believe the body development of these idividauls that leave early are in jeapordy when playing against kids that are 22 years of age. Heck take a look one day at a 22 year old and an 18 year old. Even a year can be a huge difference on kids at this stage of their lives.
This is what I mean about kids leaving early, injury risk are much higher. Now you might argue that the Canadians always do it with some sucsess, but look at there high school leauges, don't here much about them do we. I guess I am getting of track here, I dont' understand, the difference in the two I see it as the same.
But in the end I wish them both good luck in their futures and I hope everyone else does to. It is their decisions and I guess we have to live with it whether or not we agree.

Do you do any research before you post? Ness has been a year behind his age group since kindergarden. Care to guess how old he was when he graduated high school? That's right... he was 18!! If he had not "left early", he would have been 19 when he graduated.

That being said, I'm not from Roseau and I'm a college fan before I'm a high school fan, so I have no problem with Lee leaving to improve his game either.

I don't care how old he is. the fact is that mom and dad held him back from entering school at a young age. and he still had a year of eligability left. plus with his size i would think it would be in his best interest to stay and turn into a man and then move on. I know you will come back with some witty remark but you summed it up you are not from Roseau so you do not understand the situation and the hockey tradition here in Roseau. Yes I do admit it hurts loosing a couple of top noch players, but guess what Roseau always survives and we have some great players coming up to fill shoes. That being said, it is up in the air weather these players are improving there games. The question is and in my opinion at this stage in the game there is a reason that a player is suppose to have a certain amount of years at a single level. Yes maybe in some cases the players will do fine. But as far as I am conserned the player should be required to stay at that level until they have completed the years set. to be eligible for the next, wheather it be high school to college or college to nhl. Just my opinion.

You're seriously suggesting that Ness HAS to graduate at the age of 19 because of a decision his parents made on his behalf when he was in kindergarden? Wow! I wish my parents had enrolled me in kindergarden at the age of 8, I could have driven myself to junior high, I could have had a beer at my graduation party!!

I hope that was witty enough to satisfy your expectations.

pinical

?

[quote="Gopher Blog"]

1. Ness had absolutely nothing left to prove at Roseau.

I think he could have stayed and proved that he was better than his performance, as well as his teams, at the State Tournament and that was not representative of his/their ability.

2.If he had returned for another year rather than accelerating his education to finish ASAP, he would have completely wasted a year of development time.

Complete waste? Playing High school hockey is a complete waste? It didnt look that way against Hill Murray nor Benilde for him nor his team.

Some of these kids are really good and would theoretically benefit a bit more by moving on from high school but from Phil Housley to Ryan McDonough, saying that playing your senior year in high school is a complete waste is probably a little bit of an exageration to put it mildly.

If playing high school hocky is so meaningless and demeaning, why were ther about 20 NHL scouts at every game those 2 played their senior year?

Again, if you are really good, like the guys mentioned above, it doesnt matter.

lets just flip it around is ness gona be better prepared to start an nhl career after playing with the gophers? (without a dought) is lee gona be better prepaired to start at st. cloud next season after playing a year in fargo? (without a dought) packerboy step out of the 90's and into the current decade for ahwile....

watchdog wrote:lets just flip it around is ness gona be better prepared to start an nhl career after playing with the gophers? (without a dought) is lee gona be better prepaired to start at st. cloud next season after playing a year in fargo? (without a dought) packerboy step out of the 90's and into the current decade for ahwile....

I doubt it

Can't Never Tried wrote:

watchdog wrote:lets just flip it around is ness gona be better prepared to start an nhl career after playing with the gophers? (without a dought) is lee gona be better prepaired to start at st. cloud next season after playing a year in fargo? (without a dought) packerboy step out of the 90's and into the current decade for ahwile....

I doubt it

Correction...

You dought it.

watchdog wrote:lets just flip it around is ness gona be better prepared to start an nhl career after playing with the gophers? (without a dought) is lee gona be better prepaired to start at st. cloud next season after playing a year in fargo? (without a dought) packerboy step out of the 90's and into the current decade for ahwile....

Good one watchdog. Since Housley played in the 80's and McDonough graduated in 2007, I'll just have to get out of those 90s as soon as I can.

From all accounts I have heard, both were quite prepared to play at the next level they played at. Why? Cuz they were/are good.

And they got good by playing high school hockey.

packerboy wrote:

watchdog wrote:lets just flip it around is ness gona be better prepared to start an nhl career after playing with the gophers? (without a dought) is lee gona be better prepaired to start at st. cloud next season after playing a year in fargo? (without a dought) packerboy step out of the 90's and into the current decade for ahwile....

Good one watchdog. Since Housley played in the 80's and McDonough graduated in 2007, I'll just have to get out of those 90s as soon as I can.

From all accounts I have heard, both were quite prepared to play at the next level they played at. Why? Cuz they were/are good.

And they got good by playing high school hockey.

Lets's just say that no one on here should bash any kid about them making an informed decision to forego their final year of HS to make the jump to junior hockey or college hockey. Packerboy, I respect your opinion, but who are you to criticize them. Have you ever been in the position to make these decisions. I'm guessing each of these kids had many sleepless nights wondering if they were doing the right thing. When all is said and done, they have to make the decision they feel is right in their particular circumstance.

davey wrote:

packerboy wrote:

watchdog wrote:lets just flip it around is ness gona be better prepared to start an nhl career after playing with the gophers? (without a dought) is lee gona be better prepaired to start at st. cloud next season after playing a year in fargo? (without a dought) packerboy step out of the 90's and into the current decade for ahwile....

Good one watchdog. Since Housley played in the 80's and McDonough graduated in 2007, I'll just have to get out of those 90s as soon as I can.

From all accounts I have heard, both were quite prepared to play at the next level they played at. Why? Cuz they were/are good.

And they got good by playing high school hockey.

Lets's just say that no one on here should bash any kid about them making an informed decision to forego their final year of HS to make the jump to junior hockey or college hockey. Packerboy, I respect your opinion, but who are you to criticize them. Have you ever been in the position to make these decisions. I'm guessing each of these kids had many sleepless nights wondering if they were doing the right thing. When all is said and done, they have to make the decision they feel is right in their particular circumstance.

davey, I haven't bashed any kid.

I just respond to posts that say playing high school hockey is a waste of time for the truly "gifted ones" and that anybody who doesnt agree with that is "old fashioned".

Success at the MN high school level is still an important thing and is viewed as such by many in the business of evaluating talent.

If the best you can do for a reason for a kid to stay on the same level is to point out one or two games in which he and his team didn't play their best, it isn't much of a reason. The season is a hell of a lot longer than one or two games and he was pretty dominant on the whole.

If going back and dominating a level of play that a kid was already dominant at is your idea of developing for the future, more power to ya. You won't find many people with strong hockey backgrounds that would buy into that line of thinking.

Gopher Blog wrote:If the best you can do for a reason for a kid to stay on the same level is to point out one or two games in which he and his team didn't play their best, it isn't much of a reason. The season is a hell of a lot longer than one or two games and he was pretty dominant on the whole.

If going back and dominating a level of play that a kid was already dominant at is your idea of developing for the future, more power to ya. You won't find many people with strong hockey backgrounds that would buy into that line of thinking.

I don't think Budish will be wasting his time this year. Nor many other kids that already have a D1 commitment.

Gopher Blog wrote:If the best you can do for a reason for a kid to stay on the same level is to point out one or two games in which he and his team didn't play their best, it isn't much of a reason. The season is a hell of a lot longer than one or two games and he was pretty dominant on the whole.

If going back and dominating a level of play that a kid was already dominant at is your idea of developing for the future, more power to ya. You won't find many people with strong hockey backgrounds that would buy into that line of thinking.

Well sure Blog, you and your hero Lucia like to bad mouth youth hockey and sit up in the corner of the rink , and then yank players out of high school as soon as possible.

We would expect that you and your buddy would think that.

And remeber to distinguish between people with "strong hockey backgrounds" with people who have strong self interests.

Neutron 14 wrote:

Gopher Blog wrote:If the best you can do for a reason for a kid to stay on the same level is to point out one or two games in which he and his team didn't play their best, it isn't much of a reason. The season is a hell of a lot longer than one or two games and he was pretty dominant on the whole.

If going back and dominating a level of play that a kid was already dominant at is your idea of developing for the future, more power to ya. You won't find many people with strong hockey backgrounds that would buy into that line of thinking.

I don't think Budish will be wasting his time this year. Nor many other kids that already have a D1 commitment.

Next year might be a waste of his time. He should have stuck with the same colors.

ACTUALFORMERPLAYER wrote:

Neutron 14 wrote:

Gopher Blog wrote:If the best you can do for a reason for a kid to stay on the same level is to point out one or two games in which he and his team didn't play their best, it isn't much of a reason. The season is a hell of a lot longer than one or two games and he was pretty dominant on the whole.

If going back and dominating a level of play that a kid was already dominant at is your idea of developing for the future, more power to ya. You won't find many people with strong hockey backgrounds that would buy into that line of thinking.

I don't think Budish will be wasting his time this year. Nor many other kids that already have a D1 commitment.

Next year might be a waste of his time. He should have stuck with the same colors.

Hard to argue that point!

Neutron 14 wrote:I don't think Budish will be wasting his time this year. Nor many other kids that already have a D1 commitment.

Every player has his own unique circumstances. For instance, Budish's team plays a rather competitive schedule when compared to some small town teams.

Is a kid like Lee going to vastly improve facing kids with shots that are not as strong/accurate in many instances as they are the next level up? Is he going to vastly improve facing 15 shots a game against those types of shooters? I suppose he will improve no matter what but will it be as much as what he'd find against more talented players/teams in the USHL?

packerboy wrote:well sure Blog, you and your hero Lucia like to bad mouth youth hockey and sit up in the corner of the rink , and then yank players out of high school as soon as possible.

Well, if the best you can do is mention a couple of games over the course of a season as the reason to stay, it is pretty laughable.

I know you aren't big on actual facts in your little rants on topics like these but Lucia doesn't tell kids they have to accelerate school or leave for juniors before they want to. That is the player's choice. I can put you in touch with Gopher players (or parents) who left early for juniors and those who did not and they will tell you the same thing... the decision on whether to leave HS early was left up to them.

And remeber to distinguish between people with "strong hockey backgrounds" with people who have strong self interests.

Yeah cause you are so unbiased on these topics.

Gopher Blog wrote:

Neutron 14 wrote:I don't think Budish will be wasting his time this year. Nor many other kids that already have a D1 commitment.

1. Every player has his own unique circumstances. For instance, Budish's team plays a rather competitive schedule when compared to some small town teams.

2. Is a kid like Lee going to vastly improve facing kids with shots that are not as strong/accurate in many instances as they are the next level up? Is he going to vastly improve facing 15 shots a game against those types of shooters? I suppose he will improve no matter what but will it be as much as what he'd find against more talented players/teams in the USHL?

1. Carefull, watchdog and others don't acknowledge any difference in schedule as they professed in last years seeding debate.

2. How much any player is going to improve is guesswork and the people who think its a given that if they leave high school they will improve much more than if they stay are way more certain about it than they should be.

Anybody who says playing MN high school hockey is a watse of time has very little credibility.

3. Quit saying colleges dont require kids to go to Juniors. Nobody believes you.

atta boy packerboy stir the pot with the Rodents......Go Sioux!!

northwoods oldtimer wrote:atta boy packerboy stir the pot with the Rodents......Go Sioux!!

I think it's "Sue" or "Suzy's" or something now isn't it?

GL favorite......Fighting Stogies!!

packerboy wrote:2. How much any player is going to improve is guesswork and the people who think its a given that if they leave high school they will improve much more than if they stay are way more certain about it than they should be.

Anybody who says playing MN high school hockey is a watse of time has very little credibility.

Even the very best need time in HS hockey. No argument from me. I don't see it as a waste in that sense. I realize you like to twist words out of context but it doesn't do your argument much good when other people are smart enough to be able to understand the original meaning.

What I did say is there does hit a point for a small percentage (whether HS, college, etc) where they are better off moving on. It doesn't do their development much good to stay on a level they are already a dominant player on.

I recognize you see the situation in terms of black and white (meaning HS hockey is the only way to go). Not everybody has their head in the sand and think there is only one "right way".

3. Quit saying colleges dont require kids to go to Juniors. Nobody believes you.

I just know one situation well enough to know they don't require them to leave HS for juniors before they graduate with their local school. That is up to the player and his family. A great example is Patrick White. His dad would be the first to tell you that they weren't being pushed by the coach to leave HS hockey.

They may require a year of junior hockey at some point (which is generally agreed on up front by both parties) but they certainly don't force the player to do it before they graduate. Even if they tried and the player wasn't interested, he could easily decommit and go to a school that didn't require it. You act like college coaches have a gun to their head and these people are powerless. It just goes to show how clueless you are to the recruiting process, etc.