The ADM Question

[Quasar]

NPC, the more I read this "proposal" and the more I think about it the more I like it. If total freedom is allowed as Quasar proposes I think that would be the end of association hockey as we know it. It would quickly become what we have in summer hockey. The idea of allowing kids to move but only when they are going up keeps association hockey intact but allows that outlet for those that feel they have been slighted by their association (or just weren't good enough to make the cut.) A great component to this is that the other association has to accept that player and essentially invite him/her to be on their team at the next level up from where he/she came from.

The only issue I can see that has been brought up is for the superstar on a really below avg assocation team. That kid has great potential but will be held back in this model because of being on the A team already and not having the option to move up elsewhere. However, if an association like this is truly struggling to field competitive teams the question becomes would they really be fielding an "A" team? From the conversation I've been reading about Spring Lake Park they have moved in and out of having A teams. If said association only had a B team this would then allow the superstar to move. Of course this isn't what that particular association would want but it would be the right thing.

I actually like summer hockey, The ability to move to a team that suits your development curve is a very good thing. If summer hockey had a rule that said you must set your roster by a certain date the whole wild west aspect would be fixed. Most people in summer hockey are happy with it just the way it is. Let me ask you this. If a kid could play where he wanted, and the rosters had to be locked in at the start of the season, how would that end association hockey as we know it? What does that mean? My contention is that only a few kids would take advantage of this. I think 70 to 80% are perfectly happy where they are. I just haven't heard a factual argument how this would ruin association hockey. I think the AAU alternative would do a lot more damage, in fact it might end association hockey period!

[Benito Juarez]

There are always loopholes...

Superstar kid on a poor association team could tank the tryouts or skip them all together.
You could/would see kids trying to make the B team.


Just a thought.

[HockeyDad41]

Yes but the problem they bring up is that Edina will go on a tear and get all of the top A kids off of all of the top programs and put together a monster team. It is probably right, sort of like the NY Yankees do. This would stop it by not allowing A kids to be skimmed off of programs but opens the doors to B kids moving around. If you are being honest when you place a kid on your B team you are OK, if not then you lose him and you get what you deserve.

If they form this monster team who are they going to play to unleash all of that awesomeness on? Just start making the 2nd place trophy bigger than the 1st place trophy and the problem will be solved.

Seriously, as the parent of a future phenom, I would love the ability to pick his team. I'm not sure I would pick Edina's superteam to put him on though. I would probably try to find a program with the reputation for development I am looking for, and for which Edina has, but I am not yet sure that Jr. is the greatest player to ever lace up skates at his age level. So over at Edina, first line center may not be a lock and that's important to me...er..him. I do however think that he may be the man over at Eden Prarie so I would will have to give them a serious look.

Am I worried if the team we pick for him will get rolled by Edina's superteam? Not really, it's not like I would see them every weekend on the schedule. Jr. would get great development, be the first line center on arguably the second best team in youth hockey and be very prepared to represent his highschool when he gets to 8th grade.

If you look at what I said you will see that since Jr. is the first line center on EP's team he is stuck there. Edina will not be able to create this monster team unless they either home grow them which if fine or a whole lot of other people screw up and Edina has a way of finding all of the diamonds in the rough. Earlier in this thread and in others the argument against free movement is that all of the players will concentrate on a team and go monster, untouchable. This would stop that, if your little guy is on an A team whether it is EPs or somebody else's he is stuck. He can not move. The ONLY way you can move is to move up and ONLY if the association you want to go to agrees to take you. You can't move down, you can't move sideways, only up. The association you are in has no say in it after they select their teams. The only other stop point would be you can not move up a year and move. So, when Jr is a PeeWee A and wants to move up to BnB this year so that Edina can win the lottery and take him he can't move. This keeps both your little guy and Edina honest and gives those lucky dogs at EP first shot at him when he is truly a Bn so that they can see him in all of his glory, or not.

Jr.'s home association (hasn't skated there in 4 years by the way) has never reliably fielded an A team and the times they have, could only manage a win or two in the district. Forcing him skate there would only insure that he open enrolls in another school district to avoid a bad situation at a perennial basement dweller.

My point was that even if you allow the A kids to move around I doubt you will get all of the very best kids on one team. Sure doesn't happen in the summer and as good as the 2000 Machine and Blades teams are, they lose occasionally too.

[darkhorse]

I actually like summer hockey, The ability to move to a team that suits your development curve is a very good thing. If summer hockey had a rule that said you must set your roster by a certain date the whole wild west aspect would be fixed. Most people in summer hockey are happy with it just the way it is. Let me ask you this. If a kid could play where he wanted, and the rosters had to be locked in at the start of the season, how would that end association hockey as we know it? What does that mean? My contention is that only a few kids would take advantage of this. I think 70 to 80% are perfectly happy where they are. I just haven't heard a factual argument how this would ruin association hockey. I think the AAU alternative would do a lot more damage, in fact it might end association hockey period!

I'm not saying summer hockey is bad, it's great for those that want to put that time and commitment in. In my opinion there is a value that can't be replaced when it comes to playing for your community and with your friends that you grew up with. If kids choose to play for another team to move up the ladder then so be it, but for the most part it would still keep most kids in their communities. There would be significantly more parity within the league. If kids can float where they want there would be a consolidation of talent and a significant disparity between the top, middle, and bottom teams as we see in summer hockey. I don't think that is necessarily bad but why not have a little of both worlds during different seasons? The struggling associations will go away much quicker than their current rate. You would have a lot of A players in struggling associations willing to play on B teams on these superpowers. In the end it would take away significant opportunities for a large number of kids that just want to play hockey in the winter and who knows, maybe develop a passion for the sport and really excel once they hit a growth spurt.

I think your idea of having rosters locked is on the right track but why not just enforce that in the current summer hockey landscape and try to adjust winter hockey to something other than that model?

[Quasar]

I actually like summer hockey, The ability to move to a team that suits your development curve is a very good thing. If summer hockey had a rule that said you must set your roster by a certain date the whole wild west aspect would be fixed. Most people in summer hockey are happy with it just the way it is. Let me ask you this. If a kid could play where he wanted, and the rosters had to be locked in at the start of the season, how would that end association hockey as we know it? What does that mean? My contention is that only a few kids would take advantage of this. I think 70 to 80% are perfectly happy where they are. I just haven't heard a factual argument how this would ruin association hockey. I think the AAU alternative would do a lot more damage, in fact it might end association hockey period!

I'm not saying summer hockey is bad, it's great for those that want to put that time and commitment in. In my opinion there is a value that can't be replaced when it comes to playing for your community and with your friends that you grew up with. If kids choose to play for another team to move up the ladder then so be it, but for the most part it would still keep most kids in their communities. There would be significantly more parity within the league. If kids can float where they want there would be a consolidation of talent and a significant disparity between the top, middle, and bottom teams as we see in summer hockey. I don't think that is necessarily bad but why not have a little of both worlds during different seasons? The struggling associations will go away much quicker than their current rate. You would have a lot of A players in struggling associations willing to play on B teams on these superpowers. In the end it would take away significant opportunities for a large number of kids that just want to play hockey in the winter and who knows, maybe develop a passion for the sport and really excel once they hit a growth spurt.

I think your idea of having rosters locked is on the right track but why not just enforce that in the current summer hockey landscape and try to adjust winter hockey to something other than that model?

Someone already posted the idea of a summer/winter combo. I think my comment was that it was pie in the sky, or something to that effect. As a point of reference I think both summer and winter have something to offer. If there was some way to meld the best of both into a new system for Minnesota hockey it would be a winner. I can't see how it would work, but then I am only one person looking at this through my biases That's what makes this conversation so interesting. Lot's of good constructive ideas. IT would be nice if Minnesota hockey came up with something that would hold off the AAU or some other organization from causing wholesale change in Minnesota hockey. It's too expensive already, and I don't think the changes that have been bandied about on this thread would kill association hockey. I still think 70 to 80% of the kids would be perfectly happy where they are .. Thanks for the comments

[Quasar]

There are always loopholes...

Superstar kid on a poor association team could tank the tryouts or skip them all together.
You could/would see kids trying to make the B team.


Just a thought.

Sure there are loop holes and people who are going to exploit them. But if 99 kids play fair and 1 kid does not I don't think that it is a no go. I think that Karma is a nasty thing and that somehow that kid is going to get caught up to in the end. This way the other 99 can have a shot at having a shot. The superstar kid on a poor team is a problem. The third line A kid who never sees the ice and would be frozen in this model is a problem. If you had an association who was really and truly bad to the bone and they took a kid with the intent of just freezing him and not letting him get onto "the market" is another one. I think that all in all though it would clean up a lot of issues. Maybe there would have to be some sort of district appeal committee that could look at the superstar on the struggling team. I don't know about that but I am sure that something could be worked out. But going into something like this with the knowledge that it is not perfect but at least it will cure a lot of the problems has to be positive somehow.

I agree with Quasar though to be perfectly honest with you all. I like the idea of total freedom and letting the chips fall. I like being able to choose. I do realize though that MN Hockey is totally committed to Association Hockey and get the feeling that they would rather not have hockey than have non-association hockey so this might be a way to meet "them" in the middle. What is it that they say ----- when everybody is squealing the compromise was probably fair.

I'm not opposed to compromise if it's the only way. And I think your right about meeting in the middle. For what it's worth I'm squealing, but I'm not screaming. That's a good sign!

[frederick61]

No Political Connections wrote: "More than a few associations are nothing more than social clubs. I think a kid should be able to move up... Down ... sideways.. It is important that they be able to find a team that fits for them. If the residency rule were changed, it would still be up to the association to decide who they would accept.

Most associations would probably allow A-level players to tryout in neighboring associations (within their district); but neighboring associations would most likely discourage the idea in part because of the neighboring association’s responsibilities to its kids. The neighboring association’s goal is develop youth hockey for all kids in its community.

But the reality is more complex than that.

For a good number of Twin Cities associations, communities, youth hockey associations and school boundaries all overlap. One result is a single association controlling premium ice hours of the local arena has allowed all kids who live in the city participation in their local youth hockey programs. A second results is some cities have more than one association and have to split between the premium ice hours between the associations. This creates all sorts of complex situations.

An example of a single association covering more than one youth hockey association is Burnsville. Burnsville association covers only part of Burnsville. Kids living in certain areas of Burnsville go to Eagan, Apple Valley, Prior Lake/Savage, Eastview, and Lakeville schools. Because their association has a commitment to the City of Burnsville (who own and operate the ice arena) to allow all kids residing in Burnsville to participate in their association, kids living in those areas can choose to play Burnsville Hockey or their association’s hockey.

An example of a single community having multiple associations is Apple Valley. The City of Apple Valley has two associations, Apple Valley and Eastview (Eastview is not a city, it is essentially half of Apple Valley). The premium ice hours are partitioned between these two associations and the associations try to cut deals with Burnsville, Eagan, and Rosemount for additional hours. To make things even more complex, Eastview and Rosemount share school facilities so they try to cut a deal on teams. Those teams generally go under the name of the Dakota Revs (RosemountEastView).

Kids are moved “up, down, and sideways” to accommodate teams, available ice and participation numbers. The good thing Minnesota Hockey has done is to figure out a way to let the associations solve their problems. That also means that once the association has solved their problems, Minnesota Hockey has to support their decisions.

The result is that when East Grand Forks association forms a team in East Grand Forks and plays teams from Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eastview, Eagan, Prior Lake/Savage, or Rosemount; they will be playing the best that community/association/school has to offer that year at that level.

That concept being implemented is what makes Minnesota Hockey great, not having a super star team from the great north called the “Godfather’s Pizza” or the “Sears Roebuck Automen” from the southern Mississippi Valley geared to improve the talents of a few 11-12 year old kids at the cost of $15,000 per year and whose talents will most likely fade by the time they hit high school. That would make Minnesota Hockey not great.

[Quasar]

No Political Connections wrote: "More than a few associations are nothing more than social clubs. I think a kid should be able to move up... Down ... sideways.. It is important that they be able to find a team that fits for them. If the residency rule were changed, it would still be up to the association to decide who they would accept.

Most associations would probably allow A-level players to tryout in neighboring associations (within their district); but neighboring associations would most likely discourage the idea in part because of the neighboring association’s responsibilities to its kids. The neighboring association’s goal is develop youth hockey for all kids in its community.

But the reality is more complex than that.

For a good number of Twin Cities associations, communities, youth hockey associations and school boundaries all overlap. One result is a single association controlling premium ice hours of the local arena has allowed all kids who live in the city participation in their local youth hockey programs. A second results is some cities have more than one association and have to split between the premium ice hours between the associations. This creates all sorts of complex situations.

An example of a single association covering more than one youth hockey association is Burnsville. Burnsville association covers only part of Burnsville. Kids living in certain areas of Burnsville go to Eagan, Apple Valley, Prior Lake/Savage, Eastview, and Lakeville schools. Because their association has a commitment to the City of Burnsville (who own and operate the ice arena) to allow all kids residing in Burnsville to participate in their association, kids living in those areas can choose to play Burnsville Hockey or their association’s hockey.

An example of a single community having multiple associations is Apple Valley. The City of Apple Valley has two associations, Apple Valley and Eastview (Eastview is not a city, it is essentially half of Apple Valley). The premium ice hours are partitioned between these two associations and the associations try to cut deals with Burnsville, Eagan, and Rosemount for additional hours. To make things even more complex, Eastview and Rosemount share school facilities so they try to cut a deal on teams. Those teams generally go under the name of the Dakota Revs (RosemountEastView).

Kids are moved “up, down, and sideways” to accommodate teams, available ice and participation numbers. The good thing Minnesota Hockey has done is to figure out a way to let the associations solve their problems. That also means that once the association has solved their problems, Minnesota Hockey has to support their decisions.

The result is that when East Grand Forks association forms a team in East Grand Forks and plays teams from Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eastview, Eagan, Prior Lake/Savage, or Rosemount; they will be playing the best that community/association/school has to offer that year at that level.

That concept being implemented is what makes Minnesota Hockey great, not having a super star team from the great north called the “Godfather’s Pizza” or the “Sears Roebuck Automen” from the southern Mississippi Valley geared to improve the talents of a few 11-12 year old kids at the cost of $15,000 per year and whose talents will most likely fade by the time they hit high school. That would make Minnesota Hockey not great.

Just to protect the innocent.. That was my post, not NPC's

In the Metro there are number of associations that feed more than 1 high school. Kids are allowed to move because of the rules that are in place now. Why should a kid be able to choose where he will play in some associations and not in others. There are a lot of exceptions to the rule.. Should be no exceptions. Any kid should be able to play for any association in his district.

I agree that sponsored super teams are not the answer. The only good thing about them is you are playing there because you want to, and can.
There are a lot of people that don't like being told what they can and cannot do. How about the family that has an ice arena 3 blocks from home, but they have to drive 10 miles to their home ice?

The arrival of AAU or something like it will do a lot of damage ..Kinda like
"How ya gonna keep em down on the farm after they've seen Paris"

[HockeyDad41]

No Political Connections wrote: "More than a few associations are nothing more than social clubs. I think a kid should be able to move up... Down ... sideways.. It is important that they be able to find a team that fits for them. If the residency rule were changed, it would still be up to the association to decide who they would accept.

Most associations would probably allow A-level players to tryout in neighboring associations (within their district); but neighboring associations would most likely discourage the idea in part because of the neighboring association’s responsibilities to its kids. The neighboring association’s goal is develop youth hockey for all kids in its community.

But the reality is more complex than that.

For a good number of Twin Cities associations, communities, youth hockey associations and school boundaries all overlap. One result is a single association controlling premium ice hours of the local arena has allowed all kids who live in the city participation in their local youth hockey programs. A second results is some cities have more than one association and have to split between the premium ice hours between the associations. This creates all sorts of complex situations.

An example of a single association covering more than one youth hockey association is Burnsville. Burnsville association covers only part of Burnsville. Kids living in certain areas of Burnsville go to Eagan, Apple Valley, Prior Lake/Savage, Eastview, and Lakeville schools. Because their association has a commitment to the City of Burnsville (who own and operate the ice arena) to allow all kids residing in Burnsville to participate in their association, kids living in those areas can choose to play Burnsville Hockey or their association’s hockey.

An example of a single community having multiple associations is Apple Valley. The City of Apple Valley has two associations, Apple Valley and Eastview (Eastview is not a city, it is essentially half of Apple Valley). The premium ice hours are partitioned between these two associations and the associations try to cut deals with Burnsville, Eagan, and Rosemount for additional hours. To make things even more complex, Eastview and Rosemount share school facilities so they try to cut a deal on teams. Those teams generally go under the name of the Dakota Revs (RosemountEastView).

Kids are moved “up, down, and sideways” to accommodate teams, available ice and participation numbers. The good thing Minnesota Hockey has done is to figure out a way to let the associations solve their problems. That also means that once the association has solved their problems, Minnesota Hockey has to support their decisions.

The result is that when East Grand Forks association forms a team in East Grand Forks and plays teams from Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eastview, Eagan, Prior Lake/Savage, or Rosemount; they will be playing the best that community/association/school has to offer that year at that level.

That concept being implemented is what makes Minnesota Hockey great, not having a super star team from the great north called the “Godfather’s Pizza” or the “Sears Roebuck Automen” from the southern Mississippi Valley geared to improve the talents of a few 11-12 year old kids at the cost of $15,000 per year and whose talents will most likely fade by the time they hit high school. That would make Minnesota Hockey not great.

Just to protect the innocent.. That was my post, not NPC's

In the Metro there are number of associations that feed more than 1 high school. Kids are allowed to move because of the rules that are in place now. Why should a kid be able to choose where he will play in some associations and not in others. There are a lot of exceptions to the rule.. Should be no exceptions. Any kid should be able to play for any association in his district.

I agree that sponsored super teams are not the answer. The only good thing about them is you are playing there because you want to, and can.
There are a lot of people that don't like being told what they can and cannot do. How about the family that has an ice arena 3 blocks from home, but they have to drive 10 miles to their home ice?

The arrival of AAU or something like it will do a lot of damage ..Kinda like
"How ya gonna keep em down on the farm after they've seen Paris"

Probably should just open it up to cross district transfers too or that'll be the next reason that AAU's will be coming.

I have been a vocal supporter of being able to choose the best situation for the individual family/athlete since we entered the fray, but I will be the first to admit that any change that happens will most likely occur long after our run is done. Not that I think the change proposed is a bad idea, it's just that I don't believe there is enough support from the core association family across the state to make it happen. I don't think the associations should feel threatened at all at this point.

Instead of avoiding the hard work, dig in and do what you can to strengthen your individual association and work on creative options like gathering the small group that wants more and find some non-premium ice times to supplement the association ice times with focused camps and clinics. Weak associations should take a short term approach of working together while they strengthen themselves. Ask your district for guidance and help. Hold your board accountable by gathering families that want more and show up for the meetings. Involve your district representatives if you are not getting the answers you need from your association board.

The short list of alternatives available right now is growing, but I don't see MM, United AAA, and the Blades being able to take down the association model any time soon.

Fun debate, but much ado about nothing. Nothing that will happen anytime soon anyway.

[Quasar]

Probably shuld just open it up to cross district transfers too or that'll be the next reason that AAU's will be coming.

I have been a vocal supporter of being able to choose the best situation for the individual family/athlete since we entered the fray, but I will be the first to admit that any change that happens will most likely occur long after our run is done. Not that I think the change proposed is a bad idea, it's just that I don't believe there is enough support from the core association family across the state to make it happen. I don't think the associations should feel threatened at all at this point.

Instead of avoiding the hard work, dig in and do what you can to strengthen your individual association and work on creative options like gathering the small group that wants more and find some non-premium ice times to supplement the association ice times with focused camps and clinics. Weak associations should take a short term approach of working together while they strengthen themselves. Ask your district for guidance and help. Hold your board accountable by gathering families that want more and show up for the meetings. Involve your district representatives if you are not getting the answers you need from your association board.

The short list of alternatives available right now is growing, but I don't see MM, United AAA, and the Blades being able to take down the association model any time soon.

Fun debate, but much ado about nothing. Nothing that will happen anytime soon anyway.

It is a fun debate, And your right about the much ado. Your dead wrong about the nothing. perhaps nothing will happen for a year or two, but it will happen. It's up to the guys like you that are at the beginning to do what is needed, as you so aptly pointed out in your post. A lot of the people that support the idea of change figured it out when there their kids hit bantam. I know more than a few that were really surprised when all of their assumptions were overtaken by the maturation process that takes place at 13 and 14 years of age. If you think the collective experience of a bunch of Dads that have been through the wars is "Much Ado about nothing" then there is little that reading any of this can do for you. Hopefully it will be food for thought if nothing else. No sense in you being any different than the rest of us. We all learned it the hard way too..

[HockeyDad41]

Probably shuld just open it up to cross district transfers too or that'll be the next reason that AAU's will be coming.

I have been a vocal supporter of being able to choose the best situation for the individual family/athlete since we entered the fray, but I will be the first to admit that any change that happens will most likely occur long after our run is done. Not that I think the change proposed is a bad idea, it's just that I don't believe there is enough support from the core association family across the state to make it happen. I don't think the associations should feel threatened at all at this point.

Instead of avoiding the hard work, dig in and do what you can to strengthen your individual association and work on creative options like gathering the small group that wants more and find some non-premium ice times to supplement the association ice times with focused camps and clinics. Weak associations should take a short term approach of working together while they strengthen themselves. Ask your district for guidance and help. Hold your board accountable by gathering families that want more and show up for the meetings. Involve your district representatives if you are not getting the answers you need from your association board.

The short list of alternatives available right now is growing, but I don't see MM, United AAA, and the Blades being able to take down the association model any time soon.

Fun debate, but much ado about nothing. Nothing that will happen anytime soon anyway.

It is a fun debate, And your right about the much ado. Your dead wrong about the nothing. perhaps nothing will happen for a year or two, but it will happen. It's up to the guys like you that are at the beginning to do what is needed, as you so aptly pointed out in your post. A lot of the people that support the idea of change figured it out when there their kids hit bantam. I know more than a few that were really surprised when all of their assumptions were overtaken by the maturation process that takes place at 13 and 14 years of age. If you think the collective experience of a bunch of Dads that have been through the wars is "Much Ado about nothing" then there is little that reading any of this can do for you. Hopefully it will be food for thought if nothing else. No sense in you being any different than the rest of us. We all learned it the hard way too..

I don't see anything drastic happening to the association model as long as they control the ice.

You ask 100 people in my district whether change is needed and 50 won't care enough to respond, 40 like it just the way it is and 10 might want something to change and have no idea how to do it, so they turn to summer hockey for competition and development.

It's not that I think the changes you are talking about are bad, I just don't think there is any chance of that kind of wholesale change happening. I'd rather expend time and energy fixing what we have now at the association level while working within the guidelines of the district and Minnesota Hockey.

[Quasar]

NPC .. I just did a quick google for ice sheets between Blaine and Duluth along the freeway. Had 7 before I reached Princeton.. I would bet anyone of them would love to sell a little ice. I wonder how many hours are being chewed up at 10:00 pm in Siren, Wi. Or say ..Isanti. Hey old goalie any ice available in Forrest Lake? Your right Metro dwellers need to look a little beyond 694/ 494 beltway.... Good point.

I live in Western Wisconsin. without research I know of 5 sheets within 30 minutes from my house. and that's only looking West. I'll bet Baldwin/Woodville would jump at the chance to add a few hours to their bottom line. I commuted to Bloomiington for 20 years. Easy drive....

[O-townClown]

I'm amazed at the exalted status given to the Amateur Athletic Union on this board. Your experiences obviously differ from mine.

If sweeping reform comes from outstate I'll be shocked.

[HockeyDad41]

No Political Connections wrote: "More than a few associations are nothing more than social clubs. I think a kid should be able to move up... Down ... sideways.. It is important that they be able to find a team that fits for them. If the residency rule were changed, it would still be up to the association to decide who they would accept.

Most associations would probably allow A-level players to tryout in neighboring associations (within their district); but neighboring associations would most likely discourage the idea in part because of the neighboring association’s responsibilities to its kids. The neighboring association’s goal is develop youth hockey for all kids in its community.

But the reality is more complex than that.

For a good number of Twin Cities associations, communities, youth hockey associations and school boundaries all overlap. One result is a single association controlling premium ice hours of the local arena has allowed all kids who live in the city participation in their local youth hockey programs. A second results is some cities have more than one association and have to split between the premium ice hours between the associations. This creates all sorts of complex situations.

An example of a single association covering more than one youth hockey association is Burnsville. Burnsville association covers only part of Burnsville. Kids living in certain areas of Burnsville go to Eagan, Apple Valley, Prior Lake/Savage, Eastview, and Lakeville schools. Because their association has a commitment to the City of Burnsville (who own and operate the ice arena) to allow all kids residing in Burnsville to participate in their association, kids living in those areas can choose to play Burnsville Hockey or their association’s hockey.

An example of a single community having multiple associations is Apple Valley. The City of Apple Valley has two associations, Apple Valley and Eastview (Eastview is not a city, it is essentially half of Apple Valley). The premium ice hours are partitioned between these two associations and the associations try to cut deals with Burnsville, Eagan, and Rosemount for additional hours. To make things even more complex, Eastview and Rosemount share school facilities so they try to cut a deal on teams. Those teams generally go under the name of the Dakota Revs (RosemountEastView).

Kids are moved “up, down, and sideways” to accommodate teams, available ice and participation numbers. The good thing Minnesota Hockey has done is to figure out a way to let the associations solve their problems. That also means that once the association has solved their problems, Minnesota Hockey has to support their decisions.

The result is that when East Grand Forks association forms a team in East Grand Forks and plays teams from Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eastview, Eagan, Prior Lake/Savage, or Rosemount; they will be playing the best that community/association/school has to offer that year at that level.

That concept being implemented is what makes Minnesota Hockey great, not having a super star team from the great north called the “Godfather’s Pizza” or the “Sears Roebuck Automen” from the southern Mississippi Valley geared to improve the talents of a few 11-12 year old kids at the cost of $15,000 per year and whose talents will most likely fade by the time they hit high school. That would make Minnesota Hockey not great.

Just to protect the innocent.. That was my post, not NPC's

In the Metro there are number of associations that feed more than 1 high school. Kids are allowed to move because of the rules that are in place now. Why should a kid be able to choose where he will play in some associations and not in others. There are a lot of exceptions to the rule.. Should be no exceptions. Any kid should be able to play for any association in his district.

I agree that sponsored super teams are not the answer. The only good thing about them is you are playing there because you want to, and can.
There are a lot of people that don't like being told what they can and cannot do. How about the family that has an ice arena 3 blocks from home, but they have to drive 10 miles to their home ice?

The arrival of AAU or something like it will do a lot of damage ..Kinda like
"How ya gonna keep em down on the farm after they've seen Paris"

LOL, thanks Quasar for protecting the innocent, not so sure about innocent but...

First off I think that f61 is missing my point. I think that Quasar is right. It needs to be a totally open free agent system just like all of the other states have. Personally I think that they have found the solution. I also know that MN Hockey and the people running the associations want nothing to do with that. The second that MN Hockey loses control of who skates where they have lost control of what they hold dear, power. I am certain of the fact, especially given:
1. what is going on in MI with AAU,
2. with the mobility of our modern world,
3. with the amount of money involved both from the stand point of what parents are willing and able to spend and with what can be made by a sponsor
4. with the dissatisfaction amongst kids and parents who are caught in a bad situation (once again not all of them but I think my rough numbers are fairly close)
5. given that we do not have to rely on MN Hockey to tell us how to develop players, we can go to camps and see it, we look on the internet and see how others do it and we want to try some of it.
6. summer hockey breaking down the barriers and reducing the "I wonder what if" gray zone.
7. the number of kids playing hockey, there are lots of customers out there and more coming along all the time to support an other league

that it is only a matter of a very short time before AAU or a similar non-mnhockey/non-usahockey hockey league starts in and around MN. It is going to happen and the people who are using the twin cities to try to defend the status quo are missing the point. Shocking I know but we play hockey out here in the hinter lands, lots of it, and lots of us are not happy. Sure, Edina, EP, and all of the other big city types have hockey locked into place. The only small exception is MM and the proof that he has all he can handle speaks volumes. There are plenty of rinks in outer MN who have open ice. Associations are dropping in numbers and are on the verge of going away, that will open more ice up. Associations are getting desperate enough to want to try to keep hockey that you __might__ see entire associations try to switch over to open up the rules to entice kids to come skate there. What happens in Apple Valley, Burnsville, Edina and etc has very little in common with the problems faced in New Ulm, Proctor, Two Harbors, Silver Bay, Fergus Falls and etc. It is not a one size fits all and if MN Hockey is trying to look at it from the stand point of what is good for Edina and etc and project that onto what is good for those small outlying associations then they are in bigger trouble than I thought. This will go down like this, out state associations will start to fold, AAU clubs will form and take kids from them. City teams will start to have problems with their upper lower level kids moving and then it is done. Game over, MN Hockey is a distant memory.

The idea that I floated on the list was to try to find a common ground between the "let freedom reign crowd (myself included)" and the "over my dead body" crowd. Sure it has problems. An idea like this might, might be a way to get back control of the issue. Once AAU gets here and the migration and shifting starts it is not going to go away, it will accelerate. It is not the elite kids or the house kids, it is that upper middle level of kid who for what ever reason is not being serviced who is going to be willing to make the move and coincidentally they are the ones that AAU is looking for. You do not have to play USA Hockey to play high school hockey, you do not have to play USA Hockey to play Jrs or the USHL, college hockey will talk to you and the pro hockey crowd will let you play. USA Hockey's fragile monopoly over hockey players ends once a viable alternative comes along and it has came along, now lets see if it is viable. If it is, MN Hockey is done.

There is all of this talk about how much USA Hockey loves our system and about how they would like to use MN Hockey as a model. What happened when MN Hockey kept it's own ages? USA Hockey said, "no problems but you can't come play with us anymore". Did MN Hockey have to tell USA Hockey, sorry guys but your teams can't come play? Probably not. When MN Hockey folds USA Hockey is not going to step in to try to help them, they are gonna sit back and wait for the smoke to clear and as soon as it does they are going to try to get together with the new kid in town and you can bet that new kid is going to look a whole lot more like Michigan or New England than it is what MN hockey looks like now.

Outstate must be much different than the suburbs.

I am confused at who the AAU will be targeting. I mean if the AAU takes hold in Edina and grabs 3 teams worth of lower A and upper B teams, that team and talent level is going to look very different from the 3 teams from Princetion.

[Quasar]

I'm amazed at the exalted status given to the Amateur Athletic Union on this board. Your experiences obviously differ from mine.

If sweeping reform comes from outstate I'll be shocked.

I don't believe anyone yet has said they think the AAU would be a good thing. The point being made is that it could happen. Also I believe the gist of the thread is that reform should come from within. The out State scenario is valid. Also, the idea is that something like the AAU could spring up right here at home. All the posters to this thread so far are defending Minnesota hockey. Some pretty good ideas have been put forward. If you haven't read the whole thread, do so. If you have then your missing the point or pushing an agenda.. Either way your welcome to make your views known.
Unlike Minnesota hockey this board has total freedom...

[Quasar]

Outstate must be much different than the suburbs.

I am confused at who the AAU will be targeting. I mean if the AAU takes hold in Edina and grabs 3 teams worth of lower A and upper B teams, that team and talent level is going to look very different from the 3 teams from Princetion.

The Wisconsin Fire is about as far out state as you can get.
I would guess you being a Minnesota Made supporter, you would know of Bernie's involvement with the Fire, and where the kids that make up his team come from.

Does this clear it up?

[HockeyDad41]

Outstate must be much different than the suburbs.

I am confused at who the AAU will be targeting. I mean if the AAU takes hold in Edina and grabs 3 teams worth of lower A and upper B teams, that team and talent level is going to look very different from the 3 teams from Princetion.

The Wisconsin Fire is about as far out state as you can get.
I would guess you being a Minnesota Made supporter, you would know of Bernie's involvement with the Fire, and where the kids that make up his team come from.

Does this clear it up?

No because with the Fire you are talking about upper level or elite players who are motivated and have the means. How does that relate to the upper level b player in North Branch?

[MrBoDangles]

Outstate must be much different than the suburbs.

I am confused at who the AAU will be targeting. I mean if the AAU takes hold in Edina and grabs 3 teams worth of lower A and upper B teams, that team and talent level is going to look very different from the 3 teams from Princetion.

The Wisconsin Fire is about as far out state as you can get.
I would guess you being a Minnesota Made supporter, you would know of Bernie's involvement with the Fire, and where the kids that make up his team come from.

Does this clear it up?

No because with the Fire you are talking about upper level or elite players who are motivated and have the means. How does that relate to the upper level b player in North Branch?

There actually are kids from North Branch that play for the fire....... Did you know that there are doctors, lawyers, principals, business persons, etc in smaller communities too?

[Quasar]

Outstate must be much different than the suburbs.

I am confused at who the AAU will be targeting. I mean if the AAU takes hold in Edina and grabs 3 teams worth of lower A and upper B teams, that team and talent level is going to look very different from the 3 teams from Princetion.

The Wisconsin Fire is about as far out state as you can get.
I would guess you being a Minnesota Made supporter, you would know of Bernie's involvement with the Fire, and where the kids that make up his team come from.

Does this clear it up?

No because with the Fire you are talking about upper level or elite players who are motivated and have the means. How does that relate to the upper level b player in North Branch?

No one is talking about a B player from North Branch. We are talking about availability of ice outside the metro. A team from Princeton would be made up of kids from all over the Metro, as well as from surrounding communities. If it were up to me they would be the cream of the crop in the State. NPC's position as I understand it is they would be made up of A, B1, and B players that need something more than they're getting from their association. I suppose that the reality would be a mixture of all talent levels just like the summer hockey you so enjoy. There are some who cannot enjoy winter hockey, because they are in an untenable position. Easily solved just let them move to another association. It's happening all the time in the Metro. I'm pretty sure you know this. This whole thread is pretty much an inside the metro discussion, but there is no reason some of the multiple choices (play were you live, or where you go to school) couldn't be given to kids who only have one school district in their association. Lots of people in the Metro have figured out how to move within a fairly large geographic area. Perhaps all the kids that don't have a choice will make up the teams in some AAU sponsored league.
For what it's worth I personally know of Three individuals that are seriously investigating the possibility of establishing AAU in Minnesota this winter. And they will not be playing out state.

So we can all act with astonished disbelief , or we can get serious about saving the Minnesota hockey community based model.
I only care about this because Minnesota hockey was very good to me and my son many years ago, and I for one would hate to see it go. But, if no one cares enough to do something about changing the rules a little, then, I guess it's goodby USA/Minnesota hockey .. Hello AAU, or some equivalent ... I hope that's clear enough

[Quasar]

The Wisconsin Fire is about as far out state as you can get.
I would guess you being a Minnesota Made supporter, you would know of Bernie's involvement with the Fire, and where the kids that make up his team come from.

Does this clear it up?

No because with the Fire you are talking about upper level or elite players who are motivated and have the means. How does that relate to the upper level b player in North Branch?

There actually are kids from North Branch that play for the fire....... Did you know that there are doctors, lawyers, principals, business persons, etc in smaller communities too?

I 've been to North Branch and I can swear they have more than two stop signs.

Hi Bo ...Hope you had a nice weekend at the lake ....Q

[interestedbystander]

Outstate must be much different than the suburbs.

I am confused at who the AAU will be targeting. I mean if the AAU takes hold in Edina and grabs 3 teams worth of lower A and upper B teams, that team and talent level is going to look very different from the 3 teams from Princetion.

The Wisconsin Fire is about as far out state as you can get.
I would guess you being a Minnesota Made supporter, you would know of Bernie's involvement with the Fire, and where the kids that make up his team come from.

Does this clear it up?

No because with the Fire you are talking about upper level or elite players who are motivated and have the means. How does that relate to the upper level b player in North Branch?

My bet is that the VAST amount of money being spent on hockey, hockey training, goalie training, and dryland training outside of the association, is not being spent by the elite players parents, rather those just on the cusp and wanting to gain any advantage they can, to get that A spot or to play HS hockey. I love North Branch, by the way. Grew up nearby.

[old goalie85]

Q--Forest lake will sell ice. Why wouldn't we?? Have to make the payments..I think the privates will come. People I have talked to say AAU has it's own pile of problems.[volleyball, pumpkinpush] These parents have said that these "clubs" get very political. I'm not sure what he ment and I did't push.

[Quasar]

Q--Forest lake will sell ice. Why wouldn't we?? Have to make the payments..I think the privates will come. People I have talked to say AAU has it's own pile of problems.[volleyball, pumpkinpush] These parents have said that these "clubs" get very political. I'm not sure what he ment and I did't push.

Yeah, I'm sure the AAU has problems, and I don't think it's a good idea.

There are people that have a stake in private hockey that are looking at it. But, I would much rather see some kind of independent league, or better yet some rule changes so that a kid from Stillwater could play with his summer buddies from FL. NPC hit it on the head. There are a lot of ice arenas surrounding the greater metro that need to pay the bills, and as you said why wouldn't they sell ice to anyone that wants to buy it.
And if more people were as open to change as you are there would be no problem.

[spin-o-rama]

There are a lot of people that don't like being told what they can and cannot do. How about the family that has an ice arena 3 blocks from home, but they have to drive 10 miles to their home ice?

I wonder how many hours are being chewed up at 10:00 pm in Siren, Wi.

Driving to Siren, WI for 10pm ice to spite MH community based rules that make you drive 10 miles to your home rink?
You'd really have to hate your association.

MH has created leagues outside of the associations. There's the XL and the Rec league. They might do more if the need arises.

I'm still curious about all these A players that are suffering by having to play B. Are there that many kids throwing up Gretzky squirt numbers (5g/game) at the B level?

[Quasar]

There are a lot of people that don't like being told what they can and cannot do. How about the family that has an ice arena 3 blocks from home, but they have to drive 10 miles to their home ice?

I wonder how many hours are being chewed up at 10:00 pm in Siren, Wi.

Driving to Siren, WI for 10pm ice to spite MH community based rules that make you drive 10 miles to your home rink?
You'd really have to hate your association.

MH has created leagues outside of the associations. There's the XL and the Rec league. They might do more if the need arises.

I'm still curious about all these A players that are suffering by having to play B. Are there that many kids throwing up Gretzky squirt numbers (5g/game) at the B level?

Driving to Siren to play on the next Fire? could happen