HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

I heard today that there is a Girls U10 team playing at the Boys 2000 level in a tournament up in Duluth the weekend of August 20-22.

I don' t have a problem with girls playing with boys but I will say that boys will play against girls differently than they do boys! No ifs ands or buts about it, they will not play as aggressively against girls.

if your boy plays different because he is playing against a girl(that is qualified and aggressive) then that is a coaching/mental problem and he may not have the competitive/killer instinct ...he/she should be taught to play as hard as they can no matter who the opponent is.....doesn't your child play to win and as hard as he can against his younger brother and play to win,? why not do it against a girl the same age.....Don't think he wants to be known as the boy who lost to the girl but the one who beat her...I say this knowing there is some very good girls in our association..and all the boys seem to play them tough and the girls likewise..

I believe one of the 97 goalies for Fire is a girl. Does that mean that the boys don't shoot as hard on her? Doubt it.
If they're good enough to make the team, let them play. That being said, not sure I would let or want my daughter playing with the boys when the game gets to a rough level. To each there own.

Sorry, I should have elaborated. I wasn't referring to individuals on a team, I was meaning a team of girls vs a team of boys in the body contact age.

crw wrote:if your boy plays different because he is playing against a girl(that is qualified and aggressive) then that is a coaching/mental problem and he may not have the competitive/killer instinct ...he/she should be taught to play as hard as they can no matter who the opponent is.....doesn't your child play to win and as hard as he can against his younger brother and play to win,? why not do it against a girl the same age.....Don't think he wants to be known as the boy who lost to the girl but the one who beat her...I say this knowing there is some very good girls in our association..and all the boys seem to play them tough and the girls likewise..

It's human nature....calm down it isn't a "mental problem" like you claim it is.

hammer99 wrote:

crw wrote:if your boy plays different because he is playing against a girl(that is qualified and aggressive) then that is a coaching/mental problem and he may not have the competitive/killer instinct ...he/she should be taught to play as hard as they can no matter who the opponent is.....doesn't your child play to win and as hard as he can against his younger brother and play to win,? why not do it against a girl the same age.....Don't think he wants to be known as the boy who lost to the girl but the one who beat her...I say this knowing there is some very good girls in our association..and all the boys seem to play them tough and the girls likewise..

It's human nature....calm down it isn't a "mental problem" like you claim it is.

Uhhh....you're wrong. It's not "human nature"...it's taught behavior.

Pens4 wrote:As a relatively recent advocate of girls hockey....it makes me smile to read the controversy and fear created by the increasing talent of the girls playing hockey. The games-a-changing and the dump n' chase era that has existed in Men/boys hockey for a century is coming to an end in girls hockey.

Guess what? The puck is your friend and the team with it scores. Girls are being coached to hold onto the puck and make plays. Boys are being taught to not make mistakes and to "dump and chase." Physically aside...The skill gap between the boys and girls is closing faster than some like.

Hate to burst your bubble but that's not even close to true. The girls olympic team has on many occasions lost to high school boys teams. They have also proven that they cant even come close to competing at even the tier 2 junior hockey level, losing by scores like 6-0 and 9-0. Not to say girls hockey isn't developing fast, to say that the skill gap is closing may technically be true but that skill gap is nowhere near a point where you can compare mens' hockey to womens' hockey.

muckandgrind wrote:

hammer99 wrote:

crw wrote:if your boy plays different because he is playing against a girl(that is qualified and aggressive) then that is a coaching/mental problem and he may not have the competitive/killer instinct ...he/she should be taught to play as hard as they can no matter who the opponent is.....doesn't your child play to win and as hard as he can against his younger brother and play to win,? why not do it against a girl the same age.....Don't think he wants to be known as the boy who lost to the girl but the one who beat her...I say this knowing there is some very good girls in our association..and all the boys seem to play them tough and the girls likewise..

It's human nature....calm down it isn't a "mental problem" like you claim it is.

Uhhh....you're wrong. It's not "human nature"...it's taught behavior.

I can't believe you would even argue this. It is part of human nature for a man to not be as physical to women as they are to men.

When is the last time you saw a man punch a women? My guess is the answer to that is never.

hammer99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

hammer99 wrote:

It's human nature....calm down it isn't a "mental problem" like you claim it is.

Uhhh....you're wrong. It's not "human nature"...it's taught behavior.

I can't believe you would even argue this. It is part of human nature for a man to not be as physical to women as they are to men.

When is the last time you saw a man punch a women? My guess is the answer to that is never.

Take aside the fact that we aren't talking about men "punching" women; my point is that it's not "human instinct" that keeps boys from wanting to compete against girls. Boys do not come out of the womb with the innate sense that girls are weaker than them and thus are to be treated gingerly.

It's parents (and society) teaching their kids that boys are "rough and rugged" and girls are "fragile". As parents we teach our kids that it's "not nice to hit girls"....I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that...in fact, I teach my boys that it's not nice to hit ANYBODY else. But kids can also be taught that there is a difference between a hockey check and punching a girl.

Can't you figure that out??

I wonder if they are having this same discussion over on the MMA board?

When is the last time you saw a man punch a women? My guess is the answer to that is never.[/quote]

Million Dollar Baby. Rent it over the weekend, take your thorazine, and tell us on Monday if her injury was the result of human nature.

"Can't you figure that out??"

“It’s awesome,” star U.S. forward Natalie Darwitz, a two-time Olympian and a team captain since 2007. “For us, those high school teams are great competition. It’s like playing a game against Canada.

“I’m not a rocket scientist here, but boys are naturally stronger and faster,” Darwitz said. “It is just genetic. They are stronger and can shoot the puck harder. It makes us react a lot faster. I think we get a lot better playing those teams.” http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/news_article ... r_id=52120

I am all for having youth hockey be for anyone to try out (girls or boys) but this idea of bringing a top girls team to play against boys c teams is completely unnecessary. There is plenty of solid competition on the girls side and they can play up if they feel they are ready for it. I still feel this is more about dad's being able to brag about their daughters beating a boys team then anything else. Now that a couple teams have done it I am afraid we will see every less competitive boys tournament containing a top girls team. I have one daughter who played youth and one that played girls and have been involved with a lot of both. I think Pens is right about the style of play but I would say it has more to do with a U14 being able to look down at the puck with out the fear of an open ice check than an evolution of the game.

royals dad wrote:

"Can't you figure that out??"

“It’s awesome,” star U.S. forward Natalie Darwitz, a two-time Olympian and a team captain since 2007. “For us, those high school teams are great competition. It’s like playing a game against Canada.

“I’m not a rocket scientist here, but boys are naturally stronger and faster,” Darwitz said. “It is just genetic. They are stronger and can shoot the puck harder. It makes us react a lot faster. I think we get a lot better playing those teams.” http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/news_article ... r_id=52120

I am all for having youth hockey be for anyone to try out (girls or boys) but this idea of bringing a top girls team to play against boys c teams is completely unnecessary. There is plenty of solid competition on the girls side and they can play up if they feel they are ready for it. I still feel this is more about dad's being able to brag about their daughters beating a boys team then anything else. Now that a couple teams have done it I am afraid we will see every less competitive boys tournament containing a top girls team. I have one daughter who played youth and one that played girls and have been involved with a lot of both. I think Pens is right about the style of play but I would say it has more to do with a U14 being able to look down at the puck with out the fear of an open ice check than an evolution of the game.

I don't know anything about the AAA tournament the girls entered...we're they, in fact, boys "C" teams?

I don't know anything about the AAA tournament the girls entered...we're they, in fact, boys "C" teams?

They were "AAA" teams at breezy but not sure what that means anymore. It was not a real strong field.

AimHigh wrote:When is the last time you saw a man punch a women? My guess is the answer to that is never.

Million Dollar Baby. Rent it over the weekend, take your thorazine, and tell us on Monday if her injury was the result of human nature.[/quote]


because I really said that no man has ever punched a woman (sarcasm)... My guess is that you have never seen a man punch a woman, I know I haven't. However, I have on many occasions seen a man punch another man. My guess is that a majority of people on this board have seen this same type of behavior, reluctance to punch a woman, while at the same time having somewhat of a want to punch other men (a hockey example being junior hockey). Just because some men have punched a woman before, does not mean that there is not somewhat of an instinct for a man not to hurt a woman.


That may be the stupidest post on this thread that I have ever responded to.

muckandgrind wrote:

royals dad wrote:

"Can't you figure that out??"

“It’s awesome,” star U.S. forward Natalie Darwitz, a two-time Olympian and a team captain since 2007. “For us, those high school teams are great competition. It’s like playing a game against Canada.

“I’m not a rocket scientist here, but boys are naturally stronger and faster,” Darwitz said. “It is just genetic. They are stronger and can shoot the puck harder. It makes us react a lot faster. I think we get a lot better playing those teams.” http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/news_article ... r_id=52120

I am all for having youth hockey be for anyone to try out (girls or boys) but this idea of bringing a top girls team to play against boys c teams is completely unnecessary. There is plenty of solid competition on the girls side and they can play up if they feel they are ready for it. I still feel this is more about dad's being able to brag about their daughters beating a boys team then anything else. Now that a couple teams have done it I am afraid we will see every less competitive boys tournament containing a top girls team. I have one daughter who played youth and one that played girls and have been involved with a lot of both. I think Pens is right about the style of play but I would say it has more to do with a U14 being able to look down at the puck with out the fear of an open ice check than an evolution of the game.

I don't know anything about the AAA tournament the girls entered...we're they, in fact, boys "C" teams?

Well being as you have previously suggested that a boys C team would beat a Girls A team, My guess would be that these boys who lost to the girls played rec hockey.

Keep in mind I am going by YOUR LOGIC.

[quote="hammer99"][quote="muckandgrind"][quote="royals dad"][quote]"Can't you figure that out??"[/quote]

“It’s awesome,” star U.S. forward Natalie Darwitz, a two-time Olympian and a team captain since 2007. “For us, those high school teams are great competition. It’s like playing a game against Canada.

“I’m not a rocket scientist here, but boys are naturally stronger and faster,” Darwitz said. “It is just genetic. They are stronger and can shoot the puck harder. It makes us react a lot faster. I think we get a lot better playing those teams.” http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/news_article ... r_id=52120

I am all for having youth hockey be for anyone to try out (girls or boys) but this idea of bringing a top girls team to play against boys c teams is completely unnecessary. There is plenty of solid competition on the girls side and they can play up if they feel they are ready for it. I still feel this is more about dad's being able to brag about their daughters beating a boys team then anything else. Now that a couple teams have done it I am afraid we will see every less competitive boys tournament containing a top girls team. I have one daughter who played youth and one that played girls and have been involved with a lot of both. I think Pens is right about the style of play but I would say it has more to do with a U14 being able to look down at the puck with out the fear of an open ice check than an evolution of the game.[/quote]

I don't know anything about the AAA tournament the girls entered...we're they, in fact, boys "C" teams?[/quote]


Well being as you have previously suggested that a boys C team would beat a Girls A team, My guess would be that these boys who lost to the girls played rec hockey.

Keep in mind I am going by YOUR LOGIC. [/quote]



Haha I have to give this one to hammer99

slapshot445 wrote:

hammer99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote: I don't know anything about the AAA tournament the girls entered...we're they, in fact, boys "C" teams?

Well being as you have previously suggested that a boys C team would beat a Girls A team, My guess would be that these boys who lost to the girls played rec hockey.

Keep in mind I am going by YOUR LOGIC.

Haha I have to give this one to hammer99

How so??? Didn't a "C" team beat the Girls to win the championship?????

If anything, this proves my point. In order for a team of girls to compete, they need to enter a boys "C" tournament. Thus "A" youth and "A" girls are not played at nearly the same level.

If a boy's C team can beat a girl's A team......how badly would a boy's "A" team beat the girl's "A" team?

muckandgrind wrote:

slapshot445 wrote:

hammer99 wrote:
Well being as you have previously suggested that a boys C team would beat a Girls A team, My guess would be that these boys who lost to the girls played rec hockey.

Keep in mind I am going by YOUR LOGIC.

Haha I have to give this one to hammer99

How so??? Didn't a "C" team beat the Girls to win the championship?????

If anything, this proves my point. In order for a team of girls to compete, they need to enter a boys "C" tournament. Thus "A" youth and "A" girls are not played at nearly the same level.

If a boy's C team can beat a girl's A team......how badly would a boy's "A" team beat the girl's "A" team?

So in your opinion these teams that lost to the girls' teams are worse than C teams? That's what your logic seems to suggest.

slapshot445 wrote:

hammer99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote: I don't know anything about the AAA tournament the girls entered...we're they, in fact, boys "C" teams?

Well being as you have previously suggested that a boys C team would beat a Girls A team, My guess would be that these boys who lost to the girls played rec hockey.

Keep in mind I am going by YOUR LOGIC.

Haha I have to give this one to hammer99

Why thank you!

hammer99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

slapshot445 wrote:

Haha I have to give this one to hammer99

How so??? Didn't a "C" team beat the Girls to win the championship?????

If anything, this proves my point. In order for a team of girls to compete, they need to enter a boys "C" tournament. Thus "A" youth and "A" girls are not played at nearly the same level.

If a boy's C team can beat a girl's A team......how badly would a boy's "A" team beat the girl's "A" team?

So in your opinion these teams that lost to the girls' teams are worse than C teams? That's what your logic seems to suggest.

No, what I'm suggesting is that an "all star" team of girls can't win a tournament made up of supposed "C" level boys teams.

My bet is that virtually every girl on that team played either boys or girls "A". They would probably walk through any all girls tournament, yet have trouble playing in a weak boy's tournament,

This is why many "outlier" girls are better served playing on a boy's team, if they so choose.

If it's your theory that boys and girls "A" teams are at the same level, why then didn't this girls team walk through the competition and win the whole thing running away? Surely, a boys "C" team shouldn't give them any trouble, should it?

muckandgrind wrote:

hammer99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote: How so??? Didn't a "C" team beat the Girls to win the championship?????

If anything, this proves my point. In order for a team of girls to compete, they need to enter a boys "C" tournament. Thus "A" youth and "A" girls are not played at nearly the same level.

If a boy's C team can beat a girl's A team......how badly would a boy's "A" team beat the girl's "A" team?

So in your opinion these teams that lost to the girls' teams are worse than C teams? That's what your logic seems to suggest.

No, what I'm suggesting is that an "all star" team of girls can't win a tournament made up of supposed "C" level boys teams.

My bet is that virtually every girl on that team played either boys or girls "A". They would probably walk through any all girls tournament, yet have trouble playing in a weak boy's tournament,

This is why many "outlier" girls are better served playing on a boy's team, if they so choose.

If it's your theory that boys and girls "A" teams are at the same level, why then didn't this girls team walk through the competition and win the whole thing running away? Surely, a boys "C" team shouldn't give them any trouble, should it?

I have never even hinted that I think that boys and girls A hockey is comparable in competition level. I am simply pointing out that you have contended that boys C teams are better than girls A teams, and if we were to go by that logic that means that these boys teams that lost to the girls' team are worse than the C level, which would suggest that these boys who entered this AAA tournament are no better than rec hockey players (which we all know is not true).

I am trying to show you how ridiculous your comparison is between girls A hockey and boys C hockey, I'm not in any way trying to say that girls A hockey is as good as boys A hockey.

hammer99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

hammer99 wrote:
So in your opinion these teams that lost to the girls' teams are worse than C teams? That's what your logic seems to suggest.

No, what I'm suggesting is that an "all star" team of girls can't win a tournament made up of supposed "C" level boys teams.

My bet is that virtually every girl on that team played either boys or girls "A". They would probably walk through any all girls tournament, yet have trouble playing in a weak boy's tournament,

This is why many "outlier" girls are better served playing on a boy's team, if they so choose.

If it's your theory that boys and girls "A" teams are at the same level, why then didn't this girls team walk through the competition and win the whole thing running away? Surely, a boys "C" team shouldn't give them any trouble, should it?

I have never even hinted that I think that boys and girls A hockey is comparable in competition level. I am simply pointing out that you have contended that boys C teams are better than girls A teams, and if we were to go by that logic that means that these boys teams that lost to the girls' team are worse than the C level, which would suggest that these boys who entered this AAA tournament are no better than rec hockey players (which we all know is not true).

I am trying to show you how ridiculous your comparison is between girls A hockey and boys C hockey, I'm not in any way trying to say that girls A hockey is as good as boys A hockey.

Well then I apologize....but many like you, who suggest that girls just play with girls have been suggesting that the top level girls will be challenged sufficiently by playin with girls only. If you aren't suggesting that, then I was wrong in suggesting you were.

However, I'll stick to my claim that many or most Squirt C team can beat U10A teams. As a matter of fact, my son's A Squirt team scrimmaged and beat the association's U12A team on multiple occasions (obviously, this wasn't an "official" game as kids of different age levels are prohibited from scrimmaging each other - but they were sharing the ice during a practice and spent the last 30 minutes scrimmaging full ice, no check hockey). So basically you have Squirt-aged boys beating PeeWee-aged girls....and these girls weren't bad. They had some decent finishes in the tournaments they entered.

And where did I suggest that ALL "C" boy's teams could beat ALL "A" level girl's teams? I'd appreciate it if you could dig that quote out, because I don't think that's what I said. I don't speak in absolutes, I'm pretty sure I said "many" or "most"....not "all".

Again, I don't see why some are so threatened by a couple of talented girls wishing to better themselves by playing with the boys - if their ability permits it.

Just wanting to clarify as things are getting warped in this many posts. The 97 Loons defeated the girls AAA team which was very talented by scors of 8-1 twice handily. They are not a C team rec hockey team and in fact came in a close 2nd in this year international cup and 3rd in Pepsi Cup. However, the other boys teams were more AA calibre in general. All I will stress is the girls team was very talented and had full rights to be in this tournament as evidenced by their silver medal. They did full condact well and as long as you carefully scrutinize the tournament you enter, things went well. Forget sex here. Some weak boys teams have no business in certain tournaments and that should be the topic of discussion.