hockey_is_a_choice wrote: This could come down to the "haves" and the "have nots" with the "have nots" being the only players participating in association hockey. .
It already is. The "have nots" don't attend MM, play AAA hockey, pay for year round private instruction, etc. The have nots will end up on the C/B2 teams and might eventually drop out. The "haves" can afford MM, AAA, private lessons, etc.
Long gone are the days where you don't need to pay thousands of $$$ to make an A team, especially in the Metro area.
hockey_is_a_choice wrote: This could come down to the "haves" and the "have nots" with the "have nots" being the only players participating in association hockey. .
It already is. The "have nots" don't attend MM, play AAA hockey, pay for year round private instruction, etc. The have nots will end up on the C/B2 teams and might eventually drop out. The "haves" can afford MM, AAA, private lessons, etc.
Long gone are the days where you don't need to pay thousands of $$$ to make an A team, especially in the Metro area.
Not as simple as that, can't simply say the players are C/B2 because they don't have money. Many of these players go to clinics and play in summer ( thank god there is a place for them to play ! ) but money alone doesn't make a player. Conversely there some of the best don't play summer or go to clinics ... they are far and few in between but there are some. Playing summer and clinics only HELP reach your potential, NOT define your potential.
You missed the point. If private programs like Minnesota Made expand their leagues to include winter teams, there is nothing stopping the private schools from forming their own "clubs" to compete against the private teams at the youth levels. My understanding is the Minnesota State High School League rules do not apply to kids who are not in high school, which means private schools are free to form any team or club they want at the youth levels. Yes, those teams will not be allowed to compete against Minnesota youth hockey association teams, but it won't matter if the best kids have abandoned their community associations to play for privately run teams and leagues because they were forced to choose between association and privately manages teams, leagues and programs. The private school teams will play the privately operated teams and participate in the privately managed leagues. Accordingly, the private school won't need to play community association teams. In a nutshell, if the District 6 rule becomes the law of the land for association based hockey in Minnesota, you will see more private teams and once Pandora's box is opened, you cannot close it.
seek & destroy wrote:Once his program gets big enough that he thinks HE can force people to pick one over the other, he will definitely push for that...your kidding yourself if you think otherwise. He just doesn't like having people beat him at his own game.
Ask Bernie about how come the Doll kid got cut from his Machine team AFTER Bernie learned Bill Doll was investing in the Hat Trick rink over in SLP. Yep, it's about Choice - Bernie's choice.
hockey_is_a_choice wrote:Be careful what you ask for . . . If the District 6 rule withstands legal scrutiny and Minnesota Hockey rolls out the rule to cover all districts in the state and forces people to choose between association hockey and private teams, my bet is association hockey will lose many of its best players--at least in the metro area. Smaller associations, who are only a few players deep at the A level, will lose their best players to private teams. Programs like Edina, Wayzata, Eden Prairie and Burnsville will lose their marquee players to the top Tier I programs in Minnesota. Schools like BSM, STA, Hill Murray, Breck and Blake all have middle school age kids and could opt to form their own teams. This could come down to the "haves" and the "have nots" with the "have nots" being the only players participating in association hockey. Something tells me that Herb Brooks would not be in favor of this model. Be careful what you ask for--Pandora's box cannot be closed once it is opened.
What Tier 1 programs? There is only one at this time, and that topic is another can of worms separate from BM lawsuit. What "private" teams would form outside of association based programs? You would have to get USA Hockey approval (not going to happen because of MN Hockey), and who would you play? Are you talking about more "choice" programs like BM's starting up because people are upset about D6's rule? Not going to happen or it would have already. People who dislike association based hockey programs have been foreseeing the end of hockey as we know it in MN for years, and what has come of it. Nothing! The reality of the situation is that association based hockey in MN is not going anywhere whether you like it or not. The options are out there for families who dislike association hockey: Find a Tier 1 program, which will be outside the state, and spend the money and fly your kid around the country. It's being done right now by numerous families, and if your kid fits into this situation, you have the "choice" to persue it.
hockey_is_a_choice wrote:Be careful what you ask for . . . If the District 6 rule withstands legal scrutiny and Minnesota Hockey rolls out the rule to cover all districts in the state and forces people to choose between association hockey and private teams, my bet is association hockey will lose many of its best players--at least in the metro area. Smaller associations, who are only a few players deep at the A level, will lose their best players to private teams. Programs like Edina, Wayzata, Eden Prairie and Burnsville will lose their marquee players to the top Tier I programs in Minnesota. Schools like BSM, STA, Hill Murray, Breck and Blake all have middle school age kids and could opt to form their own teams. This could come down to the "haves" and the "have nots" with the "have nots" being the only players participating in association hockey. Something tells me that Herb Brooks would not be in favor of this model. Be careful what you ask for--Pandora's box cannot be closed once it is opened.
What Tier 1 programs? There is only one at this time, and that topic is another can of worms separate from BM lawsuit. What "private" teams would form outside of association based programs? You would have to get USA Hockey approval (not going to happen because of MN Hockey), and who would you play? Are you talking about more "choice" programs like BM's starting up because people are upset about D6's rule? Not going to happen or it would have already. People who dislike association based hockey programs have been foreseeing the end of hockey as we know it in MN for years, and what has come of it. Nothing! The reality of the situation is that association based hockey in MN is not going anywhere whether you like it or not. The options are out there for families who dislike association hockey: Find a Tier 1 program, which will be outside the state, and spend the money and fly your kid around the country. It's being done right now by numerous families, and if your kid fits into this situation, you have the "choice" to persue it.
Up to about 25 years ago, there were private school teams for kids K-8. If you look at the trophy cases of many church based schools, you might be able to see some of the team pictures still hanging.
Not sure how this was run in conjunction with USA or MN Hockey...they may have been no affiliation whatsoever, but there WERE leagues. They wouldn't need anybody's "approval", whether USA or MN Hockey to get started. Just a few like-minded schools willing to give it a try.
Like I said before, I don't have any issues with Bernie starting up his "Choice" leagues. I just wish he would be honest about his true intentions and quit being a hypocrite about it.
blueliner2day wrote:I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!! The only hypocracy here is calling Bernie a hypocrite. AGAIN.....pay attention people Bernie is running a BUSINESS - hockey associations are 501 c (3) ..... a non-profit cannot tell you what you can or can't do with your time/money apparantly unless you are a MN hockey association.
People take you hockey glasses off for a minute. There is a legal issue here whether you agree with it or not.
Minnesota Hockey, District 6 a 501C non profit has created a rule for people that fall within in its self designated geographical jusidiction. (monolopy) That rule simply states that if you want to play on a team with in the District 6 jurisdiction on a District 6 Association team you cannot patronize a private business that offers a simialar hockey service between the months of Sept and March.
Does this rule put the squeeze on a business? Yes. Is District 6 using its "monolopy" powers in MN hockey to tell someone what they can or cant do with their money or free time? Yes! This is the issue! Is District 6 enforcing the rule? I dont know? If they are, are they also enforcing the same rule on the District 6 players out of the 30+ players that registered for the Jr. Blades Winter Mite Development Program or is only MM targeted?
Rule A A Child can either play Association Hockey or MM. They just can't do both.
Rule B A Child can either play MM or another summer AAA program. They just can't do both.
Bernie enforces Rule B with an iron fist, yet is going to court to overturn Rule A. Don't you see the blatant hypocracy going on with this?
I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!! The only hypocracy here is calling Bernie a hypocrite. AGAIN.....pay attention people Bernie is running a BUSINESS - hockey associations are 501 c (3) ..... a non-profit cannot tell you what you can or can't do with your time/money apparantly unless you are a MN hockey association.
You're wrong.
The District isn't saying your kid can't play MM hockey. They are saying that you can't play D6 hockey IF you are playing MM. Big difference, they aren't telling parents, as you said, what you can/can't do with your money. Non-profits don't have to accept your money. Players get suspended or expelled from associations all the time for various infractions they deem worthy of suspension/expulsion. This is just another one of those.
Another example: A church is considered a 501 c(3) as well, they don't have to accept a new member just because someone demands so. A church won't lose their 501 c(3) status if a priest refuses to marry a couple if he feels they don't live by the principles as set forth by the Catholic Church.
As such, a youth hockey association doesn't have to accept players they feel don't abide by the dictates as set down by the association.
Pretty simple, actually.
And, yes, Bernie IS a hypocrite. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Why are so many people reading this as District 6 telling parents that they can't have their kids play Minnesota Made????? That's not what this is about at all!!!! They are simply telling parents they need to make a choice: association hockey or Minnesota Made. Why is that so difficult to understand for some? If you feel you kid is better off playing for Bernie, GO FOR IT!!!!!!! Then, if you find out the grass may not be greener, and you tire of his antics, you can register for association hockey year, or not. The "choice" is yours.
I'm wrong??? Apparently not the only one that thinks a non-profit has different rules than a for-profit company. Split all the hairs you want but what it boils down to is yes D6 is telling people what they can and can't do by removing the choice of playing both. It is not up to YOU, D6 or MN Hockey to tell me no. A church cannot tell you how much you HAVE to pay to be a part of their community neither does a charity tell you can only donate X dollars nor do they tell you you can only contribute to their charity but you can't donate to anyone else BUT a hockey assoc tells you you have to pay so much to play and mandatory volunteer time otherwise people like you jump on the bandwagon with the same old tired arguments about hypocracy, not enough time put into my association, blah blah blah.
blueliner2day wrote:I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!! The only hypocracy here is calling Bernie a hypocrite. AGAIN.....pay attention people Bernie is running a BUSINESS - hockey associations are 501 c (3) ..... a non-profit cannot tell you what you can or can't do with your time/money apparantly unless you are a MN hockey association.
People take you hockey glasses off for a minute. There is a legal issue here whether you agree with it or not.
Minnesota Hockey, District 6 a 501C non profit has created a rule for people that fall within in its self designated geographical jusidiction. (monolopy) That rule simply states that if you want to play on a team with in the District 6 jurisdiction on a District 6 Association team you cannot patronize a private business that offers a simialar hockey service between the months of Sept and March.
Does this rule put the squeeze on a business? Yes. Is District 6 using its "monolopy" powers in MN hockey to tell someone what they can or cant do with their money or free time? Yes! This is the issue! Is District 6 enforcing the rule? I dont know? If they are, are they also enforcing the same rule on the District 6 players out of the 30+ players that registered for the Jr. Blades Winter Mite Development Program or is only MM targeted?
A couple of points:
-Since the D6 rule is only for outside "League Play" for Squirts and above, this will not affect those players who participate in the Jr Blades Mite Development Program, or MM clinics, for that matter.
-And to your point about the "monopoly" powers telling someone what they can or cannot do with their money......YOU ARE WRONG. District 6 is NOT telling someone they can't play in MM Choice League. They are saying that if you CHOOSE to play in the Choice League, you can't play in D6. There is absolutely NOTHING in the language of the rule that PREVENTS someone from registering in the Choice League.
WHY IS THIS SO FREAKIN' HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND!?!?!?!?
Last edited by muckandgrind on Fri Nov 12, 2010 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It is unfortumate both sides are wasting time and money on this. I am sure there are pleny of families struggling to pay for their kids to play hockey and all this money is being wasted on legal fees.
It is unfortunate MN Hockey did not get D6 and MM in a room with an arbritator to discuss the issues before this landed in court.
blueliner2day wrote:
I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!! The only hypocracy here is calling Bernie a hypocrite. AGAIN.....pay attention people Bernie is running a BUSINESS - hockey associations are 501 c (3) ..... a non-profit cannot tell you what you can or can't do with your time/money apparantly unless you are a MN hockey association.
You're wrong.
The District isn't saying your kid can't play MM hockey. They are saying that you can't play D6 hockey IF you are playing MM. Big difference, they aren't telling parents, as you said, what you can/can't do with your money. Non-profits don't have to accept your money. Players get suspended or expelled from associations all the time for various infractions they deem worthy of suspension/expulsion. This is just another one of those.
Another example: A church is considered a 501 c(3) as well, they don't have to accept a new member just because someone demands so. A church won't lose their 501 c(3) status if a priest refuses to marry a couple if he feels they don't live by the principles as set forth by the Catholic Church.
As such, a youth hockey association doesn't have to accept players they feel don't abide by the dictates as set down by the association.
Pretty simple, actually.
And, yes, Bernie IS a hypocrite. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Why are so many people reading this as District 6 telling parents that they can't have their kids play Minnesota Made????? That's not what this is about at all!!!! They are simply telling parents they need to make a choice: association hockey or Minnesota Made. Why is that so difficult to understand for some? If you feel you kid is better off playing for Bernie, GO FOR IT!!!!!!! Then, if you find out the grass may not be greener, and you tire of his antics, you can register for association hockey year, or not. The "choice" is yours.
I'm wrong??? Apparently not the only one that thinks a non-profit has different rules than a for-profit company. Split all the hairs you want but what it boils down to is yes D6 is telling people what they can and can't do by removing the choice of playing both. It is not up to YOU, D6 or MN Hockey to tell me no. A church cannot tell you how much you HAVE to pay to be a part of their community neither does a charity tell you can only donate X dollars nor do they tell you you can only contribute to their charity but you can't donate to anyone else BUT a hockey assoc tells you you have to pay so much to play and mandatory volunteer time otherwise people like you jump on the bandwagon with the same old tired arguments about hypocracy, not enough time put into my association, blah blah blah.
Since you seem to be having a tough time comprehending....Let me break it down for you in very simple terms:
-D6 is NOT preventing ANYONE from playing in the Choice League.
-A 501 c(3) CAN create rules for their members.
-A 501 c(3) does NOT have to accept your money or allow you to join the ranks of their membership. (so, yes, D6 can tell you "no")
Is that clear enough for you? It really is that simple.
Some people seem to be operating under the assumption that it's their "right" to play association hockey. Well, it's not.
You missed the point. If private programs like Minnesota Made expand their leagues to include winter teams, there is nothing stopping the private schools from forming their own "clubs" to compete against the private teams at the youth levels. My understanding is the Minnesota State High School League rules do not apply to kids who are not in high school, which means private schools are free to form any team or club they want at the youth levels. Yes, those teams will not be allowed to compete against Minnesota youth hockey association teams, but it won't matter if the best kids have abandoned their community associations to play for privately run teams and leagues because they were forced to choose between association and privately manages teams, leagues and programs. The private school teams will play the privately operated teams and participate in the privately managed leagues. Accordingly, the private school won't need to play community association teams. In a nutshell, if the District 6 rule becomes the law of the land for association based hockey in Minnesota, you will see more private teams and once Pandora's box is opened, you cannot close it.
It doesn't follow. Why would private schools START a team AFTER a rule is in place saying a player can't play assoc and for the private school. It would have made more sense had they seen a need and started these teams already. My guess is they don't see the need, or least the benefits don't outweigh the overhead of running these teams and if/when the rule goes state wide none of that would change.
Oh No! all the rich kids are going to go play by themselves!! the sky is falling! the sky is falling!
So, if all the private schools decide to start their own youth team( maybe 6-7 schools) the association hockey model as we know it today is going to collapse? Really? The privates currently have HS teams, yet the public schools still seem to be putting out some quality hockey programs.
The District isn't saying your kid can't play MM hockey. They are saying that you can't play D6 hockey IF you are playing MM. Big difference, they aren't telling parents, as you said, what you can/can't do with your money. Non-profits don't have to accept your money. Players get suspended or expelled from associations all the time for various infractions they deem worthy of suspension/expulsion. This is just another one of those.
Another example: A church is considered a 501 c(3) as well, they don't have to accept a new member just because someone demands so. A church won't lose their 501 c(3) status if a priest refuses to marry a couple if he feels they don't live by the principles as set forth by the Catholic Church.
As such, a youth hockey association doesn't have to accept players they feel don't abide by the dictates as set down by the association.
Pretty simple, actually.
And, yes, Bernie IS a hypocrite. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Why are so many people reading this as District 6 telling parents that they can't have their kids play Minnesota Made????? That's not what this is about at all!!!! They are simply telling parents they need to make a choice: association hockey or Minnesota Made. Why is that so difficult to understand for some? If you feel you kid is better off playing for Bernie, GO FOR IT!!!!!!! Then, if you find out the grass may not be greener, and you tire of his antics, you can register for association hockey year, or not. The "choice" is yours.
I'm wrong??? Apparently not the only one that thinks a non-profit has different rules than a for-profit company. Split all the hairs you want but what it boils down to is yes D6 is telling people what they can and can't do by removing the choice of playing both. It is not up to YOU, D6 or MN Hockey to tell me no. A church cannot tell you how much you HAVE to pay to be a part of their community neither does a charity tell you can only donate X dollars nor do they tell you you can only contribute to their charity but you can't donate to anyone else BUT a hockey assoc tells you you have to pay so much to play and mandatory volunteer time otherwise people like you jump on the bandwagon with the same old tired arguments about hypocracy, not enough time put into my association, blah blah blah.
Since you seem to be having a tough time comprehending....Let me break it down for you in very simple terms:
-D6 is NOT preventing ANYONE from playing in the Choice League.
-A 501 c(3) CAN create rules for their members.
-A 501 c(3) does NOT have to accept your money or allow you to join the ranks of their membership. (so, yes, D6 can tell you "no")
Is that clear enough for you? It really is that simple.
Some people seem to be operating under the assumption that it's their "right" to play association hockey. Well, it's not.
I will type slowly to help you.....D6 IS preventing players by playing in the Choice league by not allowing them to do both if they wish AGAIN not up to YOU, D6 or MNHoc to say no. Quit hiding behind the skirts of the 501c(3). If you want to compete, get out from behind the protection of the 501c3 and compete head to head for your customers with your product and then you can make any rule you want (i.e. Bernie). Then you will have created the right to call others hypocrites. People will either come for your product because of the quality of your product or go where they can get what they want or combine programs. If you choose the 501c3 route, then quit complaining - you have to follow the 501c3 rules by accepting everyone whether you like it or not. Associations want the money but only on their terms and that's not the way it works.[/b]
blueliner2day wrote: I will type slowly to help you.....D6 IS preventing players by playing in the Choice league by not allowing them to do both if they wish AGAIN not up to YOU, D6 or MNHoc to say no. Quit hiding behind the skirts of the 501c(3). If you want to compete, get out from behind the protection of the 501c3 and compete head to head for your customers with your product and then you can make any rule you want (i.e. Bernie). Then you will have created the right to call others hypocrites. People will either come for your product because of the quality of your product or go where they can get what they want or combine programs. If you choose the 501c3 route, then quit complaining - you have to follow the 501c3 rules by accepting everyone whether you like it or not. Associations want the money but only on their terms and that's not the way it works.[/b]
That is the most convuluted attempt at logical reasoning I've seen it quite some time.......Yes it IS up to D6 and MN Hockey to set up the rules around their organization, and it IS up to them to tell you "no" if they so choose....how do you NOT understand this???? You do not have some sort of "right" to particpate in Association Hockey.
D6 is "competing" (so to say) against Choice Hockey. You, and other parents, can CHOOSE which program you would rather send your check to. Again, it's your CHOICE. Up or down, MN Hockey or MM - not both. You can't get much more head to head competition than that.
If the local Association is not meeting your needs....just leave and have little Johnny play for Bernie. You have OPTIONS. What you want is to have your cake and eat it too. It doesn't work that way.
you have to follow the 501c3 rules by accepting everyone whether you like it or not
Where is the rule that says a 501c3 has to accept everyone??? I'd be interested in seeing that one. Churches are 501c3, do they HAVE to accept everyone? The answer is NO THEY DO NOT - and neither do hockey associations.
Just because they are a non-profit - it doesn't mean they can't set rules for membership.
Again, it's their RIGHT to tell you "NO - we don't want you".
You need to do a little reading up on what a 501c3 really is and what their rights are.....you might want to start with 'Boys Scouts of America v Dale'.
This dispute comes down to this: Minnesota Hockey and District 6 are trying to put Bernie out of business, or, at a minimum, limit Bernie’s ability to compete with them. Once discovery starts in earnest in the lawsuit, e-mails will be produced and there will be plenty of them. Those e-mails between district board members and Minnesota Hockey board members will likely reveal candid exchanges where people “in power” have bluntly stated that they want to put MM out of business. As we all know, Bernie is a polarizing guy. Those e-mails, in turn, will help Bernie’s lawyers build their case that the District 6 rule was enacted for one reason and one reason only: to put MM out of business. Now, Minnesota Hockey and District 6 may have a different story to tell and it may be a legitimate story, but their story is more convoluted. If this case actually gets to a jury, Bernie has a simple story to tell the jury. And, in the world of successfully trying cases to a jury, it’s the principle of KISS—keep it simple stupid—that usually wins the trial.
Now, whether any of us like or dislike Bernie is not the issue (personally, I’m ambivalent towards the guy), the issue for parents is: How could this case potentially change the Minnesota Youth Hockey landscape?
For those of you who are thinking some of us are wrongly confusing summer and Tier I hockey with this issue, we are not. If Bernie wins—or loses—he is not going away, he is an enterprising entrepreneur. If Bernie wins and kids can skate in leagues or on teams in addition to association hockey, competing businesses will copy or improve upon Bernie’s model, which will change the winter hockey landscape in Minnesota. More MM choice-type leagues means opportunities for interleague competition among those private leagues. Bernie’s Choice teams could play XYZ Company’s choice-type leagues that, in turn, play Hat Trick’s or Velocity’s choice-type leagues. The private schools can jump on the bandwagon and have their club teams play the MM, XYZ, Hat Trick, Velocity, etc. teams. Those teams and leagues will be populated with kids who once upon a time played association hockey. Fewer association kids means increased costs for those left in the associations. Some of the smaller associations may be forced to merge with other associations or close down the association, which means some kids will be left to playing shinny hockey on the ponds (this might not be a bad outcome).
Yes, those private teams and leagues will not be USA Hockey endorsed, but neither are the private summer hockey AAA teams and those teams have flourished in the past several years. Many of the kids who play for mediocre associations who also play summer hockey would happily play for their summer teams year-round if there were enough teams to compete against in tournaments and “private” leagues. Minnesota Hockey and USA Hockey cannot legally stop those leagues from starting, nor can they keep kids from leaving their associations. Minnesota Hockey and USA Hockey can take the position that they will not endorse those leagues and that those teams and leagues are not sanctioned by Minnesota Hockey or USA Hockey, but, frankly, who cares, especially if a sufficient number of private leagues start up.
What happens if Bernie loses the lawsuit? He will not go away. He has proven time and time again that he is stubborn and a maverick. He will continue to work to expand his teams. As someone pointed out, the next step for MM is a bantam league. I agree.
The reality is the MM peewee supplemental league is filled with very good players. Stop by MM on a Sunday evening and watch the kids in action. The talent level of the kids is high and the kids love it. Some of the kids from weaker associations and districts are getting better competition in the peewee supplemental league than they are getting in their association and district play. I don’t know how the District 6 kids fit in with the peewee supplemental players because they’re not there, but, suffice it to say, there’s a lot of talented metro peewees outside of District 6.
In short, this is Minnesota. We are known for our independent and progressive streaks. We don’t like to be told what to do and we believe we are in a better position to choose what is in the best interests of our children than elected officials.
Will the sky fall? Will the landscape actually change? I don’t know, but I do know that if Minnesota Hockey loses this lawsuit, they just created a bigger problem for all of us. For those of you who arrogantly claim the landscape will not change, I believe you are just as arrogant as Bernie. The reality is that this is a festering issue. There are now enough people who dislike association hockey that they will continue to be thorns in Minnesota Hockey’s side; they will continue to flock to MM type leagues. Those numbers are obviously growing given the expansion of the MM leagues. Minnesota Hockey and District 6 understand this fact and they don’t like it one bit, which is why they haven’t asked for a truce and settled this lawsuit.
Simply put, the line has been drawn in the sand and we are all spectators on the sidelines watching the battle occur. With appeal rights, the battle could drag on for years.
hockey_is_a_choice wrote:This dispute comes down to this: Minnesota Hockey and District 6 are trying to put Bernie out of business, or, at a minimum, limit Bernie’s ability to compete with them. Once discovery starts in earnest in the lawsuit, e-mails will be produced and there will be plenty of them. Those e-mails between district board members and Minnesota Hockey board members will likely reveal candid exchanges where people “in power” have bluntly stated that they want to put MM out of business. As we all know, Bernie is a polarizing guy. Those e-mails, in turn, will help Bernie’s lawyers build their case that the District 6 rule was enacted for one reason and one reason only: to put MM out of business. Now, Minnesota Hockey and District 6 may have a different story to tell and it may be a legitimate story, but their story is more convoluted. If this case actually gets to a jury, Bernie has a simple story to tell the jury. And, in the world of successfully trying cases to a jury, it’s the principle of KISS—keep it simple stupid—that usually wins the trial.
Now, whether any of us like or dislike Bernie is not the issue (personally, I’m ambivalent towards the guy), the issue for parents is: How could this case potentially change the Minnesota Youth Hockey landscape?
For those of you who are thinking some of us are wrongly confusing summer and Tier I hockey with this issue, we are not. If Bernie wins—or loses—he is not going away, he is an enterprising entrepreneur. If Bernie wins and kids can skate in leagues or on teams in addition to association hockey, competing businesses will copy or improve upon Bernie’s model, which will change the winter hockey landscape in Minnesota. More MM choice-type leagues means opportunities for interleague competition among those private leagues. Bernie’s Choice teams could play XYZ Company’s choice-type leagues that, in turn, play Hat Trick’s or Velocity’s choice-type leagues. The private schools can jump on the bandwagon and have their club teams play the MM, XYZ, Hat Trick, Velocity, etc. teams. Those teams and leagues will be populated with kids who once upon a time played association hockey. Fewer association kids means increased costs for those left in the associations. Some of the smaller associations may be forced to merge with other associations or close down the association, which means some kids will be left to playing shinny hockey on the ponds (this might not be a bad outcome).
Yes, those private teams and leagues will not be USA Hockey endorsed, but neither are the private summer hockey AAA teams and those teams have flourished in the past several years. Many of the kids who play for mediocre associations who also play summer hockey would happily play for their summer teams year-round if there were enough teams to compete against in tournaments and “private” leagues. Minnesota Hockey and USA Hockey cannot legally stop those leagues from starting, nor can they keep kids from leaving their associations. Minnesota Hockey and USA Hockey can take the position that they will not endorse those leagues and that those teams and leagues are not sanctioned by Minnesota Hockey or USA Hockey, but, frankly, who cares, especially if a sufficient number of private leagues start up.
What happens if Bernie loses the lawsuit? He will not go away. He has proven time and time again that he is stubborn and a maverick. He will continue to work to expand his teams. As someone pointed out, the next step for MM is a bantam league. I agree.
The reality is the MM peewee supplemental league is filled with very good players. Stop by MM on a Sunday evening and watch the kids in action. The talent level of the kids is high and the kids love it. Some of the kids from weaker associations and districts are getting better competition in the peewee supplemental league than they are getting in their association and district play. I don’t know how the District 6 kids fit in with the peewee supplemental players because they’re not there, but, suffice it to say, there’s a lot of talented metro peewees outside of District 6.
In short, this is Minnesota. We are known for our independent and progressive streaks. We don’t like to be told what to do and we believe we are in a better position to choose what is in the best interests of our children than elected officials.
Will the sky fall? Will the landscape actually change? I don’t know, but I do know that if Minnesota Hockey loses this lawsuit, they just created a bigger problem for all of us. For those of you who arrogantly claim the landscape will not change, I believe you are just as arrogant as Bernie. The reality is that this is a festering issue. There are now enough people who dislike association hockey that they will continue to be thorns in Minnesota Hockey’s side; they will continue to flock to MM type leagues. Those numbers are obviously growing given the expansion of the MM leagues. Minnesota Hockey and District 6 understand this fact and they don’t like it one bit, which is why they haven’t asked for a truce and settled this lawsuit.
Simply put, the line has been drawn in the sand and we are all spectators on the sidelines watching the battle occur. With appeal rights, the battle could drag on for years.
Didn't you just provide proof that his business ISN'T affected by the rule ?
Opinion is not fact, which means it does not meet the definition of proof, at least not in a court of law. For all I know, MM could be filling its peewee league with players who are playing for free or at a reduced fee.
Opinion is not fact, which means it does not meet the definition of proof, at least not in a court of law. For all I know, MM could be filling its peewee league with players who are playing for free or at a reduced fee.
Then don't state the D6 is trying to put Bernie out of business as a fact.
Besides isn't opinion is accepted as "fact" when presented as an expert witness as you are presenting yourself as to be
If Minnesota Hockey and District 6 want to rely on me as a fact or expert witness, they’re in about the same shape they would be if they hired you as their lawyer.
hockey_is_a_choice wrote:This dispute comes down to this: Minnesota Hockey and District 6 are trying to put Bernie out of business, or, at a minimum, limit Bernie’s ability to compete with them.
If Bernie wins—or loses—he is not going away, he is an enterprising entrepreneur. If Bernie wins and kids can skate in leagues or on teams in addition to association hockey, competing businesses will copy or improve upon Bernie’s model, which will change the winter hockey landscape in Minnesota. More MM choice-type leagues means opportunities for interleague competition among those private leagues.
Some of the smaller associations may be forced to merge with other associations or close down the association, which means some kids will be left to playing shinny hockey on the ponds (this might not be a bad outcome).
Many of the kids who play for mediocre associations who also play summer hockey would happily play for their summer teams year-round if there were enough teams to compete against in tournaments and “private” leagues. What happens if Bernie loses the lawsuit? He will not go away. He has proven time and time again that he is stubborn and a maverick. He will continue to work to expand his teams. As someone pointed out, the next step for MM is a bantam league. I agree.
There are now enough people who dislike association hockey that they will continue to be thorns in Minnesota Hockey’s side; they will continue to flock to MM type leagues. Those numbers are obviously growing given the expansion of the MM leagues. Minnesota Hockey and District 6 understand this fact and they don’t like it one bit, which is why they haven’t asked for a truce and settled this lawsuit.
All of this suggests that there is no need for BM to worry about the D6 rule. People are 'flocking' to his leagues. 'Numbers are growing' so why is BM worried about a D6 rule? That's easy: there is money to be made off of those rich Edina and EP families in his backyard and he wants his piece of it.
D6 week in and week out offers a player the best hockey competition available. Why would any kid leave it to play elsewhere? Association hockey has worked pretty well as a development model and D6 is the premier league. There are a lot of people who don't want it ruined by a 'maverick' who is more interested in profit then he is in developing the masses. Squirt and Peewee aged players are not at an age where we should send them away with no organized hockey. Minnesota Hockey wants as many players as possible to experience organized hockey and develop.
Based on your comments it sounds like BM has a good product going and his leagues are thriving. Sit there and watch your games on Sunday night and leave D6 alone.
I would be more than happy to leave District 6 on its own little island, but the boys at MinnHock intend to take the District 6 rule statewide. Accordingly, the District 6 rule does potentially impact the rest of us, which means-- like you-- we are entitled to express our opinions about the rule and the pending litigation. This year, those of us outside of District 6 are free to sign our kids up for association and choice leagues. Next year, if we want to continue in association hockey, that choice likely will be taken away from us. To the extent I have a vote, I vote “no” to expansion of the rule beyond District 6. You can vote “yes” to keep the rule in District 6 and that’s fine, but don’t tell the rest of us to go away simply because we don’t live in District 6 and we don’t agree with a rule.
Yes, you are right, it appears that MM is filling its supplemental peewee leagues with kids from outside District 6 this year, but if the District 6 rule is expanded statewide, there won’t be too many peewee kids participating in the peewee choice league, which will presumably adversely impact MM’s business.
Finally, the District 6 rule is already impacting every MinnHock family. We are paying for the defense of the District 6 rule and we don’t even live in your fabled district. According to the Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors’ September 2010 Meeting Minutes:
“Finance/Budget: Secretary-Treasurer DeMeo informed the Board that it was necessary to amend the FY 2011 budget to provide for anticipated legal expenses to defend the corporation in a pending legal matter. The Finance/Budget Committee unanimously recommends that it be authorized to establish a new account (53N1) to record the associated expenses for legal counsel, and to fund that account with $60,000. This item went to discussion immediately as it was presented from a committee. Motion to authorize the Committee to establish and fund a new account for legal expenses carried with one nay vote from Rick Rakness [(District 8 Director)).”
hockey_is_a_choice wrote:This dispute comes down to this: Minnesota Hockey and District 6 are trying to put Bernie out of business, or, at a minimum, limit Bernie’s ability to compete with them.
If Bernie wins—or loses—he is not going away, he is an enterprising entrepreneur. If Bernie wins and kids can skate in leagues or on teams in addition to association hockey, competing businesses will copy or improve upon Bernie’s model, which will change the winter hockey landscape in Minnesota. More MM choice-type leagues means opportunities for interleague competition among those private leagues.
Some of the smaller associations may be forced to merge with other associations or close down the association, which means some kids will be left to playing shinny hockey on the ponds (this might not be a bad outcome).
Many of the kids who play for mediocre associations who also play summer hockey would happily play for their summer teams year-round if there were enough teams to compete against in tournaments and “private” leagues. What happens if Bernie loses the lawsuit? He will not go away. He has proven time and time again that he is stubborn and a maverick. He will continue to work to expand his teams. As someone pointed out, the next step for MM is a bantam league. I agree.
There are now enough people who dislike association hockey that they will continue to be thorns in Minnesota Hockey’s side; they will continue to flock to MM type leagues. Those numbers are obviously growing given the expansion of the MM leagues. Minnesota Hockey and District 6 understand this fact and they don’t like it one bit, which is why they haven’t asked for a truce and settled this lawsuit.
All of this suggests that there is no need for BM to worry about the D6 rule. People are 'flocking' to his leagues. 'Numbers are growing' so why is BM worried about a D6 rule? That's easy: there is money to be made off of those rich Edina and EP families in his backyard and he wants his piece of it.
D6 week in and week out offers a player the best hockey competition available. Why would any kid leave it to play elsewhere? Association hockey has worked pretty well as a development model and D6 is the premier league. There are a lot of people who don't want it ruined by a 'maverick' who is more interested in profit then he is in developing the masses. Squirt and Peewee aged players are not at an age where we should send them away with no organized hockey. Minnesota Hockey wants as many players as possible to experience organized hockey and develop.
Based on your comments it sounds like BM has a good product going and his leagues are thriving. Sit there and watch your games on Sunday night and leave D6 alone.
All hail D6!! the supreme league in all the land!!
NP ARTICLE:
According to the court file, the new rule says that a registered player "may not register or play hockey with any other organization, association or team during the winter hockey season, including playoffs." The district later clarified that the rule applied only to league play. Possible penalties included suspension for the rest of the season.
Brad Hewitt, District 6 director, said the new rule was passed to protect the roughly 5,800 girls and boys who play hockey in his district's program.
"We're defending the right of all kids," he said. "We're nonprofit ... (McBain) is for-profit, and he's in it for the money."
---"The district later clarified that the rule applied only to league play." Oops don't want to step on everyone's toes. Could imagine the backlash that came into his office from a multitude of hockey businesses when the rule came out. Next time be a bit more careful. Nobody probably read it over before BH released it.
---The district is protecting the boys and girls. Wow thanks BH, we parents have no idea how to do that. You are so generous to be waving your wand around and saving our lost and nimble souls.
---"We are defending the rights of the kids." What does that mean? What rights? BH, you are taking away kids and parents ability to make their own decisions. We see that very clearly. What rights are you defending? The right not to have the option to choose to develop in a superior training model if we want to. That's it. You are defending our RIGHT NOT TO DO SOMETHING. Confusing but I think I get it.
---"We're Not for Profit". And therefore we are qualified to make decisions for each and everyone of you. It's a long standing precedent that NFP organizations have sweeping powers that include making decisions for parents and their families. Right?
Isn't each one of us "For Profit"? We are trying to make ends meet and make a better life for us and our kids. We want more for our families, not less. That makes us for profit. Does that make us unqualified to make decisions. Our country operates under a for profit model and a large part of our decisions are made under this model and it seems to be working just fine. Communist countries don't fare very well with their not for profit models in which they make decisions for their people. That is probably the most ridiculous argument of the bunch. Next to "defending your kids rights".
Each one of D6s arguments is a real stretch that the high priced D6 lawyers developed for their client. Ridiculous as they may seem, they justify the bill that D6 will pay them.
Using words like protection and defending makes one sound like the white knight, but anyone with a 1/4 brain can see how silly these arguments are.
The best quote in the article that says it all, is from a parent: "I think parents know their kids," he said. "They should be able to make these decisions on their own."
Well Duhhha! But not according to BH and D6. They must step in and make the decision for you and your kid and your neighbor's kid...Why? Because big brother knows best and hey they're Not For Profit which makes them qualified to do so.
For profit parents have been known to make very wise decisions for their kids. Really!
SnowedIn wrote:NP ARTICLE:
According to the court file, the new rule says that a registered player "may not register or play hockey with any other organization, association or team during the winter hockey season, including playoffs." The district later clarified that the rule applied only to league play. Possible penalties included suspension for the rest of the season.
Brad Hewitt, District 6 director, said the new rule was passed to protect the roughly 5,800 girls and boys who play hockey in his district's program.
"We're defending the right of all kids," he said. "We're nonprofit ... (McBain) is for-profit, and he's in it for the money."
---"The district later clarified that the rule applied only to league play." Oops don't want to step on everyone's toes. Could imagine the backlash that came into his office from a multitude of hockey businesses when the rule came out. Next time be a bit more careful. Nobody probably read it over before BH released it.
---The district is protecting the boys and girls. Wow thanks BH, we parents have no idea how to do that. You are so generous to be waving your wand around and saving our lost and nimble souls.
---"We are defending the rights of the kids." What does that mean? What rights? BH, you are taking away kids and parents ability to make their own decisions. We see that very clearly. What rights are you defending? The right not to have the option to choose to develop in a superior training model if we want to. That's it. You are defending our RIGHT NOT TO DO SOMETHING. Confusing but I think I get it.
---"We're Not for Profit". And therefore we are qualified to make decisions for each and everyone of you. It's a long standing precedent that NFP organizations have sweeping powers that include making decisions for parents and their families. Right?
Isn't each one of us "For Profit"? We are trying to make ends meet and make a better life for us and our kids. We want more for our families, not less. That makes us for profit. Does that make us unqualified to make decisions. Our country operates under a for profit model and a large part of our decisions are made under this model and it seems to be working just fine. Communist countries don't fare very well with their not for profit models in which they make decisions for their people. That is probably the most ridiculous argument of the bunch. Next to "defending your kids rights".
Each one of D6s arguments is a real stretch that the high priced D6 lawyers developed for their client. Ridiculous as they may seem, they justify the bill that D6 will pay them.
Using words like protection and defending makes one sound like the white knight, but anyone with a 1/4 brain can see how silly these arguments are.
The best quote in the article that says it all, is from a parent: "I think parents know their kids," he said. "They should be able to make these decisions on their own."
Well Duhhha! But not according to BH and D6. They must step in and make the decision for you and your kid and your neighbor's kid...Why? Because big brother knows best and hey they're Not For Profit which makes them qualified to do so.
For profit parents have been known to make very wise decisions for their kids. Really!
where does it imply that BH thinks that parents don't know how to protect their kids? you're reading way to much into it. Why do you assume he as a hiden agenda? (you now what happens when you assume) seems to me he's giving you exactly what you want--the right to choose--MM or Dist 6--make a choice. why all the distrust towards non-profit?----oh, buy the way-- Communist? really!? talk about going off the deep end!!
