HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Elliott-
MN Hockey has paid lip service to redistricting for nearly 20 years. After the fiasco that is participation do you think this marry band of middle managers has the stones to tackle redistricting?

I was under the impression MN Hockey was going to be laying down the parameters (location, size, B teams ect.) under which redistricting would occur...was that the case?

mnhockeywatch wrote:Elliott-
MN Hockey has paid lip service to redistricting for nearly 20 years. After the fiasco that is participation do you think this marry band of middle managers has the stones to tackle redistricting?

I was under the impression MN Hockey was going to be laying down the parameters (location, size, B teams ect.) under which redistricting would occur...was that the case?

Lip service is what we had this weekend.
We had time to sit down and start defining what a district should be (what an association should be) and then even start working on what has already been presented, but for some reason it is hard to get people to work on the difficult.

Persumably, that task will now be started with the discernemnt committee.

Again, the wheels turn slowly until we 'need it now', and then boom there it is, good, bad or otherwise.

A district is being cleaved down the middle by its own membership. If you ask them "need it now" is upon us. Allowing an association (or 5) to succeed as an independent is not in the best interest of Minnesota Hockey.

InigoMontoya wrote:A district is being cleaved down the middle by its own membership. If you ask them "need it now" is upon us. Allowing an association (or 5) to succeed as an independent is not in the best interest of Minnesota Hockey.

They will not be allowed to do this, but yes, I agree. It is upon us and then some.

Change is sometimes painful. The power to stop independence is best applied through compromise and controlled change. My feeling is that MN Hockey has misjudged the effects of population/geography, the Made business model and AAA. If they keep fumbling more players will trickle from youth rosters and then a general migration will start. You can't stop hockey parents or commerce by putting your head in the sand as MN Hockey has done and is doing.

mnhockeywatch wrote:Change is sometimes painful. The power to stop independence is best applied through compromise and controlled change. My feeling is that MN Hockey has misjudged the effects of population/geography, the Made business model and AAA. If they keep fumbling more players will trickle from youth rosters and then a general migration will start. You can't stop hockey parents or commerce by putting your head in the sand as MN Hockey has done and is doing.

Yes, it is frustrating.

Three times on Saturday morning I suggested we start 'working' on redistricting right then and there.

My forehead is bleeding from beating it on the wall.

I know from District 1's perspective, we have twice (one year ago and at this most recent MN Hockey meeting) provided suggestions for redistricting. Mn Hockey Directors specifically asked us to bring our suggestions and we said we would take the time if they would seriously discuss the matters.

We have told MN Hockey Directors that either 1) redistrict, or 2) shut us down and allow us to be absorbed into other Districts.

I am disappointed if things didn't work out regarding redistricting conversations. SWHA is in the process of merging up our program with Washburn to form Minneapolis Youth Hockey Association. This will probably become final for next season.

In the meantime, if there was no meaningful discussion at the MN Hockey meeting, we will probably begin the process of requesting to be moved into District 3.

Our kids (all D1 kids) deserve a real league to play in. D1 will have four Bantam A and Peewee A teams this year. That is no longer a league. Further, playing in D1 does not allow us to 1) have enough teams at each level to properly place kids at their skill level - (District 1 does not have B2 hockey, so either those kids play up at B1 and get smoked, or play down at C and dominate), 2) to recruit and retain quality coaches as the schedule tends to be a light schedule.

MN Hockey has been great in allowing our kids and arranging for them to play cross district games at the A and B1 level with Districts 3 and 2 - and this has been a great way to bridge the fact that we really do not have a "league". But our kids aren't part of those leagues and our games are "scrimmage games".

It isn't right for my kids to have four solid districts surrounding us while district 1 dies a slow death and nobody wants to do anything about it. Perhaps associations petitioning (we will not be the only association to petition) to leave will either 1) let folks know that we are taking redistricting (or the lack there of) seriously and that time has run out, or 2) that we end District 1 and move teams to other Districts.

SWPrez wrote:I know from District 1's perspective, we have twice (one year ago and at this most recent MN Hockey meeting) provided suggestions for redistricting. Mn Hockey Directors specifically asked us to bring our suggestions and we said we would take the time if they would seriously discuss the matters.

We have told MN Hockey Directors that either 1) redistrict, or 2) shut us down and allow us to be absorbed into other Districts.

I am disappointed if things didn't work out regarding redistricting conversations. SWHA is in the process of merging up our program with Washburn to form Minneapolis Youth Hockey Association. This will probably become final for next season.

In the meantime, if there was no meaningful discussion at the MN Hockey meeting, we will probably begin the process of requesting to be moved into District 3.

Our kids (all D1 kids) deserve a real league to play in. D1 will have four Bantam A and Peewee A teams this year. That is no longer a league. Further, playing in D1 does not allow us to 1) have enough teams at each level to properly place kids at their skill level - (District 1 does not have B2 hockey, so either those kids play up at B1 and get smoked, or play down at C and dominate), 2) to recruit and retain quality coaches as the schedule tends to be a light schedule.

MN Hockey has been great in allowing our kids and arranging for them to play cross district games at the A and B1 level with Districts 3 and 2 - and this has been a great way to bridge the fact that we really do not have a "league". But our kids aren't part of those leagues and our games are "scrimmage games".

It isn't right for my kids to have four solid districts surrounding us while district 1 dies a slow death and nobody wants to do anything about it. Perhaps associations petitioning (we will not be the only association to petition) to leave will either 1) let folks know that we are taking redistricting (or the lack there of) seriously and that time has run out, or 2) that we end District 1 and move teams to other Districts.

Send this (or some form of it) to all District Directors for me would you.

SW Pres

By merging with Washburn your numbers should rival the big's of D3 & D6...Good Luck!

I've talked to your District Director he understands the problems faced both economic & open enrollment he comes off pragmatic about how to save the city associations. Unlike most of MN Hockey directors (never seen more logo'd apperal in my life which I think is a symptom of the problem) he's willing to push a solution that takes away his power. Most of these Directors are craving to take the next select team on a road trip. What they don't comprehend is that receiving the adulation of a 15 year old is not leadership. The structure puts 25+ directors in a position of equal power which without a respected/trusted and vocal leader is in all reality rudderless vessel in search of the rocks. Maybe a faction within the MN hockey community is saying 'no more' start fixing the problems. Passing judgment based on the 'Participation Rule' mess...in which 20+ chiefs completely screwed up...the future is uncertain!

mnhockeywatch wrote:SW Pres

By merging with Washburn your numbers should rival the big's of D3 & D6...Good Luck!

I've talked to your District Director he understands the problems faced both economic & open enrollment he comes off pragmatic about how to save the city associations. Unlike most of MN Hockey directors (never seen more logo'd apperal in my life which I think is a symptom of the problem) he's willing to push a solution that takes away his power. Most of these Directors are craving to take the next select team on a road trip. What they don't comprehend is that receiving the adulation of a 15 year old is not leadership. The structure puts 25+ directors in a position of equal power which without a respected/trusted and vocal leader is in all reality rudderless vessel in search of the rocks. Maybe a faction within the MN hockey community is saying 'no more' start fixing the problems. Passing judgment based on the 'Participation Rule' mess...in which 20+ chiefs completely screwed up...the future is uncertain!

brilliant!

mnhockeywatch wrote:SW Pres

By merging with Washburn your numbers should rival the big's of D3 & D6...Good Luck!

I've talked to your District Director he understands the problems faced both economic & open enrollment he comes off pragmatic about how to save the city associations. Unlike most of MN Hockey directors (never seen more logo'd apperal in my life which I think is a symptom of the problem) he's willing to push a solution that takes away his power. Most of these Directors are craving to take the next select team on a road trip. What they don't comprehend is that receiving the adulation of a 15 year old is not leadership. The structure puts 25+ directors in a position of equal power which without a respected/trusted and vocal leader is in all reality rudderless vessel in search of the rocks. Maybe a faction within the MN hockey community is saying 'no more' start fixing the problems. Passing judgment based on the 'Participation Rule' mess...in which 20+ chiefs completely screwed up...the future is uncertain!

Several people are up for election next Spring.
Dennis Green has already stated he is NOT running. At least two people have shown an interest in running.

Proplem - Election of President and VPs is done by the current board members. It is difficult for someone to walk in off the street (so to speak).

Watch MH web page for nominations and run or support someone - come to the meetings.

Who's shown interest in running?
Let's document where they stand on the issues before MN Hockey.

Proplem - Election of President and VPs is done by the current board members. It is difficult for someone to walk in off the street (so to speak).

Bigger problem- Why wasn't this seen as a problem earlier? This just invites all kinds of issues.

Proplem - Election of President and VPs is done by the current board members.

The leadership of MNH is made up only of those chosen by the board of MNH.
The board of MNH is made up in large part of District leadership.
District leadership is chosen by the board of the district.
District board is made up of Association leadership.
Association leadership is chosen in a way that would make teamsters blush.

mnhockeywatch wrote:Who's shown interest in running?
Let's document where they stand on the issues before MN Hockey.

Hal Tearse
Brad Hewitt

elliott70 wrote:

mnhockeywatch wrote:Who's shown interest in running?
Let's document where they stand on the issues before MN Hockey.

Hal Tearse
Brad Hewitt

Maybe Dave Margeneau (not sure if I heard it right)

3GoonsWest wrote:

Proplem - Election of President and VPs is done by the current board members. It is difficult for someone to walk in off the street (so to speak).

Bigger problem- Why wasn't this seen as a problem earlier? This just invites all kinds of issues.

Its always been this way.
To my knowledge only one person has spoke against it and proposed a change.

Unfortunately this is job for a Glen Gary Glen Rose (old movie) sales manager kind of guy. Tackling redistricting, sorting out a policy for the behemoth associations (choosing to only field a single A team) and setting an absolute ceiling on number of games and/or ice touches per level are but a couple items that need immediate attention. I'll assume that the gang that can't shoot straight will correct residency rule soon.

Based on that criteria who out of these guys have the stones to lead this bunch of middle managers?