HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Our system has two parts.

Winter association, community, hockey.
Summer AAA hockey.

It works extremely well for almost everyone and since the growth in summer AAA is working even better today than 5-6 years ago. There used to be 4-5 summer AAA teams at any age level and now there are 15. The number of Minnesota players high on junior and NHL draft lists is growing proving a lot is going right in Minnesota. The next 5 years, as more Minnesota players that are working on their game all year on summer AAA teams, the number of players and their national rankings on draft lists will grow. Our players are getting better, faster. I've seen a big jump in development and quality of play in the last 4-5 years. Many more players able to play at a high level.

Maybe focus on the idea that if an association only has 1-2-3 true A level players, and the association would prefer to play at B1 where they're better suited, those A players are allowed to waive to a neighboring association. That allowance is in place but not often used.

Have no fear Squirt parents. The top Minnesota players are very highly regarded on the national scene and they didn't have nearly the developmental options that you have today.

Quasar wrote:I know what all the regulars think. How about some input from the lurkers. This subject is not going away. One way or another it will be resolved. As I stated in my original post, one A team in Rochester caused an incredible amount of conversation.

If your kid is an average player, the system is working for you and him or her. If your kid is exceptional and your happy to see him be the stand out player on his association team, the system is working for you. If your kid is a C player and he's having fun, the system is working for you.

If on the other hand your kid is an exceptional player and you don't have the money to send him to a prep school, or to play AAA in some other state, then the system is not working for you.

As I understand the situation at present Minnesota hockey is discussing A and AA teams.. Just forming AA teams and filling them up with A players is a waste of time. Just another B1.. B2..B3
This is important for parents of mites and squirts as your kids will be there before you know it..

So .... what do you think?

It is my hope that with district pooled teams for smaller associations will bring the competition levels up for teams...... This would also make the exeptional player work harder with the new competitive teams to play against.

hocmom wrote:quote]As I stated in my original post, one A team in Rochester caused an incredible amount of conversation.

A bazillion kids play hockey in MN. 8 guys on the internet, 99% not from district 9, commented on the Rochester thing. It is a none issue.

This is a message board, not a board room.[/quote]

That's your opinion.

So answer the question.. Do you think there should be AA hockey in Minnesota winter hockey?

MrBoDangles wrote:
It is my hope that with district pooled teams for smaller associations will bring the competition levels up for teams...... This would also make the exeptional player work harder with the new competitive teams to play against.

I think pooled teams would be a great way to go. Maybe they will be the AA teams?

observer wrote:

Our system has two parts.

Winter association, community, hockey.
Summer AAA hockey.

It works extremely well for almost everyone and since the growth in summer AAA is working even better today than 5-6 years ago. There used to be 4-5 summer AAA teams at any age level and now there are 15. The number of Minnesota players high on junior and NHL draft lists is growing proving a lot is going right in Minnesota. The next 5 years, as more Minnesota players that are working on their game all year on summer AAA teams, the number of players and their national rankings on draft lists will grow. Our players are getting better, faster. I've seen a big jump in development and quality of play in the last 4-5 years. Many more players able to play at a high level.

Maybe focus on the idea that if an association only has 1-2-3 true A level players, and the association would prefer to play at B1 where they're better suited, those A players are allowed to waive to a neighboring association. That allowance is in place but not often used.

Have no fear Squirt parents. The top Minnesota players are very highly regarded on the national scene and they didn't have nearly the developmental options that you have today.

This seems to be the consensus at the moment. Bo has made this case on the thread running concurrent with this one. nice discussion thanks for your input.

I see this thread has almost reached 1,000 views.
All you guys that are reading this because you have an opinion should take a couple of minutes to sign up and start posting.
It's a little intimidating at first, but actually easy to do once you get the hang of it..

Come on ...Join in

Quasar wrote:

hocmom wrote:quote]As I stated in my original post, one A team in Rochester caused an incredible amount of conversation.

A bazillion kids play hockey in MN. 8 guys on the internet, 99% not from district 9, commented on the Rochester thing. It is a none issue.

This is a message board, not a board room.

So answer the question.. Do you think there should be AA hockey in Minnesota winter hockey?[/quote]

No. But I come at things from a different angle. I always hope that the kids will start at squirts and stick together as a team through high school. Old school team spirit, loyalty. The stronger supporting the weaker.

I don't think we have kids that would have gone on to play D1 hockey but for the fact that their home town bantam team was too weak.

I have watched too many "studs" from bantams move up to HS and play 3rd line.

Quasar wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:
It is my hope that with district pooled teams for smaller associations will bring the competition levels up for teams...... This would also make the exeptional player work harder with the new competitive teams to play against.

I think pooled teams would be a great way to go. Maybe they will be the AA teams?

The drawback for pooled teams is smaller associations losing players to the pooled teams and not having enough kids to replace them then losing their association. This is an issue the MSHSL deals with; teams that co-op to field a team works initially but soon in the town that loses its team the kids start doing something else and it's less and less of a co-op. There's a reason towns and schools fight so hard to keep their football teams independant.

I'd on't know if it's a enough of an argument to not pool kids in season but one that should be taken into consideration.

In Southern MN one kid can mean the difference between two bantam teams and one.

hocmom wrote:

So answer the question.. Do you think there should be AA hockey in Minnesota winter hockey?

No. But I come at things from a different angle. I always hope that the kids will start at squirts and stick together as a team through high school. Old school team spirit, loyalty. The stronger supporting the weaker.

I don't think we have kids that would have gone on to play D1 hockey but for the fact that their home town bantam team was too weak.

I have watched too many "studs" from bantams move up to HS and play 3rd line.

I agree whole heartily. In the mid 70's I had the privilege of coaching a group of kids from squirts through bantam. We were a small association with just enough kids to make up an A team... These kids played together all the way through high school. My kid said to me the other day "You know dad, I skated all the way through squirts, peewees, bantams and varsity with the same center" He actually did. Do you think these kids knew were the other one was? 9 kids from this group played beyond high school...

However, if any one of them wanted to find something better than what we had to offer I would have tried to help them.

Quasar wrote:

hocmom wrote:

So answer the question.. Do you think there should be AA hockey in Minnesota winter hockey?

No. But I come at things from a different angle. I always hope that the kids will start at squirts and stick together as a team through high school. Old school team spirit, loyalty. The stronger supporting the weaker.

I don't think we have kids that would have gone on to play D1 hockey but for the fact that their home town bantam team was too weak.

I have watched too many "studs" from bantams move up to HS and play 3rd line.

I agree whole heartily. In the mid 70's I had the privilege of coaching a group of kids from squirts through bantam. We were a small association with just enough kids to make up an A team... These kids played together all the way through high school. My kid said to me the other day "You know dad, I skated all the way through squirts, peewees, bantams and varsity with the same center" He actually did. Do you think these kids knew were the other one was? 9 kids from this group played beyond high school...

However, if any one of them wanted to find something better than what we had to offer I would have tried to help them.

I guess “better” is in the eye of the beholder. I can’t imagine any of your kids (parents really) were dissatisfied. Look at your results.

Today… 3 or 4 of your parents would wonder what their kid could “really do” if he only had a chance. They will then "let Johnny decide" where he wants to play.

I think adding an elite AA team might be OK if I didn't think it would be followed by cries to form and elite AA2 team.

District Level Tier I (call it AA if you wish).

There would be plenty of competition for them to play in and around town. Tier I club hockey (i.e. Fire) is always looking for local options. They could host an easy 2-3 tournaments a year bringing in teams from acorss North America. By taking an average of 2-3 kids from each association, personally I don't think it would water down the "A" league.

Just using D6 / 10 as an example, if you take the top 2-3 kids from the major programs ... 1) you would create a nationally competitive team. 2) the associations could easily fill in those missing "A" spots with kids they fretted over during tryouts.

I'm ASSUMING this would hold true in most every district. I only chose D6/10 because that is what I am most familiar with.

I guess “better” is in the eye of the beholder. I can’t imagine any of your kids (parents really) were dissatisfied. Look at your results.

LOL You gotta be kidding! The first year we played 75 games with the squirts, the parents were ready to run us out of town on a rail!!

MnMade-4-Life wrote:

District Level Tier I (call it AA if you wish).

There would be plenty of competition for them to play in and around town. Tier I club hockey (i.e. Fire) is always looking for local options. They could host an easy 2-3 tournaments a year bringing in teams from acorss North America. By taking an average of 2-3 kids from each association, personally I don't think it would water down the "A" league.

Just using D6 / 10 as an example, if you take the top 2-3 kids from the major programs ... 1) you would create a nationally competitive team. 2) the associations could easily fill in those missing "A" spots with kids they fretted over during tryouts.

I'm ASSUMING this would hold true in most every district. I only chose D6/10 because that is what I am most familiar with.

How exactly did you get inside my head?

I don't see anyone leaving the top association teams in any particular district. This might be better suited for the bottom 1/4 of the teams in any District.

One of the problems is cost. Minnesota soccer has developed some uber teams but once they did that there's no one left to play. So, now they're traveling to Chicago, Kansas City, etc. just to play a couple of soccer games. More players would have developed had they not created the super teams with no left to play against.

I'll add that the top 10 Minnesota Squirt, PeeWee and Bantam A teams can already compete with any AAA Tier 1 team in the US. That's a community based team vs. teams that draw from entire states. Minnesota hockey is already outstanding.

observer wrote:I don't see anyone leaving the top association teams in any particular district.[...]

I'm not sure what hockey you are observing ... but yes they have, and yes they would.

observer wrote:This might be better suited for the bottom 1/4 of the teams in any District.[...]

Perhaps a good idea for maybe some of the annual "B" team only associations. But even then, those would be "A" teams ... not "AA / Tier I"

observer wrote:[...]I'll add that the top 10 Minnesota Squirt, PeeWee and Bantam A teams can already compete with any AAA Tier 1 team in the US. That's a community based team vs. teams that draw from entire states. Minnesota hockey is already outstanding.

yep, for the most part. Not so much on the squirt level though, I'd say maybe the top 5-6 could compete on the Tier I level this year successfully.

Quasar wrote:

MnMade-4-Life wrote:

District Level Tier I (call it AA if you wish).

There would be plenty of competition for them to play in and around town. Tier I club hockey (i.e. Fire) is always looking for local options. They could host an easy 2-3 tournaments a year bringing in teams from acorss North America. By taking an average of 2-3 kids from each association, personally I don't think it would water down the "A" league.

Just using D6 / 10 as an example, if you take the top 2-3 kids from the major programs ... 1) you would create a nationally competitive team. 2) the associations could easily fill in those missing "A" spots with kids they fretted over during tryouts.

I'm ASSUMING this would hold true in most every district. I only chose D6/10 because that is what I am most familiar with.

How exactly did you get inside my head?

You've got to be kidding!!

MnMade-4-Life wrote:

Quasar wrote: How exactly did you get inside my head?

You've got to be kidding!!

Just agreeing with your assessment..
But no doubt about it... I do a lot of kidding!!

Did someone say "kidding", I like the AA concept Q but how would it ever be considered amongst the MN Hock regimen. Loss of control sends them into a tailspin and brings about new concepts like no checking until bantams, blue pucks, and new hockey theory programs. AA would have to be introduced by another private entrepreneur.

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:

Did someone say "kidding", I like the AA concept Q but how would it ever be considered amongst the MN Hock regimen. Loss of control sends them into a tailspin and brings about new concepts like no checking until bantams, blue pucks, and new hockey theory programs. AA would have to be introduced by another private entrepreneur.

Hi Ugbkm .. I'm not kidding about the fact that many people I've talked to have the same opinion as you... It's important for new parents to understand the limitation placed upon their kids by the "let's have fun" mentality in the average association...

Like you I'm pretty sure that within the next five years the private, for profit clubs will introduce and maintain Tier 1 hockey in Minnesota. If the people in power now and in the immediate future don't address this problem some one else will ..And I'm not Kidding

Quasar wrote:

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:

Did someone say "kidding", I like the AA concept Q but how would it ever be considered amongst the MN Hock regimen. Loss of control sends them into a tailspin and brings about new concepts like no checking until bantams, blue pucks, and new hockey theory programs. AA would have to be introduced by another private entrepreneur.

Hi Ugbkm .. I'm not kidding about the fact that many people I've talked to have the same opinion as you... It's important for new parents to understand the limitation placed upon their kids by the "let's have fun" mentality in the average association...

Like you I'm pretty sure that within the next five years the private, for profit clubs will introduce and maintain Tier 1 hockey in Minnesota. If the people in power now and in the immediate future don't address this problem some one else will ..And I'm not Kidding

Q...agreed...I have been implementing "repression" training with my players as suggested by others on this board with water boarding. Although we are scoring more goals, I'm losing player participation. Everyone needs a program that works for all youth in Minnesota. It might not take five years.....