HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

ogelthorpe
on SCYH web site under the survey - methodology it states
SCYH printed, stuffed, addressed and mailed the survey, so
how could the agency forget return envelopes when SCYH
did all the work sending them out ?

zippitydoda wrote:Wow -- how much did the association pay for the survey?

I heard the guy that does the admin work for the assocation makes something like $35k a year..........I can see paying someone to schedule the ice and maybe even pay something for the personw ho does the books but that seems like a lot. A friend tells me all three get paid in SCYHA.........so whats the total cost vs. the number of kids. It would be interesting.

Do you know how all of that got started? The previous regime created this mess when the "President For Life" couldn't get volunteers to do things (I'm not going to say why, because that is heresay and speculation on my part, though I know why I quit volunteering). That board created some paid postitions to ease a couple of folks' burdens. Now that regime got booted and is now trying to get the Tech program off the ground while leaving a mess behind. (no offense meant Wicked....)

It's sad, but until the current board (and probably the next one or two) has time to correct these issues, things will run as smoothly as they can considering...

??? paid positions of that magnitude? 35K
What makes this assoc. any different then others?
I've heard of compensation for time spent on accounting and such, and most volunteers that incurr costs submit those reciepts of cost for payment at the the regular meetings.

I spent many years in youth hockey volunteer positions, and never once received a dime!

What administrative cost add up to that?

Can't Never Tried wrote:??? paid positions of that magnitude? 35K
What makes this assoc. any different then others?
I've heard of compensation for time spent on accounting and such, and most volunteers that incurr costs submit those reciepts of cost for payment at the the regular meetings.

I spent many years in youth hockey volunteer positions, and never once received a dime!

What administrative cost add up to that?

You probably wouldn't believe it if we told you. Check my post above about the "why". I'm not going to explain it as I no longer have a voice in the association.

I can't imagine, either. Maybe I'm overstating the amounts but I don't think so. Also heard those paid positions got raises this year......when the economy is in th edumper and youth hockey groups are trying to cut costs......the admin salary would cover about 230 hours of ice where I come from. I agree with the above posters --- what happend to volunteering...... I'd like to hear from Wicked about admin costs since he was on the board and is involved with the new group.

The word is that Wicked offered the administrative director of SCYHA the same position with his new proposed group, but the director turned it down. I'll let Wicked either confirm or deny this.

I just got finished reading the posts from today. There were interesting comments on a number of different issues.

In response to Goose, no I didn't offer the adminstrative director a job, although he certainly has quite a lot of experience, and I did work with him for a few years while serving on the board. However, that being said, the cost of his services would be out of reach.

The reference to him came from a conversation one of our group members had with him. It was an informal chat, as I understand it. You could check with him to verify. We never spoke regarding a job. In regard to Zippy's question, I believe a current board member told me that SCYHA administrative costs are $100 per kid per year. That would roughtly translate into about $45,000 total.

Wow.. $100 per kid for administration.. and that could go UP if the numbers go DOWN... As a parent, I would have to pony up $100 just to cover the administration, then as a travel team parent (I think) I would have to pony up the cost of Acceleration MN, whether I wanted to or not, and THEN we talk about ice and other costs....

And we wonder why the numbers are dropping for youth hockey? I also believe that the number of practice ice hours spent sharing with another team has dropped over the years? If my kids were starting over, and I knew this, I'm not sure they wouldn't be basketball players instead..

We are in an economy where people are losing their jobs, or they're taking cuts in pay.. And we want people to pay HOW MUCH to play hockey? Make the game affordable, and work to cut costs. We've over managed, and created a monster, not just in St. Cloud, but this is a perfect example. We think we're creating D1 players in all of the kids who go through the systems, yet how many really make it?

Sorry, but this $$ figure is really bugging me. We've lost sight of why we have youth hockey.. it's not to make strong high school teams, or to create D1 and NHL players.. It's to give kids a chance to play a great game and have fun.. NO OTHER REASON SHOULD DICTATE WHAT WE DO! Give the kids a chance to play, and HAVE FUN.

I think every one of us should take a good look at the hidden agendas, and ask outselves what are we really trying to do, and at what cost? (not just $$ costs, but to the betterment of the kids)

The current board is looking at cutting costs. The adminstrative costs that exist now were also there for the previous adminstration and now this board has to deal with it. There are plenty of areas that can be trimmed and they will be.

On a seperate note I have heard that wickedshot and zippitydoda are actually the same person posting under two screen names. Not sure if this is true or not but if it is it certainly is interesting.

Blue&Gold wrote:Wow.. $100 per kid for administration.. and that could go UP if the numbers go DOWN... As a parent, I would have to pony up $100 just to cover the administration, then as a travel team parent (I think) I would have to pony up the cost of Acceleration MN, whether I wanted to or not, and THEN we talk about ice and other costs....

And we wonder why the numbers are dropping for youth hockey? I also believe that the number of practice ice hours spent sharing with another team has dropped over the years? If my kids were starting over, and I knew this, I'm not sure they wouldn't be basketball players instead..

We are in an economy where people are losing their jobs, or they're taking cuts in pay.. And we want people to pay HOW MUCH to play hockey? Make the game affordable, and work to cut costs. We've over managed, and created a monster, not just in St. Cloud, but this is a perfect example. We think we're creating D1 players in all of the kids who go through the systems, yet how many really make it?

Sorry, but this $$ figure is really bugging me. We've lost sight of why we have youth hockey.. it's not to make strong high school teams, or to create D1 and NHL players.. It's to give kids a chance to play a great game and have fun.. NO OTHER REASON SHOULD DICTATE WHAT WE DO! Give the kids a chance to play, and HAVE FUN.

I think every one of us should take a good look at the hidden agendas, and ask outselves what are we really trying to do, and at what cost? (not just $$ costs, but to the betterment of the kids)

I agree B&G it really bothered me too! and I'm not even from that area.
If we as volunteers have to be paid and the costs are that much, maybe we as parents are involved to much, and for the wrong reasons.....are we over managing the kids game?

western wrote:ogelthorpe
on SCYH web site under the survey - methodology it states
SCYH printed, stuffed, addressed and mailed the survey, so
how could the agency forget return envelopes when SCYH
did all the work sending them out ?

Sorry, you are correct I mis-stated that the agency did not include them. SCHYA did not include the return envelopes. Typing too fast.

The above poster is correct regarding some of the administrative costs that were in place when I served on the board. It's true. However, I also believe it's true that those positions got increases this year, as someone pointed out above. In addition, it might not be a good time to look at the MAC expansion when times are a bit tough.

Perhaps putting off those cost increases on the younger age levels might be a prudent thing to do. I do know that board members from the past fought ice time increases by the MAC by e mailing council members and going to at least one city countil meeting and lobbying members against the increases. I heard another one went through this year.

Finally, to HuskyHockey, if I had wanted to hide my ID, I would't have put my name out there at all -- like you. I chose to come forward. I'm not Zippy, but I might know him or her. I'm relatively sure I know some identities, like you and BlueGoose5, but I can't be totally positive.

Wickedshot. I am not sure why you would have two identies either. I did get it from a reliable source who said you told him that you had the two identities.

I may or may not post under another ID, but if I do, it isn't under zippity and it isn't on this thread; so your source either isn't so reliable or he misunderstood. It wouldn't be the first time, though, that something reported on this board is a rumor, like the report that I offered the administrative director a job or that we all went along with each other on the board while I served or that the Tech hockey coach was in trouble and losing his job. Rumors are everywhere. And a lot of them are just that. You should know that more than anyone.

i can tell you zippitydoda is not wicket

western wrote:i can tell you zippitydoda is not wicket

Who in the heck is Wicket?

huskyhockey17 wrote:.

On a seperate note I have heard that wickedshot and zippitydoda are actually the same person posting under two screen names. Not sure if this is true or not but if it is it certainly is interesting.

There are only a few people that would know this.
Board administrators and the individual involved.
Any speculation by anyone is simply self-serving.
If it were true...
it would soon cease, if it was being used for betterment of any individual.

So assuming it is NOT true, it becomes interesting that someone would tell you that.

RLStars wrote:

western wrote:i can tell you zippitydoda is not wicket

Who in the heck is Wicket?

He's the little burning string at the tip of a very small candle
Just a little sarcasm here as I know this is a delicate thread

RLStars wrote:

western wrote:i can tell you zippitydoda is not wicket

Who in the heck is Wicket?

'Wicket' is the Canadian (French or English - take your pick)
spelling of 'wicked'.

Wicket Canadian for Wicked........good one. He's a bit older than me. Sorry for revealing that. Can anyone tell me if it's true that this MAC expansion is being put upon the shoulders of the younger parents as far as funding and when this is all going to take place? What will the cost per player be?

For the record-- the admin. costs for St Cloud youth hockey were decided by a previous board of directors. The board at that time voted for this. Membership approved. The costs may still be necessary. Good to hear new board plans to review cost structure.

zippitydoda wrote:Wicket Canadian for Wicked........good one. He's a bit older than me. Sorry for revealing that. Can anyone tell me if it's true that this MAC expansion is being put upon the shoulders of the younger parents as far as funding and when this is all going to take place? What will the cost per player be?

It will be spread over all players.

From the SCYHA site:

Based on our current membership this project would result in an annual fee per child of roughly $55. This payment would start after the 2009 season when the current Acceleration contract is complete. Travel team players will see a decrease from $268 per player to approximately $55 per player. Squirt C, Mites and Jr. Mites would have an increase of approximately $55 per player, but they will see the benefits as they move up into the travel team levels, also they will utilize this space as Mites and Jr. Mites.

Most associations I'm aware of try and keep the Mites as low cost as possible, as to generate the most interest at a young age. Not sure I agree with the above concept.

I couldn't agree more, I expressed this to a board member and they stated that this is the cost per player, but that doesn't mean that this is necessarily how it will be distributed if it becomes a reality. Apperently some other big issue came up that they had to deal with, who knows what that was (the prior statement was dripping with sarcasm).

OK

Still in any way making a new Mite player pay more, because it would mean they pay less later when they actually use more is crazy.