LPH Article on USA Hockey

[SnowedIn]

Why doesn't MNH change the birthdate rules to conform with the rest of the continent?

MH does conform to USAH.

MH is 2 years July to June. Rest of the continent tier II is 2 years January to December.

[MrBoDangles]

THEY ARE SCARED STRAIGHT IE WHERE YOU SEND YOUR NAUGHTY KIDS.

OF MN HOCKEY PULLING ITS SUPPORT TO USA HOCKEY.

MN HOCKEY REGISTRATION FEE IS ALL YOU NEED.

I VOTE FOR JACK TO RUN IT HE GETS IT.....

WE COULD HAVE 1 U17 AND 1 U18 MN TEAMS.

HINT THEY WOULD BEAT THE NATIONAL TEAMS.

CAN'T HAVE THAT NOW CAN WE.

Wait, are you saying that you think a MN U17 and U18 team would beat the U17 or U18 USNDTP teams...... sorry dude but you are completely delusional. MN has some great hockey players but that is not realistic if no other reason (and there are more) than the USNDTP teams play a full season schedule together and play a USHL schedule to boot, the MN kids are playing high school hockey and some Elite league hockey, hardly on par with a USHL schedule.....

I'm not sure if that's what he was talking about, but it would be close the last couple of years if you think about the talent (if they all stayed for U16/17/18 teams) from Minnesota. I actually think it could be closer than you think if you take away up to a quarter of the USNDTP that are Minnesotans, Grab the leading scorers from the USHL that are Minnesotans. Keep the two leading scorers and best defensemen from Shattuck that are Minnesotans. Grab the two future NHL first rounders and couple others that went to the CHL.... And this is before tapping into the high school ranks.

I'd probably - actually - put my money on them some years.

bump

[O-townClown]

Bo, an all-Minnesota team would certainly be competitive. The trick of your argument is that it requires getting every kid. Does that ever happen at any level? No. Not realistically. There is actually a proxy we can look at up north.

In Canada they field either provincial teams or East and West for one of the international tournaments. U17 I think. A team from just Ontario isn't as competitive as the national team is at older ages.

There's been speculation that a national team won't want Minnesota kids if they aren't products of a system that is tied to USA Hockey. I don't see a problem. The Williams sisters and Bode Miller are examples of athletes that sought private training outside the national federation and all three have represented the United States in international competition.

[elliott70]

Why doesn't MNH change the birthdate rules to conform with the rest of the continent?

MH does conform to USAH.

MH is 2 years July to June. Rest of the continent tier II is 2 years January to December.

MH 'peewee' kids are registered as bantam teams with USAH.
There is nothing stopping an association from forming a USAH peewee age team Tier I or Tier II.

[MrBoDangles]

Bo, an all-Minnesota team would certainly be competitive. The trick of your argument is that it requires getting every kid. Does that ever happen at any level? No. Not realistically. There is actually a proxy we can look at up north.

In Canada they field either provincial teams or East and West for one of the international tournaments. U17 I think. A team from just Ontario isn't as competitive as the national team is at older ages.

There's been speculation that a national team won't want Minnesota kids if they aren't products of a system that is tied to USA Hockey. I don't see a problem. The Williams sisters and Bode Miller are examples of athletes that sought private training outside the national federation and all three have represented the United States in international competition.

95's were the first big group of Minnesota kids and there were others that still declined. Most used to pass on the opportunity before this age group.

Take those Ontario kids off and the national team isn't as competitive at all.

Ontario/Toronto would probably win their share of games against the much depleted national team.

[JSR]

Wait, are you saying that you think a MN U17 and U18 team would beat the U17 or U18 USNDTP teams...... sorry dude but you are completely delusional. MN has some great hockey players but that is not realistic if no other reason (and there are more) than the USNDTP teams play a full season schedule together and play a USHL schedule to boot, the MN kids are playing high school hockey and some Elite league hockey, hardly on par with a USHL schedule.....

I'm not sure if that's what he was talking about, but it would be close the last couple of years if you think about the talent (if they all stayed for U16/17/18 teams) from Minnesota. I actually think it could be closer than you think if you take away up to a quarter of the USNDTP that are Minnesotans, Grab the leading scorers from the USHL that are Minnesotans. Keep the two leading scorers and best defensemen from Shattuck that are Minnesotans. Grab the two future NHL first rounders and couple others that went to the CHL.... And this is before tapping into the high school ranks.

I'd probably - actually - put my money on them some years.

bump

I understand what you are getting at but your scenario is circular in it's logic. The reason being is that if you go out do all that far reaching stuff you just suggested for putting together your MN teams, then the national teams get the benefit of doing the same in this hypothetical scenario so all those kids who are better than USNDTP kids that are not from MN but play in places like the USHL or CHL or top MM programs etc.. etc... will play on the National teams and if that is the case maybe MN is competitive maybe not, but nobama said "HINT THEY WOULD BEAT THE NATIONAL TEAMS", and even in that scenario I don't see that happening....... but the fact is none of that is even remotely realistic..... Now my original response was based on the actual current available pool of kids that realistically could be put together from MN going against the current national teams as they stand now (wwith the MN kids they have included), I stand by my statement, hope that clarifies things

[MrBoDangles]

I'm not sure if that's what he was talking about, but it would be close the last couple of years if you think about the talent (if they all stayed for U16/17/18 teams) from Minnesota. I actually think it could be closer than you think if you take away up to a quarter of the USNDTP that are Minnesotans, Grab the leading scorers from the USHL that are Minnesotans. Keep the two leading scorers and best defensemen from Shattuck that are Minnesotans. Grab the two future NHL first rounders and couple others that went to the CHL.... And this is before tapping into the high school ranks.

I'd probably - actually - put my money on them some years.

bump

I understand what you are getting at but your scenario is circular in it's logic. The reason being is that if you go out do all that far reaching stuff you just suggested for putting together your MN teams, then the national teams get the benefit of doing the same in this hypothetical scenario so all those kids who are better than USNDTP kids that are not from MN but play in places like the USHL or CHL or top MM programs etc.. etc... will play on the National teams and if that is the case maybe MN is competitive maybe not, but nobama said "HINT THEY WOULD BEAT THE NATIONAL TEAMS", and even in that scenario I don't see that happening....... but the fact is none of that is even remotely realistic..... Now my original response was based on the actual current available pool of kids that realistically could be put together from MN going against the current national teams as they stand now (wwith the MN kids they have included), I stand by my statement, hope that clarifies things

"National team gets the same benefit" -Go ahead!

I thought I explained above that most of the best available are currently from Minnesota...... USHL, Shattuck, etc

I'm just saying that if the Minnesota kids all played on U16/17/18 teams they would give the best of the rest of the country a run for their money.

[SnowedIn]

MH does conform to USAH.

MH is 2 years July to June. Rest of the continent tier II is 2 years January to December.

MH 'peewee' kids are registered as bantam teams with USAH.
There is nothing stopping an association from forming a USAH peewee age team Tier I or Tier II.

Elliot, because the current association teams "DO NOT CONFORM" to the way the rest of the continent rosters their teams those association teams cannot compete against their same age groups in a national tournament. How do you think a Pee Wee A state winning team (2001's 2000's and 1999's) would do against state winning Bantam teams (1999's and 1998's) from the rest of the country. Redundant question. And guess what? The games would be full check! Bantams couldn't play in the regionals or national tournament because they have 95s that are ineligible because the rest of the country has only 97s and 96s.

Second, to your point about throwing a team together - the teams that move on to nationals in the rest of the US are club teams, not allstar teams, or put together teams. These teams start playing in September and play all season together. The teams that win state and advance through regoinals move on to nationals. You suggest that there is nothing to stop an association to forming a team to compete at nationals. How about the fact that all of these kids already play on their MN association teams which have the "NON-CONFORMING" June to July age groups and thus the thrown together secondary team, incidentally, whose roster would need to be finalized by Dec 31st, would not be able to play together all season and win state together and advance to nationals in the same way that the rest of the country does. I also think there is a minimum number of games that a team must play in order to qualify for regoinals/nationals. Lots of barriers...

Nothing stopping an association from forming a Tier 1 team? See above.

If MN had the calendar year rosters then the MN state champs would move on to regionals where they could have the chance to advance to nationals. That's the conforming way the rest of the country does it. The only change needed would be to change to the calendar year rosters. Then we'd see how association teams would stack up against the rest of the country's tier 2 teams. My guess is they'd do very well. Not to mention that winning nationals is a nice prize for a local kid and community.

[elliott70]

MH is 2 years July to June. Rest of the continent tier II is 2 years January to December.

MH 'peewee' kids are registered as bantam teams with USAH.
There is nothing stopping an association from forming a USAH peewee age team Tier I or Tier II.

Elliot, because the current association teams "DO NOT CONFORM" to the way the rest of the continent rosters their teams those association teams cannot compete against their same age groups in a national tournament. How do you think a Pee Wee A state winning team (2001's 2000's and 1999's) would do against state winning Bantam teams (1999's and 1998's) from the rest of the country. Redundant question. And guess what? The games would be full check! Bantams couldn't play in the regionals or national tournament because they have 95s that are ineligible because the rest of the country has only 97s and 96s.

Second, to your point about throwing a team together - the teams that move on to nationals in the rest of the US are club teams, not allstar teams, or put together teams. These teams start playing in September and play all season together. The teams that win state and advance through regoinals move on to nationals. You suggest that there is nothing to stop an association to forming a team to compete at nationals. How about the fact that all of these kids already play on their MN association teams which have the "NON-CONFORMING" June to July age groups and thus the thrown together secondary team, incidentally, whose roster would need to be finalized by Dec 31st, would not be able to play together all season and win state together and advance to nationals in the same way that the rest of the country does. I also think there is a minimum number of games that a team must play in order to qualify for regoinals/nationals. Lots of barriers...

Nothing stopping an association from forming a Tier 1 team? See above.

If MN had the calendar year rosters then the MN state champs would move on to regionals where they could have the chance to advance to nationals. That's the conforming way the rest of the country does it. The only change needed would be to change to the calendar year rosters. Then we'd see how association teams would stack up against the rest of the country's tier 2 teams. My guess is they'd do very well. Not to mention that winning nationals is a nice prize for a local kid and community.

The age difference is NOT why MH does not compete in Nationals.
MH decided prior to the age change to NOT participate.
For a variety of reasons.

[elliott70]

As far as registering a team by birth year, an association can do that. MH does not say you cannot do that. To be eligible for national tourneys - go ahead and make the request to MH. They may grant permission.

[elliott70]

You miss the point completely.

You can call me if you want to know how it is done

218 759 9411 work
Elliottm@paulbunyan.net
Mark Elliott
District 16 director MH
Bemidji Mn

[SnowedIn]

My point is that your response to the notion of competing in Nationals was that MN hockey conforms to USAH, ignores the fact that MN Hockey is not set up to do that. Even if there is some backdoor way of doing this, if you get the blessing of MN Hockey, it is impractical based on how the rostering is done in MH Hockey and would also not conform with the way the rest of the US teams qualify for that tournament. Your more relevant point that you just wrote is that MN Hockey chose not to participate in Nationals.

Why did MN Hockey decide it did not want to participate in Regionals/Nationals?

[elliott70]

My point is that your response to the notion of competing in Nationals was that MN hockey conforms to USAH, ignores the fact that MN Hockey is not set up to do that. Even if there is some backdoor way of doing this, if you get the blessing of MN Hockey, it is impractical based on how the rostering is done in MH Hockey and would also not conform with the way the rest of the US teams qualify for that tournament. Your more relevant point that you just wrote is that MN Hockey chose not to participate in Nationals.

Why did MN Hockey decide it did not want to participate in Regionals/Nationals?

Based on reports from the participating local associations;
The cost was extreme, in particular air fare
The event was anticlimactic after the minnesota state tourney
The event was not run well
There was at least one other significant point - cannot rember it

Since you need to indicate intent before Oct 15 and you are penalized monetary and otherwise it wa deemed not to be worth it.

[elliott70]

On the point of MH registration...
A local assn can register a team by birth year
So if you want a tier II bantam team to go to natl you select a team by birth year within the 2 year age and register as bantam, notify MH of your intent to compete for national before oct 15 - well before
And you have done the easy part
Now you have to find 20 games against similar registered teams which is the biggest problem from where I sit

[elliott70]

. Even if there is some backdoor way of doing this, if you get the blessing of MN Hockey, it is impractical based on how the rostering is done in MH Hockey ?

MH does not register teams. USAH does.

USAH gave a label to mn hockey bantam, pewee, squirt teams just to help identify them...

[elliott70]

And FYI
There is no peewee national event. Under 12 natl were discontinued after 2010 or maybe 2011

[SnowedIn]

Based on reports from the participating local associations;
The cost was extreme, in particular air fare
The event was anticlimactic after the minnesota state tourney
The event was not run well
There was at least one other significant point - cannot rember it

Since you need to indicate intent before Oct 15 and you are penalized monetary and otherwise it wa deemed not to be worth it.

Not directed at you Elliot but at MH's conclusions:

So MH decided that it was too expensive for 1-3 teams in the whole state to go to regionals/nationals. Shouldn't that be the team's choice?

Yes, winning the nationals is anticlimactic compared with winning just the state. Some people think that a US title is bigger than any state title. State is great but traveling to meet and see other competitors from other states is a great experience as well as having the chance to represent your state.

USAH gave a label to mn hockey bantam, pewee, squirt teams just to help identify them...

USAH gave them the only label they could based on the age of the players that are on the MH teams. Younger players can play up but older players cannot play down.

Now you have to find 20 games against similar registered teams which is the biggest problem from where I sit

Agreed. Which brings us back to the point that MH rostering rules make it very impractical and virtually impossible for an association team to compete for a national title.

[elliott70]

Not directed at you Elliot but at MH's conclusions:

So MH decided that it was too expensive for 1-3 teams in the whole state to go to regionals/nationals. Shouldn't that be the team's choice?

Yes, winning the nationals is anticlimactic compared with winning just the state. USAH gave a label to mn hockey bantam, pewee, squirt teams just to help identify them...

Teams had backed out from some USAH affiliates which left the affiliate responsible for them not showing and the sanctions that went with them.
I believe the fine back then was $2000.
The way it works is that it is an affiliate thing not an association thing.
And the MN team that went made the statement, and the one the year before that, and the one the year before that....
MH made the decision based on whzt was happening, perhaps it would be differetn now.
But no one has stepped forward saying they would like to go.

Not talking about winning or losing, just htat the experience was not as good, overall. Not the same tradition, not treated as well, expensive...
just not as good, espeically for the money...
Maybe differeent now,
but again, no one is asking for this.

My attempt here is to let you (all of you) know that if it is something you are looking for than ask...
Sitting back and saying that MH changed the age date so 'no' we cannot do it is not going to change anything.