How much is the fire including travel

SnowedIn · Post by **SnowedIn** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:29 pm

observer wrote:
And Observer - constant recruiting is a good thing but will not fix the development gap that we are discussing here. You're talking about finding more numbers and diamonds in the rough that come from them. We're talking about improved development that will make top players and strengthen development for all players.
More numbers and more teams means more and better volunteers which means better development. If you're a PeeWee family and there are only enough kids for one team it may not help you today as 12 year olds don't fall from trees. But, if you had spent some time recruiting when your player was a mite a lot of what you're fussing about today wouldn't be occurring. You might have three balanced teams instead of one with no balance. You can help the younger families in your association understand the importance of growth.

Again, no dispute with bigger numbers being beneficial. Agree. But more volunteers do not necessarily mean better development. If you review the last couple of pages of posts you will see what we are discussing about a change in the system. More volunteers that propogate the current system, that has an inherent developmental gap for top players, will not eliminate this gap. Changes need to be made and, until they are made, if they are made at all, a Tier 1 option should be put in place with MH approving 2 or 3 teams. In fact if Association Hockey and MH are happy with it then keep it the way it is and open up the other option of Tier 1 to those that have other needs. Just like other states do.

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:32 pm

observer wrote:
And Observer - constant recruiting is a good thing but will not fix the development gap that we are discussing here. You're talking about finding more numbers and diamonds in the rough that come from them. We're talking about improved development that will make top players and strengthen development for all players.
More numbers and more teams means more and better volunteers which means better development. If you're a PeeWee family and there are only enough kids for one team it may not help you today as 12 year olds don't fall from trees. But, if you had spent some time recruiting when your player was a mite a lot of what you're fussing about today wouldn't be occurring. You might have three balanced teams instead of one with no balance. You can help the younger families in your association understand the importance of growth.

If we only had another 5-6 strong players is a common complaint. That would have come with another 30 mites.

Some of the fussers just want to bail without giving the energy necessary for their community association to succeed. The foundation of a successful volunteer organization is that everyone pitches in. It's not just about Johnny it's about Johnny having 15 solid team mates.

I agree with what your saying. The problem is that programs like MM and The Blades are doing a better job of requiting, and training. I think I saw on another post the MM has 24 choice teams.

Then there is the problem of association size. When I was on the North Branch web site this morning, I read that they have 120 hockey families total. That's for all ages... If you happen to be an elite player living in North Branch, you need another option now !!

Hockey is changing in Minnesota... I watched this for 40 years, there have been more changes in the last 5 years than in the entire history of Minnesota youth hockey..

I believe this is due to summer AAA hockey, and the desire of all those parents and players for something better, once they have had a taste of play where you want, with who you want, at the highest level your talent will let you attain.

We are in the internet age....

I guarantee 30 years ago someone living in Florida would have no voice in Minnesota hockey .. And I for one welcome it....

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:39 pm

Quasar wrote: Hockey is changing in Minnesota... I watched this for 40 years, there have been more changes in the last 5 years than in the entire history of Minnesota youth hockey..

That's funny. I read on here that nothing's changed.

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:45 pm

Urban Iceman,
I hope you have been reading the answers to the question you asked me earlier, as well as other related posts. As you can see you don't have many options.. Your best bet is to find someone near that will take your son, and then try to convince your association to sign a waiver, so that he can play at another association..

I wish you the best of luck, and hope you can find a way for your son to continue to play at the Bantam A level.

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:52 pm

O-townClown wrote: That's funny. I read on here that nothing's changed.

royals dad · Post by **royals dad** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:55 pm

Quasar wrote:
MrBoDangles wrote:[
Winter options is the last thing holding back Minnesota's potential.
I agree with this statement !! I guess that makes me a closed minded , uniformed dufus .. So be it ....

Quasar - Thanks finally a post from you I can agree on!

SnowedIn · Post by **SnowedIn** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:05 pm

No Political Connections wrote:I think it is pretty obvious that something like this is going to happen in MN. Someday, sooner rather than later, there will be an elite level or alternate level that will give those kids who are not being offered the opportunities that they want or need with the current system. If the current teams that are being talked about Fire, Blades, MM, etc were to get together and form a league they could do it. Then they, not MN Hockey, would be in control of it. Does MN Hockey really want to lose control of the top players in the state? Sure, a Tier 1 level will not help a lot of the people who are pushing for it. Guess what, if enough of them want a Tier 2 level somebody will put it into place, the Tier 1 infrastructure will be there so adding Tier 2 on will be a snap. Anyplace there is money and a desire for something somebody will find a way to do it. Look, it is already here, the Fire. Think that people are not looking at them thinking "hey, if they can, we can"?. Do you think that a high school in some town in MN is going to look at a kid who spent the last 4 years playing Fire hockey and tell him that they do not want him? Not a chance, they will make a spot for him in a heart beat. The biggest reason that MN Hockey gives for the current model is "we are the best feeder system for the best high school hockey system in the country". The high school want to win, they will take those kids. MN Hockey's strongest allies will turn their back on them in a second because they want to win. If MN Hockey wants to have any chance of keeping something going they need to get on board the bus right now and start to drive it. They have the chance, they have the feeder programs, they have the infrastructure, they have the first and best shot at the kids, they have all of the advantages now but when the new system gets going (as it will) they will have lost. It is tough to jump on a moving bus when you have everybody on the bus trying to keep you off of it because you were too short sighted to get on it when it was stopped with the doors open. Sure, USA Hockey wants the rest of the country to adopt MN Hockey's association approach. They want the control too and what better way to keep it other than to totally monopolize the hockey landscape. It won't happen, ever, no matter how bad OTC and others try to get it put into place in their states. People have control and are making money right now, that does not end by wishing that it will end. The last thing that anybody wants is for the hockey landscape to look anything like the summer AAA hockey landscape. When teams like Machine, Velocity, Legacy, Blades and etc show up at a tourney and compete with teams made up of entirely B players rather than going someplace to compete with teams like themselves the system is broken, badly. Not bashing the elite teams, I am pretty sure that most of the time they are no happier to be there than the low level teams are to have them there but it happens and it does not make for good hockey or good development for anybody. If MN Hockey is really the slightest bit interested in what is best for the kids they had better get control of this now. They can't prevent it but they can control it. Wake up MN Hockey, if you really want to protect the kids and to do the most amount of good for the most amount of kids you need to get going, now.

Agree. It is inevitable. I would disagree that USA Hockey wants the Association approach in the rest of the country. They know it is in no way practical. In most parts of the country the number of kids playing hockey per school make it impossible. This is only possible here in Minnesota. They have private based Tier 2 hockey instead. MH ASSOCIATION HOCKEY IS A TIER 2 HOCKEY LEAGUE. Problem is Tier 1 hockey is not available as it is in the other states. That has created the vacuum that we are discussing now.

And like you say, by not adopting Tier 1 in a controlled fashion and make it a part of MH, MH will do much more harm than good. If it get's forced in and MH is not part of the process and an independent body starts making the rules, that will potentially unravel what is by far THE BEST TIER 2 SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY!

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:22 pm

royals dad wrote:
Quasar wrote:
I agree with this statement !! I guess that makes me a closed minded , uniformed dufus .. So be it ....
Quasar - Thanks finally a post from you I can agree on!

All right !! Does that mean were pals now??? $\:D/$

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:27 pm

observer wrote:
And Observer - constant recruiting is a good thing but will not fix the development gap that we are discussing here. You're talking about finding more numbers and diamonds in the rough that come from them. We're talking about improved development that will make top players and strengthen development for all players.
More numbers and more teams means more and better volunteers which means better development. If you're a PeeWee family and there are only enough kids for one team it may not help you today as 12 year olds don't fall from trees. But, if you had spent some time recruiting when your player was a mite a lot of what you're fussing about today wouldn't be occurring. You might have three balanced teams instead of one with no balance. You can help the younger families in your association understand the importance of growth.

If we only had another 5-6 strong players is a common complaint. That would have come with another 30 mites.

Some of the fussers just want to bail without giving the energy necessary for their community association to succeed. The foundation of a successful volunteer organization is that everyone pitches in. It's not just about Johnny it's about Johnny having 15 solid team mates.

That is nice in theory but not practical in alot of places. Especially in small towns here in Wisconsin where the families do not eat and breathe hockey. And in fact alot of them don't know or don't like hockey the way folks do in MN. We have 70 total families from the mite through bantam level in our association. Even the most generous of prognostication and best efforts have us hopefully geting to 120 one day but that is where it will cap out even with the best recruiting efforts ever. What then?

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:32 pm

No Political Connections wrote: They want the control too and what better way to keep it other than to totally monopolize the hockey landscape. It won't happen, ever, no matter how bad OTC and others try to get it put into place in their states.

The last thing that anybody wants is for the hockey landscape to look anything like the summer AAA hockey landscape.

And Minnesota Hockey's constituents want it to have control too. What happens if St. Cloud wins states this year at Bantam with a handful of out-of-area players? A ton of people go to Minnesota Hockey and demand that they intervene. The system doesn't work if they don't have control.

In our affiliate we are not trying at all, for the reasons Snowed In mentioned. It would have worked well if things started that way. But it is pretty hard to revert, complicated by the fact that we aren't operating on top of a network of municipal rinks. (Just one to my knowledge.)

Your comment about AAA is funny. To read what I have hear it seems like that's exactly what some people want! We need a choice...what about my kid...waaaaah waaaaa waaaa.

For those ill-served by association hockey, there are another seven months of the year when they can pretty much do whatever they want. The only limitations are your son's ability and your wallet. I'm just not seeing how so many (theoretical) kids are left out.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:32 pm

O-townClown wrote:
Quasar wrote:Ok ... Supporters of the Status quo, how about telling him what he can do for his kid. How about it O-Town, what do you think this dad should do about his situation??
Play in the association from mid-October through February and then augment the season with a more competitive Spring option.

The irony in this scenario is that it could become the norm if options to association hockey proliferate. Tier I clubs would be under the USA Hockey governance...in your HS scenario it is a non-USA Hockey team that took (swiped? poached?) the players.

You've pretty much proven that many kids will be adversely affected when the star kids bolt for the Fire and others like it.

WOW! Maybe this kid should drop to a C team to be a real stud, or better yet PeeWees. Are you joking? Tell me when his development will fall off, mini mites?

The MN REC LEAGUE is poaching star B-C players from associations right now. Is there a difference?

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:35 pm

MrBoDangles wrote:WOW! Maybe this kid should drop to a C team to be a real stud, or better yet PeeWees. Are you joking? Tell me when his development will fall off, mini mites?

The MN REC LEAGUE is poaching star B-C players from associations right now. Is there a difference?

What do you think he should do?

I am not familiar with the Minnesota Rec League. If they are truly poaching players from associations it must be outside of USA Hockey.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:39 pm

O-townClown wrote:
No Political Connections wrote: They want the control too and what better way to keep it other than to totally monopolize the hockey landscape. It won't happen, ever, no matter how bad OTC and others try to get it put into place in their states.

The last thing that anybody wants is for the hockey landscape to look anything like the summer AAA hockey landscape.
And Minnesota Hockey's constituents want it to have control too. What happens if St. Cloud wins states this year at Bantam with a handful of out-of-area players? A ton of people go to Minnesota Hockey and demand that they intervene. The system doesn't work if they don't have control.

In our affiliate we are not trying at all, for the reasons Snowed In mentioned. It would have worked well if things started that way. But it is pretty hard to revert, complicated by the fact that we aren't operating on top of a network of municipal rinks. (Just one to my knowledge.)

Your comment about AAA is funny. To read what I have hear it seems like that's exactly what some people want! We need a choice...what about my kid...waaaaah waaaaa waaaa.

For those ill-served by association hockey, there are another seven months of the year when they can pretty much do whatever they want. The only limitations are your son's ability and your wallet. I'm just not seeing how so many (theoretical) kids are left out.

So suck it up and wait for summer? You just showed how simple minded you really are.

Get off the MINNESOTA forum.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:42 pm

O-townClown wrote:
MrBoDangles wrote:WOW! Maybe this kid should drop to a C team to be a real stud, or better yet PeeWees. Are you joking? Tell me when his development will fall off, mini mites?

The MN REC LEAGUE is poaching star B-C players from associations right now. Is there a difference?
What do you think he should do?

I am not familiar with the Minnesota Rec League. If they are truly poaching players from associations it must be outside of USA Hockey.

Nothing he can do, He should have another option

When does development fall off?????????

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:44 pm

O-townClown wrote:
MrBoDangles wrote:WOW! Maybe this kid should drop to a C team to be a real stud, or better yet PeeWees. Are you joking? Tell me when his development will fall off, mini mites?

The MN REC LEAGUE is poaching star B-C players from associations right now. Is there a difference?
What do you think he should do?

I am not familiar with the Minnesota Rec League. If they are truly poaching players from associations it must be outside of USA Hockey.[/quote
]

Dude .. You don't know about the Minnesota Rec. league ??? When is the last time you were on the Minnesota Hockey web site, or talked to one of your Minnesota Hockey insiders????

Just when you had everyone convinced you knew everything!!

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:48 pm

MrBoDangles wrote:So suck it up and wait for summer? You just showed how simple minded you really are.

Get off the MINNESOTA forum.

No reason to get off. Simple minded? Keep it up with the name calling and you'll further erode your already weak pouty argument.

When a kid gets cut from a Bantam B1 team in Edina, what should he do? Oh yeah, play on the B2 team and "suck it up and wait for summer" in your lingo. What other choice does he have? Join a Tier I team based out of state if they'll take him, which they might if we're talking about a young Edina Bantam.

One thing that is clear through all of your posts is you really aren't interested in making hockey better in your community or the state in general. At least not from the comments on here. Your association is weak and your solution is to drive a dagger in it. Don't worry, you aren't alone. I can't point to dozens doing the same thing. Then they can't believe others won't rally to support them by amending rules or completely altering the system because they don't want to sleep in the bed they've made.

You keep worrying about your one kid and let those running Minnesota Hockey keep worrying about all the kids. Don't be surprised when they can't help you.

Our affiliate's "just one kid" is named Paul. He doesn't have a place (that he wants) to play because all his (supposed) friends bailed on him.

What do you propose the obviously-not-hypothetical Bantam does? I don't see a better solution than remaining with his association.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:52 pm

O-townClown wrote:
MrBoDangles wrote:So suck it up and wait for summer? You just showed how simple minded you really are.

Get off the MINNESOTA forum.
No reason to get off. Simple minded? Keep it up with the name calling and you'll further erode your already weak pouty argument.

When a kid gets cut from a Bantam B1 team in Edina, what should he do? Oh yeah, play on the B2 team and "suck it up and wait for summer" in your lingo. What other choice does he have? Join a Tier I team based out of state if they'll take him, which they might if we're talking about a young Edina Bantam.

One thing that is clear through all of your posts is you really aren't interested in making hockey better in your community or the state in general. At least not from the comments on here. Your association is weak and your solution is to drive a dagger in it. Don't worry, you aren't alone. I can't point to dozens doing the same thing. Then they can't believe others won't rally to support them by amending rules or completely altering the system because they don't want to sleep in the bed they've made.

You keep worrying about your one kid and let those running Minnesota Hockey keep worrying about all the kids. Don't be surprised when they can't help you.

Our affiliate's "just one kid" is named Paul. He doesn't have a place (that he wants) to play because all his (supposed) friends bailed on him.

What do you propose the obviously-not-hypothetical Bantam does? I don't see a better solution than remaining with his association.

He did NOT get cut.

He was left in a bad situation.

Remember about the four moving up to high school?

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:52 pm

Quasar wrote:Dude .. You don't know about the Minnesota Rec. league ??? When is the last time you were on the Minnesota Hockey web site, or talked to one of your Minnesota Hockey insiders????

Just when you had everyone convinced you knew everything!!

Is it the XL no-check, no-practice thing? If so, I don't know that I'd call it "poaching" like they are taking the most desirable players. That is an alternative to serious hockey found in associations, right?

Go ahead and run the alternative, super-serious option for kids who are above association hockey. Just don't expect the affiliate to welcome you. If there's a need like you say it will thrive. I'm pretty sure that a top Boston-area league is run outside of USA Hockey.

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:58 pm

Quasar wrote:Dude .. You don't know about the Minnesota Rec. league ??? When is the last time you were on the Minnesota Hockey web site, or talked to one of your Minnesota Hockey insiders????

Just when you had everyone convinced you knew everything!!

I looked it up. Yes, you have found another option for the Bantam in question. Do serious players play here?

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:59 pm

O-townClown wrote:
Quasar wrote:Dude .. You don't know about the Minnesota Rec. league ??? When is the last time you were on the Minnesota Hockey web site, or talked to one of your Minnesota Hockey insiders????

Just when you had everyone convinced you knew everything!!
Is it the XL no-check, no-practice thing? If so, I don't know that I'd call it "poaching" like they are taking the most desirable players. That is an alternative to serious hockey found in associations, right?

Go ahead and run the alternative, super-serious option for kids who are above association hockey. Just don't expect the affiliate to welcome you. If there's a need like you say it will thrive. I'm pretty sure that a top Boston-area league is run outside of USA Hockey.

They are taking 12 from one north metro association. I guess it's ok when MN HOCKEY does it..........

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:00 pm

Code: Select all

[quote="O-townClown"][quote="Quasar"]Dude .. You don't know about the Minnesota Rec. league ??? When is the last time you were on the Minnesota Hockey web site, or talked to one of your Minnesota Hockey insiders????

Just when you had everyone convinced you knew everything!![/quote]

Is it the XL no-check, no-practice thing?  If so, I don't know that I'd call it "poaching" like they are taking the most desirable players.  That is an alternative to serious hockey found in associations, right?

Go ahead and run the alternative, super-serious option for kids who are above association hockey.  Just don't expect the affiliate to welcome you.  If there's a need like you say it will thrive.  I'm pretty sure that a top Boston-area league is run outside of USA Hockey.[/quote]

Nice try ... Wasn't talking about what the program is.. Was talking about the fact you didn't know about it!!!

And I believe it was clear that he was talking about B and C players...
You just gotta be able to keep more than one thought at a time in your head ...

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:02 pm

MrBoDangles wrote:They are taking 12 from one north metro association. I guess it's ok when MN HOCKEY does it..........

That's a lot, and a HUGE problem if it displaces a few more that could have played with those twelve to form a team.

Why did this thing form? With A, B1, B2, and C leagues prevalent it meets what need? Or did some associations not want to bother with C hockey and this essentially farm it out to a blanket organization.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:02 pm

O-townClown wrote:
Quasar wrote:Dude .. You don't know about the Minnesota Rec. league ??? When is the last time you were on the Minnesota Hockey web site, or talked to one of your Minnesota Hockey insiders????

Just when you had everyone convinced you knew everything!!
I looked it up. Yes, you have found another option for the Bantam in question. Do serious players play here?

So now the A Bantam kid will be a Gretzky?

Time to end it

Deep Breath · Post by **Deep Breath** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:16 pm

I tend to think that the cost of playing for the Fire is fairly close to playing for the Association. Fire is a little bit more, but not so much that would scare somebody away compared to what you pay for association.

Just trying to stay on topic of the thread

SnowedIn · Post by **SnowedIn** » Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:01 pm

O-townClown wrote: If there's a need like you say it will thrive. I'm pretty sure that a top Boston-area league is run outside of USA Hockey.

Every top Boston League as well as 99% of all leagues run in the country are INSIDE USAHOCKEY. Without being INSIDE you cannot be a USAHOCKEY sanctioned team which means your team is unisured which means no other team can play you because they will be uninsured if they play a non sanctioned team and which means you will get no referees for your games because they will not be insured either in an unsanctioned event. No tournaments will allow a non sanctioned team in it either and that includes Canada because they have a reprocity agreement with each other and require docs to prove sanctioning. So any league worth its weight in salt in addition to those not, are INSIDE USAHOCKEY. Did you even know what INSIDE USAHOCKEY means?

When a Tier 1 league forms in MN during the all mighty highschool hockey season, it will be INSIDE USAHOCKEY - approved by and sanctioned by USAHOCKEY.

And realize that there are kids across the Twin Cities participating with the Fire for the reasons that have been cited but ignored by you on this thread. They are not all pinned into a corner. They want better development and they want to play with the rest of the country knows as Tier 1 competition, which is not a perfect system but better than what they have now.