Thoughts for parents of peewee/bantams in this off-season

[frederick61]

Interesting data points for parents. I went to the 2006 State B tourneys in Buffalo and yesterday ran across the Bantam B roosters for the teams that participated. I cross checked it with the players listed at their respective high schools at the start of the season to see how many made it to the varsity two years later. The teams are listed below.

Centennial-The Cougars Varsity listed 20 players. The Cougars went 18-8-2 this year losing to Blaine in the 5AA finals. No one from the Bantam B state tourney made it to varsity.
Chaska The Hawks Varsity listed 20 players. The Hawks went 7-18-1 this year losing to Holy Angels in the first round of section 2AA. Five played on the B Bantam team.
Duluth East-The Hounds Varsity listed 21 players. The Hounds went 18-8-1 this year losing to Cloquet in the 7AA semifinals. Only one player, the goalie, played varsity this year.
Luverne-The Cardinals Varsity listed 14 players. The Cardinals were 14-8 this year losing to Hutchinson in the semifinals of section 3A. Six were from the Bantam B tourney team.
Moorhead-The Spuds Varsity listed 20 players. The Spuds were 14-10-3 this year losing to Roseau in the semifinals of section 8AA. Four were from the Bantam B tourney team.
Prairie Centre-This co-op team between Long Praire, Melrose and Sauk Centre listed 18 Varsity players. The Varsity went 13-11-2 this year losing to St. Cloud Apollo in the first round of Section 6A. Twelve of the B Bantam team that made the state played on the varsity.
Princeton-The Tigers Varsity listed 20 players. The Tigers went 7-19-1 this year losing in the first round of Section 5A to St. Cloud Cathedral. Five were from the Bantam B tourney team.
Wayzata-The Trojans Varsity listed 20 players. The Trojans went 7-15-4 this year losing in the first round of Section 6AA to Hopkins. Only one was from the Bantam B state tourney team.

So for the parents of kids playing peewee or starting Bantams, the trend is if your kid is a B player, his chances of making Varsity in two or three years depend on his talent in relation to all the peewees playing and the quality of the high school team. If the high school team is struggling and your kid is competitive, he will have a good shot at varsity as noted with Moorhead and Chaska. If it is a smaller program such as Luverne, Prairie Centre and Princeton, his odds go up. If it is a good quality team ahead of him such as Duluth East and Centennial had this year, the odds go down. The one odd team in this thought process is Wayzata, a team that is down but only drew one player from the state B team. But that is competition.

[steelheader]

That's because the smaller programs don't have "A" hockey at Bantam.

[frederick61]

That's because the smaller programs don't have "A" hockey at Bantam.

I agree that smaller associations don't always have an A bantam team. But they have a B bantam team each year. Of the eight programs above, I suspect that Prairie Centre and Luverne skated only B Bantam. Princeton most likely had only a B Bantam team. The rest had A teams.

Of the associations that had A teams, Chaska took 5 from the B Bantams and Moorhead took 4. Chaska was well under .500 last year, the Spuds played better then .500. But more of the varsity slots went to the B Bantam players then A Bantam players on these teams. My point to the parents is don't be too upset if your kid is on the B team. The former Jefferson coach always made kids coming through his system play one year of B at each level (peewee/bantam) as a general rule. Why?

My second point is look at the quality of the high school team. Duluth East and Centennial both had good teams, and few B bantams made it to varsity. So the point to the parents is don't go emotional, be more of a manager for the kid and help set expectations.

One more general point, it will be interesting to watch the Prairie Centre team play the next few years. When you think that essentially a B Bantam team intact is playing at the high school level and has a record over .500 their first year out, it will be great fun to watch them develop.

[DannyNoonan]

Interesting data points for parents. I went to the 2006 State B tourneys in Buffalo and yesterday ran across the Bantam B roosters for the teams that participated. I cross checked it with the players listed at their respective high schools at the start of the season to see how many made it to the varsity two years later. The teams are listed below.

So for the parents of kids playing peewee or starting Bantams, the trend is if your kid is a B player, his chances of making Varsity in two or three years depend on his talent in relation to all the peewees playing and the quality of the high school team.

Many B Bantams are first year bantams in 8th grade. So you're saying not many 8th graders from B teams are playing varsity as sophomores. What a surprise! Can you come up with any more amazing stats?

[sorno82]

Interesting stuff. How many went private? Could some of those "B" players played at Marshall, Breck, Blake, Providence, Holy Family, etc.?

[Lily Braden]

What about schools like EP, Edina, Jefferson and Bville?

I'm assuming that the Varsity teams there look pretty much like the Bantam A teams....or am I wrong? Especially Edina and EP.

[frederick61]

Interesting data points for parents. I went to the 2006 State B tourneys in Buffalo and yesterday ran across the Bantam B roosters for the teams that participated. I cross checked it with the players listed at their respective high schools at the start of the season to see how many made it to the varsity two years later. The teams are listed below.

So for the parents of kids playing peewee or starting Bantams, the trend is if your kid is a B player, his chances of making Varsity in two or three years depend on his talent in relation to all the peewees playing and the quality of the high school team.

Many B Bantams are first year bantams in 8th grade. So you're saying not many 8th graders from B teams are playing varsity as sophomores. What a surprise! Can you come up with any more amazing stats?

No, I am saying the opposite. Typical high school varsity teams will rooster 20 players from grades 9-12. Most of the varsity player spots will be seniors and juniors leaving eight or less spots for the tenth and ninth graders. One would think that most of those spots would go to A Bantam Players. But that is not always the case. In this example, 4 of the six tenth graders that made the Chaska Varsity last year were from the Bantam B team.

But the most important point I am trying to make, is that once your kid is in a good Bantam program, things move fast in those two years and the parents involved have to think of themselves as managers of the kid playing and distant themselves emotionally from the situation. Why? Because if your kid is playing Bantam B, it maybe the ideal spot for him mentally and physically to play high school varsity as a sophomore. If the parents are discouraged, the kid may lose the will and drive to make the leap.

[frederick61]

What about schools like EP, Edina, Jefferson and Bville?

I'm assuming that the Varsity teams there look pretty much like the Bantam A teams....or am I wrong? Especially Edina and EP.

Edina rostered 20 varsity players last fall. Six were seniors, seven were juniors, six were sophomores and one was a freshman. It should be difficult for any Bantam moving up into the Edina high school to make varsity, since they would be competing with returning JV players for only five open slots, (one goalie graduated leaving five slots at forward). Add to that, the Hornets were very competitive last year going 28-3. They are going to be very strong this year. I can see a Bantam player having to be very good to make this team and if he does, potentially very frustrated because he will likely see more bench time then the other players.

Eden Prairie roster had 21 varsity players last fall. Seven were seniors, nine were juniors, and five were sophomores. They also had a strong season finishing 18-7-2. There are six slots for forwards (one goalie is graduating). Like Edina, the Bantam players moving up will have to be very good to make this team as a sophomore.

Burnsville roster had 20 varsity players last fall. Thirteen were seniors, four juniors and three sophomores. They had a strong team last year going 22-6. This team is going to have to be rebuilt with 12 slots to fill. There is opportunity here for Bantams to move up to varsity.

Jefferson roster had 20 varsity players last fall. Eight were seniors, six were juniors and six were sophomores. They had a strong team last year going 17-7-3. Two of the seniors were goalies leaving only six forward slots. As with Edina and Eden Prairie, it will be tough for any Bantam player to make this team as a sophomore when competing for one of six slots with the returning JV players.

You cannot generalize the statistics and say that a Bantam A team becomes the varsity team in a few years. I tend to believe that even the good youth championship teams that move up from peewees to bantams as groups fall apart in high school as a group for a variety of reasons. One reason is that because kids have been competing within their group intensely for A teams for 4-6 years. All the kids are better players and it shows up at high school when the kids start to mature.

But they mature differently, not always in high school, but about 2-4 years after high school. A parent will mistake the fact that suddenly a kid has grown tall for being physically mature. But they are not mature until they have broaden out. If you add this maturing to being competitive and having opportunity (slots on the roster), then things are fairly open and it really comes down to a kids attitude and work ethic. That's why the Jefferson coach forced kids coming through his program to play B.

My son played against the good Jefferson youth teams that graduated in 93 and 94. His team would get beat, sometimes badly, by these Jefferson teams but he always thought they were a good bunch of kids to play against.

[Doglover]

Great, great points. I think you nailed it. The competition is incredibly tough in these strong programs and often times you don't get a shot at Varsity until your Junior year, even if you were Bantam A. There have been 2 yr. Bantam A's that don't even make the Varsity. It's good there is a strong Jr. Gold program in these communities because a lot of very talented kids never get to wear that HS jersey just due to the depth of the program. Best to try to manage expectations, but it's still so disappointing. Some of them do go on to excel at some of the other sports - football, lacrosse, baseball - once they realize the odds.

[frederick61]

Great, great points. I think you nailed it. The competition is incredibly tough in these strong programs and often times you don't get a shot at Varsity until your Junior year, even if you were Bantam A. There have been 2 yr. Bantam A's that don't even make the Varsity. It's good there is a strong Jr. Gold program in these communities because a lot of very talented kids never get to wear that HS jersey just due to the depth of the program. Best to try to manage expectations, but it's still so disappointing. Some of them do go on to excel at some of the other sports - football, lacrosse, baseball - once they realize the odds.

There is nothing wrong with your kid being in a tough program. It is better in my estimation to play in a tough program where everyday during the season, a player is challenged to do better. That competition is great especially if it is augmented with good stable coaching from year to year.

All parents whose kids participate love their kids and want them to do well. So in a tough program, it hurts the parent inside to see them struggle. What they have to realize is that all kids develop differently. Struggling against better competition will make them play better and will bring out in the kid the desire to continue or not. Other sports may appeal to them because they can excel and that can be their choice. My point is not that however.

If a kid has that desire to continue, the parent has to set aside his emotions and take on the role of a manager, much like a professional has a manager and figure out what paths are available that allows the kid to continue to develop interest in this sport. Why? Because often I have seen the kid discouraged by “not making it” in hockey because he is not “living up to his own expectation”. One player I know who “struggled” committed suicide by 20. Another became essentially a hobo. Another developed a mental disorder and has attempted suicide a number of times.

I am not blaming the parent here. A lot what happened had to do with the kid’s personality and the majority of the kids find their own way. What I am suggesting to the parents, especially of second year peewee or first year bantam age kid, is they need to get proactive in finding opportunities that fit in family budgets to give the kid who wants to play the opportunity to develop his interest in the sport as he grows. If he has that opportunity eventually the maturing kicks in and the kid sets or resets his own expectations. The parents need to start finding the path now so that a year or two from now the kids has options.

One aside, with my kids, they worked summers to offset the costs. They didn't complain because they wanted to play.

[frederick61]

This thread was started to focus on parents of kids who are second year peewees or first year bantams this fall. There is a reason. Under current high school rules, a kid has to choose the school by ninth grade. Once he is entered, he will be penalized if he transfers to another, even if it is a private school. At least that is my understanding. If not please correct me.

I actually think it is a mean rule, because the kid is still developing when he enters the ninth grade in terms of competing at the high school level. It would be better if he had the option to opt out in the ninth grade, but not the tenth. The ninth grade rule, frankly, favors the school and coach, not the kid. And there are some high school coaches that will take advantage of the kid and parents to keep the kid enrolled so that they have the kid in their program even if he never plays.

With that said, if your kid is a second year peewee or a first year bantam, it is time to become a manager. But the first step is to determine what commitment the kid is making to the sport. Don’t be afraid to involve yourself with your kid. It should strengthen the parent/child relationship.

[DMom]

you are right fred61, I think it is a big issue for the kids, and for hockey players it is worse than other sports because of the way the playing divisions are made up agewise. I don't know if the last year of Bantam eligibilty is in any way comparable to basketball or volleyball or football. It's a thoughtful post and one that should get parents thinking.

[Whatthe]

I actually think it is a mean rule, because the kid is still developing when he enters the ninth grade in terms of competing at the high school level. It would be better if he had the option to opt out in the ninth grade, but not the tenth. The ninth grade rule, frankly, favors the school and coach, not the kid. And there are some high school coaches that will take advantage of the kid and parents to keep the kid enrolled so that they have the kid in their program even if he never plays.

Don't understand your point. You can open enroll in 15 different high schools your freshman and sophomore years and still play JV. JV is the most "still developing" ninth/tenth graders can hope for in AA schools.

[frederick61]

I actually think it is a mean rule, because the kid is still developing when he enters the ninth grade in terms of competing at the high school level. It would be better if he had the option to opt out in the ninth grade, but not the tenth. The ninth grade rule, frankly, favors the school and coach, not the kid. And there are some high school coaches that will take advantage of the kid and parents to keep the kid enrolled so that they have the kid in their program even if he never plays.

Don't understand your point. You can open enroll in 15 different high schools your freshman and sophomore years and still play JV. JV is the most "still developing" ninth/tenth graders can hope for in AA schools.

I think before we can continue this discussion, one point of fact has to be very clear otherwise we will confuse others who are reading this thread. I believe according to Minnesota State High School rules, a kid can open enroll only as a freshman. After that he suffers a one year penalty if he open enrolls as a sophomore or junior. Is that correct?

If so and a kid is a competitive player in his system as an eighth grade bantam and he wants to compete but the parents perceive he has little opportunity to play high school, the system is set up to force a decision as to what to do next by the parents/kid prior to his entering ninth grade. Once he walks through that high school door, even if it is a middle school or a private school, as a ninth grader, he is trapped. And as you point out, he is "still developing" so the parents/kid don't know. That creates tension among the parents and kid.

[goldy313]

I assume you're talking about OE transfers, not changes of residence (no penalty)
You are varsity eligible if you were a student in good standing at the previous school and meet 1 of the following criteria:
1) the student is enrolling in the ninth grade for the first time
2) the family legally changed residence
3)Court ordered change of residence for the protection of the child
4)Divorced parents - child can legally move from 1 to the other without penalty once.
5)Moves in from out of state
6)OE - the students parents must elect one of the following a) retain varsity eligibility at previous school for 1 calender year. b) have only non varsity eligibility at the new school for 1 calender year

[Whatthe]

I believe according to Minnesota State High School rules, a kid can open enroll only as a freshman. After that he suffers a one year penalty if he open enrolls as a sophomore or junior. Is that correct?

You are mixing two different rules: (1) open enrollment; and (2) transfer rule. By law, a kid has the right to try to open enroll in a high school of his/her choice. In simple terms, open enrolling is going to a school despite not living within the community/school boundaries. The right to open enroll is not related to athletics. A family can try to open enroll at a school at any age.

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/dat ... 4D/03.html

Separate deal is what athletic penalty follows the an open enrollment. By MSHSL rule, if a student open enrolls after 9th grade year, and provided none of five exceptions apply, at worst the kid cannot play VARSITY at the new school. Even though the kid can't play varsity at the new school, he/she is immediately/always eligible for any non-varsity team at the new school - JV, B squad, etc.

In addition, (and this is the weird part of the rule) the kid can still play VARSITY at the old school for one year after open enrolling in a new school.

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/publications ... f?ne=1.pdf

So if little Johnny can't make the Edina JV as a ninth grader, he can transfer to Blake and play JV for Blake as a sophomore or play for Edina varsity as sophomore.

What little Johnny can't do is play for Lakeville South varsity for three years, decide he wants to win a state champtionship his senior year, and transfer to Edina, Holy Angels, STA, etc. and immediately play varsity. However, Little Johnny can still play for Lakeville South varsity his senior year.

Long way of saying that the transfer rule hurts "still developing" ninth graders only to the extent their NHL careers will be derailed by having to play a year of JV as sophomores.

[frederick61]

I assume you're talking about OE transfers, not changes of residence (no penalty)
You are varsity eligible if you were a student in good standing at the previous school and meet 1 of the following criteria:
1) the student is enrolling in the ninth grade for the first time
2) the family legally changed residence
3)Court ordered change of residence for the protection of the child
4)Divorced parents - child can legally move from 1 to the other without penalty once.
5)Moves in from out of state
6)OE - the students parents must elect one of the following a) retain varsity eligibility at previous school for 1 calender year. b) have only non varsity eligibility at the new school for 1 calender year

Thank you, Goldy313. Can you explain OE because I am certain that most parents are locked into #1 above as the only option in normal circumstance. OE to me implies a kid entering the ninth grade can designate himself as OE and retain varsity eligibility at his current school, but cannot play varsity at the new school his freshman year. If he then wants to return as a sophomore to his original school, he can without losing a year. But if he moves on to a new third school, he loses a year (plus the freshman year).

[frederick61]

I believe according to Minnesota State High School rules, a kid can open enroll only as a freshman. After that he suffers a one year penalty if he open enrolls as a sophomore or junior. Is that correct?

You are mixing two different rules: (1) open enrollment; and (2) transfer rule. By law, a kid has the right to try to open enroll in a high school of his/her choice. In simple terms, open enrolling is going to a school despite not living within the community/school boundaries. The right to open enroll is not related to athletics. A family can try to open enroll at a school at any age.

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/dat ... 4D/03.html

Separate deal is what athletic penalty follows the an open enrollment. By MSHSL rule, if a student open enrolls after 9th grade year, and provided none of five exceptions apply, at worst the kid cannot play VARSITY at the new school. Even though the kid can't play varsity at the new school, he/she is immediately/always eligible for any non-varsity team at the new school - JV, B squad, etc.

In addition, (and this is the weird part of the rule) the kid can still play VARSITY at the old school for one year after open enrolling in a new school.

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/publications ... f?ne=1.pdf

So if little Johnny can't make the Edina JV as a ninth grader, he can transfer to Blake and play JV for Blake as a sophomore or play for Edina varsity as sophomore.

What little Johnny can't do is play for Lakeville South varsity for three years, decide he wants to win a state champtionship his senior year, and transfer to Edina, Holy Angels, STA, etc. and immediately play varsity. However, Little Johnny can still play for Lakeville South varsity his senior year.

Long way of saying that the transfer rule hurts "still developing" ninth graders only to the extent their NHL careers will be derailed by having to play a year of JV as sophomores.

Thank you for the clarification. Goldy do you agree? But "Whatthe", we are not talking about kids who think in terms of NHL, most kids actually don't-they just want to play competitively in high school. It is a simple goal and this thread is trying to look at the kid and his interest in the sport from the parents/kid perspective in terms of his opportunities while following the rules. Unfortunately the rules are set up to favor the high school and coach by making the kids and parents decide before the kid develops.

I am sorry to say that most JV squads are the worst place to develop as a player. Playing bantams that competitively offer a 60/70 game environment is far better then the 20 or so played as warm-ups at most large schools in the metro area.

Finally (and this is off track on this thread), what is wrong with little Johnny transfering in his senior to play on team with a shot at the state. If the parents are willing, why should the state board step in. All this rule does is make certain the programs with large numbers win year after year.

[DMom]

Thanks for taking the time to explain this, all of you. The JV component is interesting because it does give the ninth grader another year to make the decision. They could stay at their school in 9th grade and move for tenth grade and lose just that year of varsity play (and how many shifts do most sophomores get in those twenty games??).

It also helps to know that a kid could attend another school, tryout for them and if not making it can play at the old school (if the varsity coach is willing) rather than turn to jr. gold or u15. I don't know how many coaches would be willing to do that.

[GR3343]

[quote="frederick61"[ I am sorry to say that most JV squads are the worst place to develop as a player. [/quote]

There again, this seems to be a pretty harsh statement. It still all depends on the program. JV still has its upside in my opinion. If you have a decent coaching staff that's committed to making the program better, JV is still a development league. It definitely falls into the practice/game ratio that many were clamoring about years ago. JV players practice daily often times getting in 3 or 4 practices for every game. Depending on the program, I'd call that developing. Working on systems and general hockey skills is development unless there's a new definition of the word. Lastly, more often than not, a player can't just decide to forgo their final year of Bantam eligibility either. If the high school coach is in tune with the youth program, he's aware of when players are supposed to move up. Generally, a player moving up early is either based on a numbers need or the kid's a phenom. Most good coaches will encourage players to enjoy their final years of youth hockey and be ready to step up when it's their time. Too often, the kids or mom and dad think they're ready and say they're moving up. Like I said, it's the coach's decision.

[Night Train]

I think what a lot of this is saying is that for hockey wouldn't it be nice if the kids could wait to commit until their 10th grade year. Until a player has completed his second year of bantam, 9th grade for most, it's hard to know how likely they would be able to have an impact at a varsity program. Because of our sports structure, likely bantam through 9th grade, it's really difficult to know which school makes the most sense when considering playing high school hockey. Because of all the growth and maturity issues occurring at this age so much can change between the first year of bantam and the second.

Could the rule be changed for hockey? The rules are really in place for academics and sports become part of the discussion so that's a problem when discussing a change. Why just hockey. But, I can't think of another sport where the structure in place takes a youth hockey player through 9th grade which is after the decision of where to attend high school has already been made.

I'll add, in my opinion, it's a very rare circumstance that a player should give up his final year of youth hockey to play JV hockey. To play with their association friends for a final year is to important to pass on. High school athletics comes soon enough. I like the opinion that I've read here. Unless the player is top two lines on varsity as a ninth grader, involved with specialty teams and regular second line shifts, to pass on the development that occurs during a 50 game Bantam A season, travel tournaments, leadership, having success, for a seat on the bench for 25 (several cruddy) games, is a mistake. Families make the decision based on finances and transportation as the top two reasons. Interestingly, because of declining numbers at some high schools, I've heard of coaches asking second year bantam players to consider JV. That is unfortunate and the coaches are wrong for doing it. Let the player finish his final year of youth hockey and develop during a 50 game schedule, that lasts 6 months, as opposed to a selfish request for another body on a JV roster.

[Tony Soprano]

I think the decision to move to high school vs. 2nd year bantam really depends upon the area. With some of the smaller youth associations around that blend into smaller high school programs, it may make sense to make the move even if it means some time with the JV. I agree that if there are dedicated coaches working with the JV, it is far better to benefit from the extra parctice time as long as the focus is overall developemnt. A JV game schedule of around 20 games is sufficient, and will allow for some quality practice hours in the right environment.

On the other hand I have worked with players that did finish out their bantam years and those parents believe it was the best thing to do after the fact. I quess nobody can really say which way is better, it really comes down to each individual case, what your goals are, and if you really have the heart to suceed in the game of hockey or not. I also can come down the fact of quality coaching at the bantam level as well as the high school level. There are a lot of factors to look at, and that need to be managed properly.

[Can't Never Tried]

Another factor although usually plays a smaller role in hockey decisions is "cost", with everything getting so expensive and the family budgets getting pinched, HS hockey can look very attractive, compared to Bantam hockey.
Not to mention that practices are in most cases everyday right after school with reduced travel etc...

Just throwing it out there

[Whatthe]

Because of our sports structure, likely bantam through 9th grade, it's really difficult to know which school makes the most sense when considering playing high school hockey. Because of all the growth and maturity issues occurring at this age so much can change between the first year of bantam and the second.

Could the rule be changed for hockey?

Open enrollment was created in the early 1990's to allow students from less affluent areas to transfer to affluent schools to get the best education possible. In addition to lots of paper-work and approval issues, tax benefits flow to the new school/community and away from the old school/community as a result of the transfer. Open enrollment was designed to try to get underperforming schools to improve education or lose funds/teachers/etc. Open enrollment was not created to allow schools to get state revenue from other communities by creating super teams for 11 week sports.

Problems were being created by students/families using open enrollment to create super transfer teams and wrecking what is supposed to be community-based competition. You saw the worst example in girls basketball (Central a couple years ago). You also saw the Eden Prairie girls hockey team win a couple titles using many transfers.

If little Johnny's parents really prioritize sports above education to the extent that they are picking their high school based upon where little Johnny will get the most hockey playing time, little Johnny needs to transfer parents. Anyways, little Johnny's parents are always free to move around community to community, without athletic penalty, to live the dream.

[frederick61]

[quote="frederick61"[ I am sorry to say that most JV squads are the worst place to develop as a player.

There again, this seems to be a pretty harsh statement. It still all depends on the program. JV still has its upside in my opinion. If you have a decent coaching staff that's committed to making the program better, JV is still a development league. It definitely falls into the practice/game ratio that many were clamoring about years ago. JV players practice daily often times getting in 3 or 4 practices for every game. Depending on the program, I'd call that developing. Working on systems and general hockey skills is development unless there's a new definition of the word. Lastly, more often than not, a player can't just decide to forgo their final year of Bantam eligibility either. If the high school coach is in tune with the youth program, he's aware of when players are supposed to move up. Generally, a player moving up early is either based on a numbers need or the kid's a phenom. Most good coaches will encourage players to enjoy their final years of youth hockey and be ready to step up when it's their time. Too often, the kids or mom and dad think they're ready and say they're moving up. Like I said, it's the coach's decision.[/quote]

You made some very good points for parents/kids who are first year bantams or second year peewees this fall to think about in looking at their high school program. I would add that just because a high school coach has been coaching at the same high school for years does not mean he takes an interest in the youth program. Some coaches distance themselves from the youth program. Also, there have been times that a top coach will move into a high school for a few seasons before moving on. But most coaches are not vindictive, so if you kid changes school, they will assume that it is the best decision for the kid.