Is USA Hockey going to threaten HS Hockey as we know it?
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:55 am
Below is a recent article from US Hockey Report. I suppose I am being bad for posting this but I feel it is important given the affect it could have on HS hockey. The bolded spots in article are done by me.
Won't Get Fooled Again
By the time this weekend's USA Hockey Winter Meetings in Orlando, Florida draw to a conclusion the hierarchical structure of youth hockey in the United States could be permanently altered.
Those likely to be hit hardest will be the prep schools of the Northeast, all junior programs with the exception of the USHL, possibly the Minnesota high schools, and, most devastatingly, any current youth organization that does not meet – or does not wish to meet -- the criteria USA Hockey and the NTDP will be setting out for the new 36-team national "super league."
Why is this happening?
It's simple. USA Hockey, for the first time, has been granted player development money by the NHL. It's money USA Hockey has wanted for a long time, and they are getting it. This year's figure is $8 million. The NHL, as investors of sorts, expects the money to be spent on 'elite player development.' And that's what they are going to get. Approximately $2 million will go directly to Ann Arbor, and a hefty chunk of the remaining $6 million will go to an extension of the NTDP called the High Performance and Long Term Athlete Development Initiative. The program, being presented by Jim Johannson, Ken Martel, and Kevin McLaughlin, is designed to offer many of the training benefits of the NTDP to the 36 youth organizations that agree to hew to the player development philosophy they have carefully outlined (it's in the document we have attached to the end of this article).
What we're about to see is a massive consolidation of power in which 36 youth organizations will, in essence, be dubbed AAA+ (or AAAA, if you will). Any organization not "anointed" by USA Hockey and the NTDP will remain as they are presently set up – as AAA organizations. One could, quite accurately, say the "unchosen" will be instantly devalued, for elite players will naturally gravitate to one of the 36 super teams. For purposes of this new program, USA Hockey, which is comprised of twelve districts, will be redistricted into six regions. Within each of these new regions will reside six super teams, at five different age levels. They will only play each other. The best players will move on to the NTDP and the USHL (which will also be getting some of the NHL money, and will be expanding from 12 to 16 teams).
How the districts will be carved up depends on which organizations adhere to USA Hockey's standards. It's possible the organizations will get selected first and then squeezed into gerrymandered geographical areas. USA Hockey is playing this very close to the vest. We do know that a couple of the Chicago organizations have already been approached in a preliminary manner, much to the consternation of other AAA organizations in the area.
What organizations would be chosen? For a rough idea, do this: start with the 20-team lineup of the Tier I Elite League which stretches from the Pacific Southwest to Pittsburgh but has its biggest foothold in the Midwest with five teams in Michigan alone (Compuware, Honeybaked, Little Caesar's, Belle Tire and Victory Honda). Then, once you are through with that, look at other teams outside that loop that have shown consistent success at Nationals, and have also run solid year-round programs. Those are the ones that are also likely to be "anointed."
The irony here is the fact that the organizations most likely to be able to meet the criteria set forth for them by USA Hockey already have deep pockets. In addition, by being anointed, an increasing number of players will want to migrate to those programs, meaning the anointed organizations will be able to hold numerous tryouts (i.e. fundraisers) at numerous age levels, in the process strengthening their relationship with rink owners due to the large number of teams they will be icing.
Each of the 36 clubs chosen will be expected to operate 18-and-Under, 16-and-Under, 15-and-Under, 14-and-Under, and 13-and-Under teams – each in their own superleague. In addition, each of the anointed teams will be expected to run 6U, 8U, 10U, 12U programs that will follow the LTAD model outlined in the attachment.
Let's look at his locally. In New England, we expect there to be at least three teams, maybe a couple in Eastern Mass, and one in Connecticut. These programs would be able to skim the cream of the crop – players will obviously stream to these regional "mini-NTDPs," especially given the fact the programs are subsidized, and the economy is going through a bad patch. Kids given the opportunity to join these elite programs are kids who will not be going to private schools -- at least as hockey players. Look for kids who are in these programs at the youngest age levels to stay in them for as long as they continue to be moved up the ladder. They are on the "path" to Ann Arbor or the USHL. They will be immersed in hockey and will be playing a rugged schedule under the watchful eyes of NTDP "regional directors."
USA Hockey is putting together something that, at least in some respects -- and on paper -- is appealing. Martel, the program's principal author, has put a huge amount of thought into player development, and we respect his work greatly. Read the enclosed attachment, and you'll see that he has brought together a lot of the best thinking on the subject, and presented it clearly. Individual teams could gain much from implementing all or part of his plan -- if they wish. But for USA Hockey to say, basically, "our way or the highway" just won't fly. It might work in Soviet Russia, or East Germany, or smaller nations like Finland. In other words, countries where hockey (and athletics in general) are on the same page, and dominated by strong national governing bodies.
However, the U.S., in hockey (as well as other ways!) is a fractured, factious, crazy-quilt of a country. Here, looking back to the late 19th and early 20th century, we can see that hockey made its entry into this country from many different points and in many different ways. It entered via the boarding schools of New England, and from there filtered down to the high schools. It entered on the backs of the millworkers who streamed down from Quebec, settled in towns like Woonsocket, RI , and created what would in time become powerhouse high school programs like Mount St. Charles. It streamed across the border from Windsor, Ontario into Detroit, and took shape as a club system, similar to that in Canada. In Minnesota, it dropped down across the northern border from Manitoba to towns like Roseau and Warroad, and also moved from the east into the Twin Cities, and formed a foothold in the Minnesota high schools. In recent decades, due to NHL expansion and some strong economic boom years, the game has flourished in non-traditional areas from the Southeast through Texas, Arizona, and Southern California.
In other words, there is no one path to success in this country. There are myriad paths, and many, many people are fiercely protective of their turf, and proud of what they have accomplished in the past, and continue to accomplish. Under USA Hockey's proposal, we think the clubs that get anointed – if everything gets that far – will do well and will indeed put a lot of top players on the ice. Why wouldn't they? They will have all the players. The USHL will watch, the colleges will watch, and the pro scouts will watch. Everyone will say what a great league it is. The NHL will pat itself on the back, and so will USA Hockey, who will point to the success of the players coming out of the program, and take as much credit as they possibly can.
Those who aren't chosen to be part of the super league will limp along as best they can, carrying players who are suddenly second-class hockey playing citizens. Youth organizations will fold. Prep hockey will take a major hit. If, God forbid, a superleague team gains a toehold in Minnesota, Minnesota high school hockey, which features our game in its purest amateur state, will take a major hit.
The $8 million is simply being shoveled in the wrong direction, and here's why. We're in a recession, people have less money to spend, and the average middle class worker is earning less than ever in real wages. But the cost of playing hockey is higher today than ever. Today, hockey is a pure suburban sport. In Greater Boston, the blue-collar players that used to come out of the city's working class communities like Winthrop and Weymouth and Charlestown and South Boston and Dorchester and Quincy are fast becoming extinct.
This fall, in the blue-collar suburbs of Detroit, where the auto industry is in trouble, we are hearing stories of families pulling back from the game.
Youth registration across the country – particularly on the boys' side – is down.
We have an idea. And we don't think it's particularly radical. We believe in it because we've seen it work in Boston. We saw a whole generation of hockey players come out of town-based leagues where, in the wake of the success of the Bobby Orr-led Bruins of the late '60s and early '70s, the state jumped on board and, in a very short period of time, built a huge number of rinks. From those rinks came the likes of Mike Eruzione, Jack O'Callahan and too many others to mention. On the public rinks in Minnesota came Mark Pavelich and Neal Broten and Dave Christian and others. It was a flowering of USA Hockey and continued on with the stars of the'80s and early '90s like Mike Modano, Tony Amonte, Jeremy Roenick, Brian Leetch and many, many others.
We think the LTAD misfires on two fronts. The first is simply that it concentrates on players 13 and over. Don't worry about them. The good players at 13 will find every door open wide to them. They'll even find agents to carry them across the threshold. And coaches who will beg to have them on their teams. It's the way capitalism works, and it's the way a meritocracy works, too. Right now, there are more than enough good programs in place for the players that we currently have. We just need to get more players better prepared by the time they arrive in these programs -- skilled players, not overcoached autonomons. The LTAD even preaches the importance of player development between 11-13, so why are all the bulk of the program's benefits being funneled to those 13 and over? Why is the LTAD aimed at the few rather than the many? Hasn't the very existence of the NTDP shown that elite all-star programs of hothoused players have dubious results?
What do we really need then? We need more rinks and cheaper ice. Hockey is too expensive. We have all seen young kids leave the game because of the cost. About seven years ago, this typist saw a very good 9-year-old city kid drummed out of a youth program because his parents couldn't rub two nickels together. I still see this kid. And he's still an excellent athlete, and he's still a joy to watch. But he plays basketball.
We also know times are hard and public initiatives like what the Mass. District Commission did during the Orr era might not fly. (Though rink building would certainly create jobs!)
Listen, we don't need fancy rinks. In many parts of the country, seasonal outdoor rinks work fine. They provide a starting point. They get kids on the ice at a young age. Kids just need a place where they can play in unstructured situations without grownups, leagues, the ridiculous amounts of travel, and the huge bills. We've seen cheap outdoor rinks all across Canada. There are quite a few in Minnesota, too, in town parks. The communities manage to come up with the money. Volunteers step up with the muscle. They make it happen. It's a source of civic pride.
If we were given the $8 million dollars USA Hockey is getting and were given a mandate to spend it in a way that would help the American hockey player the most over the next 20 years, we'd put together a crack panel of men and women with proven success in public/private partnerships to figure out how to get the most rinks built in this country for the least amount of dollars. We're not talking about eight-sheet super rinks, either. We're talking "little rinks." A lot of them. It's all so simple. Get a lot of kids on skates and you'll get a lot of hockey players.
If you're skeptical, travel down to the Dominican Republic and look at all the baseball diamonds. Most of them are lousy dustpatches that would be considered an embarrassment in our bucolic suburbs. They are strewn with rocks. Bases are hard to come by. But you'd recognize them as baseball fields. They are everywhere, and they are continuously used. And the Dominican Republic produces more baseball players per capita than any other spot on the earth -- and many of the game's stars.
Our message to USA Hockey. Don't try to reinvent the wheel, and kill what we already have. Look to the successes of the past for the key to the future. It's right there under your nose.
And vote NO on the High Performance and Long Term Athlete Development Initiative.
1/17/09 Update: The proposal outlined in this article was ratified by the USA Hockey Board of Directors, and will go forward.
