east ridge association

brandy38 · Post by **brandy38** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:23 pm

Is an East Ridge association going to start up in the next few years?

youngblood08 · Post by **youngblood08** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:53 pm

no, not until they can get a rink. Talk is to put a 3rd at Bielinberg in 3-4 yrs

HSHockey25 · Post by **HSHockey25** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:41 am

They added a rink onto cottage grove's current ice rink. They will have a hockey team this year but they will not have any seniors because the seniors all got to stay at Woodbury High School and at Park High School. They will playing in the Suburban East Conference and will be in Class A I am pretty sure.

HSHockey25 · Post by **HSHockey25** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:43 am

HSHockey25 wrote:They added a rink onto cottage grove's current ice rink. They will have a hockey team this year but they will not have any seniors because the seniors all got to stay at Woodbury High School and at Park High School. They will playing in the Suburban East Conference and will be in Class A I am pretty sure.

And as far as the youth association is going to go is stay with a Woodbury and Cottage Grove youth associations for now.

Night Train · Post by **Night Train** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:22 am

It would be silly to start another youth hockey association in the community. Don't kids that ultimately will attend Eastridge High School already live in multiple communities served by existing youth hockey associations? How many and which? Youth Associations need to focus on developing strong youth players irregardless of where they ultimately attend high school. In the metro there should be almost no connection.

hockeydad · Post by **hockeydad** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:00 am

Night Train wrote:It would be silly to start another youth hockey association in the community. Don't kids that ultimately will attend Eastridge High School already live in multiple communities served by existing youth hockey associations? How many and which? Youth Associations need to focus on developing strong youth players irregardless of where they ultimately attend high school. In the metro there should be almost no connection.

almost no connection?

Then why do most associations have their jerseys and team names the same colors as the high school?
And why do many high school coaches work with their local associations.
If a community has a strong high school program, chances are there is a strong history of the school and local association working together. Most local associations territory is similar to the local high school's attendance boundaries.
I'm sure it is just a matter of time before East Ridge forms their own association. I don't see the high school team having much success until they do.

Night Train · Post by **Night Train** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:39 am

I think I said, "should be almost no connection." It's an old way of looking at things from when almost all kids from any one association attended the community school. Today all the Wayzata kids don't play at Wayzata High School, not all Edina kids play at Edina, not all Woodbury youth players attend Woodbury, and on and on. I'm suggesting that as metro hockey evolves it seems to be separating the local youth association from the once only local school option.

Plus, in some instances, local non profit 501.c3 organizations (like Stillwater) have been accused of discriminating against their communities own residents. That's one of the uglier examples of why the connection should be downplayed.

Try it. Close your eyes for a moment and focus on developing youth players period. Kids from Edina go to Holy Angels. Kids from Wayzata go to Breck. Kids from Highland go to Cretin. That's fine. Be proud of developing strong players that can make what have become strong private school teams. Should an independent 501.C3 youth association invite some of the local high school coaches to be involved in running clinics, etc. Sure. Some metro Bantam teams send their players to as many as 6 high schools. All I'm saying is invite coaches from all 6 high schools to come in and assist in developing your kids to their benefit but you don't need to show any more loyalty to one of them as opposed to the other. Can't and shouldn't.

Your charge is to develop strong youth players and prepare them for playing high school hockey wherever they choose. There are challenges to this philosophy but I think the benefit to this approach outweighs the benefit to the other approach which is discriminatory and shows favoritism. Don't confuse the end goal which is develop all kids equally.

So, there are currently plenty of youth hockey associations in the metro. Chaska/Chanhassen is the same discussion. By adding more associations in a time when associations are co-oping to boost numbers and team strength so they can compete at the highest level doesn't make sense to me. You weaken the strength of the teams and in turn slow development of all the players at all the levels.