HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Let’s hear your thoughts on USA hockey changing their bylaws and changing their Youth program to a Boys program therefore separating the boys and the girls. I for one think it is time.

I think it's rediculous to make youth hockey, Boys hockey. If a girl can compete at a high level with the boys and they want to play with the boys that's where they belong

I would be in favor of boys playing against boys, and girls playing against girls in nearly every situation and every sport. Just because a girl is better than a boy in any given sport does not mean she should compete against them. I have had conversations with many girl hockey parents and they all say the only thing holding Girls Hockey back is the Girls who play with the boys. When the girls who play with the boys come back and play only with the girls is when you will see girls hockey flourish.

IF you have enough players in your association where you can field full teams of boys and girls, I can see where you may want to make the lines very clear and uncrossable, but in smaller associations with great distances between associations, without boys and girls playing on the same team, there would be no hockey for either the boys or the girls and nobody would be playing. Keep youth hockey as it is.

ilike2score wrote:I would be in favor of boys playing against boys, and girls playing against girls in nearly every situation and every sport. Just because a girl is better than a boy in any given sport does not mean she should compete against them. I have had conversations with many girl hockey parents and they all say the only thing holding Girls Hockey back is the Girls who play with the boys. When the girls who play with the boys come back and play only with the girls is when you will see girls hockey flourish.

"The only thing holding back". You lost ALL your credibility with that dumb statement.

Air Force 1 wrote:IF you have enough players in your association where you can field full teams of boys and girls, I can see where you may want to make the lines very clear and uncrossable, but in smaller associations with great distances between associations, without boys and girls playing on the same team, there would be no hockey for either the boys or the girls and nobody would be playing. Keep youth hockey as it is.

For ilike2score: Here is an example, NUMBERS.

BlackTape wrote:Let’s hear your thoughts on USA hockey changing their bylaws and changing their Youth program to a Boys program therefore separating the boys and the girls. I for one think it is time.

Nice original topic. I can't wait to here someones interesting new take on this topic. I don't think this has ever been discussed?

Air Force 1 wrote:IF you have enough players in your association where you can field full teams of boys and girls, I can see where you may want to make the lines very clear and uncrossable, but in smaller associations with great distances between associations, without boys and girls playing on the same team, there would be no hockey for either the boys or the girls and nobody would be playing. Keep youth hockey as it is.

It's not just rural areas that would struggle with separating the sexes. This is from Richfield's website:

Levels Offered. We will host Mites, Squirts, Peewees and Bantams. Girls are encouraged to play with boys. If enough girls can assemble their own team, we’re open to hosting a girls team. If a girl would like to waive to another association, please contact the President via email.

MH can't change this rule, it is a USAH rule. While there are Edina's that have large girls programs, just next door Richfield is struggling to have a handful of youth teams.
USA hockey as a whole is closer to Richfield than to Edina. This rule will not be changed for a long time.
In fact, a girl can play with a girls team and be on a youth team.

My daughter and a number of other girls who are taking their hockey playing skills to the college level played boys hockey before high school girls hockey. She developed much better puckhandling and decision making skills on the ice because of the speed of the boys game. She also had a great group of boys to play with and never worried about being the only girl on the team. It was a great experience for her and it didn't take away from the boys experiences either.

I have no problem with girls playing with boys in association hockey at the minmite, mite and squirt levels. I do think once you get to Pee Wee's with the checking and potential, size, strength etc.. issues you do need to be careful in the decision making process of where certain girls play. I am not saying by any means that girls can't play on pee wee teams, they absolutely can and some eveen thrive but some don't. Know the ability and personality type of your own daughter is all I am saying, most areas anymore have girls teams with in reach for pee wee aged girls and older.

I know a young woman that is a senior playing in college. She is the captain of her team, as well as an outstanding student.

She played with boys teams through bantam. Then moved to girls for high school.

She is a delightful, well adjusted young woman that seems to have used the higher competition with boys teams to enhance her hockey abilities.

I think it's a decision made depending on many variables, and should be available to any girl that wants to play with the boys, whatever the reason.

Mites yes, squirts in some cases< after that no. I have locker room ?s at the jr high age and above.

old goalie85 wrote:Mites yes, squirts in some cases< after that no. I have locker room ?s at the jr high age and above.

Because they're stripping down and hitting the showers after a peewee game? With the exception of varsity rooms, there are rarely showers in the team rooms at arenas.

JSR wrote:I have no problem with girls playing with boys in association hockey at the minmite, mite and squirt levels. I do think once you get to Pee Wee's with the checking and potential, size, strength etc.. issues you do need to be careful in the decision making process of where certain girls play. I am not saying by any means that girls can't play on pee wee teams, they absolutely can and some eveen thrive but some don't. Know the ability and personality type of your own daughter is all I am saying, most areas anymore have girls teams with in reach for pee wee aged girls and older.

Girls, for the most part, hit puberty before boys. So many 12 year old girls are bigger and more physically developed than 12 year old boys.....Boys generally catch up and pass the girls around 14 years old.

muckandgrind wrote:

JSR wrote:I have no problem with girls playing with boys in association hockey at the minmite, mite and squirt levels. I do think once you get to Pee Wee's with the checking and potential, size, strength etc.. issues you do need to be careful in the decision making process of where certain girls play. I am not saying by any means that girls can't play on pee wee teams, they absolutely can and some eveen thrive but some don't. Know the ability and personality type of your own daughter is all I am saying, most areas anymore have girls teams with in reach for pee wee aged girls and older.

Girls, for the most part, hit puberty before boys. So many 12 year old girls are bigger and more physically developed than 12 year old boys.....Boys generally catch up and pass the girls around 14 years old.

I understand the whole "girls hit puberty first" thing. However athletically, even though the girls hit puberty first, the boys start to pull away athletically around 10 or 11. Not just in hockey but in all sports. Yes there are exceptions to every rule and I don't support a rule blatantly separating the two, but the fact is most boy athletes are faster and stronger and more agressive than the girls as early as 10 or 11. I see it in soccer, basketball, hockey just about every sport where they play together at early ages. One quick example, my son is 10, there is an 11 year old girl who is jsut an exceptional hockey player. Through mites and even the first year of squirts she looked better than my son, she even played Tier 1 winter hockey with boys last winter. Then this summer they were in a camp together, she no longer had that edge, depsite playing Tier 1 an dmy son only playing association and spring hockey and it wasn't because she wasn't still good it was just that my son had closed the gap almost purely based on the physical so to speak. Just my two cents

And if, like in many Minnesota locations, and many more in other parts of the country, there are not enough female players to field a team, what then, to hell with girls hockey?

Right now it's the only hockey in the country that's growing. There are many places where they certainly could play only with the girls. Should we sacrifice the entire viability of girls hockey to make sure that a few girls don't take jonnys spot on the team? To answer yes is not supporting the game we all love. It's selfish.

I propose that they just make it youth hockey for all.

If we can argue that girls are good enough to play on boys teams then we can just as well extend it to that boys are good enough to play on girls teams.

We have given that generation now over 40 plus years to get their numbers and despite all of the hand wringing and sky is falling we still have large parts of the country that don't want to, or won't particpate for whatever reason.

I still am not keen although it doesnt blow my gasket, when girls play with/on boys at the upper levels. However my gut instinct is it still is not right. I watched a boy leave the rink on a stretcher yesterday who was unconcious at one point at the bantam level. I had a bantam player leave a game a couple of weeks ago with broken ribs from a slapshot a minute into a game. While I wont have to make any decisions regarding this point I do find it quite ironic that Pop Warner football teams are only allowed 3-5 pounds difference and the rules in a contact sport such as football are so much different then hockey. Truthfully I worry more about the slapshots in hockey in a lot of cases then most of the checking.

I do enjoy watching the girls game, although at most levels in my opinion it is lightyears behind a decent boys game for the most part.

mnhcp wrote:

BlackTape wrote:Let’s hear your thoughts on USA hockey changing their bylaws and changing their Youth program to a Boys program therefore separating the boys and the girls. I for one think it is time.

Nice original topic. I can't wait to here someones interesting new take on this topic. I don't think this has ever been discussed?

This topic should be discussed until it is changed.

SECoach wrote:And if, like in many Minnesota locations, and many more in other parts of the country, there are not enough female players to field a team, what then, to hell with girls hockey?

Right now it's the only hockey in the country that's growing. There are many places where they certainly could play only with the girls. Should we sacrifice the entire viability of girls hockey to make sure that a few girls don't take jonnys spot on the team? To answer yes is not supporting the game we all love. It's selfish.

You put exceptions in for these cases.

On a different perspective but same values. Girl Scouts sell cookies. Boy Scouts sell Popcorn. Some girls build campfires and tie knots better than boys. Some boys bake and sew better than girls.

Nice original topic. I can't wait to here someones interesting new take on this topic. I don't think this has ever been discussed?[/quote]


So it is a previous discussed topic? That would make it worthy of discussion, for or against. That seems ok, and why we have a governing body of the members isn't it.

Our local association is looking at how to make girls hockey viable. The result of the study was the only way was all girls to play girls. If the best girls play with boys there is not enough girls to field a team. The people who get left out is the bottom 70 percent of girls who now have not much option. Yes I am in a small association. In the small associations it is the most critical to have all girls play together....or else you won't have girls hockey. Believe it or not I am an advocate of Girls hockey and want nothing more than the girls to succeed in hockey with their own program. The ONLY way for girls hockey to flourish is when all girls play with all girls. If the best girls leave girls to play with the boys...what does that do for the girls
big picture. What is the best for ALL the girls? It surely is not a good sign for girls hockey to lose the top 30% of their kids to other programs. With that said...I am not going to argue that the best girls can not compete with the boys. They can. My arguement is what is the best for Girls Hockey versus what is best for the Girl Hockey "Star". And then I will take my Boy Popcornpopper versus your Girl Cookie Maker any day.

THROW SOME IDEAS OUT THERE

Instead of throwing out a allow or not allow, would this fit assocations?
This is a question/idea not a opinion

Boys hockey
Girls hockey
a girl may opt to play on a boy association TOP team if she finishes in the top 30% in tryouts.

I think the more suitable question is should we eliminate girls hockey and only have youth hockey? I believe the people who have top end talent girls would be in favor of this.

if a girl can opt to play with the boys...
than a boy can opt to play with the girls...
equal rights?????