HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

If interested, email me at jgammann@comcast.net or call me at 612-695-8180. Thanks Jeff

CRDirector wrote:If interested, email me at jgammann@comcast.net or call me at 612-695-8180. Thanks Jeff

Still need a goalie

One per team. Goalies can be brought up to fill in for a sick or injured player but not down. That means push them all down a level. Sometimes 2 goalies is a can of worms anyways if one is clearly better than another. Some associations allow the top A goalie to play up to 70% of the games for that very reason. If you have 4 Bantam goalies in your association you're set (based on 4 teams?). Next would be to bring up a mature PeeWee goalie.

A 1 goalie
B1 1 goalie
B2 1 goalie
C 1 goalie

observer wrote:One per team. Goalies can be brought up to fill in for a sick or injured player but not down. That means push them all down a level. Sometimes 2 goalies is a can of worms anyways if one is clearly better than another. Some associations allow the top A goalie to play up to 70% of the games for that very reason. If you have 4 Bantam goalies in your association you're set (based on 4 teams?). Next would be to bring up a mature PeeWee goalie.

A 1 goalie
B1 1 goalie
B2 1 goalie
C 1 goalie

Seems to be a good conclusive answer, although they are not fielding an
"A" team. If, they have 4 goalies this would reasonably work out, but doubt that they do

What? No A team? A few years ago their PeeWee A team was top 10. Are you saying they totally dropped the recruiting ball to the point of not even having enough kids to field a Bantam A team? I hope someone is working hard on attracting 5-6 year olds, now, so they can make a comeback otherwise their future is moving the other direction.

But, back to the goalie issue. Maybe we can hear from CRDirector how many kids? How many teams? How many goalies? And, maybe a little story regarding why the association has shrunk so quickly from glory years on both girls and boys teams.

observer wrote:What? No A team? A few years ago their PeeWee A team was top 10. Are you saying they totally dropped the recruiting ball to the point of not even having enough kids to field a Bantam A team? I hope someone is working hard on attracting 5-6 year olds, now, so they can make a comeback otherwise their future is moving the other direction.

But, back to the goalie issue. Maybe we can hear from CRDirector how many kids? How many teams? How many goalies? And, maybe a little story regarding why the association has shrunk so quickly from glory years on both girls and boys teams.

Yes, the CRDirector has posted on this site as well as the CR A Bantam coach. You will get a different reason why there is not an A Bantam team from there perspective, but talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances. As an individual that enjoys watching hockey of all levels this group of kids were talented as was proven throughout the stages of there youth. The Association never got behind these players. Unfortunately, when they were A Peewee's the team went to the Regions out of town (?) and individuals that make the decisions within the Association were commenting on how they would like to see these kids fail. The Board got what they wanted and now are trying to dig themselves out of the hole. I will still go watch the youth level play, but the talent isn't where these kids were. Hopefully, for the players sake they can come up with a goalie on the "C" team as that is what this thread is about. Good Luck!

blueliner5 wrote:

observer wrote:What? No A team? A few years ago their PeeWee A team was top 10. Are you saying they totally dropped the recruiting ball to the point of not even having enough kids to field a Bantam A team? I hope someone is working hard on attracting 5-6 year olds, now, so they can make a comeback otherwise their future is moving the other direction.

But, back to the goalie issue. Maybe we can hear from CRDirector how many kids? How many teams? How many goalies? And, maybe a little story regarding why the association has shrunk so quickly from glory years on both girls and boys teams.

Yes, the CRDirector has posted on this site as well as the CR A Bantam coach. You will get a different reason why there is not an A Bantam team from there perspective, but talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances. As an individual that enjoys watching hockey of all levels this group of kids were talented as was proven throughout the stages of there youth. The Association never got behind these players. Unfortunately, when they were A Peewee's the team went to the Regions out of town (?) and individuals that make the decisions within the Association were commenting on how they would like to see these kids fail. The Board got what they wanted and now are trying to dig themselves out of the hole. I will still go watch the youth level play, but the talent isn't where these kids were. Hopefully, for the players sake they can come up with a goalie on the "C" team as that is what this thread is about. Good Luck!

Where do you start with all these opinions

"talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances"

There is a board meeting coming up - would love to see parents get involved - not just stand around and complain about what goes on.

Not sure which group of kids you were thinking about - but this group wasn't the one that was top 10 peewee in the state.

We have 3 teams - 3 goalies - we'd like to keep 2 on the top team.
Bantam B1
Bantam B2
Bantam C

CRBantamAcoach wrote:

blueliner5 wrote:

observer wrote:What? No A team? A few years ago their PeeWee A team was top 10. Are you saying they totally dropped the recruiting ball to the point of not even having enough kids to field a Bantam A team? I hope someone is working hard on attracting 5-6 year olds, now, so they can make a comeback otherwise their future is moving the other direction.

But, back to the goalie issue. Maybe we can hear from CRDirector how many kids? How many teams? How many goalies? And, maybe a little story regarding why the association has shrunk so quickly from glory years on both girls and boys teams.

Yes, the CRDirector has posted on this site as well as the CR A Bantam coach. You will get a different reason why there is not an A Bantam team from there perspective, but talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances. As an individual that enjoys watching hockey of all levels this group of kids were talented as was proven throughout the stages of there youth. The Association never got behind these players. Unfortunately, when they were A Peewee's the team went to the Regions out of town (?) and individuals that make the decisions within the Association were commenting on how they would like to see these kids fail. The Board got what they wanted and now are trying to dig themselves out of the hole. I will still go watch the youth level play, but the talent isn't where these kids were. Hopefully, for the players sake they can come up with a goalie on the "C" team as that is what this thread is about. Good Luck!

Where do you start with all these opinions

"talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances"

There is a board meeting coming up - would love to see parents get involved - not just stand around and complain about what goes on.

Not sure which group of kids you were thinking about - but this group wasn't the one that was top 10 peewee in the state.

We have 3 teams - 3 goalies - we'd like to keep 2 on the top team.
Bantam B1
Bantam B2
Bantam C

Same Crap - different toilet

HOW DID YOU KEEP YOUR COACHING JOB - CRBantamACoach?

We have 3 teams - 3 goalies - we'd like to keep 2 on the top team.

Just because no one wants to be the C goalie? Give em all 45 games and help them each develop. Remember, you can move them up but not down so give each some games on the top team. I remember hearing about a goalie in our association that was a single goalie for 3 years in a row. That's 120 games instead of 60.

if this is really about not hurting feelings about assigning someone a c level slot, then maybe-

slot two at C and the top rated at b2 for roster purposes. do you have to roster a designated goalie in minnesota hockey or d10?

invite them to all the practices and rotate them through all three teams' games.

have the b2 goalie play half the b2 slots and 2/3's of the b1 games.

have the other goalies each play half the c games, 1/4 the b1 games and split the remaining b1 schedule.

if one player isnt as committed to the icetime, then offer it up to the other.

they are each getting a full season icetime and experience. even moreso for practice.

have all three show up for each teams pictures.

CRBantamAcoach wrote:

blueliner5 wrote:

observer wrote:What? No A team? A few years ago their PeeWee A team was top 10. Are you saying they totally dropped the recruiting ball to the point of not even having enough kids to field a Bantam A team? I hope someone is working hard on attracting 5-6 year olds, now, so they can make a comeback otherwise their future is moving the other direction.

But, back to the goalie issue. Maybe we can hear from CRDirector how many kids? How many teams? How many goalies? And, maybe a little story regarding why the association has shrunk so quickly from glory years on both girls and boys teams.

Yes, the CRDirector has posted on this site as well as the CR A Bantam coach. You will get a different reason why there is not an A Bantam team from there perspective, but talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances. As an individual that enjoys watching hockey of all levels this group of kids were talented as was proven throughout the stages of there youth. The Association never got behind these players. Unfortunately, when they were A Peewee's the team went to the Regions out of town (?) and individuals that make the decisions within the Association were commenting on how they would like to see these kids fail. The Board got what they wanted and now are trying to dig themselves out of the hole. I will still go watch the youth level play, but the talent isn't where these kids were. Hopefully, for the players sake they can come up with a goalie on the "C" team as that is what this thread is about. Good Luck!

Where do you start with all these opinions

"talking to the parents of these players is a better evaluation of the circumstances"

There is a board meeting coming up - would love to see parents get involved - not just stand around and complain about what goes on.

Not sure which group of kids you were thinking about - but this group wasn't the one that was top 10 peewee in the state.

We have 3 teams - 3 goalies - we'd like to keep 2 on the top team.
Bantam B1
Bantam B2
Bantam C

What? Hey CRABANTAM Coach you were not around when they were A Peewee's. I have been watching CR Youth for a long time at all levels and these WERE the same kids with the exception of 3 or 4 players. The CORE group WAS still intact until recently (Coaching?). Obviously, I should have not responded to Observer's comment about not having an A Bantam team as it opened up a can of worms not regarding the topic. I think Observer is on the right track spread it out unless there is 1 standout goalie of the 3. Then rotate the 2 others? I assume there is not 1 stand out goalie as he would of opted out to be waivered to play A's somewhere else?

Blue liner--you are mistaken. the PW group that was highly ranked was 2nd year bantams in 2009-2010. they've moved on to high school. many have transfered to Blaine.

the_juiceman wrote:Blue liner--you are mistaken. the PW group that was highly ranked was 2nd year bantams in 2009-2010. they've moved on to high school. many have transfered to Blaine.

Yes, I know they were. Four transferred to Blaine and two are no longer playing hockey

Thanks to those that actually stayed on subject. Here is the scoop. We have 3 teams B1, B2 and C. 3 goalies - returning Ban A and 2 PW A from last year. B1 coach would like to keep 2 goalies. The only reason that we are looking for a C goalie is that our association only allows kids to waive in at the lowest level.

Number of players at mites has been growing the last couple of years and this year looks to be the same.

As far as not having an A team. 36 skaters total. Of the 15 that were on the A PW team 2 years ago (that won a few district games, I think 2) - 1 at Totino, 1 playing CRHS as a Soph, 1 playing CRHS as a fresh, 2 at Spring Lake Park, 1 on the girls CRHS team and a goalie playing CRHS as a soph.

It sucks, I do not like not having an A team, but at some time you have to take a step back and look at what you have. D10 is a tough grind and we can't afford to keep losing kids out of our association. Is it better to play A and see double digits on the score board or compete at a B1 level? With all respect to the coaches and players, we are not reserving rooms at the B1 state tournament site this year.

Board meeting tonight. No one there but some dedicated board members making sure that kids can play hockey and have some life lessons.

BL5 - when you are at Cook stop by and see me, I really think that you need a hug.

Oh yah - we are still looking for a C goalie. My information is in the first post if you know of anyone.........

CRDirector wrote: The only reason that we are looking for a C goalie is that our association only allows kids to waive in at the lowest level.

I heard the same thing about our organization last night informally and my gut instinct is this is just wrong.

In another time zone far far away. You try out and make whatever team the director or coaching staff deems your a best fit. No rules on waivers or paperwork or any of that rigamarole. This to me seems like a fiefdom play or don't hurt any feelings type of rule. Sad

You've got enough goalies, 3 teams and 3 goalies, so move along. Goalies can move up for games should a higher level one get hurt or have a conflict.

The other point PWD10 makes is a good one too. The rule needs to be updated ASAP. There's been talk about potential A players in associations without A teams be free to tryout at a neighboring association. Your rule limits that possibility and is over protective of your own members. If a few were to waive in for some A spots your entire association would work hard to earn the spots instead of knowing they're safe no matter how little they work to improve their game. Competition is good.

Coon Rapids has some other big issues to solve as players from the high school are transferring to play at other high schools. Recently, girls to Hopkins and boys to Blaine. To me that means recruit more and better at the youth level to strengthen the youth teams and make the future look brighter at the high school. 50 new boys and 30 new girls this year. How ya doing with your full court press new mite recruiting effort? It's the only solution for what ails ya.

Mite numbers going up and a new facility opening next year? Maybe this program will turn around. I also heard that CR is going to have some kind of a summer hockey program next year. Maybe in the coming years they will be able to hang on to everyone and be more competitive.

observer wrote:You've got enough goalies, 3 teams and 3 goalies, so move along. Goalies can move up for games should a higher level one get hurt or have a conflict.

The other point PWD10 makes is a good one too. The rule needs to be updated ASAP. There's been talk about potential A players in associations without A teams be free to tryout at a neighboring association. Your rule limits that possibility and is over protective of your own members. If a few were to waive in for some A spots your entire association would work hard to earn the spots instead of knowing they're safe no matter how little they work to improve their game. Competition is good.

Coon Rapids has some other big issues to solve as players from the high school are transferring to play at other high schools. Recently, girls to Hopkins and boys to Blaine. To me that means recruit more and better at the youth level to strengthen the youth teams and make the future look brighter at the high school. 50 new boys and 30 new girls this year. How ya doing with your full court press new mite recruiting effort? It's the only solution for what ails ya.

Disagree observer....as a goalie dad I see CR's dilemma.

Goalies should be played at their skill level. Placing A level goalies at C level hockey does nothing for the kids and is a wrong solution for player development.

I see two options if a goalie doesn't come out of the woodwork:

1) you could place both of last year's PW A goalies (that are now Bantams) as the C goalies and then have them play up onto the B2 team with goalie waivers. That way they have to creatively schedule out so that they each get a share of games at both levels.

2) Buy a set of goalie equipment and pass the pads around! C level kids are playing for fun. Not to get D1 scholarships, play in the NHL, most likely not even high school, etc. Kids find it fun to discover their 'inner goalie' and over the course of the year you may find one that fully gravitates to the position. Who hasn't seen an A or a B1 player try on goalie pads for a practice at the end of the year just because 'they have always wanted to be a goalie'. Have fun...pass the pads. When it gets down to playoffs at the end of the year, or even for some select games during the year they can always goalie waiver up a PW A or B1 goalie if they haven't found someone who has fallen in love with the position.

I would choose #2. While a few parents may whine that they don't have a goalie; the kids will have fun with it....and who do we serve?

Sorry, missed the part about having 3 A level goalies. I was thinking about the classic, nobody wanting to be the C goalie.

I like the idea of rotating the entire team or at least the 5-6 that would like to give it a try. Could be a lot of fun for the entire team. Assign the task and pads to the next player each week so they come to a practice or two before their game.

CRDirector wrote:Thanks to those that actually stayed on subject. Here is the scoop. We have 3 teams B1, B2 and C. 3 goalies - returning Ban A and 2 PW A from last year. B1 coach would like to keep 2 goalies. The only reason that we are looking for a C goalie is that our association only allows kids to waive in at the lowest level.

Number of players at mites has been growing the last couple of years and this year looks to be the same.

As far as not having an A team. 36 skaters total. Of the 15 that were on the A PW team 2 years ago (that won a few district games, I think 2) - 1 at Totino, 1 playing CRHS as a Soph, 1 playing CRHS as a fresh, 2 at Spring Lake Park, 1 on the girls CRHS team and a goalie playing CRHS as a soph.

It sucks, I do not like not having an A team, but at some time you have to take a step back and look at what you have. D10 is a tough grind and we can't afford to keep losing kids out of our association. Is it better to play A and see double digits on the score board or compete at a B1 level? With all respect to the coaches and players, we are not reserving rooms at the B1 state tournament site this year.

Board meeting tonight. No one there but some dedicated board members making sure that kids can play hockey and have some life lessons.

BL5 - when you are at Cook stop by and see me, I really think that you need a hug.

Oh yah - we are still looking for a C goalie. My information is in the first post if you know of anyone.........

No need for the hug....Keep doing what you are trying to achieve which seems to be in the right direction. Jr. Cardinal camp has appeared to draw some good numbers You, yourself are determined to get this association back to where it was while trying to retain the players to stay within CR

CRDirector wrote:Thanks to those that actually stayed on subject. Here is the scoop. We have 3 teams B1, B2 and C. 3 goalies - returning Ban A and 2 PW A from last year. B1 coach would like to keep 2 goalies. The only reason that we are looking for a C goalie is that our association only allows kids to waive in at the lowest level.

Number of players at mites has been growing the last couple of years and this year looks to be the same.

As far as not having an A team. 36 skaters total. Of the 15 that were on the A PW team 2 years ago (that won a few district games, I think 2) - 1 at Totino, 1 playing CRHS as a Soph, 1 playing CRHS as a fresh, 2 at Spring Lake Park, 1 on the girls CRHS team and a goalie playing CRHS as a soph.

It sucks, I do not like not having an A team, but at some time you have to take a step back and look at what you have. D10 is a tough grind and we can't afford to keep losing kids out of our association. Is it better to play A and see double digits on the score board or compete at a B1 level? With all respect to the coaches and players, we are not reserving rooms at the B1 state tournament site this year.

Board meeting tonight. No one there but some dedicated board members making sure that kids can play hockey and have some life lessons.

BL5 - when you are at Cook stop by and see me, I really think that you need a hug.

Oh yah - we are still looking for a C goalie. My information is in the first post if you know of anyone.........

Yes, it is a bummer when any association cannot field an "A" team especially when they have always fielded one. CRDirector where do the returning "A" Bantams going to fit into the picture? Correct me if I am wrong, but from what you stated the "A" Peewee team 2 years ago only won 2 district games. If, I remember correctly there were 2 divisions within the A Peewee D10 District Blue and Green as was last year. Did they not place 3rd or 4th in there respective division, but had a better record than the 3rd and 4th place team in the other division? Which tells me they probably did better than average and had more than 2 wins. The reason I remember this is because it was the 1st year of this splitting into 2 divisions and I thought it was pretty strange 1 division was loaded with talented teams due to regards of traveling purposes. Frankly, that would be a successful year, but like you said players either moved out or moved up for this upcoming hockey season. Even though you lost 2 sophomores and a freshmen to the High School as noted this will only hopefully strengthen the High School program. How are your levels at Peewee and Squirts this year as there was not an "A" Squirt team last year

CRBantamAcoach wrote:

CRDirector wrote:If interested, email me at jgammann@comcast.net or call me at 612-695-8180. Thanks Jeff

Still need a goalie

The word on the street is you will need 2 goalies now. Hard enough trying to find 1, now 2?

blueliner5 wrote:

CRBantamAcoach wrote:

CRDirector wrote:If interested, email me at jgammann@comcast.net or call me at 612-695-8180. Thanks Jeff

Still need a goalie

The word on the street is you will need 2 goalies now. Hard enough trying to find 1, now 2?

Humor me old Blue, what's the word?

CRDirector wrote:

blueliner5 wrote:

CRBantamAcoach wrote: Still need a goalie

The word on the street is you will need 2 goalies now. Hard enough trying to find 1, now 2?

Humor me old Blue, what's the word?

Humor? Let's just wait it out and see if it's going to be humorous or not

blueliner5 wrote:

CRDirector wrote:

blueliner5 wrote: The word on the street is you will need 2 goalies now. Hard enough trying to find 1, now 2?

Humor me old Blue, what's the word?

Humor? Let's just wait it out and see if it's going to be humorous or not

2? why is that?