HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

I picked up a rag at the local rink put out by the ADM folks the other day and after reading through it I can't help but wonder how this is going to develop the younger kids who have shown that they can learn at a higher level than their peers.

If you have a 6-7 year old kid who has been on the ice and in the program for 3-4 years (yes we have kids who are 3-4 years old start in itty bitty mini-mites) and you then throw him in with the 20-30 new kids the same age who are starting their first year, how is that a good thing for him? I'm sure that's great for the masses, but what about the ADM at this level will help those kids?

They say that part of the success of the ADM will come from kids of all skill levels playing together. I agree that the bottom kids will be pulled up, but will the top get any better from this arrangement?

If our schools can have AP and Honors classes, perhaps the ADM can have something similar for the kids who have more experience and training at the younger levels.

HockeyDad41 wrote:I picked up a rag at the local rink put out by the ADM folks the other day and after reading through it I can't help but wonder how this is going to develop the younger kids who have shown that they can learn at a higher level than their peers.

If you have a 6-7 year old kid who has been on the ice and in the program for 3-4 years (yes we have kids who are 3-4 years old start in itty bitty mini-mites) and you then throw him in with the 20-30 new kids the same age who are starting their first year, how is that a good thing for him? I'm sure that's great for the masses, but what about the ADM at this level will help those kids?

They say that part of the success of the ADM will come from kids of all skill levels playing together. I agree that the bottom kids will be pulled up, but will the top get any better from this arrangement?

If our schools can have AP and Honors classes, perhaps the ADM can have something similar for the kids who have more experience and training at the younger levels.

At 6 years old yes it still helps them because the number one thing a 6 year old can do is get better at stick handling and skating in traffic and gain confidence in those skills and even those first year kids provide the "traffic".

When my oldest (he is 10 now) was 6 I didn't know squat about the ADM. He was going into his third year of hockey and the association wanted him to play mites. I decided that I didn't want to throw so much at him at such a young age and kept him in cross ice figuring two years of mites after that ws still plenty. He was significantly better than most all of his cross ice peers. He had an absolute blast he developed confidence with the puck, skating and stick handling etc.... The followiing year he went to mites where they played full ice games, he went to tryouts and was a bubble kid for the A team so I actually asked that he be put on the B team, he was the ONLY member of his B team that did not play mites the previous year. He lead the team in goals and assists with a total of 55 points in 20 games and he was by far the best defender, skater and stick handler, the next guy on his team had 14 total points do one else had more than single digits. The following year he tried out for his second year of mites and made the A team. There were four members of the A team returning from the previous year (3 bubble kids one decent player). He ended up second on the team in points with 72 in 30 games and did so playing all 30 games on defense and made the AAA spring team he tried out for that year. He's played on quality AAA spring teams ever since. I've embraced the ADM more readily than my peers because basically my son, in a way, sort of "accidently" followed the ADM model and I've seen the results because of it. Maybe my son would have did what he did anyway maybe he would not have, we'll never know for sure but he followed that path and it worked. People underestimate the value of learning how to be "calm" on the puck and learing CONFIDENCE within the younger kids age groups.Alot of times being a dominant player on the cross ice and mite teams is WAY better for development at the young ages than "playing up" would do for them and I see it all the time especiallly for bubble kids. Remember this isn't pee wee's it's 6 & 7 year olds. It is just MY opinion but at that age fun, being on the ice skating and puck touches are #1 the rest really is BS if you ask me......

I must be on a completely wrong page. I am skeptical about how the ADM would be handled by weaker associations. I also have no idea how many points my kid had as a mite.

InigoMontoya wrote:I must be on a completely wrong page. I am skeptical about how the ADM would be handled by weaker associations. I also have no idea how many points my kid had as a mite.

I probably would not be aware of his points either but we had a nice parent make the kids a nice year book at the end of the year and i wouldn't be human if I didn't remember that about my own son when it's there in black and white, you would to, anyone would. It's a great keepsake for when the kids are older they can look back on those younger times etc.... I also wouldn't have brought it up but it seemed pertinent to explaining things in a way that would be concrete to the original posters question rather than just being speculation and hyperbole.

As for weaker associations, do mean smaller numebrs wise ro do you mean one with leadership and coaches with little hockey knowledge so thaey aren't teaching it the right way?

It's a great keepsake for when the kids are older they can look back on those younger times etc....

However, you don't think the 7 & 8 year olds that follow will enjoy the same "times"? They'll be playing cross-ice. Under the ADM model, your 10 year old would have only played about 2/3 of the games he played when he was 8. Do you have a 5 year old that is looking down the throat of this thing, or are you done with the mite/squirt levels that your are lecturing others to embrace?

I still have one last mite next year. Don't like the adm because it seems like a one size fits all type of deal. Edina is different from FL . FL is different thanKennedy. You get the idea.

InigoMontoya wrote:

It's a great keepsake for when the kids are older they can look back on those younger times etc....

However, you don't think the 7 & 8 year olds that follow will enjoy the same "times"? They'll be playing cross-ice. Under the ADM model, your 10 year old would have only played about 2/3 of the games he played when he was 8. Do you have a 5 year old that is looking down the throat of this thing, or are you done with the mite/squirt levels that your are lecturing others to embrace?

I can see your point and I do have a younger son who just turned 6 in January. So yes we have one "looking down the throat of this thing". Trust me when I say he personally was looking forward to full ice games and part of me was disappointed for him because he was very much looking forward to those full ice games and I do think there is a place in the ADM for some "tweeking" in this regard. But I also know his skill development won't suffer because of it. Also, I wasn't lecturing, I was merely pointing out through a personal analogy that it's not the end of the world either

old goalie85 wrote:I still have one last mite next year. Don't like the adm because it seems like a one size fits all type of deal. Edina is different from FL . FL is different thanKennedy. You get the idea.

I can agree with you on that.

I think what everyone is missing here is that the ADM is being put in place as a "guideline" not law.
Let's face it, the majority of our early year coaches are not polished. Most, if not all, of them are parents. Many of them played the game at some level and have "basic" hockey knowledge. I think what the ADM does best is to start the new coaches down the path of learning how to coach todays game. It is NOT the same as it was 15-20 years ago and I think it is up to us coaches to educate ourselves on how to best approach coaching todays players.
As far as full ice for mites...no way. There was a study done that shows it takes 17 strides for the average "adult player" to go from one end of the rink to the other (full ice). It takes the average mite 17 strides to go from one sideboard to the other (cross ice). It would be like asking the NHL to play the game on a Football field with boards. Cross ice builds skills, full ice not as much.

oldschoolpuckster wrote:I think what everyone is missing here is that the ADM is being put in place as a "guideline" not law.
Let's face it, the majority of our early year coaches are not polished. Most, if not all, of them are parents. Many of them played the game at some level and have "basic" hockey knowledge. I think what the ADM does best is to start the new coaches down the path of learning how to coach todays game. It is NOT the same as it was 15-20 years ago and I think it is up to us coaches to educate ourselves on how to best approach coaching todays players.
As far as full ice for mites...no way. There was a study done that shows it takes 17 strides for the average "adult player" to go from one end of the rink to the other (full ice). It takes the average mite 17 strides to go from one sideboard to the other (cross ice). It would be like asking the NHL to play the game on a Football field with boards. Cross ice builds skills, full ice not as much.

So the ADM is for the coaches and not the kids ? seems to me that practice plans would be more helpful then. I'm pretty sure todays mites are the same as yesterdays mites who could make it all the way down that terribly long sheet of ice ... if how many strides it takes a mite to go from end to end is concerning we could call it overs peed training or some other buzzword to put a better spin on it. All I'm saying is removing full ice from mites is a mistake, it needs to be tweaked.

InigoMontoya wrote: I also have no idea how many points my kid had as a mite.

Good for you!!! The way it should be!!!

To the point made about how it can help a higher end 6-7 year old... the ADM is not the bible. It is merely a guideline to help the majority of kids. there will always be those kids that progress faster, and also kids that the ADM probably won't help as much as say, 1 on 1 coaching. The ADM is meant to be a program for the masses to follow, not EVERY single association, coach and kid.

This would mean that families could supplement the ADM with skating, stickhandling, or position specific (goalie) clinics/instruction.

HockeyDad41 wrote:I picked up a rag at the local rink put out by the ADM folks the other day and after reading through it I can't help but wonder how this is going to develop the younger kids who have shown that they can learn at a higher level than their peers.

...

They say that part of the success of the ADM will come from kids of all skill levels playing together. I agree that the bottom kids will be pulled up, but will the top get any better from this arrangement?

If our schools can have AP and Honors classes, perhaps the ADM can have something similar for the kids who have more experience and training at the younger levels.

1. The ADM is all about pulling out the advanced players and putting them on a fast track. This September there will be a national pilot project targeting 13- and 14-year-old club teams. I see it as paving the way for HPCs.

2. "They" do? At younger ages there is a suggestion to break the ice in thirds and segment the group 1/3-1/3-1/3 to get players of similar ability together. One kids go through puberty there are different avenues to push the cream of the crop on an individual basis (Select camp) and team (pending pilot project mentioned above).

3. The school analogy is used a bunch and simply doesn't work. If my son is in math class and he can't keep up so the teacher slows things down to his level it will absolutely have an effect on the rest of the class. Constant-movement sports like hockey don't work the same way. Putting him at a station with players that are much better than he is would make him a drill-buster, but nobody ever suggested doing that.

Many people have confused Red, White & Blue hockey as "the ADM". Seems like you are ignoring 80% of the American Development Model in your comments.

Has anyone ever wondered why there is no push to have Little League (and younger) games played on 90' basepaths with 330' fences?

Because that makes no sense.

It's odd so many people demand the equivalent arrangement for youth hockey.