Congratulations 2000 Legacy

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Thu May 12, 2011 9:45 am

On winning the Stars and Stripes Open Tournament.

The fact that you had to leave a bunch of rostered kids at home and brought in a few non-rostered kids to get'r done really means nothing. I mean it was an open tournament after all. Display that trophy proudly coach.

observer · Post by **observer** » Thu May 12, 2011 10:11 am

Go away.

Open and invite means nothing with a 2000 team. The top open teams can beat some of the invite teams. Plus, it sounds like some kids are playing on teams at both levels.

Did you know that the top ranked 94 in the state, AJ Michaelson, played in the Showcase AAA League with the 94 Lumberjacks? And, they were a weak open team. Several Final 54 16s and 17s started on open level teams. Let me repeat, it means nothing.

Save your chest pounding for when the kids are bantam level. Everything changes.

observer · Post by **observer** » Thu May 12, 2011 10:20 am

I'll add that the very best invite teams have no one to play against so how smart is that. Dads build these uber teams, of 8 year olds, and you can't play anyone in Minnesota so you have to up your hockey budget another $10,000 and travel all over the US to find competition. Several will quit and several won't end up being all that great. Try and enjoy it my friend (love the most interesting man in the world commercials). You're getting caught up in the ugly part that will end up meaning very little.

jpiehl · Post by **jpiehl** » Thu May 12, 2011 10:31 am

I think his point was more to the fact that Legacy left some rostered kids at home and replaced them with presumably better players to win the tournament, not that there is anything wrong with open tournaments. My kids have been part of teams that have brought in kids to play for tournaments, but they didn't leave any rostered kids behind to do so, and the kids all saw the ice the same whether they were there for the tournament or on the regular roster. No kids were left out just to win a trophy, as appears to be the case here.

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Thu May 12, 2011 11:52 am

jpiehl wrote:I think his point was more to the fact that Legacy left some rostered kids at home and replaced them with presumably better players to win the tournament, not that there is anything wrong with open tournaments. My kids have been part of teams that have brought in kids to play for tournaments, but they didn't leave any rostered kids behind to do so, and the kids all saw the ice the same whether they were there for the tournament or on the regular roster. No kids were left out just to win a trophy, as appears to be the case here.

Exactly.

Hockey Fan101 · Post by **Hockey Fan101** » Thu May 12, 2011 12:14 pm

HockeyDad41 wrote:On winning the Stars and Stripes Open Tournament.

The fact that you had to leave a bunch of rostered kids at home and brought in a few non-rostered kids to get'r done really means nothing. I mean it was an open tournament after all. Display that trophy proudly coach.

Curious, how do you know they brought in a few non-rostered kids? Many of these teams have more than a full roster, so of course some of the kids don't always play. Maybe you're right and they brought kids in, but just wondering where you got your facts from?
Don't want to say it but it sort of sounds like sour grapes to me.

Bluewhitefan · Post by **Bluewhitefan** » Thu May 12, 2011 12:20 pm

Hockey Fan101 wrote:
HockeyDad41 wrote:On winning the Stars and Stripes Open Tournament.

The fact that you had to leave a bunch of rostered kids at home and brought in a few non-rostered kids to get'r done really means nothing. I mean it was an open tournament after all. Display that trophy proudly coach.
Curious, how do you know they brought in a few non-rostered kids? Many of these teams have more than a full roster, so of course some of the kids don't always play. Maybe you're right and they brought kids in, but just wondering where you got your facts from?
Don't want to say it but it sort of sounds like sour grapes to me.

Sour grapes? Because the guy doesn't like the fact that parents pay a bunch of money and their kids don't get to play? In an Open tournament? Doesn't have to prove it happened. Everyone knows it happens.

Hsymynkywicz · Post by **Hsymynkywicz** » Wed May 18, 2011 5:42 pm

With the Independent just about to begin, the same thing is happening to the 98 Legacy team. Non-rostered kids being brought and taking paying kids spots to make the program look good.

cookiejar · Post by **cookiejar** » Thu May 19, 2011 9:07 am

This is the greatest hockey coach ever. He could probably even teach ducks to float and rocks to sink. When it comes to winning, and really making a difference, you call in the Blades. It's what a good coach does. No apologies. Just git r dun. Blame the kids and their crazy parents for not being good enough and having unreasonable expectations - but don't do that until you've already cashed the checks.

Pucksahater · Post by **Pucksahater** » Thu May 19, 2011 9:15 am

Sounds like Legacy is making quite a name for itself! Hey coach are you going to cover up the helmet stickers?

Rick O'Shay · Post by **Rick O'Shay** » Thu May 19, 2011 4:11 pm

Taken from the Legacy website:

Boys (1998-1999)

TEAM MEMBER

•About 70 hours of "on ice" training
•No Practice on Friday or Saturday during the summer. Weekly practice resumes Sundays
•A five week break (6/7 thru 7/17)
•5 tournaments, each skater guaranteed 3
•2 jersey's and one pair of socks

I'd say it's pretty clear!!! If your son isn't asked to participate in at least three of the tournaments "Houston we have a problem"...

cookiejar · Post by **cookiejar** » Thu May 19, 2011 4:31 pm

Do the ringers contribute any $ towards the team? If the team has space for extra players, why wouldn't they just use the players they already have? Especially since they're the ones that paid for everything? If your kid is not playing in a tournament paid for by your team, you're paying for someone else to play for you. I don't care how the accountant tries to explain it.

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:06 pm

Rick O'Shay wrote:Taken from the Legacy website:

Boys (1998-1999)

TEAM MEMBER

•About 70 hours of "on ice" training
•No Practice on Friday or Saturday during the summer. Weekly practice resumes Sundays
•A five week break (6/7 thru 7/17)
•5 tournaments, each skater guaranteed 3
•2 jersey's and one pair of socks

I'd say it's pretty clear!!! If your son isn't asked to participate in at least three of the tournaments "Houston we have a problem"...

My interpretation of this does not include bringing in kids from Invite teams like the Blades to play while the kids who come to practice everyday sit at home. To not expressly disclose this practice while recruiting is just wrong and I for one would probably quietly endure the rest of the season, and simply find another program for next year. I'm sure that some people are really ok with this setup and probably didn't mind that they were not told prior. Good for them, I'm just not one of them.

So what difference does it make if your kid gets his 3 games? Not sure why but to me bringing in talent to win while the kids you are supposed to be developing are sitting at home just seems wrong. I would have to know more about the fees, but I doubt the price is prorated for 3 tournaments.

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:27 pm

It wouldn't bother me so much because it would be a weekend off. It would suck to be the kid at the next practice, in the lockeroom while all the other kids are talking about the tourny, and how great so and so was who played in you kids spot.

Deep Breath · Post by **Deep Breath** » Thu May 19, 2011 10:30 pm

I can appreciate the disdain that many folks on this board have for what is going, but I cannot believe that people are surprised by this. This is something that has happened with almost all organizations. Not neccessarily at each level, but certainly within the organization. Wait til the summer starts to play out and the heavy recruiting really begins: you will see kids from different teams playing with others in late summer tournaments because a coach may "want to take a look at what the kid has", regardless of how many kids are already on the paying roster. Not throwing arrows at any group, because nearly all do it, but the Blades are in Toronto this weekend. Take a look at their roster for the 2000 event and you may see a name that will have another AAA logo on his helmut when the puck drops in the morning. Again, not zoning in on the Blades, as many are guilty of this, but it is an easy example to point to for the current weekend.

Rick O'Shay · Post by **Rick O'Shay** » Fri May 20, 2011 4:05 pm

HD41 Thanks for your interpretation on 3 tournaments guaranteed but I believe no interpretation was necessary! One would hope any logical person could understand something written in black and white. With all of the wheeling and dealing, behind the scenes antics of AAA hockey you might even think it was refreshing to have an organization actually spell out what you can expect for your money. I'm not saying it's right or wrong I'm just pointing out the facts. It should be very clear to those writting the check what they will be getting for their money!

But as long as you are in the interpretation business how about an opinion on this. So I heard a rumor that the Orange Kool Aid drinkers brought a 20 player roster to Chicago only to play two lines for 80% or so of the games, is this acceptable and were the MM faithful parents told to expect this for their money?

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Fri May 20, 2011 4:20 pm

Rick O'Shay wrote:Taken from the Legacy website:

Boys (1998-1999)

TEAM MEMBER

•About 70 hours of "on ice" training
•No Practice on Friday or Saturday during the summer. Weekly practice resumes Sundays
•A five week break (6/7 thru 7/17)
•5 tournaments, each skater guaranteed 3
•2 jersey's and one pair of socks

I'd say it's pretty clear!!! If your son isn't asked to participate in at least three of the tournaments "Houston we have a problem"...

Seems pretty easy to understand.

"Guaranteed" is borderline classy for a AAA club.

Deep Breath · Post by **Deep Breath** » Fri May 20, 2011 4:21 pm

Rick--

I think your analogy with the Machine team is a bit off, as the original poster is just concerned that some non-rostered kids from another team were brought in to play in a tournament while rostered players had to stay home, most likely on the dime of the kids who had signed up to be on the team from the start. Some players not getting as much ice as others in a tournament is a heck of a lot different than some kids being left behind while non-team players are brought in. Like was written earlier, would be interesting to see what kind of "fee" those added players were asked to contribute.

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Fri May 20, 2011 4:36 pm

Rick O'Shay wrote:HD41 Thanks for your interpretation on 3 tournaments guaranteed but I believe no interpretation was necessary! One would hope any logical person could understand something written in black and white. With all of the wheeling and dealing, behind the scenes antics of AAA hockey you might even think it was refreshing to have an organization actually spell out what you can expect for your money. I'm not saying it's right or wrong I'm just pointing out the facts. It should be very clear to those writting the check what they will be getting for their money!

But as long as you are in the interpretation business how about an opinion on this. So I heard a rumor that the Orange Kool Aid drinkers brought a 20 player roster to Chicago only to play two lines for 80% or so of the games, is this acceptable and were the MM faithful parents told to expect this for their money?

So does the Legacy get to keep the trophy or do they have to share it with the Blades? Just curious.

Rick O'Shay · Post by **Rick O'Shay** » Mon May 23, 2011 10:21 am

My interpretation would be if there were shared players the trophy would then in fact have to be shared. I don't think that was the answer you were looking for but I was not able to find any posted information on the Legacy website that addressed "Championship Trophies"... My guess is that's something they typically don't have to worry about!

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Mon May 23, 2011 12:07 pm

Rick O'Shay wrote:My interpretation would be if there were shared players the trophy would then in fact have to be shared. I don't think that was the answer you were looking for but I was not able to find any posted information on the Legacy website that addressed "Championship Trophies"... My guess is that's something they typically don't have to worry about!

I must have hit a sore spot with you using the word "interpretation".

Sorry man.

I do agree with your analysis though.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Congratulations 2000 Legacy

Congratulations 2000 Legacy

Re: Congratulations 2000 Legacy

Re: Congratulations 2000 Legacy

Non-rostered kids in tournaments