HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

I was wondering what the U8 (aka the thing that replaced mites) looks like in MN. Down here in southern WI we are following the Red, White and Blue model so to speak.

Our practices are structured so that we do 6 stations that the kids rotate through, we try and keep the "like" ability kids together in these stations so they can push eachother etc..... Our association only has 28 kids at the U8 level and we have one Red team, one White team and one Blue team. So all the kids practice ont eh same nights. We usually have two practices per week. Generally speaking I like the station work for practices at this level. We also have a third "optional night" that is called a Skills Night and that is combined with our Squirt teams where the kids work on skills for 45 minutes then usually get to play a game of some sort for the last 15 minutes.

For games we are part of the "Dane County League" and they dictate our games. We only get 12 "games" and the "Games" bring 4 different Red teams together for an hour and the teams play half ice games (sort of like cross ice only cutting the ice in half and going north and south so it is wider etc....). So we have two games going on at the same time at each end of the ice. The teams play roughly 17 minutes witht he buzzer sounding every minute-and-a-half for a line change. At the end of the period the teams rotate and play a new team for 17 minutes and then once more, in essence the 4 teams play round robin over the course of an hour.

So that is pretty much how things are being done down here. My main criticisms are that 12 games seems awefully low even at the mite age level. Our team plans on attending a U8 Jamboree tourney so that will give them 3 more games and in Mid March there is a "post season" full ice tourney we may participate in so that will be fun and bring us up to 18 games but again that seems a bit low to me even at this young age. My oldest son played 25 games at the same age (all full ice) and that seemed appropriate to me at the time..... Another criticism I have is that our state governing body says that we are not allowed to ANY full ice activites of any kind during the winter season with March 1st being the "end of the winter season" in their eyes hence why we can do that full ice tourney in Mid-March. This seems ridiculous to me and a bit over reaching by the powers that be. I guess I don't quite understand why the kids/teams, that want to, can't get together occasionally and get some additional ice if they want and do some full ice scrimmages or practices if they want. This helps those kids get ready for their next step of Squirt hockey but also guess what, the kids LOVE to play full ice hockey. I am all for development, I love small area games and I am not suggesting the new model is bad but lets have a little flexibility..... and here is a novel idea, let's listen to the kids and ask them what is FUN. Everyone always says it's about the kids and let the kids have FUN, well guess what, the kids think "real hockey" and playing ful ice hockey is FUN, so why not give them a reward and let them have a handful of full ice opportunites in the secondhalf of the season. I'm not saying undo the ADM and Red, White and Blue model but would it kill ayone to let the kids have some fun and play 3 or four full ice scrimages.

Anyway wanted to hear what is happening up in MN in regards to this new model and how you are doing it, how many games, what type of games and how MN Hockey addresses full ice activites etc.... Thanks!

JSR,

I agree with pretty much everything you posted there. Look at what is happening in Michigan where the governing body has mandated what you are doing in Wisconsin, the people are in full out revolt and AAU has stepped in and taken over sponsorship of some U8 hockey so the kids can play full ice. Missouri is going through many of the same struggles. For all of USAH's faults I appreciate what the organization is trying to do and don't want the wild west that is AAU getting a foothold in hockey.

I like and agree with much of the U8 ADM model but I disagree with the heavy handed way it has been mandated in some areas of the country already (about to go nationwide next year if I remember right). The practice structure is a no brainer and is an effective use of the ice and keeps the kids moving and working on skills rather than standing in lines. I do think the practice plans could incorporate a little bit of full open ice skating once in a while though.

ADM is great for 5,6,7 year olds but I don't think it does enough for 8 yr olds in exposing them to full ice hockey and getting them prepared for Squirts. I think a good compromise would be to allow a certain number of full ice competitions in the second half of the winter season for 8 yr olds to help them transition to full ice.

I have seen teams of 9 yr olds this season who played nothing but cross ice last season. The transition has been tough and the level of play is not as high as it was with the 2002 class.

SCBlueLiner wrote:JSR,

I agree with pretty much everything you posted there. Look at what is happening in Michigan where the governing body has mandated what you are doing in Wisconsin, the people are in full out revolt and AAU has stepped in and taken over sponsorship of some U8 hockey so the kids can play full ice. Missouri is going through many of the same struggles. For all of USAH's faults I appreciate what the organization is trying to do and don't want the wild west that is AAU getting a foothold in hockey.

I like and agree with much of the U8 ADM model but I disagree with the heavy handed way it has been mandated in some areas of the country already (about to go nationwide next year if I remember right). The practice structure is a no brainer and is an effective use of the ice and keeps the kids moving and working on skills rather than standing in lines. I do think the practice plans could incorporate a little bit of full open ice skating once in a while though.

ADM is great for 5,6,7 year olds but I don't think it does enough for 8 yr olds in exposing them to full ice hockey and getting them prepared for Squirts. I think a good compromise would be to allow a certain number of full ice competitions in the second half of the winter season for 8 yr olds to help them transition to full ice.

I have seen teams of 9 yr olds this season who played nothing but cross ice last season. The transition has been tough and the level of play is not as high as it was with the 2002 class.

Totally agree

I'm not sure the ADM's LTAD model matches the age structure we use. ADM is a skill based development tool, but association age structure makes it easy to get "stuck" in the system.

ADM hits on it in biological age vs. chronological age but who is using that?

It also seems like ADM should start with 6U, then 8U etc...4 yrs under the same model segment is too long and i think thats why it feels funny. Making a 8 yr. old do the same things as a 5 yr. old when he is almost twice as old is ridiculous.

It's reassuring to read these posts. I keep telling my peers down here that the "problem" we have with buy-in is really limited to just the 8-year-old players that already have a few years of experience.

Sounds like you guys like the concept of Red, White & Blue and feel that USA Hockey is just off by a year or so by asking Mites (this year it is 2004 and younger) to do the small size games.

One thing to watch for: Affiliate presidents have an opportunity to submit a request for a one-year delay on going all-in on RW&B. It is quite likely the hardline "mandate" is like HPC, a good concept that can't progress past theoretical.

The problem is R,W&B doesn't address transitioning 8 yr olds to the full ice game. I also agree that blanketing 5yr olds and 8 yr olds under the same model is crazy. Finally, I've seen too many cross ice games that turn into a ping pong match. It actually leads to less skating and less skill development if the kids just whack the puck to the other end of the ice.

O-townClown wrote:It's reassuring to read these posts. I keep telling my peers down here that the "problem" we have with buy-in is really limited to just the 8-year-old players that already have a few years of experience.

Sounds like you guys like the concept of Red, White & Blue and feel that USA Hockey is just off by a year or so by asking Mites (this year it is 2004 and younger) to do the small size games.

One thing to watch for: Affiliate presidents have an opportunity to submit a request for a one-year delay on going all-in on RW&B. It is quite likely the hardline "mandate" is like HPC, a good concept that can't progress past theoretical.

I do like many things about the R,W,&B model and I am not saying to scrap it but they just need to be a bit more flexible and like SCBlueliner said they need to incorporate the flexibility more toward those transitioning from mites to squirts. Like down here where it is very hardlined right now about "no full ice activities during the winter season", that is bologna, I think they'd get alot less resistance if they allowed for say 6 full ice games/scrimmages and 1 tournament but those cannot be played until after January first. Those could be in addition to the small area games that are scheduled and the normal station work practices. I guess I don't see how that would hurt anyone and it would definitely be a spark for the kids and help with the transition of the kids who will be playing full ice the following season. It's still not perfect but they'd get alot less resistance and revolt if they just loosened up a little IMHO

SCBlueLiner wrote:The problem is R,W&B doesn't address transitioning 8 yr olds to the full ice game. I also agree that blanketing 5yr olds and 8 yr olds under the same model is crazy. Finally, I've seen too many cross ice games that turn into a ping pong match. It actually leads to less skating and less skill development if the kids just whack the puck to the other end of the ice.

Your ping pong analogy is why we went to "half ice" rather than cross ice, it actually is enough of a bigger amount of ice that the ping pong stuff doesn't really occur, atleast not in the Red or White team games I've watched, maybe a little at the blue level

JSR wrote:

SCBlueLiner wrote:The problem is R,W&B doesn't address transitioning 8 yr olds to the full ice game. I also agree that blanketing 5yr olds and 8 yr olds under the same model is crazy. Finally, I've seen too many cross ice games that turn into a ping pong match. It actually leads to less skating and less skill development if the kids just whack the puck to the other end of the ice.

Your ping pong analogy is why we went to "half ice" rather than cross ice, it actually is enough of a bigger amount of ice that the ping pong stuff doesn't really occur, atleast not in the Red or White team games I've watched, maybe a little at the blue level

Yeah, I'm talking to my Mite coaches this week about switching up and doing some half ice games now that it's after the first. We're on the same page and I think he'd like to introduce some full ice scrimmages towards the end of the year for the 8 yr olds. Don't know what the board is going to think about that but I'll agree to give him cover and tell them it's a coaching decision. Sometimes the board just needs to stay out of the way and let the coaches develop the players.