HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

17's

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -selectees

16's

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -selectees

2 things, congratulations and "oh my god", that is one f'd up list. Wow....

goaline wrote:17's

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -selectees

16's

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -selectees

How is bullock not on this list?

boardguy1998 wrote:

goaline wrote:17's

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -selectees

16's

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -selectees

How is bullock not on this list?

The USA hockey model is looking for hard forechecking, fierce back checking, smooth passing, hustle to the bench players that can play with the other 4 players on the ice. Perhaps she did not fall under this model?

The Cynic wrote:2 things, congratulations and "oh my god", that is one f'd up list. Wow....

Agree - Starting to believe all the bobo's, it's who you know not how good you are.

At the 17's going to Maine I agree with 6 of 11
At the 17's going to St. Cloud I agree with 9 of 15

At the 16's going to Maine (if they are actually taking the best, no matter of their age) I agree with 4 of 11
At the 16's going to St. Cloud I agree with 11 of 24

Don't comeback and say - if you think you know, why don't you use names. Not going to happen, all of these girls and parents are very excited for this opportunity and most are well deserved. this is just one Hack's opinion.

Thats why it's called a Development Camp, give some girls that are on the bubble a chance to compete against the best.

Granted I have not seen every girl on either list play, but have seen about 90% of them play, and yes more than once.

Maybe they are pulling a HB and not looking for the best player, instead are looking for the right players.

Either way - Congrats to all the girl's - fun times ahead.

Racki2016 wrote:

The Cynic wrote:2 things, congratulations and "oh my god", that is one f'd up list. Wow....

Agree - Starting to believe all the bobo's, it's who you know not how good you are.

At the 17's going to Maine I agree with 6 of 11
At the 17's going to St. Cloud I agree with 9 of 15

At the 16's going to Maine (if they are actually taking the best, no matter of their age) I agree with 4 of 11
At the 16's going to St. Cloud I agree with 11 of 24

Don't comeback and say - if you think you know, why don't you use names. Not going to happen, all of these girls and parents are very excited for this opportunity and most are well deserved. this is just one Hack's opinion.

Thats why it's called a Development Camp, give some girls that are on the bubble a chance to compete against the best.

Granted I have not seen every girl on either list play, but have seen about 90% of them play, and yes more than once.

Maybe they are pulling a HB and not looking for the best player, instead are looking for the right players.

Either way - Congrats to all the girl's - fun times ahead.

It is interesting that players should receive accolades but none of the critiques.....

In that spirit, how about you listing your 31 players you think at the least equal to the selectees...( in no particular order)

Thereby giving those players deserved recognition

nu2hockey wrote:

Racki2016 wrote:

The Cynic wrote:2 things, congratulations and "oh my god", that is one f'd up list. Wow....

Agree - Starting to believe all the bobo's, it's who you know not how good you are.

At the 17's going to Maine I agree with 6 of 11
At the 17's going to St. Cloud I agree with 9 of 15

At the 16's going to Maine (if they are actually taking the best, no matter of their age) I agree with 4 of 11
At the 16's going to St. Cloud I agree with 11 of 24

Don't comeback and say - if you think you know, why don't you use names. Not going to happen, all of these girls and parents are very excited for this opportunity and most are well deserved. this is just one Hack's opinion.

Thats why it's called a Development Camp, give some girls that are on the bubble a chance to compete against the best.

Granted I have not seen every girl on either list play, but have seen about 90% of them play, and yes more than once.

Maybe they are pulling a HB and not looking for the best player, instead are looking for the right players.

Either way - Congrats to all the girl's - fun times ahead.

It is interesting that players should receive accolades but none of the critiques.....

In that spirit, how about you listing your 31 players you think at the least equal to the selectees...( in no particular order)

Thereby giving those players deserved recognition

If you want names - go to MN Hockey Web-site, They are all there. They all deserve recognition - Some just deserve it a little more.

As I said in my original post, I'm not going to use names. Anyone that has been around these two age groups for more than a few years probably has close to my list of players I think are deserved without posting names.

I will state that one girl from a State Tourney Team didn't even make the Final 54 for 17's. and I feel she is better than some that made it to St. Cloud.

Your the one who disagrees with 31 of the selectees..I had questions on a few also..

However, if you saw the spring fest you would know why your state tourney 17 didn't make the 54's....we saw all her games and unfortunately for her it was a bad weekend and didn't earn the chance to move on.

Racki2016 wrote:

The Cynic wrote:2 things, congratulations and "oh my god", that is one f'd up list. Wow....

Agree - Starting to believe all the bobo's, it's who you know not how good you are.

At the 17's going to Maine I agree with 6 of 11
At the 17's going to St. Cloud I agree with 9 of 15

At the 16's going to Maine (if they are actually taking the best, no matter of their age) I agree with 4 of 11
At the 16's going to St. Cloud I agree with 11 of 24

Don't comeback and say - if you think you know, why don't you use names. Not going to happen, all of these girls and parents are very excited for this opportunity and most are well deserved. this is just one Hack's opinion.

Thats why it's called a Development Camp, give some girls that are on the bubble a chance to compete against the best.

Granted I have not seen every girl on either list play, but have seen about 90% of them play, and yes more than once.

Maybe they are pulling a HB and not looking for the best player, instead are looking for the right players.

Either way - Congrats to all the girl's - fun times ahead.

17s I agree with the 6 of 11
I then agree with 4 of the 15 - I'm obviously a harsher critique and concede the others could be interchangeable with now 30 girls. In that respect, I'm quite liberal.

However, if you saw the spring fest you would know why your state tourney 17 didn't make the 54's....we saw all her games and unfortunately for her it was a bad weekend and didn't earn the chance to move on.[/quote]

So your saying if 1 of the 11 that are going to Maine had a bad weekend at the festival she would not have made it to 54's - BS. I may be wrong, but I think some of the Evaluator's are local and could have given her (Based on her history as a player) the benefit to prove herself at 54's.

I agree with you guys whole heartedly. I've only been following this group for a little over two years, so maybe their playing history and hockey accolades (which HP down plays are considered) actually play a bigger role than anything going on in the games and because I'm not familiar I have trouble figuring out many of these choices. 2 things -
1) let's see where these choices are playing college puck, and also list the non-national commitments (17s)
2) my daughter is coming into the first HP age group in a little over a year. I've completely justified and rationalized (at least to my wife and I) why she should just steer clear of this entire "system." Knowing, however, that whether it's my skater or her mom or her coach or (my) ego, she may find herself participating regardless of my rational research, who/how should we chat up/suck up to/befriend/lobby/pay off? (Last one was kidding, mostly.) Does who your dad is really matter THIS MUCH?

I agree it's different to say CB should have made it. Not ok to say XX should not have made it. I'm curious how this 12u dad stands next to you long time 98-99 fans and critics. Who's missing, and why? It just seems to me less like great kids are being left off, and more like good kids are getting spots their hockey talent doesn't explain.[/quote]

Nevertoomuchhockey wrote: who/how should we chat up/suck up to/befriend/lobby/pay off? (Last one was kidding, mostly.) Does who your dad is really matter THIS MUCH?

Winny.

Racki2016 wrote:However, if you saw the spring fest you would know why your state tourney 17 didn't make the 54's....we saw all her games and unfortunately for her it was a bad weekend and didn't earn the chance to move on.

So your saying if 1 of the 11 that are going to Maine had a bad weekend at the festival she would not have made it to 54's - BS. I may be wrong, but I think some of the Evaluator's are local and could have given her (Based on her history as a player) the benefit to prove herself at 54's.[/quote]

The 66 going to Maine are USA hockey picks....what they base it on , who knows???
I do know they are scouting kids more than spring fest for the Maine camp where u18 team will come from...sometimes it appears the choices are clouded by a selectee's ink ,
and not by their actual performance...Also, when the competition steps up ,like spring fest, 54's,elite league, etc, a player who shines in mshs league sometimes does not .

Is there more than one u18 team? Like the recent fall roster was pretty strange, and didn't include the girls who just won national gold at that level this winter?
As confusing as the boys are to navigate, this is right up there.

Obviously some of the best players go. Some of the best don't. Why? Multiple reasons. Piss off the wrong person, your kid will never make it past sections. Befriend the right person, your kid could go despite not being worthy. Regarding goalies, it's a far cry from a real tryout IMO. Remington not making it two years in a row despite a fantastic tryout and festival? That's a joke and the "evaluators" should be ashamed of themselves. Witnessed numerous other instances similar over the years. Save your money.... the whole thing is a cash grab.

Hard water fan wrote:Obviously some of the best players go. Some of the best don't. Why? Multiple reasons. Piss off the wrong person, your kid will never make it past sections. Befriend the right person, your kid could go despite not being worthy. Regarding goalies, it's a far cry from a real tryout IMO. Remington not making it two years in a row despite a fantastic tryout and festival? That's a joke and the "evaluators" should be ashamed of themselves. Witnessed numerous other instances similar over the years. Save your money.... the whole thing is a cash grab.

Has Remington announced a college yet? Not many goalie commitments in that class yet. I always think schools will try to lock up goalies before f/d but often not the case.

Never, my experience is that goalies are actually a bit behind the curve for timing versus f/d. My daughter committed to Bethel recently, but I haven't heard too many other rumblings...

Hard water fan wrote:Obviously some of the best players go. Some of the best don't. Why? Multiple reasons. Piss off the wrong person, your kid will never make it past sections. Befriend the right person, your kid could go despite not being worthy. Regarding goalies, it's a far cry from a real tryout IMO. Remington not making it two years in a row despite a fantastic tryout and festival? That's a joke and the "evaluators" should be ashamed of themselves. Witnessed numerous other instances similar over the years. Save your money.... the whole thing is a cash grab.

Frankly, I think they all need to go to church immediately! All evalutors in charge of HP 16s and HP 17s, go to church now before it's too late!

They are a bunch of Godless democrats. Prob all public school teachers..

"Who's missing, and why? It just seems to me less like great kids are being left off, and more like good kids are getting spots their hockey talent doesn't explain." nevertoomuchhockey

I am not super familiar with National Camps but have seen and heard about a couple of kids that have made camps and then U18's. I have never heard a bad thing about several of them and other than a vicious cross check in a televised state tournament game last year had heard nothing bad about another one. I believe that there are kids with the talent to make it to Nat'l Camp and then U18 (30ish kids before they cut to 22 or so) that do NOT make it as a result of off ice stuff.

I have heard that it is a combination of on ice play including all the things that imnotwearingacup said so well:

"The USA hockey model is looking for hard forechecking, fierce back checking, smooth passing, hustle to the bench players that can play with the other 4 players on the ice. Perhaps she did not fall under this model?"

And also a bunch of character/off ice things. Most of us have probably heard things about players (that did or did not make said teams) that make us think differently of them. In the professional sports universe it is easy to like or dislike players from what we see or hear about them (thru personal experience, a friends experience, we read somewhere or we see on TV). From Joe Mauer to AJ Pierzynski and Alex Rodriguez to Derek Jeter.

One might look at these two lists (I realize they are from the West side paper) and try to figure out why some of the first team kids did or did not make it to whatever level and also look at the 2nd/3rd team kids to see who made or did not make what (when they were eligible).

http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/news_ar ... how/479970

http://www.startribune.com/star-tribune ... 292136491/

MN_Bowhunter wrote:

Nevertoomuchhockey wrote: who/how should we chat up/suck up to/befriend/lobby/pay off? (Last one was kidding, mostly.) Does who your dad is really matter THIS MUCH?

Winny.

How about a few named (originallyt named but omitted)........? It's not one person.... Clearly some have influence. It's a pool of folks lobbying.

*yes I edited....

The Cynic wrote:

MN_Bowhunter wrote:

Nevertoomuchhockey wrote: who/how should we chat up/suck up to/befriend/lobby/pay off? (Last one was kidding, mostly.) Does who your dad is really matter THIS MUCH?

Winny.

How about someone named Johnson and Gunderson? It's not one person....

This attitude is sad and pathetic ! Soooo many complain about politics and I have heard it way too much!! USA hockey and D1 schools want good players! They want to win!! People get fired when they don't! WAKE UP!!! They want good hard working talent and good human beings! .. And no psycho Dads! Kid yourselves all you want that it is purely political !! Maybe your little darling isn't all you think she is??
People like Winny, Johnson or CP help those that help themselves! They help highly motivated and talented players get to next level! Don't give me the crybaby story about the bubble kid that was "just as good" but did not make it!! Pathetic !!

AAA Dad wrote:

The Cynic wrote:

MN_Bowhunter wrote: Winny.

How about someone named Johnson and Gunderson? It's not one person....

This attitude is sad and pathetic ! Soooo many complain about politics and I have heard it way too much!! USA hockey and D1 schools want good players! They want to win!! People get fired when they don't! WAKE UP!!! They want good hard working talent and good human beings! .. And no psycho Dads! Kid yourselves all you want that it is purely political !! Maybe your little darling isn't all you think she is??
People like Winny, Johnson or CP help those that help themselves! They help highly motivated and talented players get to next level! Don't give me the crybaby story about the bubble kid that was "just as good" but did not make it!! Pathetic !!

You are reading and seeing only what you want to see vs some very basic facts. Evidentally you are a poor reader or possibly missed my original post where I too said "sad (yet comical)" in the HP 16/17 thread. I think we ALL can agree a basic criteria is they have to show up to tryouts. I also think we can all agree to tell some kids one thing and others, another. Maybe we disagree on this one, to give some the wink wink? Maybe we disagree on this one, to change the rules mid-stream due some known external influence ie - 57 kids? I think we can agree, the kids should be evaluated for all 3 games? It's not fair to name one person (which someone did and I've since removed my finger pointing in my poor effort to neutralize anothers post) was my point....there is a pool of people who can only do so much to help but they are clearly influential. It's human nature and natural that some in a group of decision makers to have more influence then others. Tryouts take a back seat to this. In the end they get it right for the most part (60% at 57s and 90+% at Natl Camp (alts back to 50/50)) but they can do a much better job if they'd like to.

My comments were directed more to the tone of this thread in general and not as much to your specific comment... Yes I feel some people have influence that can make a difference when a kid is comparable to others at the bottom of a list but other than that I think it works out the way it should mostly! There are in no way the amount of injustices many on this forum would lead you to believe!
"You need to play at a level that forces me to keep you on this team!"
The great Herb Brooks