HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Minnesota Hockey, Inc. Board Meeting March 31 - April 2, 2017
Marriott Minneapolis West
9960 Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis
952-544-4400

06:00 - 07:00 PM
Dinner

07:00 - 07:45 PM
Mayo Sports Medicine

07:45 - 08:30 PM
Finance/Budget
Kephart

08:30 - 10:00 PM
Executive Committee
Margenau

SATURDAY
08:00 - 09:30 AM
District Directors
Oleheiser

09:30 - 10:00 AM
Rules Committee
Halverson

10:00 - 10:15 AM
Break
10:15 - 10:45 AM
Planning Exercise
Margenau

10:45 - 11:30 AM
Hockey Operations Committee
Margenau

11:30 - 12:00 PM
Tier 1
Coole/Terwilliger

12:00 - 01:00 PM
Lunch

01:00 - 01:30 PM
Tournaments/Awards
Nyhus/Sweezo

01:30 - 02:00 PM
School Teams
Margenau

02:00 - 02:30 PM
Membership Development
Wright/Ricke

02:30 - 02:45 PM
Break

02:45 - 03:15 PM
Marketing/Communications
Gray/Andresen

03:15 - 04:00 PM
New Hockey Programs/Business Development
Slaird/Terwilliger

6:00 PM
Social Hour
7:00 PM
Awards Dinner

Saturday, April 1, 2017
Friday, March 31, 2017
Committee Meetings
Minnesota Hockey, Inc. Board Meeting March 31 - April 2, 2017
Marriott Minneapolis West
9960 Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis
952-544-4400

Easy one. No school sponsored youth teams. Schools currently hosting youth hockey teams should be shut down immediately. No exceptions!

observer wrote:Easy one. No school sponsored youth teams. Schools currently hosting youth hockey teams should be shut down immediately. No exceptions!

I assume you're talking about the private school teams like in the CAA? My understanding is that, since those aren't sponsored by USA Hockey, they don't fall under the "multiple roster" rule. Not sure that Minnesota Hockey would be able to prevent a kid from playing on a non-sanctioned team at the same time they're playing on a sanctioned team. They lost that battle against Minnesota Made.

The Exiled One wrote:

observer wrote:Easy one. No school sponsored youth teams. Schools currently hosting youth hockey teams should be shut down immediately. No exceptions!

I assume you're talking about the private school teams like in the CAA? My understanding is that, since those aren't sponsored by USA Hockey, they don't fall under the "multiple roster" rule. Not sure that Minnesota Hockey would be able to prevent a kid from playing on a non-sanctioned team at the same time they're playing on a sanctioned team. They lost that battle against Minnesota Made.

First thing to came to my mind is private school Junior Gold teams. I've always wondered how far away we are from Hill Murray Peewee and Bantam AA teams.

observer wrote:Easy one. No school sponsored youth teams. Schools currently hosting youth hockey teams should be shut down immediately. No exceptions!

Minnesota Hockey further opened up Pandora's box when they introduced Pee Wee and Bantam AA & A designations and established a stronger link between the youth programs and the high school programs. That link is also established by allowing players to play in the association where they live OR where they go to school. In many associations you have the head high school coach being one of the leaders in player development and very involved in the association (or at least most places hope they have that commitment out of the high school coach). Finally, Minnesota Hockey does not go by the USA Hockey birth year age guidelines instead going with different guidelines that lines players up by grade, the reason being high school hockey.

This community based system focused on high school hockey is touted where there is this ideal that players grow up playing with their classmates and dream of making it to State. Yet when it comes to private schools the first instinct is to deny those kids the same experiences growing up and the opportunity to play with their classmates. It is very hypocritical.

I believe that the parochial school systems, those schools that feed the private schools, should be allowed to form their own associations if they choose. Maybe it would get rid of all the recruiting negativity if a kid came up through, for example, the Hill-Murray system, where they go to a Catholic grade school on the east side, his entire hockey life rather than playing youth hockey in Stillwater only to get "recruited" to Hill in the 9th grade. Either do that or end all these links between the youth hockey associations and high school hockey.

I say all this being a big believer in the community based model and in high school hockey in Minnesota, and I'm not even a "private school guy". I just recognize that the opportunities and experiences are not the same for all the youth players.

SCBlueLiner wrote:

observer wrote:Easy one. No school sponsored youth teams. Schools currently hosting youth hockey teams should be shut down immediately. No exceptions!

Minnesota Hockey further opened up Pandora's box when they introduced Pee Wee and Bantam AA & A designations and established a stronger link between the youth programs and the high school programs. That link is also established by allowing players to play in the association where they live OR where they go to school. In many associations you have the head high school coach being one of the leaders in player development and very involved in the association (or at least most places hope they have that commitment out of the high school coach). Finally, Minnesota Hockey does not go by the USA Hockey birth year age guidelines instead going with different guidelines that lines players up by grade, the reason being high school hockey.

This community based system focused on high school hockey is touted where there is this ideal that players grow up playing with their classmates and dream of making it to State. Yet when it comes to private schools the first instinct is to deny those kids the same experiences growing up and the opportunity to play with their classmates. It is very hypocritical.

I believe that the parochial school systems, those schools that feed the private schools, should be allowed to form their own associations if they choose. Maybe it would get rid of all the recruiting negativity if a kid came up through, for example, the Hill-Murray system, where they go to a Catholic grade school on the east side, his entire hockey life rather than playing youth hockey in Stillwater only to get "recruited" to Hill in the 9th grade. Either do that or end all these links between the youth hockey associations and high school hockey.

I say all this being a big believer in the community based model and in high school hockey in Minnesota, and I'm not even a "private school guy". I just recognize that the opportunities and experiences are not the same for all the youth players.

Minnesota Hockey doesn't have any rule against Private Schools forming Associations. Duluth Marshall tried it two years ago and MN Hockey left it up to DAHA to decide. DAHA voted against it.

So the public school association had all the power and voted against allowing the private school to form their own association? Shocking. Shouldn't have even been DAHA's decision to make.

As for everything else, I did not know MN Hockey had no rules against it. That's good to know. So how would one of the Catholic school systems go about forming an association? First step would probably be getting permission from the District, right? Or just form the association and say "here we are!"?

SCBlueLiner wrote:So the public school association had all the power and voted against allowing the private school to form their own association? Shocking. Shouldn't have even been DAHA's decision to make.

As for everything else, I did not know MN Hockey had no rules against it. That's good to know. So how would one of the Catholic school systems go about forming an association? First step would probably be getting permission from the District, right? Or just form the association and say "here we are!"?

DAHA is the Hockey Association overseeing all of Duluth. There is no such thing as a "Public School" Association as Associations are not affiliated with any school. They typically use the same boundaries but as I'm sure you know, schools have nothing to do with running Hockey Associations.

First step would be to apply to MN Hockey, which Marshall did. Then MN Hockey will usually kick it down to the District to decide. In this case, the District left it up to DAHA. DAHA originally voted yes. Then at the next meeting they chose to re-vote and voted it down.

Any kid who attends Marshall can choose to either play where they live, or with a DAHA team. So it's not like they don't have anywhere to play.

SCBlueLiner wrote:As for everything else, I did not know MN Hockey had no rules against it. That's good to know. So how would one of the Catholic school systems go about forming an association? First step would probably be getting permission from the District, right? Or just form the association and say "here we are!"?

Private school hockey associations already exist. They are not sanctioned by Minnesota Hockey.

What you're talking about is setting up a Minnesota Hockey sanctioned association with overlapping geographic territories. This is in direct conflict with the community based mission, which is why any teams that want to be sanctioned by Minnesota Hockey need to have permission from their community based association. These programs exist too (see Shattuck and Gentry), but they generally play schedules consisting of teams outside of Minnesota Hockey. Players cannot participate on more than one Minnesota Hockey sanctioned team.

Minnesota Hockey cannot stop players from participating on non-sanctioned teams. This was the result of the Minnesota Made lawsuit. So, if the private feeder schools want to set up a league to play each other, they are free to do so, and that's exactly what the CAA has done. Most of the kids on those teams ALSO play for their local association, which is perfectly within the rules in addition to supporting the community model.

Yes, I am talking about setting up a MN Hockey sanctioned team with overlapping geographic boundaries. The qualifier for a player to play for that team would be that they would need to be a student in a feeder school to that private high school. Play where you live OR PLAY WHERE YOU GO TO SCHOOL.

You are talking about how the youth associations are community based youth programs. I have provided evidence that the associations are tied directly to their community high school and are feeder programs to the local public high school. It's community based...for the public schools.

I am saying that H-M, BSM, Breck, Holy Family, Marshall, etc, any privates should be able to start their own Minnesota Hockey/USA Hockey association and run it just like Stillwater, or Edina, or Minnetonka, or Eden Prairie do. The kids that play for Hill-Murray Youth Hockey Association would have to be kids that go to a Catholic school in the H-M feeder system, for example.

Duluth Marshall wanted to do that. They were blocked by DAHA. My question is why does DAHA even have a say in it? They allow East and Denfeld teams, but block Marshall?

This is still a community based model. The kids play in a youth hockey association with the kids they go to school with. Right now that doesn't happen for kids that go to a private grade school/HS.

SCBlueLiner wrote:I am saying that H-M, BSM, Breck, Holy Family, Marshall, etc, any privates should be able to start their own Minnesota Hockey/USA Hockey association and run it just like Stillwater, or Edina, or Minnetonka, or Eden Prairie do. The kids that play for Hill-Murray Youth Hockey Association would have to be kids that go to a Catholic school in the H-M feeder system, for example.

The problem is, there is no such thing as a feeder system for two reasons:

1) Which schools would be HM feeders? Which schools would be TG feeders? How about HF feeders, CDH feeders, or BSM feeders? There's no direct correlation between primary private schools and secondary private schools. Those kids can and do go all over the place between primary school and high school.

2) The reason there is no dedicated feeder for each private school is because private schools do not have a designated geography. Public high schools do. The designated geography is very, very important to community based hockey.

SCBlueLiner wrote:The kids play in a youth hockey association with the kids they go to school with. Right now that doesn't happen for kids that go to a private grade school/HS.

I just gave you a specific example of a league of private school hockey teams, so it does happen. You seem to suggest that this isn't good enough, and that those same teams should be allowed to sponsor Minnesota Hockey sanctioned teams without a local affiliate agreement. I would suggest that, even if I agreed with that idea in principle, it'd be difficult to pull off.

Even the largest private primary schools (like Blake) have about 180 kids per grade. Even assuming an aggressive participation rate of 7%, you're looking at maybe two boys teams and maybe one girls team per level. To be sure, there are youth associations that small in the state, but they're more often part of a co-op. And that's Blake. Most private schools are a fraction of the size.

An average sized association will have multiple primary school feeders, not just one. This kind of blows your whole argument of "playing with your classmates" out of the water. My kid was the only one from his public middle school on his roster of 13 kids. However, there were three players from the same private school on his team.

Of course, schools that cater to athletes like Gentry and Shattuck have much higher participation rates, but that's because kids attend those schools specifically for the draw of high end athletics. More of this is what you're encouraging. Those programs can even do cuts, which leads me to my next point.

Sanctioned associations can't discriminate. Outside of conduct violations, associations must take kids whether they are local, open enrolled, private, or home schooled. A private school association would be able to discriminate against any kid who doesn't attend that school, and could possibly even do cuts of their own students. Where would those kids go? You guessed it, the public association.

What you are arguing for is basically a path to the New England based system... club hockey in the guise of school based hockey. The best players who can also afford private school get the best hockey experience. The players who can't afford private school, be they good or bad, play association hockey.

You're arguing for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Private school kids can and do play with their classmates... for the association. You're basically arguing on the behalf of a branding issue. You don't want the private school kids to have to wear a public school brand. Personally, I think that's a silly reason to blow up the community based model.

I'm not blowing up the community based model. But I am saying that communities exist that aren't on your map of boundaries for youth hockey associations. There is an entire Catholic grade school community that exists.

All I am saying is that the parochial school system could come up with a model where the kids in their school system all play on the same team.

Maybe there are 4 total teams in the Metro based on where you go to school. If I go to a parochial school in the West Metro I am on the West Metro Catholic School team (probably the H-M team given the location). Oh, and no cuts allowed. You have a kid that goes to one of your designated grade schools he's yours.

My overall point is don't sit here and tell me the MN Youth association model is somehow separate from the High Schools they serve. Look at all the rules I pointed out about how these youth associations are set up to be direct feeders to their high school in their community and the involvement of the high school coaches in the youth system.

Then I would argue this: Either the public school kids must be allowed to participate in their regional parochial association, or parochial kids are prohibited from playing in the community association. Without that stipulation, you're creating a two tier system by default.

I tend to agree with The Exiled One on this one. I think you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist.

If youth associations are truly feeder programs for public high schools......as a general rule most of them don't tend to work out that way or as well as you'd expect. For example, look at the huge numbers of youth players that have been skating in the Minnetonka and Wayzata for years and their relatively limited levels of success respectively at the high school level. I guess if that's the case.....I'd ask the question.....which high schools would you say are out there where you can see tremendous benefits from the feeder program? At least at the level you'd expect to? Possibly Edina......but who else? And even they have runs where they don't end up being as strong at the high school level as you'd think they would because of talent outflows. And please don't say Lakeville North.

On the flip side.......if you feel the private schools are at a disadvantage and they need to have the playing field leveled.........we'll have to agree to disagree.

The Exiled One wrote:Then I would argue this: Either the public school kids must be allowed to participate in their regional parochial association, or parochial kids are prohibited from playing in the community association. Without that stipulation, you're creating a two tier system by default.

I would agree with what you say there.

Yeah, I probably am searching for an answer without there really being a problem. What set me off is the comment about "no school based teams" and "probably not far from a H-M Pee Wee and Bantam team" along with the general shots taken at private schools on this site over the years. Simple comments like, "Stillwater has a good group of Bantams." "Yeah, but I wonder how many they will lose to H-M." You see, it's statements like that that imply the public school has rights to those youth players and when they end up going to a private it is a "loss". So my response to that is give the privates the opportunity to have their own youth hockey programs and have their own feeder program.

I say all that and, like I said, I'm not even a private school guy.