2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

There are a number of districts that limit out of district players here in the Midwest. I know Michigan only allows 3 including the non-US citizens at 2. I believe the Mid-American has a restriction as well, but I can't quote it.

For those arguing that Assebet is any less involved in recruiting than SSM, NSA, or NAHA is a joke. Carl is a master at recruiting players, matching them with a Prep school, and then placing them on one of his teams. The Polar Bears are very similar. The only "club" teams at Nationals are generally from the Midwest, look at the rosters for Mission, Little Caesars, etc... they have 80% of their players from within their state.

But Assabet’s equally as good at “recruiting” 12 and 14 year olds and putting competitive teams together for that age group too. So I wouldn’t consider this alleged matching of prep schools to be responsible for Assabet’s success.

And I'm pretty sure Carl Grey does not have any pull in any admissions at any boarding school. He might know hockey coaches at these schools and suggest they recruit these players, but it’s the prep coaches who do any type of actual recruiting. And if he does do this, I’m not sure that there’s been more than a handful of players over the past five or ten years whose idea to go to a boarding school started from or can be credited to Carl Grey.

Assabet has always been competitive for every age group because they literally monopolize on almost all talent coming out of New England, whether these players go to boarding school or not. And their u19 and u16 teams get to reap the additional benefits of basically being located in the Silicon Valley of boarding schools. This isn’t the workings of Carl Grey secretly getting kids into prep schools, it’s just a very good location to have a club team.

 

[8uupw/mystick]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Stop calling Assabet a CLUB TEAM. They are far from a club-team.

CYA, Colorado, Little Ceasars, Mission are club teams.

Assabet is a All-Star team from Mass. They play together enough to qualify for Nationals and thats it. Then spend majority of the calender hockey year playing with there Prep School team. Then they select the team from all the players playing in prep league to play for Assabet at Nationals.

Here to sum it up, NOT A SINGLE PLAYER ONLY PLAYS FOR ASSABET.
ALL THE PLAYERS HAVE OTHER TEAMS TO PLAY FOR.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Assabet is a All-Star team from Mass.

That's basically the definition of a club team.

 

[vid]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Stop calling Assabet a CLUB TEAM. They are far from a club-team.

CYA, Colorado, Little Ceasars, Mission are club teams.

Assabet is a All-Star team from Mass. They play together enough to qualify for Nationals and thats it. Then spend majority of the calender hockey year playing with there Prep School team. Then they select the team from all the players playing in prep league to play for Assabet at Nationals.

Here to sum it up, NOT A SINGLE PLAYER ONLY PLAYS FOR ASSABET.
ALL THE PLAYERS HAVE OTHER TEAMS TO PLAY FOR.

All these teams are All-Star teams! It's fun. They enjoy it. They are all competitive and they all want to play competitive college hockey. It is great!

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You are chasing people away from your opniion with your I know it all attitude. By the way you may be a snooty prepy, it would appear so by your posts but most kids I have met from preps are just normal kids regaurdless of Mom or Dads income. I have no ties to NAHA but I believe they should be able to enter a team for Nationals. Your kidding yourself if you think most of these teams are built with local based talent most will take kids from anywhere as long as they play at a high level. Some "Culb teams " do more recruiting then college teams do.

I'm sorry my sarcasm comes off as being snooty. One joke about boarding schools and I have a lynch mob after me. I edited my defense post to all those who I offended, no more jokes.

But still my argument is not that all families can't afford prep schools so it’s not fair. It’s that prep schools provide so much more than just athletics. I don’t even think that they're more competitive in hockey, it’s that they’re not remotely close to the same thing as a club program. If you put both preps and club teams in the same division, then you’re excluding all New England boarding schools because all their best players play for Assabet or some other local club team even if they’re actually from the great lakes or where ever.

No one here wants to drown the talent at Nationals. It just doesn’t seem that difficult or complex for someone to start a club team near Shattuck or NAHA and put enough local kids on your team to meet whatever residential requirements there are. Worst-case scenario is you might have to replace a couple of your average players with slightly weaker players, best-case scenario you can replace some of your weaker players with stronger players willing to drive to practices but weren’t willing to go to a boarding school or weren’t able to go because of academics or financials. This doesn’t seem like it would be too difficult or be asking too much if all the top players at Shattuck and NAHA want to play on a youth hockey team and be able to go to nationals as well.

If you have club teams and public schools in the same league and then throw boarding schools into the mix, then now you have a league full of apples, oranges, and origami pigeons. Not that ones better than the others, it’s that they just don’t go. Boarding schools are not a youth hockey program.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I believe those rules allow for up to two "imports" on a national bound team. Not sure on the details of it, but I know of several teams that were at Nationals last year with Canadians on it that played in our region in prior years. All those players were attending a "Prep" school in the US.

Up here we also have a two import rule for such things as provincials (our version of states). At the minor (U21 and younger) levels you are only an import for one year. In your second year you are not considered an import.

Huh? That may be a rule in your association, but each one has there own rule....some allow no imports, some would allow 100% imports, some you are an import forever if you are a non-resident, some grandfather based on past participation. There are no provincial import rules at all to be able to compete for a provincial title.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Huh? That may be a rule in your association, but each one has there own rule....some allow no imports, some would allow 100% imports, some you are an import forever if you are a non-resident, some grandfather based on past participation. There are no provincial import rules at all to be able to compete for a provincial title.

You are incorrect. This is not an association, but an OWHA rule. To be able to participate in the OWHA championship you can have no more than two imports from outside the province in a given year. That is the very reason OHA is not able to participate in the Provincials. Once a player has played for a full season with an OWHA registered team, they are no longer considered an import.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

If you want to talk about rules being set up to make Olympic hockey development better, look at the Canadian rules. The residency and competiton rules are unified on a national level. You don't have kids left in no-mans-land because one jurisdiction will recognize your team and the other won't.

.

That's not totally true....each provincial body sets the parameters and runs the process associated with selecting the provincial team it sends to Nationals. They don't all operate the same way. For example, in Ontario, the OWHA does not allow girls who play boys hockey, or girls who go to school in the US to participate in its team selection process. You're out of luck. However, many girls who happen to live in other provinces and play boys or US Prep or club hockey, are still selected to their regional teams.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You are incorrect. This is not an association, but an OWHA rule. To be able to participate in the OWHA championship you can have no more than two imports from outside the province in a given year. That is the very reason OHA is not able to participate in the Provincials. Once a player has played for a full season with an OWHA registered team, they are no longer considered an import.

Sorry, I didn't think you were talking about out of province....I was talking municipal residency rules.

However, Missy Jrs had 3 players from out of province newly registered this year until one left mid-season.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

That's not totally true....each provincial body sets the parameters and runs the process associated with selecting the provincial team it sends to Nationals. They don't all operate the same way. For example, in Ontario, the OWHA does not allow girls who play boys hockey, or girls who go to school in the US to participate in its team selection process. You're out of luck. However, many girls who happen to live in other provinces and play boys or US Prep or club hockey, are still selected to their regional teams.

Point taken about these rules regarding "who you play for". I was talking about residency restrictions and what teams a player is allowed to play for. Canada has consistent residency requirements for team composition from province to province. Canada has much greater hockey density for females than the US which makes this work.

On the US side, we have areas of great density and areas where you have to draw girls from hundreds of miles around just to get 15 girls in an age bracket who can play at a level where they can score an occasional goal against teams from hockey dense areas.

Districts have to be flexible in residency requirements to allow these girls to form teams and participate. That means the best players from Florida and North Carolina - and there are a few who have gone onto play D1 hockey - go to NE preps and play for Assabet or Polar Bears or go to NAHA. Without flexible residency requirements, about 20% of all female players would not be able to play competitive hockey within their home district.

In fact, I'm having a hard time finding a girl the SE District south of the DC area who has gone onto play D1 or D3 hockey without leaving the region to play on a team - either prep, club, or NAHA/SSM/Culver/Gilmour.

My issue here with Hcky85 is that she is fixated on the school and team integration issue while throwing 1/5 of the players in the US under the bus with regards to allowing them to compete at the highest level because they all can't go to prep schools within easy drive of one of the major clubs. When my daughter could get transportation to play club from her school, she did and found places to play. One year that required at least 5 hours of driving every Saturday night - Sunday afternoon. She never blamed a loss on bus legs, though.

Minus the situation in Vermont, every district and affiliate I can think of allows outsiders to play on their teams. Vermont's issue really is a few club coaches who use their 1-vote-per-association clout to effectively ban the only team in the state that makes use of outside players. It is entirely political. Even now that they have a 2nd tier of National competition made especially for teams like those that choose to keep NAHA out, they won't yield to the idea that a team that spends the bulk of the year in their state can't represent them (and do a great job at that).

The other thing I think you Canadians and I will agree on is that the rules governing participation are about developing the players, the game, and the competitive environment as a whole in Canada. USA Hockey OTOH, at a National Level is about that, but so much of the participatory rules beyond that (district and afiiliate level) is not done for the betterment of the players, game, and competitive environment. In fact, the rules are made to stifle changes to the status quo where new challengers are kept out by rule.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I'm sorry my sarcasm comes off as being snooty. One joke about boarding schools and I have a lynch mob after me. I edited my defense post to all those who I offended, no more jokes.

But still my argument is not that all families can't afford prep schools so it’s not fair. It’s that prep schools provide so much more than just athletics. I don’t even think that they're more competitive in hockey, it’s that they’re not remotely close to the same thing as a club program. If you put both preps and club teams in the same division, then you’re excluding all New England boarding schools because all their best players play for Assabet or some other local club team even if they’re actually from the great lakes or where ever.

No one here wants to drown the talent at Nationals. It just doesn’t seem that difficult or complex for someone to start a club team near Shattuck or NAHA and put enough local kids on your team to meet whatever residential requirements there are. Worst-case scenario is you might have to replace a couple of your average players with slightly weaker players, best-case scenario you can replace some of your weaker players with stronger players willing to drive to practices but weren’t willing to go to a boarding school or weren’t able to go because of academics or financials. This doesn’t seem like it would be too difficult or be asking too much if all the top players at Shattuck and NAHA want to play on a youth hockey team and be able to go to nationals as well.
If you have club teams and public schools in the same league and then throw boarding schools into the mix, then now you have a league full of apples, oranges, and origami pigeons. Not that ones better than the others, it’s that they just don’t go. Boarding schools are not a youth hockey program.

You clearly know nothing about being involved in the startup of a new hockey organization. I've been through it twice. The only way a new club gets any traction in an area without a surplus of talent to keep it preptuating is to have a solid initial recruiting class, a draw (some combination of facility, specialized training, or educational opportunity) that will be a natural magnet for players on a continuing basis.

In MN, the rules only allow participation on either a HS team OR a club team which is why the Thoroughbreds have so many out of state players (the natives are typically from hockey-poor towns where the benefits of club hockey over local HS outweigh the travel requirements). SSM, with the Thoroughbreds now up and running, have more OOS players than ever. Shattuck hasn't suffered for it though, as there are plenty of fish out there who want to go to SSM.

In VT, they have the Vermont Selects which by and large a second-tier club because the top talent from the region goes away to prep school and many play with the club teams near their prep schools. They've been this way for ever. It would be nice to see more locals stay home and play for Bill Driscoll, but this takes time.

It is sure getting tiring watching you argue agains the large population of experience hockey people around here, most of which have no affiliation with NAHA, but appreciate the idea that the best teams should allowed to play each (not required to as you continue to argue about preps and HS and whatnot) other in an open competition for the 19U National championship.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

The other thing I think you Canadians and I will agree on is that the rules governing participation are about developing the players, the game, and the competitive environment as a whole in Canada. USA Hockey OTOH, at a National Level is about that, but so much of the participatory rules beyond that (district and afiiliate level) is not done for the betterment of the players, game, and competitive environment. In fact, the rules are made to stifle changes to the status quo where new challengers are kept out by rule.

I don't know...I think this might be somewhat of a "grasser is greener" situation in part. The more details you know about anything, the more you tend to also see the flaws too. I think it's safe to say there is always room for improvement in any endeavor.

I can assure you that there are also lots of cases in Canada where decisions are made for questionable reasons rather than "the betterment or development of the game and its players", as well as rules being put in place to protect the status quo and the power brokers.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I'm sorry my sarcasm comes off as being snooty. One joke about boarding schools and I have a lynch mob after me.

That's an easy problem to fix. Next time, use red type. Experienced posters will then know you are only trying to be sarcastic, like this:

Say, don't you usually have to wear funny looking coloured jackets at boarding schools?

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I don't know...I think this might be somewhat of a "grasser is greener" situation in part. The more details you know about anything, the more you tend to also see the flaws too. I think it's safe to say there is always room for improvement in any endeavor.

I can assure you that there are also lots of cases in Canada where decisions are made for questionable reasons rather than "the betterment or development of the game and its players", as well as rules being put in place to protect the status quo and the power brokers.

I can assure you that the majority of affiliate and district rules limiting outside participation are about protecting the status quo and power brokers. Grandaddyscout pointed out a rule in Mid-Am limiting out of district participation to 3 players. That rule was originated to be aimed directly at a team my daughter played for (and possibly partly because of her partipation - she never gave up a goal to the other team at her age level in the district in 2 years) in the past that put the final stake in the heart of the organization. For matters of logistics, this out of district team was the closest team to us and the other out-of-district players. Too bad, because that team actually won games against teams that went to Nationals and didn't necessarily embarrass itself like the other teams at that age bracket.

Many of the girls from that organization went onto prep hockey, but unfortunately many gave up the game after they busted up the organization. Definitely not good for the players nor the game, but it made some other parents pretty happy.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

That rule was originated to be aimed directly at a team my daughter played for (and possibly partly because of her partipation - she never gave up a goal to the other team at her age level in the district in 2 years) in the past that put the final stake in the heart of the organization.

Many of the girls from that organization went onto prep hockey, but unfortunately many gave up the game after they busted up the organization. Definitely not good for the players nor the game, but it made some other parents pretty happy.

Sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, self-interested and envious people with their own agendas are not limited by geography. In Ontario, there are actually 4 different governing bodies for boys hockey (as well as the OWHA for girls) under the OHF, and none of them get along. God help you if you have a boy playing and happen to live in an area bordering one of these jurisdictions---if you want to get permission to play for an organization which is in another one a few minutes away, because that might actually mean less travel to games, tough luck. Some people have spent fortunes on lawsuits, moved residences, or paid ludicrous "transfer fees" ie payoffs, to get permission just to be allowed to sign elsewhere. And some have just quit the sport or went back to HS hockey instead, because they were denied.

Believe me, there are also a lot of girls hockey associations that lose sleep trying to promote amendments to league rules with the primary intent of weakening teams like the Aeros, NCCPs (top Ottawa club, now gone) and Stoney Creeks of the world. In the Ottawa area, some competing organizations set all sorts of rules punishing girls who wanted to go try out for NCCP and making it difficult for them to return to play once they did.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

But Assabet’s equally as good at “recruiting” 12 and 14 year olds and putting competitive teams together for that age group too. So I wouldn’t consider this alleged matching of prep schools to be responsible for Assabet’s success.

And I'm pretty sure Carl Grey does not have any pull in any admissions at any boarding school. He might know hockey coaches at these schools and suggest they recruit these players, but it’s the prep coaches who do any type of actual recruiting. And if he does do this, I’m not sure that there’s been more than a handful of players over the past five or ten years whose idea to go to a boarding school started from or can be credited to Carl Grey.

Assabet has always been competitive for every age group because they literally monopolize on almost all talent coming out of New England, whether these players go to boarding school or not. And their u19 and u16 teams get to reap the additional benefits of basically being located in the Silicon Valley of boarding schools. This isn’t the workings of Carl Grey secretly getting kids into prep schools, it’s just a very good location to have a club team.

ROFLMAO You clearly don't know how much coach referrals have to do with prep recruiting. All coaches know who Carl is. If Carl says Suzy is a finisher to a prep coach, the coach doesn't need to spend hours watching.

Carl doesn't have to do much though as pretty much everyone knows who in MA is playing on which team at Assabet in a given year.

And trust me, the test scores and grade requirements are much lower for a recruited (from Assabet or a few other places as well) player than for applicants in general.

Yes, Carl has a nice location, but there are plenty of other clubs in the region with plenty of access to enough talent. He has a well-oiled machine.

I'm sure Hux or a few others see the effects of Carl and others of his stature on Prep recruiting directly. I believe he's shared at least one such story here (although not naming the club) about how the say-so for a player has gotten a kid not necessarily shopping prep in the door over a weekend.

So while you may have gone to a prep school and attend an Ivy, you haven't necessarily been exposed to the stuff that goes on behind closed doors that a few parents and insiders have had the exposure to.

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Stop calling Assabet a CLUB TEAM. They are far from a club-team.

CYA, Colorado, Little Ceasars, Mission are club teams.

Assabet is a All-Star team from Mass. They play together enough to qualify for Nationals and thats it. Then spend majority of the calender hockey year playing with there Prep School team. Then they select the team from all the players playing in prep league to play for Assabet at Nationals.

Here to sum it up, NOT A SINGLE PLAYER ONLY PLAYS FOR ASSABET.
ALL THE PLAYERS HAVE OTHER TEAMS TO PLAY FOR.

Your ignorance of how Assabet Valley works is staggering. They play a league schedule that begins in September and runs through the Polar Bear. Assabet breaks for the Month of January and returns in February to practice and play some games until the State tournament. You said "they play together enough to qualify for Nationals and that's it" and that's Completely false! They played 4 games in the Assabet tournament, 4 In the Rhode Island tourament, 7 in the Polar Bear and we haven't even talked about their own league. Maybe you don't undertand that a team need only play 10 games to qualify for Nationals, Assabet played a few more than that. You also said that they spend the majority of the calendar hockey year playing in a prep league. Again you are clearly wrong or if I want to give you the benefit of the doubt (which I don't) you are misinformed. The New England Prep Schools usually start the week before Thanksgiving for tryouts and practices with the games starting in early December. The leagues take 2 weeks off at Christmas and it all ends with the "New England's in the first week of March.
Assabet Valley meets once a week on Sundays for a morning practice and an afternoon game because of their prep school commitments. This year's Assabet 19 team has 2 out of district players.

But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good rant!

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

They played 4 games in the Assabet tournament, 4 In the Rhode Island tourament, 7 in the Polar Bear and we haven't even talked about their own league.

You forgot to mention participation in the NAHA Labor Day tournament.

But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good rant!

There's been a lot of this going around the past few weeks! Why should this thread be exempt?

But anyway....Other teams from New England have the very same phenomenon, including but not limited to the Charles River, Mass. Spitfires, East Coast Wizards, Connecticut Stars, Polar Bears, Middlesex Islanders, and Woonsocket RI. With the exception perhaps of that last entry, each of the others have also sent at least one team to Nationals at some age group during the past 5 years. Maybe not yet at U19, but some of them are getting close!

Each of these clubs is exactly that, a "club", with a similar program style, and with a similar number of players who participate with their high school teams (not all of them prep school teams, including at Assabet). It's not an Assabet phenomenon, it's a New England phenomenon. Assabet has simply managed to be dominant in Massachusetts, while the Polar Bears and Connecticut Stars have been more dominant for the New England District.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You forgot to mention participation in the NAHA Labor Day tournament.


There's been a lot of this going around the past few weeks! Why should this thread be exempt?

But anyway....Other teams from New England have the very same phenomenon, including but not limited to the Charles River, Mass. Spitfires, East Coast Wizards, Connecticut Stars, Polar Bears, Middlesex Islanders, and Woonsocket RI. With the exception perhaps of that last entry, each of the others have also sent at least one team to Nationals at some age group during the past 5 years. Maybe not yet at U19, but some of them are getting close!

Each of these clubs is exactly that, a "club", with a similar program style, and with a similar number of players who participate with their high school teams (not all of them prep school teams, including at Assabet). It's not an Assabet phenomenon, it's a New England phenomenon. Assabet has simply managed to be dominant in Massachusetts, while the Polar Bears and Connecticut Stars have been more dominant for the New England District.

Excellent posts. Both you and UCONN hit the nail on the head with facts.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Believe me, there are also a lot of girls hockey associations that lose sleep trying to promote amendments to league rules with the primary intent of weakening teams like the Aeros, NCCPs (top Ottawa club, now gone) and Stoney Creeks of the world. In the Ottawa area, some competing organizations set all sorts of rules punishing girls who wanted to go try out for NCCP and making it difficult for them to return to play once they did.

Another good (or is that bad) example of an umbrella organization getting in the way of "progress" and/or "doing the right thing" is the hard time the OWHA gave Stoney about sanctioning the various CAN-AM events.