What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
1) We'll never have a "competitive national prep school tournament" for several reasons. First, NE prep hockey is governed by NEPSAC which has no affiliation with USA Hockey and doesn't want it. NEPSAC also governs all other NE prep sports, so why would they want to slice off hockey? Second, Prep hockey is primarily a product of New England, with a smattering of other schools scattered out through the mid-atlantic, and midwest. The teams from other areas for the most part don't have an organizing structure beyond a couple of leagues. Most organize under USA Hockey for purposes of being allowed to play against other USA Hockey club teams so they have a supply of teams to play against. To segregate them from playing against local club teams during the season would be to effectively shut them down, as the travel for these schools across the US to play each other would be ridiculous. And if they are going to play against club teams in the regular season, why do we insist that they cannot play against them in the National Championship?
Click to expand...

I’m not sure why a competitive national prep school tournament can’t exist. I’m not saying put Culver, Shattuck, Gunnery, NAHA or NSA in the same league as NEPSAC, I’m not even saying put all those school in the same league themselves. But they should all be in the same division.

Have these schools play whatever club teams or high schools they’d like during the season, but at the end of the year they’re still a school, so they should compete for a championship with other schools not youth teams.

Split it up into regions and every league can send whatever prep team wins it all. And if you’re the only prep school in the region, well then you have an easy road to nationals.

I think if you ask any player on a prep team they’d like the option to go to nationals with their school team and their club team. And it doesn’t seem like it would be that impossible to set up.

... But then we might be doing something that players might actually want, so we should just leave the pickering to parents and coaches who want the best bragging rights.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

hcky85 said:
I’m not sure why a competitive national prep school tournament can’t exist. I’m not saying put Culver, Shattuck, Gunnery, NAHA or NSA in the same league as NEPSAC, I’m not even saying put all those school in the same league themselves. But they should all be in the same division.

Have these schools play whatever club teams or high schools they’d like during the season, but at the end of the year they’re still a school, so they should compete for a championship with other schools not youth teams.

Split it up into regions and every league can send whatever prep team wins it all. And if you’re the only prep school in the region, well then you have an easy road to nationals.

I think if you ask any player on a prep team they’d like the option to go to nationals with their school team and their club team. And it doesn’t seem like it would be that impossible to set up.

... But then we might be doing something that players might actually want, so we should just leave the pickering to parents and coaches who want the best bragging rights.
Click to expand...

The rules are there for all teams to abide by. I for one am in favor of Shattack, NSA, NAHA and any other "program" or "school" that chooses to compete at the National level and can do so. If you start a high school league it will be weaker than the National level anyway. Why would Shattuck and NAHA and ect. want to compete in that tournament. The teams that can't compete in the "National Level" should go tier II.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

videohockey said:
G, why bother? Not even 25 and he/she believes they have the USAH/NAHA issue (and the problems of youth hockey and the world, as well I'm sure) solved. You are not going to convince them otherwise.
Click to expand...

Not really, clearly there's to many regional biases for a universal opinion about whether schools like shattuck or NAHA should compete in youth nationals to exist.

But there should be a universal opinion about what a youth program is.

I'm for competition but not if you need to destroy the basic concepts that underline youth sports.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

hcky85 said:
I think if you ask any player on a prep team they’d like the option to go to nationals with their school team and their club team. And it doesn’t seem like it would be that impossible to set up.

... But then we might be doing something that players might actually want, so we should just leave the pickering to parents and coaches who want the best bragging rights.
Click to expand...

I don't know who the heck you are talking to, but there isn't a girl I nor my daughter knows who has ever discussed the concept of a nationals for prep school hockey. They know that NE prep schools are different than NAHA and NSA and Shattuck which often play club hockey against their club teams. They know their club teams are more selective and would think it a joke for their prep team to take on SSM or NAHA for a National "prep" championship.

One other FACT that you seem to ignore here. There are no National High School Championship tournaments in any sport I know of, either public, private, or prep.

You keep bringing up ideas that cannot happen and nobody else around her have any desire to have. Please stop beating your dead horse.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

hcky85 said:
I’m not sure why a competitive national prep school tournament can’t exist. I’m not saying put Culver, Shattuck, Gunnery, NAHA or NSA in the same league as NEPSAC, I’m not even saying put all those school in the same league themselves. But they should all be in the same division.

Have these schools play whatever club teams or high schools they’d like during the season, but at the end of the year they’re still a school, so they should compete for a championship with other schools not youth teams.

Split it up into regions and every league can send whatever prep team wins it all. And if you’re the only prep school in the region, well then you have an easy road to nationals.

I think if you ask any player on a prep team they’d like the option to go to nationals with their school team and their club team. And it doesn’t seem like it would be that impossible to set up.

... But then we might be doing something that players might actually want, so we should just leave the pickering to parents and coaches who want the best bragging rights.
Click to expand...

Ok, so originally you stated that it was not fair for a "Prep School" type team to play with the "Youth" teams, correct? Now you are suggesting that girls, who can afford to play both prep and club, should be able to participate in two "National" tournaments. Hmmm, now who is thinking about those more fortunate and having an advantage?

You also stated that the girls from NAHA should start a club team close by....really, how is that possible? If the state of VT has an out of residence rule, they are not going to allow a "club" to compete with players from NAHA, any more than they will allow NAHA to compete.

Really, your argument has jumped all over in this thread. I admire your determination to find solutions, but you might seriously want to learn more about how this whole process has been working and what those before you have done to try and fix some of the issues being discussed.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
3) Most importantly - The players at the top club level don't care who organizes the team whether it is school, the local rink, the local church, or the a multi-national corportation. The top players and teams want to play each other for a national championship against ANY challenger. If they win a "National Championship", they don't want it to have an asterisk next to it saying "excludes teams formed by schools, churches, and multinational corporations (not that any exist today, but your concept would exclude them as well). Feel free to divide the lower levels of hockey teams any way you like, but an OPEN division Championship deservers to be OPEN to ALL.
Click to expand...

Clearly not, because you've already said that a new youth program could be started right next to NAHA and it wouldn't get a single player.

And I don't think there needs to be an asterisk next to "Youth National Championship" saying "excludes teams that are not youth hockey teams".
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
How far can you walk with a goalie bag and 2 sticks and be ready to play?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing probably not that far so I would choose a boarding school that's good enough to fulfil my hockey needs or if I needed to play youth hockey too, then I'd choose a school close to a youth program so my shoulders didn't hurt to much.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

hcky85 said:
Not really, clearly there's to much regional biases for a universal opinion about whether schools like shattuck or NAHA should compete in youth nationals to exist.

But there should be a universal opinion about what a youth program is.

I'm for competition but not if you need to destroy the basic concepts that underline youth sports.
Click to expand...

Videohockey (who you just replied to) lives in a different district from spike, UConnfan, IceIsNice, and myself. I think we all agree that NAHA would be a welcome addition to Nationals.

And I think the rest of us agree that an "girls" (youth female) category doesn't restrict anything but age and gender. Prep hockey restricts to prep, HS hockey restricts to HS. But "girls" from a Venn diagram perspective can include all of HS and Prep if it wants (it is a superset whereas HS and Prep are subsets of "girls").

Really, your opinion is only yours and we've heard it plenty enough.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
Videohockey (who you just replied to) lives in a different district from spike, UConnfan, IceIsNice, and myself. I think we all agree that NAHA would be a welcome addition to Nationals.

And I think the rest of us agree that an "girls" (youth female) category doesn't restrict anything but age and gender. Prep hockey restricts to prep, HS hockey restricts to HS. But "girls" from a Venn diagram perspective can include all of HS and Prep if it wants (it is a superset whereas HS and Prep are subsets of "girls").

Really, your opinion is only yours and we've heard it plenty enough.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

hcky85 said:
I'm guessing probably not that far so I would choose a boarding school that's good enough to fulfil my hockey needs or if I needed to play youth hockey too, then I'd choose a school close to a youth program so my shoulders didn't hurt to much.
Click to expand...

So that limits us to schools where the hockey coach runs a club program at the rink with his students on the team. Hey, that sounds like NAHA. :eek:
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Based on the demonstrated passion and voluminous debate exhibited by Notfromaroundhere and Hcky85, I still say they simply have to be husband and wife!

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
Videohockey (who you just replied to) lives in a different district from spike, UConnfan, IceIsNice, and myself. I think we all agree that NAHA would be a welcome addition to Nationals.

And I think the rest of us agree that an "girls" (youth female) category doesn't restrict anything but age and gender. Prep hockey restricts to prep, HS hockey restricts to HS. But "girls" from a Venn diagram perspective can include all of HS and Prep if it wants (it is a superset whereas HS and Prep are subsets of "girls").

Really, your opinion is only yours and we've heard it plenty enough.
Click to expand...

Hey, keep me out of this! I never intended to opine on the definition of a club team. My only issue is that I think USA Hockey needs to create conformity throughout the country. If they want SSM in, then require Vermont to change their rule to let NAHA in. Or exclude all of them. I really don't care, except that I thought the creation of Tier I for girls should mean the same thing as Tier I for boys, all comers can play. Tier I Boys U18 includes Shattuck and Gilmour, so why shouldn't Tier I girls? Teams that have a problem with that should play Tier II.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Relax and enjoy your daughter(s) time in hockey, it goes by fast.

Relax..As an earlier post said, "the girls want to play against the best; regardless of where and who they play for."

Relax...and remember, that by the list on another post, 80% of the girls going D1 next year have never heard of the USA Hockey Nationals. Just saying...

Relax
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

This year USA Hockey is sponsoring a National High School tournament. :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: Right now it is only for boys USA Hockey registered HS teams that don't board. However they are in the planning processes of having a Prep (ie boarding school) tournament for next season and I think girls is somewhere on the horizon.

Don't know where they'll hold it (this year it is in Chicago 4/7 -> 4/11) in the future, but it's coming.

In reading the literature it looks like they're running it like a 19U youth tournament, rather than a HS tournament, but if all USAH knows is how to run youth tournaments, then I guess that's what they do.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

spike said:
Hey, keep me out of this! I never intended to opine on the definition of a club team. My only issue is that I think USA Hockey needs to create conformity throughout the country. If they want SSM in, then require Vermont to change their rule to let NAHA in. Or exclude all of them. I really don't care, except that I thought the creation of Tier I for girls should mean the same thing as Tier I for boys, all comers can play. Tier I Boys U18 includes Shattuck and Gilmour, so why shouldn't Tier I girls? Teams that have a problem with that should play Tier II.
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to misrepresent your opinion, but from what you've posted we value consistency in rules AND letting the best play at the top level (Tier 1) Nationals and don't look at this whole thing through a "school can't compete with club" concept.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

joecct said:
This year USA Hockey is sponsoring a National High School tournament. :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: Right now it is only for boys USA Hockey registered HS teams that don't board. However they are in the planning processes of having a Prep (ie boarding school) tournament for next season and I think girls is somewhere on the horizon.

Don't know where they'll hold it (this year it is in Chicago 4/7 -> 4/11) in the future, but it's coming.

In reading the literature it looks like they're running it like a 19U youth tournament, rather than a HS tournament, but if all USAH knows is how to run youth tournaments, then I guess that's what they do.
Click to expand...

I noticed that the majority of the states represented are not from traditional hockey areas. Not an auspicious start. I'm guessing the year Minnesota shows up, the competition will be over. Can you say basketball scores over the teams from the southeast?

I'm starting to wonder if the various state HS sanctioning bodies (state athletic associations) are/will be having a fit as they have lost control over a school sponsored team. We'll see how this shakes out.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

OnMAA said:
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.
Click to expand...

Great point. How could I forget about such a great recent example!

Here's another one, where both girls and boys bodies got in the way. Several years ago, my daughter really wanted to participate in the prestigious Quebec Peewee tournament. Unfortunately the GTHL which she had been a part of for years (boys governing body in the GTA) has a boycott on against this tourney for all its teams. :mad: (sigh) She was invited to participate on a nearby girls team for the upcoming season, which looked to be a super team and was being invited to attend the Quebec Peewee tournament as the first girls team ever to be allowed in. So on that basis she decided to make the switch to girls that year. However, the OWHA later refused permission for them to attend, saying girls teams should not be allowed to play against boys teams because there are lots of competitive girls teams to play instead. :mad: :mad:

They went on to an undefeated season. Instead, the highlight became whooping Assabet in the final of the tourney the team went to instead of Quebec (as well as RR). Apparently the first losses for that Assabet team in years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top