2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

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.

No that would be the exact opposite of what I mean when I say a youth team that's not affiliated with an academy that provides room and board along with tuition.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You could let d1 teams go for the d3 national title and that would make d3 college hockey a lot more competitive. But no one wants that because they understand the advantages that d1 schools would have so they’re able to put the tournaments over all level of competition second to the actual fairness for d3 teams because it is their tournament. D3 rules are never changed so that they can cater to the demands of d1 teams, or even have d1 teams in mind. The fact that d1 teams have more talent is still completely irrelevant and rules are made to protect d3 teams with solely those teams in mind.

So I think rules for USA youth hockey concerning nationals should do exactly what Vermont’s doing. Protect the fairness for youth hockey teams because it’s their tournament, even if that compromises the overall level of talent.

You clearly do not understand the difference between D1 and D3 championships. D3 is open only to schools that meet the D3 requirements (registration with the NCAA under a certain set of standards). The championship commonly referred to D1 National Championship is actually the NCAA Championship (no division in the title). It is open to schools from ALL NCAA divisions as long as they meet the requirement of # of games against D1 opponents. St. Anselm and St. Michaels are both D2 schools that theoretically could compete for that tournament if they scheduled enough games agains D1 registered opponents and were ranked sufficiently high to get a bid.

As to what the VT affiliate is doing to exclude NAHA (beyond not applying the same rules to boys teams - another story told every year here), it excludes NAHA based upon the residency of its players, NOT THE FACT THAT THEY ATTEND THE SAME SCHOOL. If every player at NAHA were a resident of Vermont, they would be cleared to compete for Nationals. The VT affiliate rules make no mention of where a child attends school as a qualifying issue. No district excludes a team from Nationals based upon whether the team is school based or not.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

No that would be the exact opposite of what I mean when I say a youth team that's not affiliated with an academy that provides room and board along with tuition.

Hate to tell you this, but schools don't generally rent out their rink to club teams unless it is run by someone there on campus. They need all the prime time ice they can get for their own teams.

As I asked you before, if you think you can run a "club" program on a prep school campus independently of the school, go for it. Problem is that you don't understand how the business of youth hockey works but are more than willing to deny working business models the opportunity to improve the product.

 

[granddaddyscout]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I am confused, where is all this dominance by these "prep school teams" the last 4 champions at 16U were Assebet and prior to that Cal Selects and Syracuse. At 19U SSM has won 4 of the last 5, but the first 3 had more to do with the Lam sisters than them being a Prep School. Prior to that it was all club teams (admttedly SSM didn't field a team) Any team with the Lams would have had an excellent chance of winning and if I am not mistaken they are from ND where there are no real options for them. Mission won two years ago in a multi OT game, both club teams. Last year SSM won in a bit of an upset over Mission. The top teams this year seem to be Mission, LC, AV, and SSM. 3 Club 1 Prep, bottom line is SSM and NSA are able to field school based teams that also meet their USA Hockey district requirements.

Let it go buddy, letting NAHA in would be a good thing but it ain't going to happen!!!

 

[Hux]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Hate to tell you this, but schools don't generally rent out their rink to club teams unless it is run by someone there on campus. They need all the prime time ice they can get for their own teams.

As I asked you before, if you think you can run a "club" program on a prep school campus independently of the school, go for it. Problem is that you don't understand how the business of youth hockey works but are more than willing to deny working business models the opportunity to improve the product.

Actually, most of the Prep rinks around these parts rent their ice to local programs, including girls club teams and especially split season teams, since they don't use/need the ice during the Prep season.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Y

As to what the VT affiliate is doing to exclude NAHA (beyond not applying the same rules to boys teams - another story told every year here), it excludes NAHA based upon the residency of its players, NOT THE FACT THAT THEY ATTEND THE SAME SCHOOL. If every player at NAHA were a resident of Vermont, they would be cleared to compete for Nationals. The VT affiliate rules make no mention of where a child attends school as a qualifying issue. No district excludes a team from Nationals based upon whether the team is school based or not.

You do realize the issue of player's residency even exists because these players attend a boarding school. I've never said a high school or a catholic school or any other type of school shouldn't be able to register, I'm saying a BOARDING school should not be able to field a youth hockey team.

I understand this isn’t Little League baseball where every town has enough players to make their own team. So I don’t think there should be really any residency requirements for an individual player based on town, state, or number of miles, but I do think there should be very strict limit on the number of out of state players a single team is allowed to have.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

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.

The fact that right now their actually is a high school/ prep division at nationals makes it seem like some other people may have the same desire.

A national high school tournament for basketball was recently set up, both public and prep schools being included in the same one, by ESPN.

Then there’s also golf, wrestling, football, rugby, cheerleading, and tennis that all have some type of national high school tournament. And then softball, baseball, soccer, lacrosse, and volleyball all have high school tournaments that are invitation only based on national rankings. So although it’s the nations best high school/ prep school teams participating the tournaments still aren’t called nationals.

But all those sports seem to realize they don't need to go for a youth national title in order to play the nations most competitive schools, which is what they are.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I understand this isn’t Little League baseball where every town has enough players to make their own team. So I don’t think there should be really any residency requirements for an individual player based on town, state, or number of miles, but I do think there should be very strict limit on the number of out of state players a single team is allowed to have.

Why? it's Tier 1

 

[lschwarz60]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You do realize the issue of player's residency even exists because these players attend a boarding school. I've never said a high school or a catholic school or any other type of school shouldn't be able to register, I'm saying a BOARDING school should not be able to field a youth hockey team.

I understand this isn’t Little League baseball where every town has enough players to make their own team. So I don’t think there should be really any residency requirements for an individual player based on town, state, or number of miles, but I do think there should be very strict limit on the number of out of state players a single team is allowed to have.

Why hockey boarding schools? What do you think the difference between boarding schools and full time U19 programs are? Just because the kids are driven to the rink in a bus vs. mom, dad's or there own car they should be excluded.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Why hockey boarding schools? What do you think the difference between boarding schools and full time U19 programs are? Just because the kids are driven to the rink in a bus vs. mom, dad's or there own car they should be excluded.

Because one is restricted to picking the majority of their players from their state or region (unless someone is willing to drive 8 hours a day for practices and games), while the other basically has no regional or national restraints on the talent pool of players they get to pick from.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

In Canada, no actual teams--whether club, HS, or prep--have the opportunity to compete for the national U18championship. The competition is limited to teams put together by each region exclusively for the purpose of this tournament only, composed of the best players from that area (at least in theory) wherever they may happen to normally play.

This would be a way of eliminating all the controversy over which teams should be eligible. Would you view that as an alternative solution?

That’s basically the same set up for the national development camps. They pick a certain number of players from each region and put them on teams to practice and play against each other for a week. There’s no national title or even specific teams like new england or the mid west. But it’s all the best players from each region playing against each other.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You clearly do not understand the difference between D1 and D3 championships. D3 is open only to schools that meet the D3 requirements (registration with the NCAA under a certain set of standards). The championship commonly referred to D1 National Championship is actually the NCAA Championship (no division in the title). It is open to schools from ALL NCAA divisions as long as they meet the requirement of # of games against D1 opponents. St. Anselm and St. Michaels are both D2 schools that theoretically could compete for that tournament if they scheduled enough games agains D1 registered opponents and were ranked sufficiently high to get a bid.

I’m not sure if stating the converse nonimplication of what I really said has any relevance at all.

I said it’d be like if people wanted to let d1 schools play in the d3 tournament to make it more competitive. Not that a d3 or d2 team theoretically can’t play in the d1 tournament.

It’s that certain set of standards that you mention as defining d3 teams, that I’m saying is currently missing for youth teams if boarding schools are allowed to compete at nationals.

 

[John Frum]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You continue to miss the point.

Think of Tier 1 like D1. Think of Tier 2 like D3. The youth teams you refer to can play in the Tier 2 nationals. It is not necessary to water down the competition in Tier 1.

But of greater significance is this: you know no model except that of NE prep schools and what is done in Massachusetts. That model makes no sense to the other regions or they would have already adopted it. (It's a model that has been around for years).

 

[lschwarz60]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Because one is restricted to picking the majority of their players from their state or region (unless someone is willing to drive 8 hours a day for practices and games), while the other basically has no regional or national restraints on the talent pool of players they get to pick from.

So what you're saying is a team like the Polar Bears who have been around for 25 years and is the only all girls association in Ct. would not be allowed to play for Nationals because they have 8 out of state players on there team. Which by the way if they didn't have the access to the Ct. prep schools for players they wouldn't be around because there is not enough tier 1 talent in such a tiny state to support this level of hockey.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Actually, most of the Prep rinks around these parts rent their ice to local programs, including girls club teams and especially split season teams, since they don't use/need the ice during the Prep season.

Same up here. Running a rink for the exclusive use of a prep team would be a huge money pit that could never be justified.

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

You continue to miss the point.

Think of Tier 1 like D1. Think of Tier 2 like D3. The youth teams you refer to can play in the Tier 2 nationals. It is not necessary to water down the competition in Tier 1.

But of greater significance is this: you know no model except that of NE prep schools and what is done in Massachusetts. That model makes no sense to the other regions or they would have already adopted it. (It's a model that has been around for years).

No, I do completely see your side that the whole NE prep school/ what’s done in MA wouldn’t make sense in other parts of the country. I didn’t mean to come off as saying since the system works out here it will work out everywhere. I was just throwing that out to show that there are actually other possibilities that exist that could deal with prep schools and the problem with players not being allowed on more than one roster.

I get way to side tracked from what it is I’m actually trying to say when notfromaroundhere keeps knit picking the tiniest most irrelevant parts of my posts or responding with so what your saying is you hate women’s hockey or education or community service basically every time.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

I get way too side tracked from what it is I’m actually trying to say when notfromaroundhere keeps knit picking the tiniest most irrelevant parts of my posts... basically every time.

Awww! That's so cute...that even though you two fight like an old married couple, he still has the ability to get you all flustered like it's still a new relationship

 

[hcky85]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

So what you're saying is a team like the Polar Bears who have been around for 25 years and is the only all girls association in Ct. would not be allowed to play for Nationals because they have 8 out of state players on there team. Which by the way if they didn't have the access to the Ct. prep schools for players they wouldn't be around because there is not enough tier 1 talent in such a tiny state to support this level of hockey.

I really don’t claim to know what the best set up should be nor have I voiced my opinion about what specific requirements should be. But I don’t think a team should have only two or three players from the region that they actually represent; especially when all of these out of region players go to the same boarding school and are trying to admit themselves as a youth team but as their boarding school.

I just strongly feel that prep schools, not youth teams that happen to have players that don't live in the same state, should not be able to enter their team as a youth team to compete for tier I u19 nationals. Now, any club team from MN will have a hard time ever getting to nationals when they have to beat SSM (who won 4 out of 5 past national titles). NSA outscored opponents 40-2 on their way to a NY tier I state title. And if NAHA were ever allowed in then that would be the team coming out of NE every year.

But then I guess people would say that the MN Thoroughbreds and CT Polar Bears (not sure about the youth team that lost in New York) can play in tier II but the problem is that they’re not tier II teams by any circumstances. But they are actually youth programs.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

No, I do completely see your side that the whole NE prep school/ what’s done in MA wouldn’t make sense in other parts of the country. I didn’t mean to come off as saying since the system works out here it will work out everywhere. I was just throwing that out to show that there are actually other possibilities that exist that could deal with prep schools and the problem with players not being allowed on more than one roster.

I get way to side tracked from what it is I’m actually trying to say when notfromaroundhere keeps knit picking the tiniest most irrelevant parts of my posts or responding with so what your saying is you hate women’s hockey or education or community service basically every time.

Give em hell 85'er...

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

Give em hell 85'er...

Hey...no instigating penalties from you, cowboy.