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

4LoveoftheGame said:
None of these hockey factories should be play at Nationals. Nationals should be for community based club teams.
Click to expand...
4LoveoftheGame, in the words of the honorable Judge Chamberlain Hollar, "That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection......OVERULED!"

:D
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

videohockey said:
Hey. I think I found his/her thesis. Now if they would care to pose a legitimate argument other than "stop your whining"........
Click to expand...

Okay how about this? Of the six teams who have already qualified for Nationals and are NOT hockey academies here are their total number of out of district (or in some cases state) players:
Assabet Valley: 2
Connecticut Polar Bears: 2
Colorado Selects: 3
Little Caesars: 2
Washington Pride: 2
Ohio Flames: N/A

So it appears that five of the six programs were able to assemble team comprised mostly of student-athletes from their district (Ohio's online roster does not list hometowns and I was unable to find it elsewhere). Can SSM, NSA or NAHA say the same? Highly doubtful.

None of them should be at Nationals. That is my point, if I did not make it eloquently enough for you, I apologize, but I stand behind my belief. These teams make a mockery of youth hockey and should stop trying to get into a tournament that the should be barred from in the first place!

Flame on!
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

IceIsNice said:
4LoveoftheGame, in the words of the honorable Judge Chamberlain Hollar, "That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection......OVERULED!"

:D
Click to expand...

Very good! Great quote from a fine film!

Check my subsequent post for further development of my point.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

4LoveoftheGame said:
Okay how about this? Of the six teams who have already qualified for Nationals and are NOT hockey academies here are their total number of out of district (or in some cases state) players:
Assabet Valley: 2
Connecticut Polar Bears: 2
Colorado Selects: 3
Little Caesars: 2
Washington Pride: 2
Ohio Flames: N/A

So it appears that five of the six programs were able to assemble team comprised mostly of student-athletes from their district (Ohio's online roster does not list hometowns and I was unable to find it elsewhere). Can SSM, NSA or NAHA say the same? Highly doubtful.

None of them should be at Nationals. That is my point, if I did not make it eloquently enough for you, I apologize, but I stand behind my belief. These teams make a mockery of youth hockey and should stop trying to get into a tournament that the should be barred from in the first place!

Flame on!
Click to expand...

oh this ought to be good.....
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

In a bizarre twist..... I actually kind of agree with you, sort of.... as I said before, I'm not a card carrying member of NAHA (NRA, maybe....) but fair is fair. It should be the same accross the country. If you're going to disqualify one school, disqualify them all.

Now, as far as whether they are included or not, this is not a case of 6 kids from one town getting together with 6 kids from the next town to beef up some town team. These girls make a sacrifice that lasts a full academic year, and so their de facto "residence" becomes their school. Therefore, I say reward the extreme commitment, and let them in. After all, a championship should be about beating the best. Imagine an Olympics that didn't include Team USA or Team Canada? What would that be worth?

Okay, okay, don't get me started on that again. Oh, but, Team USA and Team Canada centralize, and actually practice together as a team, that's why they can fricken kill every other team in the world. But, do the Olympics find a reason to exclude them? No! They follow the rules, produce their team, and come to compete because....they are the best from their particular part of the world.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

IceIsNice said:
In a bizarre twist..... I actually kind of agree with you, sort of.... as I said before, I'm not a card carrying member of NAHA (NRA, maybe....) but fair is fair. It should be the same accross the country. If you're going to disqualify one school, disqualify them all.

Now, as far as whether they are included or not, this is not a case of 6 kids from one town getting together with 6 kids from the next town to beef up some town team. These girls make a sacrifice that lasts a full academic year, and so their de facto "residence" becomes their school. Therefore, I say reward the extreme commitment, and let them in. After all, a championship should be about beating the best. Imagine an Olympics that didn't include Team USA or Team Canada? What would that be worth?

Okay, okay, don't get me started on that again. Oh, but, Team USA and Team Canada centralize, and actually practice together as a team, that's why they can fricken kill every other team in the world. But, do the Olympics find a reason to exclude them? No! They follow the rules, produce their team, and come to compete because....they are the best from their particular part of the world.
Click to expand...

Where we diverge is on the residence issue. I am certainly old fashioned, but I think the teams should be made-up of mostly local kids and that is certainly not the composition of the hockey academies. Everyone has choices to make in life. I believe that if you choose a hockey academy you should lose the "right" to compete against these more local organizations for the same championship. Which is, actually, not a right at all!
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

4LoveoftheGame said:
Okay how about this? Of the six teams who have already qualified for Nationals and are NOT hockey academies here are their total number of out of district (or in some cases state) players:
Assabet Valley: 2
Connecticut Polar Bears: 2
Colorado Selects: 3
Little Caesars: 2
Washington Pride: 2
Ohio Flames: N/A

So it appears that five of the six programs were able to assemble team comprised mostly of student-athletes from their district (Ohio's online roster does not list hometowns and I was unable to find it elsewhere). Can SSM, NSA or NAHA say the same? Highly doubtful.

None of them should be at Nationals. That is my point, if I did not make it eloquently enough for you, I apologize, but I stand behind my belief. These teams make a mockery of youth hockey and should stop trying to get into a tournament that the should be barred from in the first place!

Flame on!
Click to expand...

I agree. Either all or none. That has been the point from the very beginning. As I stated earlier in this thread, USA Hockey has established a "Prep School" division, so why not have any team that does not have parental residence in the state that said team has been registered, play in the prep division and the teams made up of 100% home grown talent play in another division.

Of the teams you have listed that include out of state players, you mean to tell me that there were not enough in state players to round of their rosters...I feel very comfortable in stating that each of those teams have plenty of girls from with in their state borders to field a complete team, especially since, as you pointed out there are a handful on each team.

This would be a win win. The best teams in the country play against the best and the local teams also get a chance to compete against like teams. This helps hockey grow for all states while providing a true National tournament for those programs that recruit outside of the state or country.

Just a thought
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

4LoveoftheGame said:
Where we diverge is on the residence issue. I am certainly old fashioned, but I think the teams should be made-up of mostly local kids and that is certainly not the composition of the hockey academies. Everyone has choices to make in life. I believe that if you choose a hockey academy you should lose the "right" to compete against these more local organizations for the same championship. Which is, actually, not a right at all!
Click to expand...

Then you have the question as to why is it fair for a Little Caesars or any other team to recruit players from outside their state boundaries to compete with teams that do not have that same opportunity? How is that fair? Especially since Michigan, Massachusetts, and Colorado have a much higher level of participants than a state like Texas, Ohio, Florida, Georgia, etc. and should be able to recruit sufficient talent with in their borders.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

4LoveoftheGame said:
Okay how about this? Of the six teams who have already qualified for Nationals and are NOT hockey academies here are their total number of out of district (or in some cases state) players:
Assabet Valley: 2
Connecticut Polar Bears: 2
Colorado Selects: 3
Little Caesars: 2
Washington Pride: 2
Ohio Flames: N/A

So it appears that five of the six programs were able to assemble team comprised mostly of student-athletes from their district (Ohio's online roster does not list hometowns and I was unable to find it elsewhere). Can SSM, NSA or NAHA say the same? Highly doubtful.

None of them should be at Nationals. That is my point, if I did not make it eloquently enough for you, I apologize, but I stand behind my belief. These teams make a mockery of youth hockey and should stop trying to get into a tournament that the should be barred from in the first place!

Flame on!
Click to expand...

OK where is the "community" part of these clubs you mention??? HUH? You talked about Nationals being for "community" clubs! Your argument is changing as the posts continue.

The fact that ALL of the teams you mention use players from other states/districts says that NONE of them are community organizations.

My daughter played on a team at Nationals with girls from 6 states in 3 districts and IT WAS NOT A HOCKEY ACADEMY. The fact was that these girls all came from communities without enough girls playing hockey to field 5 players on the ice, much less an entire team.

The fact is that there are plenty of girls who for lack of a team in their area must travel hundreds of miles to play on a girls team. The fact that girls from Oklahoma and Iowa and Western Wisconsin go to SSM for lack of an available club team in their home town make SSM compete unfairly?

You keep demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge of the hockey situation across the country but seem to have big opinions that the rest of the country should run like Vermont or whatever rock you crawled out from under.

You don't seem to have much "love for the game" if you want to exclude teams that draw players from nontraditional areas from the top level of competition.

Abraham Lincoln once said "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt."

I suggest you take his advice.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

holycrap. 4 or 5 pages ago, I just asked who was going. I didn't mean to start a WWIII. I should have left this thread buried where it was. Sorry
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

2inNet said:
holycrap. 4 or 5 pages ago, I just asked who was going. I didn't mean to start a WWIII. I should have left this thread buried where it was. Sorry
Click to expand...

haha, I think there is some comments mixed in about who is going to win, or who is going, along with the same ole same ole:)
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

gotice said:
Then you have the question as to why is it fair for a Little Caesars or any other team to recruit players from outside their state boundaries to compete with teams that do not have that same opportunity? How is that fair? Especially since Michigan, Massachusetts, and Colorado have a much higher level of participants than a state like Texas, Ohio, Florida, Georgia, etc. and should be able to recruit sufficient talent with in their borders.
Click to expand...

I guess my answer would be that I see a distinction between two or three players from out of state/district and two or three players from IN the district or state.

Some teams will naturally draw from across state lines due to geography. I am aware that many of these out of state/district players are coming from further away, but the vast majority of the teams I listed are at least from their "home" district.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
OK where is the "community" part of these clubs you mention??? HUH? You talked about Nationals being for "community" clubs! Your argument is changing as the posts continue.

The fact that ALL of the teams you mention use players from other states/districts says that NONE of them are community organizations.

My daughter played on a team at Nationals with girls from 6 states in 3 districts and IT WAS NOT A HOCKEY ACADEMY. The fact was that these girls all came from communities without enough girls playing hockey to field 5 players on the ice, much less an entire team.

The fact is that there are plenty of girls who for lack of a team in their area must travel hundreds of miles to play on a girls team. The fact that girls from Oklahoma and Iowa and Western Wisconsin go to SSM for lack of an available club team in their home town make SSM compete unfairly?

You keep demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge of the hockey situation across the country but seem to have big opinions that the rest of the country should run like Vermont or whatever rock you crawled out from under.

You don't seem to have much "love for the game" if you want to exclude teams that draw players from nontraditional areas from the top level of competition.

Abraham Lincoln once said "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt."

I suggest you take his advice.
Click to expand...

Just keep throwing out the insults! At least your brethren can have a civil conversation. If you'd like to discuss my thoughts on the issue, I'd love to hear yours as well. If you want to hurl insults then I'll just elect to continue my conversation with others and ignore you.
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

4LoveoftheGame said:
Just keep throwing out the insults! At least your brethren can have a civil conversation. If you'd like to discuss my thoughts on the issue, I'd love to hear yours as well. If you want to hurl insults then I'll just elect to continue my conversation with others and ignore you.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but what have I said that is NOT true about your posting? If it is true it is not an insult.

Troll - a person who enters a thread and starts posting intentionally inflammatory remarks without adding facts or insight into the discussion to stir the pot. Your first post here was to tell the NAHA people to stop whining. Definitely inflammatory.

Newbie - Look at your join date and how much you seem to know about the subject. Fact.

Ignorance - You on multiple occasions failed to recognize the difference between USA Hockey rules and Vermont Hockey rules.

You may feel insulted, but I have only pointed out the facts about your posting. So you might want to take the advice you give the NAHA people and stop whining. :rolleyes:
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

notfromaroundhere said:
I'm sorry, but what have I said that is NOT true about your posting? If it is true it is not an insult.

Troll - a person who enters a thread and starts posting intentionally inflammatory remarks without adding facts or insight into the discussion to stir the pot. Your first post here was to tell the NAHA people to stop whining. Definitely inflammatory.

Newbie - Look at your join date and how much you seem to know about the subject. Fact.

Ignorance - You on multiple occasions failed to recognize the difference between USA Hockey rules and Vermont Hockey rules.

You may feel insulted, but I have only pointed out the facts about your posting. So you might want to take the advice you give the NAHA people and stop whining. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Okay, you're the smartest ever!

Could you be more of an ornery character if I asked nicely?
 
Re: 2009-2010 Top U19 Teams

4LoveoftheGame said:
I guess my answer would be that I see a distinction between two or three players from out of state/district and two or three players from IN the district or state.

Some teams will naturally draw from across state lines due to geography. I am aware that many of these out of state/district players are coming from further away, but the vast majority of the teams I listed are at least from their "home" district.
Click to expand...

Get real! The Wisconsin Wild 12U (Milwaukee based) team that finished 2nd at Nationals in 2005 had girls from Colorado and Cleveland despite both of those locales have teams AT Nationals that both players refused to play for. They also had multiple players from the Chicago area with multiple local teams to play for. That team was definitely NOT about players playing for their "community" (as you put it) club team. And this was at the 12U level! You must be gullible to believe that the outsiders on this team are there because they are neighbors without a local national bound hockey team to play for.

Face it. You do not understand club hockey at the National level. You keep making weak arguments about this idea of "community" based hockey teams at nationals. You've ignored my arguments not because I've insultued you, but because I've spoken the facts about club hockey, rules for Nationals participation, and your lack of knowledge outside of your own hockey rink.

Just to give you an idea, my daughter has played for USA Hockey teams registered in 6 different districts and played hockey in 22 states and of course Ontario. I've been around enough of this country to know how hockey works in a lot of places. There is a reason my tag here is "notfromaroundhere".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top