Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

[bbtt]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

Let me restate your quote:
The problem that I have with allowing boarding school teams into Nationals (even at Tier 1) is the advantage that they have over 99% of the other teams. If a team is able to practice 5 days a week, do integrated off-ice training and live together as a unit, they have advantages that a club just doesn't have.

Which part of the problem you have with boarding schools playing at Nationals being because of their ability to practice more, etc. wasn't what you were saying?

I said that boarding school teams have the advantage of having players that practice 5 days a week and live together. You said that I was unhappy that players at these three schools were too committed. Those are two very different statements. I have no problems with any choice a player makes - but I believe that Nationals (whether Tier 1 or Tier 2) should be made up of similar teams.

As to your commute, I'd gladly trade 300 mile round trips 4x a week with carpool support (you weren't the only one doing this) for a minimum 650 mile round trip every weekend (maximum 2000 mile and average of 900 mile round trip) without any carpool support.

As to this comments above: 1) There was no carpool. I was driving from the west while the others were driving from the north and east. 2) You were driving to watch your daughter's game which was a choice (and a good one). I was driving my daughter to her practice and to the airport to go to games. (You may have missed the comment in that I didn't get to see many of her games because they were not driveable.) So that is 1,200 miles per week to be part of the team, not as a spectator. 3) On top of her school, I also had a job.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

I said that boarding school teams have the advantage of having players that practice 5 days a week and live together. You said that I was unhappy that players at these three schools were too committed. Those are two very different statements. I have no problems with any choice a player makes - but I believe that Nationals (whether Tier 1 or Tier 2) should be made up of similar teams.



As to this comments above: 1) There was no carpool. I was driving from the west while the others were driving from the north and east. 2) You were driving to watch your daughter's game which was a choice (and a good one). I was driving my daughter to her practice and to the airport to go to games. (You may have missed the comment in that I didn't get to see many of her games because they were not driveable.) So that is 1,200 miles per week to be part of the team, not as a spectator. 3) On top of her school, I also had a job.

You have no problem with the choices a player makes (unless it involves committment to play for a school that wants to compete at nationals), but if they choose to play on a team that is exclusively made up of players from one school, that team isn't allowed at nationals? My point here is that the sponsoring organization (be it a private club, city-owned rink, or private school, or public school) shouldn't be discriminated agains in determining eligibility for playing in what is billed as the top Tier National Championship. If going to school together makes it unfair, then living in the same town with a community subsidized rink should also be unfair because they can afford more ice time. USA Hockey is not the "fair" police trying to equalize the opportunity. Note that they only have a minimum game requirement - not a maximum game requirement.

USA Hockey (National) has never had a problem with schools playing for the Tier 1 National Championship. They've always treated that tournament as an "open" tournament for the best team from each district. It is the districts that choose to put more restrictions on team composition that cause the issue. USA Hockey set up this Tier 2 tournament (the subject of this thread) to allow districts to send teams WITH RESTRICTIONS IN COMPOSITION to compete for a championship. It was never engineered to keep restricted composition teams (Tier 2) from competing at Tier 1 (still the restricted team's perogative where to play).

And as to my driving, in fact many of the weekends I drove 750 miles for 2-3 hours of PRACTICE without a game. She didn't even have a local boys team to play on one season. Eventually, the hockey situation became so tenuous and the educational opportunity to go to boarding school (at a reasonable cost), not to mention my health was going to heck. So the past few years, I've got to watch her play 3 games a year for her boarding school team and a couple games for a club team at the Polar Bear.

And I have been employed and spent a large number of Friday and Sunday Nights those years driving through the night to get my daughter to school and me to the office on time Monday morning. I didn't have the budget (and still don't) to fly my daughter to games.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

You have no problem with the choices a player makes (unless it involves committment to play for a school that wants to compete at nationals), but if they choose to play on a team that is exclusively made up of players from one school, that team isn't allowed at nationals? My point here is that the sponsoring organization (be it a private club, city-owned rink, or private school, or public school) shouldn't be discriminated agains in determining eligibility for playing in what is billed as the top Tier National Championship. If going to school together makes it unfair, then living in the same town with a community subsidized rink should also be unfair because they can afford more ice time. USA Hockey is not the "fair" police trying to equalize the opportunity. Note that they only have a minimum game requirement - not a maximum game requirement.

USA Hockey (National) has never had a problem with schools playing for the Tier 1 National Championship. They've always treated that tournament as an "open" tournament for the best team from each district. It is the districts that choose to put more restrictions on team composition that cause the issue. USA Hockey set up this Tier 2 tournament (the subject of this thread) to allow districts to send teams WITH RESTRICTIONS IN COMPOSITION to compete for a championship. It was never engineered to keep restricted composition teams (Tier 2) from competing at Tier 1 (still the restricted team's perogative where to play).

And as to my driving, in fact many of the weekends I drove 750 miles for 2-3 hours of PRACTICE without a game. She didn't even have a local boys team to play on one season. Eventually, the hockey situation became so tenuous and the educational opportunity to go to boarding school (at a reasonable cost), not to mention my health was going to heck. So the past few years, I've got to watch her play 3 games a year for her boarding school team and a couple games for a club team at the Polar Bear.

And I have been employed and spent a large number of Friday and Sunday Nights those years driving through the night to get my daughter to school and me to the office on time Monday morning. I didn't have the budget (and still don't) to fly my daughter to games.

I honestly can’t read your posts so I’ll just guess and hope these are the things you need clarified.

1. Boarding schools get to hand pick their kids from all over the country and even all over the world if they wanted too. Club teams cannot.

2. A boarding school has their own facilities and gym on the campus they live on. Which is great for development. But that makes them more like a college team than a youth organization. There’s a huge advantage as a team.

3. This is a championship for youth hockey. So the first objective is making sure the competition is fair and development comes second. At the national and state development camps, that’s when development comes first and fairness comes second.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

You have no problem with the choices a player makes (unless it involves committment to play for a school that wants to compete at nationals), but if they choose to play on a team that is exclusively made up of players from one school, that team isn't allowed at nationals? My point here is that the sponsoring organization (be it a private club, city-owned rink, or private school, or public school) shouldn't be discriminated agains in determining eligibility for playing in what is billed as the top Tier National Championship. If going to school together makes it unfair, then living in the same town with a community subsidized rink should also be unfair because they can afford more ice time. USA Hockey is not the "fair" police trying to equalize the opportunity. Note that they only have a minimum game requirement - not a maximum game requirement.

USA Hockey (National) has never had a problem with schools playing for the Tier 1 National Championship. They've always treated that tournament as an "open" tournament for the best team from each district. It is the districts that choose to put more restrictions on team composition that cause the issue. USA Hockey set up this Tier 2 tournament (the subject of this thread) to allow districts to send teams WITH RESTRICTIONS IN COMPOSITION to compete for a championship. It was never engineered to keep restricted composition teams (Tier 2) from competing at Tier 1 (still the restricted team's perogative where to play).

And as to my driving, in fact many of the weekends I drove 750 miles for 2-3 hours of PRACTICE without a game. She didn't even have a local boys team to play on one season. Eventually, the hockey situation became so tenuous and the educational opportunity to go to boarding school (at a reasonable cost), not to mention my health was going to heck. So the past few years, I've got to watch her play 3 games a year for her boarding school team and a couple games for a club team at the Polar Bear.

And I have been employed and spent a large number of Friday and Sunday Nights those years driving through the night to get my daughter to school and me to the office on time Monday morning. I didn't have the budget (and still don't) to fly my daughter to games.

You guys should have moved to Canada(Ontario). Lots to choose from here. Then you could have gone back to the US for your schooling. Maybe for free. Just kiddin.....

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

Actually the phrase was that he met her several times -- doesn't that imply a face to face contact to you?

Hitting tailpipes and crack pipes… doesn’t that imply a joke to you?

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

And...

4. Tier I club teams are closer to being a tier II club team than a boarding school is to being a Tier I club.

5. No one is happy with the set up now.

6. People are trying to make a youth national tournament into something it’s not.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

I honestly can’t read your posts so I’ll just guess and hope these are the things you need clarified.

1. Boarding schools get to hand pick their kids from all over the country and even all over the world if they wanted too. Club teams cannot.

2. A boarding school has their own facilities and gym on the campus they live on. Which is great for development. But that makes them more like a college team than a youth organization. There’s a huge advantage as a team.

3. This is a championship for youth hockey. So the first objective is making sure the competition is fair and development comes second. At the national and state development camps, that’s when development comes first and fairness comes second.

1) Club teams are only restricted by the rules set by the district. I can tell you that my daughter personally played against a 12U team many years ago with players from 4 states in 3 time zones.

2) You haven't seen the facilities at my daughter's boarding school. Let's just say I haven't been to a rink that a club team plays at that is anywhere near as wretched. The local HS gym and rink where we live have better facilities. And NAHA's home rink is nothing to write home about IIRC.

3) I'm not seeing what is unfair about the composition of the teams in question. If they all played together for Assabet, you wouldn't question it, but because they go to class together you have a problem. What is unfair about getting an education?

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

And...

4. Tier I club teams are closer to being a tier II club team than a boarding school is to being a Tier I club.

5. No one is happy with the set up now.

6. People are trying to make a youth national tournament into something it’s not.

4) Perfect non-sense.

5) Actually, everyone I know is happy with the rules for how things are run on National basis right now with the exception of NAHA's situation. How they are misused in the Vermont affiliate is a relatively small corner problem. They are the only missing Tier 1 team of any significance from Tier 1 Nationals.

6) Nothing has changed at the Tier 1 National Tournament in years (SSM has been there forever it seems), so I'm not sure where you are coming from about making it something that it is not.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

1) Club teams are only restricted by the rules set by the district. I can tell you that my daughter personally played against a 12U team many years ago with players from 4 states in 3 time zones.

2) You haven't seen the facilities at my daughter's boarding school. Let's just say I haven't been to a rink that a club team plays at that is anywhere near as wretched. The local HS gym and rink where we live have better facilities. And NAHA's home rink is nothing to write home about IIRC.

3) I'm not seeing what is unfair about the composition of the teams in question. If they all played together for Assabet, you wouldn't question it, but because they go to class together you have a problem. What is unfair about getting an education?

1. Awsome... but I bet the team didn't get to practice five days a week or have a school provide a campus for which they could all could live at.

2. Well if you need state of the art facilities maybe you should have had your daughter choose a school that better suites your needs. Personally I don’t think you need much to be able to do a lot with what you have.

3. Everyone with the exception of two players are local kids on Assabet, so no there isn't a problem. If you still don't get what's unfair might I suggest you try checking your pockets for some extra common cents... maybe you'll have enough to buy a clue.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

4)

5) Actually, everyone I know is happy with the rules for how things are run on National basis right now with the exception of NAHA's situation. How they are misused in the Vermont affiliate is a relatively small corner problem. They are the only missing Tier 1 team of any significance from Tier 1 Nationals.

That's quite bigoted of you to only acknowledge the views of the people you know directly.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

That's quite bigoted of you to only acknowledge the views of the people you know directly.

It would be presumptuous to acknowldege the views of people I don't know.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

1. Awsome... but I bet the team didn't get to practice five days a week or have a school provide a campus for which they could all could live at.

2. Well if you need state of the art facilities maybe you should have had your daughter choose a school that better suites your needs. Personally I don’t think you need much to be able to do a lot with what you have.

3. Everyone with the exception of two players are local kids on Assabet, so no there isn't a problem. If you still don't get what's unfair might I suggest you try checking your pockets for some extra common cents... maybe you'll have enough to buy a clue.

1) But the club team kids get home made meals and a comfortable bed. And club teams are perfectly allowed to practice every day. No unfair advantage there.

2) My point was that facilities don't make the team and having them conveniently located does not give a team an unfair advantage.

3) I wasn't talking about the players on Assabet, but on the teams you don't want at Nationals. If THOSE players played for any club team, you wouldn't have a problem. I'm looking in my pocket for reading glasses to ship to you so you can read my posts correctly.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

It would be presumptuous to acknowldege the views of people I don't know.

Yea uh call me crazy but I don’t get how seeing something from more than one perspective is being presumptuous.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

1)

3) I wasn't talking about the players on Assabet, but on the teams you don't want at Nationals. If THOSE players played for any club team, you wouldn't have a problem. I'm looking in my pocket for reading glasses to ship to you so you can read my posts correctly.

Yeah, I wouldn't have a problem with any of those players playing on a club team. What I don't think is fair is boarding schools competing with club teams at nationals.

And just a side note... I only go out of my way to be rude to you, no one else.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

Yea uh call me crazy but I don’t get how seeing something from more than one perspective is being presumptuous.

It is called putting words in people's (who you don't know) mouths. I don't speak for people I don't know. The folks I know in club hockey like having the best teams at Nationals, even if they all attend the same school together (like SSM).

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

Yeah, I wouldn't have a problem with any of those players playing on a club team. What I don't think is fair is boarding schools competing with club teams at nationals.

So if all the players on SSM went down to the corner rink and signed up to play on a team together (in addition to their school team), coached by the same coach, wearing the same uniforms, you wouldn't have a problem?

And just a side note... I only go out of my way to be rude to you, no one else.

It's because you like me soooo much.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

1)
3) I'm not seeing what is unfair about the composition of the teams in question. If they all played together for Assabet, you wouldn't question it, but because they go to class together you have a problem. What is unfair about getting an education?

They could never all play for Assabet or any club team because they're from all over the country. That's the point people are trying to make.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

They could never all play for Assabet or any club team because they're from all over the country. That's the point people are trying to make.

Players from SSM are from all over the country and I don't see a whole lot of folks complaining about them being at Nationals. Minnesota allows it for out of state kids living at a school. Vermont has other ideas.

 

[bbtt]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

I am not sure what else I can say to help you understand that a team that practices together 4-5 days a week with games on the weekends at a school, where they live together, eat together, etc has an advantage over one that practices twice a week with games on weekends, so I am not even going to bother trying to convince you.

I will just say that this year, in what I initially thought would be a huge failure, USA Hockey changed the Youth (i.e. Boys) Nationals to allow one representative from each state. Rather than continuously getting shut out by the few perennial power houses (who really shouldn’t have anything left to prove), this allowed each state to compete at a level that was representative of their state’s registration rates (1A, 2A, 3A & 4A). Watching these games, it was great to see similarly skilled teams play each other when there was nothing on the line but heart. Sure, there were a few mis-steps with teams allowed in the wrong categories (luckily, they didn’t win), but overall, it was a great experience.

It will be interesting to see if the inclusion of a broader base, of relatively unknown teams, will translate into a higher retention rate/commitment next season.

That is my hope for girls (although my girl is long gone from this scene). Prep schools may grow an individual’s skills and capabilities, but until we are able to translate hockey into an affordable alternative for the masses it will continue to be a niche sport.

 

[videohockey]

Re: Tier I & Tier II MA Girls's to Nationals?

They could never all play for Assabet or any club team because they're from all over the country. That's the point people are trying to make.

I'll jump in here. That's not true. It happens all the time all over the country. Players go and live with families and go to school in another district to play at a club team there. Totally legal as long as it is allowed by the district. And yes, many of them allow it.