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.

USA Hockey National Championships

Re: USA Hockey National Championships

joecct said:
I think NAHA is not allowed to participate because of the affiliate rules that, I believe, prohibit out of state players.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think that's the case as there are several other teams in that area that have players from other states.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

joecct said:
Silly question
Boys brackets are 17/18 (18U) & 15/16 (16U)

Girls brackets are 16/17/18 (U19=18U) and 14/15 (U16=15U)

Why the difference?
Click to expand...

The girls are the same at 16U but the older bracket is 19U not U19. So this past season a player could be as old as a 96 birth year in girls but only a 97 for boys in 18U.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

giwan said:
No, I don't think that's the case as there are several other teams in that area that have players from other states.
Click to expand...

Aside from some very high level USA Hockey rules around team eligibility, it is really up to the Districts to determine what programs are and aren't eligible. Some districts are amenable to the JWHL teams and some aren't. One thing that was put in place in some districts like MA (and may actually be a USA Hockey rule now) is that a program had to be in existence for a few years (3?) and sponsor Tier 1 teams at at least 2 different age groups (from U14, U16, and U19) before they were eligible for Nationals. This was primarily designed to eliminate a team qualifying that was started by a disgruntled group of parents that was only in existence for a season or two, but it may also effect some of the JWHL teams because I don't think all of them have U16 teams as well as the U19 team.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

HockeyEast33 said:
Hey, as usual, thanks for knowledgelessly weighing in. The comparison in this discussion was to MN and the MN Tier 1 teams that are being put together draw from the entire state which is a **** site farther than 20-30 miles from some rink. Hell, MA itself is over 100 miles long. Pay attention and don't let your hatred for Assabet (whatever the reason) obscure reality.

Most prep school players in MA are actually from MA and/or NE, not around the country/world as you state. Regardless, the fact that the girls are in or aren't in prep school has nothing to do with where they are from. And a good portion of NE is within 50 miles of Concord, MA where Assabet plays (the Western half of MA is farther from Concord than NH, RI, and CT). Below are the state and (where I knew them the town) residences of graduating Tier 1 players of the past 5-6 years at Assabet as listed on the website (and a couple I know were missing). Of the 55 girls, 36 (65%) are from MA, 49 are from NE (including MA - 90%), and 6 are from outside NE (including two from Albany, NY area which is 2.5 hours from Concord). There is 1, count her 1, international player in the last 6 years. I suppose you can say that it's not really a de facto MA team since only 2/3 of the players are from MA, but it is definitely a de facto New England team and drawing from a geographic area not significantly different than MN.

The clueless meanderings by some on this forum about how Assabet Valley historically gathered players from all over the country to form a super team is misinformed and outright wrong. It's primarily a NE based program and pretty much always has been (at the younger and Tier 2 levels it is 100% New England). You can hate the program for whatever reason you want (usually because you lost to them), but at least get the facts straight. Also, the Polar Bears, Wizards, Stars, Breakers, Spitfires, and other NE programs pretty much all draw from NE prep schools and usually have a higher percentage of players from the rest of the country than Assabet Valley (especially the Polar Bears and Stars).

Caitrin Lonergan - Roslindale, MA
Cara Najjar - MA
Leah Olsen - MA
Alexandria Laing - Marblehead, MA
Makenzie Kent - MA
Lauren Kelly - Watertown, MA
Katherine Pate - Saco, ME
Haley Mullins - RI
Shayna Tomlinson - NH
Julianne Landry - MA
Mallory Souliotis - Acton, MA
Victoria Deangelis - RI
Brooke Avery - Concord, NH
Brooke Wolejko - CT
Sydney Daniels - MA
Brianna Laing - Marblehead, MA
Natashia Rachlin - Dedham, MA
Robyn White - MA
Briana Mastel - Wallingford, CT
Taylor Marchin - MI
Erin Conway - MI
Phoebe Staenz - Switzerland
Meghan Turner - NH
Molly Strabley - ME
Margaret Draper - MA
Martha Findley - Duxbury, MA
Casey Leveillee - NY
Janelle Ferrara - Winthrop, MA
Mary Parker - Acton, MA
Jordan Juron - Latham, NY
Jamie Haddad - Springfield, MA
Jordan Hampton - NH
Melissa Piacentini - MA
Taylor Cross - Saugus, MA
Kathrin Goguen - Acton, MA
Nicole Ferrara - Winthrop, MA
Emily Field - Littleton, MA
Ann Doherty - IL
Chelsiea Goll - NH
Lauren Guarente - MA
Brooke Simpson - Boxborough, MA
Mariana Walsh - Walpole, MA
Ann DiPastina - NH
Kerrin Sperry - No Reading, MA
Eliza Butler - Lexington, MA
Jacqueline Young - Medford, MA
Denna Laing - Marblehead, MA
Jacqueline Ham - MA
Marissa Gedman - Framingham, MA
Madeline Joyce - Boxborough, MA
Elizabeth Parker - Acton, MA
Ashley Salerno - Brunswick, ME
Kerri Stuart - Tewksbury, MA
Sammy Woodward - Lexington, MA
Nina Riley - Lexington, MA
Click to expand...


Hi Carl....Sorry I must have hit a nerve.

P.S. and somebody has Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much time on their hands.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

So here's what I think we've learned:

1. Nationals are too expensive. Sets the financial bar too high and works counter to the objective of growing hockey (USA Hockey's mission, right?).
2. Nationals are too long. Student-athletes missing a week of school is unacceptable. Plus, the more days, the more cost (see #1).
3. Minnesota has it right, or as right as you can get it. The players play for their local high schools and then select teams in the shoulder and summer seasons.
4. Minnesota has best hockey participation rates. That's because kids play for their high schools and make local hockey exciting and aspirational for younger players. That is also why the state championship is the best championship in the country.
5. Every state has different rules. That means you've got full-year teams like Shattuck playing against part-time teams like the Penns Elite. Teams like NAHA aren't eligibile because of state rules. So winning the National tournament proves nothing except that kids that play together all year play better together.
6. USA Hockey needs to re-assess.

Like I said in my first post a few days back, I've been sending kids to Nationals for a long, long time. In my opinion, the best thing for hockey is for USA Hockey to go summer. That solves the academic conflicts and keeps more kids home playing for their local high schools - which increases participation because it makes the game more exciting locally. Plus, college coaches would love it so they can recruit off-season. Minnesota (and I don't live anywhere near Minnesota) has the best model. FOLLOW IT!

(Note to those who don't want summer hockey. Every other sport does their "select" season during an off-season. For example, spring is the "select" season for soccer and basketball. Hockey's select season has been in winter because historically, rinks weren't open in the summer. But those days are over. Get it now??)
 
Last edited:
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

PuckRush said:
3. Minnesota has it right, or as right as you can get it. The players play for their local high schools and then select teams in the shoulder and summer seasons.
4. "That is also why the state championship is the best championship in the country".
Click to expand...


Point 3: Agreed
Point 4: On the girls side it is not "the best championship in the country". Attendance is generally weak, the best teams are often not at the state tournament at all. Sections have been known to be much more exciting! Of course there are exceptions.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

Mountie Clever said:
Point 3: Agreed
Point 4: On the girls side it is not "the best championship in the country". Attendance is generally weak, the best teams are often not at the state tournament at all. Sections have been known to be much more exciting! Of course there are exceptions.
Click to expand...

Who has a better state tournament on the girls side than Minnesota's?
 
FiveHoleFrenzy said:
Who has a better state tournament on the girls side than Minnesota's?
Click to expand...

And boys. I've wondered about the USAH HS championships. You play the state tournament in front of your friends. You play a national championship in front of Mom and/or Dad.

If you win States, when you walk into school the next day and you and your teammates are Spartacus. Win the nationals and it's "Where's your homework."

Give me States over nationals anytime.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

FiveHoleFrenzy said:
Who has a better state tournament on the girls side than Minnesota's?
Click to expand...

Best is subjective. Best level of talent/teams? Best attendance? Best facility? Best organized? Best fans? Too many variables to answer without a little specification....

If you mean best level of talent, I think it would be hard to argue that the MN state tourney is not the best of the state HS tourneys. However, the NEPSAC tourney (NE Prep School) would probably rival it talent wise but that is the whole region. More broadly, the USA Hockey Nationals probably has the best level of talent/teams - usually 5-10 U19 teams that are exclusively made up of future D1/D3 players - not many MN HS teams falling into that category (a few though).
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

The MN girls HS tourney definitely has its flaws, but I'd say one area where it does well is in interest. Even though we'd like to see larger crowds, if a team reaches the championship game, it has likely played in front of ~ 10,000 fans between sections and the three rounds at state, with the last two rounds being televised. Other than international events, there aren't too many chances for girls that age to play on a similar stage. Yes, you see more talent at nationals or in the top club leagues, but there is extra meaning to the games if you get to play with the girls that you grew up with.

Just as with college programs, there is no one absolute best, as different events will be better fits for some. Everyone is different and values different things, but it is nice to have choices.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

HockeyEast33 said:
Best is subjective. Best level of talent/teams? Best attendance? Best facility? Best organized? Best fans? Too many variables to answer without a little specification.
Click to expand...

Best is not subjective when it's about what we're talking about - what's fair to student-athletes, cost efficient for parents, and what's best to grow the game. Minnesota has it figured out.

USA Hockey Nationals is a huge resource drain on parents and a time drain on students and needs to be re-thought. The Minnesota model avoids (or has avoided) this whole national's mess.

I believe strongly that the "select" (or "travel") season for hockey should be a different season than the high school season. Minnesota's model works because it turns their young girls into fans of hockey by keeping players local. Young girls then aspire to play youth hockey, for their high schools, and the dream of a state championship. That's how you grow the game and one of the reasons that MN is dominant in girls and women's hockey.

Contrast that with the rest of the country. In the northeast, and I'm not sure people realize this, girls public high school hockey is in it's infancy, relatively speaking. The best players (with a couple of exceptions) are at Preps and playing for part-time "travel" teams, or playing for JWHL teams. There are no young girls watching Prep, travel or JWHL.

So "best" is the best model - and that is Minnesota. I sure hope they don't get sucked into the "travel" vortex during the high school season. If the rest of the country followed their model (are you listening USA HOCKEY????), we'd have the best players playing each other in the summer, and during the winter, everyone has their choice - including the best choice for most: Staying home and playing for their home team high school..
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

PuckRush said:
Best is not subjective when it's about what we're talking about - what's fair to student-athletes, cost efficient for parents, and what's best to grow the game. Minnesota has it figured out.

USA Hockey Nationals is a huge resource drain on parents and a time drain on students and needs to be re-thought. The Minnesota model avoids (or has avoided) this whole national's mess.

I believe strongly that the "select" (or "travel") season for hockey should be a different season than the high school season. Minnesota's model works because it turns their young girls into fans of hockey by keeping players local. Young girls then aspire to play youth hockey, for their high schools, and the dream of a state championship. That's how you grow the game and one of the reasons that MN is dominant in girls and women's hockey.

Contrast that with the rest of the country. In the northeast, and I'm not sure people realize this, girls public high school hockey is in it's infancy, relatively speaking. The best players (with a couple of exceptions) are at Preps and playing for part-time "travel" teams, or playing for JWHL teams. There are no young girls watching Prep, travel or JWHL.

So "best" is the best model - and that is Minnesota. I sure hope they don't get sucked into the "travel" vortex during the high school season. If the rest of the country followed their model (are you listening USA HOCKEY????), we'd have the best players playing each other in the summer, and during the winter, everyone has their choice - including the best choice for most: Staying home and playing for their home team high school..
Click to expand...

MN is not without it's problems
it could change easily, there are a few trying to privatise HS hockey, and we have our preps too, sort of, the private schools, although they compete with the public. But if you look at the history, it has been swinging away from the public schools, although not to the extent it has destroyed the MN model (for lack of a better term). Not everybody plays for their home team, some go to a private school, or use open enrollment to attend one of the hockey factories.
Some criticize the reigning class A power for not moving up to AA, others criticize the other A schools for not moving back down and bringing up the competition level of class A
at the HS level participation has dropped, although not a great deal
it's not perfect, but it is working
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

PuckRush said:
Best is not subjective when it's about what we're talking about - what's fair to student-athletes, cost efficient for parents, and what's best to grow the game. Minnesota has it figured out.

USA Hockey Nationals is a huge resource drain on parents and a time drain on students and needs to be re-thought. The Minnesota model avoids (or has avoided) this whole national's mess.

I believe strongly that the "select" (or "travel") season for hockey should be a different season than the high school season. Minnesota's model works because it turns their young girls into fans of hockey by keeping players local. Young girls then aspire to play youth hockey, for their high schools, and the dream of a state championship. That's how you grow the game and one of the reasons that MN is dominant in girls and women's hockey.

Contrast that with the rest of the country. In the northeast, and I'm not sure people realize this, girls public high school hockey is in it's infancy, relatively speaking. The best players (with a couple of exceptions) are at Preps and playing for part-time "travel" teams, or playing for JWHL teams. There are no young girls watching Prep, travel or JWHL.

So "best" is the best model - and that is Minnesota. I sure hope they don't get sucked into the "travel" vortex during the high school season. If the rest of the country followed their model (are you listening USA HOCKEY????), we'd have the best players playing each other in the summer, and during the winter, everyone has their choice - including the best choice for most: Staying home and playing for their home team high school..
Click to expand...

First - glad that you know what is best for everyone in the free world (that's what I get accused of on this forum!) - you should impose your will on everyone.

Second - the context of the discussion was what was the best tournament (not the best model), which has little to do with your ramble.

Third - you say that the Minnesota model avoids the whole "Nationals mess", yet Minnesota is now actively hosting (by most accounts poorly) and joining Nationals - seems somewhat disingenuous, doesn't it? "We hate it but we want to join it"....
 
Last edited:
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

I've been trying not to respond but... self-control is not a strong suit. I get it that the MN HS tourney is #1 for MN girls. I also get that the the Prep Tourney is #1 for MA girls (and girls from other states) who play in that league. I also know that Nationals is expensive and the kids are missing school. But, really, if you want to grow the game it's not only about MN and MA. All the girls I know from Chicago and MI play all year for a chance to in this tournament. And, what about the girls from the Pitt team and the CA girls and so on. Do you know what their travel bills and hotel costs are already? This is the only tournament may of us "outsider" parents are actually happy to pay for. It sure beats paying huge cash to play in Ontario in December. I love that the MN Elite girls are now playing and hope they will will travel to MI next year. After watching the 16U teams this years, I'd bet that 90+% of the best girls were there. Iron sharpens iron and all that.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

jumbodaddy77 said:
I've been trying not to respond but... self-control is not a strong suit. I get it that the MN HS tourney is #1 for MN girls. I also get that the the Prep Tourney is #1 for MA girls (and girls from other states) who play in that league. I also know that Nationals is expensive and the kids are missing school. But, really, if you want to grow the game it's not only about MN and MA. All the girls I know from Chicago and MI play all year for a chance to in this tournament. And, what about the girls from the Pitt team and the CA girls and so on. Do you know what their travel bills and hotel costs are already? This is the only tournament may of us "outsider" parents are actually happy to pay for. It sure beats paying huge cash to play in Ontario in December. I love that the MN Elite girls are now playing and hope they will will travel to MI next year. After watching the 16U teams this years, I'd bet that 90+% of the best girls were there. Iron sharpens iron and all that.
Click to expand...
You bring up some very salient points. While I am one who complains about the amount if cost involved (travel, hotels, etc..) your are correct with your assessment, we may not like the cost, but happy to pay it for the opportunity to see the best players. There is no question that the best 16U's were present this year. In fact, many college coaches will tell you that this age group is deeper in talent maybe more than ever.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

HockeyEast33 said:
First - glad that you know what is best for everyone in the free world (that's what I get accused of on this forum!) - you should impose your will on everyone.

Second - the context of the discussion was what was the best tournament (not the best model), which has little to do with your ramble.

Third - you say that the Minnesota model avoids the whole "Nationals mess", yet Minnesota is now actively hosting (by most accounts poorly) and joining Nationals - seems somewhat disingenuous, doesn't it? "We hate it but we want to join it"....
Click to expand...

1. Yes, I think I know what's best. I try to impose my will on my kids too. Doesn't work, but I keep trying.
2. The context of this discussion was started by me. I was critical of Nationals, and then got broader with MN model solutions. My "rambling" has purpose.
3. I know. I can't believe MN is heading there.
 
Re: USA Hockey National Championships

jumbodaddy77 said:
I've been trying not to respond but... self-control is not a strong suit. I get it that the MN HS tourney is #1 for MN girls. I also get that the the Prep Tourney is #1 for MA girls (and girls from other states) who play in that league. I also know that Nationals is expensive and the kids are missing school. But, really, if you want to grow the game it's not only about MN and MA. All the girls I know from Chicago and MI play all year for a chance to in this tournament. And, what about the girls from the Pitt team and the CA girls and so on. Do you know what their travel bills and hotel costs are already? This is the only tournament may of us "outsider" parents are actually happy to pay for. It sure beats paying huge cash to play in Ontario in December. I love that the MN Elite girls are now playing and hope they will will travel to MI next year. After watching the 16U teams this years, I'd bet that 90+% of the best girls were there. Iron sharpens iron and all that.
Click to expand...

It's good that you respond. The current system isn't all bad. You make extremely good points about Club Teams from USA Hockey regions not named Minnesota, Massachusetts or New England. But for those other Clubs, couldn't you play in the summer, have nationals and still get everything they get now?

ps.. The New England Prep tournament may feature good hockey, but it is not aspirational for young girls (ages 5-12) because the prep schools don't represent a town or city. The only young girls there are some sisters, cousins and faculty kids - and not many of them. So it doesn't help grow hockey at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top