Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 2/26/2024 in all areas

  1. My son played in the AHF. I'll say that the league does a much better job of managing their website. Live scoring, stats, players of the week, all-star teams are all pretty cool and certainly add to the experience. I'll also say that the level of competition in that league is absolutely not worth the 10-12 hours of driving you'd do for a weekend, even if you do get 4-6 games. If you're in PAHL already there's no point in adding that amount of driving and hotel stays to play teams that are equal to the competition out here (at best). If you're an independent team you can easily find equal or better competition within 2-3 hours (Ohio, Buffalo) and not take that long trip on the turnpike.
    5 points
  2. That's called equity. If one goes, they all should be invited so as not to make anyone feel inferior.
    4 points
  3. Just wait...... because you know it can't be far away. Every other female sport basically has had and maybe hockey already has too, the transgender athlete playing in the female division and the risk/probability of that causing injury. This sport is so f'd up from the top of USA hockey down through every level. Somehow the fun and enjoyment of this game needs to be placed back at the top of the priority list ahead of all of this other bullshit.
    3 points
  4. I think this is absolutely true. You can see from the discussions on this forum that girls hockey is unimportant to many. And it's obvious to anyone who pays attention at any organization that, even at the orgs that really care to try to make girls hockey work, the girls are less than a second thought. It was only a year or two ago that basically every organization was giving their girls only one practice a week - at some orgs, every other week - and often they were on Sunday nights. Or late Friday night. The reason for allowing girls to roster on an extra team is simple - to promote girls hockey in the region. And for many orgs the only way to make girls teams happen is to dual roster the maximum number of girls. The proposed rule justification says that it "could cost us a small number of girls teams". It surely will do that. What's hard to understand is why PAHL thinks that's not a big deal as implied by that wording. Of the 25-or-so organizations listed on PAHL's website, only 11 have even one girls team. And every season some teams fold while others arise, so that it's never possible to predict who will have a team or how many teams will be in a division. Because of the small number of teams, almost all girls divisions play reduced schedules - that is, the girls teams don't get the same 20 game seasons the boys teams do. The 19U division this season, for instance, had 12 game seasons. A girl who dual rosters on two girls teams won't end up playing 40 girls games on top of whatever coed schedule they have because girls teams normally don't get that many games and also because they probably won't get to every game for both girls teams either. As for girls missing coed games, I've coached both girls teams and coed teams that had girls who missed games for their other team. As long as everyone is up front about it, that situation is what it is. Normally you are either prioritizing one of the teams over the other all the time, or you make a case-by-case call depending on the opponents and/or the importance of the game. It's not ideal, but it's something teams have been working with for a long time. I'm not going to get into arguments about whether girls can or should play coed hockey at any level. I've long believed that girls should play coed at least through 12U because they get exposed to more players and more teams and there are more games in PAHL for coed teams as well as more tournament opportunities. I've known plenty of girls who handled 18U coed just fine. My experience is that as the players get older teams expect more and more from their players and I cannot imagine that most 16U/18U coed teams would tolerate players missing games because of their "other" team, whether the "other" team is a girls team or another coed team. So honestly I don't think that allowing girls to roster on both girls teams and boys teams is a big deal, because at the 16U and 18U levels girls tend to play for only one or the other anyway. PAHL has to make a choice between parents complaining that their male player is getting discriminated against on the one hand and the viability of girls hockey as a thing on the other hand. Personally I think this whole argument is a waste of air because nobody is really hurt by the current rule. Regarding the Tier 1 rule, it's really not that significant. I agree with it in principle, but in practice I understand that the primary Tier 1 organization in our area generally tries to keep players from also playing on PAHL teams anyway.
    3 points
  5. Yes, they probably will be behind the programs that I mentioned (except maybe Niagara) but as was pointed out by other members, D1 hockey is the one sport that is not as divided into "have's and have not's". The Michigan's, Minnesota's, BU's, and Denver's are going to be the programs that recruit the 18 year old's that get drafted in June, but because of the role of junior hockey, teams like Quinnipiac, Union, and Providence can compete and win by bringing in players that are 20-21 years old and compete at a championship level. RMU could and can compete with those teams, and having better facilities would help with attracting better players.
    3 points
  6. well aren't you just a ray of sunshine. I did some research : The Colonials got off to their best start in program history in 2021 at 11-3 and saw themselves ranked within the USCHO Top 20 for much of the season, reaching a program-best #17 in January. At 15-9 overall and 10-5-0 in AHA play, the Colonials earned a West Division title while boasting the AHA Coach of the Year as well as conference MVP, Rookie of the Year, and Defenseman of the Year. The top offensive team in AHA and one of the most prolific in all of college hockey, RMU's 85 goals was one of the highest totals in all of NCAA DI, and their 25% success rate on the power-play was tops in the conference. - this happens to be the SAME year the program was ended by the President. Schooley's team has reached four AHA title games and raised three championship banners since the start of the decade. After making the program's first-ever trip to the NCAA Tournament via an AHA postseason title in 2013-14, the Colonials ruled the league during the grueling regular season in 2014-15 and 2015-16, winning 24 games in each of those years. Additionally - several players from RMU have gone on to play professional hockey on some level. Then let's talk about the women's program - 4 women played in the Olympics - 2 earning medals. 3 banners for winning CHA and several women drafted into Professional Women's hockey.
    3 points
  7. If I am not mistaken, one of the things that RMU doesn't like about the Island facility is that it is off campus, and therefore not as easy for resident students to attend games at. This was one of the stated advantages that the on campus basketball arena had over the hockey arena. So I assume they hope they'll get more spectators at an on campus arena.
    3 points
  8. I’m sure Black Bear would be very quick to buy the facility and keep it operational.
    3 points
  9. Congratulations to all the teams that won their Divisions this weekend. Too bad all we get is scores! No game sheets to see how the games went! Or for that matter any coverage at all. Does PAHL have a facebook or Twitter site? It's ashamed how far behind Black Bear Tier 2 they are. Hopefully we will be able to find the MidAms on Score Sheet this weekend. If PAHL is not going to recognize their top AA players, I would suggest all those teams Join the Atlantic Hockey Federation and have their own Western PA Division.
    2 points
  10. 2 points
  11. ECHL average pay is somewhere in the 700/week range. Minimum is like 500-something and up to around 1000. Very few if any players around here would have the ability to make a team. It might be a "lower" league but when it comes down to it those guys are closer to nhl players than the best players around here are to the ECHL.
    2 points
  12. thats too much work for the paid " Executive Administrator " to handle - What do we pay for again?
    2 points
  13. I disagree vehemently with this logic but let’s say you’re exactly right. Make PAHL and PIHL the options for girls. Now it’s equal. How many PAHL girls have a legitimate shot at making a high school team? Remember the top girls aren’t playing PAHL now. I’d say very few especially at decent sized schools. Now girls make up less than 1% of the PIHL players- is that really a second option? You’re making the second option an option the girls are by and large not going to be able to actually have practically speaking. Under this rule, like Bender said, a PAHL girl is now playing a 12 game PAHL season if she’s lucky (assuming PAHL girls teams don’t crumble under this rule which some certainly will) and can’t crack a high school team. Practice once a week if she’s lucky on Saturday night. A boy is playing 25ish games for PAHL, regular practices, plus a full PIHL schedule, regular practices. Rules are now equal. Are they equitable?
    2 points
  14. I agree with that. Plus it's not like the rink will come up in a month. It's a years-long plan to get the rink built.
    2 points
  15. Reading another forum regarding comments made by the PAHL rules' committee, it didn't sound as if there was a great understanding of the girls' landscape. There is no pending litigation, only a fear. There is a prevailing knee jerk reaction that is appealing in its simplicity. "It's not fair that boys can't play Tier I and on a PAHL team and girls can, that is not equal, so hence we are subject to liability." This goes to how a segment of society is viewing affirmative action outreaches in general. This thought process ignores the reality of what it is to be female and try to play. Even Tier I girls teams struggle to find appropriate competition. There are not more than a team or two legit AA teams around here. So good female hockey players struggle to find appropriate competition to develop. Having teams made up of a wide range of age differences is frustrating to development. Playing with boys helps that development, but as others said, also has a lot of drawbacks. Not every girl is going to want that. I don't know what the solution is. Triple rostering is a terrible idea, because that does not help the team that comes in as the last choice for that player. Beer league minutes on youth sports teams because of lack of bodies also hurts development, but hey, there is a team out there! I just don't get the sense that the people who are looking at making this actually knows what it is to be female and try to play around here or sufficiently care. What is new?
    2 points
  16. You don’t seem to be a fan of RMU hockey.
    2 points
  17. See this is the problem with hockey. "Theoretically" a lot of people may not want to pay for or have the funds to pay for Excel, Pens, and North Catholic as you would probably pay about $30,000+ for the season. Some people may not want to run their kids 50 minutes both directions to play for Pens. Your top 5-6 players and maybe goalies at Pens are possibly at another level but after that most of the other players are interchangeable with the top players from the other high level local teams. That's why it shouldn't be a free ride for certain organizations and they need to attempt to be as fair as possible. I think Mid Am does a pretty good job. It will never be perfect and there is always room for improvement.
    2 points
  18. Our family is out of the game as it pertains to pahl, pihl and anything youth hockey. My only 2 cents is my sons pahl team when he was 14u had a female player (she was very good) but missed half of the pahl co-ed games due to conflicts with her girls team or the other 3rd (and 4th) team she was on. At one point the conflict was them playing each other. I feel that is an issue. A pahl teammate missing games/practice for a pihl conflict is ok and acceptable. But to miss because of pahl or similar conflicts I see an issue...Mind you this was years ago, I can imagine it happens more now. Just something to think about..... Boys only miss for pihl hockey conflicts... So ultimately it hurts the team (s) they may be multi rostered on....
    2 points
  19. If you want to drive young girls away from hockey, this is a great mentality. Just let them play coed and it will be an "equal" playing field for all. Right now you have 8 PAHL organizations fielding 20 girls only teams from 10U thru 19U (with a 19U division that includes a 16U team). I know a lot of those organizations have to double roster kids on both the 12U and 14U teams in order to fill out entire rosters, so you can have *barely* enough teams to keep the divisions running. The rule change wording even acknowledges "this will likely be a step backwards in a few places and therefore could cost us a small number of girls teams." The rule about double rostering for girls to play on two teams is somewhat unfortunate necessity. It is not like these girls are taking roster spots away from other girls on those teams, there are just not enough players to go around. I suspect another onus for these proposed rule changes is parents on birth year PAHL teams being upset about talented girls who play 10U and 12U Pens Elite girls while also playing on the AA coed teams for the PAHL. Sometimes they may have to pick and choose which team they play for on a tournament or for a certain weekend, and that gets the other parents upset. Every person is different, but most girls I've seen and known playing hockey seem to thrive on the competition playing with and against the boys at their age plus enjoy the comradery and sense of fitting in with their girls teams as well. Limiting their choices and number of teams that organizations are even able to field for them as options to satisfy some legal sense of obligation of gender equality really goes against the mission and objective of making hockey fun, fair, and accessible to as many young people who want to participate as possible. If any of you have any influence on the organizations or people in organizations voting on these proposed rules, if you care about the present and future of girls hockey in the region, I would strongly urge you to vote "no" on these changes.
    2 points
  20. It’s holding them back recruiting wise. Think of how many prospective players would be enticed by brand new ON CAMPUS facilities. Bring in better talent, put a better product on ice, attract more fans.
    2 points
  21. Girls hockey in Pittsburgh and the District is in a far worse place than boys if you can believe that. One of the issues is this, the PPE program with their magical powers are somehow able to field not just one, but two "Tier 1" teams at both 12U and 10U. Yet as the players get older, no one else in Western PA is allowed to field a Tier 1 Girls program by declaration of the MidAm district. So by logic, there aren't enough of these players being developed properly to continue at the Tier 1 level past 12U..................................................... ORRRRRRRRRR There are some 12U and 10U families that have been sold a large dose of Kool-aid for their 4 years in the program.
    2 points
  22. Makes sense if you have the right evaluators with no ties to the MidAm. Bring them in from other Districts! Make the kids all wear black or white helmets with no stickers. There is a fair way to do it and it's not what is going on right now!
    2 points
  23. The desire to have better officiating in my belief is shared across many groups and that includes the Referees themselves and the scheduling partners. Despite what many believe, it's hard to imagine that anyone actually chooses to be screamed at by making bad calls intentionally. However, this latest discussion highlights where the real issue lies. Who can help when there is a legitimate problem with specific individuals. The answer should be simple right? The affiliate governing body, or in our case the MidAm District. Here is the website for the MidAm district which has no less than 46 current positions. That's right 46. And they include 9 separate DEI positions. 9 of them. https://www.midamhockey.com/page/show/5022993-board-contacts How many people are there to deal with any referee issues? One. That's right, one person for six states but yet some states need multiple DEI personnel? That's basically saying that on any given weekend there is a 9 times more likely chance that there will be a DEI issue as opposed to an officiating issue? Give us a break. You want better officiating? Look no further than this group and when the Annual District meeting happens this spring, tell your association President to speak up on matters such as these.
    2 points
  24. Last year at MidAms, a parent emailed an official livebarn clips from a game. Not about missed penalties, but about assists that were not given and that their player would not be able to choose the prep school of their choice because of this.
    1 point
  25. Yeah I went to far with that one! Maybe charge a fee to have a stat changed. If a parent is crazy enough (I hope it's only a few) then they might be crazy enough to pay to have it reviewed. I just think stats with errors are better than no stats at all! Just my opinion.
    1 point
  26. Icemen charge about $4400 for the season. Does not include coach fee or team fees. Also does not include jerseys, socks, shell, jackets, etc. The AHF is a low level “AA” league at best and traveling 5+ hours to Philly and NJ? Not great value for the competition.
    1 point
  27. This is the problem with having score sheets, the parents have to ruin it once again. Goalie parents are the WORST by far and most of them don't know what a REAL shit on goal is and want everything thrown near their kid listed as a shot. They yell at the coaches, refs and score keepers if their kids don't get their assist or shots right. I know parents that have actually called and Emailed the teams, leagues and companies running a tournament because they keep their own stats and even send video clips of their kids not getting a 2nd assist or a shot went off their kid and someone else got the goal. Parents ruin everything in youth sports.
    1 point
  28. PAHL wants to charge the money and do the least work possible. Basically they run an organized in-house league that travels to play. I can see it getting to where they're being challenged with a competitor now and will probably end up rolling over and giving up as they continue to lose players and teams. However, I'll add that the AHF/THF groups on Facebook have an awful lot of complaining about "my kid faced 60 shots but the scoresheet only said 58", "they totally missed my kid's secondary assists 3 time this weekend", or any different incarnations of that you can think of. So I can see where PAHL doesn't want hounded week in and week out with those kind of complaints.
    1 point
  29. Wouldn't it be nice if the PAHL had a social media presence and actually did more to recognize the players in their league! You would have the best of both leagues here at home!
    1 point
  30. 18U had some close competition. Preds beat Mt Lebo in overtime Saturday coming back from 2 - 0 deficit in the third. Arrows beat Preds in shootout after two five minute over times to win PAHL 18U yesterday.
    1 point
  31. You have to remember that part of the cost of being in those leagues is that you have to travel E, to Philadelphia, Delaware, and New Jersey, in order to play league games. It's not just the cost of the league itself.
    1 point
  32. The PAHL and Midam are total hack buddy-buddy orgs. I couldn't break the glass to get in there, despite trying for years when my kids were active. They want the status quo and nothing more. No ambition, nobody with motivation to improve. The top 2 people in that org are stooges... none of this is surprising.
    1 point
  33. You’re correct. But, it basically boils down to the clingiest of clingers to the last thread of any competitive hockey that they’re going to play in their lifetime. I get it (mostly). It’s basically, this is what the culmination of all of those years having fun and working hard is going to be as the competitive apex. For most guys, it’s high school, possibly ACHA D-Whatever for a couple/few years before booze and chicks enter the equation…then that’s it. It ramps up fast; starting at bantam > then U16 > then U18 levels. I’m not really sure that most parents and youth players coming up even realize that it now takes 1-2 of Junior hockey after high school to be legitimate for any reputable ACHA D1 hockey. It was just starting to go that way in the early 2000s when I played. But, that was also the time ACHA D1 layed the foundation in order to shed the “club hockey” stigma…and also started getting players into pro leagues like the ECHL. The landscape has changed quite a bit over the past 20-25 years. I remember when the ECHL was just above the delineation line of what was considered “professional.” $250/wk paycheck was a standard E contract (unless you were under an AHL contract…which was more liveable). It’s all so fleeting when you think about it.
    1 point
  34. I don’t think that detail matters. Any age group is one too many…
    1 point
  35. Not so sure that the local team is run any different from the other teams in the UHL. The bit about them going to Senior AAA status is a bit, uh, interesting. The fact that teams do way better at home than on the road is kind of telling. There are Senior leagues in the west, like the Black Diamond League, that would blow the doors off this league. I agree that the social media for the River Monsters is very good. Whoever is doing that should get a raise. https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/bdhl
    1 point
  36. Nothing I said was personal to you at all. I’m just trying to engage in discussion to understand things better and understand perspectives. Sorry you got offended. Sometimes it is hard to really understand tone and viewpoint on message boards. Congrats on all your accomplishments and laying out why you’re way more qualified than me to have an opinion on this. I guess I’m just a concerned father, team manager, and friend to many families that are heartbroken by this and promised them I’d do what I could to understand perspectives and viewpoints better. No D1 athlete here… you got me… overworked dad bod going on🤷😉 So are you saying we should essentially make all sports co-ed then? Come on, I’m not recommending segregation in hockey. Unreal. USA hockey has separate girls hockey rules and divisions for crying out loud. Were your D1 and all American accolades co-ed too? If not, why did you play girls sports and not instead try to play high level boys sports? I’m getting off topic and don’t want this thread shut down in case there is other info anyone has on this that could help the debate before the vote occurs in a few weeks. Private message me if you still wish to engage, sorry you are bowing out. You might have a helpful perspective. In have a feeling this is fizzling out. Great context on Facebook if anyone is interested in learning more and helping to support local girls hockey development. https://www.facebook.com/story.php/?id=841603716173422&story_fbid=2161727097494404 These are some of the families I’m supporting. 3 of these mothers are D1 athletes who helped me understand the inequities here. Maybe that will resonate with some of you since if my hot air will not.
    1 point
  37. So I'm hearing the manager and assistant manager (coach and assistant coach?) were kicked off the team after threatening to go to the authorities over money laundering. Anybody know the details?
    1 point
  38. I agree. The comment about RMU losing to a D3 program doesn't have much weight. I don't see that happening. The D3 programs that were good enough to be D1 programs moved up to D1 a long time ago (St Cloud State, Mercyhurst, RIT, Bemiji State, etc.). The D3 programs left are barely better than ACHA D1 teams, and in fact in many case are not even that good. Yes, the big-time programs are going to dominate, but with only about 60 NCAA D1 programs any given year, there is just too much talent that RMU won't get some. Not granting the full 18 scholarships and smaller budgets will hurt, of course. The comment about the coaches not being the right staff to get them to a better spot, maybe that is true too. But despite the comments about there being too many Tier 1 programs around, there is still plenty of talent in the US, Canada, and Europe for RMU to fill its roster because of the scarcity of NCAA D1 options. I do think an on-campus rink and better facilities will help. It's not like basketball, where there are hundreds of programs & choices. If this option is a little better, their recruits will get better too. I am definitely not saying RMU is going to be a top choice for top 10 draft picks, but calling it a "last ditch" is not really true either. The alumni report certainly isn't as impressive as Michigan's or even UMass's, but it's not like there aren't some good players who went to RMU: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/alumni.php?tmi=7731
    1 point
  39. What’s wrong with the 10u and 12u black team families at PPE doing what they’re doing? 4 years playing a combo of local games that they pick against generally similar competition and adding to it about 6 regional tournaments against other girls teams? Would you rather put these girls in the girls ‘PAHL pen’ where there are 4 teams in a division and 2 of them can barely skate? And play each other like 4 times and call it a season…?
    1 point
  40. So if it is on campus, that would mean it is a different facility than the current complex, not an addition to it. Is my logic correct?
    1 point
  41. The statement in the Trib explicitly says the following, "The 100,000-square-foot development also would house enhanced training and locker room facilities, offices, plus regional amenities to meet the needs of youth and amateur hockey players." As soon as this building would open, I would think Black Bear would be waiting with their checkbook. If I remember correctly they had, at some point, made an offer or had reached out about the current rink during the controversy when the Men's and Women's teams were dissolved.
    1 point
  42. Looks like the entire Pens Elite 2010 team was invited!
    1 point
  43. They just posted the schedule for MidAms Tiers 1 and 2. https://www.midamhockey.com/page/show/8308033-district-tournament https://www.midamhockey.com/page/show/8308036-state-tournaments
    1 point
  44. And while I am complaining about the MidAm why can't they post schedules for the District tournaments? Is it a secret? They do NOTHING to promote the sport. I know the schedules are out already! Just try to find them! At least PAHL has schedules up for playoffs!
    1 point
  45. Yes, the MidAm site states explicitly that "higher ranked teams will receive more spots at evaluations", which makes sense. I believe the 09 group will be split up into 8 teams, which does seem like too many kids to evaluate in such a short period of time. You cannot chose who is attending based off of stats, because of the discrepancy in the level of play across teams. In theory, the harder the schedule the more difficult it will be to put up numbers and vice versa. The kids on a team that faces stiffer competition should not be penalized because of that just as a players on a team that plays a weaker schedule should not get a boost. Evaluators won't be able to see who the "right ones" are in that short of a time period. The evaluation is normally very, very game heavy, so they are looking for the kids that perform the best in game situations. I like this format because it eliminates the players that focus only on what they learn in skills clinics and are great at stick handling through cones, but don't know how to really play in a game situation. Nothing is going to be perfect, but at least this format makes sense.
    1 point
  46. You're right about coaches nominating their kids. That's a problem. I've seen some misses for sure, but overall MidAm tryouts have done a decent job identifying the right kids. We've all seen some yellow buckets not advancing and kids from lesser teams advancing. The system is not perfect, but it's certainly not a joke. And parents that convey that message and mindset to their kids have already set them up for failure.
    1 point
  47. The "BETTER" teams get more picks. Coaches pick the kids from their team. They take WAY to many kids off the bat between Western PA, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia. On top of that EVERY Midam team gets at least 1 invite plus some school teams as long as they are registered with Midams. To answer your question NO, it absolutely should not go entirely on stats. It SHOULD go to kids that know how to play as a team and not the ones who's parents push them to put up 100 goals and 00 assists. Like Herb Brooks said "I'm not looking for the best players, Craig. I'm looking for the right ones." Unfortunately with Midams that isn't always true either when it comes to the 2nd round. 9 times out of 10 ALL the yellow helmets with get the call back, usually ALL the red helmets and then the coaches kids or kids who's parents know someone at USA hockey and then the best kids to fill the open spots.
    1 point
  48. HAHA, try to find some stats! Especially in the PAHL. Kids nominated by Coaches! Teams can make up whatever stats they want for independent team players! MidAm tryouts a total joke! Coaches kids nominated most often!
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...