Jkersman01

Coach Flavi, my man, you’re missing a step. As Pucks just said a few min ago, When you fill out a roster and submit to PIHL at the beginning of the season, you need to note the eligibility of the player. If montour actually indicated to PIHL this was a transfer player (as defined by PIHL rules), and PIHL approved the roster early on- PIHL had culpability here and I would think any half decent rep at the hearing 2 nights ago would have successfully argued that as a mitigating circumstance. But if montour didn’t disclose that (so for all PIHL knew this new name was a freshman that lived in montour for 10 years… and just now was playing varsity), the TEAM (manager, coaches, or whoever all collaborated on this) should bear this responsibility. That might be why PIHL didn’t know until someone (now, albeit late in the game) brought it to their attention.

In that case everyone is at fault. That’s my point. If PIHL knew, or should have known, this was an issue, shame on them too.

I think we pretty much said the same thing at the same time… ?

Next time you get pulled over for speeding, try getting out of it by telling the cop you’ve been speeding for 6 months and they didn’t discipline you, so doing it now is unfair. See how that works out. After it doesn’t, try it before the magistrate too. I have empathy for the players and especially the goalie. Really sucks. I’ve been a team manager for 4 years now. I know how important it is to get the the roster info right at the beginning of the year (clearances, etc as well) plus making sure it is accurate for EVERY game. I know every detail about each kid on my kids’ teams. that’s my job. I agree with what someone said- blame here belongs likely with manager and coaches. At beginning of season, they knew this was a dicey situation. You dot your I’s and cross your T’s. On the PIHL roster form you be CERTAIN you note they’re a transfer student. If they did all that and PIHL just didn’t follow through with certifying him after everything was done properly, then I can feel a little more for Montour folks, and I would think the PIHL board would have taken that into consideration before they ruled on this. Frankly they should have. However, I’ve not seen anything alleging that the roster was filled out properly and it was PIHL that didn’t do their job beginning of the year.

This! Smells fishy. Be careful here. Hopefully this gets removed.

Being Mario Lemieux or Bobby Orr doesn’t make you more qualified to chime in on PIHL eligibility rules than your average Joe, frankly… this isn’t a discussion about why a power play isn’t effective…. Goodness…

Anybody else been able to confirm this yet? Certainly not alleging this is fabricated at all, just curious if it is out there yet…

You can go to the AAA team websites (SHAHA, Esmark, Vengeance, PPE, Preds), and look at their rosters. They’re mostly all published, then go to PIHL rosters and cross reference. It’s all public info. I’m not going to make this about any high school team or organization. You can do that if you want.

Actually, they are. I know a couple that do they might not show up a lot, but they are Rostered and eligible, and they do play.

By my estimation, PPE alone, for high school aged boys only; probably has 15 kids billeting. Some kids billet from only 1-2 hours away (ie johnstown) to Pittsburgh for the week only (go home on weekends) to make commute to North Catholic more doable. You could billet to a family 10 min down the road if you want. Maybe 2-3 days a week too! That’s why I 100% support this rule. Otherwise, you could jump from one school to another easily simply by saying you’re billeting, not ‘transferring’

Or, and I have no knowledge or basis for saying this, but perhaps in this situation if it in fact was an unintentional ‘violation’- Coach: Great! That would help a lot! Let’s put him on the roster and see if PIHL approves it! (Without researching rules or going through eligibility protocol which it sounds like is in fact in place procedurally) This really sucks for the kids. All of them- goalie included. I really do hope, if this ineligibility determination is in fact final, he’s got people supporting him. It certainly isn’t his fault.

What do I know, but this seems simple to me. If he was in fact approved by prior commissioner because all rules were followed, there should be some meeting minutes, or something similar, documenting that decision. Bust that out at the meeting tonight and be done with it. If not, they’ve been playing with an ineligible player and should be ineligible for playoffs. The stuff about him wanting to play HS hockey and make friends is irrelevant as it relates to eligibility.

As long as their black teams are paying their fees and behaving themselves, I really don’t think they care too much.

I don’t believe this is true. I’ve known them both for quite a while. To your inquiry into his qualifications- he was a good player in his own right. He knows quite a lot about the game, is a good coach and motivator, and has had successful teams. He’s done just about as much for girls hockey in pittsburgh over the last 5 years as anyone.

@forbin makin’ rhymes and droppin’ beats… obviously….

Here’s an option, but requires dominoes. RMU is back next year. Ice at Neville will be tight. Essentially hours before RMU hockey was shut down 2 years ago, they were in cranberry with pens talking about that third sheet where they’d play. Pens back to building 3rd sheet. If RMU moves up there, that frees up a good bit of ice at Neville. Esmark to Neville? If Black Bear ends up giving esmark a reason to move out of New Ken and Southpointe doesn’t get that 2nd sheet in, maybe this could work. Can pull south hills contingent and cranberry contingent?

For someone who is claiming to not make statements unless you have facts to back them up, what you got on me? I’m most certainly not an employee. I was just asking questions and giving my thoughts on this topic. Show me one quote of mine where I’m defending the program? I actually agree with a good bit of what you’re saying. You’re just too blinded by rage on this topic to tolerate any comments that aren’t scathing hatred for PPE. I can play that game where I guess who you are too if you want. I’d prefer this not be personal at all, so please don’t make it that.

I’m sure this won’t be popular, but we can blame organizations, personal interests, politics all we want. In the end, in Pittsburgh (maybe different than some other cities and Canada notably due to municipal rinks and funding), it takes two things for someone to be ‘successful’ as this thread is apparently defining it. First, parents with cash to support private skating lessons, etc. Second, a talented and legit D1 athlete of a kid. I really think we ignore the second. We think if you spend $15k per year from the time your kid is 7 years old, if they don’t make it, it’s someone’s fault other than (1) yours as the parent that funded it or (2) your kid’s lack of legit athletic ability. If that organization brings in a kid from Ontario, LA, or frankly the pens black team when they turn down to 1 team at the pee wee level, it must be a problem with the organization. PPE has many faults. Other organizations like PPE do as well. What about some PW teams (I won’t name the specific organization I’m referring to this year) that cut 4-5 kids that have been with the program since mites because pens black kids tried out? They got star struck and those kids that got cut went to another organization that beat them early in the year. Should we bash that org? It’s not just PPE- it’s all levels. It’s naive to think it’s isolated there. I’m not defending it or supporting it. Just highlighting the variables and constants. To expect any organization to turn 50% of the squirt program (who, let’s face it, probably aren’t really the best athletes, just the kids that have had their parents push them to hockey early and forked the cash to have it show at an early age) into D1 commits is unreasonable. Go ahead- take the top 7 year olds and move them all to one organization. Keep them all together through thick and thin. They’ll likely form great bonds and make great memories. I’m not saying that’s not a good thing. To the contrary actually, what an awesome experience to have as a kid. But to think you’ll turn them into D1 athletes simply because they’re good 7 year old players, to my point, I think at least, is delusional.

I think Carter Schade was part of that class, too. I may be off a year...

I’m a joke??? Calling me out? My name isn’t PPE, Lemieux, Moorehouse, etc… I have 2 kids that play. My son who I never wanted to be a part of PPE and my daughter who is. Girls side much different. I have no reason to attack, or defend the boys program. I was engaging in what I was hoping would be a productive discussion on the topic. I see you have no desire to do that but instead want to keep repeating the same thing over and over again while lobbing personal insults.

Lots of good points. I agree with most. But are we considering that PPE only ‘started’ in 2012? That’s 10 years ago. If we’re going form an opinion on development of local kids from squirts through 18, that’s a 10 year period. Arguably, PPE only has maybe 2 recruiting years worth of opportunity for D1 commits (ignoring a stint in juniors first with an eye to being a freshman at age 20ish). In 2012, if you started as a first year squirt (ignore 66ers for now), you’d only be 19 now. To counter that, you can look at the older teams now, identify the local kids left, and narrow down that there are perhaps only a handful left, so those numbers won’t increase much as it relates to local talent. That would be valid.

I don’t follow high school hockey that closely (starting to a bit more) but isn’t this post directly below the updated ‘rankings’ showing SV as top dog? That’s a mention and acknowledgement, no?

I haven’t jumped in but have been following this. Was there even one person that was ‘picking’ on him? I judge the tone as genuine curiosity as to what happened with lots of respect for someone who played NAHL at a young age. Don’t stir up hate where there isn’t any. There’s enough in this world we don’t need manufactured drama…

I’ve not worked with one. I’ve heard presentations by a few in the past and know 2 families pretty well that have used them. I’ll pull this out of my behind, but I’d bet 10% are good and the other 90% aren’t going to do anything. Perhaps, the other way to look at it, is 10% of the kids with advisers are actually good enough to allow the advisors to do their ‘thing’, while the other 90% of kids and families really shouldn’t be hiring one in the first place (but many advisors likely won’t turn down the fees or be brutally honest with them). I’m not sure what it is- probably a bit of both.

And Mt. Lebo beat this South Pgh team this year. Not saying they're better- I wouldn't know. Plus its just one game. Aviators have a very good 12U AA team as well that, using the logic I quoted above, if accurate, could very likely hang with Esmark.