No Politics

Some info for '08 parents out there.  There are also 16U programs out there with tryouts/supplementals coming up, but this is for '08s only.  I am working with about a dozen different '08 families right now, so I probably have the most info about them (followed by '09s -- total mess right now -- and '07s).  I will try posting those separately along with the mixed-year options.  Please feel free to add information from other programs or these, and please keep everything positive.  Remember:  for THE KIDS, not revenge, etc.

And one last note:  Parents, this tryout season has been nuts, but if you and your children are unwilling to say "this team feels right" and to stay there, you're adding to the problem.  You're running out of BY and AAA/AA options, so maybe that will chill everything out for everyone!

'08 Huskies

-  '08 Huskies are holding tryouts tomorrow morning (10:00am) at PIA.  This may be a great opportunity for families of higher-level players (A Major and up), as I was told this is the third of three tryouts, and the AA team they thought they could place may be in question because a few players made Vengeance, Icemen, and Renegades AAA/AA teams and went there instead.  

-  I was also told some other parents were spooked by the Huskies initial push to make this team AHF only (no PAHL).  However, players and parents were told that they are planning to play a modified PAHL/AHF schedule with showcases as we are seeing with other programs.

-  I will say that it is my impression that the Huskies haven't been able to make the transition happen very smoothly at that rink yet.  Their website is down (horrible timing, right?) and you have to use the PIA site to register, for example.  So since it's tomorrow morning, I was told just show up if you can't register in time.  If I was a higher-level '08 parent, I'd go if I lived close enough and had the time.  Seems like a very viable opportunity to consolidate some orphans in that area, and I think they'll work out the kinks.  And with those existing kinks, it may open up a lot of ice time and attention to this team's players. 

'08 Vipers Stars

-  '08 Vipers Stars are holding supplemental tryouts Monday, April 24th at 8:00pm at Alpha.  From what I've been told, they had the same thing happen as I mentioned happened to the Huskies.  They had a decent team, but then the AAA/AA tryouts elsewhere pecked away at their team.  They are looking to fill those newly created gaps.

-  I personally spoke with three parents who said their kids really liked the head coach, and decided to stay for that reason.  I heard from Alpha folks that this team is set to play out of Shadyside Academy, so keep that in mind.  That rink is VERY nice, but can be hard to access.  And given that it is a private rink, ice times may be sketchy.  Again, though, it could be great for local orphans, and parents with experience with the new coach are upbeat about the possibilities.

'08 Badgers

-  '08 Badgers start Monday the 24th (6:30pm) and run through Tuesday (7:00pm) according to their website.  The tryouts are at Palmer (Delmont), and tryouts are still open.  Sorry, but no parents have shared any information about these tryouts (probably because they haven't started!).

18 minutes ago, HockeyFan6687 said:

How do you obtain all of this information? That’s more coverage than NHL preseason!

I am not able to speak for others, but I know what I know because I've been around so long and know so many families who share information with me.  Too many tryouts are blacked out (silly in my opinion), so it's hard to know how many kids were there, what they looked like, etc.

That's how I knew there were over forty kids at some tryouts and less than ten at others.

9 minutes ago, aaaahockey said:

I can usually help with u16 now and girls most ages although I thought girls was insane this year at some levels.  

I am helping a couple families with 14U girls, but I’m out of my element.  I only saw NP, the Huskies, and the Badgers having regular, non-NB programs for girls.

I hope I am missing some.

I've seen a lot of talk about tryout/AA/AAA craziness in other posts, and I can attest that it's WAY worse than past years.

Every year I help families track tryouts, and this year it's a mess.  Like others have said, some programs are being left, others are being overwhelmed, AAA kids are going AA, etc.  We've read enough about the AAA problems, but I have heard of (and witnessed) multiple AA tryouts with over forty skaters.  And I have also witnessed regular A-level tryouts with less than ten.

This is beyond sad, because it is the kids who suffer.  I mean, where does the A Major Black kid go who knows -- and whose family knows -- he is A Major Black?  This year?  The tryout with four kids and a goalie.

We know what's going to happen when all these AAA/AA tryouts end.  It's already started -- SUPPLEMENTALS and tons of orphan players.

I feel bad for the level-headed families who are ultimately left out in the dark, so I thought we could all come together on this site and post UNBIASED supplemental information and team overviews (this team needs forwards, this team needs two D and a goalie, etc.).  Not to poke fun, not to say "serves them right," but for the kids who are in danger of losing one season of what we all know is a VERY short, VERY fast youth career.  I personally don't like some programs, but I will still post what they offer if I find it.  Again, it's for the kids.

I am a North Hills guy, so I'm limited to mostly northern information, and I don't have info on all the northern programs.  I've also been helping '07 to '09 kids this season, so I'm limited there.  So please jump in if you have anything (especially in the south and other age groups).  I think it would make more sense to have separate topics for different age groups (18U, etc.), too.

Can we do this?

RJ, I have NEVER seen movement like this year.  Teams from last year who were struggling to field a AA team now have over forty kids going out for them, and other teams are simply folding because they get ten kids coming out to tryouts.  I think parents' heads are just spinning from all the gamesmanship from the programs.

You already mentioned the AAA chaos, and I think a lot of that has to do with kids leaving AAA programs for AA programs.  There's a trickle-down effect.

There has to be a better system than what we have.  It's the kids who are hurt every year, and it's not always the fault of the parents trying to find that extra A.

I hope programs and parents use this board as a CONSTRUCTIVE way to find a home for these orphan kids.

Huskies 15U are AHF, too, according to their website.

3 hours ago, zam said:

You could ask organization 1 if they had any players decline placement and see if they would reconsider your kid for a spot.  

Agreed it might help by being honest with both organizations. But if your kids are young, as it sounds like they are, you are pretty much burning a bridge with that organization if you pull your kid after committing to them.  You might find it hard to make a team there again in future years.

Zam's answer was spot-on.  

As others said, honesty is key.  You don't want to burn bridges, so doing it the way Zam explained makes the most sense.  

If you come across as being angry, or -- even worse -- that you are trying to extort the team ("if you don't take kid #2, kid #1 will fly"), that's not good.  But every organization, no matter how political will understand simple common sense if it isn't practical for your family.

You:  "Did you have any players decline placement?  If so, could you please reconsider my child for a spot?  It is too difficult for us to get kids to two different rinks, so I will most likely have to decline my other child's offer.  We don't want to do that, though, because my child really wants to play here.  If you aren't able to offer my child a spot, I totally understand and can appreciate that."

Something like that.

On 4/7/2023 at 10:16 AM, HatTrick said:

How can the vipers offer a higher level than current organizations in that area?  Are they fielding AAAA teams now?

Give it time!  Someone will!  Ha ha.  

13 hours ago, Hattrick Swayze said:

I know Vipers are holding tryouts at Alpha but does anyone know if they actually have ice there next season? I have heard from a few people at that facility that they will not have enough ice or any ice at Alpha. It would be really sad if players try out for them and then they do not have any practice ice for next season. I hope they are not desperately trying to hang on and setting the players and families up for a complete disaster.

Don't take this as gospel truth because we know what comes of "I heard," but I was told by a Vipers parent that they will be playing at Shadyside Academy, and that they won't know the details until they see who comes to tryouts and they know how many teams they'll have.  

All good points.

In regard to the girls, my friend has a daughter who just decided to play hockey last season at 12U.  She is admittedly (and understandably) not very good, and she is moving up to 14U.

I've been looking, and I only found three programs even offering girls hockey at a normal, non-national bound level:  NP, Huskies, and Badgers.  That's a shame.

And the in-house ideas are brilliant.  When I was a kid, sports were just for fun (like in-house).  Like you guys said, when you have competitive travel hockey that takes in kids who belong in in-house, it waters everything down even more, makes it less fun, and forces kids to play at levels they don't want to.

And reasons like that are why I asked if there were too many programs.  I feel there are more, weaker programs than there are legit, interested players to fill them.  If half the programs disappeared, and you had in-house, that could be great.

Hi, folks.

I know this topic comes up as parts of other threads, but I feel it would be a good talking point (especially around tryouts) to discuss how many programs there are out there, how they are all vying for the same kids, how it ends up diluting the entire talent pool, and if hockey in Western PA would be better if we had less programs.

My kids are older, and I only have one left in PAHL/PIHL, but I always try helping the families of younger players.  I even keep a spreadsheet of tryout dates, costs, etc. of programs in our ares (the North Hills) all in one sheet so I can help them make sense of it all.

I have to be honest:  My head is spinning this year.  We all know the gamesmanship that takes place, like "who is going to hold tryouts first," but this year is even quirkier than usual in my opinion.  Maybe it's the Black Bear effect, but it's definitely more convoluted.

Again, being in the North Hills, the big dog is NP.  They stand alone and seem to run a good program, but are not always convenient for some folks. Then you have ALL the others.  Those are the programs other posters have mentioned fight for the same kids, then end up having a team of one AA-level player, a few A Major players, and some A Minor/B players sprinkled into a team of eleven kids who play A Minor Black or something.  That is not fair to ANY of those kids, yet it happens each season.

I've NEVER understood that, and thought I'd start the discussion so that maybe we can help younger families here, too.

I'm not saying full-ice practices should be the norm, but kids DO need at least a portion of practice time to be full-ice.  When I used to coach, it was about a 75/25 split.  We'd have two hours of practice per week (two one-hour practices).  One practice would be half an hour full-ice, and half an hour half-ice.  The other practice would be five to ten minutes full-ice (skating warm-ups with two teams), then fifty minutes 1/2 ice for each team.  Worked well.

There are too many drills that require full (or at least 3/4) ice, and too many team concepts require full-ice.  So I think it is correct to say most training can be done with half-ice, but there is no replacing that necessary full-ice component.

It's not an either/or argument.

2 hours ago, hockeyisgreat said:

I know of more than one AA Preds team that was lucky to get a half ice slot per week and maybe a full ice slot once a month.  If you check their website no where do they tell you what practice time you will get.   

Great post, hockeyisgreat.

This seems to be happening more and more around Western PA.  As an example, Alpha is also bunged-up with ice time, and teams like the Aviators only get one 1/2 ice practice per week.  

I only have one son left still of playing age, but I ALWAYS ask about practice frequencies and styles (1/2 vs. full ice) before registering him for tryouts.  It speaks volumes if programs don't let you know practice frequency and annual costs in advance of tryouts.  Seems the only programs who are truly immune to limited ice time are those like the Arrows (smaller program and the rink is publicly owned) and the AAA teams.  Those kids always seem to get at least two practices per week no matter what.

AMR, I feel for you, but I have to agree with LGP.  We have friends with kids at the Aviators, they are already at Alpha, and their kids only get one 50 minute practice a week (half sheet at that!).

So if a team with (I assume) a lease there can't get extra ice time because there isn't any to be had, how can the Vipers?  Did the Vipers sign a lease?  If so, whose ice is being taken?

6 minutes ago, twoboys said:

North has Alpha, the Frozen Pond Lemieux, Baeirl and Shadyside.  That is 9 sheets.  Also, there is also PIA and the Belmont if you consider them North.

In my opinion, what people are REALLY talking about here is the number of rinks near major roadways, and those that are tucked in deeper (and are therefore harder to get to).

Before people laugh about Belmont, 28 is a straight burn.  For the same reasons folks here say Printscape is so convenient, one would have to say Belmont and Alpha are convenient.  And Baierl is right off of 79, 76, AND 19... convenient.

Yeah, if you're coming from the south, PIA is really a PITA (ha ha), but it isn't really THAT bad.  28 to Tarentum exit, five lights, then 366/56 to the rink three minutes later.  Wow... tough.  Thank God for GPS, right?

It's simply distance and time.  

Sorry, folks, but I read this a couple days ago, came back today, and laughed by balls off.  I'll say what I said before:  TO EACH THEIR OWN.  There are rinks south of the city, and there are rinks north of the city.  There is nothing wrong with Printscape, and there is nothing wrong with PIA.  It totally depends on what works for a particular family situation.  I live in the North Hills and totally detest going to Ice Castle or the YMCA because of the 51/88 perpetual traffic, but for people who live in the south that's probably nothing for them.  So great for them!

Honestly, I don't see the point of this entire argument.  It seems more like a North v. South or Jets v. Sharks kind of thing rather than an actual hockey thing.

PIA, Southpointe... it's all perspective, guys.  

I live in the North Hills and HATED driving to Printscape, the YMCA, or Ice Castle.  Folks living in the South Hills I'm sure HATE driving to PIA, Frozen Pond, or the Belmont.

One of my sons played for the Arrows.  I heard all the time how far away the Belmont is.  When 28 isn't under construction -- insert joke here -- it only takes forty minutes to get there from downtown, though!

So it's all perspective based on where you live.  Simple as that.  To each their own.  

Makes me wonder why we don't have PAHL districts.  South Hills rinks work better for South Hills families, and North Hills Rinks work better for North Hills families.

AMR, I understand what you are saying, and agree in part, and disagree in part.  What I am sharing is not the perceived variety.  It is the observed truth that I have witnessed with my own eyes.  And -- quite honestly -- I am not even talking about my own kids.  

I think when we can look at OTHER kids/families and say "boy... that kid is getting ripped off by the coach," it isn't perceived.  One of my sons once played for a 16U team where the coaches said "ice time must be earned."  Fair enough.  I agree with that 100%.  But when the head coach's son is out there coasting -- noticeably -- and is getting on the PP unit, but other kids who are playing harder -- noticeably -- are getting passed over for the coach's kid, what are we to say?  That's just the parent's perception?  That's just how we see it, but it isn't reality?

I was an assistant coach on that team.  I saw that happen with my own eyes, and when I brought the inequity/unfairness/hypocrisy to light -- to the HC himself ONLY -- I was actually reprimanded by the board when the coach brought it to their buddies on that board.  How dare I stick up for the kids instead of going along with his personal favoritism!  I resigned rather than be part of that nonsense.

Perception?

Now I will share that the organization in question -- not yours -- can't keep players and is currently hanging by a thread.  In my opinion, deservedly so.  We left after that season, and so did seven other families from that team.

If boards stand by and do nothing when OBVIOUS political actions are taking place, then people leave.  Simple as that.  

That is why I would disagree with your comment that organization shopping "happens more often than not" because of wanting to play at a higher level.  More often than not -- from my family and countless other friends' family experiences -- organization shopping happens when an obvious wrong isn't righted.

If it was just one troublemaking family's perception that their kid is being mistreated, just that kid would leave, not eight players.  When you see organizations losing families/teams in droves, it isn't because parents believe their kids are AAA players, and -- again -- I am tired of hearing that as an excuse for mismanagement.

Again, I am the president of a youth soccer board and we do not have those problems.  Why?  Because I -- and the other board members -- don't tolerate it.  Our program?  Growing exponentially.

I don't know why people keep glossing over the point that so many here are trying -- respectfully -- to make:

Take Black Bear's name out of it and look at everything objectively.  I've had multiple kids go through multiple PAHL programs. Some were good for some of my kids, some were bad for others.  It ALWAYS came down to politics when things went bad.  Never an exception.  Bad coaches focusing only on their kid or the kids in their family's clique, bad board members killing entire teams because their kid got beat out (so create one gigantic team with cuts instead of two smaller teams without cuts), etc.

And spare me the "it's the parents taking their kids from team-to-team trying to be the next Crosby" talk.  Those parents exist, but folks on this board like expanding the actions of a small minority to EVERY parent out there.  I don't know how many kids you all had go through more than one PAHL program, but I have met hundreds of family members over my kids' "careers," and those "next Crosby" parents are few and far between. I would wager that probably AT LEAST seven out of every ten kids/parents could care less, and would be glad staying at one program from 8U through 18U to play with their buddies if they could.

That excuse -- and that's what it is -- is what organizations use when they crap the bed and want to blame someone else. The sad truth is that most of those "program hoppers" are not only FORCED to leave a bad situation -- or quit the game altogether -- but they're now being blamed and labeled for it, too!  Damn.  And we are for the kids?

Where is the accountability?  Deke... AMR and I have had good conversations about what is happening at the Vipers.  All I am hearing from you is:  Black Bear is bad.  I looked up the Vipers 990 returns (non-profit tax returns), and you guys were losing money hand over fist well before Black Bear even bought that rink.  Your numbers have decreased dramatically.  A few years ago one of my children played there, and there were tons of teams at all age groups there.  I looked on your website and saw three.  Is that Black Bear's fault?

Not trying to belittle you or your program.  I just don't know how you can pin that all on Black Bear.  There has to be a "my bad" in there somewhere, and I think that is what is lacking in almost every program, not just yours.

This is why so many of us are interested in seeing Black Bear's model.  I personally am so sick of hearing "there's politics everywhere."  I say that because there doesn't need to be, and we all know that.  I've seen organizations where there are no politics.  Board President's kid sucks, so Board president's kid doesn't play as much.  Board President backs the decision of the coaches.  Contrary to popular belief, that does happen!  Just not often enough.  Whose fault is that?  Asshat board members, coaches, etc. who would rather destroy a program than upset the little fiefdom they are trying to create.

If there ARE politics everywhere, that plays right into the Black Bear model.  If people equal profit, and politics forces people (profit) away, Black Bear would therefore not play into politics, right?  I mean, we can't have our cake and eat it, too.  We can't say "Black Bear is all about profit," and "politics will still happen under Black Bear."  The two concepts don't jibe.  

Isn't PAHL also run by parent volunteers?

AMR, you may be right.  I can tell you that as a parent, I had to watch my children play for multiple organizations over their youth careers and I always wondered how adults could muck up something so simple, though.  That is why I am actually interested in seeing if Black Bear's model would work.

What we have obviously isn't working.  My eldest son, for example, started playing when he was seven years-old, and only had TWO seasons that could be described as fun (first year of 8U, and second year of 12U).  All his coaches said he was a good kid, he was a talented player, and he never had any desire to be anything more than an A-level player no matter how much he was asked to play at higher levels.  He just loved playing hockey and being with his friends.  That poor kid took every jab the adult dad coaches (and the boards who supported them even after receiving tons of complaints about the same coaches) gave him, and only ONCE got upset in his entire "career."  Rightfully so, too.

So you asked how you address politics.  I assume you are on a board.  I am, too (just not a hockey board... soccer).  Here's the question I would ask you and all the other board members from ANY organization who may see this, and which I ask my board all the time:  Do you care more about developing these kids and the organization over the long-term, or are you looking to do what is best for only your child, their friends, and/or those people who are in your personal clique?

No one is going to admit that they took the selfish route.  No one.  But many did (and do).  It's all about ego, right?  So if Black Bear is all about money, at least it's not ego.  Unlike a board that doesn't care about dysfunction in their organization as long as their kids and their friends are okay, Black Bear (or any other unorthodox organizational management unit) technically would, right?  Because every family that leaves means less money for them.

That, to me, is the difference.  They have a vested interest in succeeding.  Parent-run organizations don't.  A terrible board president, for example, could ruin an organization, then simply take their kid somewhere else.  Every family that leaves could be written off as "troublemakers" or labeled "that family who jumps around all the time."  It costs that president NOTHING personally (other than a lot of bad karma!), whereas it would cost Black Bear everything if they don't fix it.

Just my observation and speculation, though!

Rock, I understand what you are saying.  Again, I am not able to comment on Black Bear... don't know enough about them.  I am sure people don't like them, but is that because they can't pull their political BS with Black Bear?  Is their kid actually playing A Minor Black where they belong instead of being put on the AA team because mom's on the board?

My focus isn't even Black Bear, per se.  Profit is not the same as politics.  What drew my attention in this chain is that so many people want to see Black Bear as this evil empire, and are totally willing to absolve the local organizations of the political BS that helped opened the door to the Black Bears of the world to begin with.

We're talking about the Vipers at the moment.  Is that what may have happened there?  How did they go from having TONS of loaded teams just a few years ago to having a handful of teams this year?  Black Bear?

We have very good friends who USED to be in the Vipers organization when it was hot.  They said the Vipers Board was split because some of the more reasonable members wanted to maintain the developmental model that was working, while the board members who wanted their kids to be "AA" players pushed the Stars "AA" program (even if it wasn't AA like sadday4hockey stated).  Maybe they righted that ship somewhat, because the '08 AA team seems to be doing well this year, but that same team was winless just a couple years ago because they weren't truly AA.  But the damage was done organizationally, right?

That's what makes me shake my head.  Yes, politics happens everywhere, but why aren't boards, coaches, managers, etc. ever accountable for the political moves they make (other than families just moving to another organization)?  Too many parent board members/coaches/managers hook their own kids up to the detriment of the organizations.  Do we (as a whole) learn from that?  No.  

We see the same thing over and over again, and now we are supposed to sympathize with an organization who slit their own throat?  Not from this cat.

I don't know enough about Black Bear to state an educated opinion on them, but I will say this:  I was reading this chain and signed up for this message board today.  I took the name "No Politics" for a reason.  My child is a teen who knows tons of kids from many different programs (including the Vipers/Stars/Esmark), and politics like a president/VP/board member's kid and their friends getting special treatment, extra ice time, etc. kills these programs.  

Parents aren't as stupid or obnoxious as everyone makes them out to be.  Contrary to popular belief, most parents I know don't want their kid to play AAA (or even AA).  They just want their kid to play where they actually belong, and have fun without political crap like a team manager dictating tournaments that benefits THEIR family instead of the majority of the TEAM'S families, dads coaching just to give their less-talented kids more ice time, and boards who ignore it all because they are friends with those hacks.  

If a corporation like Black Bear solves these problem by looking at the bottom line ($$$) instead of playing favorites and creating an intra-organization (or even intra-team) "haves and have nots" culture that ruins the sport for the kids and their families, then I am in favor of it.

Can I ask a seemingly stupid question?

What is Esmark other than a name?  Isn't it the PLAYERS who make the team?

So couldn't Black Bear/The Huskies just add a AAA team and pull those players from the current Esmark squad?

To those families, there wouldn't be a difference, right?