HereForTheChirps

15 minutes ago, LGP13 said:

Weird, I couldn't find anywhere on their press release where it says SCIR is going from non-profit to for profit Vengeance.

So, 1 Logo, no other (PAHL) organizations to split ice time with, assuming increased fees. What are the positives of this move? I understand SCIR probably had to do it or they wouldn't have a place to play for their teams, but from the outside looking in, it looks like a dirty move by Vengeance to make more money with no upside for the teams forced to rebrand?

In a message to the SCIR members, it was clarified that the non-profit organization that currently runs SCIR will remain intact and will just have a new DBA. You hit the nail on the head, no other PAHL organizations at the rink to compete with.  That is the advantage.

Disclosure: I have a player at SCIR

 

16 minutes ago, Oighir said:

Depends on the parent/coach, in my opinion. Non-parent coaches would be a welcome change, but most of the time, it comes saddled with their training/lesson business on the side.  Or they bring in outside players. I guess my point is there are pros and cons to non-parent coaches.  If you can keep out the extracurricular unspoken requirements, that's what will help keep things neutral. Unfortunately, it's not an easy thing to do.

I'm just not sure it's worth it for AA programs to narrow the focus on coaching searches at this point. AAA should be able to sort out coaching without parents. The money is there, and typically, the resources, so presumably, you could get an outside coach without much issue.  I'd argue that's a perk of playing AAA among other things. 

There are certainly good parent/coaches out there, some of which I would much rather have coaching my kid than some of these paid coaches with the side training expectation mentioned.  Some of these guys are in it for the wrong reasons.  Many of the parent/coaches have a great hockey background and are not in it for the money, just the love of the game and wanting to help their kid and his/her teammates with their knowledge.

7 minutes ago, dazedandconfused said:

So the much maligned PAHL has 8 teams with 4 of them in the top 50 whilst the much hyped AHF has 31 teams with 8 in the top 50?

Huh? I never made the connection.

Yet, many on here laud the idea of traveling to the Jersey swamps for "better competition"

Don't forget the ability for the scouts to see how many goals Johnny scored.

I don’t think the Preds players will, they left for a reason.  The Badgers players were supposed to be on that team that folded.  I could see them going back.  There are a few on Mid-State in the same boat.

27 minutes ago, HockeyFan6687 said:

How many of those four top teams will take a hit when Esmark swoops in and takes their picks for their AAA 09 team?

I think each team may lose a few.  I don’t think any one team will be decimated.  I think Icemen and Mid-State will also contribute some players to the Esmark cause as well.  

I can say I'd much rather get my teeth kicked in locally at 16U AA and build towards the 16U major year instead of traveling 5 hours to play mediocre competition.

Looking at the scores and competition from the AHF, I don't think it makes any sense to travel across the state to play in that league.  

1 minute ago, sample39 said:

USA Hockey doesn't recognize 15U as a division under Tier 2, which is why you haven't seen a PAHL division for it yet.  

There are a couple of different approaches to this.  You can play up in AA as the minor birth year for the sake of greater competition but at the cost of winning.  I believe the Huskies did this last year.  Or you can play one year in Major Black and continue the build towards AA for the following season.  I believe the Hornets did this last year.  Both teams have similar records in 16AA this year.  So I would hesitate to say one route is better than the other.  It's more about what makes most sense for the team.  

Entering good tournaments, playing a solid independent schedule makes up for a lot of it.

2 minutes ago, RJUSHL said:

Who knows? A lot of 09 teams could improve and move up to AA. Foxes, Aviators, Yetis, etc.

Do you think a AA Minor division is a bad idea? Is it in the best interest of PAHL to create one and avoid losing three or four good 09 AA teams?

I think it is a great idea if there are enough teams

3 minutes ago, RJUSHL said:

You'd probably have 7 or 8?

Based on your previous post where the bottom 2 of 8 were off the list, who do you see adding?

Also, there are some ‘08 teams holding their own in 16uAA this year, what makes you say the top ‘09 teams won’t play AA?

Even if PAHL created a 16U AA Minor division, would there be enough teams?

Maybe it is just me, but it seems like some of the local teams are a bit more open to playing each other this season across all age groups.  Again, could be just my perception.