Lifelongbender

Some discussion of this over on the "Tryouts?" topic, too.

35 minutes ago, Bob Loblaw said:

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/04/16/bradys-run-park-ice-arena-refrozen-coronavirus-bodies/

LOL, I logged on here specifically to post this, but you beat me to it.

I can hear the complaining by parents whose kids play there after this is all over. Neither of my kids have played there in over 7 years, but there are games there.

What a situation!

There are plenty of tournament companies still scheduling late summer and early fall tournaments as well.

T

12 minutes ago, Danner27 said:

Valid points and similar to what I have been thinking. Honestly, this is the end of how things once were. There will be a new normal that won’t happen until a vaccine is in place. I was just reading all summer concerts are canceled and it’s looking like they won’t be back until 2021, I suspect youth sports will be the same. Some of my friends disagree, time will tell. I do not think colleges even go back for the first semester, they continue online. Folks, get ready. If this is how it plays out western pa will lose a rink or two. 

The western PA region can hardly afford to lose any ice, but that does seem like a VERY likely outcome of this situation. Hopefully someone comes along who wants to buy them out, but it sure seems like investors for ice arenas are few and far between. There were already a slew of rumors of rinks closing or struggling as it was.

I expect that 'eradication' is a strong word for what is coming - I feel strongly that parents and players are too invested and dedicated to their sports for that - but you can bet that the new normal will be both smaller and weirder than what we had going on before. I worry if some organizations will have trouble getting ice in the coming new normal.

12 hours ago, aaaahockey said:

In general, many AAA families especially at younger ages, are out of touch with reality. I'd be shocked if they didn't travel unless there are specific regulations about it. 

Well, what I think is clear is that if hockey happens, there are PLENTY of people who will let their kids play. Even travel. That's just the way of the world.

23 hours ago, Paul Baxter said:

So in visiting the PIHL website and PIAA websites, the winter/spring sports are "suspended" indefinitely.  So when the suspension ends, say in early May (or whenever) does the PIAA and PIHL actually expect to resume sports in which their players haven't practiced for months? 

I have no idea why they haven't just formally cancelled things. Even if we get back to normal (??) on May 1, I just don't see it being of any practical nature to have HS sports for a month.  I just think these orgs are sad they will be losing $$ more than anything.

Remember that all the rinks are taking out their ice. Even if we could start in May, it would take a little time to get ready to play those games.

Sadly this PIHL season has to be considered over, even if they're not officially cancelling anything.

24 minutes ago, Snap Shot said:

I had a chance to speak to an organization's president last week and he said that he's anticipating August/September tryouts for PAHL teams with PPE probably going in late July depending on what happens with the NHL season since getting the Penguins back on the ice will take priority at that facility.

That's consistent with what I'm hearing from organizations around the South Hills.

From their 3/20/2020 update:

Quote

In addition, USA Hockey strongly recommends the cancellation of all affiliate tryouts, district tryouts, district/multi-district development camps for all birth years for the spring and summer of 2020.

1 minute ago, PeterThePuck said:

USA Hockey Strongly Recommends that there is no Tryouts Spring or Summer.

i don’t see Try - Outs until August September.

With the 2nd and 3rd waves coming do you think there will be Hockey next year?

If a Rink gets this Virus in their place and kids and Teams come down with it. 

For God sake if a kid dies with that a Lawsuit having the rink open doing this pandemic I don’t see Hockey next year.

I agree with @PeterThePuck on his last two sentences here - this is why I do think that organizations will follow USA Hockey recommendations.

At any rate, now that they've made recommendations, I guess we will see who is right about this issue eventually.

On 3/29/2020 at 3:29 PM, dazedandconfused said:

Maybe he should have been doing those during his playing days? For his own development. #drillkillerhimself

Hey, this is off-topic, I know, but  they played game 4 of the 2009 Stanley Cup series against Detroit on SportsNet the other day, and TK looked pretty good in that series. Anyone remember the goal he had in the second of game 4 from Kunitz and Crosby? Lord almighty. I'd forgotten about that play.

Yeah, it's hard to see how HS hockey could restart now. I've heard rumors that some of the rinks have taken out, or are taking out, their ice. Anyone know if there is any truth to that?

19 hours ago, dazedandconfused said:

I've heard both sides. You say they're good, others say he's just out there herding cattle and collecting money. I know this much, he caused the Beaver organization a lot of headaches by booking clinics and then sending other people to run them because he was off collecting money from another organization at another rink. I don't think there is a whole lot of morality shown by him. Not that the same can't be said about many others doing the same thing.

I'm sorry to hear that. I can only speak for the ones my kid went to, which he was personally there for, and the mandatory coaches checking clinic I went to when I started coaching bantams a few years back, which he ran personally, and which was better than what I expected. I thought those were good sessions. I'd be disappointed, too, if I had those experiences.

I'm nearer to where he is, though. Might be that he's more likely to come out himself down this way.

19 hours ago, dazedandconfused said:

Maybe he should have been doing those during his playing days? For his own development. #drillkillerhimself

Well, however he may have practiced as a player, his on-ice sessions are pretty good.

I haven't watched his off-ice videos, though. I'd guess they are pretty good.

On 3/21/2020 at 11:20 PM, nemesis8679 said:

Yeah that was a good article. Also the one one Michel Briere. 

Yeah, that one was a good one, too.

There's a remarkable article on The Athletic (sadly, a pay site) about a small number of the things that made Mario great. The video cuts are worth reading the whole article.

I don't normally think posting this sort of thing here is right, but in a spring with no hockey, this article is a breath of much needed oxygen.

https://theathletic.com/1685688/2020/03/19/marshall-the-tape-on-what-made-mario-lemieux-le-magnifique/

1 hour ago, The King said:

I’m not sure I understand. You’re saying the government (State and federal) isn’t deciding the processes regarding COVRID? You think USA hockey makes these decisions on their own? 

Perhaps I was unclear, if you sincerely thought that first sentence was what I meant. Those two sentences are not mutually exclusive. From a regulatory standpoint, the government is making at large decisions about businesses being closed and gatherings being restricted.

At the same time, I do think that, like virtually all companies and organizations in the US, USA Hockey is setting their own official policies, in addition to those of the Federal and State authorities. In general, those policies are probably based upon, or actually nothing more than references to, government policies. I am entirely unsure what would happen if, for some reason, the government said it was OK to resume normal living and USA Hockey still wanted people to hold off on hockey operations. It's not clear to me what effect a USA Hockey policy would have in this case. Since the organizations rely upon USA Hockey for collective insurance, they may have more influence on organized hockey operations than expected. The assertion made above that the purpose of insurance provided by USA Hockey is to protect USA Hockey is only partially true; the insurance makes it much less expensive (and, perhaps in some cases, is the only thing that makes it possible) for local organizations to have insurance to protect the local organizations, and to protect the rinks. Without the insurance provided by USA Hockey, it's likely that many organizations would not be able to afford insurance in order to have operations.

This is all academic, anyway, because I strongly doubt that USA Hockey would adopt a policy that was at odds with a government policy. In the case of complying with a government policy, that is its own built-in defense in a court room (which could be either weak or strong, depending upon the issue and the case, and the locality).

26 minutes ago, The King said:

I agree. Nobody should be having tryouts. But it has nothing to do with any perceived authority the governing body has to tell anyone they should or should not. The state and federal government is deciding what is acceptable and what is not. But here’s an example of what I’m talking about- say the CDC has given an all clear on July 1. USA hockey sets a date of August 1 For commencement of tryouts. Local rinks will open ASAP in order to begin making money again whether USA hockey says so or not. So if the rink is going to hold the clubs to their contracts, why would anybody not have evaluations, set a roster, and start practicing ASAP? If your answer is because USA hockey said so, you’re wrong. They have no legal authority to keep any organization from conducting business. That includes forming rosters and collecting fees in order to pay ice contracts. Simply doing things because USA hockey says so is irresponsible 

Obviously I don't agree with all of this, but the final truth is that we will see what happens. It's easy for any of us - myself included - to make predictions we will ultimately not be held up to scrutiny for.

You just can't have tryouts, or any other events, in the face of a set of best practices prepared by the governing body. This is for both liability and optics reasons. Nobody will hold tryouts if USA Hockey tells us not to.

22 minutes ago, sadday4hockey said:

This is assuming that everything post-virus is status quo. I just don't see that being the case.

Starting at the Tier 1 level, PPE and Esmark mainly, are people going to be so quick to make that huge financial commitment?

For some, and maybe many, there is the reality that hockey gets axed from the family budget. I definitely see this having a major impact on the sport both Nationally and locally alike. Perhaps it will help to fix a few things and keep more teams playing more local hockey instead of the independent Tier 2 and faux AAA schedules. Unfortunately, it's also going to create a decrease in the number of participants next season.

You will also see a lot more "choices" being made between School hockey and amateur hockey. No longer will there be as many players able to make the financial commitment to both teams.

That's an interesting take, @sadday4hockey. I hadn't considered the financial component of the current crisis in my model. I don't think it changes how tryouts will work, though.

On the other hand, there is probably an interesting discussion to be had on the potential effects of the COV-19 situation on hockey in the region in general, assuming that it continues to be an issue for any significant period of time. Surely there will be financial effects in everyday lives over time. That was a very interesting answer.

11 hours ago, hipcheck66 said:

Here’s how this will work most likely:

PPE will announce their post-Virus tryout schedule

Other organizations will attempt to schedule in the week to 10 days that follow

Since this is exactly how organizations schedule normally, this seems the most likely outcome this time too.

1 hour ago, Jack Handey said:

Not in my organization.  April decisions are made in April. 

Honestly, and sincerely, that's great. That's probably how it should be.

I'm not an expert on other organizations, but in my organization the top teams are, in general, pretty much set (maybe needing to add a player or two) LONG before tryouts. I'd guess that's true of others, too.

50 minutes ago, Chinstrap said:

Probably not a stretch to think that most every organization already has their top two or three teams at each age grouping already chosen; probably been chosen since January or so.

This is surely 100% true.

14 minutes ago, forbin said:

In theory couldn't most organizations hold tryouts even as late as June/July and still keep there normally scheduled August practice start times? Yes, this wouldn't be ideal, and I know there are teams that practice and/or play in tournaments over the summer but at least it wouldn't derail next season completely. I am still optimistic that the real big threat and impact of this will be a thing of the past come May or so.

Well, yes, assuming that the ice is available. Many rinks have already contracted out their ice for the summer nearly completely. This is a challenge. It's not an easy situation, sadly.

This as been on my mind. One assumes that contingency plans have to be in place (though the way that most organizations work, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that most of them don't have a plan at all). I know I have been talking to people about this at our organization.

My kids are scheduled to tryout in mid April, and their tryouts begin just at the outside edge of most closures. It's certainly interesting times.

They told my son's JV team that it was postponed.

Honestly I suspect cancelled anyway.

1 hour ago, Saucey said:

Don't you guys have anything better to do? Danner27 and The King (think it is the same guy) love it when someone takes their bait. Just move on.

I agree.

Whether or not they are the same person, one thing is clear: it's not worth feeding their fire by responding to them just to argue about who is a parent on a team. They both say things worth debating from time to time, but in the end those discussions seem to always turn to accusations that the other party in the discussion is a parent on the team, as if that is somehow sufficient to invalidate whatever that person may be saying.

I'd love to debate hockey topics here, and not have to spend time arguing about whose kid plays on what teams. That's not worth discussing, except where it has an actual bearing on a conversation rather than merely being intended to somehow belittle a parent.

For the record, my kids don't play for ANY of these organizations, and are both A players. I enjoy this discussion board when there are useful discussions about hockey and related topics. I don't see how arguments about who has the bigger stick are useful. It's best to just ignore the boorish behavior (when it happens, and from anyone) rather than giving the guys who post that stuff what they want: attention.

Just my $0.02.