Lifelongbender

Ok, that makes sense. I know that I have played there in various adult league functions. It was hard to imagine a HS game on it.

I am asking this question sincerely - are you saying that there are high school games played on the Stadium Rink at ISC? That's hard to believe for a number of reasons, by far the most significant of which is the fact that it isn't regulation sized. The neutral zone is so short that staying onside is a serious challenge in breakaways when you first start playing on it. Plus when Pittsburgh doesn't really have a winter, like this year, the front corner ice is awful.

This is the edge of what I was referring to about how these organizations have damaged girls' hockey in the region. Well said.

Yes, there are a good number of female players in the Pittsburgh area, especially at the U12 and U10 ages. PAHL, the Penguins, and USAHockey are all pushing to expand girls hockey. Personally I think this is a good thing, but YMMV. So here's the thing about the Pens Elite move. Virtually all the girls play co-ed hockey up through U12. Girls do tend to drop out more than boys do at all ages, but what happens at U14 is body checking. While I think it's a large minority, there are many girls who, either because of their own preference or the preference of their parents (and man, both are common), decide not to play co-ed hockey at the U14 (bantam) level and above due to body checking. Remember that body checking - as opposed to body contact - is not permitted in girls' or womens' hockey AT ANY LEVEL, INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL. A number of PAHL organizations are making efforts to develop more robust girls-only programs to give these girls a place to play if they choose to stop playing at U14. But in order to accomplish this in an effective way, it's important to have solid programs for the U10 and U12 levels as well. Some girls look forward to the competition and excitement of full-on body checking hockey (although the truth is that introducing delayed offsides makes a bigger difference than body checking at the bantam level - for the love of Pete why not introduce delayed offsides earlier?), but at least a large minority do not want to play against boys in full-on body checking. Now the Pens Elite are offering full-time teams for girls at all ages. They have the resources, like ice time and coaching staff, and the roster of players, to do so. Most PAHL organizations are not going to be able to field full-time girls' teams at levels below U14 because their girls are playing and want to play co-ed at this age level, and even at the U14 level there are plenty of girls who continue to play co-ed, which makes offering a full-time team even at that level tenuous for most organizations. But the Pens can do it, and for the reasons above it's in their perceived interests to do so. Regarding the statements @The King made about SafeSport, there's probably some truth to this. There are few rinks in the area that are equipped to handle more than two or three girls in a girls' locker room at a time. Any U14 or above game that features just one girl on each of the two teams is going to have trouble finding separate facilities for their female players to get ready in, because most of our local rinks have girls' locker rooms so small that two bantam or midget-aged players can't get dressed in them together. This is certainly true of all of the former Bladerunners facilities. This situation does come up, by the way. Obviously there is a huge difference between a Pens Elite-type program and the typical PAHL organization program, but these underlying justifications for these moves are still largely the same. Regarding money as a motive for this, I don't see it, though I am certain that there are going to be a number of responses that use a bunch of dollar signs to make that allegation. For a host of reasons, it would be a much less risky way to make money at the U14 level to offer more teams for male players. It strikes me as a gambit in their drive to increase girls participation in hockey at every level. I predict that some of the PAHL organizations in the region will try to follow suit if the Pens Elite programs work out and offer full-time girls teams for PAHL play, instead of the current model that is for part-time girls teams pretty much everywhere. I could continue to write here about how the Pens Elite and other similar organizations have also damaged girls' hockey in the region, but that's a topic for another time. This move was inevitable, really. Hopefully the Pens Elite doing this will entice girls to keep playing at older ages, and enable the local organizations to build complete teams for them.

LOL. I remember that discussion. Good times.

Yes. I agree wholeheartedly. That feels like a recipe to waste half an hour of expensive ice.

Never had any issues there myself, but I've never been there late at night.

This is a fair question, @The King. I was speculating about why a kid would come so far, to a place where they speak a different language, when opportunities much closer to home exist in abundance (and there are very good opportunities for development in Europe). This might have been somewhat uncharitable, but that wasn't my intent. Frankly, I don't have the issues with PPE that many folks who regularly post here seem to have. As for the rest of your post, I generally agree with what you said.

@nemesis8679 while I agree with you regarding your second paragraph, if we have learned anything from this message board, it has to include the realization that there are a very large number of people who are irrationally concerned with their player "getting the best opportunities" and playing a the highest possible level, rather than simply letting their player enjoy playing. Now, regarding the question posed there, I assume that you move here from Kazakhstan because you haven't been given a better shot with anything really advanced over there - I haven't the foggiest notion what PPE-level opportunities exist in Kazakhstan, though obviously there's lots of high level hockey in Europe - and the PPE can offer you financial help courtesy of all the lower level players they accept solely to generate revenue for this specific purpose. My guess is that there is a certain type of person who views such an opportunity in the US as superior to one in say, Sweden, for obvious (if somewhat fantastical for the simple reason of the very long odds) reasons. It may be that in Boston they're not looking for recruits in Kazakhstan because their hockey culture is so much more advanced than that of Pittsburgh. Lord knows. Seems like a serious ordeal to go through for such a small chance of the huge paycheck to me.

Wow, you were being serious? I'll bite - so what? Predicting that the Penguins might be involved in construction of a new rink is not exactly earth shattering. Of course they will.

Umm, fellas, I think the CC reference was a joke. You know, something that rarely occurs here because too many folks have no sense of humor whatever. At least I hope it was. I certainly took it as a joke. If it wasn't intended as a joke, it is simply another kind of joke.

Yeah, you're right. I don't know what I was thinking. Rough morning!

Yeah, I'm afraid that @HereWithPopcorn is right on this one. The floor there is a permanent wood floor. There isn't going to be any ice hockey there in our lifetime.

Don't underestimate a few things regarding the rink itself, too. You'll be going there quite frequently for six or seven months in the year, so the distance and convenience is a factor. Also, you'll actually be INSIDE the facility quite a bit; if it matters to you, for instance, Pittsburgh Ice Arena (NP) has a gym in it, a decent snack bar, and is convenient to the turnpike. Lots of parents take their kids to practice and hit the gym for a workout while their kids are practicing. For me, the convenience of the rink to my home trumps all of these, since I am typically on the bench or on the ice with my kids anyway, and not standing in the lobby waiting. But I hear comments about these things from parents all the time (because our home rink does not have some of these amenities). At any rate, because you'll be going there all the time, these are things to think about. @RegDunlop7 and @fafa fohi made good points that don't need to be repeated. (Though I have to agree that when an organization messes around with schedules instead of having a set schedule for a season, it is pure misery.)

And, of course, there's also the inevitable question of why the whole thing is such a big deal to so many who aren't directly affected. If the kids' families have the money to pay-to-play, and it matter that much to them, so be it. It's on the kids and their parents to do the research and be properly informed.

I agree 100%. This design takes care of one of the crippling issues that site would have had - parking. I can't see any way to make the Armory work without parking vehicles inside the building, under roof. I also read that the City/County/DOT have committed to upgrading the local road there. Because access to this location is the other crippling issue. It is not going to be an easy site to get into and out of, and I bet the locals come to hate the rink almost immediately because of the traffic.

Well, I assume that if you can build a sheet of ice and a refrigeration plant this way, you can get the Zamboni up there, too. Hard to imagine they missed that in their considerations. Dumber things HAVE happened, though.

One of the guys I know sent me to this website when I just asked him: http://www.perkinseastman.com/project_3432843_hunt_armory_ice_complex And to this website as well: https://www.nextpittsburgh.com/city-design/hunt-armory-ice-rink-office-development-moves-forward-thanks-to-state-grant/ The key takeaway is a paragraph near the bottom: "Once completed, the new and improved complex will be centered around two skating rinks — an NHL regulation-sized rink and a smaller, 100-by-60-foot rink." That's one sheet of hockey-suitable ice. It would appear that parking is planned for indoors.

I've heard conflicting rumors about this, some from people in a very good position to know. I'd love to hear the truth on it, too. I don't see how six hockey teams could drive to, park at, and then get out of the Armory at the same time (if they use the typical two on the ice, two coming in as two leave model). I'd heard they were planning to park cars under the Armory's roof, but I then heard that was off the table. And I just don't see how the neighborhood roads can handle that level of traffic. Cool building though.

These two sentences probably apply to the "AAA" teams at every organization in the entire tri-state area.

If an overnight camp is what you're looking for, my kids have both enjoyed the Kent State camps for several years. It's close to home and reasonably priced.

Boys, at some point you have to come to the realization that trying to convince a guy he's being a jerk ends up making you sound just as bad as it goes on. Just go to your account settings and ignore the guy who bugs you and your days will be much happier and maybe we can actually talk about hockey constructively rather than just argue about who is the bigger 1) idiot and/or 2) jerk. Just my $0.02, but I actually like the hockey talk that sometimes breaks out here during the fighting. For my part, I haven't seen any evidence that fear of competition is a serious issue at the JV games I attend with some regularity. I guess maybe I'm stupid, but that's my observation.

I don’t know about the Vengeance, and the various reasons why a rink would or would not have LiveBarn. But I do wish that LiveBarn had a Roku app.

YMCA (the old Bethel Park Bladerunners) doesn't have it.

Obviously this is hearsay, but you're saying that a player who was at the meeting for a disciplinary hearing lost his temper? Wow, it's hard to see how that could happen. You'd think they'd have been well coached before they got there. Of course the entire incident probably invalidates the supposition that the players are well coached. But that's just hard to imagine.