sadday4hockey

Okay, but give us another reason. I just looked back, when SHAHA won they were in 3A and so was Mid-State in 2014 but that was 3 years after they won 16U 2A in 2011 so maybe they chose to or were told they were playing 3A. Armstrong runner-up team played at 2A and SCIR 3A. SHAHA and SCIR - larger than Altoona and Armstrong Like I said, I think that's it but I'm not certain. At least I've provided some data and a thought process whereas you continue to state your opinions.

Guy is a great Coach and he's true to himself. He's everyman, from Pittsburgh. Love the Chapeau.

I think it's based upon the size of the organization itself and how many total members they have or how many they average. I'm not certain about but if anyone has the motivation to look at past Armstrong results, that would be an indication. And even the old Mid-State teams that were so loaded. As far as the HS Nationals, that's just a bad HS tournament with a fancy name. Not that all the teams are bad but as stated above, the competition is greatly varied and makes for some ugly scores.

Players and organizations went there for the cheap ice rate. That's why Esmark did everything they could to move, the new pricing severely cut into their profit margins. You have to have something really good to get people to drive to that area.

While that may be true, the PPE laid the groundwork for early recruiting with the "Elite Mites". They use the Jam to secure every participants contact info and then the great push by Trevor Edwards to get them to bring their SuperStar to the only place for developing their great talents. Then 5 years (2 @8U) of bleeding them dry before they cast off more than half at 12U Major and then of course, the final purge of local players at 14U and 15U to get the high rent out of town players to stay, play and mostly PAY. What a great job they've done growing local hockey.

Pretty sure all of those factors are used in "competitive formula". It may not be perfect, but no one has presented a better alternative since it started and I think the vast majority would agree it's better than the old alternative described by Racki

I think at Tier 1 all 16 are accounted for for 18, 16 and 15. Didn't check 14's because ...... well, they actually earned that birth.

Look at Myhockeyrankings. All the flags appear to have been assigned next to the teams. It appears they got in at 15U and 16U but not at 18U

Nothing like openly flaunting a violation of the Tier 1 recruiting rules. Strange that they have 05/06/07 together since 05 falls in the 18U age group.

Let's wait and see if North Hills survives tryout season. Other that the older Esmark age groups, NHAHA as a whole is on unsteady footing.

This!!! Without a doubt. However, I hear the CFR (Chief Financial Recipient) and others are quite happy.

Yes, definitely an unfortunate way to lose but all 3 Tier 2 divisions were tightly contested and many teams were capable of winning at each age group.

That was a gutsy call by the referee in OT. It was the right call but kudos to whoever it was to have the backbone to do it because we all know the NHL guys would never do it. That kid was just medically cleared from injury on Friday and notched two GWG's this weekend including that one. Something surely he'll never forget.

Esmark 14's with a strong 0-3 fifth place finish. Guess that name change, Coaching change, league change really had a positive effect.

Keeping Tier 1 up to date, Tier 2 not so much.

It's typically NOT a strong field. Not to take anything away from the teams but there are typically no teams from Minnesota or New England so.......

I think on the surface this approach would be a good place to start but after giving it some thought realized that something like this would make the Ohio split-season teams ineligible. Ohio hockey has a rule that players are not allowed to play HS hockey and amateur hockey at the same time which is why that system works there. Ohio HS is not under USA hockey but under the Federation Hockey umbrella.

Pretty sure they are 05/06 this year. That's why some bolted for the vaunted Icemen I thought.

Right? The Stan's tend to enjoy war as much as we enjoy our hockey nonsense.

So the world today exists only for 2% of the players currently playing? Because that's probably the percentage that will ACTUALLY play more than club hockey.

Viewing those two links above, neither the Tier 1 group and especially the Tier 2 group strike fear into any top 25 programs. That Tier1 thing makes some sense for all those east coast teams but it would appear to add a lot of travel for Esmark? Did they leave the NAPHL and the trips to Minnesota and Texas?

Right, so now Yuri is the standard bearer for hockey value?

I would LOVE to see an accounting of what they have actually paid out in claims over the years versus what they have collected/paid in premiums. Your personal insurance is always used first so only people with no insurance or limited coverage can even start the process of trying to utilize their insurance and while I've thankfully never had to look into it I do know several families who have and they it's a very difficult process to deal with.

I see you used the word we're which implies you have a player on the team. Perhaps you should check with your organization because your team is NOT listed in the 16U Tier 2 NB rankings for Mid-Am District. https://myhockeyrankings.com/rank.php?d=MM&y=2021&v=127 This could signify a couple of things such as your organization never filed the paperwork or they filed the paperwork for Tier 1 and then tried to change it to Tier 2 (love that about face option) and were denied.

They take the rankings as of a certain date so they can plan accordingly. Teams close in ranking may have interchanged since then. They are listed as Tier 1 which means they aren't eligible for Tier 2. But hey, they'll all be back to buy another vowel I'm sure.