carroll81

1 hour ago, Wes said:

Here is the video from the stands.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UKKes4MinEWIv7iqTmlNpMKcbPLgkqJj/view?usp=sharing

 

The 2 guys that separated the player did a nice job.  They could be linesman. 

The guy trying to separate the other 2 failed.  Once they're down, just lay on them.  They will get tired after about 10-15 seconds.

5 hours ago, nemesis8679 said:

So I agree with what you're saying. That said, at that age, some kids don't listen well. Some kids are slow (physically slow but putting out effort is one thing, lack of effort is another), or not good shots, or make bad decisions. After all reasonable coaching efforts are made to improve that player, ice time is the next motivator. If you can't put in maximum effort and getting beat to the puck constantly or trying to skate through as many opposing players as you can before turning the puck over or you continue to be out of position or take too long of shifts or blindly throw the puck around- you shouldn't be taking ice time from those that are not doing these things. If so-and-so knows coach will put them out just the same as the kid who's blocking shots, racing to pucks, making hard passes, and they can continue to not play to maximum ability, there is no incentive to do any different. Yeah, that kid should be sitting more of the game than the kid who's working hard. Anything different is not fair to the kids who are busting their asses. It's okay to just want to play hockey and have a good time without getting too serious and getting the same ice time as everyone else- that's why there's in-house leagues. 

 

And to clarify, I'm not talking about players who just aren't as gifted as others, I'm talking players who aren't putting effort in. If maximum effort is being used, then that's a completely different story. 

 

I agree with this and would add that sometimes you are up against an opponent that not everyone will be able to compete against.  So, a third line might go every other shift or not get a penalty kill shift.  But, then you make it up to them on a game where they can have more success.

4 hours ago, Happy Hockey Fan said:

If you want the kids to learn positioning, have them play deck hockey. Kids that have played or play deck hockey are always better at positioning. 

I'll go one step further, if you want them to learn positioning, have them play Basketball, Soccer and Lacrosse.

2 hours ago, fafa fohi said:

I just heard the Vengeance just poached acquired a defenseman from a Renegades team.  Word came from a very reliable source - can anyone confirm?  It cannot be true because something like this would never happen, especially from such a dignified organization this late into the season.  Say it ain't so.

Nothing like some fresh chum going into the holidays.

Cheers!

Trade deadline.  Coaches making moves.  Rosters lock in 8 days for USAH.  ?

6 hours ago, Lifelongbender said:

"E-sports" are much cheaper and, outside carpal tunnel syndrome, don't cause injuries.

And they have none of the traditional positive health effects, either.

One can see why schools wouldn't hesitate to add them, given how glued most kids are to their consoles. But what a shame.

There is a surprising number of college scholarships for e-sports now available.  It will soon surpasses that of hockey, if it hasn't already.

On 11/10/2021 at 10:09 AM, Pa Hockey said:

Great point or like Illinois the Penguins and Flyers could choose to invest in the community hockey programs ? The Penguins Cup and Flyers Cup should be in the NHL Arena to Start ! 

Playing high school hockey in an  NHL arena sucks.  The novelty wears off quickly when you are only filling 3 sections of the arena.

The Flyers have been investing in community hockey for years through Ed Snider Youth Hockey.  They have raised and spent millions.  They have paid for the city to reopen rinks.  Their youth hockey program (Snider Youth) has teams playing at all levels of Tier 2.  They are a fantastic program and very successful.  They are an example of professional sports having success in diversity and inclusion, before it was a thing.  Their efforts will never result in more growth of high school hockey though.

1 hour ago, AMR24 said:

Hi! So I am following this closely. My son is also a senior BUT could still play 1 more year of AAA next year. We are sort of in a weird area where he’s not sure if he should do another year and aim towards juniors (which is where he wants to play but feels like his time is running out) or just jump into college and play club for 4 years; like UPJ or Allegheny. And we have no clue on how to get him on there list for playing. I never thought about filling out new player forms…I’m just feeling overwhelmed and I know he is. Any guidance on this will help!

Have you talked to your club coach and program director?  They should be able to give you a good read on where your son falls. 

2 hours ago, Danner27 said:

Actions like this have plagued western pa hockey for 20 years. It will never change. The schools need to take over the teams. NA is the only school district to step up I think. it took somewhat of a similar situation for them to do this but my old mind is failing me anymore. I’m sure someone around here can post the exact reason. Regardless, varsity hockey would be in a much better place if it was a official school sport. no more boards, no more parents running things. 

  It would be nice, but the school principals and ADs (i.e. PIAA) will never vote for it.  The current high school hockey establishment (cartel leagues) will never suggest it.

The school districts will get involved these days.  At least in the East, the leagues talk to the districts about grades, etc.  Many teams are recognized by the schools (get varsity letters).  So, the principals and ADs will get involved if they have to, though they would prefer not to (lots of other things on their plates).

2 hours ago, Shrimp Worters said:

 

You and a few others have commented about your experiences at this rink, thank you.  Other than not allowing high school games to be played at this rink, perhaps PIHL has limited options.   This rink appears to have had issues for years.   While there is plenty of blame to go around, the rink management and rink owners (Armstrong County) deserve the most blame in my opinion.  The players, coaches, refs, fans and administrators all change over the years but this rink seems to be the one that stands out having a consistent long term problem.

I would suggest that others light a Flame and share their experiences/stories at this rink to educate the forum.  I'm sure the stories are out there, so please share them.

Hopefully the slap on the wrist by PIHL is not the end of justice here.  Statue of limitations won't end for a while.  Hopefully the family pursues action against the rink management and the rink owners (Armstrong County).  Nothing causes change like a big pinch to the pocketbook.  Even if the family doesn't need/want the money, it could be donated to a cause and help prevent this from occurring to another child.

  What, exactly, are you going to sue for?  What is the statute of limitations that you are talking about?

1 hour ago, Mitch said:

Release I just got

That seems like a reasonable response.  Maybe they could have addressed the security/police presence also.

Thanks for posting.

2 hours ago, hockeyisgreat said:

"My rant was solely directed and the constant ref bashing that goes on by know-it-all ass hats that HAVE NOT, CANNOT and WILL NOT ever attempt to do the job. I will reiterate..... What will all of you do when nobody will put on the stripes anymore?"

 

SO TRUE Grumpy!  The stripes are the most important people and there is no way that they get paid enough for what they do and have to endure so that our kids can play the game. I do disagree with them at times but I always respect what they do.

Without Referee's, it's just recess.

2 hours ago, nemesis8679 said:

They're totally culpable, they're there to be in charge. Warning, penalty, eject. This has been already gone over. They can stop the game right there. I've seen it happen over much less. C'mon. 

Is that a PIHL or MidAm policy?  In the Atlantic district, we can't issue any penalties for spectator behavior.  We eject them, stop the game until they leave, and have the team(s) identify the person.  Can does not resume until all that happens.  Then all the information is added to a supplemental game report.  It is up to the league and district to take further action.

The ICSHL has security at games here.  They handle any crowd issues.  We really don't get involved.

As for the Mars coaches pulling their team... that's a big no-no.  It is a match penalty for refusal to start play. 

Not sure what I would have done if I was working that game.  But I will say that the league and district would not let it happen again.

2 hours ago, Corsi said:

Yes, from what I heard from some parents the top division was Tier 1 AAA, the middle division was Tier 2 AAA, and the bottom division was a "high AA/low AAA" division.  

That sums up the whole argument we have been having about AAA now.    If you have to have 2 divisions of Tier 1, it is not Tier 1. 

To satisfy the market, let's just make everything a division of Tier 1.  Problem solved.

3 hours ago, Saucey said:

I think the main takeaway from this very helpful discussion is 'stay in school, kids.' ? This is good stuff guys, ty.

Yes!  If your goal is to play sports in college.  One of the first questions the coach will ask is "What are your grades?".  In that question is: what coursework are you taking, what school are you attending, and what are your standardized test scores.  They have to justify every kid on their roster.  Stay in school, study hard.

5 hours ago, Danner27 said:

Yes, the mid west division that has lindenwood operates like it’s ncaa d1 making up merit scholarships for anything they can. this trend started about 6-7 years ago. No, you are not going to play hockey on a full scholarship (most ncaa d1 kids are not on full scholarships at the mid to small programs) but they find creative ways to get the players they want.  Most acha m1 programs will In some way offer some finical help for players they really want, the kids considered top players on the team, but it’s the top programs that really pony up for kids they want. I’ve have not heard much or seen much in regards to this at the m2&3 levels. 
 

locally, I know a kid rmu gave 4k a year to for a language scholarship to help push him to attend and play. Yes, it’s not much but he’s a local kid that wanted to attend rmu anyway. Tuition around this time was 18k a year if you commuted. This player had pretty good hs transcripts with a very high sat score. After all the normal minor stuff, academic achievement scholarships etc I think he was down to 14k a year then they added the language scholarship for another 4k. In the end he got 16k over 4 years due to his hockey ability. This player I’m speaking of is a 99 who spent 6 years at PPE, my oldest played with him -  do the math, this was before excel was around, a season at PPE During these years with travel was costing around 8-9k.  I was told rmu does not often operate like this but they knew this player was considering a ncaa d3 school across the state that cost 3xs more. 
 

to continue locally, I have never heard much about the other schools doing much of anything like this but I’d be willing to bet if there is a kid they really want who has other options via academics, more than likely the coach will help the school find some coins in the sofa to create some sort of merit scholarship, but you better be a STELLAR HS student with very high SAT / ACT scores. I know the tests are optional now at a lot of colleges but they are still a big driving force behind academic money. 
 

This is good information.  I will add that you can look at this from the other side also.  You can use hockey as a way to get into a school that you might not have a shot at getting into normally.  With the competitiveness and diversity initiatives of universities, having a coach be able to put your kids app on the top of the pile and have a discussion with the admissions office on your behalf can be the thing that gets them admitted.  You still need the grades though.  This doesn't happen for every player, but can help for some.

On 9/22/2021 at 11:40 AM, Jack Handey said:

You can have a 50-50 battle at the blue line, or you can have a 50-50 battle behind the opponents' goal line.  If you want to see more offense and more scoring and just as much creativity, let them have the battle behind the goal line.  The new offsides rule forces a puck carrier at the blue line to turn back and re-group into traffic.  On occasion I have seen as many as 8 or 9 skaters between the blue and the red line because of the turn back.  Yes some creativity will be required to keep possession.  But the rule forces more play and more time spent in the neutral zone with high traffic.  Is this really what we want to see and where we want to play the game?

 I see your point.  So I paid a little more attention to the neutral zone play in my games this week.   Rustin vs. Downingtown - Puck comes out of zone, D to D and right back on the attack; either a quick pass to a forward cutting through the middle, pass opposite to a wing on the blue line or skate it in.  In a rare instance of a clogged zone or a line change, it's a pass back to the D partner to change a side of the attack and try it again.  So, it is really not a 50/50 battle in the neutral zone because you never give up the possession to begin with.  Still plenty of cycling and play below the goal line. 

Reminded me of a game last year when Bishop McQuid(?) from Rochester came through.  It was maddening how they would never dump the puck, ever.  They would cycle all the way back into their own end if they had to.  If they could not generate a clean zone entry, they would reset and do it over.  Sometimes 3-4 times.  Crazy.   When you do it like that, it is actually easier to maintain possession.  You are spreading play out over 2 zones, instead of jammed in one.

I watched the NHL teams do it on the powerplay last season and it would drive me crazy.  I now see the value in it.

15 hours ago, BeaverFalls said:

It sounds like you’ve just completed your first level cep and had your head pumped full from the good idea fairies from usa hockey.

kids get better by playing the game. Not by constant whistles and stoppage of play.

There is no proof that automatic offside has made anyone a better player. It’s simply there because it’s easier for newer and unskilled officials to make the call than managing the numbers of delayed off sides. Same with icing at all times. It makes it easier to just call an icing regardless of game context. 
 

Creativity on the penalty kill is about the last thing you want to be teaching young players. Positioning, reading passes etc on the other hand…

Newer officials were not working games with delayed off-sides.  Level 1 officials work below that level.  They are not putting rules into effect to make it easier for officials.  They are doing it to change the style of play.

Finally worked a bunch of games this weekend.   Worked every age group, mostly T1.    Surprising results:

1. The icing rule has not stopped anyone from simply icing the puck on the power play.

2. The offside rule is not that big a deal.  The good teams are regrouping back through their D.  Once in a while there is a whistle off a bad bounce, etc. 

3. The competitive contact rule has led to more contact off the puck.  Many of the T1 teams were using a lot of man-to-man D, with position battles everywhere.  Was not expecting this at all.

Interested to see how this goes over the next few weeks.   Don't think it's time to reject the changes just yet.  Need another 4-6 weeks to see what happens.  Same reaction occurred when the Standard of Play was first introduced and all the obstruction penalties were added.

33 minutes ago, RJUSHL said:

So what's your solution to minor year BY teams leaving PAHL and going independent? Is there anything PAHL should be doing that would help the situation?

 The birth year thing grew out of Tier 1, because of the Midget level, complicated by USAH using a calendar year vs. school year.  Coaches/scouts wanted to see the 15U's.  That is the year they wanted to focus on.  Many other sports use graduation year  once you get to the older ages. 

Once the legitimate college/junior bound levels started to do that, everybody  else wants to keep up with the Jones. 

My solution for the older groups....  the districts should mandate that to be eligible for playoffs, you must be associated with a recognized USAH Tier I or Tier II league.

2 hours ago, Pucks11 said:

...

 

It doesn't matter because in the long run if the kid is good locally then they leave before any of these organizations can fully develop them. 

This truth is the way it is today.  If they are still local after 15U, that is pretty much the ball game.

1 hour ago, BeaverFalls said:

The whole checking rules are a mess. A player can be in possession and still not allowed to be checked. The hell does that mean. I’m not talking about incidental where it’s in their skates and they don’t have the puck. 
 

The verbage from USA Hockey is intentionally ambiguous and confusing. I think, maybe, I know what their intent is but it’s too vaguely worded for the average person and kid to understand. 

You have to be in possession AND control.   You can be in possession without being in control. 

For example, I am stickhandling up the ice and dump it into the corner.  I am in possession and control until I dump it.  I am still in possession until someone else plays the puck.  No more finishing the check, because I am no longer in control of the puck.

It is going to take a few weeks for this to even out.  Just like when they introduce the Standard of Play a few rule books ago.   It took about 2 month for that to work itself out. 

1 hour ago, Jack Handey said:

Got my new rulebook.  Does anyone else find that it feels twice as thick as the last rulebook?

New book: 408 pages.  Last book: 394 pages.   NCAA: about 170.  NFHS: 145 pages.

Winner?  NFHS!

1 hour ago, hockeyisgreat said:

RMU students started a petition on Change.org to have Dr Howard removed as President.  So I guess they didn't reinstate Hockey for 21-22 and are still leaving it open ended for 22-23 depending on how much fund raising gets done.

They raised $40k so far.  That ain't gonna cut it.

3 hours ago, Novos51 said:

We participated at the 18u tournament for Central. Got bronze on a tie breaker to the west. Here is how it stacked up

North Team - some college kids (ACHA mostly) some T3 kids and a mix of skill form Wilkes Barre area. Lost big to East, pretty big to Central, and beat West

West Team - Similar mix bit more skill from around Pittsburgh area. Beat central 5-4, lost big to East, and lost to North

Central - ACHA kids from Mercyhurst, Kids from Icemen, some AA, and a mix of others.  Lost to west by a goal, beat Central pretty big, and lost 6-4 (with EN)

East - Basically entire team was Jr. Flyers and Genesis. Kids said team was built two months prior and had been practicing. It showed. 
 

Our central team after two games really blended and gave them a heck of a game. 
 

This tournament is huge for the Philly area apparently. Not so much elsewhere. Central had a hard time getting kids. Lots of counties but really only four or five actually have hockey. The west has a large base to draw from but their isn’t anyway PPE or Esmark is going to let their kids play!

My son and the players really enjoyed it. I didn’t like the three game format. No playoff feel. Tie breakers decided 2-4. 

You might be mixing up your regions.  Looking at the program rosters for 18U, the East was mostly from WBS teams.  The South was mostly Genesis and Team Philly, with one Little Flyer and one Philly Elite (Hollydell).

15 hours ago, Lifelongbender said:

A couple years ago some officials were enforcing this, at least in the preseason. They were penalizing the third man into a battle. It will be interesting to see if this gets widespread enforcement this season.

It was put in to clarify what they tried to eliminate in the last go around.

Two guys battling in the corner, third guys comes in and checks the opponent off the puck - Penalty.

Two guys battling in the corner, third guys comes makes a play on the puck (can use body positioning)  - No Penalty.

They also clarified the body contact while two players are chasing the puck.  Just because there is contact prior to getting to the puck does not mean there is a penalty, even if one player ends up on the ice.  As long as it's a battle for position, no penalty.

Nothing here is really new since the previous rulebook, at least in terms of how they want it called.