carroll81
-
Posts
175 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by carroll81
-
-
17 minutes ago, HSFBLJ said:
Eliminiating all scholarships, now kids actually decide to go to college for an education. Novel idea... There is big money behind college athletics until that dries up or goes somewhere else we are stuck with the low level coaches who gladly take your money promise you the world and have no idea how to deliver. Hockey is the poster child for all of this. Roughly 70 schools offer scholarship hockey. 25 players per team 1750 scholarships. You can probably cut that up and push the number to 3000.
The math is actually worse than you show. NCAA D1 hockey has only 18 scholarships per team. D2 has 13.5 per team. Average team size is a little higher. The teams can split the money up. I would be curious to know how many actual full rides there are. My bet is not many. As Covid and the RMU situation show, you better like the school.
-
Moving to a three official system is actually worse in terms of watching all the players for roughing, head contact, plays behind the play, etc. USAH only recognizes the 1 Referee, 2 Linesman system, so that means only 1 set of eye watching for those types of infractions. At the levels you guys are talking about, it is not a good investment.
The issue, as several have allured to, is the late starters, late development kids (bad AA, younger A, and all those 3rd and 4th A teams). These players get little or no introduction to body contact and angling, now referred to as Competitive Contact. They are still working on skating fundamentals, passing and shooting. Adding a third skill that needs to occur while the other 2 are happening is not good. They would benefit from a non-checking division.
Those levels are also where you have the most diversity of skills. It is really hard to officiate, especially for the guys and girls that typically work those games. It is a vicious cycle, that most league and organizations are not really paying much attention. My prediction is you will see more non-checking divisions going forward. Not by USAH fiat, but by leagues and admins reacting to the market. Back to rec hockey, but not called rec hockey, because it will upset many parents.
-
42 minutes ago, forbin said:
Not to completely derail this thread but building of this comment: Looking at how the AHF is structured I think it would be a really smart move for those organizations at Black Bear rinks to join the AHF as a supplemental program. Looks like they play 2 showcases (8 total games) and 8 AHF regular season games, that you could easily schedule in 2 or 3 weekend trips to NJ/MD/ Eastern PA. It appears the majority of the teams in the AHF also play in their local travel league as well.
So using 12U as the example your looking at (20) PAHL regular season games, 4-5 weekend trips to AHF territory for 16 more games total (showcases and league games). Maybe throw in another local tournament and one to Buffalo or whatever for an additional 8-10 games and you have a nice 44-46 game schedule with some variety in travel and teams played. From my perspective that sounds pretty sweet.
@bb2j3z since you're involved in the Rebellion, what are your thoughts on this idea?
AHF is starting out as an alternative to the EJ as supplemental games/showcases for SEPA and NJ teams. Notice that it is the teams in the area that are owned by the rinks. Those rinks were renting ice to the EJ for their showcases and those clubs were buying ice for their EJ games. Running the league themselves brings that revenue and cost structure totally under their control. The clubs will also still participate in their local Tier 2 leagues (DVHL, NJYHL, etc.). For now, it should reduce travel and cost for the teams also.
Another benefit for the teams is that they don't travel to Boston, only to play in a showcase with teams from the area. As @forbin mentioned, it could be a good option for SWPA teams as well, if it can replace some of the other travel that you guys are doing.
-
2 hours ago, hockeyisgreat said:
It is my understanding that there is no Tier 2 U15 division. Is that correct? Why would any organization playing in Tier 2 want to field a team of all 06 players then? Just trying to understand all this. Thanks in advance.
There is no U15 in USAH Tier 2. Organizations do it to market to the parents that think it is better.
Tier 1 added U15 to help with the scouting/recruiting. That is the year when legitimate junior and college programs are making decisions.
-
44 minutes ago, hockeyisgreat said:
So I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that the only answer is to move to a hockey hotbed with a 10 year old if he is a natural athlete to begin with? How do you know at 10 if they will have the drive at 16? How do they have a better chance to develop? Maybe you are saying to let them play where ever and if they are good enough at 16 tryout for PPE. Up until then its just a waste of Money? All very interesting! I sure don't have an answer. I do know that being a natural is not enough without the internal motivation.
There are lots of kids that may be "athletic" at 10. The ones on the "elite" teams at that age are usually there because they developed sooner than the other 10 year olds. Moving to a hockey hotbed is not going to change that.
If you asked me to choose which 10 year old is going to be the better athlete at 18, I'm looking at the parents. Did they play sports in college? Did they play any sport at a high level? Are they athletic? I'll be right more often than looking at are they on the 10 year old elite team.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Saucey said:
What's the definition of competitive contact??
All new and improved Body Contact:
"Changes “Body Contact” to “Competitive Contact” and incorporates language from Declaration of Player Safety, Fair Play and Respect to more completely define competitive contact."
We also now have "Physical Engagement""
"Adds new Glossary definition for “Physical Engagement” and is defined as: Two players who are in pursuit of the puck are allowed to use competitive contact provided that possession of the puck remains the sole objective of the two players. This includes opposing players competing for the puck in front of the goal or along the boards."
Can't be good when there are as many changes to the Glossary than there are to the actual rules in Section 6.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Saucey said:
'Most officials didn't call it that way' is a big one. Most officials around here do not call 'there must be a play for the puck before hitting'. If the officials aren't on board, forget it and it's just confusing for everyone. And there is a shortage, so they've got the power.
Looks like they added some wording regarding the contact before playing the puck. Lots of updates to the glossary regarding contact, not to mention how to apply Major penalties when there is an injury.
"Adds new Glossary definition for “Physical Engagement” and is defined as: Two players who are in pursuit of the puck are allowed to use competitive contact provided that possession of the puck remains the sole objective of the two players. This includes opposing players competing for the puck in front of the goal or along the boards."
The first month or so of the season during rule changes years is always interesting,
-
1 hour ago, Saucey said:
The same. What happened in Pittsburgh with the sale of 'elite' status to parents happened all over with youth sports. It would have come in some form or another.
Agree with Saucy here. It's in all sports.
-
2
-
-
On 6/15/2021 at 10:02 AM, forbin said:
So their solution is to have kids learn this facet of the game only IF they make it to Juniors/College/Pro. Um....what?
Also, can someone clarify the icing on the PK rule for me, does the shorthanded team have to gain the red line to dump the puck? Or is it this subjective "they have to make a play to get it out of the zone" rule?
Icing is now always in effect at all times.
-
1 hour ago, Saucey said:
Ah. So is that rule an effort to reflect the realities of programs and ice scheduling, you think? That would make sense.
I think so. As for the adjustments to the penalty times, that also more closely reflects what was happening locally. Many districts/affiliates were already adjusting the penalty time based on period length, which was allowed.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Lifelongbender said:
I cannot tell you how many times I have seen officials get confused about the different rules for the same age levels, too.
Also, can anyone make sense of the fact that JV uses 13 minute periods, while both midget age groups (16U and 18U - the same age range as JV) use 15 minute periods? By the way, that means that JV penalties will now be 1:30 minutes long. Midgets, too, but JV? Come on.
Period length depends on how much ice time you buy. Crazy here in the East:
Tier 1 Midget - 17 minute periods with an ice cut
Tier 2 Midget - 16 minute periods, no ice cut
Varsity - 16 minute periods, no ice cut (Flyers Cup is 17 with a cut)
JV - 15 minute periods, no cut
Prep School - 17 or 18 minute periods with 1 or 2 ice cuts
Local Tournaments - midget is typically 13/13/15, no cuts
-
Unfortunately, the Fighting Planets didn't have much fight in them after the long bus ride to West Chester. They went down to Allentown CC 14-5. Congratulations to them for making their first state final.
For those who don't care and want to keep the tenor of the vocal hockey posters, obviously Allentown is sandbagging in the AA division and should be playing AAA since they can recruit.
Finally, there are probably more lacrosse guys from western PA playing NCAA lax than there are playing NCAA hockey.
Oh, and Pens Elite still sucks.
-
2
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, hockey57410 said:
So what...
Pens Elite sucks... PAHL should just become the faux AAA league... Anybody who's kid plays in the PIHL is just throwing money away... and my son would be in the NHL if that crappy squirt coach hadn't cut him.
Better now?
-
2
-
-
A little off topic, but Mars will be playing in the PIAA Lacrosse AA championship this weekend. They will be playing against Allentown CC. It is the first time a team from the west will be in a title game and it will be the first time there is a non-Philly champion. Good Luck to the Fightin' Planets!
They play at 2:30 on Saturday, followed by the AAA final (Kennet vs. Radnor). PCN will broadcast the games.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, mrfreeze said:
It would seem strange that NCAA would be pushing this right now, starnge thing is RMU had plans to move the mens program to UPMC with the third rink, I don't think seating was to much better, but they would get an amazing locker room and access to the Pens workout facility. Being so far off campus did not make sense to me, but I do think it would have helped them recruit kids. I know when kids are looking at schools and junior programs the main thing they really look at is the facilities, sometime more than the education factor. Penn State has really taken over in this area as the go to and I think the rink and locker rooms has lots to do with it. The USHL facilities are also amazing, These programs are really spending money in this area. I think now would be an excelent time to push the Hunt Armory project, with Peduto on his way out we may see this actually happening and you could get the Pens and one of the local schools to step up and make this a home rink with a path to Division 1 hockey, Chattam could move in, Pitt and CMU are right there, Duquesne is not far. This could really be a good option for these college, add some diversity programing to make the current Karens happy. You could also work with PIHL and make this a netrual site location for games of the week. That location has plenty of space to build mutiple locker rooms for these programs, Central Catholic would also be a great option and could really grow it's program to another level. If they do the mini rinks, you could offer a great ADM option and use those for training and lessons. Just takes the right people to get behind it.
Hockey is going to help Chattam, Pitt, CMU, and Duquesne with diversity?
If hockey can bring in kids that will pay full tuition, those schools will consider it. Otherwise it is a non-starter.
Unless some rich alumni decides to pay for it.
-
Colleges are re-evaluating all the sports programs. Covid accelerated the financial decline of many universities. I would be curious how many of the effected athletes were paying full boat vs. on some type of aid.
Quick look at the finances of Bobby Mo show that they are struggling. Enrollment is down. They cut staff. Their endowment is one of the lowest of the 800 colleges in PA and is poorly managed. At ~$37m it is less than the cost to run the place for a year (~$59m).
Bottom line, they need to attract full paying students.
-
The latest few post show the problems of hockey and youth sports in general today, especially regarding "development".
Many parents want "development" because they want to keep up with the Jones and brag about their kids
Some/many parents want "development: because they have unrealistic knowledge of college admissions and sports
Most of the kids just want to play games.
What USA Hockey advises for development (3:1 practice/ game ration; playing multi-sports) is not what the market (families) or the suppliers (rinks/clubs) want.
The suppliers follow the market.
-
3 hours ago, hockeyisgreat said:
How do you know that going into tryouts? Very tough decisions to make when your kid really wants to play AAA. How do you know which team is a good investment. I guess maybe limit tryout to the top 3 and if you don't make it move on to a good AA team?
Ask the players. As much as the parents like to think they know who the really good players are, they usually look at the players and teams through a colored lens. The players know who belongs on various teams and who does not.
-
Wes, is this the right bracket format, or am I finding the wrong tournament?
-
18 hours ago, aaaahockey said:
I guess that's part of the question - if I can teach you IQ as a lacrosse or a basketball coach why can't a hockey coach? Serious question too - I don't have the answer.
That is a great question. My thoughts on it are that the movement of lacrosse, basketball and even soccer are similar - move to space, setting picks, set plays, fast breaks, slow breaks, etc. These are all concepts that are taught in those sports that directly contribute to on ice awareness. You get to see those things in different spaces, with different numbers of players, taught by different coaches.
-
1 hour ago, nemesis8679 said:
Too much emphasis on skills drills. Everyone can be Pavel Barber with an empty net and some practice.
Once there's opposition, less space, and someone in your face everytime you touch the puck, then it's a different story.
Knowing what to do in tight space and when you have pressure is still a skill. You teach it using small area games. If they are not doing small area games at your practices, then there is a problem. Doing these types of drills will also help with IQ, or what I think Denis was referencing as the IQ that coaches want to see. But, it is more than space and opposition. It is awareness, pattern recognition, seeing the ice, knowing where the play is going. That is much harder and many/most can't get there.
-
It is hard to coach IQ.
There are lots of coaches who can run drills out of the Coaching Manual. There are fewer coaches who can actually coach proper skills. There are fewer that can coach IQ.
If you want to increase IQ, play other sports. Basketball, soccer and lacrosse.
Even with great coaching, many kids will never develop IQ.
-
31 minutes ago, Jack Handey said:
Yes, for Tier I. Tier II playoffs are a few weeks out yet.
That seems crazy. Nationals are not for another 7 weeks. You can get another whole season in before then.
-
Is this your district tournament to determine who goes to Nationals?
My Hockey Rankings getting data directly from PAHL?
in Western Pennsylvania Youth Hockey
Posted
It is primarily done by volunteers:
https://myhockeyrankings.com/report_scores.php