nemesis8679

No, you're right. Having no marketing to create appeal, interest, or simply let people know where and when you're playing HELPS organizations to grow a crowd. Never once have I seen a representative of one of the schools at a tournament so much as handing out some free tickets to the kids. Going to games isn't in anyone's minds, so they don't go.

Um, this is why the term "marketing" exists. None of these teams have that.

We'll see about that. It could be hearsay, but it sounds like the Aviators are going to be pressed a little for ice. A handful of teams, and a lot less slots for all of them than what Renegades or Vipers have. Sounds like some parents weren't happy with the coaching they had the last season and were enticed away by the Aviators coach. Now that they went and committed to Aviators, we'll see whether the grass is greener or not when the coaches they weren't happy with won't be the coaches they would've had again anyway, and that they'll presumably be getting less ice or a lot more shared ice now for perhaps more or the same amount of money.

I always thought it was crazy that Esmark, a legit AAA team, plays at the shit hole PIA.

What was that saying about a fool and their money?

I don't care for how the lower age groups are nothing more than a cash grab, leading kids and parents to beliI don't care for how the lower age groups are nothing more than a cash grab, leading kids and parents to believe they have a shot to stay. And also, of course, the whole excel / NC thing. eve they have a shot to stay. And also, of course, the whole excel / NC thing. Also, I notice the younger kids are great at drills, not so much at passing.

Well, the conservative free market line of thinking would be that as people complained and no longer wanted to play there, they'd have to bring in better coaches. All orgs fighting for the best coaching would bring every org up, right?

I think there should be a model where if you're from x district, you play for for the RMU. You're from y district, you play for north Pittsburgh. You're from z district, then Renegades is your team. Same with AAA teams. Juniors and up, yeah go wherever. Take the high school model for instance. Teams are separated A though AAAAA or whatever. Competing teams have basically the same amount of kids to draw from. Your district doesn't have a team, you can play a district over. Can't make a team? That's what house league is for. Everyone's on a level playing field.

Good points. Main drawback I see with spring tryouts is a kid who busts his ass over the summer and makes big devolopment strides could be playing down a level or two from what he should be once the fall comes. I'm sure part of having it in spring especially at the higher ages is also so they get obligated early. No chance to be on the fence and decide over the summer that they really don't miss playing and not sign up again. But with fall tryouts, at least you have a good idea who was serious enough to put work in over the summer. Both have pros and cons.

Yeah. Even if we take child abuse out of the equation, religion is hogwash to me. I went to catholic school though 8th grade, and I dont' believe any of it. So without going on a tangent, I'll just say that there is no reason that I would send my kid to a school where something none of us believe in is central to the environment. And that's without even getting into the discussion of a kid missing out on the experience of a regular, diverse, co-ed high school experience. There's other teams you can play for.

Yeah, that was my point. And the excel thing? No way my kid is doing anything at North Catholic. And to commit to that program for your child's alternative schooling- and cost- when PPE hasn't produced ONE nhl player? No thanks.

I would love to know, what in the hell does David Morehouse actually know about hockey?

Like I've said before. I've had kids pass up opportunities for summer teams or tournaments because they had obligations with a team they'd been on for years. "Well I can't play that event for your team, because if I miss this tournament/summer league/etc. with my other team, I'll never get back on it. I'm only on it now because I got on x-amount of years ago, and if I really have to legit try out again, I'm not really good enough to get back on. So if I wanna stay on that team, I have to play every event with them." So what's that say about how fair tryouts are? Not all of them, of course. But most coaches or "evaluators" will go with the known quantity or a liked personality or not wanting to hurt someone's feelings that they have known for a time over the new kid that beat the wheels off some of the other kids for 3 days of tryouts. Not with every team of course, but we all know how life works. Let's not be foolish. Of course, if a kid looks like Crosby out there compared to everyone else on the ice, yeah someone might get bumped from the team. But if they're just better, not heads-and-shoulders better, they aren't going to bump the incumbent. I can't help but think this plays a huge factor in having closed tryouts.

Ben and Bruce Hanus at PIA do a great job. They work them hard and get a lot out of the kids, without making it where the kids dread going there. If you're looking for hard-ass coaching, yelling, being loud, and whatnot, then they aren't the coaches for you. Like I said, they work the kids hard, but are positive and encouraging. They genuinely care about the kids' devolopment. That said, if a kid wants to work at 80% instead of 100%, there's not a lot anyone can do. It's mostly up to the kid as to what they get out of it.

Lots of players come into their own only when they get older. A kid that is naturally big, aggressive, fast, or a combination can rule the roost at 8-12 years old. Once everyone matures more even at an older age and kids are deciding for themselves to work hard or not makes a big difference, too. That said, and it happens in baseball and I presume other sports as well, is that the younger you start the less likely it is to be cut from certain teams that you were on prior. A combination of familiarity and personal attachments come into play. But just because you've been at whatever level for x amount of years does not mean you're necessarily the best player to fill a role and that somebody else can't take it. But, whether a coach or whoever picks someone over someone else just depends. And like I said, not always just because they're the best player.

What a bunch of jabronis.

Because hockey is a much harder sport. Just the speed that it moves at, it's hard to process information that quickly. Look at McDavid. He's fast, but there's probably at least a dozen players that are faster. Difference is, they can't process everything else at top speed like he does.

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.

Well, there you go. It's tough to make it.

No, not counting Hornets. Under the current "ownership" only.

So, since it's inception, how many players from PPE have played a game in the NHL?

I'm all ears...

Ah, I see...

Why was he banned from Renegades?

Everyone will be lucky to play ACHA, in the end.