Corsi

14 hours ago, aaaahockey said:

Apparently that team is going "AAA" next year as well.  Seems questionable to me to make that jump the first year of checking. 

Not sure how it's "questionable", all the 2009 teams are going to be playing their 1st year of checking, regardless of "AAA", "AA", "A", or "B"... so its equal footing for everyone from that perspective.  

3 hours ago, twoboys said:

And it doesn't exactly look like SHAHA made it easy for the 09 team since they had to buy ice at Rostraver at times. 

I reached out to my friend about this.  It has nothing to do with the SHAHA organization not making it easy to schedule the independent games, it was that the ice time was already accounted for by other teams in the organization having PAHL games scheduled, which took precedence to the independent games.  He did mention that the organization and the scheduler have been very supportive, but this was an issue with other teams within the organization's regular season game schedule being a higher priority.

On 3/4/2022 at 12:59 PM, RegDunlop7 said:

You're missing the point. There's no reason that the top Pittsburgh-area Tier II teams can't play in a competitive PAHL division (20 games) then use the remaining 20-30 games on their schedules to travel for tournaments/non-league games.

In theory that is the best way to do it, I know that 2009 SHAHA did that exact thing this season (I know it is only Pee Wee, but it's a good example).  I'm friends with a parent on that team and from what I've been told, the issue comes when scheduling the extra 20-30 games.  The "AAA" teams ranked in the 50-100 range won't schedule a team with the "AA" next to it because it destroys their ranking if they were to lose or tie.  So the "AA" team ranked in the 120-150 range doesn't get a chance to challenge themselves against better teams without having the "AAA" next to the name.  I'm sure that sounds crazy, and it is, but that's the way that clump of teams schedule, in order to keep the "AAA" moniker alive.

On 3/2/2022 at 2:50 AM, mrfreeze said:

Over the last 10 years 12u AA, 14u AA and 16u AA usally have 4 competive teams, the other 6 suck. What is the real benifit of staying in PAHL to play 2/3 of your games against crap. They can still get local games against the 3 or 4 simular teams and then find other simular games.

Thank you Mr. Freeze for stating it this way.  That is the problem that PAHL runs into and the reason you have teams going independent.  Playing a PAHL AA schedule is similar to going to a tournament with 2 strong teams in a division and 4 weak teams, you still HAVE to play games vs. the weak teams.  As a parent of a player that has since aged out, I used to HATE traveling to Buffalo, or Detroit and having to be at a rink at 7AM to play a game that ends up 10-0 with a running clock.  Very similar things happen every weekend in PAHL at the AA level when one of the "powerhouse" teams has to face one of the lower level teams.  These are also the games that often end up featuring high penalty minute totals and parents acting like idiots out of frustration.  I get the reasoning behind playing an independent schedule if you are one of the strongest PAHL teams in a given BY with little or no competition within the division.

Teams have been doing this for years with the EJEPL, which has allowed teams to play their DVHL schedule and also an approximate 20 game EJEPL schedule.  Some of those teams have left EJEPL and are now part of the AHF (Black Bear).  I could see some of the "AA" PAHL teams leaving PAHL for a something similar as this and then supplementing with an independent schedule.  It would allow there to be 20 or so games already scheduled and then independently schedule however many additional games the team decides to offer.  The question that should be asked, in my opinion, is what league will offer the best competition, because if you are going to travel to NJ, Philly, or Virginia for league games, the level of competition would need to be higher from top to bottom than what teams are getting currently with PAHL.

I don't feel like people are complaining or anything along those lines, but are simply pointing out how things have evolved over the past 15-20 years when it comes to youth hockey.

Yes, Silver Sticks was a "big deal" going back to the mid to late 80s.  Now, the higher end teams don't attend and instead go to the CCM Invite and Super Series events.  The point about knowing who you are going to play is a big deal, especially when teams are putting together their schedules.  You would run the risk of having some very unhappy parents if you spend the time and money on a tournament and the teams are not even remotely competitive with each other.  

Anytime I've coached younger kids we always used off ice to introduce systems and get the players to at least have an idea of where they should be going.  I've watched a bunch of Pee Wee AA Major hockey this season because a friend has a son that plays at that level, and I still enjoy going to the rink.  What is very noticable is what was commented on before, the lesser skilled players still allow themselves to follow their eyes to the puck, instead of understanding the idea of spacing, and how spacing can lead to chances.  Prime example last weekend in one of these games when on winger stayed wide, while there were 5 players bunched together in a scrum, puck came free, the kid picked it up, and beat the defenseman wide for a breakaway goal.  If that players doesn't recognize to stay wide and out of the scrum, there's ZERO chance that goal happens.

35 minutes ago, sadday4hockey said:

If your 12U or younger team has a set group of players for the PP, you should ask the Coach, why?

Roll your lines, teach them all PP and SH situations and you will be surprised at who are some of the more capable players in these situations.

PK requires a lot of thinking and desire. PP requires an understanding of spacing and puck movement.

Nowadays, all of these traits can be difficult to find in players.

You missed my point.  They are not running a set PP and are just turning over lines, but my point is that the kids are pretty much only getting 1 unit out per PP attempt, with the second unit getting 10-15 seconds if they are lucky.  Not enough time to get a change.

It has definitely worked at the younger age groups so we don't have kids taking a hooking penalty and missing 2/12 minutes in a given period.  The only drawback I've seen is how quickly the PP opportunities go by.  This has lead to very little time to give different groups of kids the chance to get PP time.  This has also lead to less chancse to get set up in the zone and begin the process of learning to "set-up" on a power play.  From talking to some parents I know with kids playing at the 1min penalty levels, all the chances come off of the rush and very few are during "extended" zone time where the kids get to develop quicker decision making and passing skills.

The head of the WPIAL was on Pittsburgh radio this morning (93.7 The Fan) and she addressed this exact question.  She alluded to it being a cost issue and said that hockey has its own league (PIHL) that handles the affairs of the league.  I worked in public education for years and had the chance to talk to a few athletic directors about why hockey wasn't an official school sport and was treated as a club sport.  The answers almost always had to do with cost, insurance, or Title IX requirements.  

2 hours ago, muckerandgrinder said:

I’m going to play devils advocate here but judging from my experience, a sizable percentage of the parents who have played hockey do not yell at the referees. That is a solid statement that I can get on board with.
   That said, a lot of them do tend to lend their “expert” opinions to other parents in the stands in regards to not only officiating but other topics such as questioning makeup of lines, d pairings, PK/PP etc. Parents are new to the game are easily influenced by another parent who extols a type of street cred simply because they played hockey at some point. 

Great point...  I was lucky, I only coached my own son up until he moved up to Pee Wee and then we switched to a larger organization that already had experienced coaches in place.  I still volunteered and helped out with practices when it was needed, but I rarely had to go on the bench anymore. 

What you say is really accurate about "experienced" hockey parents having an influence is true, but that is a symptom of the lack of parental education that goes on within organizations.  When parents aren't being taught something they will naturally listen to whoever is around that seems like they know what is going on and what they are talking about.  This especially true with younger kids and their parents as they are just starting out in the sport.  

2 hours ago, hockeyisgreat said:

Don't you think the majority of kids playing nowadays have parents who played hockey? I'll bet it's close to 75 percent. No facts just what I see.  Mom's yell the loudest! Dad's get on the Refs more.  Just my opinion!

It is probably less than 50% of parents that have played at best, and I'm not counting the dad that started playing beer league at 28 years old and thinks because they started watching hockey in 1990 knows everything there is to know about the game and how it's supposed to be played, just parents that grew up playing the game and have that as a point of reference. 

I agree that Mom's yell the loudest and that Dad's are on the refs the most, but again I feel like these are the parents who didn't grow up around the game and think they know about the game, but actually "know just enough to be dangerous".  These are the parents that I never wanted to be anywhere near when watching a youth game.  There's a reason that, from my experience, that the parents that grew up around the game for the majority of their lives are usually the parents who watch the game from a corner of the rink away from the shit show that happens in the stands.

18 hours ago, aaaahockey said:

I tend to see very bad parent behavior in Hockey and Football almost all the time.  I don't see it as much in lacrosse, baseball, or basketball, at least not to the serious level I've seen it in the other two sports. I know it happens but I go to every hockey game expecting to see bad parent behavior whereas I go to other sports not expecting it. 

I've heard some horror stories about soccer and baseball when you get into the kids playing tournament teams, not so much at the lower levels.

We shouldn't limit this to just hockey.  It is across all youth sports and at all skill levels.  There's a reason leagues have issues with getting officials, coaches, and other volunteers when they get to spend their freetime dealing with idiots.  

28 minutes ago, aaaahockey said:

Lebo played in the middle division and did excellent.  That's the same division many of those Preds teamed played in.  Whether they are AAA or not isn't my call to make lol.  

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.  

Esmark 09:  0-4

Preds 09:  0-3-1

SHAHA 09:  1-1-2

23 hours ago, BACKCHECKING said:

The kids who start playing squirt and peewee for PAHL are at a disadvantage to the kids who start out playing for PPE, Esmark and Vengeance. A player who only gets (2) 50 min of shared ice practices a week and 30 games a year in PAHL will not develop the same as a player who get (2) hour + practices and 60 games a year. 

Kids develop better with practice than they do with games.  If you bring it back to what Preds are doing by going independent, the SHAHA '09 model is probably more economical.  Play your PAHL schedule, add a few tournaments, and then a fill in the rest of your 50-60 games by playing multiple "home at home exchanges".  Cost would be more than PAHL, but you are getting more out of it, but still substantially less than going full independent or PPE.

18 hours ago, forbin said:

We know. We all know this, but unfortunately for you not all of us have kids that old yet and this is a forum for discussion. Therefore discussion of younger birth years will take place. 

Thanks Forbin.  I've been lucky enough to be around youth hockey between playing and coaching for probably upwards of 90% of my life and have coached from Mites to Midgets.  Most parents don't get the education that is needed for them to understand truely what the odds are of their player moving on to higher levels, or even what those levels look like from a skill level.  Unfortunately, with experience we know that the jump from "B" to "A", "A" to "AA", "AA" to "AAA" all get exponentially harder as a player moves up the ladder.  I will always go back to parent/player education as being the most overlooked aspect of youth hockey.

To steer the discussion back towards what we were originally talking about, there is some value in discussing and watching kids at 12U play.  I've been lucky enough to watch kids that you can already see are going to be able to advance and thrive at 14U because they do play a borderline physical game at that age, while there's also the other end of the spectrum of the kids that shy away from contact at 12U and are going to struggle greatly and probably end up giving up the game, or not advancing to higher levels of play because of that.  I do believe this is where the value of having major/minor at 12U and up would be valuable and also illustrates why teams might chose to go independent.  I've always felt through the years that higher level of play will almost always = more physicality because the players have better control of their bodies because those players are better athletes in general.  If you have a team that is going to physically dominate other teams in their "home" league, then there is value in going independent.  Anything can happen during a game and a team can/will run into a hot goalie sometimes and lose a game that they dominated every other aspect of.  Should that team have to dominate teams that they are going to beat 95% of the time or maybe play a schedule that ends up in a .500 or .600 record and the kids get challenged?

I don't think a few teams choosing to not play a PAHL schedule is necessarily hurting the growth of the game.  I'm probably going to sound like a broken record, but there's plenty of ways to do this, but teams playing games vs. out-of-town teams as opposed to PAHL wouldn't be anywhere near what I would argue could help "grow the game".  These players still live in Western PA and will probably play PIHL for their schools as they get older.  If you want to "grow the game" here's a few suggestions that would be way higher on the list than teams playing independent:

1.  Better "learn to play" Programs

2.  Find ways to make the cost more affordable

3.  Better parent education programs

4.  Coordination with other sports to allow kids to participate in multiple activities at the same time instead of forcing early specialization due to conflicting schedules.

5.  Organizations/coaches have honest conversations with parents about where their player truly is skillwise.  There's a big jump when an "A" player moves to "AA" and there's an even larger jump when a "AA" player jumps to "AAA".  Parents who are "undereducated" from a hockey perspective won't understand this and thus make decisions based only on the number of "A's"

Feel free to add to the list.

Heard from a few sources that they won't return calls from PAHL '09 teams when they try to schedule them.

13 hours ago, sadday4hockey said:

Your 06 and 05 are inverted.

06 is Allegheny

05 is Steel City

Got it, thanks!

Highest Ranked PAHL Teams:

'09:  SHAHA

'08:  Steel City

'07:  Allegheny

'06:  Steel City

'05:  Allegheny

On 9/25/2021 at 10:49 AM, twoboys said:

I don't think that is the reason.  I think it has to do with most smaller organizations are the only game in town.  Thus, the parent of a high level AA or AAA kid must decide if he or she wants to drive to another organization with a better team or not.  Or stay put and have their kid dominate at A Major Black.  This is usually the case in Squirts and to a lesser extent peewee.

Thank you twoboys.  That is exactly what I posted last week when it comes to higher skilled players at the younger age groups.  When you have that happen at a smaller organization there isn't a population of like skilled players to pull from, so the better players and their parents have to make choices as to where to play.

42 minutes ago, RJUSHL said:

You sir, are a weird dude. 

What am advocating exactly? And who is it that you think I am?

I don't think he's "bashing" anything.  I've been involved with both ends of the spectrum and there's pluses and minuses when it comes to both.  Within PAHL, there are more organizations which would be considered on the "small" side and only a handful on the "large" side.  I believe that RJUSHL's point has been that in the current make up of the league, small organizations are at somewhat of a disadvantage on the ice simply due to the numbers game.  I haven't read any of his posts and had the feeling that he's anti-small organizations.  Much of what he's stating, is for the most part, true within the landscape of PAHL.  The reason some organizations are at a disadvantage is due to their location and the the population of the area where their rink is located.  It is nearly impossible for organizations like State College, Indiana, Lawrence County, and Beaver County to compete with the likes of Mt. Lebanon, SHAHA, Allegheny, etc on a yearly basis.  It is not those organizations fault, it is simply a numbers game and I feel that RJUSHL is just pointing that out when he is making references to "small" and "large" organizations.  This ultimately does come into play when you are talking about placements and the competitive balance within the league.