Jump to content

RJUSHL

Members
  • Posts

    96
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by RJUSHL

  1. 10 hours ago, GrumpyOldPucker said:

    Ashley Veschi played at RMU - coached PPE, not sure where she is now or if she does private lessons

    Kate (Michaels) Binnie was captain of her D1 school, coached PPE, not sure where she is now or if she does private lessons

    Kaley Mooney now U14 girls head coach PPE played and coached at Miami as well as coaching U18 and U20 boys in Sweden not sure if she does private lessons

    Very helpful. Thank you.

  2. 20 hours ago, GrumpyOldPucker said:

    because if you haven't played at the highest levels you simply cannot know what you are talking about. 🤢😫🤐

    Hey Grumpy, obviously there are exceptions, but I don't think you would deny that there is a connection between top level coaches and a background that included high level playing experience, although I know most dads on here think they know what they're talking about. And specifically with skills and skating coaches, many young kids that are really trying to push their skating and skills are visual learners, and need to see someone demonstrate, not just bark orders like some of these old fat guys like to do. It's really not complicated to see why a group of kids would want a skills/skating coach with high level playing experience, that can still actually move on the ice.

    • Like 1
  3. NCAA players get "merit" scholarships all the time, even if they don't have a full athletic scholarship. Usually they are a collection of a lot of random small(ish) scholarships that add up to something significant. Everyone knows why they are receiving the scholarships. And it's also naive to think that athletic departments don't push college applications to the top of the list if it's an athlete they really want. Happens all the time. Admissions departments look at the full picture of the kid and aren't only looking at GPA and SAT scores. Athletics contribute to that overall picture of the kid.

    I'm glad a lot of the best prospects in the US and Canada are starting to see how good the NCAA development path is. Less games, more practice, more time in the gym, the start of an education, and just a great college experience compared to a kid playing a 68 game regular season schedule in the CHL. They end up playing 90+ games when all is said and done. That's too much for a kid in prime development years. I think we'll start to see more of the best prospects go USHL for two years and then head off to a good college program. I think that's smart.

  4. I started this thread, but in the Preds 09 defence, if they stayed AA, they likely would only have 1 or 2 teams that would give them competitive games out of the ten teams in 12U AA.

    It looks like they updated their name on MHR to now say "AAA" even though it's the same group of kids for the most part that have played AA PAHL for the past few years. As dumb as it is, adding that extra "A" may make it easier for them to schedule independent games once they made the decision to go that route.

    I personally don't like it when teams go independent because it weakens PAHL AA, but at the same time, they're a good team. I'm not going to call them "faux" AAA. Looks like in PA they may be bit below the Vengeance 09 team and right there with the Esmark 09 team. Hard to know how it will all shake out.

    https://myhockeyrankings.com/rank.php?y=2021&v=123&v2=124&s=PA

    And I can't believe I'm giving the Preds any credit at all, but I've heard they generally have decent non-dad coaches for their BY teams. Everyone on here rightfully so preaches development and I think (not always), non-parent coaches who have played at a decently high level are better for kids in terms of development. Again, there are exceptions to this, but at least the Preds have a lot of paid non-parent coaches.

  5. 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?

    But in one scenario you concede possession and then try and win it again. In the other scenario you try and keep possession with deceptive skating and quick puck movement. If you have defenseman that know what they are doing the regroup will not be in traffic. They may occasionally have to evade a good aggressive skating forward but that's hockey. Make a move. Find an open guy.

    I'm honestly not 100% convinced one way or another about this rule change one way or another, but I am surprised how people are immediately against it like it's a completely cut and dry issue. I think the jury is still out. I like what USA Hockey is trying to accomplish with the rule.

  6. 9 hours ago, RJUSHL said:

    The only appeal game I know about is the South Pgh 2009 team appealing their 12U Major Black Placement. They played the Aviators 2010 team yesterday in an appeal game. MHR shows a 1-1 tie for the game.

    Looks like South Pgh also tied Yetis AA and lost by 1 to Lebo AA. Not sure how PAHL placement committee will view those results. I'm guessing that's not convincing enough and that they will stay at Major Black.

    Also based on the divisions that were posted earlier in this thread, it looks like the Aviators 2010 team will play PAHL AA this year. Kudos to them for staying in PAHL and playing teams almost exclusively a year older than they are.

    I heard that the South Pgh team was moved up from Major Black to AA after the appeal. I'm surprised a tie would accomplish that. That means the 12U AA division went from 8 teams to 10 teams after placements and appeals. 

    Any other appeals that people know about? There are have to be some.

  7. 1 hour ago, aaaahockey said:

    Hope it goes better for them than most of the AA minor birthyear teams. If they lose all their games they might leave and go AAA independent next year. 

    Looking at the Aviators MHR, they've done ok against some AA teams that are a year older. Where did this team come from? I don't remember them last year in squirts.

  8. On 9/24/2021 at 9:05 AM, hockeyisgreat said:

    Has anyone heard of any appeals?  Any appeals games on Sunday?  Are Appeals Hearings automatically granted?  

    The only appeal game I know about is the South Pgh 2009 team appealing their 12U Major Black Placement. They played the Aviators 2010 team yesterday in an appeal game. MHR shows a 1-1 tie for the game.

    Looks like South Pgh also tied Yetis AA and lost by 1 to Lebo AA. Not sure how PAHL placement committee will view those results. I'm guessing that's not convincing enough and that they will stay at Major Black.

    Also based on the divisions that were posted earlier in this thread, it looks like the Aviators 2010 team will play PAHL AA this year. Kudos to them for staying in PAHL and playing teams almost exclusively a year older than they are.

    • Like 1
  9. 1 hour ago, hockeydadlife said:

    Is that what you have seen so far this year? I have seen many many AAA games and have seen no change. Other than more games ending at a curfew. Much like the no icing rule, they hoped for one result and it has not helped the game or players one bit in my opinion. Why not have set rules thr  the youth hockey ranks? Let the kids learn the complete game earlier and progress. Makes no sense to me.

    I’ve seen what you’re describing. For better teams it hasn’t made a huge difference. For worse teams the play is more choppy. We’ll see if they adapt or not. 

  10. 27 minutes ago, aaaahockey said:

    Be careful what you ask!  

     

    And I agree with you about the smaller orgs. The hockey world is small enough for many of us to put things together (and no I don't know who you are but beaver falls might) 

    You're probably right. I don't really care too much if he knows who I am but for some reason I struck a nerve with him. I don't have some super secret agenda. I try and be reasonable on here but I guess some people just take it personally when they disagree with an opinion. I've been wrong about things before and I'm sure I'll be wrong about things again.

  11. 2 hours ago, BeaverFalls said:

    Youve bashed “smaller” (see inferior) organizations repeatedly on this bored, while acting hokey and as if people can’t see through your thinly veiled act as to who you are and what you’re advocating.

    You sir, are a weird dude. 

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

  12. 31 minutes ago, BeaverFalls said:

    Obviously you have an ax to grind with smaller organizations.  Shouldn’t they opposite be true?  If an organization can field 7 teams, wouldn’t they have more money and resources?

    I have no axe to grind. I’ve really never had any major issue with placements. PAHL does a nice job imo. All I’m saying is that if an organization has two teams, there could be a wide delta between the top player and the bottom player on each team. Not saying that’s bad at all, just saying that has the potential to make placement more challenging. But they usually get it right. 
     

    I have no clue what I said to make you think I have an issue with smaller organizations. Your comment makes no sense.

    • Like 1
  13. 26 minutes ago, 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?

    This is a good argument. We'll see how it plays out.

  14. 10 minutes ago, Corsi said:

    I asked around last night and apparently this exact thing happened a few years ago with a State College team.  My friend phrased it like this, "they had a really good goalie and a AAA level defenseman and ended up playing in the championship game."  That team was apparently bumped to AA after blowing everyone out in their placement games and then finding their own appeal game that they were competitive in.  The "one or two players" scenario seems to hold most true at the younger age levels, where speed and experience can let a player or two have an extreme impact on an entire team.  

    That’s interesting. Placing teams in smaller orgs is challenging because there can be a large talent disparity between the top and bottom of the roster. You see this much less at places that field 5+ teams at each age group. 

  15. 1 hour 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…

    It’s always hilarious when someone tries to make (wrong) assumptions about someone instead of offering solid arguments. 😂

    Delayed offsides by definition = non-possession. This new rule change is subtle but it emphasizes skill and decision making under pressure. To me that’s a good thing. I’m not arguing it’s validity based on whether or not it’s easy or difficult for the refs. I’m arguing based on kids development as hockey players. Take away the easy option and actually make them think and be creative. 

    And I didn’t mention anything about the PK.

     

    • Uh, Ok 1
×
×
  • Create New...