Knowing when to parts ways with coach/team

[Macky85]

With tryouts around the corner, we are trying to make a decision if we should stay or go. I am sure this topic will produce many responses of differing opinions, but we need some guidance from families that may have experienced this in the past. Most of our friends that coach older age groups think we need to move on if the coaching isn't going to change for next season. Its not a personality issue the coaches are great guys off the ice, but more so, what seems to be coaching knowledge/experience and a group of dads running the bench. I know, we'll likely deal with dad coaches (which I have nothing against if they're doing it right) anywhere we go except for maybe AAA, which were not at that level.

My son is a first year squirt on a mix year team playing PAHL upper A. There's pretty good talent on this team, but their development and record do not show it. Their record is well below 500, but with the talent on the team it shouldn't be. They continue to fall apart in the 3rd period. Its completely understood they're kids and are learning but it appears the coach can't get through to them.

The following are some of the developmental concerns myself and other parents have expressed.

Its close to the end of the season and the kids still can't pass efficiently nor do they want to. Its a me first mentality. Even from the second year players. They can't change on the fly or change efficiently. Sometimes shifts are 2 minutes plus. Have never worked on PK or PP. Only two players have moved positions all season. They are two of the stronger players and they have been moved from F to D periodically. None of the other 5-6 top forwards have switched positions. Pretty much other than those two, no players have played another position.

The following are some of the concerns with the coaching decisions.

Putting lesser skilled players on defense, will not shift them to wing. Pairing two of the weakest defenseman and putting them out there on the PK. All season parents (who have coached and been through this a time or two with older siblings) and coaches (from other teams) have suggested not pairing the weaker players and to at least move the one to forward, it has gone nowhere. Majority of the goals are when these players are on the ice. There are enough solid players on the team that could play defense. 

Short shifting the weaker forwards, sometimes they're not even getting 10 minutes of ice time for a game. We typically have 2-3 full forward lines so they all should be getting at least 10 minutes. If we are down a center for a game, rather than spreading the double shifts amongst all the forwards and having a wing play center, one of the centers gets double shifted. That one player tends to be on the ice over 20 minutes in a 36 minute game. Do you think that player is even effective come the 3rd period. 

The dad running the forward door puts his son on the ice any chance he gets. He literally has his son parked next to him at the door, everyone else has to fall in line behind him. Even if there are 3 lines,  everyone else goes to the back, he stands next to the door. At times his some has come off the ice and puts him right back on. There are fresh forwards standing there. Putting all 3 centers out on the ice at the same time and then leaving one out there after already being on the ice for a full shift. Apparently this dad has a reputation of doing this outside of this team and other parents expressed they would not even consider playing for a team if he's on the bench.

I know the head coach doesn't always see what's going on, but its been brought to his attention and this dad is still on the bench. Some of the parents have tried to be respectful and have had meaningful conversations with the coach throughout the season and we have discussed our concerns with the manager, but nothings changed.

I know the grass isn't always greener, but should we ride it out another season and hope for improvement (providing my son makes the team), play down for one of the lower level squirt teams or tryout at another organization?

I should add, we really like the families on the team and my son has made a lot of friends, but are we doing him a disservice if we stick with the team and nothing changes. There's definitely more to life than youth hockey and we value the friendships we've made this season. 

Edited February 26, 2025 by Macky85

[sample39]

I had a really long response to this post, but I'll sum it up with this - Your son is a 1st year Squirt.  Let him have fun playing hockey with his friends.  That is what matters most at this age. 

You will have the rest of his youth career to track shift length and be critical of coaches, d-pairs, line combinations, special teams, etc.  

[carroll81]

1 hour ago, sample39 said:

I had a really long response to this post, but I'll sum it up with this - Your son is a 1st year Squirt.  Let him have fun playing hockey with his friends.  That is what matters most at this age. 

You will have the rest of his youth career to track shift length and be critical of coaches, d-pairs, line combinations, special teams, etc.  

THIS!

[Macky85]

1 hour ago, sample39 said:

I had a really long response to this post, but I'll sum it up with this - Your son is a 1st year Squirt.  Let him have fun playing hockey with his friends.  That is what matters most at this age. 

You will have the rest of his youth career to track shift length and be critical of coaches, d-pairs, line combinations, special teams, etc.  

Thanks for the response. To be clear, I don't track my sons playing time or stats. He definitely gets a lot of playing, but I would be pissed if my son did not hit the ice after 6 minutes into the game.

It concerning for the kids that are obviously not getting fair playing time and the couple that expressed quitting midway through the season. It wasn't exactly fun for them. 

I believe you are or were a coach. Is what we have experienced this season normal and acceptable coaching? I don't believe what has gone on is endorsed by USA Hockey. If its supposed to be fun, should there be drastic playing time differences? If kids want to try other positions, should they be told no, isn't this about development and exposure? Its just squirt hockey.

Its easy to tell parents, don't think too much into it, let them be kids and have fun, but what if it isn't fun for some of the kids. Is this bad coaching or what is to be expected? 

[stickboy]

The other posts are spot on, but I’d move on just to get away from the O bench coach if he is as you described. And I believe you as I’ve seen it many times!  They typically don’t change, or go easily. So it’s not worth the headache for another season. He doesn’t get it (it’s PAHL A)!  And his decisions are partly to blame for your team’s lack of success.  The other players aren’t invested, especially later in the game, because they know what’s going to happen (Sonny gets the call). 

[sample39]

1 hour ago, Macky85 said:

Thanks for the response. To be clear, I don't track my sons playing time or stats. He definitely gets a lot of playing, but I would be pissed if my son did not hit the ice after 6 minutes into the game.

It concerning for the kids that are obviously not getting fair playing time and the couple that expressed quitting midway through the season. It wasn't exactly fun for them. 

I believe you are or were a coach. Is what we have experienced this season normal and acceptable coaching? I don't believe what has gone on is endorsed by USA Hockey. If its supposed to be fun, should there be drastic playing time differences? If kids want to try other positions, should they be told no, isn't this about development and exposure? Its just squirt hockey.

Its easy to tell parents, don't think too much into it, let them be kids and have fun, but what if it isn't fun for some of the kids. Is this bad coaching or what is to be expected? 

Yes, I am a coach.  I am trying to understand exactly what advice you are searching for.  Your original post asked the question if your player should move on.  That's a fair question, but the reasons are confusing.  You want a coach that will provide equal ice time and opportunity.  At this age and skill level, that is important.  And if that's truly an issue like you describe, then the team should meet with the coaching staff, civilly, and work it out.  Especially if the one assistant coach is putting his own kid out twice as much like you said. 

However, at the same time, you were being critical of personnel on defense, specific d-pairs, who goes out on the PK, not practicing special teams, and suggested hiding weaker players on the wings.  So it sounds like you WANT to shorten the bench in order to achieve better results since your team is "underachieving", because the "coach can't get them through".  Is that why you want to leave?

The great thing about amateur hockey is that you are free to go wherever you like.  If you want to hop from association to association every year, you are free to do that.  But understand while the team colors may be different, the team problems may be the same.  

Edited February 26, 2025 by sample39
Typo

[aaaahockey]

If it is a mixed Birthyear team, a) I would expect your kid will move up a division or two next year and b) are all these coaches kids the younger Birthyear?  If not, they will be moving to Peewee and you will be staying at squirt.   

[Macky85]

32 minutes ago, aaaahockey said:

If it is a mixed Birthyear team, a) I would expect your kid will move up a division or two next year and b) are all these coaches kids the younger Birthyear?  If not, they will be moving to Peewee and you will be staying at squirt.   

All the coaches kids are 2015s, so would will still be on the team.

[Macky85]

35 minutes ago, sample39 said:

Yes, I am a coach.  I am trying to understand exactly what advice you are searching for.  Your original post asked the question if your player should move on.  That's a fair question, but the reasons are confusing.  You want a coach that will provide equal ice time and opportunity.  At this age and skill level, that is important.  And if that's truly an issue like you describe, then the team should meet with the coaching staff, civilly, and work it out.  Especially if the one assistant coach is putting his own kid out twice as much like you said. 

However, at the same time, you were being critical of personnel on defense, specific d-pairs, who goes out on the PK, not practicing special teams, and suggested hiding weaker players on the wings.  So it sounds like you WANT to shorten the bench in order to achieve better results since your team is "underachieving", because the "coach can't get them through".  Is that why you want to leave?

The great thing about amateur hockey is that you are free to go wherever you like.  If you want to hop from association to association every year, you are free to do that.  But understand while the team colors may be different, the team problems may be the same.  

I apologize if my message came across contradicting, that wasn't my intent. Myself and parents have met with the coach about many of the issues I mentioned but its fallen on deaf ears. Basically my team I will do it my way.

As for the the weaker players, I wasn't suggesting to shorten the bench. I was trying to point out some of the coaching short comings and his attitude of I am not changing. Splitting up weak d-pairs isn't shortening the bench, more so, strategy to not hang two players out to dry. They've struggled all season with out much improvement. They may have had more fun if the got to play some offense and not constantly playing on their heals.

Are these common issues with coaches that improve over time or all signs pointing to nothing is going to change and we should look elsewhere. What I am trying to ask is for those that have been around the block a time or two, is what I am listing as concerns enough to say, get out now or give it another year.

We really don't want to leave, the organization is great, but there's a potential to be stuck with this group for the foreseeable future. 

[Spear and Magic Helmet]

I think you have made the case to leave. It sounds like the coach is not a good fit for your expectations. Leave on good terms, but you might as well see if the grass is greener elsewhere. 

[aaaahockey]

22 minutes ago, Spear and Magic Helmet said:

I think you have made the case to leave. It sounds like the coach is not a good fit for your expectations. Leave on good terms, but you might as well see if the grass is greener elsewhere. 

Right definitely good terms. Don't bad mouth the coach on the way out or after you get somewhere else.  Worst thing you can do in the small world of hockey is to be "that guy" and then wonder why your kid doesn't make the team the following year.

[fafa fohi]

No offense, but if you are this way being critical of coaches and decisions made on special teams, ice time, etc with your kid only being nine years old, I can only imagine how YOU will be in a couple of years.

You are concerned over the coaches putting lesser skilled kids on defense?  Hell most kids at that age are still figuring out how to pee let alone being set on a position.  If the coaches kid getting all of the ice time is a ten year old, don’t worry about it as he will move up to PW next year.

My advice?  Don’t be “that dad.”

[Happy Hockey Fan]

1 hour ago, fafa fohi said:

No offense, but if you are this way being critical of coaches and decisions made on special teams, ice time, etc with your kid only being nine years old, I can only imagine how YOU will be in a couple of years.

You are concerned over the coaches putting lesser skilled kids on defense?  Hell most kids at that age are still figuring out how to pee let alone being set on a position.  If the coaches kid getting all of the ice time is a ten year old, don’t worry about it as he will move up to PW next year.

My advice?  Don’t be “that dad.”

Obviously if the coach that plays his kid is moving up then it wouldn’t be a problem, for this guy. It becomes a problem for the next team.

People like this should not be coaching. If you are a coach at the squirt or pee wee level and don’t try to give equal playing time, or favor your kid overtly, you shouldn’t be on the bench. It is developmental hockey, everyone should play near equal amounts. Every kid should play different positions at this age. Every kid should be getting PK or PP time at this age. I know there are always exceptions. But in general, everyone should get opportunities to play in all situations at that age. And it should be a priority for every organization to make sure that coaches follow these guidelines.
 

I know, I am dreaming. It happens in every sport at all levels. 

[Macky85]

54 minutes ago, fafa fohi said:

No offense, but if you are this way being critical of coaches and decisions made on special teams, ice time, etc with your kid only being nine years old, I can only imagine how YOU will be in a couple of years.

You are concerned over the coaches putting lesser skilled kids on defense?  Hell most kids at that age are still figuring out how to pee let alone being set on a position.  If the coaches kid getting all of the ice time is a ten year old, don’t worry about it as he will move up to PW next year.

My advice?  Don’t be “that dad.”

None taken.

All the coaches kids are 2015s, they'll all be back, but its only the one coach that doesn't like to take his son off the ice. Actually the 2014s tend to be treated like unwanted children, which is an issue in itself. 

After seeing the kids battle every week and losing over 30 games we've become a bit jaded and cynical, especially since the team was represented to the families as being highly competitive.

[Wildcat19]

I know the organization you’re talking about. They have quite the reputation for dad coaches

 

Edited February 27, 2025 by Wildcat19

[aaaahockey]

38 minutes ago, Wildcat19 said:

I know the organization you’re talking about. They have quite the reputation for dad coaches

 

Isn't that 99% of all organizations?  

[zam]

Wow! There is a lot to unpack in that message. Everything about the coaching as well as your (parent) expectations smells like a dumpster fire! Shortening the bench, running systems, PP, PK, hiding weak players on certain lines, at the Squirt A level? Really?! Are we trying to give the players (All the players) a chance to get better or are we collecting trophies? Cause I'll let you in on a little secret, If you don't win the Squirt B Minor Black My Hockey Ratings Steel City Cup trophy this weekend, don't worry they will be awarding it again two weeks from now. You have plenty of time to get a whole shelf full of them.

Dunno if things are better anywhere else, but you really should consider getting the heck out of that situation!

[kid310050]

1 hour ago, Wildcat19 said:

I know the organization you’re talking about. They have quite the reputation for dad coaches

 

Without parent coaches most organizations wouldn't have half the teams they do now

[Corsi]

I have been involved with youth hockey at all levels over the past 35+ years and the 1st thing I would stress is the players age vs. the expectations of both the parents and the coaches.  I am going to ask what do the coach's practices look like?  Are the staff practicing things like a PP/PK system, regrouping, forechecks, or are they practicing skills via "small area games"?  I know that at such a young age the players need to develop skills, which will help with the concern about the passing ability.  Kids at that age are going to get better practicing, not by playing games.  

[Law]

18 hours ago, sample39 said:

I had a really long response to this post, but I'll sum it up with this - Your son is a 1st year Squirt.  Let him have fun playing hockey with his friends.  That is what matters most at this age. 

You will have the rest of his youth career to track shift length and be critical of coaches, d-pairs, line combinations, special teams, etc.  

Absolutely 

[YardSale]

I would consider bringing up your concerns about the coaching to the organization.  Many organizations are trying to put the right people behind the benches.  Often times, they only have a parent's hockey experience to go on when naming coaches at the younger ages.  If specific details are brought to their attention in a civil manner, the odds are good that they will be able to correct the current coaching staff's philosophy or look at other options for the next season.  

[TeamRamRod]

Trying not to be too repetitive, but I think you need to adjust your expectations a bit.  I see AAA kids at 10u who don't grasp PK and PP concepts.  I usually have started to see some of the better AA and AAA teams execute good PP and PK at the 12u levels, but that varies with coaching and the overall ability of the kids on the ice.  I can tell you coaching at the 10u level can be pretty difficult.  You'll have kids who can barely skate or catch a pass and others who may be capable of more.  Designing practice plans that can benefit the entire team is tough, so I'd just let the folks volunteering do their thing.  This challenge occurs at other levels as well, but 10u you'll have a lot more kids who still need the basics.  Other things you mention, like being able to pass the puck and make good changes - all of these are things the kids will continue to get better at.  Be patient and adjust your expectations.  It's amazing how quickly kids improve on things like this, but it won't happen overnight.  

I will also say in regards to the Dad on the door - I am not a fan of a Dad running a door their kid is on.  I've always preferred they run the door opposite of what their kid is on.  That's a simple fix in my opinion.  At 10u/12u kids should be getting relatively equal playing time.  It's always going to vary some depending on penalties and maybe having uneven lines due to kids being out.  However, you'll run into stuff like this wherever you go and there are a lot worse things that can happen.  My experience is that when you leave a club because of 3-4 complaints you have you're likely trading those things in for 3-4 other things that are also not ideal.  I hear so many dysfunctional stories from clubs in this area that if my kid is with his buddies and having fun, with a group of Dad's that care about them then that's all I can ask for.

[Carl Racki]

Here are some thoughts from a guy who has been involved in hockey for a long time.  My sons played at Pens Elite.  I can tell you at the squirt age they never worked on the power play or pk.  They would go over it a little in film or off ice.  99% of the time at squirt they just ran their lines through.  It was all about skill development but would work on concepts off ice.  I don't believe any team should be spending ice time working on a power play at the squirt level and the high level teams typically don't unless things have changed.  

As for parent coaches it can go either way but you need them.  There are not enough good paid coaches out there for high level and Varsity teams in my opinion much less all the travel/ other school teams.  If you have a very qualified parent coach it may be a much better option than a lot of paid depending on experience and motives.   If the parent coach is an issue the organization needs to let them go.  I will say years ago my one son's team had a great parent coach (no it wasn't  me) and because so many parents are anti parent coaches the organization went to a paid none parent coach.  Myself and another player moved on from that team as when I talked to the "new none parent coach" I was very concerned with how he would run the team.  That team went from 40 wins to only ten the next season.  The season after the whole team pretty much fell apart.  

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING AT SQUIRT IS THAT THE PLAYER IS HAVING FUN, SKILL DEVELOPMENT, AND A POSITIVE COACHING ENVIRONMENT

[aaaahockey]

11 hours ago, YardSale said:

I would consider bringing up your concerns about the coaching to the organization.  Many organizations are trying to put the right people behind the benches.  Often times, they only have a parent's hockey experience to go on when naming coaches at the younger ages.  If specific details are brought to their attention in a civil manner, the odds are good that they will be able to correct the current coaching staff's philosophy or look at other options for the next season.  

Kind of true but you also have to have someone else step up.  In many of my experiences the head coach has been almost forced to do it. 

[Burgh6687]

Biggest thing here is…..no team in any association should run on a team per team basis.  There should be a developmental model that your coaches are to be following.  That’s tied into skill development, hockey iq, and later systems.  That’s what makes programs thrive when once they get to the older levels you’re not on reset every year.  They know what they need to do.  
 

The easy thing to do is questions the coach and in fairness some arent gettig that guidance and being thrown on a deserted island and sometimes the only option.

Edited February 28, 2025 by Burgh6687