Boston Globe Boys' high school hockey is ‘having an existential crisis.’ It starts with the rinks.

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Which goes back to the parents, who want to boast that their kids are playing select hockey.

This is pretty reductive and completely inaccurate. My youngest son is a very good player. I could have him play town with a shitty structure (playing escape room and fishy fishy cross my ocean as a first year squirt) and have him play with players several levels below him. Or he can play where all the other good players are. This suggestion that it’s all about the parents egos applies to a very small percentage of hockey parents. 95%+ of hockey parents I’ve interacted with (and that’s a lot, as I’ve coached for several years and have two kids in where we’ve had over 55 games just since Christmas) just want what’s best for their kids. To play in a team at the right level for them where they have a good coach and they have fun.

There are very loud issues with a small handful of parents/coaches etc. 20 years ago if a mom went in the ice to try to fight a ref in Upsilanti, no one would now about it. Now everyone sees it, and it gives an inaccurate representation of what most parents are like.

I have my issues with MA club hockey for sure. But it’s not how you describe it.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

View attachment 987708


People keep saying participation is down but it's not. Even Minnesota and Mass have been flat (discounting the COVID drop). And a lot more girls playing. This is just inaccurate.

I have two kids in club hockey, one on the lower end and one who is pretty good. Great experiences with both, and the thought of being in our town program instead gives me the willies. It's a disaster.

Several questions since you seem to have access to USA Hockey data and say Minnesota & Massachusetts have been flat. Is that for the years on your graph? What are the apple to apple comparisons regarding the boys in Minnesota & Massachusetts? Is that flat or down for those years and the rise in girls hockey hiding a decline amongst boys and therefore it's not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[Morris Wanchuk]

To me I look at the time/financial outlay to play hockey and I just feel it could have been used better for me which I am applying to my kids.

Same for Figure skating and gymnastics. Looked at those for about 5mins an noped real fast

Luckily my daughter is into running which seems like the simplest sport to get recruited for. We have a senior going to Williams who didn't even start emailing coaches until Junior year. No showcases or select teams. Just sent them his times.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

@KillerMillerTime (your post was caught up under Wally's so had to @ you)

Well, I guess I don't see girls participation "masking" any issues - I think it's wonderful for girls to play hockey (and sports in general). MA does very well with girls participation - where Rhode Island has the largest state gap between boys who play sports and girls who play sports.

Overall boys participation has seen a slight decline, but that's in line with sports as a whole. In 2013, 43% of children aged 6-17 played a "Core Team Sport" - meaning they play on a regular basis. That dropped to 40% in 2023 (though 2023 saw an uptick from 37% in 2022. Boys hockey participation right in line with that overall. There are many reasons for that, but the macro numbers are there.

In 2013-14, MA had 48,000 boys registered with USA Hockey (required to play on any team, town or club). That number was 46,000 in 2023-24. But there's a COVID hangover there - the year before COVID (2019-20), the number was flat at 48,000. All sports have seen that hangover effect (lots to talk about there, but not germane here).

Minnesota has seen steady growth, from 55,000 to 59,000 over the same timeframe. A lot of talk about how differently the two states operate, and it's a much different state demographically. But yeah, Minnesota is easily the top state for hockey, with MA a comfortable second. There's plenty to like about how Minnesota operates, but do you think cities and towns in MA would have their taxpayers vote to build community rinks? No chance in hell that happens.

The top states in terms of growth from 22-23 to 23-24 are largely non-traditional states (which is fantastic). Florida is first, followed by Michigan, South Carolina, Oregon and North Carolina. Those are percentages obviously as there are very few rinks in four of those states. But again, hockey is growing well in non-traditional markets.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

Its happening in NH as well.

I dont have explicit details as Matt does here. But I know of several schools (both who I played for and who I played against) 15 years ago now that either dont have a team or have combined schools. I think there was even a three school combination into one team.

Hockey is bleeding popularity. Its sad.

I talked to a Dad at work today whose daughter is approaching high school and he said its all about the private schools collecting the talent in the area.

Fenway, Alan, Gee Wally & myself are probably the oldest posters here
with "institutional" memories.

These Select Teams and Prep\Catholic Schools are not recent creations. I can remember when I was in 2/3 grade in 1962-63, my older brothers played in
a "Junior" League run at Belmont Hill by Scott Parrott. Players were from a bunch
of nearby towns and it was divided into three levels. There were a lot of Catholic
powerhouses back then also. Difference now, is lots more private rinks with private prigrams, lot more noticeable.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Fenway, Alan, Gee Wally & myself are probably the oldest posters here
with "institutional" memories.

These Select Teams and Prep\Catholic Schools are not recent creations. I can remember when I was in 2/3 grade in 1962-63, my older brothers played in
a "Junior" League run at Belmont Hill by Scott Parrott. Players were from a bunch
of nearby towns and it was divided into three levels. There were a lot of Catholic
powerhouses back then also. Difference now, is lots more private rinks with private prigrams, lot more noticeable.

Yeah the Minuteman Flames turn 50 years old next year.

I also take issue with the framing of public v private rinks, as if it's a bad thing. The public rinks in MA are almost all ragged and beat up at best, and many are complete dumps. Go into the bathroom at Janis in Lowell or at Kasabuki and tell me how you feel. The "Orr" rinks - who all have the same exact footprint - are still operating, and you can feel the germs on you as you walk around. Without these private rinks there would probably be a lot more staph infections around lol.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

@KillerMillerTime (your post was caught up under Wally's so had to @ you)

Well, I guess I don't see girls participation "masking" any issues - I think it's wonderful for girls to play hockey (and sports in general). MA does very well with girls participation - where Rhode Island has the largest state gap between boys who play sports and girls who play sports.

Overall boys participation has seen a slight decline, but that's in line with sports as a whole. In 2013, 43% of children aged 6-17 played a "Core Team Sport" - meaning they play on a regular basis. That dropped to 40% in 2023 (though 2023 saw an uptick from 37% in 2022. Boys hockey participation right in line with that overall. There are many reasons for that, but the macro numbers are there.

In 2013-14, MA had 48,000 boys registered with USA Hockey (required to play on any team, town or club). That number was 46,000 in 2023-24. But there's a COVID hangover there - the year before COVID (2019-20), the number was flat at 48,000. All sports have seen that hangover effect (lots to talk about there, but not germane here).

Minnesota has seen steady growth, from 55,000 to 59,000 over the same timeframe. A lot of talk about how differently the two states operate, and it's a much different state demographically. But yeah, Minnesota is easily the top state for hockey, with MA a comfortable second. There's plenty to like about how Minnesota operates, but do you think cities and towns in MA would have their taxpayers vote to build community rinks? No chance in hell that happens.

The top states in terms of growth from 22-23 to 23-24 are largely non-traditional states (which is fantastic). Florida is first, followed by Michigan, South Carolina, Oregon and North Carolina. Those are percentages obviously as there are very few rinks in four of those states. But again, hockey is growing well in non-traditional markets.

Yeah towns aren't going to vote construction of new rinks, though my old hometown of Belmont is actually doing that right now but I am certain they are
an outlier.

I have no issues with girls hockey at all. I just wanted an apples to apples comparison and recent growth in women's hockey would muddle the numbers.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

Yeah the Minuteman Flames turn 50 years old next year.

I also take issue with the framing of public v private rinks, as if it's a bad thing. The public rinks in MA are almost all ragged and beat up at best, and many are complete dumps. Go into the bathroom at Janis in Lowell or at Kasabuki and tell me how you feel. The "Orr" rinks - who all have the same exact footprint - are still operating, and you can feel the germs on you as you walk around. Without these private rinks there would probably be a lot more staph infections around lol.

I'm not framing anything. I am just saying a private rink owner can do whatever
he pleases with his ice time, as opposed to a town rink.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

Minnesota has seen steady growth, from 55,000 to 59,000 over the same timeframe. A lot of talk about how differently the two states operate, and it's a much different state demographically. But yeah, Minnesota is easily the top state for hockey, with MA a comfortable second. There's plenty to like about how Minnesota operates, but do you think cities and towns in MA would have their taxpayers vote to build community rinks? No chance in hell that happens.

Minnesota has a smaller percentage minority population than Massachusetts,
but raw numbers because Massachusetts has about 1.3M more people and have as many white people, so the demographics aren't that different.

The main difference is that Minnesota has a deeper hockey culture than Massachusetts, in part due to a colder climate which for decades lent itself to greater availability to ice to play the sport.

I saw first hand what hockey in Minnesota is like. Took my son and his Bantam Team (9th Grade) out and then him and his HS teammates out after their Soph. year to the Twin Cities and played a couple of High School programs.

Took them back out to Minnesota right before his Senior year (2002-03) the year after they played in Super 8, to play in a HS Jamboree and they gave us a 3 period line up of Duluth East HS (Sean Hill, Marshall Faulk, Phil Verchota)
Elk River HS (Paul Martin & Joel Otto) and The Blake School. The day before we scrimmaged White Bear Lake HS. Tied the period against Elk River, lost by a goal to
Blake and got beat by Duluth East. They invest in their sports in Minnesota, not just hockey either.

Rented out the John Rose Speed Skating Oval in Roseville earlier in the day which had dedicated shinny areas inside the speed skating track to run a practice before
the scrimmage. Only cost $175 for the hour rental if an outdoor refrigerated speed skating oval.

There are outlier towns in Massachusetts that have hockey traditions which would build or refurbish their rinks like Belmont or Arlington to name two.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I'm not framing anything. I am just saying a private rink owner can do whatever
he pleases with his ice time, as opposed to a town rink.

The author framed it that way in his article. Sorry I should have phrased it better.

 

[PlayMakers]

This suggestion that it’s all about the parents egos applies to a very small percentage of hockey parents. 95%+ of hockey parents I’ve interacted with (and that’s a lot, as I’ve coached for several years and have two kids in where we’ve had over 55 games just since Christmas) just want what’s best for their kids. To play in a team at the right level for them where they have a good coach and they have fun.

I strongly disagree with that statment. At least, that hasn't been my experience as a coach or a parent.

If the Kings Elite offered a spot to any kid on a BHL American team 95% of those parents would have them switch overnight. Outside of a handful of the truly elite programs there is massive roster turnover year to year across most club teams. That's not driven by 9 year olds who just had a great experience and a lot of fun, that's driven by parents.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I strongly disagree with that statment. At least, that hasn't been my experience as a coach or a parent.

If the Kings Elite offered a spot to any kid on a BHL American team 95% of those parents would have them switch overnight. Outside of a handful of the truly elite programs there is massive roster turnover year to year across most club teams. That's not driven by 9 year olds who just had a great experience and a lot of fun, that's driven by parents.

Well sure I guess. I mean that’s like five levels up, so unless the Kings Elite coach is a complete dumbass, the kid was playing at the wrong level by a lot.

 

[PlayMakers]

I feel like the article is blaming club teams and junior teams for the failing of public school hockey, but there is a reason those programs arose.

When I played high school hockey in the early 90's, high school hockey was already on it's last legs. We were told that if we wanted to play college hockey we had to go to prep school or the catholic conference.

I think junior hockey (and the 'club' youth feeder programs under them) sprang up because not everyone could afford $40k to go to Nobles or St. Seb's (or in my case Salisbury). Today it costs $70k to go to Nobles, or you can play junior hockey for $6500, you play 50 games (instead of the 20 you get in high school), you play good competition in front of scouts... It's no contest.

Now, the Academy teams take it to another level beyond prep and junior. Those teams, you get 1 practice for an 60-80 minutes. Academy teams give you 3 hours of ice time daily. Prep teams play 20 games, Junior teams play 50 games, Academy teams play 70 games and play across multiple leagues, they play against prep teams, junior teams, they're eligible for Tier 1 Nationals, they can even play in the high school nationals.

 

[PlayMakers]

Well sure I guess. I mean that’s like five levels up, so unless the Kings Elite coach is a complete dumbass, the kid was playing at the wrong level by a lot.

I think it's more like 2 levels up, but I think you can say the same about a kid in the E9 or the Fed Platinum or whatever you consider 1 level below. Give that parent an opportunity to move up and they jump it, regardless of whether their kid is happy, having fun and well coached.