Hockey Alberta considers getting rid of geographic restrictions for minor hockey

[Yukon Joe]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/proposed-hockey-alberta-rule-changes-would-remove-residency-based-registration-requirements-for-minor-hockey-1.7406929

Right now if you go to register your kid for money hockey you are required to sign up with your local minor hockey association. The primary advantage of that is competitive balance, that you play with kids in at least the same part of the city, and at least you kind-of mostly get ice times close to you (although because rinks aren't all evenly balanced throughout the city this isn't always true).

Downsides are that if you don't like your local club for some reason you're out of luck. There's also a side disadvantage that if you love you are forced to register with a new club for the next year.

But now Hockey Alberta is proposing getting rid of that requirement. You can sign up with any club. This does open up the advantage that clubs can now compete - maybe one offers better ice times, or more ice times, or more predictable ice times - or who knows.

Downside though is - how do you ensure competitive balance in such an environment?

Interestingly though is elite hockey (your AA/AAA teams) will sort-of stay in place (you can only try out for a team based on what minor hockey club you're a member of). It's also a one-time only choice - you can't switch year-by-year.

I have to say the fact that they're proposing a kid is "locked in" once they first register kind of defeats a lot of the purpose of the change. As a hockey parent what I'm looking for in a hockey program for a 5 year old is very different than for a 12 year old.

I don't want to focus just on Alberta though, as that's a topic only a couple people (if that) would care about). What more general experience do people have with open versus closed registration for minor hockey?

Click to read more...

 

[Slats432]

This is a precarious topic with no right answer.

https://e1.envoke.com/m/eaa58ec595914df7af464ad829ea9b41/m/ee7627235b078bf78db6759d97c8e6eb/

I know for the AA/AAA stream there is resistance from some clubs that it would reduce the amount of kids trying out for their associations when kids opt for the stronger clubs.

The only new thing is that if you were from SE Edmonton, but decided to play NWZ in your MHA, if you decided to tryout for AA/AAA you would be in CAC drawzone and not MLAC or SSAC.

I don't see how this accomplishes anything.

 

[jetsmooseice]

I have no issue with geographic restrictions. In my neck of the woods there is a pretty good balance that has been achieved among MHAs and I'm not sure what moving to this model would really accomplish. What problem is Hockey Alberta trying to fix here?

 

[Slats432]

I have no issue with geographic restrictions. In my neck of the woods there is a pretty good balance that has been achieved among MHAs and I'm not sure what moving to this model would really accomplish. What problem is Hockey Alberta trying to fix here?

I think by offering more choices and going in that direction they are trying to combat the growth of academies, and I am not sure how this accomplishes anything.

 

[jetsmooseice]

I think by offering more choices and going in that direction they are trying to combat the growth of academies, and I am not sure how this accomplishes anything.

Where I live I am in fairly close proximity to at least 3 other MHAs other than the one in my area. But the thought of having to drive farther for every practice, most games, etc. is unappealing.

And I can see this becoming a winner take all kind of thing where a couple MHAs become the place to be, while others suffer. Not really sure how that helps things.

 

[Buffdog]

Isn't U18 AAA female in Alberta already "play where you want"? I think there are 6 teams and I seem to recall talking to a dad from Alberta who told me that at a large U18/prep tournament here in winnipeg

Minor Soccer has gone away from strict districts here in winnipeg at the Premiere levels... with a couple of restrictions. Players can try out for any club, but clubs can only bring in 5 new players a year (I believe)

I also belive that the GTA did away with districts a while ago, at least at certain levels.

 

[the valiant effort]

Rearranging deck chairs.

 

[Yukon Joe]

This is a precarious topic with no right answer.

https://e1.envoke.com/m/eaa58ec595914df7af464ad829ea9b41/m/ee7627235b078bf78db6759d97c8e6eb/

So thanks for this. I was trying to find the original material from Hockey Alberta but couldn't.

One thing this really brought home for me is that I was thinking only about cities - this would have a huge effect on rural associations too. If you're in a small community your minor hockey association may well only have one team per age level, which then by necessity contains players of a wide range of skill levels. So some families may well want to register in a minor hockey program in a bigger centre precisely so your kid can try to play with higher-skilled kids.

I know for the AA/AAA stream there is resistance from some clubs that it would reduce the amount of kids trying out for their associations when kids opt for the stronger clubs.

The only new thing is that if you were from SE Edmonton, but decided to play NWZ in your MHA, if you decided to tryout for AA/AAA you would be in CAC drawzone and not MLAC or SSAC.

I don't see how this accomplishes anything.

So first of all from that link it makes it sound like Hockey Edmonton / Hockey Calgary have the option of keeping boundaries:

What impact does this change have on Hockey Edmonton and Hockey Calgary?
The current boundaries for Hockey Edmonton and Hockey Calgary closely align with their respective city limits. With the change, these boundaries would no longer be recognized in Hockey Alberta’s regulations, however both Hockey Edmonton and Hockey Calgary would continue to have the authority to work with their membership to determine boundaries within their city.

So that could mean no change.

But assuming the cities do get rid of boundaries - the strange thing is though it depends on where you first register! So let's say I think MLAC would be a better AAA team for my kid to try out for. I'd need to make that decision when my kid was 5 or 6 and register him for Mill Woods.

Right now, when my kid is 14, I kind-of wish I'd forced him to play right-shot when he started. It just seems like teams are always looking for right-shot D.

But he started 9 years ago. 9 years ago I had no idea if he'd even like hockey, I had no idea he'd play D, and I had no idea he'd wind up trying out for AAA teams. I also would have had no idea what AAA team would be the best for him to play for 9 years later.

 

[Slats432]

So first of all from that link it makes it sound like Hockey Edmonton / Hockey Calgary have the option of keeping boundaries:

It looks to me that it outright said the AA/AAA clubs would maintain boundaries.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I have no issue with geographic restrictions. In my neck of the woods there is a pretty good balance that has been achieved among MHAs and I'm not sure what moving to this model would really accomplish. What problem is Hockey Alberta trying to fix here?

So what they're trying to compete with is the "rebel leagues" - leagues unaffiliated with Hockey Canada/Hockey Alberta. I don't have access to all the registration data, but they're definitely something Hockey Canada is concerned with.

Rebel leagues (like the Hockey Super League or HSL) can say they have the following benefits:
-full ice at younger ages
-contact at younger ages
-paid (or better) coaching
-more predictable ice times
-guaranteed spots (not so sure, but I think this happens)

It looks to me that it outright said the AA/AAA clubs would maintain boundaries.

Yes it did. But it sounded like Hockey Edmonton/Calgary could maintain minor hockey boundaries if they want.

 

[jetsmooseice]

One thing this really brought home for me is that I was thinking only about cities - this would have a huge effect on rural associations too. If you're in a small community your minor hockey association may well only have one team per age level, which then by necessity contains players of a wide range of skill levels. So some families may well want to register in a minor hockey program in a bigger centre precisely so your kid can try to play with higher-skilled kids.

I thought the cure for this in smaller towns was just to have everyone play down...

I say this only half facetiously, having seen my kid's team (which has generally always been very competitive in regular season play) get absolutely dominated on some occasions in rural tournaments by teams from small towns. I mean, I know farm kids are built different but I don't think they're THAT different.

 

[jetsmooseice]

So what they're trying to compete with is the "rebel leagues" - leagues unaffiliated with Hockey Canada/Hockey Alberta. I don't have access to all the registration data, but they're definitely something Hockey Canada is concerned with.

Rebel leagues (like the Hockey Super League or HSL) can say they have the following benefits:
-full ice at younger ages
-contact at younger ages
-paid (or better) coaching
-more predictable ice times
-guaranteed spots (not so sure, but I think this happens)

That makes sense in terms of identifying the threat they want to respond to, but it still doesn't really explain what eliminating geographic restrictions is supposed to achieve. It sounds like a solution that someone proposed in a hastily called Hockey Alberta Zoom meeting where the agenda could be summarized as "QUICK! DO SOMETHING!" and they just ran with the first thing that someone came up with.

For what it's worth the rebel league thing sounds like an absolute fever dream of ideas conjured up by the most toxically delulu hockey parents I can think of. Except predictable ice times, that one I can get behind.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I thought the cure for this in smaller towns was just to have everyone play down...

I say this only half facetiously, having seen my kid's team (which has generally always been very competitive in regular season play) get absolutely dominated on some occasions in rural tournaments by teams from small towns. I mean, I know farm kids are built different but I don't think they're THAT different.

Yeah, so my kids teams have gotten destroyed by small town teams.

But really - it's usually because there's one or two kids on those teams that can just destroy everyone. So yeah, if you have a kid that could be a Tier 1 player in a larger community, but is stuck playing on a Tier 3 team because it also has kids from Tiers 1 through 6. Maybe those "Tier 1" kids though would be more challenged and develop better on a team full of players of equal skill.

 

[Yukon Joe]

For what it's worth the rebel league thing sounds like an absolute fever dream of ideas conjured up by the most toxically delulu hockey parents I can think of. Except predictable ice times, that one I can get behind.

So on the one hand I can sort of understand. I get frustrated with minor hockey too.

You show up for tryouts and you have no idea what level your kid is going to play at, and no idea who the coaches are going to be. I really, really don't want to crap all over volunteer coaches (they're all just hockey dads like me trying to do their best by their kids) but I've seen some amazing coaches who can really help the kids grow, and some really mediocre coaches.

So if you throw together a combination of "full ice at U9", "experienced coaches" and "predictable ice times" I guess I can see the appeal.

Although - it all costs. And those predictable ice times are out of town a lot. Which is why I've stuck with Minor Hockey.

 

[jetsmooseice]

So if you throw together a combination of "full ice at U9", "experienced coaches" and "predictable ice times" I guess I can see the appeal.

Yeah, maybe I've been lucky with minor hockey. My kid has had the same coaches most years, and they are fantastic... they're dads but these guys have extensive experience at elite levels so they know what they're doing. And they have the perfect mix of "let's have fun" and "let's be competitive" for that age and tier. So no issues there.

As for the full ice thing, I remember being extremely skeptical about it when my son was younger but I can see the benefits of it in hindsight. I'm not sure that playing full ice at 7 would have really improved the experience. But I guess some parents are convinced that it's the way to go. Same with contact... my son is 11 and I really don't see the benefit of having him bodychecking at this age. Hockey is already risky enough from an injury standpoint, I don't know why we would want to make it riskier for kids that are still younger and more fragile.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Yeah, maybe I've been lucky with minor hockey. My kid has had the same coaches most years, and they are fantastic... they're dads but these guys have extensive experience at elite levels so they know what they're doing. And they have the perfect mix of "let's have fun" and "let's be competitive" for that age and tier. So no issues there.

As for the full ice thing, I remember being extremely skeptical about it when my son was younger but I can see the benefits of it in hindsight. I'm not sure that playing full ice at 7 would have really improved the experience. But I guess some parents are convinced that it's the way to go. Same with contact... my son is 11 and I really don't see the benefit of having him bodychecking at this age. Hockey is already risky enough from an injury standpoint, I don't know why we would want to make it riskier for kids that are still younger and more fragile.

Like I said - some of the coaches have been fantastic. A couple have played at the U-Sports level, or have otherwise had high-level hockey experience and are good at bringing that experience to the kids without talking down to them.

But that's where you can see the difference. I don't think I've ever seen a really "bad" coach, but some just don't have the same knowledge or experience.

Full ice? My kids were on either side of the cut-off. One played full ice starting from age 7, the other one played half-ice for two years until full ice at age 9. I wish there was an in-between honestly - like could you do half ice for one year? Moving from cross-ice to full ice is a huge step (and the ice is so large for 7 year olds), but after a while it did feel like the kids would benefit from learning more about playing positions.

As I think about it that's sort-of what happened with my oldest. Hockey Canada brought in half-ice hockey after my kid played his first year of Novice at full ice. Nobody wanted to take kids used to playing full ice and move them back to half ice, so for one year they had "Novice Major" (full ice), and "Novice Minor" (half ice).

As for bodychecking - again I guess the rebel leagues try to do a half step with "modified contact" - not full hitting but being much more forgiving about body rubs and more incidental contact.