Is this shady or normal for hockey parents?

[WarriorofTime]

My son in u15. There was a pretty big discrepancy in u13 as well. So maybe the exact height may not be 6' but the discrepancy is accurate.


View attachment 870571

Looks like some kids and one of their dads stepping out there, lol

 

[Yukon Joe]

Edit: It may have been written already and I missed it or different terminology may have thrown me off. In your scenario of AAA/AA, will organizations often ice both at the same level? So a 12U AAA and a 12U AA? If so, let's say a tries out, makes AA for the team for which he is zoned. Parents and player believe he is a AAA player. Can they tryout for another AAA team or do they need to get a release from their home zoned organization?

Sure - so it confuses me at first too.

So for the first time we're having both U13 AAA and AA teams (used to be AA only). We also have U15 AAA and AA.

Lets take U15 because it's more established. You go out and try out for the U15AAA team (if you want - you can go straight to federation hockey). If you don't make the AAA team you can ask for your release to go to a different club. You'll typically get that release. You go to a different club and get a minimum of one tryout. Ideally you'd better be connected and know what teams are looking for which players, if at all. I don't think our club picked up anyone else from other clubs.

So if you don't make AAA at the different club, you go back to your home club to try out for AA (or you just go straight to AA in your home club which is what we did). The same process then happens - if you get cut you can ask for release and go to another club to try out for AA. Otherwise you just go down to federation hockey.

So the upside is it tries very hard to be fair. Clubs can't poach players from other teams unless they're cut first. Clubs typically do not deny a kid release if asked. We did know kids who were released and got picked up by other clubs.

Downside is it is all very time-consuming. If a kid is one of the very last cuts by a team they are guaranteed a tryout - but other teams are probably almost all formed. If you're then one of the last cuts from AA and go to federation, they're already mid-way through their tryouts - and they don't give kids any credit for being a late AA cut, so sometimes those kids that might have been a late AA cut can side down to Tier 2 or 3.

Looks like some kids and one of their dads stepping out there, lol

U13 can be kind of crazy - some kids hit puberty early and sprout up a head or more taller (and start looking like adults) than some of the kids who haven't and very much look like little kids.

It does start to even up in U15 but still - you can be a stand-out kid at younger ages, and maybe you were just a little bit shorter than average. But once puberty hits and you're still short for your age the size difference becomes much more noticeable. One of my kids friends - very capable player, always one of the better ones out there despite being short - the height difference now at U15 was just too much for him and he dropped out of contact hockey.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Sure - so it confuses me at first too.

So for the first time we're having both U13 AAA and AA teams (used to be AA only). We also have U15 AAA and AA.

Lets take U15 because it's more established. You go out and try out for the U15AAA team (if you want - you can go straight to federation hockey). If you don't make the AAA team you can ask for your release to go to a different club. You'll typically get that release. You go to a different club and get a minimum of one tryout. Ideally you'd better be connected and know what teams are looking for which players, if at all. I don't think our club picked up anyone else from other clubs.

So if you don't make AAA at the different club, you go back to your home club to try out for AA (or you just go straight to AA in your home club which is what we did). The same process then happens - if you get cut you can ask for release and go to another club to try out for AA. Otherwise you just go down to federation hockey.

So the upside is it tries very hard to be fair. Clubs can't poach players from other teams unless they're cut first. Clubs typically do not deny a kid release if asked. We did know kids who were released and got picked up by other clubs.

Downside is it is all very time-consuming. If a kid is one of the very last cuts by a team they are guaranteed a tryout - but other teams are probably almost all formed. If you're then one of the last cuts from AA and go to federation, they're already mid-way through their tryouts - and they don't give kids any credit for being a late AA cut, so sometimes those kids that might have been a late AA cut can side down to Tier 2 or 3.



U13 can be kind of crazy - some kids hit puberty early and sprout up a head or more taller (and start looking like adults) than some of the kids who haven't and very much look like little kids.

It does start to even up in U15 but still - you can be a stand-out kid at younger ages, and maybe you were just a little bit shorter than average. But once puberty hits and you're still short for your age the size difference becomes much more noticeable. One of my kids friends - very capable player, always one of the better ones out there despite being short - the height difference now at U15 was just too much for him and he dropped out of contact hockey.

OK, gotchya. So, AAA and AA are separate tryouts. With federation, do they have the same restrictions?

 

[Slats432]

Sure - so it confuses me at first too.

So for the first time we're having both U13 AAA and AA teams (used to be AA only). We also have U15 AAA and AA.

Lets take U15 because it's more established. You go out and try out for the U15AAA team (if you want - you can go straight to federation hockey). If you don't make the AAA team you can ask for your release to go to a different club. (THIS ISN'T A RELEASE, IT IS A 2ND TRYOUT REQUEST AND IT IS 100% GRANTED BY EVERY CLUB) You'll typically get that release. You go to a different club and get a minimum of one tryout. Ideally you'd better be connected and know what teams are looking for which players, if at all. (IN EDMONTON THERE IS SOMEONE WHO COORDINATES IN EVERY LEAGUE WHERE 2ND TRYOUTS OCCUR. CLUBS WILL GENERALLY NOTIFY THIS PERSON WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR. "I COULD USE ANOTHER DMAN OR GOALIE) I don't think our club picked up anyone else from other clubs. (IF YOU ARE A STRONG CLUB THE NEED FOR IMPORTS IS MINIMAL, SO YOU HAVE TO BE A VERY STRONG PLAYER TO BEAT OUT AN INCUMBENT. THERE IS NO BENEFIT TO A CLUB TO DEVELOP A PLAYER FROM OUTSIDE THE CLUB WHEN YOU HAVE AN EQUAL PLAYER IN THE CLUB)

So if you don't make AAA at the different club, you go back to your home club to try out for AA (or you just go straight to AA in your home club which is what we did). The same process then happens - if you get cut you can ask for release and go to another club to try out for AA. Otherwise you just go down to federation hockey.

So the upside is it tries very hard to be fair. Clubs can't poach players from other teams unless they're cut first. Clubs typically do not deny a kid release if asked. We did know kids who were released and got picked up by other clubs.

Downside is it is all very time-consuming. If a kid is one of the very last cuts by a team they are guaranteed a tryout - but other teams are probably almost all formed. If you're then one of the last cuts from AA and go to federation, they're already mid-way through their tryouts - and they don't give kids any credit for being a late AA cut, so sometimes those kids that might have been a late AA cut can side down to Tier 2 or 3. (THE PROCESS COULD CERTANLY BE BETTER, IF THERE IS A TRICKLE DOWN FROM U18AAA to U17AAA to U16AA, IT CAN REALLY HURT KIDS THAT ARE LATE CUTS. ESPECIALLY GOALIES)



U13 can be kind of crazy - some kids hit puberty early and sprout up a head or more taller (and start looking like adults) than some of the kids who haven't and very much look like little kids.

It does start to even up in U15 but still - you can be a stand-out kid at younger ages, and maybe you were just a little bit shorter than average. But once puberty hits and you're still short for your age the size difference becomes much more noticeable. One of my kids friends - very capable player, always one of the better ones out there despite being short - the height difference now at U15 was just too much for him and he dropped out of contact hockey.

My comments in blue.

 

[Slats432]

OK, gotchya. So, AAA and AA are separate tryouts. With federation, do they have the same restrictions?

Yes and no, you can have 60 kids tryout for AAA then 35 get released down to AA. 10 of them go tryout for different clubs, 25 continue the tryout with AA. Then more AAA kids get released, and the 10 that went to other tryouts come back to your club.

The complexity happens when you are down to 22-23 kids on AAA and 22-23 on AA. The U18AAA might be waiting for a WHL or Junior A guy and the WHL might be waiting for the NHL guy which right near the end of the process with trickle down.

NHL--->WHL--->JUNIOR A--->U18AAA--->U18AA or U17AAA--->U16AA--->To Federation. One released kid can affect a bunch of kids.

Federation is a bunch of skates and then they formulate teams in tiers. No releases, just placements.

 

[Minnesota Knudsens]

Looks like some kids and one of their dads stepping out there, lol

Funny story: as I said my son is a pretty big kid and his bread and butter last year was stealing the puck in his own end and then catching the D men a bit flat footed. Once he got a step on the D he’d be gone. But we played one game against an absolutely massive defenseman. This kid just towered over my son and the opposing coach appeared to be line matching them. My son would get a step on this kid and the kid skated with these crazy long strides and just reeled him back in lol. My son’s legs meanwhile were just pumping away but getting nowhere. It’s kind of comical to me now, but I recall my son getting really pissed off.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Yes and no, you can have 60 kids tryout for AAA then 35 get released down to AA. 10 of them go tryout for different clubs, 25 continue the tryout with AA. Then more AAA kids get released, and the 10 that went to other tryouts come back to your club.

The complexity happens when you are down to 22-23 kids on AAA and 22-23 on AA. The U18AAA might be waiting for a WHL or Junior A guy and the WHL might be waiting for the NHL guy which right near the end of the process with trickle down.

NHL--->WHL--->JUNIOR A--->U18AAA--->U18AA or U17AAA--->U16AA--->To Federation. One released kid can affect a bunch of kids.

Federation is a bunch of skates and then they formulate teams in tiers. No releases, just placements.

OK. Seems like it is a totally different system that what we have here.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Yes and no, you can have 60 kids tryout for AAA then 35 get released down to AA. 10 of them go tryout for different clubs, 25 continue the tryout with AA. Then more AAA kids get released, and the 10 that went to other tryouts come back to your club.

The complexity happens when you are down to 22-23 kids on AAA and 22-23 on AA. The U18AAA might be waiting for a WHL or Junior A guy and the WHL might be waiting for the NHL guy which right near the end of the process with trickle down.

NHL--->WHL--->JUNIOR A--->U18AAA--->U18AA or U17AAA--->U16AA--->To Federation. One released kid can affect a bunch of kids.

Federation is a bunch of skates and then they formulate teams in tiers. No releases, just placements.

The question though - is this system more or less fair then the "free for all" that was described in the US?


So a little tangent - I'm a lawyer. In order to become a lawyer in Canada after graduating law school you need to go through something called articling - a year apprenticeship. The law firm you do you articling with can have a huge impact on your future career.

Back when I graduated you went through something called a "match". Firms would interview as many or as few students as they wanted to. Students could apply to interview with as few or as many firms as they wanted to. Each firm, and each student would then make a ranked list in order of which student or firm you wanted to be matched to. This was put into a computer and WHAM - out came your match. Firms and students were bound to each other for the year.

It was all very fair - nobody could try and get an early advantage by trying to scoop students early. But it had the effect of taking some level of choice away from both parties. You didn't have to put any particular firm or student on your list, but once you did (even if they were at the bottom) if that's who you matched with that's where you went.

Anyways - that system is now long gone. Now articling recruitment is a free-for-all. If you think you've identified a top student you try and get them signed up right away, and so there are all kinds of shenanigans played. But you then have total 100% choice over where you go / who you hire.

Not so hypothetically - there's a coach my kid has trained with before over at a different club. He likes this coach, and that coach seems to like my kid. Would it be the end of the world to allow my kid to just "sign" with the other club early on in the process? Both sides know what they're getting and would seem to be happy. Now you can see the downside too - when I say my kid has trained with this coach that means we've paid him, so this could definitely be open for corruption and abuse.

I dunno - just something for discussion if anyone wants to pick it up. The minor hockey system isn't about to change just on my say so, and I'm not sure that our present system isn't about as good as it can get.

 

[Slats432]

The question though - is this system more or less fair then the "free for all" that was described in the US?


So a little tangent - I'm a lawyer. In order to become a lawyer in Canada after graduating law school you need to go through something called articling - a year apprenticeship. The law firm you do you articling with can have a huge impact on your future career.

Back when I graduated you went through something called a "match". Firms would interview as many or as few students as they wanted to. Students could apply to interview with as few or as many firms as they wanted to. Each firm, and each student would then make a ranked list in order of which student or firm you wanted to be matched to. This was put into a computer and WHAM - out came your match. Firms and students were bound to each other for the year.

It was all very fair - nobody could try and get an early advantage by trying to scoop students early. But it had the effect of taking some level of choice away from both parties. You didn't have to put any particular firm or student on your list, but once you did (even if they were at the bottom) if that's who you matched with that's where you went.

Anyways - that system is now long gone. Now articling recruitment is a free-for-all. If you think you've identified a top student you try and get them signed up right away, and so there are all kinds of shenanigans played. But you then have total 100% choice over where you go / who you hire.

Not so hypothetically - there's a coach my kid has trained with before over at a different club. He likes this coach, and that coach seems to like my kid. Would it be the end of the world to allow my kid to just "sign" with the other club early on in the process? Both sides know what they're getting and would seem to be happy. Now you can see the downside too - when I say my kid has trained with this coach that means we've paid him, so this could definitely be open for corruption and abuse.

I dunno - just something for discussion if anyone wants to pick it up. The minor hockey system isn't about to change just on my say so, and I'm not sure that our present system isn't about as good as it can get.

Open borders is a topic that gets discussed. It doesn't hurt the strong clubs. They will attract the best players, and continue to be powerhouses. The players that might not make a team that can move to a different club, they benefit.

The clubs at the lower end? Well, take academy and apply it to club hockey. You will get a lot of the top guys wanting to play for one club and making super teams, and they will win alot. Does that help development? I don't know that it would. Then you have the guys on the top club not playing with the players from their draw zone, the guys that go to school together. There would likely be movement season to season so today you play for X club, but you didn't get the same PP time as Billy so you move to Y club. You would have late movement. Watching to see what players sign where so you can go to the either the stronger club or wait to see what your chances are an sign late to give yourself a better chance at a weak club.

As for shenanigans? You asking how good would it be to be in the situation as the parent who started the thread.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Don't get me wrong. My experience has not been it is a wild west free for all of everyone moving around. Have I heard of some whacky stuff like an entire team not returning to tryouts the next year? yes.

On one hand, if parents are not happy with how an organization does things, they have the opportunity to explore other opportunities. On the other hand, some orgs get accused of constantly just doing whatever will make the parents happy and parents will use the threat of leaving to get what they want.

Another good thing, is if you do your HW you can find the org that is right for you. Some, are very strict in terms of practice attendance, lateness, practice uniform. for example, miss a practice and you sit a period or a 1/2 period. Others are a bit more expensive, but you get more. For example, uniforms are included in tuition, more practice time, more games, more tournaments included, paid coaches. They will also have "full" teams in terms of roster size and the better teams will shorten benches in close games.

On the other end, I know of 2 that are the opposite. One, tuition is less than 1/2 the tuition at mine. However, teams get their 2 practices per week, 6 pre-season games, 16-20 league games and that is it. Volunteer coaches (nothing wrong with that). Might be able to pick up a few non-league games if you can find a suitable opponent looking for a game that has ice. Hard to do though if you can't reciprocate and they dont really get additional ice slots to fill in with non-league games. They can go to tournaments, but the parents either have to pay or they have to fundraise. They keep rosters small about 10-13 skaters, so kids get plenty of ice time each game. Another prides itself on being a "family focused" program. Their goal is to get kids as mites and have them stay together until they graduate HS. They will get a few new kids here and there, but it is usually a friend of a kid on the team, a family who just moved to the area. They don't actively recruit with the intent of increasing the W's against the L's. Basically, if you were on the team as a 12-year old, so long as there were no issues, you will make the team when you are 13. They are not worrying about hanging banners. Their tuition is in line with the rest of the league, but they will get additional ice slots for non-league games, they will have 1-2 tournaments entry fees included in their tuition. I know someone whose kid is older than mine and played there. Said it does cause some kids to leave because they want to be in a more competitive serious environment, but I think that is fine. Can't please everyone and if they do what works for them, then so be it.

I know of another (not one I would ever consider just due to the location) but the players have a very strict dress code for games (ridiculous if you ask me, but whatever). Secondly, the PARENTS are expected to buy the team sweatshirts and hats and wear it to games. They are expected to go out for breakfast/lunch/dinner depending on game times after almost every game. Aside from the location, that is not for me. I am ok with the occasional (1-2x per season) team lunch or dinner after a game, but not almost every game. But again, to each their own.

Point of this yapping here is that I like the idea that families can find the program that works best for them if their closest program is not the best fit.

 

[Yukon Joe]

So thanks @patnyrnyg - it's always interesting to hear how things work in other parts of the world.

I know of another (not one I would ever consider just due to the location) but the players have a very strict dress code for games (ridiculous if you ask me, but whatever).

For what it's worth it is not at all unusual for kids at higher level teams to have to show up in a jacket and tie up here. I think it's silly, but not at all unusual.

Secondly, the PARENTS are expected to buy the team sweatshirts and hats and wear it to games. They are expected to go out for breakfast/lunch/dinner depending on game times after almost every game. Aside from the location, that is not for me. I am ok with the occasional (1-2x per season) team lunch or dinner after a game, but not almost every game. But again, to each their own.

OK - a dress code for PARENTS is pretty crazy. I mean I do have swag for some of my kids teams that I'll wear to games, but it is in no way required and most parents do not do that.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

So thanks @patnyrnyg - it's always interesting to hear how things work in other parts of the world.



For what it's worth it is not at all unusual for kids at higher level teams to have to show up in a jacket and tie up here. I think it's silly, but not at all unusual.



OK - a dress code for PARENTS is pretty crazy. I mean I do have swag for some of my kids teams that I'll wear to games, but it is in no way required and most parents do not do that.

Both of my daughter’s teams made the players dress up before games last season, which I didn’t have a problem with.

A lot of the parents wore team apparel, but if it was ever forced on me, we’d be finding a new org.

We pay all the exorbitant costs, so don’t ask me to wear your team logos.

I hate the idea of wearing apparel for my favorite sports team let alone my daughter’s teams.

Can’t believe any parents would go along with that or the “everyone eats dinner/lunch” together rule.

It’s bananas what some parents will put up with because they think it will get little Johnny to the show.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Both of my daughter’s teams made the players dress up before games last season, which I didn’t have a problem with.

A lot of the parents wore team apparel, but if it was ever forced on me, we’d be finding a new org.

We pay all the exorbitant costs, so don’t ask me to wear your team logos.

I hate the idea of wearing apparel for my favorite sports team let alone my daughter’s teams.

Can’t believe any parents would go along with that or the “everyone eats dinner/lunch” together rule.

It’s bananas what some parents will put up with because they think it will get little Johnny to the show.

So this is a total aside - but I assistant coach my middle kid. For several years now they have some kind of team apparel (hoodie, jacket, whatever) where someone steps forward to help subsidize through a sponsorship - for the kids. I then get asked to buy the same apparel - at full price - to wear on the bench. And because parents have to personalize the merch it's always particular to that year, and not generic club logos.

So I now have quite the selection of such gear...

 

[Slats432]

I know of another (not one I would ever consider just due to the location) but the players have a very strict dress code for games (ridiculous if you ask me, but whatever). Secondly, the PARENTS are expected to buy the team sweatshirts and hats and wear it to games. They are expected to go out for breakfast/lunch/dinner depending on game times after almost every game. Aside from the location, that is not for me. I am ok with the occasional (1-2x per season) team lunch or dinner after a game, but not almost every game. But again, to each their own.

Point of this yapping here is that I like the idea that families can find the program that works best for them if their closest program is not the best fit.

Parents required to have meals with the team and wear team gear is kind of nuts.

A strict dress code is a club thing. Every high level club I know does it. If you want to be at your best, dress your best, create an atmosphere, team focus, respect for team, respect for self, etc. There are tons of psychological studies showing the benefit of dressing well. This is an extension of that.

I support it personally, but I see why there are those who don't like it.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Parents required to have meals with the team and wear team gear is kind of nuts.

A strict dress code is a club thing. Every high level club I know does it. If you want to be at your best, dress your best, create an atmosphere, team focus, respect for team, respect for self, etc. There are tons of psychological studies showing the benefit of dressing well. This is an extension of that.

I support it personally, but I see why there are those who don't like it.

For a 10U team, it is a bit ridiculous, imo. Added expense for parents. Besides, since they are not showering immediately after the game in the lockerroom, the clothes get ruined pretty quick.

 

[Slats432]

For a 10U team, it is a bit ridiculous, imo. Added expense for parents. Besides, since they are not showering immediately after the game in the lockerroom, the clothes get ruined pretty quick.

I don't consider U10 a club team. It would be drastic. And I don't consider a kid elite until they hit U15 anyways.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Yes, I am aware the dress code is not uncommon. I noticed our 14U team always showed up in a pair of khakis and a polo.

Agreed on the dress code for parents. From what I understand, it is not mandatory, but "expected'. I bought some team gear when my daughter started. Usually wear it to games, but it is certainly not mandatory and many other parents do not do so. Their justification is they are trying to establish a "culture". Uh-huh, sounds more like a cult, but to each their own.

I don't consider U10 a club team. It would be drastic. And I don't consider a kid elite until they hit U15 anyways.

agreed. Teenagers, it is different. When I was in jr high, the school basketball team used to have to wear a tie to school on days they had road games. Wrestling team, too. When I got to HS, a few teams did for all games. But yes, a few around here will insist 10U kids have a dress code "into and out of the lockerroom".

 

[Yukon Joe]

Parents required to have meals with the team and wear team gear is kind of nuts.

A strict dress code is a club thing. Every high level club I know does it. If you want to be at your best, dress your best, create an atmosphere, team focus, respect for team, respect for self, etc. There are tons of psychological studies showing the benefit of dressing well. This is an extension of that.

I support it personally, but I see why there are those who don't like it.

This is just me:

No problem with a dress code for games. But it can be as simple as team gear (the aforementioned team jacket), or a collared shirt, or whatever. But I like the idea of everyone showing up dressed the same - as a team. As you say it shows respect and focus.

What I don't like is my kid having to wear a suit. Literally the only reason he owns a suit is to wear to hockey games. Maybe if a relative dies he'll have a suit to wear to a funeral, but otherwise it's something he never wears. It's just another hockey expense.

Don't get me wrong - if that's what the coach requires, that's what we'll do. I don't cause a stink about it. But anonymously on the internet? I'll complain.


That being said - on Monday I had an incredibly early rec hockey game, so I went straight from work - wearing a suit. It was kind of fun to show up to the rink all dressed up. But it was a pain to have to get back into that suit after the game, even after showering.

I was only asked about a dozen times "so you must have come straight from work, huh"...

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

When I was in jr high, the school basketball team used to have to wear a tie to school on days they had road games. Wrestling team, too. When I got to HS, a few teams did for all games. But yes, a few around here will insist 10U kids have a dress code "into and out of the lockerroom".

This reminded me that my daughter, who plays for her middle school team, is required to dress up on game days when they come to school as well.

Boys have to wear dress pants, dress shoes, buttoned down dress shirt, and tie.

My daughter just wore a dress and nice flats or whatever they are called.

 

[Minnesota Knudsens]

Don't get me wrong. My experience has not been it is a wild west free for all of everyone moving around. Have I heard of some whacky stuff like an entire team not returning to tryouts the next year? yes.

On one hand, if parents are not happy with how an organization does things, they have the opportunity to explore other opportunities. On the other hand, some orgs get accused of constantly just doing whatever will make the parents happy and parents will use the threat of leaving to get what they want.

Another good thing, is if you do your HW you can find the org that is right for you. Some, are very strict in terms of practice attendance, lateness, practice uniform. for example, miss a practice and you sit a period or a 1/2 period. Others are a bit more expensive, but you get more. For example, uniforms are included in tuition, more practice time, more games, more tournaments included, paid coaches. They will also have "full" teams in terms of roster size and the better teams will shorten benches in close games.

On the other end, I know of 2 that are the opposite. One, tuition is less than 1/2 the tuition at mine. However, teams get their 2 practices per week, 6 pre-season games, 16-20 league games and that is it. Volunteer coaches (nothing wrong with that). Might be able to pick up a few non-league games if you can find a suitable opponent looking for a game that has ice. Hard to do though if you can't reciprocate and they dont really get additional ice slots to fill in with non-league games. They can go to tournaments, but the parents either have to pay or they have to fundraise. They keep rosters small about 10-13 skaters, so kids get plenty of ice time each game. Another prides itself on being a "family focused" program. Their goal is to get kids as mites and have them stay together until they graduate HS. They will get a few new kids here and there, but it is usually a friend of a kid on the team, a family who just moved to the area. They don't actively recruit with the intent of increasing the W's against the L's. Basically, if you were on the team as a 12-year old, so long as there were no issues, you will make the team when you are 13. They are not worrying about hanging banners. Their tuition is in line with the rest of the league, but they will get additional ice slots for non-league games, they will have 1-2 tournaments entry fees included in their tuition. I know someone whose kid is older than mine and played there. Said it does cause some kids to leave because they want to be in a more competitive serious environment, but I think that is fine. Can't please everyone and if they do what works for them, then so be it.

I know of another (not one I would ever consider just due to the location) but the players have a very strict dress code for games (ridiculous if you ask me, but whatever). Secondly, the PARENTS are expected to buy the team sweatshirts and hats and wear it to games. They are expected to go out for breakfast/lunch/dinner depending on game times after almost every game. Aside from the location, that is not for me. I am ok with the occasional (1-2x per season) team lunch or dinner after a game, but not almost every game. But again, to each their own.

Point of this yapping here is that I like the idea that families can find the program that works best for them if their closest program is not the best fit.

This is really interesting. This thread has talked a lot about nutty parents, but not a lot about questionable organizations. I guess it’s important to note that questionable organizations are basically run by nutty parents (volunteers). We’ve been with our current organization for 2 years and it feels like we’ve already seen a lot.

I really like the idea of paying a bit more for proper coaching. Right now there’s a big difference in our organization between rep coaching and everything else. Spending a year with “coach dad” can often feel like losing a year of development. I also feel like there are a lot of dudes coaching just to guarantee that A) their son always makes a team despite being a borderline player and B) they can stack certain teams so their kid will have a fun year.

 

[Slats432]

This is really interesting. This thread has talked a lot about nutty parents, but not a lot about questionable organizations. I guess it’s important to note that questionable organizations are basically run by nutty parents (volunteers). We’ve been with our current organization for 2 years and it feels like we’ve already seen a lot.

I really like the idea of paying a bit more for proper coaching. Right now there’s a big difference in our organization between rep coaching and everything else. Spending a year with “coach dad” can often feel like losing a year of development. I also feel like there are a lot of dudes coaching just to guarantee that A) their son always makes a team despite being a borderline player and B) they can stack certain teams so their kid will have a fun year.

There is no way to get away from dad coaches unless you are at the club level. This year our organization had to add 4-5 new coaches. Get applications, interview candidates. The reason they aren't dad coaches is because of the reasons you mentioned.

I have no favourites other than the best kids (Attitude and skills).

There is always discussion about coach honorariums, and if you are with a club that will provide it, you can get non dad coaches. There is a big delta between a club coach and a dad coach for sure.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I really like the idea of paying a bit more for proper coaching. Right now there’s a big difference in our organization between rep coaching and everything else. Spending a year with “coach dad” can often feel like losing a year of development. I also feel like there are a lot of dudes coaching just to guarantee that A) their son always makes a team despite being a borderline player and B) they can stack certain teams so their kid will have a fun year.

So I have to stand up for at least some "coach dads" (by the way - not me).

My kids have had some awesome coach dads, who played hockey growing up, who are serious about being a coach and have taken some classes. My kids learned a lot (one even later turned into a paid coach for a hockey club).

I've also seen some who have very little clue what they're doing.

When it comes to paid/honorarium coaches - this might be more from spring hockey, we've also seen coaches who take the honorarium and hardly ever show up, or who only show up because of an all-expense-paid road trip.

So yeah - your hockey year can depend so much on the coach for sure - but whether it's a "coach dad" or a "paid coach" isn't necessarily the deciding factor.

 

[Slats432]

So I have to stand up for at least some "coach dads" (by the way - not me).

My kids have had some awesome coach dads, who played hockey growing up, who are serious about being a coach and have taken some classes. My kids learned a lot (one even later turned into a paid coach for a hockey club).

I've also seen some who have very little clue what they're doing.

When it comes to paid/honorarium coaches - this might be more from spring hockey, we've also seen coaches who take the honorarium and hardly ever show up, or who only show up because of an all-expense-paid road trip.

So yeah - your hockey year can depend so much on the coach for sure - but whether it's a "coach dad" or a "paid coach" isn't necessarily the deciding factor.

Comparing the coaching in Spring hockey to club hockey shouldn't happen. I would be surprised if over 50% were certified.

 

[Minnesota Knudsens]

Comparing the coaching in Spring hockey to club hockey shouldn't happen. I would be surprised if over 50% were certified.

Sorry please explain Club hockey to me? Is this the same as Academy hockey?

 

[Yukon Joe]

Comparing the coaching in Spring hockey to club hockey shouldn't happen. I would be surprised if over 50% were certified.

So on the one hand I believe almost all of the spring hockey coach's we've had have been club hockey coaches during the winter. I can't speak specifically to their certification but I'm positive if you're a club hockey coach you have to have your certification.

That being said - I've been less than impressed with their attendance during spring hockey.

Absolutely no interest into going into names, and we haven't had the same coach for both winter and spring hockey so I can't make any direct comparison.