Commercialization ruining minor hockey

[WarriorofTime]

As in all areas of life, just because someone is spending top dollar, doesn’t mean it’s always financially prudent to do so. I’m sure plenty more people here “could afford it” if they didn’t save for retirement, carried a high credit card balance, etc. Too often people associate spending a lot of money with “having” a lot of money.

 

[jetsmooseice]

So of course if you're a slam dunk for the WHL you don't need to bother with CSSHL-type money to begin with.

But I do kind of get it. You're making really good money. You love your kid. Your kid loves hockey (and you love hockey). So anything your can do to advance your kid's chance even a little bit may well be worth it - I after all you can't take it with you.

Zack Hyman is the example. Growing up he was always a good player, but never exceptional. His dad though spent millions of dollars literally buying teams for Zack to play on. The thing is - it worked. Hyman was drafted and has now played a lengthy NHL career. The thing is this shouldn't take anything away from Hyman - he has clearly worked very hard thoughout his minor and pro career. But lacking the kind of all-world skill he never would have made it this far absent his father's cash.

So look - if my household income was more like $500k+, rather than what it is, I may well try to send my kid to play at NAX. But that wouldn't be any kind of financially wise decision - rather it would be an emotional decision all about my kid.

If you are legitimately wealthy and can throw down Hyman-tier money on your kid's hockey dream without thinking twice about it, then for sure, do it... I mean, why not. As you say, you con't take it with you. I'd certainly do it if I was in that position.

But I'd wager that most people with kids in CSSHL, even if they are higher earners than average, they are probably making significant sacrifices to do it. Even if that "sacrifice" is nothing more than not buying a nice cottage, boat or whatever. And in that case, I doubt the CSSHL is going to elevate your kid from a decent player to a can't miss WHL/NHL draft prospect or whatever.

 

[Yukon Joe]

If you are legitimately wealthy and can throw down Hyman-tier money on your kid's hockey dream without thinking twice about it, then for sure, do it... I mean, why not. As you say, you con't take it with you. I'd certainly do it if I was in that position.

But I'd wager that most people with kids in CSSHL, even if they are higher earners than average, they are probably making significant sacrifices to do it. Even if that "sacrifice" is nothing more than not buying a nice cottage, boat or whatever. And in that case, I doubt the CSSHL is going to elevate your kid from a decent player to a can't miss WHL/NHL draft prospect or whatever.

I think I would agree. Obviously anyone short of a billionaire doesn't have $30k to just throw around. But we're talking about families where the decision is to send the kid to CSSHL vs hold off on buying a new vehicle for a year, or taking a local holiday versus an overseas holiday.

And I don't think going to a CSSHL school will make your kid a "can't miss" prospect - but could it take your kid from a 20% chance to a 60% chance of being drafted? Maybe (and to be fair I'm just guessing at the actual numbers).

And also to be fair - CSSHL schools have two different categories - regular and prep. Off the top of my head I can't even remember which is the higher one (I think it might be prep). If you make the prep roster you might have a meaningful shot at a pro career, but less so if you make the regular roster (or vice versa).

To re-iterate though - my kid doesn't go to a CSSHL school, I have no experience with those schools beyond talking to other parents, so if someone sends their kid to such a school and finds it to be a wonderful experience I have nothing that would contradict that.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Soccer is definitely a different system but my local MLS team the New York Red Bulls have instituted a free program for their U10 and U11 groups this year. Of course you still have to get your kid to that point to begin with but it's nice to see a team taking some burden off of families.

It's also different from hockey in the sense that NHL teams can't just grow their own local talent like the MLS can. We've had numerous players on the first team MLS team who have been in the academy since they were young kids and worked their way up the system so if these U10 and U11 kids do well they'll be kept in the system to go as high as they can.

A lot of soccer is like this throughout the world but drafts aren't a thing everywhere else. The MLS still has a collegiate draft but those players aren't anywhere near sought after like our other sports leagues.

They also have their own training grounds so that makes things easier because they aren't fighting for ice time nor paying for it. Even though it's still free it's also good marketing too because even if the kids don't turn out to be anything you have local kids and their families who still become a fan of the team. They have the MLS team players and coaches interact with the kids of all age groups so they get to see what it's like to be at the MLS level.

It's just a shame to me that hockey can't be more like this. I know the Devils run a first time learn to play hockey thing but it's still not free, they provide the gear and ice team but I think it's still like $200-300 and once you go through it you're done and have to go through whatever the normal programs are around here to continue playing.

Soccer still has a big pay to play problem in the US but I think as the MLS keeps growing they'll offer more programs and even at younger ages all across the academys and hopefully for free. If anyone's interested in what they offer...

Youth | NewYorkRedBulls.com

The latest news, scores, highlights and stats from the New York Red Bulls.

www.newyorkredbulls.com

My daughter started with Rangers Learn to Play. Seems like every team has it. Great program and a much cheaper way to see if your kid wants to play. Just about every player in our organization started with either Rangers or Devils learn to play and went from there. There is a Devils Youth Organization, as well as a Flyers in Voorhees, but it is certainly not free or any kind of academy for the NHL teams.

 

[Yukon Joe]

My daughter started with Rangers Learn to Play. Seems like every team has it. Great program and a much cheaper way to see if your kid wants to play. Just about every player in our organization started with either Rangers or Devils learn to play and went from there. There is a Devils Youth Organization, as well as a Flyers in Voorhees, but it is certainly not free or any kind of academy for the NHL teams.

I dunno - the Edmonton Oilers program seems more like PR then a meaningful attempt to get lots of kids playing.

First Shift | Edmonton Oilers

The NHL/NHLPA FIRST SHIFT program is designed to ensure a positive experience for new-to-hockey families.

www.nhl.com

So for $299 you get full head-to-toe equipment plus 6 one hour ice sessions with former Oilers. The price is pretty solid for including full gear, but really - if you're getting started at age 4 (First Shift starts at age 6) through my local program you can get a full session of 18 weeks, 45 minutes per week sessions for $215 early bird price and probably get away with under $200 for gear.

If you want to compare apples to apples at age 6 - cost of the program would be $445, but for a total of 18 weeks of twice per week hockey. Gear again probably not much more than $200.

I know maybe I'm coming from a place of privilege to say that $650 for 36 sessions is a way better deal than $300 for 6 sessions - but it is! Not to mention that ideally you do want kids to get started younger as they're just little sponges at that age in learning.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I dunno - the Edmonton Oilers program seems more like PR then a meaningful attempt to get lots of kids playing.

First Shift | Edmonton Oilers

The NHL/NHLPA FIRST SHIFT program is designed to ensure a positive experience for new-to-hockey families.

www.nhl.com

So for $299 you get full head-to-toe equipment plus 6 one hour ice sessions with former Oilers. The price is pretty solid for including full gear, but really - if you're getting started at age 4 (First Shift starts at age 6) through my local program you can get a full session of 18 weeks, 45 minutes per week sessions for $215 early bird price and probably get away with under $200 for gear.

If you want to compare apples to apples at age 6 - cost of the program would be $445, but for a total of 18 weeks of twice per week hockey. Gear again probably not much more than $200.

I know maybe I'm coming from a place of privilege to say that $650 for 36 sessions is a way better deal than $300 for 6 sessions - but it is! Not to mention that ideally you do want kids to get started younger as they're just little sponges at that age in learning.

Just about every rink in the NY Metro Area has Learn to Play run by either the Rangers, Devils, or Islanders. When my daughter did it (2019-20 and 2020-21), it was about $250 for 10 sessions. 2nd year was supposed to be a girls league, but turned into a girls house league as we came back from covid as they wouldnt allow travel. The rinks themselves push it for the novices as the pre-cursor to house league. Coaches are hired by the Rangers and Rangers alumni showed up from time to time to coach.

I also think getting "more kids involved" is a little easier in a place like Edmonton as it is in the NYC Metro area and other parts of the US. My nephew who lives outside of Detroit did Red Wings Learn to Play, but didnt stick with it. He was given the same exact equipment my daughter was given.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Just about every rink in the NY Metro Area has Learn to Play run by either the Rangers, Devils, or Islanders. When my daughter did it (2019-20 and 2020-21), it was about $250 for 10 sessions. 2nd year was supposed to be a girls league, but turned into a girls house league as we came back from covid as they wouldnt allow travel. The rinks themselves push it for the novices as the pre-cursor to house league. Coaches are hired by the Rangers and Rangers alumni showed up from time to time to coach.

I also think getting "more kids involved" is a little easier in a place like Edmonton as it is in the NYC Metro area and other parts of the US. My nephew who lives outside of Detroit did Red Wings Learn to Play, but didnt stick with it. He was given the same exact equipment my daughter was given.

Yeah that's probably just a difference between Canada and the US.

In Canada there are concerns about declining minor hockey registrations, but there's still a very thriving minor hockey scene with or without the Oilers being involved. As such very very few of the kids I know who play hockey came through the First Shift (or before that it was called 'Lil Oilers).

The advantage of the Oilers program is they help you with equipment - both in giving you equipment, but also in having a session dedicated to how to put on your gear. The minor hockey system does tend to assume you know a couple of things about hockey, so if you're brand new to the sport you're stuck just going to stores to get their help.

 

[jetsmooseice]

On a related note, the Winnipeg Jets run the Winnipeg Jets Hockey Academy but it's focused on kids from low-income/socially challenged areas who likely wouldn't otherwise play. I think they also have programs targeted at immigrant families as well. This makes good sense because the existing minor hockey apparatus does a good job of capturing most families with an interest in minor hockey.

I suspect that in the US, NHL teams have to take a somewhat more hands-on role in promoting the game and encouraging people to play at a grassroots level.

 

[BruinDust]

Until Minor Hockey puts more focus on playing games and less on practice, they will continue to see a decline in enrollment.

Seriously if your say a 16-17 year old house league player, why should they even practice at all? I'd argue at that level, say your registration gets you 3 ice sessions per week, it should be 3 games and no practice. They aren't going anywhere if they are only playing house league at that age, so why not put more focus on the fun part of hockey, playing the game. What 16-17 year old house leaguer wants to be disciplined and bag-skated by some asshole coach on a power trip?

 

[Yukon Joe]

Until Minor Hockey puts more focus on playing games and less on practice, they will continue to see a decline in enrollment.

Seriously if your say a 16-17 year old house league player, why should they even practice at all? I'd argue at that level, say your registration gets you 3 ice sessions per week, it should be 3 games and no practice. They aren't going anywhere if they are only playing house league at that age, so why not put more focus on the fun part of hockey, playing the game. What 16-17 year old house leaguer wants to be disciplined and bag-skated by some asshole coach on a power trip?

See I totally disagree.

I'm a 49 year old beer leaguer. I'm obviously "not going anywhere" - but practices are how you get better, how you improve your skills. So I signed up for a adult camp last winter, hope to do it again. I wish I could do more practices.

99.9% of these kids aren't "going anywhere" - but isn't there value to practice and improving one's skills? I mean 99.99% of kids taking music lessons aren't going to become professional musicians - but isn't trying to get better part of the process to?

I mean yes - make sure your kids aren't being bag skated by an "asshole coach on a power trip", and even practices should at least partially focus on having fun (whether that's playing British Bulldog for younger kids, or a shootout competition for older kids" but you won't learn anything by only playing games.

 

[WarriorofTime]

There isn't a youth sport out there which isn't heavily practiced based. Leave "games only" to adult rec leagues.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

See I totally disagree.

I'm a 49 year old beer leaguer. I'm obviously "not going anywhere" - but practices are how you get better, how you improve your skills. So I signed up for a adult camp last winter, hope to do it again. I wish I could do more practices.

99.9% of these kids aren't "going anywhere" - but isn't there value to practice and improving one's skills? I mean 99.99% of kids taking music lessons aren't going to become professional musicians - but isn't trying to get better part of the process to?

I mean yes - make sure your kids aren't being bag skated by an "asshole coach on a power trip", and even practices should at least partially focus on having fun (whether that's playing British Bulldog for younger kids, or a shootout competition for older kids" but you won't learn anything by only playing games.

Agree with ya, but you also need good house hockey coaches. I didn’t have that, half the practices were wasted time and the majority of the rest of it were drills too removed from real-game situations. It’s like they were trying to do pro coaching with kids, just overly complicated or specific a lot of the time. The skating work was good, but practicing the breakout against no competition for half a practice.. meanwhile half these kids can’t even lift the puck, let’s maybe try coaching shooting sometime. It was always strategy, rarely actual skills, so you’d see the same 14 year old ankle bender at the end of the season, he’d just stand in the right place now.

Anywho, they were just dads so I get it, but they were also pretty competitive and into it. I remember one guy shit-talked the other a bit so more dudes wanted to be on his squad- kinda a shit show in my experience. Not really sure what you can do about that, but incompetent refs, asshole parents, insane travel, legitimately dangerous assholes getting their aggression out- house hockey was fun, not sure I’d want my kid to play in the area I played in.

 

[BruinDust]

See I totally disagree.

I'm a 49 year old beer leaguer. I'm obviously "not going anywhere" - but practices are how you get better, how you improve your skills. So I signed up for a adult camp last winter, hope to do it again. I wish I could do more practices.

I'm a 43 year old beer leaguer. And I get practice is a way to improve your skills. But you can improve playing games. I didn't play for a decade before getting back into rec hockey at 34-35 and I had a long way from where I was when I stopped playing in my mid 20s. But from just playing games, I was improving. The more frequently I played, the more I improved. Never had a practice once. Now there are a few things I'd love to work on, but they are very specific and really the same things I needed to work on back when I played minor hockey, Just doing routine drills with a group wouldn't accomplish a whole lot more than just playing games. By the time I was 16-17 my skill level was stagnant. At that point I needed one-on-one instruction to iron out the weak areas of my game like backward crossovers, sharp turns, edge-work.

You can be a 18 year old house league player who transitions into a 19-year old beer leaguer and suddenly your not practicing at all and likely no worse off. I just think once you get to a certain point at a certain level and minor hockey age, group practice is a bit of waste of time and money when it comes to minor hockey because the drills your doing with the group/team aren't targeting those specific things an individual player needs to work on. Just going through the motions.

Agree with ya, but you also need good house hockey coaches. I didn’t have that, half the practices were wasted time and the majority of the rest of it were drills too removed from real-game situations. It’s like they were trying to do pro coaching with kids, just overly complicated or specific a lot of the time.

You hit the nail on the head. You need good coaches. I didn't have that in minor hockey. I had one coach who stood out. The rest were bad-to-mediocre. Couple lunatics sprinkled in between. Learned essentially nothing. Week after week of the same drills. Like you said, drills far removed from real-game situations. Zero, literally zero, one-on-one instruction. Random bag skates are a total waste of time and are only used to send messages while turning players off the sport. Any teenage player who wants to excel and advance to higher levels needs to concentrate on fitness off-ice on their own time and dime.

Frankly I think a lot of parents are being taken to the cleaners by "hockey coaches" running their own game with private group sessions outside the minor hockey realm. There is this one practice that goes ahead of my Friday Night shinny skate and I'll watch a bit before getting dressed. What a waste of time. The kids spend more time down on one knee being explained how to navigate this obstacle course the coaches have spent the past 10 minutes setting up than they do actually doing drills. None of which are these complicated and convoluted group drills simulating real game situations. I'd assume the parents in the stands don't know any better and are impressed by the fancy obstacle course. I guess if the kids are having fun then whatever but as player I would of hated it. If I ever got back into coaching minor hockey (coached 1 year high school level), I'd keep my group drills simple and my practices up-tempo. The less time the kids spend down on one knee, the better. If you identify something a player is really doing wrong, then do the individual coaching.

I hear now the practice-to-games ratio is 2 practices to 1 game. And they wonder why a lot of older teenagers are finding other things to spend their time and money on.

 

[Rpenny]

Here is the thing. This has been going on for years and it is only getting worse. What annoys MANY parents is that "officially" the teams and leagues need the money due to the increase in operating costs and rarely do the players or parents get any help off setting the costs for the players

 

[patnyrnyg]

Until Minor Hockey puts more focus on playing games and less on practice, they will continue to see a decline in enrollment.

Seriously if your say a 16-17 year old house league player, why should they even practice at all? I'd argue at that level, say your registration gets you 3 ice sessions per week, it should be 3 games and no practice. They aren't going anywhere if they are only playing house league at that age, so why not put more focus on the fun part of hockey, playing the game. What 16-17 year old house leaguer wants to be disciplined and bag-skated by some asshole coach on a power trip?

Completely disagree on the focus on games. But, do they actually have house league for 16-17 year olds? I don't know of any around here. I would think if a 16-17 year old was not going to play travel, they would just play mens league at their local rink.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I'm a 43 year old beer leaguer. And I get practice is a way to improve your skills. But you can improve playing games. I didn't play for a decade before getting back into rec hockey at 34-35 and I had a long way from where I was when I stopped playing in my mid 20s. But from just playing games, I was improving. The more frequently I played, the more I improved. Never had a practice once. Now there are a few things I'd love to work on, but they are very specific and really the same things I needed to work on back when I played minor hockey, Just doing routine drills with a group wouldn't accomplish a whole lot more than just playing games. By the time I was 16-17 my skill level was stagnant. At that point I needed one-on-one instruction to iron out the weak areas of my game like backward crossovers, sharp turns, edge-work.

You can be a 18 year old house league player who transitions into a 19-year old beer leaguer and suddenly your not practicing at all and likely no worse off. I just think once you get to a certain point at a certain level and minor hockey age, group practice is a bit of waste of time and money when it comes to minor hockey because the drills your doing with the group/team aren't targeting those specific things an individual player needs to work on. Just going through the motions.


You hit the nail on the head. You need good coaches. I didn't have that in minor hockey. I had one coach who stood out. The rest were bad-to-mediocre. Couple lunatics sprinkled in between. Learned essentially nothing. Week after week of the same drills. Like you said, drills far removed from real-game situations. Zero, literally zero, one-on-one instruction. Random bag skates are a total waste of time and are only used to send messages while turning players off the sport. Any teenage player who wants to excel and advance to higher levels needs to concentrate on fitness off-ice on their own time and dime.

Frankly I think a lot of parents are being taken to the cleaners by "hockey coaches" running their own game with private group sessions outside the minor hockey realm. There is this one practice that goes ahead of my Friday Night shinny skate and I'll watch a bit before getting dressed. What a waste of time. The kids spend more time down on one knee being explained how to navigate this obstacle course the coaches have spent the past 10 minutes setting up than they do actually doing drills. None of which are these complicated and convoluted group drills simulating real game situations. I'd assume the parents in the stands don't know any better and are impressed by the fancy obstacle course. I guess if the kids are having fun then whatever but as player I would of hated it. If I ever got back into coaching minor hockey (coached 1 year high school level), I'd keep my group drills simple and my practices up-tempo. The less time the kids spend down on one knee, the better. If you identify something a player is really doing wrong, then do the individual coaching.

I hear now the practice-to-games ratio is 2 practices to 1 game. And they wonder why a lot of older teenagers are finding other things to spend their time and money on.

This happens in every sport. As teenagers get older (16-17-18ish) they start to realize what they are as an athlete. I played baseball until I was 15. By the time I was 13 I realized I was much better at football. I played Sr Division for my local little league from 13-15, but it was just to play. I would have made the HS team, but wouldnt have played. So, I focused on football and threw the shotput and discus in track. For most kids it is, "I am not getting a scholarship...." or "I am not going to start on this team, so I am done." Like I said, can't imagine there are too many house leagues for kids that age around and if there are, can't imagine their practices would be run the say way a Mite practice would run.

 

[BruinDust]

Completely disagree on the focus on games. But, do they actually have house league for 16-17 year olds? I don't know of any around here. I would think if a 16-17 year old was not going to play travel, they would just play mens league at their local rink.

They had it when I grew up.

Matter of fact, the local rec league in my hometown didn't allow you to play in it until you were 25. One year we created our own league to fill the gap and no minor hockey aged players were involved.

Men's league's in my current community you never see minor hockey aged players unless a team or group are short one evening and some dad brings his teenage son up. It's sort of a last resort. Then factor in alcohol consumption that goes on in men's leagues post-game (not judging I partake).

It's about keeping kids in the sport into their teenage years and even into adult-hood. An over-emphasis on practice time (like a 2:1 ratio in favor of practice) just pushes players out of the sport. We had 2:1 ratio in favor of games growing up and that should be the bare minimum for any minor player IMO. You want to practice more? There is a cottage private industry for that. A kid who truly wants to get better...put in the time off-ice to improve strength and conditioning.

By the time I was 16-17, I needed individual focus on weaker skills to really improve. Running another faux 3 on 2 through a bunch of pylons wasn't accomplishing anything.

I'll toss another one out there. Stop using pucks as a carrot. I'd want my players doing drills with pucks as much as possible. Obviously some drills you can't. But by and large, I'd want pucks on their sticks doing drills. If you can do it with a puck, than you can do it without. Meanwhile, you see coach after coach using pucks in practice as carrots and taking them away if the kids misbehave or don't do exactly what he coach wants.

Hockey is suppose to be fun. To many parents/coaches/executives/hockey canada make it a chore.

 

[BruinDust]

This happens in every sport. As teenagers get older (16-17-18ish) they start to realize what they are as an athlete. I played baseball until I was 15. By the time I was 13 I realized I was much better at football. I played Sr Division for my local little league from 13-15, but it was just to play. I would have made the HS team, but wouldnt have played. So, I focused on football and threw the shotput and discus in track. For most kids it is, "I am not getting a scholarship...." or "I am not going to start on this team, so I am done." Like I said, can't imagine there are too many house leagues for kids that age around and if there are, can't imagine their practices would be run the say way a Mite practice would run.

Wasn't like that at all for me and my friends growing up. Not for hockey, not for other sports like basketball or volleyball or baseball or soccer. We did it because we enjoyed it. Most guys who played minor hockey back then (mid 1990s) that gave it up was because there simply wasn't enough time to do say hockey/basketball/volleyball which all overlapped in our community. (keep in mind we had next to no summer hockey). I gave up basketball in Grade 8 because I simply liked hockey more, but if I'm honest I was a better basketball player at the time because I started hockey a bit later and I was tall for my age group at the time. We weren't working towards some end goal. It was just for fun. Maybe that has changed a lot for young people and teenagers.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Completely disagree on the focus on games. But, do they actually have house league for 16-17 year olds? I don't know of any around here. I would think if a 16-17 year old was not going to play travel, they would just play mens league at their local rink.

I think 14/15 is the end of the road for House League. Something like the local high school team is where a kid would end up, and if they can't make that team, they stop playing or join a rec men's league. I think most kids that can't make a team or don't want to tryout just stop playing (at an organized level) at that point. Even very low level men's league teams are usually guys that played at least high school (although the occasional guy that started playing late may be there, but they're predictably usually quite bad even at that level).

 

[BruinDust]

I think 14/15 is the end of the road for House League. Something like the local high school team is where a kid would end up, and if they can't make that team, they stop playing or join a rec men's league. I think most kids that can't make a team or don't want to tryout just stop playing (at an organized level) at that point. Even very low level men's league teams are usually guys that played at least high school (although the occasional guy that started playing late may be there, but they're predictably usually quite bad even at that level).

I've been involved in several adult rec leagues in my lifetime and I have NEVER seen minor hockey aged players actively enrolled. And frankly I do not want minor hockey aged players in my rec leagues. And if I had 16-17 year old kid, I wouldn't want him in a men's rec league. Rec or not, there are over-aggressive meatheads in adult rec too, even in non-contract.

Maybe I'm just that far removed from my minor hockey/youth sport days. Perhaps today it's all about some end goal of scholarships and making these higher level competitive teams. Very different mentality than what we had growing up. Sad really. But just more fuel to the fire as to why minor hockey is heading down the wrong path where it's all about money and status and ego. If average 14-15 year olds are quitting because they didn't make a particular team, could it be proof what I'm saying about the over-emphasis on practice in those age groups taking the fun out of the sport.

 

[patnyrnyg]

They had it when I grew up.

Matter of fact, the local rec league in my hometown didn't allow you to play in it until you were 25. One year we created our own league to fill the gap and no minor hockey aged players were involved.

Men's league's in my current community you never see minor hockey aged players unless a team or group are short one evening and some dad brings his teenage son up. It's sort of a last resort. Then factor in alcohol consumption that goes on in men's leagues post-game (not judging I partake).

It's about keeping kids in the sport into their teenage years and even into adult-hood. An over-emphasis on practice time (like a 2:1 ratio in favor of practice) just pushes players out of the sport. We had 2:1 ratio in favor of games growing up and that should be the bare minimum for any minor player IMO. You want to practice more? There is a cottage private industry for that. A kid who truly wants to get better...put in the time off-ice to improve strength and conditioning.

By the time I was 16-17, I needed individual focus on weaker skills to really improve. Running another faux 3 on 2 through a bunch of pylons wasn't accomplishing anything.

I'll toss another one out there. Stop using pucks as a carrot. I'd want my players doing drills with pucks as much as possible. Obviously some drills you can't. But by and large, I'd want pucks on their sticks doing drills. If you can do it with a puck, than you can do it without. Meanwhile, you see coach after coach using pucks in practice as carrots and taking them away if the kids misbehave or don't do exactly what he coach wants.

Hockey is suppose to be fun. To many parents/coaches/executives/hockey canada make it a chore.

You are now 43, which means you grew up a very long time ago. Things change. Coaching methods change. WHEN I WAS A KID, travel teams in my area had 1 team per age group. If you didn't make it, you played house. Now, most orgs have multiple teams and it changes based on how many participants they have. If 25 kids show up for their tryout. They will make 2 teams. If 40, they will make 3 and so on depending on how many the org can accommodate due to ice slot availability. As a result, house is dead around here.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I've been involved in several adult rec leagues in my lifetime and I have NEVER seen minor hockey aged players actively enrolled. And frankly I do not want minor hockey aged players in my rec leagues. And if I had 16-17 year old kid, I wouldn't want him in a men's rec league. Rec or not, there are over-aggressive meatheads in adult rec too, even in non-contract.

Maybe I'm just that far removed from my minor hockey/youth sport days. Perhaps today it's all about some end goal of scholarships and making these higher level competitive teams. Very different mentality than what we had growing up. Sad really. But just more fuel to the fire as to why minor hockey is heading down the wrong path where it's all about money and status and ego. If average 14-15 year olds are quitting because they didn't make a particular team, could it be proof what I'm saying about the over-emphasis on practice in those age groups taking the fun out of the sport.

Can only really speak to my locale, but high school hockey is a pretty low bar/feeder to nowhere at that point (some high end kids will play ACHA D2/D3). If a kid is unable to make a high school hockey team (which may include Varsity and JV), I wouldn't say they have a ton of incentive to find an organized place to play. I bet most JV teams can't even fill a full roster, so it's no cut at that point (probably different in say, Minnesota). That's a big reason House League runs out at that point because High School Hockey is where those kids go so there really aren't any players left at that point.

I also don't think that's unusual. If you can't make a high school team in other sports, you just stop playing at an organized level, there's nowhere really to go from there.

 

[BruinDust]

You are now 43, which means you grew up a very long time ago. Things change. Coaching methods change. WHEN I WAS A KID, travel teams in my area had 1 team per age group. If you didn't make it, you played house. Now, most orgs have multiple teams and it changes based on how many participants they have. If 25 kids show up for their tryout. They will make 2 teams. If 40, they will make 3 and so on depending on how many the org can accommodate due to ice slot availability. As a result, house is dead around here.

Call it whatever you want. Whether it's games within a minor hockey org (house league) or travelling It's still a bunch of average skilled players who "should be" playing for fun. We had travel games and travel teams too, they were competitive games where you played as hard as you could to win and from bantam age onward, all those games were body contact. But it was still just a bunch of average 14-18 year olds playing a game for fun and being around their friends at the end of the day. We had two guys who were exceptional and one got a cup of coffee in the show. It wasn't a team full of exceptional players working towards a hockey future.

I coached a local high school team one year. Those kids played very hard in competitive games, full body contact. But not one of them had any chance of a future in the sport, just average kids playing a game. A few of them played U17/U18 AAA level. Just average kids and when the game was over, it was over. If they lost miserably, I wasn't about to bag skate them at their regular Tuesday practice. I tried to keep ice time as even as possible and cut my bench only when absolutely necessary.

But you are right, it was a long time ago, and clearly things have changed. And not for the better. I talk to parents in other sports and it fits what you are saying. Goes back to my original point, society has changed the emphasis on youth sports from something to do for fun and to socialize with your peers, to something all about ego (parents and child) and an unrealistic end goal. I guess when you have a commercial cottage industry telling far too many parents that their kid has a future in a sport just to bilk those parents of a lot of money, this is what you get.

I also don't think that's unusual. If you can't make a high school team in other sports, you just stop playing at an organized level, there's nowhere really to go from there.

Basketball and Volleyball were like this where/when I grew up. Hockey, soccer and baseball you could play until 18 regardless of skill level.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Completely disagree on the focus on games. But, do they actually have house league for 16-17 year olds? I don't know of any around here. I would think if a 16-17 year old was not going to play travel, they would just play mens league at their local rink.

So just speaking for Edmonton here...

We definitely have "house league" of federation hockey that goes up to U18 for all levels, even a U21 rec league. Now I will definitely say that starting at U15 enrollment does drop off noticeably - probably for all the reasons mentioned here. But it very much exists and is still relatively popular.

Agree with ya, but you also need good house hockey coaches. I didn’t have that, half the practices were wasted time and the majority of the rest of it were drills too removed from real-game situations. It’s like they were trying to do pro coaching with kids, just overly complicated or specific a lot of the time. The skating work was good, but practicing the breakout against no competition for half a practice.. meanwhile half these kids can’t even lift the puck, let’s maybe try coaching shooting sometime. It was always strategy, rarely actual skills, so you’d see the same 14 year old ankle bender at the end of the season, he’d just stand in the right place now.

Oh sure - I've seen lots of practices that spend to much time working on strategy and tactics, and not enough time working on fundamentals. But this kind of goes back to the original complaint - if all you're worried about is playing games, then tactics can make big difference (up to a point). A lousy skater who knows where to stand might be a better player then a good skater who is just an uncontrollable rover out on the ice.

And don't get me started on lengthy time spent just standing around explaining drills.

But I still 100% disagree with the idea of "don't bother practicing, just play games".

 

[Yukon Joe]

I'm a 43 year old beer leaguer. And I get practice is a way to improve your skills. But you can improve playing games. I didn't play for a decade before getting back into rec hockey at 34-35 and I had a long way from where I was when I stopped playing in my mid 20s. But from just playing games, I was improving. The more frequently I played, the more I improved. Never had a practice once. Now there are a few things I'd love to work on, but they are very specific and really the same things I needed to work on back when I played minor hockey, Just doing routine drills with a group wouldn't accomplish a whole lot more than just playing games. By the time I was 16-17 my skill level was stagnant. At that point I needed one-on-one instruction to iron out the weak areas of my game like backward crossovers, sharp turns, edge-work.

You can be a 18 year old house league player who transitions into a 19-year old beer leaguer and suddenly your not practicing at all and likely no worse off. I just think once you get to a certain point at a certain level and minor hockey age, group practice is a bit of waste of time and money when it comes to minor hockey because the drills your doing with the group/team aren't targeting those specific things an individual player needs to work on. Just going through the motions.

But see that's it - I went through a whole winter session with a pretty good coach (in a group). Half the time there was no puck involved - just skating and edges. And it really helped me. I mean it helped coming from a low bar, but my skating improved significantly - and nothing I ever would have learned just playing games.

So that's where even if you're 1 16 year old who with no path to pro hockey - there's still a lot of benefit to working on fundamentals. Maybe you have a bad coach who doesn't teach those things, but a good coach who does is gold.