Importance of having a team in proper division.

[Yukon Joe]

If the players are paying for it and handling all the logistics, sure. At that point, it’s their own time and their own money at stake.

Otherwise, it’s the parents’ time and money at stake. The parents are literally customers purchasing a service from the coaches. Giving them no voice in the decision is completely inappropriate and arguably disrespectful.

The pressures @Yukon Joe describes one post above are very real and seem to crush parents underfoot in this dynamic. I don’t know when low-level rec hockey coaches got this kind of social power, to tell people that their kids get to call the shots, but when the bills are in the five-figures annually it’s time to put that stuff out to pasture.

OK, so a couple more thoughts. I feel like I'm not taking a firm stance on these issues, but only because they're complicated.

So for a lot of coaches, they're not being paid - they're volunteers. They're just doing it because their kid is on the team and they love hockey. So I will ALWAYS try to defer to what the coach wants to do, because they were willing to put their time forward to be head coach, and I wasn't, I assistant coach which is a time commitment as well, but nothing like being the head coach. Last week on one kid's team, I was like "I wouldn't be spending our practice time on this", but I'm not the head coach, so I said nothing.

The issue I had with my other kid's team - to be fair they put it to a team vote of parents. My side lost. Fair enough. So we'll spend the extra money even though I really don't want to. But my feeling is that despite the fact that a quarter of the team was against this particular idea (because of the cost) the other parents seem hell-bent on just spending even more money, and not going "well OK we're going to do this thing, but since a bunch of parents thought it cost too much money lets try to cut costs elsewhere".

 

[patnyrnyg]

If the players are paying for it and handling all the logistics, sure. At that point, it’s their own time and their own money at stake.

Otherwise, it’s the parents’ time and money at stake. The parents are literally customers purchasing a service from the coaches. Giving them no voice in the decision is completely inappropriate and arguably disrespectful.

The pressures @Yukon Joe describes one post above are very real and seem to crush parents underfoot in this dynamic. I don’t know when low-level rec hockey coaches got this kind of social power, to tell people that their kids get to call the shots, but when the bills are in the five-figures annually it’s time to put that stuff out to pasture.

Their own money at stake? So they are playing in a money league? At 16, 17, 18, the kids are old enough to make the decision. At that point, yes, mom and dad are there to write the check and cheer. This is not a question of whether the kid is going across the country to play at 16. This is a decision of whether to play in one division or another. And, the attitude that the parent is the customer and should have their say really a big part of the problem in not only youth sports but education as well.

If a parent is paying 5 figures for low level travel, then they are the sucker.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Their own money at stake? So they are playing in a money league?

Unless the kids are paying for the league/equipment/travel/etc, who’s paying for it? The parents. So yes, they are the ones with a financial stake in the decision.

At 16, 17, 18, the kids are old enough to make the decision.

And as described above, the kids are being manipulated by an authority figure to choose a pre-determined outcome in opposition to the parents.

That’s so wildly inappropriate it doesn’t need to explaining.

At that point, yes, mom and dad are there to write the check and cheer.

At no point is this true. I’ve put a kid through the college level in high level competition (not hockey) and it is absolutely not EVER the case that the parent should just be there as a check-writer. **** that shit. Athletic leagues like anyone else are accountable to the people who are paying for their existence. If that gets reversed, it’s time to bail on that league because you are a full-on sucker in their eyes.

And, the attitude that the parent is the customer and should have their say really a big part of the problem in not only youth sports but education as well.

I’m not talking about getting involved in coaching decisions or lesson planning. This is not a helicopter parenting issue.

Something as fundamental as what tier the team plays in, that’s not a choice to be delegated to the kids — especially not after propagandizing them that they only have one real choice if they want respect in the eyes of the coach. As a parent you’re presumably putting your kid into the program and paying $X,000 so that they will have fun and develop their skills. Getting annihilated 12-0 over and over is neither productive nor fun. At that point the onus is on the organization to come up with an actual plan for correction, and run that plan past the ultimate decision-makers — which are the parents.

I probably shouldn’t have used “customer/service” terminology because as @Yukon Joe pointed out above, not everyone in these organizations has a business relationship with what’s going on. But at the end of the day, volunteers or not, they are making very significant demands of time and money in return for certain promised outcomes (skill development, fun, etc). If those outcomes aren’t happening, they are accountable to the people who invested in them.

Some of these organizations truly do take the parents’ contributions for granted. We do not exist for the purpose of delivering whatever a teenager demands on behalf of some adult with an agenda. There’s nothing at all wrong with telling an organization to shove it if they get that twisted.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Unless the kids are paying for the league/equipment/travel/etc, who’s paying for it? The parents. So yes, they are the ones with a financial stake in the decision.

how is your money "at stake"? Do you only pay if the team loses? Do you have to pay additional money if the team loses? Are you betting on the games? You are spending the money, to say it is "at stake" is misleading.

And as described above, the kids are being manipulated by an authority figure to choose a pre-determined outcome in opposition to the parents.

That’s so wildly inappropriate it doesn’t need to explaining.

have the kids actually said they would rather play in the lower division?

At no point is this true. I’ve put a kid through the college level in high level competition (not hockey) and it is absolutely not EVER the case that the parent should just be there as a check-writer. **** that shit. Athletic leagues like anyone else are accountable to the people who are paying for their existence. If that gets reversed, it’s time to bail on that league because you are a full-on sucker in their eyes.



I’m not talking about getting involved in coaching decisions or lesson planning. This is not a helicopter parenting issue.

Something as fundamental as what tier the team plays in, that’s not a choice to be delegated to the kids — especially not after propagandizing them that they only have one real choice if they want respect in the eyes of the coach. As a parent you’re presumably putting your kid into the program and paying $X,000 so that they will have fun and develop their skills. Getting annihilated 12-0 over and over is neither productive nor fun. At that point the onus is on the organization to come up with an actual plan for correction, and run that plan past the ultimate decision-makers — which are the parents.

I probably shouldn’t have used “customer/service” terminology because as @Yukon Joe pointed out above, not everyone in these organizations has a business relationship with what’s going on. But at the end of the day, volunteers or not, they are making very significant demands of time and money in return for certain promised outcomes (skill development, fun, etc). If those outcomes aren’t happening, they are accountable to the people who invested in them.

Some of these organizations truly do take the parents’ contributions for granted. We do not exist for the purpose of delivering whatever a teenager demands on behalf of some adult with an agenda. There’s nothing at all wrong with telling an organization to shove it if they get that twisted.

sorry, but this definitely feels like helicopter parenting or a parent who simply says, "I am paying, so I shoudl have a say." No different than the person who thinks because they pay taxes that they should have a say in the math curriculum being used in the local high school. If these were little kids, 8, 9, 10 year olds, and so forth. Different story. When we are talking about 16-18 year olds, their thoughts on the matter should count more than the parents. They are not stupid at that age and yes they likely know they are going to have a tough time in the higher division. But, they all had the opportunity to speak up and tell the coach they would rather play the shorter games in the lower league where they can have competitive games. Secondly, if they are playing at this low of a level at this age, they are playing because they like playing. Which, I am all for. One of the shames I see in youth sports as that they dont have enough lower level leagues for older kids. I can remember when I was 16 receiving a call to ask if I was interested in playing on a low-level travel baseball team. Unfortunately, I didnt have the time with HS track. Few of my friends were ready to play. 2 I remember told the guy they weren't interested and their reason was they weren't getting a baseball scholarship, so what is the point? Terrible attitude, but whatever, it is long in the past.
[/QUOTE]

 

[tarheelhockey]

how is your money "at stake"? Do you only pay if the team loses? Do you have to pay additional money if the team loses? Are you betting on the games? You are spending the money, to say it is "at stake" is misleading.

Honestly not sure what the semantic issue here is. It’s very clear how I’m using the word “stake”, and it’s a standard usage.

have the kids actually said they would rather play in the lower division?

“They have officially made their decision to stay in BB. I had asked for a parent vote but they decided to go by a team vote in the change room while the coach spouted propaganda.”

sorry, but this definitely feels like helicopter parenting or a parent who simply says, "I am paying, so I shoudl have a say." No different than the person who thinks because they pay taxes that they should have a say in the math curriculum being used in the local high school.

In the post you replied to, I directly said I’m not talking about being involved in coaching decisions or curriculum decisions.

That’s not what we’re talking about here.

I’d like to know any other context where something like this happens. Your kid goes through a shit experience at a really high cost of time and money, and you approach the people running things to talk about changes… and in response, they corner your kid and convince them that you’re just giving loser advice. And then come back to you saying they’ve taken a vote with your kid and you lost, so go eat a dick and write another check.

Something about the youth sports context seems to disempower people to push back against behavior that they would never accept in other situation. No idea why that happens. Parents are not ATMs, and kids are not adult decision makers. That whole dynamic is bonkers.

When we are talking about 16-18 year olds, their thoughts on the matter should count more than the parents. They are not stupid at that age

Strongly disagree. 16-18 year olds routinely display a total lack of understanding of their own best interests.

 

[namttebih]

I think at that age, it has to be up to the players.

I would have no problem with them being part of the decision making process. It's the method in which she asked the question that is the issue. The coach basically said that it's us against the world and bullied the team into the decision.

Additionally, you obviously haven't been around a lot of 14 -17 year old girls if you think that they are sound decision makers.

 

[namttebih]

On top of it all,

how is your money "at stake"? Do you only pay if the team loses? Do you have to pay additional money if the team loses? Are you betting on the games? You are spending the money, to say it is "at stake" is misleading.


have the kids actually said they would rather play in the lower division?



sorry, but this definitely feels like helicopter parenting or a parent who simply says, "I am paying, so I shoudl have a say." No different than the person who thinks because they pay taxes that they should have a say in the math curriculum being used in the local high school. If these were little kids, 8, 9, 10 year olds, and so forth. Different story. When we are talking about 16-18 year olds, their thoughts on the matter should count more than the parents. They are not stupid at that age and yes they likely know they are going to have a tough time in the higher division. But, they all had the opportunity to speak up and tell the coach they would rather play the shorter games in the lower league where they can have competitive games. Secondly, if they are playing at this low of a level at this age, they are playing because they like playing. Which, I am all for. One of the shames I see in youth sports as that they dont have enough lower level leagues for older kids. I can remember when I was 16 receiving a call to ask if I was interested in playing on a low-level travel baseball team. Unfortunately, I didnt have the time with HS track. Few of my friends were ready to play. 2 I remember told the guy they weren't interested and their reason was they weren't getting a baseball scholarship, so what is the point? Terrible attitude, but whatever, it is long in the past.

[/QUOTE]
It isn't about winning or losing in a vacuum. This is what's best for them though for development and having fun. They aren't learning anything when they don't touch the puck or can not set up a play in the offensive zone. I have 15 years coaching experience and my opinion was thoroughly dismissed. I know what is at stake here and it has nothing to do with cost or even icing a championship roster. This has to do with them coming away from games feeling good about themselves. Right now they are sad and embarrassed after games. They aren't excited for practices or games as they find them pointless. Again, not because they are losing, but because they stand no chance of even being competitive.

 

[Yukon Joe]

It's easy to forget that coaches are definitely in a position of power and authority over young players, and they can easily have sway over something like this.

My U13 team - the coach definitely swayed the choosing of a team name a couple of weeks ago. Yes the kids agreed in a vote, but it was clearly what the coach was pulling for. Now a team name is really quite innocuous so I don't care, but something like what division to play in is a bit more important.

I'm not opposed to the kids getting to decide (this isn't an issue of money, or safety where parents need to be involved), but it's kind of shitty that the coach pushed so strongly for one outcome. I do firmly believe you won't learn and grow if you can't touch the puck in a game.

 

[MeHateHe]

16-18 year olds routinely display a total lack of understanding of their own best interests.

You're not wrong on this score, but then again, the pre-frontal cortex doesn't fully develop - especially in young men - until 25 or so, so most young people are bad decision makers. It's just science, man.

However, I think getting into this without some involvement of the players is the wrong way to go. I wouldn't shut parents out of the discussion either, which is what seems to have happened. Rather, I'd have a full discussion so that each family unit got a vote in how this proceeds.

This benefits the kids, because it gives them a little sense of their own destiny and they can go into a season where they're going to get creamed on the regular - but go in with their eyes wide open. It's a good learning opportunity. It also means parents can have some discussion time with their kids about the whole topic of their athletic growth.

When I was a young player, we played against teams from the next town over. They usually had two or sometimes three teams, and we were a tiny town and scrambled to get enough players in our age group to make one team. Over the years, we'd beat (and sometimes badly) their lower teams and then lose to their top team. But by the time we hit what is now known as the U-18 division, we were more or less on par with the top team the next town over. That growth didn't happen overnight, and it wouldn't have happened had we just kept thumping their B and C teams.

I think there's a benefit to playing against better competition, first, and I think there's a benefit for kids to be shown that there's a benefit to playing against better competition. I think kids need to be offered a challenge, which doesn't happen if you just let the parents decide, because a lot of parents are mostly interested in seeing their kids succeed - no one wants to watch their kids get humbled. So I think the parents and kids should be brought into the discussion.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I think there's a benefit to playing against better competition, first, and I think there's a benefit for kids to be shown that there's a benefit to playing against better competition. I think kids need to be offered a challenge, which doesn't happen if you just let the parents decide, because a lot of parents are mostly interested in seeing their kids succeed - no one wants to watch their kids get humbled. So I think the parents and kids should be brought into the discussion.

You want to face competition from teams a little bit better then you are. You want to be pushed, but you want to see there's enough room for you to compete just a little bit harder and have success.

But I'll repeat - if you're getting pumped every game, if you never touch the puck - you will not improve.

 

[MeHateHe]

You want to face competition from teams a little bit better then you are. You want to be pushed, but you want to see there's enough room for you to compete just a little bit harder and have success.

But I'll repeat - if you're getting pumped every game, if you never touch the puck - you will not improve.

Sure, there's a limit. In my experience, we went years getting beat by 12-14 goals and it was humiliating. It took years for that growth to happen. How much of a skills gap is appropriate is not really the point I was intending to make, but rather that there is some benefit in having kids involved in the discussion, especially around accepting a challenge in which success will not be measured in wins and losses.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I would have no problem with them being part of the decision making process. It's the method in which she asked the question that is the issue. The coach basically said that it's us against the world and bullied the team into the decision.

Additionally, you obviously haven't been around a lot of 14 -17 year old girls if you think that they are sound decision makers.

Yes, as a 47-year old man, I do not spend time with 14-17 year old girls.

 

[namttebih]

Yes, as a 47-year old man, I do not spend time with 14-17 year old girls.

As a 45 year old man I spend a lot of time with 15-17 year old girls as a parent and coach. I know how mature they are (aren't)

 

[Squiffy]

——

Curious to hear how it is going so far OP? Probably a couple of games in to season right?

 

[namttebih]

Curious to hear how it is going so far OP? Probably a couple of games in to season right?

They have actually been very practice heavy so far and only played the first official game of the season last night. 6-0 loss. Our goalie stood on her head. It could have been much worse. We had about 5 shots on net with 1 quality scoring chance and approximately 20 seconds sustained pressure total. We had several power plays without any sustained pressure. On one of them, we had 5 shots against where they had actually set up 4 on 5. My daughter said that during the second intermission the coach asked if they were going to come out hard and attack down 4-0 and everyone stayed quiet.

So not great.

 

[Yukon Joe]

So this thread wasn't about my U13 kid's team, but after their first 3 games they're 0-3 with 4 goals for and 28 goals against (although yesterday's 13-0 shellacking didn't help that stat).

I'm hoping we get moved down at this point. I'm just an assistant coach, but I'm positive our head coach would agree. That would be from Tier 3 to Tier 4.

My U15AA kid is also having a rough year of it, having gone 1-3-1 so far, with a GF of 11 and a GA of 19. Being relegated is not an option at this level, but I wouldn't want it anyways - feels much more like the kids just aren't putting it all together, rather than them just being outclassed every game.

 

[MeHateHe]

So this thread wasn't about my U13 kid's team, but after their first 3 games they're 0-3 with 4 goals for and 28 goals against (although yesterday's 13-0 shellacking didn't help that stat).

How are practices? Seems to me that would be a pretty good indicator of how the kids are feeling. Losing that badly is always going to suck, so that part of the experience may not be the best way of knowing how this impacting them, but I'd say how they respond in practice will really tell you how they're feeling.

 

[Yukon Joe]

How are practices? Seems to me that would be a pretty good indicator of how the kids are feeling. Losing that badly is always going to suck, so that part of the experience may not be the best way of knowing how this impacting them, but I'd say how they respond in practice will really tell you how they're feeling.

The 13-0 loss was just yesterday. We've lost the other two games, and they weren't exactly close, but this last one really hurts. We'll see how the kids do at their next practice. Head coach is worried about the attitude of a couple of players.

 

[namttebih]

Curious to hear how it is going so far OP? Probably a couple of games in to season right?

A couple more games under their belts. 0-7 and 1-7 losses. Both games our goalie had >.900 save percentage. We finally scored another goal, but that's only 3 in 9 games. Outscored 66-3 now. I really feel for the girls. Morale is...low

 

[Squiffy]

Meanwhile in my daughters league, different loop, but still, there’s a team out to a 5-0 start, 47 GF 0 GA. Filled in a team 17-0 in their last one.

Should there be some mechanism built in for realignment say one month in? On both side of the spectrum it just doesn’t seem right. I don’t think there’s any metric you could apply to it, just a team decision to request re-allotment for the governing body to consider maybe?

I know I have friend of mine coaching a tier 2 select team that has done exactly that, one month in and has asked to be moved up to tier one, and he expects they will be.

Of course that doesn’t help your situation right, where they are hell bent on being up a level. And I don’t know how you can force a team down that has duly been approved and paid for their spot.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Should there be some mechanism built in for realignment say one month in? On both side of the spectrum it just doesn’t seem right. I don’t think there’s any metric you could apply to it, just a team decision to request re-allotment for the governing body to consider maybe?

I think most leagues with multiple tiers have some mechanism for moving teams up and down. No tiering system is going to work out perfectly from the beginning.

The question for the OP though is should it require the consent of the team to be moved? You can also see it the other way - if there is a team blowing away their opponents by 10+ goals per game, should it be okay for the team to say "nah, we're good" and not be moved up?

In my experience (both from men's league and minor hockey) you're much more likely to be moved if you speak up, but it's not a requirement.

Anecdotally - last summer in men's league we started in the very bottom division. We told the league "yeah you should move us up" as we were winning handily. The league responded by moving us up 3 whole tiers, where we promptly got destroyed. Over time we got moved down one level, then again one more level, until we finished up just one step higher than when we started. (now this is rec hockey, and they're more willing to move teams throughout the season)

 

[Squiffy]

A couple more games under their belts. 0-7 and 1-7 losses. Both games our goalie had >.900 save percentage. We finally scored another goal, but that's only 3 in 9 games. Outscored 66-3 now. I really feel for the girls. Morale is...low

At the end or nearly of the regular season. Did it get any better?

 

[namttebih]

At the end or nearly of the regular season. Did it get any better?

With tournaments they are 3-27-1. They are ranked 70 out of 71 in the province. 2 of their wins came against the 71st ranked team. The other was in a tournament where the other team took 40 minutes in penalties. They lucked out and acquired a AA goalie who moved centers and didn't have a home, so the scores are typically close even if the play/ shots aren't.

The sad thing is that there isn't much relief expected coming up from U15. They have a similar record with a goalie who is also playing her first year in rep.

The girls have definitely all improved. Unfortunately so has everyone else.

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

Forgive me - it sounds like most of your children’s teams are based in Canada?

I’m trying to remember how my young hockey career went about.. It was definitely a ‘house-league’ at first, then a interstate ‘junior development league’ where kids from different towns play against each other (middle school- grades 6-9), then high school/ high school travel summer leagues(?)

It definitely sounds confusing north of the border.. unless I never got into the intricacies of children’s hockey.

 

[Squiffy]

Forgive me - it sounds like most of your children’s teams are based in Canada?

I’m trying to remember how my young hockey career went about.. It was definitely a ‘house-league’ at first, then a interstate ‘junior development league’ where kids from different towns play against each other (middle school- grades 6-9), then high school/ high school travel summer leagues(?)

It definitely sounds confusing north of the border.. unless I never got into the intricacies of children’s hockey.

As I follow US minor hockey, we are talking, in this thread, about the equivalent of "travelling teams" from the States, that runs from 9 years old until 18 roughly. For girls hockey, there are 4-6 tiers of "travelling teams" depending where you are, boys is 3 or 4 tiers ... at least in Ontario anyways.

House League ---> "Select" hockey (different tiers of that, composed of best of the house league players) --> Rep Hockey = travelling teams (different tiers)

I reserve the right to be wrong in this take.