Hockey Discussions > Mite Hockey
AAU
#4BobbyOrr:
--- Quote from: Puck Yeah on June 16, 2017, 08:15:59 AM ---
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 07:57:52 AM ---I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).
--- End quote ---
I think you missed the bigger point.
So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development. Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.
--- End quote ---
I am not missing the bigger point, the fact is many of these kids will be 9 years old before the half ice season is over, not 7. Most mite A kids for this year are already 8. There is a huge difference between a 6 yr old and a 9 yr old. I don't deny that small area games have some value as well but you can't tell me that full ice games for 8 and 9 yr olds have no value. The bigger point (which you have apparently missed) is that USA Hockey and the local associations are mandating a long term development plan so they can have a better chance of picking the best 24 guys at 18 and up and beating Canada without any consideration for what parents of 7, 8, and 9 year olds and those kids actually want. What about the kids that just want to play A/B hockey and aren't gunning for the USNTDP and the NHL? Who the hell cares if they play full ice if that is what they want? Why do you even care?
A kid can play one year of Mite level inhouse at 8 and then play full ice Squirt B at 9 but a kid that started inhouse mini mites at 4, mites at 5, travel track 2 at 6 and track 1 at 7 isn't ready for ANY full ice at 8? Many of these kids have been playing in full ice spring tournaments against the best of their age group in places like Chicago (won Chitown Shuffle), Toronto (lost in OT to the Toronto Bulldogs in semis of a Brick Series tournament), and Minnesota (won the MN Brick Series tournament).
In my son's baseball little league there is a 6 year old playing Minors with 9 and 10 year olds and nobody cares because he is a hell of a player. He even pitches. Nobody is trying to say that because of his age he should still be hitting off of a tee ONLY. And this is a league that regularly sends it's all star teams to regionals and states, it is a very competitive league.
Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.
Puck Yeah:
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 09:44:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Puck Yeah on June 16, 2017, 08:15:59 AM ---
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 07:57:52 AM ---I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).
--- End quote ---
I think you missed the bigger point.
So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development. Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.
--- End quote ---
Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.
--- End quote ---
The fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight. I just find it silly that so many people believe that it is imperative that a mite or squirt have the utmost in competition and skill level to develop. Hockey is a a late developing sport. How many 18-19 y.o. defenseman do you see going in the first round? There are so many more factors that go into who makes it to high level hockey than if the kid plays full ice or not at 8 years old. The funnel gets tighter and tighter, interest wanes, GPA becomes important, girls, and unfortunately for some the mighty 6 pack becomes more attractive.
Parents need to ask themselves "are you doing what you thought you would be doing when you were 12, 13, 14 or 15? Are you doing what your parents wanted for you at that age?"
It has nothing to do with zero tolerance. It has to do with overall agenda and perspective.
#4BobbyOrr:
My perspective is these kids may be playing another sport by the time they get to high school, who knows? Why put such drastic limitations on them at the early stages? Why not mix it up? At the older levels they have a mixture of small area games (in practice) and full ice games in season and tournaments. When it comes down to it I think the local associations are on board more because it makes the ice more profitable with more kids on the ice than for anything having to do with development.
trans4761:
--- Quote from: Puck Yeah on June 16, 2017, 10:33:32 PM ---
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 09:44:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Puck Yeah on June 16, 2017, 08:15:59 AM ---
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 07:57:52 AM ---I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).
--- End quote ---
I think you missed the bigger point.
So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development. Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.
--- End quote ---
Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.
--- End quote ---
The fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight. I just find it silly that so many people believe that it is imperative that a mite or squirt have the utmost in competition and skill level to develop. Hockey is a a late developing sport. How many 18-19 y.o. defenseman do you see going in the first round? There are so many more factors that go into who makes it to high level hockey than if the kid plays full ice or not at 8 years old. The funnel gets tighter and tighter, interest wanes, GPA becomes important, girls, and unfortunately for some the mighty 6 pack becomes more attractive.
Parents need to ask themselves "are you doing what you thought you would be doing when you were 12, 13, 14 or 15? Are you doing what your parents wanted for you at that age?"
It has nothing to do with zero tolerance. It has to do with overall agenda and perspective.
--- End quote ---
Well said.
If I had to do it all again, at 7/8 years old I'd put them in roller. Much less expensive and developed their hands.
Falcons Hockey:
--- Quote from: trans4761 on June 17, 2017, 09:26:10 AM ---
--- Quote from: Puck Yeah on June 16, 2017, 10:33:32 PM ---
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 09:44:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Puck Yeah on June 16, 2017, 08:15:59 AM ---
--- Quote from: #4BobbyOrr on June 16, 2017, 07:57:52 AM ---I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).
--- End quote ---
I think you missed the bigger point.
So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development. Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.
--- End quote ---
Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.
--- End quote ---
The fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight. I just find it silly that so many people believe that it is imperative that a mite or squirt have the utmost in competition and skill level to develop. Hockey is a a late developing sport. How many 18-19 y.o. defenseman do you see going in the first round? There are so many more factors that go into who makes it to high level hockey than if the kid plays full ice or not at 8 years old. The funnel gets tighter and tighter, interest wanes, GPA becomes important, girls, and unfortunately for some the mighty 6 pack becomes more attractive.
Parents need to ask themselves "are you doing what you thought you would be doing when you were 12, 13, 14 or 15? Are you doing what your parents wanted for you at that age?"
It has nothing to do with zero tolerance. It has to do with overall agenda and perspective.
--- End quote ---
Well said.
If I had to do it all again, at 7/8 years old I'd put them in roller. Much less expensive and developed their hands.
--- End quote ---
Both my boys played both ice and roller. One stayed in roller and plays weekly now in adult leagues the other stayed with Ice and now plays juniors and is looking for that college spot. I have learnt that being the very best Squirt/PW/Bantam whatever means nothing.
Your son needs to develop to be the very best 18/19 year old player.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version