Calhockey.com
Hockey Discussions => Bantam Hockey => Topic started by: lcadad on February 04, 2019, 01:30:57 PM
-
Warning to the reading or internet forum attention challenged: this is longer than the average post, and if you don't like reading long calhockey posts this won't be for you. You know who you are.
There is no system in youth sports I know of, where someone has designed a system as ridiculous and insulting to its participants as the CAHA AA Flight2 system. Everything about the system is demeaning and insulting to its participants, and what makes it especially egregious is that the teams that end up in Flight2 have no real input or visibility into the so called process of evaluation, nor is that process open or transparent.
No place outside of spring and beer league hockey is there a system where people invest the time, effort and money into a situation where anywhere from six to 10 teams play for the opportunity to have the most points in their division only so that they can "challenge" in a one game playoff in order to gain a berth as 8th place in the upper division playoffs vs teams that you never had a chance to play the entire season. It's hard to even describe to my friends who have hockey playing kids in other areas of the country.
Who is it that thought this was a good idea? Whomever it was, they clearly look down upon the flight 2 participants, but it is what it is. The main indictment of the system is that CAHA has proven in the 2 years of the system's existence to objectively suck at their evaluations and this just goes to further show how tone deaf the CAHA board is when it comes to the current AA system.
This season in Flight2 Bantam AA, there are at least 4 teams that are as good as the bottom 3-4 Flight1 teams. When I say "as good" I mean that those games would likely have been closely contested. It's also probable that those same 4 teams could challenge up into the upper echelon on the right day. The Flight1 system allows for late season runs like the one that netted the Bears their U12 state championship after a 5th place finish. The playoffs have meaning and rewards for improvements in Flight1, where the Flight2 teams get the Hunger games.
Given that last season, 2 of the 3 Flight2 challengers won their "play in" games, along with various Flight2 vs Flight1 upsets and ties in SCAHA, many hoped that CAHA and SCAHA would see the error of their ways. SCAHA obliged CAHA this season by eliminating all the cross flight games Flight 2 teams could look forward to last year. Once again these changes were unannounced until after flighting and the season had begun. Clearly they heard the criticism last season and their answer was to double down on limiting opportunities to make their evaluations look bad.
If Flighting is such a great thing then why didn't CAHA Flight U16 with 16 teams?
They also eliminated the Flight2 SCAHA playoffs because "teams didn't want them" when in fact, teams that are now top 4 echelon Flight1 participants (looking at you Wave parents) were eager participants last season. Perhaps if SCAHA understood that much of the negativity came from the way that system was announced mid-season they'd have once again had a SCAHA flight 2 tournament, but in many ways I'm glad they didn't so that everyone can see clearly the purpose of Flighting which is to punish its participants for rostering AA teams.
Well, now that the Bantam season is done we have a vivid example of the stark reality of Flight1 vs Flight2 participation:
In Flight2 it came down to the last game of the last CAHA weekend as to who would "win" 1st place. Even teams that I would not consider in the top 4 enjoyed upticks in their play in the last half of the season. The 4th place team, which beat every team in the division at least once, entered the final CAHA weekend with nothing to play for. Nor do the other 2 teams now that the season is complete, one of which is competitive with the '05 AAA teams in the state. The Flight2 system is a complete joke at the expense of hundreds of california hockey families.
While I wish the Kings1 the best in their playin game, there is no winning in Flight2. If you win the division and the play in game, what that proves definitively is that you were denied the opportunity to play other Flight1 teams you should have been playing throughout the season, and CAHA does not have a time machine to get you back those lost opportunities.
The originators of this system, along with its defenders and supporters say the system works well in doing what it was designed to do, and that is to keep the Flight1 elite teams from having to face unworthy Flight2 competitors. As a so called "objective" that's pretty ridiculous when you consider how bad the system is at achieving its goal. Flight1 7-9 teams all lost 13 of 16 games this season with goal differentials of -33, -43 and -50.
And yet, going into the final day of CAHA competition, a team with 2 wins and a team with 1 win were both playing for slots in the top 8. Contrast that to Flight2 and it's clear that getting your ass handed to you all year in Flight1 is still favorable to the ridiculous system in Flight2.
From what we could piece together in results from the comical 40 minute jamboree there was enough information to tell CAHA that as many as half the teams they were putting into Flight1 were not objectively better and more deserving than 5-6 of the teams they pushed down to Flight2. Congrats to CAHA for doing exactly what they said they would NOT do and Flighting when they did not have clear evidence there was significant separation. WTF is the Jamboree for other than to placate people and feed them a lie in regards to the objectivity and fairness of the Flighting process.
Along the way, CAHA and SCAHA have been very effective in putting a chill on cross flight competition and scrimmages. If you are a Flight1 team that is marginal, it is highly unlikely that you are going to want to scrimmage against a Flight2 team who might be able to beat you. You can't blame the Flight1 team coaches for wanting to avoid the potential embarrassment.
CAHA needs to wake up. Everyone knows that there are kids playing A and AA who could easily be top players in AAA. Many of these players are excluded from AAA not due to their talent or potential, but simply due to financial or geographic limitations.
The Bears Bantam AA teams the last few seasons (and the '05 AA Flight2 Saints2 this year) have shown that they are capable of playing against AAA teams nationally. Meanwhile people are fleeing the state in droves, because they can see how the CAHA system favors a few clubs and abuses many others with its system and selective enforcement of its rules.
Many people saw the huge liability and flaws in the system when the first notices were posted and most of those have come to pass. This petition summarized many of those problems in advance of Flighting so I'm not going to regurgitate them, but kudos to the people who signed onto the petition publically: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/call-to-abandon-unnecessary-and-problematic (https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/call-to-abandon-unnecessary-and-problematic)
People often say, "Yeah it's easy to complain but what would be better?" Unfortunately there is no short term fix that won't involve some pain, but it seems clear to me when you look around the country at other locales where youth hockey is thriving and people have choices, that the systems don't look anything like CAHA.
It would not be that hard to fix things and return California youth hockey to something reasonable. If I was running CAHA/SCAHA this is what I would do immediately:
-Eliminate the AAA franchise system. There should be more AAA teams in the state to bring California towards the USA hockey guidelines. More teams mean more local games at less cost and opportunities for more kids to participate and discover their potential. AAA teams take time and planning, but if there was a simple unconstrained way for clubs to move up to AAA, teams would emerge. One need look no further than this season's Brick team to see that the majority of the players will not be Ducks or Kings, but rather Gold Rush.
-Eliminate the AA Flight system. CAHA has shown it can't Flight objectively, and shouldn't be in the business of doing so regardless. CAHA was formed to organize games and leagues, not pick winners and losers before the season even begins.
If anything it should be looking at how to move AA towards AAA by organizing divisions by birth year. This would incentivize clubs to work towards and build sustainable teams where kids in the same birth year play and develop together.
This season several clubs took one year bets on a few major year players added to predominately minor year teams for the purpose of giving the team a slight pre-season advantage, often at the cost of casting off younger birth year participants who may have already played for that club and team for years. I saw this happen at a number of clubs this season, with no big payoffs and plenty of hard feelings.
Conversely, it might also make it less likely that a team would bet on an advanced minor year player when there were comparable major year players the coach didn't take. Often these decisions can dramatically undermine the birth year team they might otherwise be leading, only to struggle against physically more advanced players as the season progresses. I've seen numerous posts from parents of kids who played up an age group and deeply regret the decision to do so, as it lead to undermining of confidence and in some cases losing ground in the lineup as other older kids matured and became better suited to the physical challenges of playing bigger and stronger kids. There are always exceptions to this rule, but they are far fewer in number than the players who take these placements. The CAHA system could be helping everyone make reasonable decisions while still allowing them options.
-
Heroic and true. I enjoy every year my kid plays, but CAHA seems to do everything in their power to limit opportunities rather than expand them.
-
Thanks ICADAD for writing what many of us parents think. This is why we left this year, for greener pastures. Due to geography mainly and politics to some extent, the top level we were able to play was the very flawed AA system last year. We live 100+ miles away from Ducks and Kings, so AAA was out of the question. Even if my son had moved in with a billet family, there was no way he would be able to bust through the system to play AAA. So he left. Now my 02 is playing against 18AAA teams and excelling. He is attracting scouts from the next level up and thriving after less than a year of getting out of Dodge. If your kids have any inkling of playing competitive hockey, they have to leave SoCal. Even AAA is a mostly dead end. CAHA and SCAHA and the HS leagues have killed off any hope of moving past their roadblocks. Good luck to changing this mess.
-
Mine is looking to leave, as well. Just to be able to continue to develop. I’m so tired of the “they’re never going pro anyway†excuses. Who cares about going pro? Most just want to continue to play and improve and have the confidence that comes from challenging yourself. This is depressing.
-
I, speaking for all the "attention challenged " morons here would ask for the Cliff Notes version if you please.
-
CAHA needs to end the flight system! The bottom 4 Flight 2 teams should have been dropped to A. Only one dropped and we can see how the other 3 did... If CAHA would have have the guts do do this, there would have been 15 teams and no reason to flight.
-
I, speaking for all the "attention challenged " morons here would ask for the Cliff Notes version if you please.
You can jump to the bottom and read the recommendations.
-
This is the actual best post ever posted on this forum. The entire board of CAHA should resign for being hopelessly incompetent. FWIW, my son has been begging me to let him follow his friends out of state -- California tier hockey has become a joke. When we were in an out-of-state tournament earlier this season, other teams laughed at what a joke California hockey is. It's embarrassing. There's talent here, however -- it's worth pointing out that not that long ago, the California Wave had one of the best AAA programs in the nation. It's literal insanity that smaller clubs are no longer allowed to field AAA teams.
Also, and by the way, if my son were a squirt, Gold Rush is 100% the club I would take him to today -- they're the SoCal club trying to do things right.
-
I agree with a lot of what you say here Icadad, but for the record the Wave were not “eager participants†in last year’s ridiculous Flight 2 playoff. My understanding is that they asked to be excused from that charade but were told the club would be sanctioned if they didn’t show up.
The root cause of this flighting nonsense is the relentless pursuit of $$$$ by California’s youth hockey industry. If CAHA forced the bottom 25% of AA teams to drop to A every year the problem would be solved, but that will never happen since member clubs would lose revenue from a lot of parents willing to pay for the extra “A.â€
-
The root cause of this flighting nonsense is the relentless pursuit of $$$$ by California’s youth hockey industry. If CAHA forced the bottom 25% of AA teams to drop to A every year the problem would be solved, but that will never happen since member clubs would lose revenue from a lot of parents willing to pay for the extra “A.â€
What Strawman said, but lets not forget it all started from the undefeated GSE's PWAA team first getting beat by a 9th placed team, then followed up by the Wave adding the finish touch en route to winning State 2 years ago. Apparently GSE, Mr and Mrs Kahn were distraught enough that they felt the need to rig the system to hopefully prevent future atrocities. If you think the current flight system is bad, their original plan was worse. If they had their way, the number 1 seed would get an automatic ticket to the big dance with no need to participate in playdown...
-
As Strawman said, I think the root cause is the pursuit of $$$$ by California's youth hockey industry.
I also agree with most all that Icadad said. Well spoken, Icadad. CAHA is doing their best to drive hockey out of CA. In Bantam at least, they could have done away with flighting. Personally, I don't think the bottom 4 needed to go as 3 and 4 improved substantially over season, but everyone could see the bottom 2 needed to go. CAHA did right by dropping one team to A, but directly interfered with the other team dropping to A. From what I understand from the majority of parents on OC2, they wanted to go to A, but they were refused and forced to stay AA. When your club has a CAHA board member on payroll, they won't likely drop and lose the $$$$. Flight 2 teams paid the same money as Flight 1 and all fought like hell to make #1. All else in Flight 2 has been made irrelevant by CAHA. They make no effort to actually assess the teams. The top 4 Flight 2 teams had every right to compete in Flight 1 compared to the bottom 4 of Flight 1.
-
Lots of misinformation flying around.
Curtis Brown from San Jose Created the flight system.
At least get facts straight
http://caha.com/minutes/2016-17/20170128-CAHAMinutes.pdf (http://caha.com/minutes/2016-17/20170128-CAHAMinutes.pdf)
-
I agree with a lot of what you say here Icadad, but for the record the Wave were not “eager participants†in last year’s ridiculous Flight 2 playoff. My understanding is that they asked to be excused from that charade but were told the club would be sanctioned if they didn’t show up.
The root cause of this flighting nonsense is the relentless pursuit of $$$$ by California’s youth hockey industry. If CAHA forced the bottom 25% of AA teams to drop to A every year the problem would be solved, but that will never happen since member clubs would lose revenue from a lot of parents willing to pay for the extra “A.â€
Well, lets just say that once the Wave realized they were going to play, they wanted to win the tournament, as did many of the other teams. I have nothing against the WW or its parents, and if anything having the playoffs was something Flight2 teams could look towards given the limited opportunities offered by the CAHA Flight2 system.
I can't agree with your "force 25% down" argument. That is the type of thinking that lead to this current system. It's arrogant and dismissive and highly subjective. I understand there is a bar, beneath which certain teams really shouldn't be in a particular division, and there has to be some exploration of that but CAHA has shown it's biased towards the bigger clubs and against the smaller regional ones.
I also don't buy the argument that parents in general are looking to "Buy an extra A" nor is that the reason teams get in over their heads. Most are doing their best to navigate a really complicated situation that balances the capabilities and aspirations of their child, with logistics, cost, opportunities and the prospect they will receive quality coaching. It's a difficult situation for many teams, because the vast majority of 2nd tier AA teams are significantly better than all but a few of the best A teams. When a AA team is forced to play in A, that damages the experience for the entire A division, which is also highly oversubscribed. The reality is that there is no magic number of AA teams that is perfect. It will vary year to year, division to division.
It's no more fair to have marginal AA teams forced down to A, then it is to have a AAA team playing in AA.
I'm obviously just repeating myself, but birth year divisions and teams fix many of these problems eventually.
-
Lots of misinformation flying around.
Curtis Brown from San Jose Created the flight system.
At least get facts straight
http://caha.com/minutes/2016-17/20170128-CAHAMinutes.pdf (http://caha.com/minutes/2016-17/20170128-CAHAMinutes.pdf)
What misinformation are you talking about?
The outlandish 1st place bye rule WAS part of the original proposition.
We have been prisoners participants in Tier2 for 3 seasons already and the system has been changed every one of those seasons, in pretty drastic fashion.
I personally don't give a crap who came up with the rules or what goes on during CAHA board meetings, but I do know that CAHA was formed to provide league structure so that Socal and Norcal teams could play each other with the ultimate goal being the determination of state champions. Just getting back to that would be a huge step in the direction of righting what many parents see as a sinking ship.
-
CAHA is the most miserable, self-serving sham of youth hockey in America. Want proof? Well, let's look at this AAA charade. CAHA has one AAA team in NorCal, the pathetic and lowly San Jose Jr Sharks. To get a AAA team, CAHA bylaws set out two prerequisites:
8.1 CAHA MISSION STATEMENT FOR TIER 1: A high level program whereby a Member Association may recruit and solicit on a state wide basis for registered players to compete at the highest level of amateur hockey within a specific age division on a National Level.
b. Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at the Tier II level in the current and previous season.
c. With Youth Council's recommendation, the CAHA board has the authority to prohibit a club from fielding Tier I teams whose prior season's collective performances was non-competitive.
Now, let's look at the Jr Sharks AAA program... they have AAA at 07, 06, 05, & 04. That's four different birth years. Peewee and Bantam. Four teams in total. And of those four teams... they have ONE WIN in CAHA. That's pathetic, and the Jr Sharks and CAHA should be ashamed of themselves. Overall, the four teams have a combined record of 1-23. Their combined stats are 28 GA/157 GA with -131 goal differential.
If the Jr Sharks AAA program were a horse, they'd have been put down years ago. And the carcass would have been burned and buried to contain the stench. Yet, year after year, the buffoon organization that is CAHA gives the Jr Sharks rubber stamp after rubber stamp, paralyzing Tier hockey in NorCal. However, I really don't blame the Jr Sharks' utter incompetence... I blame CAHA's misguided policies and outright corruption.
However... let's look at AA. Surely it must get better? Surely the Jr Sharks are crushing it at Tier II? Uh, no... not even close. At Peewee, the Jr Sharks have one team in Flight II. They are 6-6-2. At Bantam, they have one team, also in Flight II. They are 5-10-1. They're both at the bottom of Flight II, which defines them as non-competitive.
So, oddly... not one team within the Jr Sharks Tier program is competitive, and the Jr Sharks DO NOT fit the criteria of maintaining the two (2) teams at BOTH the Peewee or Bantam level to warrant a AAA team. Make no doubt, these bylaws were created by CAHA to destroy the Wave AAA teams of years past, and it is appalling that year after year CAHA is allowed to wield its ultimate power over all of California unchecked.
Surely CAHA President and #1 Boob, Tom Hancock, will address these annual bylaw oversights? Surely that human pus bucket will put down his 8th hot dog of the day, wipe away the yellow mustard from his JC Penney polo and do what's right for the youth of California?
Nope. Definitely not. The #1 Boob will just keep getting fatter and the kids of California will just keep leaving the state in droves. It's a shame. A real shame. And it's all on CAHA, their idiot President and the Board of Dunderheads that call themselves Directors.
-
Well, lets just say that once the Wave realized they were going to play, they wanted to win the tournament, as did many of the other teams. I have nothing against the WW or its parents, and if anything having the playoffs was something Flight2 teams could look towards given the limited opportunities offered by the CAHA Flight2 system.
Sorry dude, but it’s pretty funny that anyone would single out WW as having been enthusiastic participants in that Flight 2 playoff shitshow last year. That’s a good one. Which isn’t to say that there shouldn’t be Flight 2 playoffs ... provided folks are told they’re going to happen before the season is already over.
-
CAHA needs to end the flight system! The bottom 4 Flight 2 teams should have been dropped to A. Only one dropped and we can see how the other 3 did... If CAHA would have have the guts do do this, there would have been 15 teams and no reason to flight.
A club's reputation is on the line if they field a team that they do not consider good enough to play at the level. Grossly underperforming teams/clubs will not attract players for upcoming seasons. Instead, it is left to CAHA after a half baked Jamboree with a heavy dose of politics thrown in. The impact on the team that was dropped was both financial and emotional. After the team was disbanded, almost all of the players went to other AA teams and were able to hold their own. Simply put, that dropped team would have been alright playing in Flight 2 and growing for next year.
-
CAHA needs to end the flight system! The bottom 4 Flight 2 teams should have been dropped to A. Only one dropped and we can see how the other 3 did... If CAHA would have have the guts do do this, there would have been 15 teams and no reason to flight.
A club's reputation is on the line if they field a team that they do not consider good enough to play at the level. Grossly underperforming teams/clubs will not attract players for upcoming seasons. Instead, it is left to CAHA after a half baked Jamboree with a heavy dose of politics thrown in. The impact on the team that was dropped was both financial and emotional. After the team was disbanded, almost all of the players went to other AA teams and were able to hold their own. Simply put, that dropped team would have been alright playing in Flight 2 and growing for next year.
The issue with these teams that should drop is that they have to many A players on the roster and the AA kids can not carry them. If these teams are forced to drop, the legit AA kids will find a home on a AA team, the A players will not. I know for a fact that all of the kids on that AA that dropped did not go to AA teams. The remaining ones joined A teams ether at the same club or other clubs. This is the scenario that will happen and would have happened to those other 3 teams. It is the responsibility of the coaches and club to field a legit AA team and if they can not do that then, they should not push forward with a team that is not at an appropriate level. If the club is incapable of doing this then, CAHA should step in and force them to drop. It is not fair to the AA kids to be surrounded by A players and it is not fair to the A kids who are in over their heads. I give credit to the Wave for dropping that team.
I should add that if you are stuck in this scenario the only way out is to buy your player out of the contract. That SUCKS!
-
"Now, let's look at the Jr Sharks AAA program... they have AAA at 07, 06, 05, & 04. That's four different birth years. Peewee and Bantam. Four teams in total. And of those four teams... they have ONE WIN in CAHA. That's pathetic, and the Jr Sharks and CAHA should be ashamed of themselves. Overall, the four teams have a combined record of 1-23. Their combined stats are 28 GA/157 GA with -131 goal differential."
Curious why you did not include the 03 (15AAA), 02 (16AAA) or 01 (18AAA) teams? Realizing of course this is a Bantam forum but you included PeeWees so. . . . . . .In 2 of those 3 cases, their records do not fit your narrative. The 15AAA are 4-2 in CAHA and top seed for upcoming state tournament. The 16AAA is 3-3 in CAHA (all teams 3-3) and are second seed in state tournament. The 18AAA team is in last place.
Listen, the Sharks absolutely have flaws but I'm not sure who would replace them to carry the Tier 1 banner in NorCal. GSE? Last time they fielded a AAA team was 15AAA in the 2016 season. They went 1-10 in CAHA and were dead last (56th out of 80 teams nationally). Santa Clara? They struggle to field top AA teams with all of them mid to low end of their respective divisions. Not exactly great candidates to take over for the bumbling Sharks. The Sharks are not as established as the Kings and Ducks. The pool of players is much smaller than Southern California. It's no wonder that they do not fair as well. Without looking up the records though, I'd venture to guess that they are becoming more competitive relative to the Kings and Ducks. I'd also argue they are pretty competitive across the country versus other Tier 1 Programs. At 05 they are 22-13 and ranked 30 out of 99 teams. Granted Ducks are 10 and Kings are 12. At 04 they are 17-15-2 and ranked 40 out of 117. Ducks are 9th and Kings are 17th.
Long argument short for JackBender. . . . . .who should replace Sharks as AAA club in NorCal? If the argument is just allow other AAA teams, then we water it all down again. Those teams ranked in the 20s and 30s become ranked in the 50s and 60s real quick. Then everyone starts whining about that approach again.
-
So 2 out of 7 Jr Sharks AAA teams aren't HORRIBLE? Strong argument. CAHA and Jr Sharks should continue as the status quo. Looking forward to seeing how that upcoming 08AAA team looks like. Maybe they'll rise from horrible to just putrid come 15U when all the talent leaves SoCal because the parents are so sick of the constant CAHA political nonsense.
The thing is, though... it's not talent that inhibits NorCal from being competitive. NorCal has tons of talent. More than enough to put together a competitive AAA team at every birth year. The problem is that the Jr Sharks organization is incompetent, hockey in NorCal is a political/regional mess... and CAHA is the all-controlling governing body behind this dumpster fire. Fix it. Fix the Jr Sharks.
CAHA is an expert at destroying programs and Tier divisions... so how about fixing one?
The buck stops with CAHA, and CAHA needs to stop not only enabling but promoting this incompetence. They need to take a step back and solve the youth hockey debacle that is NorCal. A majority of the CAHA Directors (the #1 Boob included) live in NorCal. The CAHA headquarters is in NorCal. This is their mess.
They created the two bylaws to cripple AAA hockey in SoCal. All talent now leads through Jr Ducks/Jr Kings, making them rich and competitive Nationally. Yet, in doing this... CAHA exposed the Jr Sharks as a fraud organization, and pointed a bright light on the NorCal disarray they lord over. They need to follow their rules or do away with them... because until then, they will continue to be called out for their blatant hypocrisy.
It may not happen today or tomorrow or even next week... but someone from USA Hockey will notice this mess. Someone will take a close look at the #1 Boob and his Board of Dunderheads... and then maybe... maybe... logical, fair and consistent goals will be pursued in an attempt to actually nurture and grow the game of hockey in the State of California.
-
Sorry, just because you post it, doesn't make it true. You are WAY overstating the issues with NorCal Hockey and in particular the Jr Sharks.
11AAA is 52 of 88 - middle third in country
12AAA is 68 of 95 - bottom third in country
13AAA is 30 of 99 - top third in country
14AAA is 40 of 117 - middle third in country (39th would be top third)
15AAA is 28 of 117 - top third in country
16AAA is 36 of 154 - top third in country
18AAA is 110 of 142 - bottom third in country
How does that represent 5 teams being "HORRIBLE"? I'd say 4 good, 2 average and 1 bad team. Perhaps you are really trying to argue that the Sharks are not as good as the Ducks or Kings. Ok, that's more reasonable. I've offered that it's primarily based on a much larger pool of players to create top 15 teams.
I also disagree that there is tons of talent in NorCal. Where are they? Are they playing for AA teams? If so, why isn't a single NorCal AA team in any division in 1st place in CAHA? The reality is below (GSE has multiple teams in some age groups which is why they are listed with two rankings).
12AA GSE is 89th, Santa Clara is 165th, GSE is 273rd
14AA GSE is 15th, GSE is 147th
16AA GSE is 79th, Santa Clara is 171st
18AA GSE is 122nd, GSE is 145th, Santa Clara 182nd
Doesn't appear to be a ton of talent on those teams based on rankings other than the GSE North Bantam team. So. . . . .how does CAHA fix this NorCal "dumpster fire"? Allow other clubs to have AAA teams? So we pool all these kids comprising the 160th ranked AA teams and they become magically awesome at AAA and replace the Sharks? Lol. Sorry, it just isn't that easy.
Thanks for the discussion, I really do enjoy the back and forth.
-
Sorry, just because you post it, doesn't make it true. You are WAY overstating the issues with NorCal Hockey and in particular the Jr Sharks.
11AAA is 52 of 88 - middle third in country
12AAA is 68 of 95 - bottom third in country
13AAA is 30 of 99 - top third in country
14AAA is 40 of 117 - middle third in country (39th would be top third)
15AAA is 28 of 117 - top third in country
16AAA is 36 of 154 - top third in country
18AAA is 110 of 142 - bottom third in country
How does that represent 5 teams being "HORRIBLE"? I'd say 4 good, 2 average and 1 bad team. Perhaps you are really trying to argue that the Sharks are not as good as the Ducks or Kings. Ok, that's more reasonable. I've offered that it's primarily based on a much larger pool of players to create top 15 teams.
I also disagree that there is tons of talent in NorCal. Where are they? Are they playing for AA teams? If so, why isn't a single NorCal AA team in any division in 1st place in CAHA? The reality is below (GSE has multiple teams in some age groups which is why they are listed with two rankings).
12AA GSE is 89th, Santa Clara is 165th, GSE is 273rd
14AA GSE is 15th, GSE is 147th
16AA GSE is 79th, Santa Clara is 171st
18AA GSE is 122nd, GSE is 145th, Santa Clara 182nd
Doesn't appear to be a ton of talent on those teams based on rankings other than the GSE North Bantam team. So. . . . .how does CAHA fix this NorCal "dumpster fire"? Allow other clubs to have AAA teams? So we pool all these kids comprising the 160th ranked AA teams and they become magically awesome at AAA and replace the Sharks? Lol. Sorry, it just isn't that easy.
Thanks for the discussion, I really do enjoy the back and forth.
SOMEBODY has been paying attention! More AAA teams is an absolute HORRIBLE idea...unless you want to water down the already watered down product even further...sheesh...
-
A club's reputation is on the line if they field a team that they do not consider good enough to play at the level. Grossly underperforming teams/clubs will not attract players for upcoming seasons.
Somebody needs to break this news flash to the clubs that field those grossly underperforming teams year after year.
-
The belief that there are fully stocked AAA level teams in california that are being held back is ludicrous. With the exception of the Bears last year there isn’t a AA team in California that would perform much better than the Sharks at AAA When top California AA teams play AAA teams ranked above a #30ish ranking they haven’t done so well. Just like the Sharks AAA. Sure some could compete in the #30-50 ranking (like the Sharks) but is that what you are looking for? Many of those AAA teams should be AA anyways. The top California AA team this year lost by a wide margin to the top California AAA teams. Sure they have 1-2 players, but it ends there. Certainly not enough for an entire roster.
The Kings and Ducks have a hard time each year putting together 3-4 lines of AAA caliber kids to compete above #20. There is not much depth at that level in the state. I don’t know where all this hidden talent is that can field additional AAA teams. The Sharks are weaker than the Kings and Ducks because of lack of depth. Nothing related to their program.
The same A and AA kids try out for AAA, a few step up and fill vacancies. The ones that don’t make it usually play AA. They’re playing AA because they were unable to unseat the AAA kid. The teams take the best players that are willing to play for them.
There are no doubt stars among the AA ranks. There just aren’t enough of them who are geographically concentrated.
-
The belief that there are fully stocked AAA level teams in california that are being held back is ludicrous. With the exception of the Bears last year there isn’t a AA team in California that would perform much better than the Sharks at AAA When top California AA teams play AAA teams ranked above a #30ish ranking they haven’t done so well. Just like the Sharks AAA. Sure some could compete in the #30-50 ranking (like the Sharks) but is that what you are looking for? Many of those AAA teams should be AA anyways. The top California AA team this year lost by a wide margin to the top California AAA teams. Sure they have 1-2 players, but it ends there. Certainly not enough for an entire roster.
The Kings and Ducks have a hard time each year putting together 3-4 lines of AAA caliber kids to compete above #20. There is not much depth at that level in the state. I don’t know where all this hidden talent is that can field additional AAA teams. The Sharks are weaker than the Kings and Ducks because of lack of depth. Nothing related to their program.
The same A and AA kids try out for AAA, a few step up and fill vacancies. The ones that don’t make it usually play AA. They’re playing AA because they were unable to unseat the AAA kid. The teams take the best players that are willing to play for them.
There are no doubt stars among the AA ranks. There just aren’t enough of them who are geographically concentrated.
...exactly....
-
Goodness, the pro-CAHA plant has been exposed. Is that you, #1 Boob? Or perhaps one of your Clovis lackeys? Regardless, a quality of team is subjective. I've seen them. They're not good. But let's be objective. 1 win at the four youngest divisions combined is objective. A 1-23 combined record. -131 Goal Differential. That's horrible by any definition. Not average. Not below average. Not kinda bad. It's horrible.
But that's not the whole point...
The whole point is that according to CAHA bylaws, the Jr Sharks DO NOT quality for AAA teams. At either PW level or Bantam level. However, CAHA continues to NOT follow their own rules year after year, giving the AAA distinction to an organization that can't put together competitive teams until Midget, when the SoCal talent leaves the state.
Please explain, pro-CAHA plant? Please explain why CAHA rules ONLY apply when they benefit the individual interests of the #1 Boob and his Board of Dunderheads?
-
The Sharks are weaker than the Kings and Ducks because of lack of depth. Nothing related to their program.
Uh, yeah... it's related to their program. They don't ice competitive teams year after year... but CAHA keeps rewarding their incompetence.
-
I don’t think CAHA has done anything consistently and I have been unimpressed. Their motivation is clear...$
They were inconsistent at the CAHA camp allowing 2003 kids who were not present to make the team even though they clearly stated that all participants must try out in person. I doubt all out of state selectees were injured
If those are the rules then they are culpable for allowing the Sharks to field a AAA team.
My points were based on the “belief†that there is an abundance of AAA talent that are unable to play at that level. More AAA teams would make it worse. As an example, the Gulls have a monopoly in the San Diego market and they don’t have a AAAteam. They went from 5 teams 3 years ago to none. Why? Lack of depth. One or two kids leave and teams unravel. It’s an example of how thin the talent is and how fragile the fringe programs are
-
Great. Then CAHA should follow their own rules. It's one or the other... and that is what consistently pisses people off. Either allow teams to ice AAA teams as they please or follow the rules and DO NOT allow Jr Sharks to ice AAA teams at PW/Bantam when they NEVER meet minimum requirements.
One or the other. Pick.
-
No argument
-
Great. Then CAHA should follow their own rules. It's one or the other... and that is what consistently pisses people off. Either allow teams to ice AAA teams as they please or follow the rules and DO NOT allow Jr Sharks to ice AAA teams at PW/Bantam when they NEVER meet minimum requirements.
One or the other. Pick.
If JackBender thinks a small group of us are shills for CAHA, can we assume his little Johnny got cut from the Jr Sharks as to the reason he seems so butt hurt by them? Now that we seem to have you giving up on the hidden NorCal talent issue, let’s turn to your “main pointâ€. Re read the CAHA rules you highlighted and tell us which ones they are not following? Maybe the one that says they can deny a club if their collective performances were non competitive? Do you know what collective means? Hint......it means more than just how they did against the Ducks and Kings (who have fantastic teams by the way particularly at the younger age groups). It is also the reason I provided SJs record against Tier 1 competition across the country. They are not setting the world on fire but they are definitely not non competitive.
Fire away JB.
-
Great. Then CAHA should follow their own rules. It's one or the other... and that is what consistently pisses people off. Either allow teams to ice AAA teams as they please or follow the rules and DO NOT allow Jr Sharks to ice AAA teams at PW/Bantam when they NEVER meet minimum requirements.
One or the other. Pick.
If JackBender thinks a small group of us are shills for CAHA, can we assume his little Johnny got cut from the Jr Sharks as to the reason he seems so butt hurt by them? Now that we seem to have you giving up on the hidden NorCal talent issue, let’s turn to your “main pointâ€. Re read the CAHA rules you highlighted and tell us which ones they are not following? Maybe the one that says they can deny a club if their collective performances were non competitive? Do you know what collective means? Hint......it means more than just how they did against the Ducks and Kings (who have fantastic teams by the way particularly at the younger age groups). It is also the reason I provided SJs record against Tier 1 competition across the country. They are not setting the world on fire but they are definitely not non competitive.
Fire away JB.
Sorry.....my argument was not complete. Collective includes all age groups not just the younger age groups which is why I noted 02 and 03 groups.
-
Didn't take long for the "self fulfilling prophecy of failure - Cali has no talent" argument to surface. Yes I guess that Boston, NJ, Minnesota and Canada have special "AAA" juice, or maybe they just have more opportunity for kids to play and develop at whatever rate they are capable.
I don't know what fantasy world that you live in where there is a long line of people battling to get onto the LA AAA teams with the also rans dropping down to AA. That doesn't exist. There's at least several teams worth of kids playing AA with the talent and physical ability to compete with kids playing AAA who will never be anywhere near a AAA tryout. I took my kid to the pre-tryout skate and scrimmage 2 days prior to the tryouts for a AAA team a year or so ago, and there were maybe 4 kids on the ice who weren't already on the team from the year prior. Everyone knows that the teams are 95% picked in the spring and the main group who is actively trying to challenge up is already playing at the club on a AA team.
For plenty of people, they don't live anywhere near the AAA teams. For many others the cost and extensive travel isn't feasible. And I'm sure there are plenty who have considered whether it was a good investment or beneficial to their overall development for their kid to make a AAA club only to end up on the 4th line. When your league season is 6 games in total, it might come as a surprise to you that a lot of people aren't rushing to sign up for that.
If there was only 1 or 2 players per AA team that are capable of playing AAA, even with that small number you could field 1 or 2 additional AAA teams just in Socal. Norcal's problems are different and shouldn't be the tail that wags the dog in any case.
Saints '05, whatever might happen with them, are an example of how a team in a particular area can coalesce over time. Often it's a combination of team management, stability over a period of 2+ seasons, committed parents and coaching. If all those things are in place, a AAA team could emerge from any number of geographic areas or clubs, but the franchise system discourages that. Things ebb and flow in youth hockey as coaches and programs come and go.
Every AAA team is not going to be the Chicago Mission or Little Caesars, and they don't have to be. Competition and opportunity raises the level of play over time.
-
Great. Then CAHA should follow their own rules. It's one or the other... and that is what consistently pisses people off. Either allow teams to ice AAA teams as they please or follow the rules and DO NOT allow Jr Sharks to ice AAA teams at PW/Bantam when they NEVER meet minimum requirements.
One or the other. Pick.
This ^^^^^
-
I’m the last person to defend either CAHA or the Sharks, but how is it that people think they fail to comply with CAHA’s minimum requirements for having AAA teams?
The rule quoted above provides:
b. Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at the Tier II level in the current and previous season.
Last I checked, the Sharks do have at least two AA teams. Not necessarily at each age level, but that isn’t what the rule requires.
-
Great. Then CAHA should follow their own rules. It's one or the other... and that is what consistently pisses people off. Either allow teams to ice AAA teams as they please or follow the rules and DO NOT allow Jr Sharks to ice AAA teams at PW/Bantam when they NEVER meet minimum requirements.
One or the other. Pick.
AAA
First of all the idea that by removing tha CAHA rules on AAA would allow for more QUALITY AAA teams is just wrong...there is TRUELY not enough talent out there to support it...unless you are not bothered by weak AA or worse level teams slogging around on the ice. Which may be the case here...
Secondly, if the Sharks don’t qualify for AAA, then are you suggesting that all NorCal AAA capable kids just quit or leave? Maybe travel south and take away spots from YOUR kids? Good plan...
-
PutYourFootOnTheGas aka pro-CAHA plant... we've moved on from the subjective definition of "competitive."
Per the bylaws, to have a PW 07AAA team or PW 06AAA team, the Jr Sharks have to have two (2) PW AA teams. They DO NOT meet this requirement. They have one (1). That is a violation of the bylaws:
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
The same is true at the Bantam level. Again, either allow organizations to do as they please or enforce the bylaws.
So, again, which is it?
-
I like and appreciate all the comments here.
Instead of rules, rules, and rules, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, nth question should be "is this good for players and developing players?" That is all that matters.
A few things to ponder:
- Individual players are recruited and advance. Not teams. Scouts and next level coaches don't care about the team national standing. Whenever I do contract scouting or write reports for NZ or for a team, I have NEVER included the score of the game, who won, or what the MHR ranking was for the teams. It is simply focused on individual players.
- Each AAA team can ONLY have 1 starting goalie, 1 top line, 1 primary PP, 1 primary PK, 1 top D-pair, etc. So the comment to me this past summer from a group of NCAA D1 coaches was "if everyone knows this, why is California going the opposite direction? We would like to see them expand to double or triple the number of AAA teams so that more players get developed for the next level and eventually for us at the D1 level." - that should be the ONLY type of input people need to be convinced of how to develop more players.
- We are so focused on everything and anything EXCEPT developing more great individual players. Flights and letters and rules and everything else is a moot point unless you get kids playing multiple sports and get them more than two multi-team shared practices per week and 30 games per season.
Keep expressing opinions and pursuing the right environment and culture. I will have more comments posted on this topic on my page later this week. Important stuff. I love the topic and sincerely appreciate it.
-
PutYourFootOnTheGas aka pro-CAHA plant... we've moved on from the subjective definition of "competitive."
Per the bylaws, to have a PW 07AAA team or PW 06AAA team, the Jr Sharks have to have two (2) PW AA teams. They DO NOT meet this requirement. They have one (1). That is a violation of the bylaws:
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
The same is true at the Bantam level. Again, either allow organizations to do as they please or enforce the bylaws.
So, again, which is it?
Is it “two (2) teams at the Tier II level....†OR “[size=78%]two (2) teams at their Tier II Level....†??? I honestly don’t know. It doesn’t have to be at the particular age group....just any (2) Tier II teams. [/size]
-
Great and noble vision. I like what you are saying. When you look at the Boston and Detroit area they have close to 10 AAA programs each. Most are in he 20-30 ranking with 1-2 top 10 teams. That’s the ideal state. California is the most populated state in the country and we can’t put together more than 3 AAA clubs. The sport is not part of the culture.
A major issue that tempers the growth in California is rink ownership. States where hockey is more expansive simply have more affordable access to ice. The lack of municipality owned rinks makes it too expensive and perverts the mission. City owned rinks offer stick times for $6-8 not $20.
The flaw is that the governing body is only interested in expanding the sport if means their club benefits.
Teams with only one highly competitive line can’t compete nationally which means lower rankings. Jobs and incomes are at stake when programs like the Ducks and Kings don’t do well on the national stage. Therefore the big clubs fight over the limited talent and monopolize it.
-
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
This is the bylaw. Page 25 of the Guidebook. The key words are "Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at THEIR Tier II level."
If you're trying to interpret it the other way, with a club only needing two (2) Tier II teams at ANY level... that would make just about EVERY CAHA club eligible for AAA. CAHA clubs with two AA teams include: Jr Ducks, Jr Kings, Wave, GSE, Blackhawks, Jr Sharks, OCHC, Jr Reign, Jr Gulls, Empire, Maple Leafs, Saints, and Jr Ice Dogs.
So, clearly, that is not correct.
It is as it is written... so should CAHA allow clubs to do as they like or should CAHA enforce their own bylaws?
To have it both ways is hypocritical. It's either one or the other. So what is it?
-
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
This is the bylaw. Page 25 of the Guidebook. The key words are "Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at THEIR Tier II level."
If you're trying to interpret it the other way, with a club only needing two (2) Tier II teams at ANY level... that would make just about EVERY CAHA club eligible for AAA. CAHA clubs with two AA teams include: Jr Ducks, Jr Kings, Wave, GSE, Blackhawks, Jr Sharks, OCHC, Jr Reign, Jr Gulls, Empire, Maple Leafs, Saints, and Jr Ice Dogs.
So, clearly, that is not correct.
It is as it is written... so should CAHA allow clubs to do as they like or should CAHA enforce their own bylaws?
To have it both ways is hypocritical. It's either one or the other. So what is it?
JackBender, you've misquoted the CAHA Guide Book. It is "the" Tier II level NOT "their" Tier II level. I've copied and pasted below.
Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at the Tier II level in the current and previous season.
That means it is (2) Tier II teams at any level. I assume the rationale is you can't just pop up out of no where and decide to have a AAA team. There should be a history of fielding tier II level teams before you step up to the big leagues. I also assume the same goes for fielding tier II teams, you need to show history of fielding A level teams. Walk before you can run concept. Not a terrible idea as I've heard of some horror stories about the old Anaheim Wildcats program which this may have been directed at.
Like it or not, the Sharks ARE following the rules. That also means any of the clubs you've noted above, can have a AAA team if they want. They just need to submit an application.
-
PutYourFootOnTheGas aka pro-CAHA plant... we've moved on from the subjective definition of "competitive."
Per the bylaws, to have a PW 07AAA team or PW 06AAA team, the Jr Sharks have to have two (2) PW AA teams. They DO NOT meet this requirement. They have one (1). That is a violation of the bylaws:
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
The same is true at the Bantam level. Again, either allow organizations to do as they please or enforce the bylaws.
So, again, which is it?
I repeat my question. Where in this rule does it say a club must have two AA teams at the PeeWee level to have a AAA team at the PeeWee level? It doesn’t. It just says the club must have st least two AA teams to have any AAA teams. You can like the rule or hate it, but it simply doesn’t say what you want it to say.
-
PutYourFootOnTheGas aka pro-CAHA plant... we've moved on from the subjective definition of "competitive."
Per the bylaws, to have a PW 07AAA team or PW 06AAA team, the Jr Sharks have to have two (2) PW AA teams. They DO NOT meet this requirement. They have one (1). That is a violation of the bylaws:
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
The same is true at the Bantam level. Again, either allow organizations to do as they please or enforce the bylaws.
So, again, which is it?
I repeat my question. Where in this rule does it say a club must have two AA teams at the PeeWee level to have a AAA team at the PeeWee level? It doesn’t. It just says the club must have st least two AA teams to have any AAA teams. You can like the rule or hate it, but it simply doesn’t say what you want it to say.
I agree with you Strawman. JackBender is misinterpreting the CAHA rules. I think both of his arguments have unraveled today.
-
Oh my god. You two are such morons. Look at the previous posts. How many times does it have to be spelled out for you? You two are such stooges. Such shills. YOU are the reason CAHA is such an UTTER CLOWN SHOW.
USE YOUR EYES. USE YOUR BRAINS.
CAHA Guidbook. Page 29. Section 8.3.
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
The word is THEIR. THEIR. The word is POSSESSIVE. THAT CONNECTS THEM.
If you idiots can't interpret this sentence as it is written, or understand the meaning of the words, then we have nothing to talk about. You can't interpret the the simplest of sentences. You think four teams at four levels with a combined 1-23 record in the league is competitive. You're idiots. Your President is an idiot. And your Board of Dunderheads are idiots.
Enjoy the playoffs as all your NorCal teams get annihilated... especially the AAA Jr Shark Dumpster Fires.
Oh, and the fact that both you dopes completely ignore the advice and thoughts of Brad Hamacher, a real hockey mind and influence on the kids, is telling. You're CAHA shills. Total frauds. Nothing more.
-
Oh my god. You two are such morons. Look at the previous posts. How many times does it have to be spelled out for you? You two are such stooges. Such shills. YOU are the reason CAHA is such an UTTER CLOWN SHOW.
USE YOUR EYES. USE YOUR BRAINS.
CAHA Guidbook. Page 29. Section 8.3.
8.3 Member Associations fielding Tier I teams shall maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level in the current and previous seasons.
The word is THEIR. THEIR. The word is POSSESSIVE. THAT CONNECTS THEM.
If you idiots can't interpret this sentence as it is written, or understand the meaning of the words, then we have nothing to talk about. You can't interpret the the simplest of sentences. You think four teams at four levels with a combined 1-23 record in the league is competitive. You're idiots. Your President is an idiot. And your Board of Dunderheads are idiots.
Enjoy the playoffs as all your NorCal teams get annihilated... especially the AAA Jr Shark Dumpster Fires.
Oh, and the fact that both you dopes completely ignore the advice and thoughts of Brad Hamacher, a real hockey mind and influence on the kids, is telling. You're CAHA shills. Total frauds. Nothing more.
Time to take a break from the bottle, Bender.
The antecedent of "their" in this sentence is "Member Associations," not "Tier I teams." It would make no sense for it to be the latter given that Tier I teams are birth-year teams, which are divided into major and minor years, while Tier II teams are not.
And no, I'm not from NorCal, I don't think the Sharks are particularly competitive, I'm not a big fan of CAHA. I also think Brad Hamacher is a great. English is however my first language.
-
There used to be seven AAA teams in some divisions in this state. Next year the most California are slated to have is four at 18U and 13U. In all other categories there are only three AAA teams.
-
Teams with only one highly competitive line can’t compete nationally which means lower rankings. Jobs and incomes are at stake when programs like the Ducks and Kings don’t do well on the national stage. Therefore the big clubs fight over the limited talent and monopolize it.
Again that's an opinion, and lore, and it's just blatantly not true. All the best players do not flock to the 3 AAA teams and there is no waiting line, outside of the clubs themselves.
A well known coach comes in and flat out tells you that other programs and D1 coaches are saying WTF is wrong with CAHA, but you all know better.
-
Hey JackBender,
Just to be clear, the rules as I understand them is that a club requires two Tier2 teams in addition to any AAA teams they might have. It doesn't matter the age group. This is in fact the rule that did in the Titans long running AAA team.
With that said, your prior point in regards to the hypocrisy of the CAHA rules in regards to the Sharks lack of competitive credibility is right on.
I am not by any means a Shark hater, nor would I demand that the Sharks be stripped of their AAA teams. I just don't think the franchise rules serve california hockey in general. The defense of the sharks seems to be that they are not that bad nationally and perhaps that's fair, but in their home state they are dead last year after year, often without being able to win a single game in their home league. They have no defense to offer, because there is none. They had a monopoly, and that monopoly didn't produce teams that can beat either of the other teams, save for once in a blue moon. Individually, it's clear the program produces some very capable players that go on to higher levels of hockey. Taking away their monopoly shouldn't have any effect on the program, and if it does, then that is probably some healthy and much needed disinfection that will either force them to up their game, or force them to retract.
Also, and BTW, how hilarious that programs had to submit their APPLICATIONS for AAA teams when the current season isn't even over yet. And you wonder why few coaches and organizations want to go to the trouble. Also just have to say -- while I wish the Icedogs much luck with their '06 AAA foray, once you take the nucleus of their PW groups and form a AAA team, how are they going to meet the "2 Tier 2 team" requirement. Again, while it shouldn't matter a bit in regards to the AAA team, the reality is that it still does, and they could pull the rug out from under the team next year.
-
There used to be seven AAA teams in some divisions in this state. Next year the most California are slated to have is four at 18U and 13U. In all other categories there are only three AAA teams.
It's also funny that Flighting was apparently tried years ago and was abandoned. Apparently there is absolutely no institutional knowledge passed down in CAHA. Maybe at the next CAHA board meeting someone from the Sharks organization will discover that you can make sticks out of wood, and next season all Flight2 teams will be mandated to use them as part of CAHA's renewable energy initiative.
-
Ugh. Words are hard.
Tier I team is the antecedent, and the following is “maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level.†Tier II is the possessive of the Tier I team. The “level†is the Tier I level. PW, Bantam, Midget, etc.
Regardless... these rules (and there are more than just this) were written several years ago to cripple small clubs and consolidate power. Wave were targeted. Heat were targeted. And Wildcats were targeted (perhaps rightly so).
That particular rule was used to reject many, many applications... until organizations just gave up or coaches moved somewhere else... but it was used arbitrarily. When it was convenient.
Just as the “competitive†rule was used. Arbitrarily.
The Jr Sharks should be able to do as they please. As should other teams. But CAHA has an agenda. They have conflicts of interest. There is no transparent. No consistency. They don’t follow their own rules. They make up new rules on the fly. They bully programs. Suppress others. Target specific people. And that is what pisses people off.
This thug-like behavior won’t change with the current group and their skewed philosophies. It’s a shame. And the AAA or Flighting methods are just two of many examples to highlight this.
-
Ugh. Words are hard.
Tier I team is the antecedent, and the following is “maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level.†Tier II is the possessive of the Tier I team. The “level†is the Tier I level. PW, Bantam, Midget, etc.
Regardless... these rules (and there are more than just this) were written several years ago to cripple small clubs and consolidate power. Wave were targeted. Heat were targeted. And Wildcats were targeted (perhaps rightly so).
That particular rule was used to reject many, many applications... until organizations just gave up or coaches moved somewhere else... but it was used arbitrarily. When it was convenient.
Just as the “competitive†rule was used. Arbitrarily.
The Jr Sharks should be able to do as they please. As should other teams. But CAHA has an agenda. They have conflicts of interest. There is no transparent. No consistency. They don’t follow their own rules. They make up new rules on the fly. They bully programs. Suppress others. Target specific people. And that is what pisses people off.
This thug-like behavior won’t change with the current group and their skewed philosophies. It’s a shame. And the AAA or Flighting methods are just two of many examples to highlight this.
LOL. Time to morph the argument again JackBender? Not the sharpest tool, eh? It’s easy to see when Mr. Wordsmith starts with the.......â€well, the main point is†or “regardlessâ€.
Here is the truth. Youth hockey in California has NEVER been more healthy. There are more kids playing at all levels and more competitive teams fielded than EVER before. I’ve never said CAHA or the Sharks are perfect. Far from it but it’s ridiculous all the whining and complaining that happens on these boards. Enjoy the journey as the road for all of these kids leads to beer league (which is awesome by the way).
I don’t know who the coach is that came on but just because he provides an opinion or shares a conversation also doesn’t mean that the content is an absolute truth. Of course there is only 1 goalie, 1 PP group, 1 PK group, 1 set of top D. How often do you think they are out there in a 14 to 0 game? You want / need competitive games. 3-2, 1-0 not 10-0 or 13-2. That’s what the flight system tried to address. That’s why they make it hard for organizations to field AAA teams. It’s not easy to pull off.
I really do appreciate the back and forth. Certainly has added to board traffic which seems way down this year.
-
LOL. Time to morph the argument again JackBender? Not the sharpest tool, eh? It’s easy to see when Mr. Wordsmith starts with the.......â€well, the main point is†or “regardlessâ€.
Here is the truth. Youth hockey in California has NEVER been more healthy. There are more kids playing at all levels and more competitive teams fielded than EVER before. I’ve never said CAHA or the Sharks are perfect. Far from it but it’s ridiculous all the whining and complaining that happens on these boards. Enjoy the journey as the road for all of these kids leads to beer league (which is awesome by the way).
I don’t know who the coach is that came on but just because he provides an opinion or shares a conversation also doesn’t mean that the content is an absolute truth. Of course there is only 1 goalie, 1 PP group, 1 PK group, 1 set of top D. How often do you think they are out there in a 14 to 0 game? You want / need competitive games. 3-2, 1-0 not 10-0 or 13-2. That’s what the flight system tried to address. That’s why they make it hard for organizations to field AAA teams. It’s not easy to pull off.
I really do appreciate the back and forth. Certainly has added to board traffic which seems way down this year.
It isn't healthy when you are fielding only 3 AAA teams at almost every age group for the number of players in the state.
-
I really think a lawyer needs to take a look to see if legal action can be taken to move this in the right direction.
Who is the USA Hockey representative for California?
-
Ugh. Words are hard.
Tier I team is the antecedent, and the following is “maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level.†Tier II is the possessive of the Tier I team. The “level†is the Tier I level. PW, Bantam, Midget, etc.
Regardless... these rules (and there are more than just this) were written several years ago to cripple small clubs and consolidate power. Wave were targeted. Heat were targeted. And Wildcats were targeted (perhaps rightly so).
That particular rule was used to reject many, many applications... until organizations just gave up or coaches moved somewhere else... but it was used arbitrarily. When it was convenient.
Just as the “competitive†rule was used. Arbitrarily.
The Jr Sharks should be able to do as they please. As should other teams. But CAHA has an agenda. They have conflicts of interest. There is no transparent. No consistency. They don’t follow their own rules. They make up new rules on the fly. They bully programs. Suppress others. Target specific people. And that is what pisses people off.
This thug-like behavior won’t change with the current group and their skewed philosophies. It’s a shame. And the AAA or Flighting methods are just two of many examples to highlight this.
LOL. Time to morph the argument again JackBender? Not the sharpest tool, eh? It’s easy to see when Mr. Wordsmith starts with the.......â€well, the main point is†or “regardlessâ€.
Here is the truth. Youth hockey in California has NEVER been more healthy. There are more kids playing at all levels and more competitive teams fielded than EVER before. I’ve never said CAHA or the Sharks are perfect. Far from it but it’s ridiculous all the whining and complaining that happens on these boards. Enjoy the journey as the road for all of these kids leads to beer league (which is awesome by the way).
I don’t know who the coach is that came on but just because he provides an opinion or shares a conversation also doesn’t mean that the content is an absolute truth. Of course there is only 1 goalie, 1 PP group, 1 PK group, 1 set of top D. How often do you think they are out there in a 14 to 0 game? You want / need competitive games. 3-2, 1-0 not 10-0 or 13-2. That’s what the flight system tried to address. That’s why they make it hard for organizations to field AAA teams. It’s not easy to pull off.
I really do appreciate the back and forth. Certainly has added to board traffic which seems way down this year.
I know the coach so my suggestion to you is to listen to him and not discount his opinion.
-
Ugh. Words are hard.
Tier I team is the antecedent, and the following is “maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level.†Tier II is the possessive of the Tier I team. The “level†is the Tier I level. PW, Bantam, Midget, etc.
Regardless... these rules (and there are more than just this) were written several years ago to cripple small clubs and consolidate power. Wave were targeted. Heat were targeted. And Wildcats were targeted (perhaps rightly so).
That particular rule was used to reject many, many applications... until organizations just gave up or coaches moved somewhere else... but it was used arbitrarily. When it was convenient.
Just as the “competitive†rule was used. Arbitrarily.
The Jr Sharks should be able to do as they please. As should other teams. But CAHA has an agenda. They have conflicts of interest. There is no transparent. No consistency. They don’t follow their own rules. They make up new rules on the fly. They bully programs. Suppress others. Target specific people. And that is what pisses people off.
This thug-like behavior won’t change with the current group and their skewed philosophies. It’s a shame. And the AAA or Flighting methods are just two of many examples to highlight this.
Specifically which clubs have been denied AAA programs due to this rule? I think the Titans might have run afoul of it, but anybody else? GSE was offered AAA status last year but declined due to lack of interest among enough families. Gulls program imploded due to lack of depth, competitiveness and other issues. I’ve heard the Wave declined to apply for AAA status a couple of years ago, again due to lack of interest. The rule itself doesn’t disqualify many clubs, it just requires them to be developing at least a tiny bit of tier-level talent of their own. That’s not to deny that there are lots of other issues and challenges with AAA hockey in California, which there are.
-
Ugh. Words are hard.
Tier I team is the antecedent, and the following is “maintain a minimum of two (2) teams at their Tier II level.†Tier II is the possessive of the Tier I team. The “level†is the Tier I level. PW, Bantam, Midget, etc.
Regardless... these rules (and there are more than just this) were written several years ago to cripple small clubs and consolidate power. Wave were targeted. Heat were targeted. And Wildcats were targeted (perhaps rightly so).
That particular rule was used to reject many, many applications... until organizations just gave up or coaches moved somewhere else... but it was used arbitrarily. When it was convenient.
Just as the “competitive†rule was used. Arbitrarily.
The Jr Sharks should be able to do as they please. As should other teams. But CAHA has an agenda. They have conflicts of interest. There is no transparent. No consistency. They don’t follow their own rules. They make up new rules on the fly. They bully programs. Suppress others. Target specific people. And that is what pisses people off.
This thug-like behavior won’t change with the current group and their skewed philosophies. It’s a shame. And the AAA or Flighting methods are just two of many examples to highlight this.
LOL. Time to morph the argument again JackBender? Not the sharpest tool, eh? It’s easy to see when Mr. Wordsmith starts with the.......â€well, the main point is†or “regardlessâ€.
Here is the truth. Youth hockey in California has NEVER been more healthy. There are more kids playing at all levels and more competitive teams fielded than EVER before. I’ve never said CAHA or the Sharks are perfect. Far from it but it’s ridiculous all the whining and complaining that happens on these boards. Enjoy the journey as the road for all of these kids leads to beer league (which is awesome by the way).
I don’t know who the coach is that came on but just because he provides an opinion or shares a conversation also doesn’t mean that the content is an absolute truth. Of course there is only 1 goalie, 1 PP group, 1 PK group, 1 set of top D. How often do you think they are out there in a 14 to 0 game? You want / need competitive games. 3-2, 1-0 not 10-0 or 13-2. That’s what the flight system tried to address. That’s why they make it hard for organizations to field AAA teams. It’s not easy to pull off.
I really do appreciate the back and forth. Certainly has added to board traffic which seems way down this year.
I know the coach so my suggestion to you is to listen to him and not discount his opinion.
Definitely not discounting the opinion. Just trying to make the point that it’s an opinion. Many ways to skin a cat as the saying goes. Many ways to have success in hockey. I know the coach has a website. I’ll take a look for sure.
-
Right. More kids in California are playing hockey now than ever. And that’s somehow connected to CAHA. Because of the wonderful job CAHA has done expanding, nurturing and promoting the game. Always putting the kids first. Serving all the clubs, big or small. Really PUSHING the game statewide for everyone.
Way to go, CAHA. Way to go.
I’m sure it has nothing to do with the NHL initiative to expand the game. The visibility of the game on TV and streaming services. The statewide investments made by the Ducks/Kings to build rinks. Refurbish rinks. Start early development programs like the Lil Ducks and Lil Kings. I’m sure it has NOTHING to do with that.
It’s CAHA. It’s definitely CAHA. They’re the ones. Thanks for the sales video, CAHA shill.
Oh, and the argument is the same. It has always been the same. Clearly laid out. Told several different ways.
Enjoy the playoffs... and pray USA Hockey doesn’t show up in Clovis for an audit.
-
Here is the truth. Youth hockey in California has NEVER been more healthy. There are more kids playing at all levels and more competitive teams fielded than EVER before.
disagree
there are fewer tier teams now than 5-6 years ago. look it up
160+ tier-caliber kids are playing out of state this season. that is NOT healthy
only one california team has advanced to playoffs at nationals last five years (lost in quarters).
positive things: new facilities, girls numbers up, adhsl. caha has nothing to do with those. squirt and pw numbers also are healthy, but will be interesting to watch trend now that kings stink instead of winning cups.
imho caha needs to prioritize expanding opportunities for kids and providing compelling reasons to stay rather than leave state in bantam/midget years. cheers
-
Here is the truth. Youth hockey in California has NEVER been more healthy. There are more kids playing at all levels and more competitive teams fielded than EVER before. I’ve never said CAHA or the Sharks are perfect. Far from it but it’s ridiculous all the whining and complaining that happens on these boards. Enjoy the journey as the road for all of these kids leads to beer league (which is awesome by the way).
ALL hockey leads to Beer league if you play the game long enough. For some people the Beer league includes ex-NHL and former D1, Jr. and euro, swedish and finnish pros. Meaningless defeatist slogan truth be told. There is nothing wrong with kids having a dream, and goals that might exceed their grasp when all is said and done. And yet there are kids who grew up playing youth hockey in Cali who have been in the NHL recently, will eventually be in the NHL, or are in the NHL currently. I'm not going to list them, and it's also besides the point. Many kids play AAA in states around the country, and California is the only state I know of that artificially restricts and depresses the number of teams. The ratio of AAA players to total players is far below that of the more established hockey leagues and systems and the guidelines set out by USA Hockey. Once again, CAHA is run by people who think they know something that nobody else around the country does.
I don’t know who the coach is that came on but just because he provides an opinion or shares a conversation also doesn’t mean that the content is an absolute truth. Of course there is only 1 goalie, 1 PP group, 1 PK group, 1 set of top D. How often do you think they are out there in a 14 to 0 game?
If you actually bothered to read what was written, the coach related what D1 & D3 college coaches are saying.
You want / need competitive games. 3-2, 1-0 not 10-0 or 13-2. That’s what the flight system tried to address. That’s why they make it hard for organizations to field AAA teams. It’s not easy to pull off.
It's a fantasy that people with no apparent experience talk about. The wonderful magical world of complete parity. When you look at just about any division anywhere with 6-8 teams or more, you're going to find that someone comes in first and someone comes in last, and more often than not there's a median point where goal differential is positive vs. negative.
Before the institution of Tier2 Flighting, there were teams that were pushed down. The mechanics already existed, and if anything CAHA has been less successful in negotiating with those teams since the Flighting began. And of course there are the teams that wanted to drop and were forced not to....
The issue is that CAHA's tier2 evaluation has missed the mark for 2 out of 2 years now, as well as the fact that Tier2/Flight2 bears no resemblance to Tier2 competition throughout the rest of the country and is the kludgiest and worst implemented ruleset that exists in youth hockey.
As I also stated clearly there is a simple improvement if people insist, and that is to transition to Tier2 Birthyear divisions, which in general predict the relative level of competition in Tier2 year over year at both Peewee and Bantam. We can use WW as an example, even though WW is no different than most Tier2 teams in amount of flux the team experiences:
-Won state championship with primarily PW Major team
-Allocated to Flight2 as First year Bantams
-Top half of Flight1 Bantams with mostly '04 team
You could look at the strong teams in PWAA as well, and see that the majority of the top teams are primarily '06
There will always be hybrid teams that have a foot in each camp, but it should come as a surprise to noone that the bottom Bantam AA Flight2 teams are primarily minor year with a few '04's and that the primarily '04 teams like the Saints, GSE2, Bears1 and WW have beat up on the bottom group. CAHA knew the constitution of the teams and still rushed to put 2 core '05 teams into Flight1 and look how that worked out.
CAHA's goal with this system and many of these rules is all about discouraging AAA teams and many AA teams. That this would be by design speaks for itself. CAHA should be a neutral party rather than the Godfather bestowing its blessings on the biggest programs and meddling and discouraging the smaller clubs at every turn. It's laughably predictable that CAHA's latest fiasco is trying to browbeat the 8th place Wave PWAA team over their participation in the most illustrious PW tournament in youth hockey, in completely needless fashion. That's how CAHA and their little buddies in SCAHA roll -- never missing a chance to make parents angry apparently.
-
Great post Icadad. Let me quote part of it:
"ALL hockey leads to Beer league if you play the game long enough. For some people the Beer league includes ex-NHL and former D1, Jr. and euro, swedish and finnish pros. Meaningless defeatist slogan truth be told. There is nothing wrong with kids having a dream, and goals that might exceed their grasp when all is said and done. And yet there are kids who grew up playing youth hockey in Cali who have been in the NHL recently, will eventually be in the NHL, or are in the NHL currently. I'm not going to list them, and it's also besides the point. Many kids play AAA in states around the country, and California is the only state I know of that artificially restricts and depresses the number of teams. The ratio of AAA players to total players is far below that of the more established hockey leagues and systems and the guidelines set out by USA Hockey. Once again, CAHA is run by people who think they know something that nobody else around the country does."
Our son, a Bantam '05 had the good fortune to play in the SCAHA and CAHA selects. Both experiences were the best and most fun he has had in 7 years of hockey. He would not be sad to see more of that kind of hockey experience for players who do not fit the AAA profile.
At the SCAHA selects there were 4 teams of about 22-24 players including goal keepers. There were some A players and a good sample of AA and AAA players. The quality of play seemed to me to be definitely better skill than either flight 1 or 2 in terms of passing, skating, and shooting albeit not as physical as the top 4 or 5 of flight 1 CAHA teams. Some of that is just physical maturity. The AAA players probably pulled the AA closer to their quality and style of play. If correct, that may be the key.
At least 4 AAA '05 teams could be created in SCAHA and since there were a number of very good players who did not tryout, there is probably enough talent for a 5th and maybe a 6th team.
We have attended summer camps in Minnesota and Canada and our better AA players can hold their own with their AAA cohort outside of California.
If the big clubs feel threatened by this expansion of AAA hockey, let them field two teams in each birth year if they can attract the talent. The Saints, OC, Wave, Ice Dogs, Gold Rush and maybe others could, in time, field competitive AAA teams for each age group.
At the CAHA selects, the play was slightly but not necessarily dramatically better. There was a goal keeper from a remote part of Northern Cal hockey-wise who plays Bantam B. There are hidden gems out there and one of the goals of the associations should be to create a ways to recognize and nurture that talent. The current system may recognize talent through selects but is not nurturing it effectively.
Six AAA '05 AAA teams would go a long ways toward upgrading the quality of play and the development of individual talent. It would allow current AAA parents to save money on travel and keep their sons at home for a few more years before juniors or university. If there is fear about dilution of play, the best teams travel still travel as much as they do now. My guess is that there would be fewer blowouts than with the existing system of tier play.
-
California only has about 10 kids a year with the skills to play real jrs and D1. So what purpose would more AAA teams provide? Skilled kids make a team AAA, a AAA team won’t give a unskilled kid skills. CA should only have 1 AAA team. There is no way AA CA kids are equal or better then MN top kids. MN does not play AAA during the winter except for Gentry. They have a fall tier 1 league representing the MN Hockey Districts that play enough games against each other to qualify for nationals. Each fall MN sends some regular association bantam AA teams to the Chicago Invite and they play in the elite division. There are no CA AA teams playing at that level. The CA AAA teams don’t even do very well in that division. MN high school hockey is 2 classes AA and A. Some of the AA teams have more D1 commits then the whole stat of CA. If CA players could compete with MN players, CA teams would go to MN and play MN teams. Instead of going to MN and playing non MN teams. Tahoe has a MN team in their league Northstar academy, which has blown Tahoe out both times they’ve played. Northstars goalie wasn’t even the starter for his mid level class A high school team(that’s why he went to Northstar). The teams that MN sends to the high school nationals are made up of kids that were cut from their respective high schools jv teams, meaning the team is the third highest team in that town. And they play against the best HS’s in CA. That’s how far CA is from competing against real hockey markets. It’s not a organization that’s holding back CA hockey players, it’s the skills of the CA hockey player that is holding them back. There is a CA kid playing on UofMN hockey team, proving that good kids will move on.
-
California only has about 10 kids a year with the skills to play real jrs and D1. So what purpose would more AAA teams provide? Skilled kids make a team AAA, a AAA team won’t give a unskilled kid skills. CA should only have 1 AAA team. There is no way AA CA kids are equal or better then MN top kids. MN does not play AAA during the winter except for Gentry. They have a fall tier 1 league representing the MN Hockey Districts that play enough games against each other to qualify for nationals. Each fall MN sends some regular association bantam AA teams to the Chicago Invite and they play in the elite division. There are no CA AA teams playing at that level. The CA AAA teams don’t even do very well in that division. MN high school hockey is 2 classes AA and A. Some of the AA teams have more D1 commits then the whole stat of CA. If CA players could compete with MN players, CA teams would go to MN and play MN teams. Instead of going to MN and playing non MN teams. Tahoe has a MN team in their league Northstar academy, which has blown Tahoe out both times they’ve played. Northstars goalie wasn’t even the starter for his mid level class A high school team(that’s why he went to Northstar). The teams that MN sends to the high school nationals are made up of kids that were cut from their respective high schools jv teams, meaning the team is the third highest team in that town. And they play against the best HS’s in CA. That’s how far CA is from competing against real hockey markets. It’s not a organization that’s holding back CA hockey players, it’s the skills of the CA hockey player that is holding them back. There is a CA kid playing on UofMN hockey team, proving that good kids will move on.
This is a thoughtful and informed post and maybe correct. How then do we explain the difference between CA and MN kids? Is it cold weather and free ice? Better genes? Coaching, but if that then access to free ice is less important? Higher level of competition? Too many distractions for CA hockey players? I don't think it is ordained that MN kids will be consistently better than CA kids. A kid's hockey future is not determined by age 6! There is a lot that good coaching, ice time, and the highest possible level of competition can do to help CA kids develop. CAHA and if you are correct, local clubs, isn't getting it done. Maybe it is self-delusion but I think 5-6 AAA teams would make a difference but for institutional and internal political reasons, it isn't happening nor are any other initiatives being explored. Your answer leaves me thinking that if your son or daughter wants to be an ice hockey player, parents should buy them a surfboard.
-
Why does this always come back to D1 or NHL? Many kids just want to keep challenging themselves by playing at a higher level? Kids that want to work hard- shocking, right? But they exist, and in significant numbers. And they do this despite the “you’re from CA so give up now†stuff they hear.
-
A level kids work just as hard as AAA level kids. The difference is skill. So why would more AAA teams create better hockey players when the 3 current one only move 10 on a year? Seems like a waste of money for the rest of the AAA players, when they could have worked just as hard and had just as much fun playing AA hockey. Playing against better competition didn’t help the majority of current AAA kids that didn’t move on. Why would more AAA teams help the kids currently playing AA? In the example above with MN HS having a varsity,jv, and jr gold teams. The jr gold kids work just as hard and have just as much fun playing hockey as do the varsity kids. They are just not as skilled, but the funny thing is those parents don’t blame MN Hockey for holding their kid back. The ones that do blame go to places like Northstar Academy and Soiux Falls Power AAA and teams like that.
-
Kicksave, Yes. That is one of the great benefits of ice hockey or any sport.
-
Oh sorry - I’m not saying kids at A don’t work hard. However... since “hard work pays offâ€, those kids wind up improving, and they may want a higher level of challenge. I know many such kids. They’re constantly met with, “Oh no one is going pro from Californiaâ€. It’s ridiculous.
-
You’re delusional if you think an A player works just as hard as a AAA player. Do you really think that the AAA players were just born with that amount of skill? Or is it more probable that they worked harder and dedicated more hours on ice, off ice and in the gym because they wanted to achieve their AAA goal? A goal attainable by very few in California because CAHA limits the spots available. So a lot of kids that are willing to work harder and put in the additional effort and raise their skill to that level will never reap the benefits.
-
California only has about 10 kids a year with the skills to play real jrs and D1. So what purpose would more AAA teams provide? Skilled kids make a team AAA, a AAA team won’t give a unskilled kid skills. CA should only have 1 AAA team. There is no way AA CA kids are equal or better then MN top kids. MN does not play AAA during the winter except for Gentry. They have a fall tier 1 league representing the MN Hockey Districts that play enough games against each other to qualify for nationals. Each fall MN sends some regular association bantam AA teams to the Chicago Invite and they play in the elite division. There are no CA AA teams playing at that level. The CA AAA teams don’t even do very well in that division. MN high school hockey is 2 classes AA and A. Some of the AA teams have more D1 commits then the whole stat of CA. If CA players could compete with MN players, CA teams would go to MN and play MN teams. Instead of going to MN and playing non MN teams. Tahoe has a MN team in their league Northstar academy, which has blown Tahoe out both times they’ve played. Northstars goalie wasn’t even the starter for his mid level class A high school team(that’s why he went to Northstar). The teams that MN sends to the high school nationals are made up of kids that were cut from their respective high schools jv teams, meaning the team is the third highest team in that town. And they play against the best HS’s in CA. That’s how far CA is from competing against real hockey markets. It’s not a organization that’s holding back CA hockey players, it’s the skills of the CA hockey player that is holding them back. There is a CA kid playing on UofMN hockey team, proving that good kids will move on.
your observations about MN are absolutely true. but california is not minnesota, nor is any other state. let's stick with southern california.
your estimate that 10 kids per year have the talent is low. the number is closer to two-and-a-half to three times that, going back to at least the 95s. obviously, some birth years are stronger than others, but right now in the 1998 class, I count 18 playing or committed to NCAA D1, 3 playing D3 and 8 playing junior A in NAHL& BCHL -- total of 29 kids. The numbers in the 1999 class are virtually identical: 18 D1, 3 D3 and 10 in legit jrs (including 2 in USHL). 2000 class is weaker, but 2001 class is strong: there already are 15 D1 commits, 2 kids in the WHL, and easily another dozen with at least junior a/d3 potential.
now, if you historically have at least 30 kids per year with sufficient talent, and a goal to grow the number in future years, where do those kids go to get the crucial first-line/first d-pairing opportunities when there are only 2 aaa teams in so cal? where does the third best goalie in the class go? where does the talented kid stuck behind the son of nhl-dad coach go? unless caha permits more teams, those kids go elsewhere. that's a shame.
the rationale behind kneecapping the titans, wave and gulls aaa teams was crap. every one of those clubs moved kids to the next level, which is the *only* thing that should matter at aaa. if jk didn't want to play those clubs 3 times a year, fine, eliminate regular season games and just hold a february tournament weekend to determine who moves on to districts. then you could spend all your time jetting back east to play t1elite, while letting the other clubs do what they do.
-
MN examples were used cause previous poster said CA AA kids match up well with MN AAA players. I was showing how the best CA high school teams(with ex NHLr kid and AAA players) gets beat by MN kids cut from jv. Everyone say you can’t use MN as a example but why not? Paul Martin coms from a town of 15000 that last year had 3 players players in the NHL. The association has 3 bantam teams and all district games are within a hour drive. They play 3-4 tournaments with 1-2 being a 2-4 hour drive away and the other ones being local. Every year a couple of teams from their will dominate and a couple will get blown out. No big deal it’s not about winning but development. Why couldn’t CA have city leagues with A,B,and C. Balance teams at the clubs based on those levels and have the kids play each other. City champs move on to state. Ice time will always be expensive in CA, but take away all the travel time and money and you might grow the game. I used 10 cause CA has roughly 40 kids currently playing D1.
If a kid currently playing 3rd line can’t make 2nd line is it cause he’s not working hard or not as skilled. If only 30 kids are going to move on to the next level from 3 AAA teams. How come the other 30 aren’t, Lack of hard work or they didn’t have a he skill set? Or maybe the 30 that didn’t only had the goal of playing AAA and not higher. If you take the current bottom AAA kids and form another team are those kids now skilled AAA first liners or will it be a weak AAA team? Yes there top kids currently playing AA that could replace the bottom AAA kids. The end result will be the same with those kids not moving on either.
-
Read Gladwell. You’ll find out that everything you are saying here is false. A kids don’t work as hard. If they do. they move up. The better competition and coaching makes a difference. A system run by people who work half as hard or are half as creative with their desire to see Caha rise would prosper. A system that blames its own failings on the kids they have to work with is a lost cause. Lost CaHa.
-
I wish I had bought my kid a surfboard.
-
Pop,
I don't even know what to say to you. Minnesota doesn't even play the same age groups as the rest of the country. For example, Peewee in Minnesota is kids who have birthdays between June 30, 2007 and July 1, 2005. What this means is that kids that would be midgets elsewhere are Bantams in MN, depending on their birthdate. Everything in Minnesota is community based, since the apex of the system is high school hockey. That is not the case pretty much anywhere else in the country. There is no point in comparing or talking about minnesota youth hockey in comparison to the rest of the country, because the system is different and not applicable or replica-table anywhere that doesn't have hundreds of community rinks where schools play their hockey.
-
MN has almost 19,000 kids playing hockey at 8U, CA has about 3500.
-
Any thoughts on Kings 1 winning play-in over Kings 2 to qualify for playdowns? Kings 1 was originally slated to be the '04 Kings AA team (in flight 1) and Kings 2 to be '05 (in flight 2). Internal politics, etc changed that plan and Kings 1 ended up winning flight 2 & Kings 2 placed 8th with 2-3 wins in flight 2 (only against the 9th place & 7th place teams).
-
Any thoughts on Kings 1 winning play-in over Kings 2 to qualify for playdowns? Kings 1 was originally slated to be the '04 Kings AA team (in flight 1) and Kings 2 to be '05 (in flight 2). Internal politics, etc changed that plan and Kings 1 ended up winning flight 2 & Kings 2 placed 8th with 2-3 wins in flight 2 (only against the 9th place & 7th place teams).
Pretty much the first point of this thread. At least 4 of the teams in Flight2 (Kings1, Saints2, Ducks1, Flyers) are/were as good as the Kings2, Bears2 and GSE2.
This should not have been a surprise to anyone who looked at the Jamboree scores. As one example, Kings2 beat Flyers and Bears2 by 1 goal in the jamboree. Said Jamboree was pretty ridiculous but anyone who saw the Kings/Flyers games would have seen a very close contest. For the Flyers it was literally their 1st game for the team, as they had not even had a scrimmage prior. They still were evaluating whether certain players would be on offense vs. defense. Later in the Jamboree Flyers beat Kings1 by 1 goal.
What then does CAHA turn around and do, before the weekend is even concluded from rumors i was hearing? They anointed Bears2 (and Kings2) to Flight1 and put Flyers, Ducks1 and Kings1 in Flight2. Idiotic would be too kind of a term for the decision making process in light of the jamboree system, and this was during a year where you couldn't even find out the frigging scores from the Jamboree. There was one team in Flight2 that got crushed. They had a hard time in the Jamboree and I'm sure the parents would now agree they should have dropped. Otherwise, Bantam AA would have been a better experience for everyone without Flighting, and certainly for the four flight2 teams that CAHA screwed over.
The problem is that this has happened both years now, where teams have gotten placed in Flight2 when they belonged in Flight1. CAHA has shown they are inept at best, and politically motivated at worst. The main difference this year is that the Kings and Ducks got a taste of it.
-
Well, the greatest criticism of the Flight system is probably that it doesn't predict development throughout the season. Some teams get better, and some don't. Kings 1 are probably the stronger team now because they've been winning all season, gaining confidence... while it could be argued that the Kings 2 suffered from the opposite.
I like the Flight system in many ways... but basing placement on preconceptions of the kids/teams and a twenty-minute eye test in early September is not very smart or fair. Icadad's point has been that teams get better... so instead of over-reaching and manipulating the process like always, CAHA should just let the process naturally work its way out. I tend to agree with that now.
The CAHA shills will say it was that way and people complained... but so what? Let them complain. I tend to support a hands off approach. Let it work itself out on its own, like it always does.
So if parents/organizations want their teams to get pounded week after week... that's on them. But don't manipulate the system. Unfortunately, as usual, CAHA just can't help themselves.
-
Right on Mr. Bender!
-
- Each AAA team can ONLY have 1 starting goalie, 1 top line, 1 primary PP, 1 primary PK, 1 top D-pair, etc. So the comment to me this past summer from a group of NCAA D1 coaches was "if everyone knows this, why is California going the opposite direction? We would like to see them expand to double or triple the number of AAA teams so that more players get developed for the next level and eventually for us at the D1 level." - that should be the ONLY type of input people need to be convinced of how to develop more players.
this one of the most important things posted on the is board in a long time. one reason why many kids are leaving the state in droves is because CAHA is purposefully reducing opportunities for kids. Dumb. They should be doing the opposite. Thank you Brad hamacher.
So will they be adding 2nd and 3rd lines of kids who could be playing top line minutes in AA to these new teams?
-
There are only 13 kids from CA playing in the USHL, and about 40 playing D1(around 10 a year). Of the USHL kids only 2 came from prep, 1 From SSM and 1 from CIH. 6 of those kids came from CA AAA (Ducks and Kings and 1 from Grizzly's) 1 from CYA and one from NJ AAA. And 3 didn't list where they played. Of those 13 about 5 are only playing minimal minutes and games(1 with only 5 games played). Only a couple D1 teams have more then one CA kid on the roster. I find it hard to believe that a group of D1 coaches are coming to CA and talking about the lack of AAA in the state. What schools were the coaches from? USHL puts more kids in D1 and is the only tier 1 jr league in USA. NAHL and BCHL move kids on, but much less then USHL. If only 13 CA kids are good enough to make the USHL, where are all these skilled CA kids that will make up another team? If there are AA kids skilled enough to play in the USHL he will be dominating AA. Just because a team is AAA (sharks) doesn't mean the kids are good enough to move on. The Sharks are a low ranking AAA team with no alum playing in the USHL, but is there a CA AA team that can beat them? Are there any AA kids that should be playing 1st line AAA? You can see by numbers you better be 1st line if you have any chance of moving on, and even most of the 1st line kids don't move on. I don't think any kids skilled enough to move on are being passed over.
-
Pop... judging from your past posts, you seem to have an agenda. You should just say what it is.
My agenda is that I think the governing body should help grow the game... not restrict it. If clubs fail trying to ice certain teams, that's on them. Why should CAHA care? They should be encouraging opportunity, and they should be reasonable and flexible to every club's needs and desires. That's what a good governing body does. They adapt to the market... not inhibit it. It's not CAHA's job to ice teams... it's their job to expand the game and allow everyone to flourish.
Expand the game. Allow teams to have freedom. This shouldn't be scary to anyone... unless you have an agenda (which CAHA does, and I suspect you do as well).
-
There are only 13 kids from CA playing in the USHL, and about 40 playing D1(around 10 a year). Of the USHL kids only 2 came from prep, 1 From SSM and 1 from CIH. 6 of those kids came from CA AAA (Ducks and Kings and 1 from Grizzly's) 1 from CYA and one from NJ AAA. And 3 didn't list where they played. Of those 13 about 5 are only playing minimal minutes and games(1 with only 5 games played). Only a couple D1 teams have more then one CA kid on the roster. I find it hard to believe that a group of D1 coaches are coming to CA and talking about the lack of AAA in the state. What schools were the coaches from? USHL puts more kids in D1 and is the only tier 1 jr league in USA. NAHL and BCHL move kids on, but much less then USHL. If only 13 CA kids are good enough to make the USHL, where are all these skilled CA kids that will make up another team? If there are AA kids skilled enough to play in the USHL he will be dominating AA. Just because a team is AAA (sharks) doesn't mean the kids are good enough to move on. The Sharks are a low ranking AAA team with no alum playing in the USHL, but is there a CA AA team that can beat them? Are there any AA kids that should be playing 1st line AAA? You can see by numbers you better be 1st line if you have any chance of moving on, and even most of the 1st line kids don't move on. I don't think any kids skilled enough to move on are being passed over.
Your comment here and others suggest that development is over by age 13 or so. If that is true, why do many D1 coaches prefer older players. Harvard, for example, has players who are 24-25 years old. The logic, presumably, is not body development since most D1 football and basketball players to directly from high school. Many D1 elite football players who are drafted by the NFL need a year or two to fully development. But if the argument is that it is not about physical development or athleticism but the complexity of the game and the diverse skills that it requires, then development is on-going for those who reach D1 and it is not all over at age 13 or 15.
Even if you can argue that it is all over at age 13, you implicitly assume that the process of selecting AAA kids if perfectly rational and is absent any factors such as politics, distance from the arena, or parental financial status.
-
The guy has an agenda... likely a CAHA shill, like Gas, sent here to help deflect/distract the CAHA flogging taking place.
-
Can we please stop with the numbers, for most us it’s about options (clubs and especially coaching staffs) and not just promoting the 3 NHL affiliated clubs. We as the cunsumer should have more options. My kid is not going to a D1 school nor to the NHL but I would still like him to be given the opportunity to play at the highest level and compete. Even if this means his team would have a low national ranking.
-
I’m saying talent is the most important. The USHL is the top jr league in US that develope talented kids and only 13 kids from CA play in that league and none come from east coast prep. People on this site talk as if going east is a good option for CA kids to go D1 and that you can just create a great player. More CA kids playing in the USHL come from CA AAA and none from the Sharks. The reason CA kids don’t move on is they don’t have the talent to move on. YHow come the only CA kid from US prep came from SSM? And none from prep out east? Of the 40 D1 players from CA you’d be surprised by the lack of prep school representation. How come 4 kids can go from the Ducks to the USHL and not the rest? Did the 4 get better coaching? More Exposure? Work harder? Or have more talent? If a top line AAA kid gets passed over because of politics or whatever. He would dominate AA. You have to be a top player at one level before you move up to the next. If your not a top 14 year old player in CA, where do you think they will rank in Mass? I’m for as many AAA teams as the market allows, but to think that’s the reason kids don’t move on is not true.
-
I’m for as many AAA teams as the market allows, but to think that’s the reason kids don’t move on is not true.
No one thinks or believes that.
People leave the state because there is limited competition at AAA, travel costs are too high, and the opportunity to play AAA is miniscule. This is because of CAHA's political games. Everyone wants to be seen, everyone wants an opportunity... and as Hamacher (a player, coach, father) pointed out, scouts/recruiters place bias on kids not playing AAA. Fair or not, parents believe this... so they ship their kids East.
Is this right or wrong? That's not the discussion. The discussion is about the limits CAHA is unnecessarily implementing on clubs desiring to offer AAA hockey. CAHA has suppressed or destroyed every AAA program not affiliated with an NHL club. That's called "market manipulation" and it's not good for anyone... especially their constituency, the consumer.
-
Pop, you still assume that it a player's fate is fixed by age 13 if not a lot sooner. Why doesn't the NHL just have a draft of 10 year olds and be done with it.
Let the rest of us move on and spend more time at the beach. Maybe we should just have local teams, forget private stick-times and travel to lovely Vacaville for CAHA Weekends? Or better yet, we could just serve up beer for in-house youth leagues; it is never too soon for kids to accept their fate and learn their place in life.
To take you seriously, maybe youth hockey in California is like selling high priced real estate on the Moon. The sad thing is that this may be true.
-
Although I generally agree that more options is usually better, I don't think CAHA is wrong in limiting the number of AAA teams. You have to have certain standards. Sorry Defenders, but just because I would like my kid to play at Wimbledon or the Masters doesn't mean that they should let him in. By the way, how many programs have applied to CAHA for AAA status and been denied?
If your kid is good enough and wants it badly enough, he will be noticed whether he's playing at AAA or B. Maybe not this year, but next year, or the year after.
I keep hearing about Cali kids leaving in "droves." Who are they? It's easy to say that, but what's the evidence for it? And, if they're leaving it's not because of CAHA, but to go to prep school.
-
If your kid is good enough and wants it badly enough, he will be noticed whether he's playing at AAA or B. Maybe not this year, but next year, or the year after.
If your player is in the top 5% or 75-100 players in their age group or if they are in MN, MI, IL, or MA, this is 100% true.
For everyone else, including the 300+ more D1 Commits from your age group, this is the biggest lie in hockey. But it does make people feel good about their path decisions......
-
If you're not in top 5% of your age group you're not going to D1.
I repeat, if you're good enough and work hard enough you will be noticed and climb the ladder.
Stop making excuses. CAHA is not holding anybody back.
-
The biggest lie in hockey is that hamacher checking camp is worth the money.
There.
I pissed in your pool.
We are both probably right but it doesn’t feel good to crap on the dreams of others.
-
You’re right. Caha is not holding back the most physically gifted and driven players in every age group by their decisions.
If the goal is to not hamper kids who are in the very top categories of maturity, determination and money then they are doing the job well.
If they are looking to serve a diverse population of kids who have different levels and circumstances to become better and thrive, they have missed the mark.
Let’s hope you’re right and they only care about a very small piece of the pie. It takes them from incompetence to flaming victors just by narrowing the mandate.
-
Umm... yeah they are... by placing limits on the AAA teams. That's the whole point. Read the entire thread... with numbers upon numbers upon numbers to prove that CAHA is unnecessarily manipulating youth hockey.
Again... what is so scary about allowing teams to do as they please?
Look at the numbers. When there were no limits, SoCal teams were WINNING NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. With limits, THEY ARE NOT.
Give the teams freedom. If they suck and are not competitive, no one will join the teams in subsequent years. People are not stupid. But CAHA treats people like they are morons need to be limited... because CAHA knows best.
-
The biggest lie in hockey is that hamacher checking camp is worth the money.
There.
I pissed in your pool.
We are both probably right but it doesn’t feel good to crap on the dreams of others.
I think you missed my point. The 300 other additional D1 commits I mentioned have to do extraordinary, and I do mean extraordinary, things to overcome "not being found". I have a tremendous amount of respect and encouragement for those guys. Had they stayed put and just quit because "they weren't good enough" and accepted "not being found", they never would have overcome massive adversity and achieved. Is that clearer?
-
If this was the point you were making in the first post then a retract my sarcasm and agree.
-
Jack B-how many AAA applications has CAHA turned down?
Which specific kids have had their hockey development limited because there are only 3 AAA teams or because of the 2 flight system?
What is wrong with playing AA?
HCC-just curious: what do you mean "300 other additional commits"?
How many D1 programs are there: 50-60?
let's say 70 teams-25 players a team over 5 years -that's 350 D1 spaces a year total
-
I dont have my sheet in front of me but I think there were 432 or 436 freshman this year. [size=78%]That is the number in my head. I will double check and get back[/size]
-
You’re right. Caha is not holding back the most physically gifted and driven players in every age group by their decisions.
If the goal is to not hamper kids who are in the very top categories of maturity, determination and money then they are doing the job well.
If they are looking to serve a diverse population of kids who have different levels and circumstances to become better and thrive, they have missed the mark.
Let’s hope you’re right and they only care about a very small piece of the pie. It takes them from incompetence to flaming victors just by narrowing the mandate.
-
Landshark-what specific things should CAHA should do to promote the game better and who should pay for it?
-
Jack B-how many AAA applications has CAHA turned down?
Which specific kids have had their hockey development limited because there are only 3 AAA teams or because of the 2 flight system?
What is wrong with playing AA?
First, you should do some research on your own, or read the previous posts closer. A very clear picture has been drawn with facts and conclusive motives.
For the 2016-2017 season CAHA did not list which teams got denied. But if you read the meeting minutes, you will see that for the 2017-2018 season Titans (2), Jr Flyers and GSE were all denied.
For me to list specific kids, that is both ridiculous and against the forum rules. Read the previous posts more closely, the numbers are given. But if you have any awareness of the landscape, you should be perfectly aware of the talent leaving California after Bantam. Not even the CAHA shills deny that fact.
There is nothing wrong with playing AA. But that should be the choice of the kid and the parent... not the governing body. If Kings want to ice five AAA teams, then they should be able to do that... and the same is true for the Maple Leafs or Vacaville Jets.
Don't lose focus... we're all simply saying that CAHA should be nurturing hockey in California. Expanding it. Not limiting it.
What exactly is your problem with allowing the market to dictate the limits? No one seems to want to answer this.
-
Landshark-what specific things should CAHA should do to promote the game better and who should pay for it?
I'll answer... take off the limits. And it doesn't cost anything. In fact, it would actually SAVE everyone TONS of money to have more AAA teams. In 2015, there were 10 AAA teams at 16U. 10. That's a lot. Yeah, the bottom teams sucked... but the final standings were perfectly symmetrical, just like every other division. There are now 3 teams at 16U. And that costs EVERYONE tons of money to play games... out of the state. And guess what happens the following year? Yes, everyone leaves because it's cheaper just to move the kid back east.
THAT IS THE PROBLEM!!! AND IT IS ONE CAHA CREATED!!! STARTING WITH 11U!!!
-
Because AAA is supposed to be the highest level of hockey and you end up having to play teams that aren't very good and vice versa. For example, just ask the PW kings and Ducks how much they like playing the jr sharks. Just ask the Jr sharks how much they like getting beaten 11-0 every game by those teams. Just ask the kids and parents on the old wildcats AAA teams how much they liked getting smoked every game.
And why should the "big clubs" spend all this time and money developing kids from mites to PW and then have somebody come along and say i want to have a Bantam AAA team and I'm going to take all the best players from the big clubs.
Why not have 78 teams in MLB or 96 in the NHL?
-
If the Sharks had competition in NoCal... they wouldn't be so bad. They'd be forced to do better. Develop better. Recruit better. Retain better. Like I said, competition weeds out incompetence. It's Business 101. But CAHA manipulates the system by granting the Sharks AAA at every level regardless of their past record.
Remove the limits. Allow nature to take its course. If that bankrupts the Sharks and puts them out of business, then they should be ran a better business. That should not be CAHA's concern. They should be unbiased. Expanding the game. Helping everyone.
Oh, and how MLB and the NHL run their leagues has NOTHING to do with youth hockey in California, so don't conflate the two.
-
I’d start with an initiative that promoted scrimmages at the AA and AAA levels. Look to mix in top AA teams into an exhibition schedule? Maybe. I’d look for relentless and creative leadership who find partners who can help fund the sport. If CAha could use its buying power to build programs that bridge a and aa in he off season. Free 3 on 3 sessions that get players of different levels to mix and be seen at a local level. YouTube channel that interviews players after games. Something hat brings attention to the sport that just takes time and not money. Newsletter that reminds people of the benefits and the new initiatives of CAHA. Each coach could video a lesson for Caha that kids can do at home. Each could be guided to develop a philosophy and a growth mindset that could be articulated and on display for parents seeking diversity of coaching. Welcome days at each club that force open a closed culture. Tryout proceedures that take some of the politics out of the process. A partnership between rinks in Canada and California. It works with businesses. Give people an affiliation and it may bring our humble kids closer to their glorious hockey awesomeness. eBay used equipment fundraiser? Visiting coach program from an international location? A rule that basic books have to be public access to be in Caha? A barrage of new ideas that make people excited about California hockey. Pick and choose and ridicule if necessary.
-
If the Sharks had competition in NoCal... they wouldn't be so bad. They'd be forced to do better. Develop better. Recruit better. Retain better. Like I said, competition weeds out incompetence. It's Business 101. But CAHA manipulates the system by granting the Sharks AAA at every level regardless of their past record.
Remove the limits. Allow nature to take its course. If that bankrupts the Sharks and puts them out of business, then they should be ran a better business. That should not be CAHA's concern. They should be unbiased. Expanding the game. Helping everyone.
Oh, and how MLB and the NHL run their leagues has NOTHING to do with youth hockey in California, so don't conflate the two.
You clearly do not follow NorCal hockey closely. We’ve also already covered this topic but once again, look at the AA teams up north. They are all pretty bad save for the GSE 14AA team. What club can magically start fielding solid AAA teams besides SJ? GSE is probably the best candidate but they fell flat on their face the last few times they tried. We all agree that the Sharks are not as advanced as the Kings or Ducks but they have pretty solid 13AAA, 14AAA, 15AAA and 16AAA teams. In fact, just this past weekend, their 14AAA, 15AAA and 16AAA teams all beat their Kings counterparts in MN. Their 14AAA and 16AAA teams were the only CA teams to make it to the semis of the Tier 1 playoffs. This gap between the California clubs is not as wide as everyone is making it out to be except at the PeeWee level and quite frankly......who cares, those kids are still wearing Superman pajamas.
-
Or maybe we should just restrict MLB to three teams? That sounds like a recipe for the best possible outcome. All three teams will be back east because only they are really good enough to play baseball.
-
I like all of Landshark's ideas-very creative. Landshark should run for CAHA Board. It's easy to bitch and moan, but more difficult to come up with specific ideas as LS has.
We can't ignore that the Big Three are the prime supporters and sources of money for amateur hockey in California. Of course, they're going to have outsize influence on CAHA. The rink owners also have their own agendas and CAHA has to be attuned to them as well.
BTW, I also like Landshark's idea of limiting MLB to three teams-although I might limit it to about 12. The baseball would be much better. Half the teams tank anyway every year. I would also go back to original six in NHL. Does anybody really want to watch the Kings play the Coyotes?
JackB-I have no idea what's going on with Jr Sharks or anything else in NorCal hockey.
I'm guessing though that if they had a bigger pool of talent to draw from as in SoCal, their management would be less incompetent.
And since you don't like my NHL or MLB analogy, how about HS football-why don't we let every school, no matter how small or bad they are at football, play in the same division as Rancho Santa Margarita or St. John's Bosco as long as the parents at the small crappy schools want that?
-
If the Sharks had competition in NoCal... they wouldn't be so bad. They'd be forced to do better. Develop better. Recruit better. Retain better. Like I said, competition weeds out incompetence. It's Business 101. But CAHA manipulates the system by granting the Sharks AAA at every level regardless of their past record.
Remove the limits. Allow nature to take its course. If that bankrupts the Sharks and puts them out of business, then they should be ran a better business. That should not be CAHA's concern. They should be unbiased. Expanding the game. Helping everyone.
Oh, and how MLB and the NHL run their leagues has NOTHING to do with youth hockey in California, so don't conflate the two.
You clearly do not follow NorCal hockey closely. We’ve also already covered this topic but once again, look at the AA teams up north. They are all pretty bad save for the GSE 14AA team. What club can magically start fielding solid AAA teams besides SJ? GSE is probably the best candidate but they fell flat on their face the last few times they tried. We all agree that the Sharks are not as advanced as the Kings or Ducks but they have pretty solid 13AAA, 14AAA, 15AAA and 16AAA teams. In fact, just this past weekend, their 14AAA, 15AAA and 16AAA teams all beat their Kings counterparts in MN. Their 14AAA and 16AAA teams were the only CA teams to make it to the semis of the Tier 1 playoffs. This gap between the California clubs is not as wide as everyone is making it out to be except at the PeeWee level and quite frankly......who cares, those kids are still wearing Superman pajamas.
Actually Ducks made it to semis too but details.
-
Gas... CAHA doesn't need to manipulate the system. It's not their job. If the Sharks fail, so what? If GSE fails, so what? If Santa Clara fails, so what? Every March the season ends, and every September the season begins again. But it is not CAHA's job to say who is good and who is bad and who should play where. That is overreaching and manipulative and a dangerous conflict of interest.
But this isn’t an opinion… it is the cornerstone of the CAHA guidebook:
28.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of CAHA, in addition to any purposes set forth in the Articles of Incorporation of the organization, is as follows:
--To encourage, foster and promote the development and growth of the sport of amateur ice hockey within the State of California.
--To conduct certain affairs of USA Hockey, to assist in the governance of the Registered Participant Members and Member Teams of USA Hockey and to regulate the sport of amateur ice hockey within the State of California.
--To encourage and develop the mental knowledge, skills, ability and sportsmanship of all participants with respect to the sport of amateur ice hockey.
--To conduct State ice hockey tournaments and to select representative Member Teams to participate in USA Hockey District, Regional and National Tournaments.
--To carry out all other responsibilities, duties and obligations imposed on CAHA pursuant to the Affiliate Agreement with USA Hockey.
Hmm. Sure doesn’t look like the guidebook calls for CAHA to be picking where teams should be playing and which clubs should be allowed to ice AAA teams, does it? They should be, you know, encouraging, fostering and promoting… not restricting. Oh, and it continues:
29.1 CAHA is and shall remain nonprofit, nonsectarian and nonpartisan.
29.2 CAHA shall not be operated in a manner which will generate pecuniary gain or profit for any Member Association or individual and is organized solely for nonprofit purposes.
29.3 No substantial part of the activities of CAHA shall be devoted to carrying on propaganda, attempting to influence legislation or becoming involved in any political activities.
Yikes. Those three are a doozy. Now we’re getting somewhere. So, by giving the three NHL affiliate clubs automatic AAA bids regardless of their performance, yet restricting every other clubs at the same time (hello, Titans!)… is that remaining nonsectarian and nonpartisan? Uh… I’m not so sure. Perhaps a lawyer should look at this? Or, you know, more appropriately, CAHA’s governing body… USA Hockey?
To many, CAHA has been moving in the wrong direction on several issues. They’ve been overreaching for years, and AAA hockey and the flighting system are two prime examples of this. CAHA should not be helping some clubs and hurting others.
-
If you're not in top 5% of your age group you're not going to D1.
I repeat, if you're good enough and work hard enough you will be noticed and climb the ladder.
Stop making excuses. CAHA is not holding anybody back.
It literally is holding people back.
-
USA Hockey Participation Statistics for California
12U 14U 16U
2009-10 1413 1380 1314
2017-18 2426 2021 1699
Purposefully reducing AAA and AA opportunities after participation rises around 50% in eight years is dumb, unless all those new participants an then some are benders. https://cdn2.sportngin.com/attachments/document/0043/6194/09-10_FINAL_REPORT_BOOK.pdf?_ga=2.24704570.1631449719.1550558036-480502214.1550558036 (https://cdn2.sportngin.com/attachments/document/0043/6194/09-10_FINAL_REPORT_BOOK.pdf?_ga=2.24704570.1631449719.1550558036-480502214.1550558036)
https://cdn3.sportngin.com/attachments/document/2210-1687681/2017-18_Final_Registration_Report.pdf?_ga=2.200954414.1631449719.1550558036-480502214.1550558036 (https://cdn3.sportngin.com/attachments/document/2210-1687681/2017-18_Final_Registration_Report.pdf?_ga=2.200954414.1631449719.1550558036-480502214.1550558036)
-
If only 13 CA kids are talented enough to play in USHL and that’s multiple birth years. And only 1 came from prep(SSM). Where are the kids that are leaving ending up? The CA AAA teams again go to MN last weekend and don’t play MN teams, why? Last weekend was the start of MN youth district tournaments and the last weekend of boys high school season. Do you think the scouts were watching the MN kids or are they going to watch some CA AAA teams play easch other? The only scouts there were paid to be there by the tournament organizers. USHL drafts kids at 16, but each team have tryout camps for the undrafted. Those camps are filled with kids who were passed over for whatever reason. Guess how many kids make the team? CA has to get a allotted number of kids to send to National Camp, meaning better kids from MN/MI are being passed over. The allotted kids from CA and other districts are drill busters. It doesn’t look good for the CA player. Soucts see this so if a kid isn’t a top AAA player they’re not interested. A 4th line grinder in the USHL was a top performer on his AAA team. Of the 13 CA USHL players 5 are 4th line bubble players getting minimal games and minutes. But those 5 were great players on their team before. If a top 15 player from CA is a bubble player in USHL and only the top 30 move on to other legitimate jr. Do you really think the 80th best kid in CA is all of a sudden going to jump into the top 30 because of the team he’s playing on? Nobody answered why only 4 JD players are made USHL and the rest didn’t even though they all had same coaching, exposure, and practices. To me it’s because only 4 had the talent. You can develop talent not create it.
-
The biggest lie in hockey is that hamacher checking camp is worth the money.
There.
I pissed in your pool.
We are both probably right but it doesn’t feel good to crap on the dreams of others.
I think you missed my point. The 300 other additional D1 commits I mentioned have to do extraordinary, and I do mean extraordinary, things to overcome "not being found". I have a tremendous amount of respect and encouragement for those guys. Had they stayed put and just quit because "they weren't good enough" and accepted "not being found", they never would have overcome massive adversity and achieved. Is that clearer?
I believe that most of the people who "make it" have to claw there way to the top. That is why they make good coaches and good people because they had to work for everything they got. The anointed ones have nothing when they get older because they do not know how to work for anything.
-
If only 13 CA kids are talented enough to play in USHL and that’s multiple birth years. And only 1 came from prep(SSM). Where are the kids that are leaving ending up? The CA AAA teams again go to MN last weekend and don’t play MN teams, why? Last weekend was the start of MN youth district tournaments and the last weekend of boys high school season. Do you think the scouts were watching the MN kids or are they going to watch some CA AAA teams play easch other?
The Minnesota system is entirely oriented around participation in High School. For that reason, their age groups are set up to match the start and end of school years so that they can have kids playing together with their class at school. It is a unique system that works for Minnesota, but isn't used anywhere else, and for that reason, rankings and head to head competition with Minnesota teams is rare.
-
North Dakota also follows this model.
-
Pop... what the hell are you rambling on about? What is your point?
Yeah, it's tough. Yeah, it's a hard road. Yeah, being in California it is hard to be seen... so of all places, California's governing body shouldn't be SUPPRESSING opportunities!
Really, CAHA should be the most progressive, most open minded, most helpful, most ambitious governing body in the country. But they're not. Not even close. They're curmudgeons like you, Pop... telling everyone they suck and that they know best and that people and clubs shouldn't even try. Oh, correction... actively and aggressively NOT ALLOW people and clubs to even try.
-
North Dakota also follows this model.
Makes sense, thanks for the update.
-
Pop... what the hell are you rambling on about? What is your point?
Yeah, it's tough. Yeah, it's a hard road. Yeah, being in California it is hard to be seen... so of all places, California's governing body shouldn't be SUPPRESSING opportunities!
Really, CAHA should be the most progressive, most open minded, most helpful, most ambitious governing body in the country. But they're not. Not even close. They're curmudgeons like you, Pop... telling everyone they suck and that they know best and that people and clubs shouldn't even try. Oh, correction... actively and aggressively NOT ALLOW people and clubs to even try.
They are behaving like the California Government. These are the same idiots...
-
Yes it’s based of school year, because playing with your friends trumps all there. But it’s also not birth year, it’s combined so bantams are 8th and 9th graders. So your saying a CA 04 AAA team can’t compete with a MN association team that might have a couple late 03s, but also has a bunch of 05s on it? Aren’t the CA kids talented enough? Wouldn’t that qualify as the higher competition that people are sending their kids east for? What games do you think the scouts in MN going to watch, CA 04s playing each other or MN bantam teams with high end 05s, 04s and a couple late 03s? What purpose does going to MN to play non MN teams serve? SSM played more teams from MN(member of MHSEL) then they do east coast prep schools. Why? Because that gives them better competition and exposure then playing the east coast teams do. And costs less! All of it is based off talent. Talented teams want to play other talented teams. Look at the teams that Sharks play. Look at the teams the bad east coast AAA teams play. Those kids aren’t moving on and they play AAA. Why? They don’t have the talent to move on. Empire played a low level MN association tournament(A-B) this winter and got smoked.
-
Pop... again, what is your point?
MN develops the game better than everyone. They provide opportunities for everyone. Because so many kids play, they can district the game. But they're NOT suppressing the game. Not at all. California produces more ELITE ATHLETES than anyone other state. Not all choose to play hockey, of course. But if they did... or at least 10% more did... California would be world beaters. Elite talent comes from elite athletes... and California has elite athletes in droves. But the governing body SUPPRESSES the game at its highest level... AAA hockey.
CAHA shouldn't. It's against the NHL's "expand the game" initiative. It's cynical. It's counterproductive. And it only hurts the consumer.
-
Growing the game means get more kids playing hockey. Not creating teams at a higher level for kids that couldn’t make a existing team at that level. How come the CA kids in the USHL were able to make it from CA AAA but the kids couldn’t make CA AAA and left for prep still can’t make the USHL?
-
Growing the game means get more kids playing hockey. Not creating teams at a higher level for kids that couldn’t make a existing team at that level. How come the CA kids in the USHL were able to make it from CA AAA but the kids couldn’t make CA AAA and left for prep still can’t make the USHL?
I don't know, let's get in our time machine and go into the future so we can see what happens in the USHL and beyond when the generation of kids actually affected by these rules and some of the brilliant rules changes in the last 3 years come of age....
-
Growing the game must happen on many fronts... and AAA is the crown jewel. Every kid who puts on a Jr Kings sweater sees the older boys in those purple sweaters... and they dream of putting one on of their own. It's special. AAA means something. It is a goal.
CAHA should be nurturing this goal. Providing opportunity. Growing the dream. Make it a big, attainable thing. Broadcast it. As a result, more will play and pursue it... instead of being told at 13 that they don't have a shot.
You're very cynical. It's not a good trait. 11 kids from the 03AAA Jr Kings team were drafted to the WHL last year. That's one team. 11 kids. Drafted. WHL. Better than the USHL. Not sure what you're talking about. Lighten up.
-
Jack B-how many AAA applications has CAHA turned down?
Which specific kids have had their hockey development limited because there are only 3 AAA teams or because of the 2 flight system?
What is wrong with playing AA?
HCC-just curious: what do you mean "300 other additional commits"?
How many D1 programs are there: 50-60?
let's say 70 teams-25 players a team over 5 years -that's 350 D1 spaces a year total
I advise players and families on this stuff as a part of my 1on1 programs so this data and line of thinking is very well researched, very well thought out, discussed with coaches and professionals across the nation including players and coaches, and gleaned from pay hockey services and paid media/journalism.
See the link below for the actual numbers and this is NCAA Div I only. The data and line of thinking is different for CHL and NCAA Div III.
The "300 additional commits" is an estimate of those players that were not good enough to be found or at least not found before age 18. In my previous statement, I said the top 5% or 75-100 players are found. That is an estimated number that are clear front runners at age 15/16 and are invited to NTDP camp, USHL tenders, early DI verbal commits, drafted USHL Phase I (Futures) draft, USAH National Camp. In my opinion, those players were "good enough to be found." If there are approx 430+ incoming NCAA Div I Freshman each season (varies by injuries, transfers, early Pro signings, etc) and the "found" players number in the 100 range, then the estimated difference is 300 or 300+. I respect there are multiple birthyear Freshman entries each fall and the numbers are not perfect because of that dynamic, but generally speaking, the data still holds. Hope that math makes sense.
There are another estimated 500-900 really good hockey players that have an uphill road and need to climb and scratch and claw their way. In some ways it is a "coin flip" whether a player ends up in DI or DIII. They have to get there by extraordinary measures and have things go their way. Many go unfound and quit along the way. Many go unfound and find other interests or don't want to wait and start college on time. There are some that refuse to leave home for academic or girlfriend or family reasons so they also go unfound. There are some that have been told playing AA is good enough and "if you are good enough, you will be found" and since NOBODY scouts AA other than pay-to-play Tier 3 hockey, they indeed are never found. There are actually many different reasons. But there will be an estimated 300 out of this group that do end up in NCAA Div I.
I did a "where are they now" from the USHL Phase I (Futures) draft analysis On November 15, 2018 and is on my FB page for those interested. Some interesting data there.
https://www.facebook.com/Hamacherhockey/photos/a.1178529588844119/2264934113536989/?type=3&theater (https://www.facebook.com/Hamacherhockey/photos/a.1178529588844119/2264934113536989/?type=3&theater)
_
-
Much good info and stats. I never knew scouts are paid to go watch. Does that happen often?
We want our kids to be provided the chance to play AAA hockey regardless of where they stand on the team top or bottom. We shouldn't have to send them away for their love of the game. Parents are doing that, not every parent thinks their kid is going places. Why can't we be afforded the chance to watch and see how they develop? Of course we all hope our kid will defy stats. And yes, of course they are headed to beer leagues, but the games that matter are when they are kids. No one comes to watch my beer league games.
These hard working players deserve the chance to play and be seen at the highest of levels. Anything less is a disservice to player and family.
-
How come the CA kids in the USHL were able to make it from CA AAA but the kids couldn’t make CA AAA and left for prep still can’t make the USHL?
Simple answer: the number of kids choosing to go the prep route really took off with the 2000 and later birth years, and most of them haven’t graduated yet. There are about a half dozen prep grad 2000s playing now in BCHL and NAHL; twice that number are still in school. I’m aware of nine 1999s who went East Coast prep (including girls); 4 are D1 commits, 2 are D3 commits, 1 still BCHL and 1 still NAHL. Good results.
-
So now that the mostly meaningless regular season is over, the real season begins tomorrow. Good luck to everyone making the trek. Dont expect many upsets, but I would say the team that come out with best effort will move on.
-
Hmmm If Kings 1 is now in the playdowns in Vacaville this weekend, but they have a scheduled SCAHA game tomorrow against the Gulls what happens to Kings1 if they don’t show up for their scheduled SCAHA game? Are they allowed to forfeit or reschedule or are they too being forced to send some kids back to play that game or their coach will be suspended?
It was actually HC suspended for a YEAR and the club BARRED from Tier hockey for a year. Guess we'll see, won't we. My guess is that it'll be canceled and never spoken of again... kind of like the PWAA Ducks 2/Maple Leafs SCAHA game that was canceled (over Maple Leaf objection) so that Ducks 2 wouldn't have to play two games (which did NOT conflict) on the same day they were playing the Wave team.
-
Kings are above the law, didn't you know?
-
This has been a really amusing thread to catch up on. Not sure what has been funnier, the Jr Sharks bashing, or the lack of understanding of the world of AAA.
First the Jr Sharks. True they are rarely as good as the Ducks, and struggle with the Kings. The AAA landscape looks like the following based on myhockeyrankings (which is not great, but it's the best we have.) You can break down the rankings into three parts, with 'grey areas' between them. Within these sections, on any given day, any team can beat any other. Playing 'up' a section is always a struggle. Playing 'down' a section, an easy game. This seems to be true at almost every AAA level:
At the top of the rankings you have about 15-20 teams that can be considered 'elite'.
From roughly positions 20 through 50 you have what most people would consider 'good' AAA teams.
From about 60 on, you have AAA teams that are struggling. 'Bad' teams. At the bottom you usually have 10-20 teams that shouldn't be in AAA.
The Ducks are almost always in the first section. The Kings are typically in that grey area between 1 and 2, and the Sharks are almost always in the second section. So yes, the sharks struggle with the kings and ducks.
There are many of reasons for that. I think competition for players does play a part in the Kings and Ducks improving their programs over time. There is a bigger pool to draw on. They Sharks typically do not have 'tournament' and 'import' players, but rely on local kids, something the kings and ducks are not as strict about. I think the ability to commute may play some role too, as kids from the north of the bay area basically cannot play for the Jr sharks (and the sharks have not adapted to that with practice time changes, etc.) Can the Sharks improve? Yes. They are not doing badly though, drafting more WHL players this year than either the Ducks or Kings, and sending four kids to the national camp.
Would competitive teams in the area help? Maybe. But only if there are enough kids at the AAA level available. There aren't. GSE was approved to field an 04 AAA team last year. I'd argue that CAHA bent over backwards to make it happen too, approving it based on a sample roster that included mulitple '05 players (very rare at AAA beyond the Connor Bedard's of the world.) That's the only way they could make it work.
But they couldn't make it happen. GSE withdrew their application. I haven't spoken to parents about it directly, but I'm guessing that one of the reasons was that they looked at the small roster and realized they'd get their butts kicked. Some of those kids ended up playing for the Jr sharks. And as it turns out, the GSE team that was to form the core of it sort of ended up imploding this year.
We all want the game to grow. But half-assed attempts at building teams don't help anyone. The situation may well be different in Socal, where there are many more AA teams, but I wouldn't know.
-
We all want the game to grow. But half-assed attempts at building teams don't help anyone. The situation may well be different in Socal, where there are many more AA teams, but I wouldn't know.
Indeed a lot of the issues with CAHA seem related to the situation in Norcal, as well as the fact that CAHA's leadership is primarily people from Norcal. The situation in Socal is certainly different than in Norcal, but this is not solely a criticism with the AAA system. The complaint many people have is the heavy handed protectionist policies that limit and damage the opportunities and experience of individual families.
I don't think you see the contradictions in your own arguments. On one hand you admit that the Sharks are a 2nd tier AAA program, but then go on to say they shouldn't be judged purely on the basis of wins/losses and competition with the other 2 AAA franchises. Meanwhile teams that could also slot into the same category as the Sharks would be "half-assed attempts".
-
That's an 'interesting' reading of my comments. I would not describe the Jr Sharks as a 'second tier' AAA team because they aren't in the top %15 in the country. At that point you'd be saying the Dallas jr Stars are a tier II team, along with Omaha AAA, Fox motors, Chicago Young Americans, Phoenix Jr Coyotes... etc. You might want to look at the rankings. The Ducks are exceptionally good. The Kings very good too. The Jr Sharks do just fine against most AAA teams (just look at the record).
As for 'teams slotting into the same category...' Please. GSE#2 was #24 in the Tier II rankings. And the proposed AAA roster had multiple 05's on it. My guess is with that roster they would have been crushed at AAA, and one or two injuries away from defaulting games - admittedly something we never will know for sure, as the club itself had the good sense to drop out. They were not forced out by any 'CAHA politics'. They were given a chance and could not manage it.
As I said, maybe that's not the case in Socal, given the larger number of AA teams, but up north, there simply isn't the AAA talent available.
We all want the game to grow. But half-assed attempts at building teams don't help anyone. The situation may well be different in Socal, where there are many more AA teams, but I wouldn't know.
Indeed a lot of the issues with CAHA seem related to the situation in Norcal, as well as the fact that CAHA's leadership is primarily people from Norcal. The situation in Socal is certainly different than in Norcal, but this is not solely a criticism with the AAA system. The complaint many people have is the heavy handed protectionist policies that limit and damage the opportunities and experience of individual families.
I don't think you see the contradictions in your own arguments. On one hand you admit that the Sharks are a 2nd tier AAA program, but then go on to say they shouldn't be judged purely on the basis of wins/losses and competition with the other 2 AAA franchises. Meanwhile teams that could also slot into the same category as the Sharks would be "half-assed attempts".
-
I don't want you to misinterpret my comments, although I can see how they could be misread. I was simply referring to the AAA teams that are not "Elite" per your classifications, as being 2nd tier AAA. I did not mean that as a claim that the Sharks should be playing AA.
I understand that GSE decided not to pull the plug on an '04 team AAA. It goes without saying that at each birth year there are varying levels of talent and competitiveness across the different clubs. It sounds like GSE after careful consideration did what they determined was best for them given the available pool of talent, and this should be the case for most all teams, only that's not the way things work.
However, while we are at it, we have recent examples of AA Socal teams (Bears '03 & Saints '05) who have played up into AAA tournaments and had a good deal of success, which suggests they could have played AAA the entire year and most likely slotted into the same general category as the Sharks. The current rules just make things complicated and confusing for everyone involved, but across the entire state of California, there is ample evidence that there are enough players to have more AAA teams than there are now. I won't retread the historical record on this, but it's already been documented that it's been that way in the past as well. I find it fairly ridiculous that teams have to make the case for going AAA before they have even had tryouts or really have an idea of what they might be able to draw, and yet by the same token, have had to present evidence showing they'll be competitive. The Kings, Ducks and Sharks have to show absolutely nothing, and I doubt seriously they would want to deal with the red tape other clubs are required to provide.
-
Like I said, I know little about SoCal :-) Apart from the fact that you seem to be gaining rinks and we seem to be losing them (largely due to real-estate prices.)
I do wonder if anyone has done a survey around the country to see how many AA teams tend to coexist for each AAA team. My impression is that for the most part AAA teams are pretty scarce. I'm always amazed at how many AAA teams we play that have the exact same travel problems (with smaller distances) that we do - states with only 1 or 2 AAA teams are not that uncommon - it just happens that the next state is usually closer!
If you use myhockeyrankings as a proxy, it looks like there is on average a AAA team for every 10 AA teams. 1199 AA teams ranked nation wide, versus 116 AAA teams.
So maybe we aren't that far off with 3 AAA teams for 18 or so AA teams.
I don't want you to misinterpret my comments, although I can see how they could be misread. I was simply referring to the AAA teams that are not "Elite" per your classifications, as being 2nd tier AAA. I did not mean that as a claim that the Sharks should be playing AA.
I understand that GSE decided not to pull the plug on an '04 team AAA. It goes without saying that at each birth year there are varying levels of talent and competitiveness across the different clubs. It sounds like GSE after careful consideration did what they determined was best for them given the available pool of talent, and this should be the case for most all teams, only that's not the way things work.
However, while we are at it, we have recent examples of AA Socal teams (Bears '03 & Saints '05) who have played up into AAA tournaments and had a good deal of success, which suggests they could have played AAA the entire year and most likely slotted into the same general category as the Sharks. The current rules just make things complicated and confusing for everyone involved, but across the entire state of California, there is ample evidence that there are enough players to have more AAA teams than there are now. I won't retread the historical record on this, but it's already been documented that it's been that way in the past as well. I find it fairly ridiculous that teams have to make the case for going AAA before they have even had tryouts or really have an idea of what they might be able to draw, and yet by the same token, have had to present evidence showing they'll be competitive. The Kings, Ducks and Sharks have to show absolutely nothing, and I doubt seriously they would want to deal with the red tape other clubs are required to provide.
-
Is it one AA flight for all ages next season?
-
Is it one AA flight for all ages next season?
This really will depend on how many teams actually form at the tryout date in a few weeks. As there are more AAA teams this season, there may be a trickle down effect where less AA teams form. The flood of kids out of california continues, so that is also a factor that won't be well understood until tryouts in the next few weeks.
Not sure about Norcal, but you can get an idea of how many teams are likely by looking at the Scaha list, and assuming there might be 2 or 3 Norcal AA teams. http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml
As not all teams have listings, you can go off the individual club websites and come up with a "Declared team" list of something like this:
Ducks1
Ducks2
Kings1
Wave1
Wave2
Reign
Rose City Pats
Jr Gulls
Ice Dogs
Jr Flyers 1
Jr Flyers 2
SDIA
Saints
Bears
OCHC
Empire
GoldRush
GSE1
GSE2
Sharks
If all these teams form, there might be Flighting, but that is a big if. I'm sure CAHA won't tip their hand until the last minute, but the coaches usually know what's going to happen well in advance, as to whether there's going to be a jamboree or not.
-
Is it one AA flight for all ages next season?
This really will depend on how many teams actually form at the tryout date in a few weeks. As there are more AAA teams this season, there may be a trickle down effect where less AA teams form. The flood of kids out of california continues, so that is also a factor that won't be well understood until tryouts in the next few weeks.
Not sure about Norcal, but you can get an idea of how many teams are likely by looking at the Scaha list, and assuming there might be 2 or 3 Norcal AA teams. http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml (http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml)
As not all teams have listings, you can go off the individual club websites and come up with a "Declared team" list of something like this:
Ducks1
Ducks2
Kings1
Wave1
Wave2
Reign
Rose City Pats
Jr Gulls
Ice Dogs
Jr Flyers 1
Jr Flyers 2
SDIA
Saints
Bears
OCHC
Empire
GoldRush
GSE1
GSE2
Sharks
If all these teams form, there might be Flighting, but that is a big if. I'm sure CAHA won't tip their hand until the last minute, but the coaches usually know what's going to happen well in advance, as to whether there's going to be a jamboree or not.
If I am not mistaken going into last year's season CAHA had cooked up some sort of CAHA weekend preseason format to accomplish flighting that would replace the Jamboree weekend.
-
I can count a few more team from NorCal:
GSE North
GSE South
Santa Clara Blackhawks
Tri Valley Blue Devils
Jr Sharks AA-1
Jr Sharks AA-2
Last season was a different format due to Covid.
The season before was only one flight. Even there were a lot of AA teams and they played in A division.
-
Is it one AA flight for all ages next season?
This really will depend on how many teams actually form at the tryout date in a few weeks. As there are more AAA teams this season, there may be a trickle down effect where less AA teams form. The flood of kids out of california continues, so that is also a factor that won't be well understood until tryouts in the next few weeks.
Not sure about Norcal, but you can get an idea of how many teams are likely by looking at the Scaha list, and assuming there might be 2 or 3 Norcal AA teams. http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml (http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml)
As not all teams have listings, you can go off the individual club websites and come up with a "Declared team" list of something like this:
Ducks1
Ducks2
Kings1
Wave1
Wave2
Reign
Rose City Pats
Jr Gulls
Ice Dogs
Jr Flyers 1
Jr Flyers 2
SDIA
Saints
Bears
OCHC
Empire
GoldRush
GSE1
GSE2
Sharks
If all these teams form, there might be Flighting, but that is a big if. I'm sure CAHA won't tip their hand until the last minute, but the coaches usually know what's going to happen well in advance, as to whether there's going to be a jamboree or not.
If I am not mistaken going into last year's season CAHA had cooked up some sort of CAHA weekend preseason format to accomplish flighting that would replace the Jamboree weekend.
You are not mistaken.
The AA CAHA format will include 2 portions. August-December which will include all teams. These teams will compete for a spot in the top 12. The top 12 teams will continue onto the CAHA league for the remainder of the season. All other teams will have their CAHA season come to an end. Those teams will become a tournament/scrimmage team.
-
Is it one AA flight for all ages next season?
This really will depend on how many teams actually form at the tryout date in a few weeks. As there are more AAA teams this season, there may be a trickle down effect where less AA teams form. The flood of kids out of california continues, so that is also a factor that won't be well understood until tryouts in the next few weeks.
Not sure about Norcal, but you can get an idea of how many teams are likely by looking at the Scaha list, and assuming there might be 2 or 3 Norcal AA teams. http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml (http://www.scaha.com/scaha/viewalltryouts.xhtml)
As not all teams have listings, you can go off the individual club websites and come up with a "Declared team" list of something like this:
Ducks1
Ducks2
Kings1
Wave1
Wave2
Reign
Rose City Pats
Jr Gulls
Ice Dogs
Jr Flyers 1
Jr Flyers 2
SDIA
Saints
Bears
OCHC
Empire
GoldRush
GSE1
GSE2
Sharks
If all these teams form, there might be Flighting, but that is a big if. I'm sure CAHA won't tip their hand until the last minute, but the coaches usually know what's going to happen well in advance, as to whether there's going to be a jamboree or not.
If I am not mistaken going into last year's season CAHA had cooked up some sort of CAHA weekend preseason format to accomplish flighting that would replace the Jamboree weekend.
You are not mistaken.
The AA CAHA format will include 2 portions. August-December which will include all teams. These teams will compete for a spot in the top 12. The top 12 teams will continue onto the CAHA league for the remainder of the season. All other teams will have their CAHA season come to an end. Those teams will become a tournament/scrimmage team.
Someone told me teams that don’t make the top 12 will drop to “A.†I have a hard time seeing how that is possible mixing in with teams that have presumably started their SCAHA schedule already :o
-
after successfully wrecking midget hockey in cali, the caha braintrust is now working on bantam. peewees next.
-
after successfully wrecking midget hockey in cali, the caha braintrust is now working on bantam. peewees next.
You have it all wrong. CAHA is focused on finding a way to reduce the oversubscription of california hockey programs wherever they may be, in much the same way that the great Ebeneezer Scrooge suggested certain people should die and decrease the surplus population. Once enough kids have fled the California youth hockey scene, there will be more than enough open roster spots, so that all californians can enjoy the perfection of a system where every game ends in a tie borne of penultimate competitive equality.
In the perfect future, all California AAA teams will boast rosters anointed as future NTDP shoe-ins at 10u, and will never leave the top 5 national rankings, as it was in the olden days of California hockey supremacy. Those who are not satisfied with their assigned place, will be free to seek out stick time on their way to beer league valhalla.
The problem is the suckers unsophisticated letter chasing parents who just continue to fail to understand how damaging it is when your son or daughter plays on a team that loses. It's not CAHA's fault that you don't understand that if your kid was actually good at hockey, they would be on a team that always WINS. CAHA knows in advance which teams will win and which will lose, so there is really no reason to waste time playing games when we all know the outcome of the season weeks before tryouts even occur. You are all wasting time and resources that could be better spent by the really good kids kicking ass in Phoenix or Dallas.
Far too many people seem to think that just because they PAY for their kids to play hockey, that means they might want some choice as to what club or coach appeals to them or even just wanting to play for a team that is a practicality for their location. This is all wrong headed thinking. All kids peak at 10u. If your kid isn't dominating 12 year olds by that age, then face the facts -- they will never be good. Stay in your lane. Stop joining teams that lose games to other teams that might be better.
Until such time, as all of you idiots keep wanting choice in the marketplace of california youth hockey, CAHA will have no choice but to continue to come up with new and increasingly outlandish systems to punish LOSING HOCKEY and decrease competition accordingly. Sure this year, they may just unilaterally dump teams from AA to A, but clearly this is a half measure. After all, Tier 2 isn't a path to Tier 1, or a pragmatic alternative to Tier 1, despite what some of you may mistakenly think it to be, but it in actuality really only exists because some idiot hit the "I" key twice, many years ago, fat fingered the copy and paste into the CAHA rule book, and published the rules before anyone noticed that somewhere between sixteen and twenty teams had formed. Since they're now stuck with it, you can't blame the CAHA board from trying to have some fun and experiment on kids.
I did manage to get a transcript from the latest CAHA board meeting, and I thought this discussion was interesting:
"Why do we have so many shitty AA teams, I mean, C'mon? Can't we do something about this travesty?"
"I have a thought. Perhaps demoting a team to A isn't enough. Just spit balling here, but what if we came up with a more meaningful -- I don't know, punishment doesn't really capture it, I mean this is youth hockey and the eyes of the world are upon us here..."
"I think we all know where this is going, and it can't come soon enough as far as I'm concerned."
"People we discussed this at the last six meetings, and we keep getting stuck on the details of who exactly is going to pay for the branding and maintenance of the branding equipment, as well as the specific terminology to be used."
"But I thought we agreed that 'Losers' was vague and just to open to interpretation, and for that reason, the brand should say 'BAD AT HOCKEY'"
Now I know this might be a concern to you Bantam parents, and perhaps even outrageous that AA demotion might also involve a painful permanent branding of your child, but you can rest easy knowing that this discussion only pertains to how the Bantam system could be adapted to work at the U12 level.
-
pay no attention to the 2000 goalie who didn’t even play travel hockey until 13, played for heat and titans, and committed to quinnipiac last week. only jk and jd can develop kids.
-
21 bantam AA teams declared for scaha...CA must have alot of great talent at the bantam level.
-
we may have a few teams with nothing much to do after Nov..
-
I just read the worst post filled with absolute lies and falsehoods. I mean, literally saying the opposite of truth and reality in paragraph after paragraph. That rant had to be sarcasm, right? :o Just wow.
Parents should not be on here spreading such nonsense and misinformation by presenting opinion as fact.
-
You're a parent presenting opinion as fact, correct?
-
Just so I am clear about this year's CAHA plan, after the Nov.12-14 weekend, only 12 teams will be left to play in the CAHA season and playoffs....with the rest relegated to scrimmages and tournaments? If so, there will be plenty of broken hearts this season, as I'm looking at over 20+ teams at bantams alone (including norcal teams)....
-
Yes. I think you are correct. Back in the day, I think teams had to make their own games at AA and once you played everyone once, and you were not in the hunt. You ended up only playing in tournaments as there was a crazy point system and if you made it to the top level with points, you would never risk playing anyone again for fear of playing yourselves out of a spot
Hopefully CAHA will provide something for the teams that get the boot in Dec. This will be an interesting reset year. Everyone plays everyone once I think, then a line is drawn.
-
Everyone plays everyone once I think, then a line is drawn.
I don't know how that is possible with 20+ teams
-
THe math makes it tough. if there is 20 teams you have to play 5 games over 4 weekends.
-
Currently there are 18 declared 14U AA teams. Doesn’t make the math a whole lot easier, but it isn’t the original 21 everyone thought.
-
Currently there are 18 declared 14U AA teams. Doesn’t make the math a whole lot easier, but it isn’t the original 21 everyone thought.
Does that include NoCal?
-
after successfully wrecking midget hockey in cali, the caha braintrust is now working on bantam. peewees next.
You have it all wrong. CAHA is focused on finding a way to reduce the oversubscription of california hockey programs wherever they may be, in much the same way that the great Ebeneezer Scrooge suggested certain people should die and decrease the surplus population. Once enough kids have fled the California youth hockey scene, there will be more than enough open roster spots, so that all californians can enjoy the perfection of a system where every game ends in a tie borne of penultimate competitive equality.
In the perfect future, all California AAA teams will boast rosters anointed as future NTDP shoe-ins at 10u, and will never leave the top 5 national rankings, as it was in the olden days of California hockey supremacy. Those who are not satisfied with their assigned place, will be free to seek out stick time on their way to beer league valhalla.
The problem is the suckers unsophisticated letter chasing parents who just continue to fail to understand how damaging it is when your son or daughter plays on a team that loses. It's not CAHA's fault that you don't understand that if your kid was actually good at hockey, they would be on a team that always WINS. CAHA knows in advance which teams will win and which will lose, so there is really no reason to waste time playing games when we all know the outcome of the season weeks before tryouts even occur. You are all wasting time and resources that could be better spent by the really good kids kicking ass in Phoenix or Dallas.
Far too many people seem to think that just because they PAY for their kids to play hockey, that means they might want some choice as to what club or coach appeals to them or even just wanting to play for a team that is a practicality for their location. This is all wrong headed thinking. All kids peak at 10u. If your kid isn't dominating 12 year olds by that age, then face the facts -- they will never be good. Stay in your lane. Stop joining teams that lose games to other teams that might be better.
Until such time, as all of you idiots keep wanting choice in the marketplace of california youth hockey, CAHA will have no choice but to continue to come up with new and increasingly outlandish systems to punish LOSING HOCKEY and decrease competition accordingly. Sure this year, they may just unilaterally dump teams from AA to A, but clearly this is a half measure. After all, Tier 2 isn't a path to Tier 1, or a pragmatic alternative to Tier 1, despite what some of you may mistakenly think it to be, but it in actuality really only exists because some idiot hit the "I" key twice, many years ago, fat fingered the copy and paste into the CAHA rule book, and published the rules before anyone noticed that somewhere between sixteen and twenty teams had formed. Since they're now stuck with it, you can't blame the CAHA board from trying to have some fun and experiment on kids.
I did manage to get a transcript from the latest CAHA board meeting, and I thought this discussion was interesting:
"Why do we have so many shitty AA teams, I mean, C'mon? Can't we do something about this travesty?"
"I have a thought. Perhaps demoting a team to A isn't enough. Just spit balling here, but what if we came up with a more meaningful -- I don't know, punishment doesn't really capture it, I mean this is youth hockey and the eyes of the world are upon us here..."
"I think we all know where this is going, and it can't come soon enough as far as I'm concerned."
"People we discussed this at the last six meetings, and we keep getting stuck on the details of who exactly is going to pay for the branding and maintenance of the branding equipment, as well as the specific terminology to be used."
"But I thought we agreed that 'Losers' was vague and just to open to interpretation, and for that reason, the brand should say 'BAD AT HOCKEY'"
Now I know this might be a concern to you Bantam parents, and perhaps even outrageous that AA demotion might also involve a painful permanent branding of your child, but you can rest easy knowing that this discussion only pertains to how the Bantam system could be adapted to work at the U12 level.
What's up ID, been a while. Thank you, i had trouble sleeping last night and decided to check the boards. By paragraph 66 i was out.
-
Find it hard to believe that teams seasons will be over in Dec. The clubs ARE NOT in the buisness of giving back money. Not gonna happrn
-
Tournaments. Let’s make it more pricey for hockey in Cali.
-
Currently there are 18 declared 14U AA teams. Doesn’t make the math a whole lot easier, but it isn’t the original 21 everyone thought.
This is just SCAHA. From everything I can gather (posts here, SCAHA declarations and team websites/ contacts), SCAHA will actually only start with 17 teams (Heat didn't form a team and SD Gulls only formed 1 team per website, they were originally in for 2 originally). Add in NorCal's 4 teams (both GSE teams, Sharks and Santa Clara Blackhawks) and 14U AA should start with 21 teams total.
-
Find it hard to believe that teams seasons will be over in Dec. The clubs ARE NOT in the buisness of giving back money. Not gonna happrn
Sounds like that because of how late into the year AA will actually be determined, teams that don't drop themselves by 9/15 will be relegated to just that as it would be too late to add them to an already established A season. AA not fully set until mid-November. Not saying I agree with it, just logistically not sure how there is a way to incorporate actual relegation into A with the format CAHA chose to use this year.
CAHA Weekend Dates:
Sep 17-18, 2021 (Preseason #1)
Oct 8-10, 2021 (Preseason #2)
Oct 22-24, 2021 (Preseason #3)
Nov 12-14,2021 (Play-In Weekend)
-
Find it hard to believe that teams seasons will be over in Dec. The clubs ARE NOT in the buisness of giving back money. Not gonna happrn
Sounds like that because of how late into the year AA will actually be determined, teams that don't drop themselves by 9/15 will be relegated to just that as it would be too late to add them to an already established A season. AA not fully set until mid-November. Not saying I agree with it, just logistically not sure how there is a way to incorporate actual relegation into A with the format CAHA chose to use this year.
CAHA Weekend Dates:
Sep 17-18, 2021 (Preseason #1)
Oct 8-10, 2021 (Preseason #2)
Oct 22-24, 2021 (Preseason #3)
Nov 12-14,2021 (Play-In Weekend)
Agreed. They'll be relegated to just SCAHA scheduled games, scrimmages, and become a tournament team. The clubs still get paid for the full season, but the parents will just have to reallocate their funds from CAHA weekends to tournaments which aren't part of club fees from my understanding. I'm not sure how this all will play out, but it just seems the players won't be playing for anything meaningful come December besides maybe tournaments.
-
What's up ID, been a while. Thank you, i had trouble sleeping last night and decided to check the boards. By paragraph 66 i was out.
Trans you know I write this stuff just for you. ;D Like so many others, have been facilitating the prescribed cali hockey experience by having my kid play hockey somewhere other than Cali. Back for the summer, he was doing some skates with a bunch of other kids '06 and older, and of the roughly 25-30 that participated in these skates, there were maybe 2 or 3 that will be playing hockey in the state next year. :o
-
Locations for all weekends posted on CAHA.
Sept. 17-19, 2021 Simi Valley - San Jose - Vacaville - Las Vegas
Oct. 8-10, 2021 Lakewood - Simi Valley - San Jose - Valencia
Oct. 22-24, 2021 Lakewood - San Jose - Vacaville - Valencia
Nov. 12-14, 2021 Simi Valley - Valencia
Dec. 3-5, 2021 Anaheim - Irvine - Vacaville
Jan. 7-9, 2022 Anaheim - Irvine - Riverside - Valencia
Feb. 11-13, 2022 Riverside - San Jose - Vacaville
Feb. 25-27, 2022 Anaheim - Valencia (12U only)
And 21 teams to start off:
Bears
Blackhawks
Ducks 1
Ducks 2
Flyers 1
Flyers 2
Goldrush
GSE 1
GSE 2
Gulls
Ice Dogs 1
Ice Dogs 2
Kings 1
Kings 2
OCHC
Pats
Reign
Saints
Sharks
Wave 1
Wave 2
Nothing posted on the 2 brackets for the preseason weekends yet.
-
Are these CAHA weekends stay to play? Please tell me they are not.
-
They are not:
"Following is a listing or link to potential hotels for CAHA Weekends. Please note that these hotels are NOT mandatory (except for "Playdowns" and "Playoffs") and are provided for referenece only. Teams are free to book any hotel at any location they so choose."
-
Who plays where? Or is caha still sorting that out?
Locations for all weekends posted on CAHA.
Sept. 17-19, 2021 Simi Valley - San Jose - Vacaville - Las Vegas
Oct. 8-10, 2021 Lakewood - Simi Valley - San Jose - Valencia
Oct. 22-24, 2021 Lakewood - San Jose - Vacaville - Valencia
Nov. 12-14, 2021 Simi Valley - Valencia
Dec. 3-5, 2021 Anaheim - Irvine - Vacaville
Jan. 7-9, 2022 Anaheim - Irvine - Riverside - Valencia
Feb. 11-13, 2022 Riverside - San Jose - Vacaville
Feb. 25-27, 2022 Anaheim - Valencia (12U only)
And 21 teams to start off:
Bears
Blackhawks
Ducks 1
Ducks 2
Flyers 1
Flyers 2
Goldrush
GSE 1
GSE 2
Gulls
Ice Dogs 1
Ice Dogs 2
Kings 1
Kings 2
OCHC
Pats
Reign
Saints
Sharks
Wave 1
Wave 2
Nothing posted on the 2 brackets for the preseason weekends yet.
-
Who plays where? Or is caha still sorting that out?
Team-specific schedules are still being worked out it seems. Hopefully soon as we are about a month out from the first weekend.
-
With Los Angeles just mandating vaccine passports today for places like gyms, restaurants, concerts, etc. I'd imagine if your child plays a game in LA they will need to provide a passport to watch it or enter the building.
So much for the Labor Day tourney in LA. I really just don't want our kids to go through this BS again.
-
Yeah, not confident a season will be possible with that, hope I am wrong. Sounding like CAHA issued the 1st preseason weekend with all 14U headed to San Jose so hopefully that is an indication they are committed to push on this year.
-
Here's a solution....
Get your kid vaccinated. It's a contact sport.
-
Here's a solution....
Pack yourself a parachute every time you drive over a tall bridge. It's a long way down.
-
Here's a solution....
Pack yourself a parachute every time you drive over a tall bridge. It's a long way down.
Sounds like you are saying you don't think you have a good enough reason to get your kid vaccinated.
Well.... now you do. To play hockey.
-
Hearing Ice Dogs 2 moved down to A so, if accurate (SCAHA now shows only 1 team declared for ID), down to 20 teams total to start off in San Jose. There should be some kind of structure for brackets and this first weekend’s games by mid-next week after the 8/15 deadline hits.
-
On the vaccination requirement topic: who cares what your political or risk-management beliefs are. I took my teenage son to a hockey tournament in Colorado in February. He caught covid either at the tournament or at an airport. When we got home he had a cough, we got him tested and he was positive. He was SICK for a full week, unable to get out of bed, cough, fever, the works. He was at 50% for two weeks after that, even had chest pain. It took him 6 weeks at least to get back to 80%, 3 months to get to 100%. He got vaccinated as soon as he was eligible.
This is just our experience, I realize plenty of teens have no symptoms. But this was a perfectly healthy kid who doesn't usually get sick. Take it seriously, even if you only care about yourself and your own family and aren't concerned about being an asymptomatic vector.
-
I just can't imagine a team opting not to strongly encourage or require vaccination from a strictly operational/convenience perspective. Compare the cases...
The unvaccinated team is going to spend the entire season wondering if their next tournament is going to be unavailable to them because of a recently instituted vaccine mandate. They are going to have to do parent travel, because no coach wants to deal with an unvaccinated covid case. In areas like LA or SF (and certainly more to come - Santa Clara/San Jose said yesterday they are studying the new SF rules right now) they are going risk losing their practice facilities. They can't play in Canada because they can't get there. They would be crazy to play in Texas (or Florida, but that's less of an issue.) Sounds a lot like last season to me.
The vaccinated team can go out and travel with the knowledge that their kids are far, far more likely to get seriously injured on the ice, during a game, than end up hospitalized from Covid. Team travel becomes reasonable again. Tournaments don't have a question mark over them. Travel to Canada or Texas is possible.
I'm not talking about politics or medical science here. I did lose a close relative to Covid. And I know one youth hockey player that is struggling with 'long covid' - so it's real. But to me, it's just the convenience/operational aspect that makes this an obvious call.[/size].
-
Here's a solution....
Pack yourself a parachute every time you drive over a tall bridge. It's a long way down.
Yeah, because the chances of catching COVID and the chances of driving your car off of the side of a tall bridge are totally comparable, right.
Hint: there were less than 40k traffic fatalities in the US in 2018 (last year with complete stats), there have been over 600k COVID deaths so far.
Honestly, I had COVID (picked it up at a Vegas Tourn last year), and I've been vaxxed and my son has been vaxxed. I'd still feel a lot more comfortable if all the players were vaxxed, just because I don't want to sit out of work for another quarantine, and I don't want my son to miss that much hockey.
-
a kid cant attend school in california unless he/she is vaccinated for tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, hep b and chickenpox. https://cchealth.org/immunization/school-requirements.php (https://cchealth.org/immunization/school-requirements.php)
ive got no problem with adding to that list a vax for the bug that has killed 60k+ californians over the past year. is there a lil gretzky out there not tough enough to take a needle? theres no constitutional right for your kid to play hockey. give your kiddo the jab or he doesnt play. your choice.
-
But but but... Freeeeeeedom!!!
-
Hearing Kings 1 and Wave 1 skated to a 3-3 tie over the weekend.
-
Hearing Kings 1 and Wave 1 skated to a 3-3 tie over the weekend.
Smooth bit if coaching by DK tied game for JK's in last seconds.
-
Question.....on the JKs, there were a few kids with what seemed to be Bakerfield helmets. Anyone have intel if they are on the team or just for show ??
-
3 from Bakersfield is what I was told.
-
Heard there were quite a few Bakersfield teams at the Cube over the weekend as well. Wonder if the kids that played for JK were down for that.
-
Quite a few scrimmages in the books past two weekends. Any reports of winners and losers? Also hearing CAHA conferences are established. Anyone have those and want to share?
-
Conf 1
Blackhawks
Ducks 1
Flyers 2
Goldrush
GSE 2
Kings 1
Pats
Wave 1
Wave 2
OCHC
Conf 2
Bears
Ducks 2
Flyers 1
GSE 1
Gulls
Ice Dogs
Kings 2
Reign
Saints
Sharks
Anyone care to predict the top 4 from each bracket per CAHA's preseason format?
-
still trying to get a sense for who these teams are that have two teams. I know Flyers and Kings are split by birth year, but any idea for Ducks and GSE, are they by birth year (and if so, which is which) or mixed?
-
still trying to get a sense for who these teams are that have two teams. I know Flyers and Kings are split by birth year, but any idea for Ducks and GSE, are they by birth year (and if so, which is which) or mixed?
GSE is usually regional: North/South
-
I think the Ducks may be structured closer to full birth year teams. Gasseau was coaching an 08 team last season so I assume he is running with close to the same group on Ducks 2.
-
Anyone care to predict the top 4 from each bracket per CAHA's preseason format?
I'll bite,
In no particular order:
Conf. 1
Ducks 1
Kings 1
Wave1
Gold Rush
Conf. 2
Flyers 1
GSE 1
Kings 2
Bears
(Source, a magic 8 ball)
-
Anyone care to predict the top 4 from each bracket per CAHA's preseason format?
Here's my stab at it also.
Pool A:
- Wave 1
- Kings 1
- GSE 2
- Ducks 1
Pool B:
-
Interesting, what do you know about the GSE teams this year? Not knocking as there are a lot of unkowns after a year of hibernation for some. For me in no order:
Conf 1
Wave 1
Kings 1
Ducks 1
crap shoot for the 4th spot but going to guess Goldrush
Conf 2
Flyers 1
GSE 1
down to guessing again for these last 2 but Saints and Kings 2
-
Is it going down to 8 teams :o or 12?
-
My understanding is that caha takes the top 8, then the rest of the teams fight it out for the last 4 spots....or something like that
-
***20 teams seeded and split into 2 brackets of 10 teams
Sep 17-18, 2021 (Preseason #1)
Oct 8-10, 2021 (Preseason #2)
Oct 22-24, 2021 (Preseason #3)
***top 4 teams from each bracket advance to AA, making 1st 8 teams
***teams 5-8 from both brackets move on to Play-In Weekend
***teams 9 & 10 from both brackets dismissed from Tier II
Nov 12-14, 2021 (Play-In Weekend - DOUBLE ELIMINATION)
***top 4 teams advance to join AA, making 12 total teams
***teams finishing 5th or higher dismissed from Tier II
Highlighted is what I am referring to. I am just looking at who makes the first cut of 8. It ends up being 12 total after teams that finish 5-8 from both brackets are mixed in for one final weekend in Nov., top 4 from that group of 8 would then advance.
-
Interesting, what do you know about the GSE teams this year? Not knocking as there are a lot of unkowns after a year of hibernation for some. For me in no order:
Curious too about GSE...although it looks like at least one of their teams will be in the labor day tournament in valencia, so I guess we'll see.
-
Curious too about GSE...although it looks like at least one of their teams will be in the labor day tournament in valencia, so I guess we'll see.
The other GSE will be in the Anaheim tourney for Labor Day. Both tourneys will definitely give some clearer indication as 14 of the 20 total teams are playing between both tourneys.
-
Quite a few scrimmages in the books past two weekends. Any reports of winners and losers? Also hearing CAHA conferences are established. Anyone have those and want to share?
2 more to report. Sharks beat the Blackhawks this week by a score of 7-1. Also heard the Ice Dogs took one on the chin from the Wave A team recently with a score of 3-1 Wave.
-
ID AA did not play Wave A, maybe their AA(1) team that dropped to A?
-
I can’t confirm as another parent told me about it but wouldn’t that be their A team then if they dropped to A?
San Jose Ice facilities are requiring vaccination for 12 years old and up beginning 9/20.
http://www.solar4americaiceatsanjose.com/covid/vaccination-policy (http://www.solar4americaiceatsanjose.com/covid/vaccination-policy)
Negative test or having COVID prior doesn’t exclude. The first CAHA weekend is 9/17-9/19, but I feel the season is over before it has begun.
-
I guess I'll clarify, ID have not played a Wave team. I was referring to the ID team that dropped to A.
-
I can’t confirm as another parent told me about it but wouldn’t that be their A team then if they dropped to A?
San Jose Ice facilities are requiring vaccination for 12 years old and up beginning 9/20.
http://www.solar4americaiceatsanjose.com/covid/vaccination-policy (http://www.solar4americaiceatsanjose.com/covid/vaccination-policy)
Negative test or having COVID prior doesn’t exclude. The first CAHA weekend is 9/17-9/19, but I feel the season is over before it has begun.
Starting Sept 1 Los Angeles County is requiring a negative test prior to games and an on ice mask mandate regardless of vaccination status.
-
Starting Sept 1 Los Angeles County is requiring a negative test prior to games and an on ice mask mandate regardless of vaccination status.
Yes, LA County you can show a negative test. San Jose is not allowing a negative test or the fact that you already had COVID exempt you. Have to be fully vaccinated regardless after 9/20.
-
I guess I'll clarify, ID have not played a Wave team. I was referring to the ID team that dropped to A.
Got it, thanks for this.
-
RE vaccination...
USAHockey has been asking for full medical history for 10+ years on the standard release form for tournaments, including tetanus vaccination status. We've all signed the forms. Schools have been insisting on vaccination forever. Don't like the idea of mRNA for some (unscientific) reason? Get J&J. Or don't play. Your choice.
Just get your kid vaccinated and stop whining.
Personally, when my kid goes into the corner, in a flurry of heavy breathing and spittle, against some other kid, I will feel much better if I know they are both vaccinated.
-
RE vaccination...
USAHockey has been asking for full medical history for 10+ years on the standard release form for tournaments, including tetanus vaccination status. We've all signed the forms. Schools have been insisting on vaccination forever. Don't like the idea of mRNA for some (unscientific) reason? Get J&J. Or don't play. Your choice.
Just get your kid vaccinated and stop whining.
Personally, when my kid goes into the corner, in a flurry of heavy breathing and spittle, against some other kid, I will feel much better if I know they are both vaccinated.
J&J is not a traditional vaccine either, so there is that small piece of info to consider. Thanks though internet guy, I am sure you have convinced millions with this rant...
-
RE vaccination...
Just get your kid vaccinated and stop whining.
Or move to a much more sane state as many Californians are doing. Where you both can parent your kid and let them play hockey.
-
RE vaccination...
USAHockey has been asking for full medical history for 10+ years on the standard release form for tournaments, including tetanus vaccination status. We've all signed the forms. Schools have been insisting on vaccination forever. Don't like the idea of mRNA for some (unscientific) reason? Get J&J. Or don't play. Your choice.
Just get your kid vaccinated and stop whining.
Personally, when my kid goes into the corner, in a flurry of heavy breathing and spittle, against some other kid, I will feel much better if I know they are both vaccinated.
J&J is not a traditional vaccine either, so there is that small piece of info to consider. Thanks though internet guy, I am sure you have convinced millions with this rant...
Oooo... "Internet guy". I like the sound of that :-)
I wasn't the guy saying that because your kid isn't vaccinated, there won't be a season, and we should all pick up our balls and go home. For what it's worth, a straw poll on my kids AAA team showed only one kid not vaccinated (I don't know the reason). it's just not that big a deal for most people.
-
Oooo... "Internet guy". I like the sound of that :-)
I wasn't the guy saying that because your kid isn't vaccinated, there won't be a season, and we should all pick up our balls and go home. For what it's worth, a straw poll on my kids AAA team showed only one kid not vaccinated (I don't know the reason). it's just not that big a deal for most people.
Calm down bud, I applaud your team and the DECISION they made. Good for them and all who choose to or not to honestly. I'm not here to judge any parent's choice there, just talk hockey. I simply stated an opinion of what I think could happen, not yelling at anyone to do it or else.
-
When I read JargrBombs last post, I cannot keep the scene from Breakfastclub out of my head.. "Not Even Close... Bud". I feel there is one certainty in life, hockey for better or worse will be played in California. At a Tier I level, and maybe to a lesser extent Tier II - I would expect that teams would really push to be vaccinated. Tier 1 travels the country and after a while - taking tests every week and trying to follow the protocols of all the places you have to visit - in the end - seems quite complex and painful. It seems way simpler at this level to just get all the staff and players 12> vaccinated. Then it becomes a much simpler game to play. Thats my two cents.
Its basically the two shot Pfizer for any kid at this point. The good news its pretty easy to get these days. Just a stroll to the local Wallgreens
-
I've said it in other threads. As a coach you'd have to be incredibly short-sighted not to insist on vaccination. If you don't, you are buying yourself a season of worrying whether the next tournament will be cancelled for you because of a mandate. A season of not doing team travel for fear of having to make medical decisions for other people's unvaccinated kids. A season of potentially losing access to your practice facilities.
Just from an operational perspective, it's really the only sane choice to make. I'd say from B on up.
-
When I read JargrBombs last post, I cannot keep the scene from Breakfastclub out of my head.. "Not Even Close... Bud". I feel there is one certainty in life, hockey for better or worse will be played in California. At a Tier I level, and maybe to a lesser extent Tier II - I would expect that teams would really push to be vaccinated. Tier 1 travels the country and after a while - taking tests every week and trying to follow the protocols of all the places you have to visit - in the end - seems quite complex and painful. It seems way simpler at this level to just get all the staff and players 12> vaccinated. Then it becomes a much simpler game to play. Thats my two cents.
Its basically the two shot Pfizer for any kid at this point. The good news its pretty easy to get these days. Just a stroll to the local Wallgreens
Minimum of weekly tests will soon be required in LA County. San Jose requiring vaccinations (my guess is testing requirements will soon follow).
Are there any restrictions on the upcoming Anaheim and Valencia tournaments?
Is this the beginning of the end of the CAHA season?
-
That’s the thing - I personally know of cases when vaccinated people get sick with COVID and then only testing and checking symptoms are the only way.
Then if you are in a camp - not to take random shots into your arms and kids arms - why even bother
If the test is still required.
And I get the operational prospective - but apparently freedom of choice has winners and losers.
And vaccination believers are trying to win this battle -
If they believe in the vaccine - why they are afraid of not vaccinated people then? They are protected in their mind.
I am ok with them getting shots - they are not ok with ones that don’t; they want restrictions for them - that’s the thing
Oh, and then nobody talks about best thing in the world - natural immunity - had it, over it, good to go - noooo, says believers - go get a shot which just got approved…
And FYI - coworker told me - I have not checked - that FDA approval committee has former Pfizer director on board - movie that comes to my mind is Fugitive with Harrison Ford fighting big pharma
-
Not sure I'd call vaccines that have now been used on almost 2 billion people world wide, and over 200 million here in the USA "random shots" :) But whatever.
Anyways, don't listen to me - I'm just "internet guy". The solution to doubt with this is pretty obvious, ask your family physician.
It's amazing how few people do that given that's where people go for all their other important, more dangerous, medical advice. (My guess is that they know what the answer will be and just don't want to hear it)
There will be a season in California. It will be largely in masks, with road trips to other states for the high end, and only for the vaccinated here. That's not CAHA's call, it's not "the vaccinated's" call, it's local governments call.
-
You will be surprised - but our family physician said - if you are not afraid/had it mild or no symptoms and are ok - you don’t have to get vaccine
My suspicion on advices are that they also have no idea and follow the general ruling and/or political agenda.
But - if one is cautious/afraid of the virus - get vaccine,
If one is cautious of vaccine consequences In the long run and have natural immunity - don’t take it
But why the first ones try to make ruling on everyone?…
You probably know that Pfizer is not yet fully approved for 16 or 18 and younger - so you are a lab rat still.
And quantity of people that got shots don’t mean any quality to me (there are more billions probably who believe in Jesus Christ and still there are others who don’t and live their lives)- it was done in a rush at the very least.
Hockey in masks and shots, tests every 48 hours - might as well upgrade to computer NHL game - totally safe (aside from computer virus threat)
-
OK, I'll bite, since you have asked the question a few times. For others, feel free to ignore this, as it is not hockey related (mostly).
Why do the vaccinated want the unvaccinated to get it... I can just speak from my perspective, but I think this is right...
Reason 1: Because we want our lives back. Because we see that as long as hospitals are overloading (as they are in Florida and Texas), or at risk of overloading, we will be under restrictions. We hate masks as much as anyone. And vaccination and some approach to herd immunity is the only way this ends. Yes, there will be boosters. And we will happily do that if it means we return to normality. Remember, the vast majority of the hospitalized and dying are unvaccinated. Deaths due to vaccinated cases are almost unheard of, and always are paired with other significant medical conditions.
Reason 2: Because that overloading of the medical system ends up costing us. There is a huge bill to be payed, and as much as we like to talk about "individual responsibility" in this country, when the ER's are full, it puts up all of our rates. These people you see in hospitals (Mostly 30 years old+, and %90+ unvaccinated, despite the number of unvaccinated being < %50 now) will run up bills in the 100's of thousands of dollars. That's what a 2 week stay in hospital costs. Most of them don't have that money, so insurance will pay or as likely, the hospitals will pay. In either case, we all pay. If that 30 year old was vaccinated, the cost to us is nothing, because it's incredibly unlikely they end up in hospital.
Reason 3: Because there will always be people who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons. They will live at risk until the cases go down, and the cases are being driven right now largely by the unvaccinated. Some of us have people in their families in that situation, and some of us just care about the unfortunate.
Reason 4: Because we care. Yes, even about people that don't agree with us politically. 600,000+ dead already, and probably another 300,000 dead in a post-vaccinated world is a blemish against this country.
Reason 5: Because, yes, you can still get Covid when vaccinated... BUT the science is pretty clear that if you are vaccinated you spread it much, much less. Most people don't even know they have it. For about 3 days you have significant virus present, but it drops off far, far quicker than the unvaccinated (about twice as fast). So your kid not being vaccinated does still increase the chances others getting sick versus an vaccinated kid.
Reason 6: Because even if the unvaccinated teenagers are not likely to end up in hospital, they are much more likely to get it, more likely to have symptoms and spread it, and more likely to take it home, to school, to practices, to games, etc, and pass it along to teachers, staff, coaches, parents, etc, outside of their family, who did not make that "choice".
Now, you are going to hear all sorts of nonsense about how the vaccines will create new variants (that's NOT how that works - mutation is random, and mutations actually happen faster in an unvaccinated population because it's just a numbers game). And how it's not been tested enough, which is also incorrect - all the acceleration that happened was about cutting red tape and doing things in parallel. The same amount of testing happened to get it to emergency approval as any medicine. If you are reading that stuff, I would question your news sources. Numbers do count.
The mRNA vaccine is completely out of your system in about 5 days, leaving behind just the memory of the spike protein in your immune system. It's a technology that has been used to fight cancer for many years. Millions of people taking it with no side effects does count.
-
Thank you for your response - and it is ultimately hockey-related - anyway -as it affects it;
1. Masks do not help - there are scientists saying that (albeit their voice is getting silenced by mainstream media); some think they do - so that's an open question in itself
2. Yes to a certain extent - but when you say the vaccine is free - you mean like printing money to pay big pharma won't affect you - in terms of raising taxes, falling dollar, inflation etc?
3 and 4 - no comments - for obvious reasons
5 and 6 - maybe yes, maybe no - you listed your opinion based on some research and facts - others will counter you with other opinions based on also facts and research
European football leagues are fully functioning - in some countries with more spectators than the others - no one wears masks on the field, I think (check me if I am wrong) there is no vaccination mandate for sports there, for youth sports included. I know countries where for certain there are no such mandates.
On cancer thing - I am no pro on this, to put it mildly - I can give you credit of you know the topic - but last time I heard people still die from cancer and it's one of the statistically significant death causes.
It was still done way quicker than it would normally take - and the fact that 2 billion have it and live so far (btw - you know of course about reported multiple "casualties" on this) - also means not a whole lot to me now - I'd wait couple years to see how that goes.
Deaths from COVID - let's just say I have no idea what it is and have no faith in reported numbers whatsoever. They have been politically and economically driven (in both directions) too much to decipher the truth now - imho.[size=78%] [/size]
And you missed my point on natural immunity (probably not on purposes) - what if you had it, got over it, and good to go - your immune system works fine vs it - so why try to improve something (with potentially devastating side effects, at best - neutral ones) that works perfectly?
That is a major question/concern that again getting "overheard" in the mainstream (yours on the political side of things) media.
-
My email was mean to explain, not defend :-) To clarify my thinking though...
Masks clearly do help. That's just physics. Though how much is obviously a question of mask type, use, situation, etc. It is clearly spread as an aerosol, something that was not originally assumed, and that reduces effectiveness, but does not eliminate it.
For the purposes of hockey though, I doubt they help at all, since in my experience players that are forced to wear them have them around their chins :-) My personal preference would be to mandate vaccination but NOT masks on the ice.
On the natural immunity thing, there is a lot of noise out there on this. The actual papers I've read (to my ability) indicate that natural immunity is good, but not as robust as vaccination, and probably fades faster. I have seen it recommended (by physicians) that those who have had Covid take at least one dose of the vaccine after 3 months. The problem with that of course, is that's not enough to satisfy most mandates. I admit that legally those with previous infections are being forced into a corner a bit. I can imagine that is a question of logistics though. Tough to prove you've had it, unlike a vaccine.
Also, vaccinated individuals who get break through cases and recover (all of them, basically) seem to have very robust immune responses - beyond the simply vaccinated.
BTW, I don't think of this as a political issue, and it's sad that people see it that way. It *is* a social welfare issue, just like all vaccination questions.
-
I fall firmly in the vaccination camp. It seems we now live in a society where everyone becomes an expert via way of internet. People who really have worked in the field of immunology and vaccine ware fare have seen these mRNA approaches as the culmination of many many years of hard fought research with billions spent on truly understanding how they work. These people are very smart and understand this more than 99.9 percent of all. By all counts this is the safest and most effective vaccine since vaccines have been used. It’s safer then flying it seems. I am truly baffled.
My parents tell me stories of polio and small pox and Scarlett fever and other various viruses that killed people outright or crippled them for life. The vsciation rate of that population is above 90 percent. Pretty much anyone that can get it. Got the shot
My generation were fortunate enough to barely remember our shots we got that were mandated by the government before you could attend school There is now though a whole generation of people who think every virus is just “another fluâ€. And not to worry. And shots are evil and it’s all alie. It only when they are hooked up to a ventilator and have told they have a 50 50 chance to live . Is when they wish they could have simple got vaccinated.
-
Sorry - just trying to be complete here, and I forgot to address one of your points.
On the "multiple casualties", sure. A very few people have had adverse side effects. That is to be expected with any medicine.
Tylenol is the drug in common use that has maybe the largest number of adverse side effects. About 400 people a year die from liver failure caused by tylenol. But a huge number of people take it, so as a percentage it is not worth worrying about - you are more likely to die driving out to buy your tylenol than taking it.
Same thing with the vaccines.
Again, for comparison, the chances of dying under anesthesia are about 1 in 10,000. WAY, WAY more dangerous than the covid vaccines. If your doctor said "we need to operate", most people would probably do it. Your doctor is now (very likely - I'd encourage you to ask) telling you to take the vaccine.
I'm done now. Take the above for what it's worth (or don't)
Thank you for your response - and it is ultimately hockey-related - anyway -as it affects it;
1. Masks do not help - there are scientists saying that (albeit their voice is getting silenced by mainstream media); some think they do - so that's an open question in itself
2. Yes to a certain extent - but when you say the vaccine is free - you mean like printing money to pay big pharma won't affect you - in terms of raising taxes, falling dollar, inflation etc?
3 and 4 - no comments - for obvious reasons
5 and 6 - maybe yes, maybe no - you listed your opinion based on some research and facts - others will counter you with other opinions based on also facts and research
European football leagues are fully functioning - in some countries with more spectators than the others - no one wears masks on the field, I think (check me if I am wrong) there is no vaccination mandate for sports there, for youth sports included. I know countries where for certain there are no such mandates.
On cancer thing - I am no pro on this, to put it mildly - I can give you credit of you know the topic - but last time I heard people still die from cancer and it's one of the statistically significant death causes.
It was still done way quicker than it would normally take - and the fact that 2 billion have it and live so far (btw - you know of course about reported multiple "casualties" on this) - also means not a whole lot to me now - I'd wait couple years to see how that goes.
Deaths from COVID - let's just say I have no idea what it is and have no faith in reported numbers whatsoever. They have been politically and economically driven (in both directions) too much to decipher the truth now - imho.
And you missed my point on natural immunity (probably not on purposes) - what if you had it, got over it, and good to go - your immune system works fine vs it - so why try to improve something (with potentially devastating side effects, at best - neutral ones) that works perfectly?
That is a major question/concern that again getting "overheard" in the mainstream (yours on the political side of things) media.
-
Three things they should not allow you to discuss on Calhockey. Religion, politics, and Covid.
People see things differently that's a surprise...
Who on here does not want the kids to play a safe healthy season? Answer: no one.
When a game is over the stats are clear. The score is recorded there are winners and loser's clearly. The FACTS about covid wont be clear for years. After all there are still flat earthers out there. (not intended to encourage either side of the debate)
So lets return to what is clear...
Any games being played this weekend?
Any winners or losers?
Only thing I have heard so far was that the Pats had it rough in Valencia today.
57 shots to 5? But the score was only 5-0?
Anyone see this game? How do you have 57 shots and only 5 goals in youth hockey?
Looking at San Jose... If 50% of your team is unvaccinated today and get the first shot tomorrow... they will not be considered fully vaccinated until after the 3rd CAHA weekend. (shot 1... 21 days shot 2.. 10 days before the State of California considers you vaccinated.) I think all CAHA weekend games scheduled in San Jose after 9/20/2021 are forfeited.
Will CAHA change venues? I have heard Vegas Storm wants in to CAHA. Move SJ CAHA weekends to Vegas?
Am I wrong? No Covid debate please just am I reading this wrong?
-
I think they don’t have much a choice but to move it from SJ. CAHA doesn’t (as of today) require vaccination, so I don’t see how they can hold a CAHA weekend at a venue that does. Unless somehow Solar4America comes up with a workaround like convincing someone that venue means sheet of ice not the facility and banning spectators to keep the numbers below 50. Plenty of rinks in SoCal that can accommodate a CAHA weekend, so I hope Vegas doesn’t happen. However, it was originally on the list of CAHA weekend locations.
-
Rumor has it, LA County has an ordinance drafted already that mirrors San Jose's so I think it will only be a matter of time. Being fortunate enough to know families from several different clubs, levels and teams, I am actually hearing there are quite a few teams out there that may be closer to 50/50 on this issue than some here think. Time will tell I guess. Vegas or OC/ SD/ Riverside/ Kern could all be options to find ice if that happens as well.
As far as scrimmages, good to see teams and these kids getting at it the last couple of weekends. In addition to the Flyers 1/ Pats scrimmage listed above (that Pats goalie did well to hold it to 5 it sounds), I have heard of the following on deck for tomorrow:
- Bears vs Ducks 1
- Wave 1 vs Flyers 1
- Flyers 2 vs Kings 2
- Bears 07 AAA vs Saints AA (hearing this Saints team is pretty solid)
-
Ducks 1 over Bears 6-3
Wave Flyers tie 4-4
Kings 2 are hurt down 4+ players tie Flyers2?
Bears AAA over Saints 27-1 if not Peter goes NAPHL with this team to retain AAA glory?
-
Love the last prediction, haha! I haven’t heard much on today’s games except on that game, Bears 07 AAA beat Saints AA 14-2. Anyone else?
-
Was able to chase down the scores of the remaining scrimmages this weekend and was told of a couple of more that took place. Anyone else know of more?
Flyers 1 vs Wave 1 4-4 tie
Bears vs Ducks 1 4-2 Bears
Wave 2 vs Pats 3-0 Wave 2
GSE 2 vs Blackhawks 6-2 GSE 2
Kings 2 vs Flyers 2 8-0 Kings 2
-
Reading the Covid posts on here is worse than actually getting Covid. Equally as painful is the misinformation and bias.
Bottom line, there are pros and cons to getting and to not getting vaccinated. The one thing you (or the government) can't do is force anyone to get vaccinated. The failure of the FOR PROFIT health care and hospital systems in America are not the responsibility of the citizens to maintain.
What they (officials) are doing is giving everyone ultimatums - get vaxed or get out. That is NOT a structured choice and it's garbage.
You realize the big 3 vax companies are making over 10 billion each supplying this MANDATED vaccination for all.
Oh, and kids wearing masks while playing hockey? That idea is absolutely dangerous and moronic.
-
I knew I am not the only one here... just "other voices" sometimes are louder...
-
Blades. I know the cons of not getting vaxed. For some, death. For others 3-6 months on disability, lost wages, financial ruin - losing their house, and their families have to scramble to survive. I actually know two people that are / have experienced these cons of not getting vaxed. (one of the two died), and the other - well lets just say their life blew up as they knew it. Those are some Hefty cons for the unlucky few, These cons are not what I read on the internet, or what someone told me. This is first hand news i have personally seen.
What are the pros? I have personally seen none.
-
I've avoided saying "Talk to my dead uncle" here... but yeah. Talk to my dead uncle. From Covid.
-
Blades, if the 3 pharma firms created the virus so they could make ten billion each, your argument might have merit. They did not and they were induced by the last guy in the White House to work feverishly to create a vaccine that seems to work well with minimal and rare side effects. What is your problem?
-
The one thing you (or the government) can't do is force anyone to get vaccinated.
it can if you want your kid to attend school: https://cchealth.org/immunization/school-requirements.php
-
Vaccination carries a 4x increase in myocarditis. Don't pile on ne. I got vaccinated in the first round in CA. I just think people can hear information on both sides and make a decision. I'm still first in line for the booster.
-
Soo…. Any predictions on the upcoming Labor Day tournament in Anaheim and Valencia? 😀
-
Soo…. Any predictions on the upcoming Labor Day tournament in Anaheim and Valencia? 😀
I suspect there will be some winners and some losers.
Change my mind.
-
I suspect there will be some winners and some losers.
Change my mind.
They all get to play...for now, so all winners in my book.
-
I am really sorry to hear for your loss or any loss for that matter, I truly am, but I must point out that this is your personal experience. I never went remote with my job like a lot of people, so I have seen my fair share of cases both through work, friends and hockey all last year. I probably know 175-200 people by now that have gotten this thing in the last 19 months, not one has died. I fully realize people do though. I will say that I have had some friends get pretty sick. That is just my experience though, I am not a denier in any way of this thing, as much as this reply might imply. A lot of people have died (600K+), but a lot have survived (almost 31M) in the US alone. I think that certain aspects are being misrepresented or even cherry picked if you will, especially in regards to kids.
fistocuffs
Blades. I know the cons of not getting vaxed. For some, death. This is going to sound brutal but no other way to say it, 98% survive this thing, and that is taking into account ALL Americans. Look up the data for yourself. Most who succumb to this are elderly or have comorbidities (it is funny that this argument is now allowed for vaxxed people who are hospitalized or die but could not be used at all just a short year ago prior to the vaccine). Most, but I do realize there are deaths in the lower age range as well, I see the stories in the news too. Still, the younger, healthier you are, the greater the survival rate to where the data is even showing that 50 and younger are well over 99%.
For others 3-6 months on disability, lost wages, financial ruin - losing their house, and their families have to scramble to survive. I actually know two people that are / have experienced these cons of not getting vaxed. (one of the two died), and the other - well lets just say their life blew up as they knew it. You could say the same about the restrictions and lockdowns. It financially ruined far more IMO. We have lost our minds a bit when it comes to this response. The eviction order alone demonstrates that. Tenants can't be evicted but landlords can be foreclosed on??? What about the social aspect of these kids? Suicide and mental health issues are up in teenage kids, for something that has a less than 1% chance for them. So many negatives not being thought about with our actions on this.
Those are some Hefty cons for the unlucky few, These cons are not what I read on the internet, or what someone told me. This is first hand news i have personally seen. Again, personal experiences differ. And unfortunately, depending on the news source (on both sides I might add), it is so hard to know what to believe. If you watch MSM, you might think Florida and Texas are will be empty plains when this is all over, but the mortality rate in both Cali and New York are almost a full point higher than both of these states with their death rate, and I would bet they are more vaxxed too. That's weird... Even weirder, look at Hawaii. Most years, on average 600 people die from influenza/ pneumonia. In the last 19 months, 589 people have died from COVID there. Hmm. Why the irrational stance on mandating this vaccine then? I am all for a vaccine. Make it available, first proving beyond a doubt that it is in fact safe (I mean long term) and it works (see breakthrough cases, transmissibility AND deaths), and let people decide their own risk. We do it everyday with most things in life, but somehow with this, we are trying to get to absolute zero with cases. It will never happen. There are plenty of credible, award winning, pioneers in the science and medical field who have been trying to say and show all of these things, but are being shunned and silenced. That is most disturbing to me, all logic seems to be gone and people just pick sides, including our own scientific/ medical community.
What are the pros? I have personally seen none.
- Natural antibodies? Israel's recent study (700K people I might add) showed that natural antibodies were 13x higher than those of vaxxed individuals. 13x.
- Myocarditis risk greatly increased from the vaccine, especially in younger males. I don't want that for my kids.
- Not wondering what long term effects could come of this shot? Personally, I would love to have been able to wait for Novavax or one of the other 3 traditional vaccines out there. Sadly, it for whatever reason, is not being released in this county and the mandates/ walls seem to be closing in.
- Having a fully staffed hospital, a fully staffed police/ fire dept or even fully staffed military. What is worse, giving someone the abiltiy to choose but willing to stay in it and fight the good fight? Or just having them quit and not be there at all when needed?
notTHATdad
I've avoided saying "Talk to my dead uncle" here... but yeah. Talk to my dead uncle. From Covid. Very sorry for your loss.
-
Was able to chase down the scores of the remaining scrimmages this weekend and was told of a couple of more that took place. Anyone else know of more?
Flyers 1 vs Wave 1 4-4 tie
Bears vs Ducks 1 4-2 Bears
Wave 2 vs Pats 3-0 Wave 2
GSE 2 vs Blackhawks 6-2 GSE 2
Kings 2 vs Flyers 2 8-0 Kings 2
Bears must have played Ducks 2 (team out of Lakewood). Ducks 1 is out of Great Park ice (Vasilevski team) and has not had any scrimmages yet.
-
Was able to chase down the scores of the remaining scrimmages this weekend and was told of a couple of more that took place. Anyone else know of more?
Flyers 1 vs Wave 1 4-4 tie
Bears vs Ducks 1 4-2 Bears
Wave 2 vs Pats 3-0 Wave 2
GSE 2 vs Blackhawks 6-2 GSE 2
Kings 2 vs Flyers 2 8-0 Kings 2
Bears must have played Ducks 2 (team out of Lakewood). Ducks 1 is out of Great Park ice (Vasilevski team) and has not had any scrimmages yet.
Weird as that is what I was told but you are correct it seems. Apologies.
-
JagrBomb. I can see the points you make. I would not want to get covid as a way of immunity vs a shot though. The shot seems to do its job and keeps people from getting severely ill. And its far safer imo.
Personally I view Covid vax as an insurance policy. Do I really need it? Probably not - most of the points you make support that I probably do not need it in the grand scheme of things. The stats say - even if I get it. my survival rate at my age - given the healthcare system has a place for me and can treat me w/o having to make some hard supply shortage choices - . probably over 90-95%.
Viewed from a perspective of insurance. In a year, if one in 10 fires results in a destroyed home, 0.03% of individual homes are destroyed by fire. The chances of a home being burned down would be approximately one in 3000. Even better odds. Yet people pay for home insurance and fire coverage as standard practice. They would call you crazy if you did not. Too much is at stake to bet against it happening - even at those odds.
the average cost of insurance is approx. 1500 per year. Compounding that over 10 years at 10% with moderate risk gives you approx 30k. If never needed, what a waste. but if needed, wow! my $150k house is covered and I can walk away w/o owing a dime. I choose to not look at the 30k price tag, i look at what it buys in the event your house burns down.
This is how i look at it. No shot = take the self insured route. And a lot of people can afford that path for sure.
Having said all that, JagrBomb - your points are well made for that position.
-
See - we can almost agree on disagreeable....
There are millions of people who are encouraged/"forced" to get a shot - and they already had virus and recovered successfully. Partially known facts. But there might be something in the future...
Consequences of the shot - mostly unknown - I wonder if there is a spike in heart attacks (mostly among seniors, e.g.) or strokes or anything similar in the next few years - would we even know - from general public knowledge prospective? Would they be able to decipher - that it's from the vaccine? Would they tell us?
So - comparison with fire insurance - would work - if in certain cases insurance company won't pay you - and you do not know exact probability of those cases.
This is from CDC site:
"Since April 2021, increased cases of myocarditis and pericarditis have been reported in the United States after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), particularly in adolescents and young adults. There has not been a similar reporting pattern observed after receipt of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine (Johnson & Johnson).
In most cases, patients who presented for medical care have responded well to medications and rest and had prompt improvement of symptoms. Reported cases have occurred predominantly in male adolescents and young adults 16 years of age and older. Onset was typically within several days after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, and cases have occurred more often after the second dose than the first dose. CDC and its partners are investigating these reports of myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination."
Ans yes, personal experience matter - I knew at the time quite well one young man and one girl who died in separate car crashes before reaching 25.
I still do not know anyone who died from Covid - I know quite a few who got it and recovered. And none around me have been living in bunkers during last year.
And I know, I know that so many people die in car crashes and so many died of virus - but if I go by my experience I'd say - don't let them drive before 25 (risks are high - correct), or don't let them drive when I drive with my kids - as they increase chances of collision dramatically. But we don't do that - why we do that here.
It's critically overplayed - and with time maybe we'd see that. To JagrBomb point - I do know family where girl 15 year old after sitting one HS at home asked for mental help and even had suicidal thoughts. Totally normal family - middle class, no "pre-conditions". She could not meet her closest girl friends for the following reason - their parents went paranoid and did not let them out for a year.
There are all sides of the coin - but the one that gets a certain media attention/coverage - are getting in majority of minds.
Imagine - they'll start talking mental health, with examples, suicidal rates, crying parents on TV etc, - every day for year - and virus would get mild coverage (kind of - it's a flu season, no numbers, no hysteria) - you'll storm the school to get opened, you'll call sitting at home people crazy and devastating to their kids etc.etc.
-
Weird as that is what I was told but you are correct it seems. Apologies.
The name change is throwing everyone off. Last season, Gasseau's team was the Ducks Peewee AA 1 and Vasilevski was 2. This year it has switched. Vasilevski is Bantam AA 1 and Sandy's team is 2.
-
JagrBomb. I can see the points you make. I would not want to get covid as a way of immunity vs a shot though. The shot seems to do its job and keeps people from getting severely ill. And its far safer imo.
Personally I view Covid vax as an insurance policy. Do I really need it? Probably not - most of the points you make support that I probably do not need it in the grand scheme of things. The stats say - even if I get it. my survival rate at my age - given the healthcare system has a place for me and can treat me w/o having to make some hard supply shortage choices - . probably over 90-95%.
Viewed from a perspective of insurance. In a year, if one in 10 fires results in a destroyed home, 0.03% of individual homes are destroyed by fire. The chances of a home being burned down would be approximately one in 3000. Even better odds. Yet people pay for home insurance and fire coverage as standard practice. They would call you crazy if you did not. Too much is at stake to bet against it happening - even at those odds.
the average cost of insurance is approx. 1500 per year. Compounding that over 10 years at 10% with moderate risk gives you approx 30k. If never needed, what a waste. but if needed, wow! my $150k house is covered and I can walk away w/o owing a dime. I choose to not look at the 30k price tag, i look at what it buys in the event your house burns down.
This is how i look at it. No shot = take the self insured route. And a lot of people can afford that path for sure.
Having said all that, JagrBomb - your points are well made for that position.
I have to say, this is quite a refreshing reply in today's age of social media and platforms like these. A respectful discussion and understanding of each other's side, even if the two walk away no closer to resolution. I know everything I have said I would say to you in person and am confident by your response that you would do the same, I feel these platforms have actually hurt us as a society the last 10 years or so. Stick taps to you.
I could keep going with points as I am sure you could as well, but at the end of the day, I would just like to be able to choose on something like this for my kids as I do the flu vaccine. Not all get it and many have their reasons, but they have the choice.
Anyways, back to hockey, we need to enjoy it while it lasts.
- For Anaheim, I am intrigued to see what GSE 1, Reign and OCHC do as I know nothing about them. I know Sharks beat Blackhawks pretty good but not sure what that means. Haha! Thinking a GSE v Bears final but this is a completely blind guess.
- For Valencia, I think Flyers 1 have the upper hand here for sure but don't know much about Vegas. Kings 2 intrigue me with the season they had last year but not sure how that will translate to playing bigger, stronger kids in a checking game. Only one way to find out.
-
First 14UAA game of the tourney. Ice Dogs 3 vs Reign 1. Ice Dogs out shot the Reign 23-6.
-
Kings 2 beat Flyers 2 by a score of 4-0, shots were 34-15 in favor of the Kings per the scoresheet on the tourney website.
-
The PROS are having family members with preexisting illnesses who need the shot, actually take it. Why, because they NEED it.
I am sorry for anyone's loss, but unfortunately knowing whether or not you NEED a shot isn't for the government to decide.
The CONS... the shot that was only emergency authorized (NOT APPROVED) for youth 12-17 has a side effect - death. I do not care the percentage because it has been all but confirmed the Pfizer shot has resulted in Myocarditis - a viral infection that causes heart failure and DEATH. I do not think I need another CON. Those lemmings playing for rinks that are mandating everyone 12 and older who enter have proof of vax is murder. (Extreme, sure, but what else do I call it? An accident?) The PRO of not getting vaxd is staying alive as a teenager.
Again, many of my extended family members have been vaxd and for good reason. I didn't stand at their door and tell them DONT DO IT!!! I was glad they did if it made them feel safe.
If anyone, especially a parent, determines there is no need for a shot for themselves or their children, then that's on them. They didn't give out preexisting illnesses, they didn't seek out the elderly, they didn't create the virus, and they are not choosing to spread the virus either.
I know much of this has been posted by others, but I was asked directly, so I wanted to let you know I did read your posts. Also, I never said the vax companies made the virus to make money off of the vax. They are making money thanks to the government just like defense contractors did during "war." I know they didn't plan 9-11, but they sure profited from it... or did they???
-
Blades - I need a lesson from you - how to stay positive in stick/wash stuff with such views.... truly
And - fistcoffs - you may do as many "virtual" face washes to me as you wish - but you can't shut down "freedom of speech" voices! (that's sarcasm, ok?)
-
Issues of choice and politics completely aside, a few corrections, because there is a lot of misinformation out there.
Myocarditis is not a "virus". It is a medical condition. It's a word that means "heart inflamation." It CAN be caused by a virus, but also by adverse reactions to medicines, and many other reasons.
So far, 33 kids under 19 have died of Covid in California alone:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/COVID-19-Cases-by-Age-Group.aspx
And many, many more have suffered long term impacts ('long covid'), including players in the hockey community.
As of July, the CDC had zero cases of anyone dying of Myocarditis. Yes, some people got sick. Some quite sick. They recovered.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7027e2.htm
This may have changed by now, but it is exceedingly rare, particularly in comparison to deaths from Covid.
The numbers show you are far more likely to die during the drive to and from your vaccination appointment than from vaccine-induced myocarditis.
-
So it was 0 under 18 death cases in CA I believe about last year time - now it is 33 per your source (who knows what they rule there - but let’s assume it is covid)
How many died of flu during the same period of time? Closing on 2 years soon.
Have not heard any mandates on flu vaccines - and you are saying it is not politics - it is social welfare?
Any death is a tragedy to someone, youth death is even more so - but statistically 33 out of almost 40mln (comparable to size of Poland, Spain, Ukraine) during “terrible pandemic�
And do we know preconditions for those?
And I have not heard anyone young enough (30 minus) around me (can’t say for everyone sure) about long-term effects - recovered, running again… I do believe some might have aftermath - not sure the stat though.
And to be complete - when you say there are no death from miocardities as of now - I do not think young kids are going to die right away - I am more concerned on long term effect - and increasing chances in the future. So I would give it couple of years for more study to arrive and see. Maybe even longer.
One of my colleagues did full blood analysis prior to getting a shot and they are making “a pool†like that with one MD - to build a case - if anything happens to them they (if alive) or their close ones - will have evidence what it was and what it became.
I’d wait it out…
Anyway - at least this data does not make me rush to get a shot.
Disclosure - my kids never got flu shot either - and knock on wood never had a flu.
Just let us decide on our own without closing us from normal activities and everything will happen as it should…
-
Looks like Anaheim and Valencia finished up. How'd all the teams do? Any big surprises?
GSE (1?) won AnaheimFlyers (14) won Valencia
-
Kings 1 and Wave 1 played in St Louis. Kings lost in the quarterfinals, Wave lost in semifinals.
https://www.nationalshowcasehockey.com/puck-drop/puck-drop-schedule (https://www.nationalshowcasehockey.com/puck-drop/puck-drop-schedule)
-
Looks like Anaheim and Valencia finished up. How'd all the teams do? Any big surprises?
GSE (1?) won Anaheim, Flyers (14) won Valencia
Just looking at the results and scoresheets of some of the games from both:
Anaheim - Sharks and Bears appear to have a had a good weekend both posting 3 wins and then tying each other. I had heard Bears were up in this one by 4 goals after the 1st but seemingly collapsed in the 2nd and 3rd. GSE 1 topped the Sharks in the championship 4-1, I don't see a shot tally but a ton of penalties for this one. Anyone here happen to catch either of these games? Interesting note about this tourney, but a buddy of mine pointed out that something like 15 of the 18 total games played here lined up with the matchups for the 2 CAHA preseason brackets.
Valencia - Flyers 1 and GSE 2 tied (I expect both of these teams to be at the top of AA this year). Kings 2 hung tough though pulling out a win against GSE 2 (3-1) to advance to the championship. According to the scoresheet, Flyers 1 took it to them though beating them by a score of 5-1 and outshooting them 29-13.
-
Looks like Anaheim and Valencia finished up. How'd all the teams do? Any big surprises?
GSE (1?) won Anaheim, Flyers (14) won Valencia
Just looking at the results and scoresheets of some of the games from both:
Anaheim - Sharks and Bears appear to have a had a good weekend both posting 3 wins and then tying each other. I had heard Bears were up in this one by 4 goals after the 1st but seemingly collapsed in the 2nd and 3rd. GSE 1 topped the Sharks in the championship 4-1, I don't see a shot tally but a ton of penalties for this one. Anyone here happen to catch either of these games? Interesting note about this tourney, but a buddy of mine pointed out that something like 15 of the 18 total games played here lined up with the matchups for the 2 CAHA preseason brackets.
Valencia - Flyers 1 and GSE 2 tied (I expect both of these teams to be at the top of AA this year). Kings 2 hung tough though pulling out a win against GSE 2 (3-1) to advance to the championship. According to the scoresheet, Flyers 1 took it to them though beating them by a score of 5-1 and outshooting them 29-13.
I think GSE 2 is the one in Anaheim and GSE 1 was in Valencia. I'm assuming GSE North would be 1 and GSE South would be 2. Both GSEs looked to be pretty good though. I saw GSE South/2 play and they looked the best of from the Anaheim tourney.
-
GSE 1 is South (Bay) and GSE 2 is North (Bay) FYI...
-
... something that has never made sense to anyone outside of the GSE organization... :-)
-
... something that has never made sense to anyone outside of the GSE organization... :-)
Wonder if it's a CAHA rule that same clubs must be 1/2/3 rather than:
GSE S (for south)GSE S 2 (for GSE South 2 if required)
GSE N (for north)
Or maybe it's just fun to confuse people?
-
You mean GSE Larry and GSE Mario doesn't work? LOL
-
I can confirm that GSE 2 was in Valencia and GSE 1 was in Anaheim through the coaches that were at each tourney and a dad from the GSE team that was in Valencia.
-
... something that has never made sense to anyone outside of the GSE organization... :-)
GSE started in the South Bay...hence they are known as GSE 1
...its not exactly rocket science...
-
This weekend's SCAHA preseason games on tap.
Jr. Reign -- Wave (1)
Bears -- Wave (2)
Pats -- Jr. Ducks (2)
Jr. Kings (1) -- Flyers (2)
Jr. Gulls -- Goldrush
Jr. Ducks (1) -- Flyers (1)
Saints -- Ice Dogs
Wave (2) -- Lady Ducks
Jr. Kings (2) -- OC Hockey
Predictions? Mine are in bold.
-
Saving my 1000th post for my first pics of the year. Yea, grew up in the " golden age " of CH. Cheers to every dumb shit ive called out and those that hated my guts throuout the years. To those i say, kiss my ass !!
Jr reign vs Wave 1 wavw 1 by 5.....eerrr make it a shit load, BF Still owes me $$
BEARS VS WAVE 2 BEARS BY 1
PATS JD2 JD BY 3
JK 1 FLYERS2 JK BY 3
GULLS GOLDRUSH IDK
JDUCKS1 FLYERS1 FLYERS BY 3
SAINTS VS ICE DOGS IDK
JK2 VS OC HALF OFFS BY 1 **
** shand OC
GOOD LUCK EVERYONE
please foegive my spellng....fat fingers
-
Jr. Reign -- Wave (1) by 5
Bears -- Wave (2) by 1
Pats -- Jr. Ducks (2) by 1
Jr. Kings (1) -- Flyers (2) by 2
Jr. Gulls -- Goldrushby 1
Jr. Ducks (1) -- Flyers (1) by 2
Saints -- Ice Dogs by 1
Wave (2) -- Lady Ducks by 2
Jr. Kings (2) -- OC Hockey by 2
I was going to say ditto, but altered it a little.
Predictions? Mine are in bold.
Ditto..
-
Jr. Reign -- Wave (1) by 7
Bears -- Wave (2) by 1
Pats -- Jr. Ducks (2) by 1
Jr . Kings (1) -- Flyers (2) by 3
Jr. Gulls -- Goldrush by 1
Jr. Ducks (1) -- Flyers (1) by 3
Saints -- Ice Dogs by 1
Wave (2) -- Lady Ducks by 2
Jr. Kings (2) -- OC Hockey by 1
Winners in bold.
-
GSE (2) vs Santa Clara Blackhawks
-
What was the score?
-
What was the score?
Game is tomorrow.
They played before and it was lopsided for GSE. Suspect similar outcome.
-
Not many scores posted in SoCal... Not sure how to even find NorCal scores.. Any updates? Week one coming up week two scheduled.
-
SCAHA is particularly slow to update but here is what I heard or saw over the weekend:
Jr. Reign - 1 -- Wave (1) - 18
Bears - 5 -- Wave (2) - 1 (SCAHA shows 5-0 which is incorrect)
Pats - 0 -- Jr. Ducks (2) - 2 per SCAHA
Jr. Kings (1) - ? -- Flyers (2) - ?
Jr. Gulls - ? -- Goldrush - ?
Jr. Ducks (1) - 3 -- Flyers (1) - 6
Saints - 6 -- Ice Dogs - 0
Wave (2) - ? -- Lady Ducks - ?
Jr. Kings (2) - 1 -- OC Hockey - 1
Also heard Flyers 07s played ID 08 AAA. ID lost 7-4 and probably more importantly lost 3 kids to injury from this one??
I've not heard on the NorCal games from this weekend.
-
Since this multi-weekend preseason process starts in 2 days, below are my picks for the initial 4 teams from each bracket to lock in a AA spot after the 3rd weekend is completed:
Conf 1
Blackhawks
Ducks 1
Flyers 2
Goldrush
GSE 2
Kings 1
Pats
Wave 1
Wave 2
OCHC
Conf 2
Bears
Ducks 2
Flyers 1
GSE 1
Gulls
Ice Dogs
Kings 2
Reign
Saints
Sharks
-
Here are some of the Jr Ducks 1 Scores from Labor Day weekend. They looked rusty in their first two games but then pretty solid in the last two.
Lost to Wave 2 2-0
Lost to OCHC 4-2
Tied GSE 1-1
Beat OCHC 3-0
GSE ended up winning the Anaheim Labor Day Tourney.
-
obviously preseason, but why no standings?? now someone needs to do the math for us lol
-
Six undefeated teams leaving eval weekend 1...Kings 1 Kings 2 Wave 1 Saints Bears and Flyers 1.
Thoughts?
Many scores were very lopsided.
-
Six undefeated teams leaving eval weekend 1...Kings 1 Kings 2 Wave 1 Saints Bears and Flyers 1.
Thoughts?
Many scores were very lopsided.
Overall lopsided competition matchups for some of the teams that went undefeated. Won't start to level out until weekend #2.
Surprised on
Sharks win over GSE (1)
Blackhawks overall competitiveness
Kings (2) wins
Jr. Ice Dogs losses
After the scores - I'm confident that CAHA made the right decision with this experiment. The top 4 of each will separate themselves during the next CAHA weekend. The ones to battle it out for the remaining spots will all be even and is a toss-up of how the 13/14-year-old decides to play that specific weekend.
Not one team this weekend will look anything like they will in December. Some just have more of a gap to narrow.
-
Six undefeated teams leaving eval weekend 1...Kings 1 Kings 2 Wave 1 Saints Bears and Flyers 1.
Thoughts?
Many scores were very lopsided.
Overall lopsided competition matchups for some of the teams that went undefeated. Won't start to level out until weekend #2.
Surprised on
Sharks win over GSE (1)
Blackhawks overall competitiveness
Kings (2) wins
Jr. Ice Dogs losses
After the scores - I'm confident that CAHA made the right decision with this experiment. The top 4 of each will separate themselves during the next CAHA weekend. The ones to battle it out for the remaining spots will all be even and is a toss-up of how the 13/14-year-old decides to play that specific weekend.
Not one team this weekend will look anything like they will in December. Some just have more of a gap to narrow.
Good analysis and I agree with it.
- The Shark's win was a surprise.
- I didn't know much about the Blackhawks and counted them out, but they're a contender.
- Kings (2) I wasn't too surprised since I've heard they have a lot of talent for an 08 squad.
- I didn't think the Jr. Ice Dogs losses were a surprise. Their other team had to drop to A. That A team did look impressive at the A level at first then lost in the finals to the Wave team they beat previously.
My updated top 8 projections:
Pool A: 1) Wave1, 2) Kings1, 3&4)Toss up battle for last 2 slots (Blackhawks, Wave2, Goldrush, GSE2)
Pool B: 1) Flyers 1, 2) GSE 1, 3&4) Close battle between Kings 2 vs. Bears and possibly Saints.
With growth, suspensions, and injuries that could all change. So far I think this "experiment" is going well and it's been interesting.
-
(https://www.calhockey.com/)
I had some free time. :)
-
Agree with all of the above. I think weekend #2 will show who will survive the cut for 2 reasons:
1) match-ups will have evened out after 4 more games obviously.
2) This next weekend could be the nail in the coffin for a lot of teams, especially to the teams who dropped all or most games off the bat on weekend #1. This is essentially the last weekend to secure a spot as the way I understand it, only game #1 from the 3rd weekend counts towards this qualifying preseason format. The other 3 games from this 3rd weekend are inter-bracket games that will not have a bearing on preseason standings.
-
Interesting outcomes from this weekend in some games and most spots for the top 4 are locked up.
Bracket 1 sees Wave 1, Kings 1, Goldrush and GSE 2 all advancing as the top 4 teams. Pats and OCHC are out.
Bracket 2 has Flyers 1, Kings 2 and GSE 1 locked in and the Bears/ Saints will be shooting for the last spot depending on the outcome of each of their first games in Valencia in 2 weeks. As luck would have it, they play each other at the first game in Valencia. Ducks 2 and Reign are bounced.
All of the remaining teams (Blackhawks, Ducks 1, Wave 2, Flyers 2, Sharks, Gulls, Ice Dogs and the loser of the Bears/ Saints game) will have to duke it out in November for the final weekend to secure the last 4 spots.
-
Interesting outcomes but nothing too unexpected. Previous guesses have been fairly accurate. The battle for the remaining spots is going to be exciting. I do wish more of the games in weekend #3 had seeding implications.
-
I heard it's going to be a double elimination tourney for the last 4 slots. It should be interesting. I'm guessing they'll be seeded for this tourney base on where they land after CAHA week 3.
-
I heard it's going to be a double elimination tourney for the last 4 slots. It should be interesting. I'm guessing they'll be seeded for this tourney base on where they land after CAHA week 3.
Like the normal playdowns? Win 2 or lose 2 and you are done?
-
Newbie on the site. Thanks for providing a place for additional info and insights into California youth hockey.
This preseason "tournament" feels way better than having an evaluation weekend and then human discussions about putting teams into flights. It has made for some spirited games because there's something meaningful to play for. The only down side is that some teams might be done with their season before they were given a chance to improve.
Maybe for the future, keep this same tournament format but to decide the flights (not to decide who's CAHA season ends before it started.) In any case, it's a fun time. Can't wait to see the next CAHA weekend results.
-
Newbie on the site. Thanks for providing a place for additional info and insights into California youth hockey.
This preseason "tournament" feels way better than having an evaluation weekend and then human discussions about putting teams into flights. It has made for some spirited games because there's something meaningful to play for. The only down side is that some teams might be done with their season before they were given a chance to improve.
Maybe for the future, keep this same tournament format but to decide the flights (not to decide who's CAHA season ends before it started.) In any case, it's a fun time. Can't wait to see the next CAHA weekend results.
The CAHA season would be over, however, the hockey season shod not be. If teams were serious about development they would continue to work with the kids on the teams and have a develop plans and path forward through the remainder of the season. This should including playing teams they are competitive with locally and planning some tournaments.
Will SCAHA/NorCal work with these teams to schedule?
There are, without a doubt, kids with individual AA or AAA skill on teams that do not end in the AA CAHA league. It'll be interesting to see drops/signings that happen as part of this.
If you're with a club that doesn't make it and that club doesn't provide a development path moving forward I'd stay clear from them in the future.
Looking forward to see the do-or-die tournament style play-in.
-
I know we all poke fun at CAHA but...
I think this system works much better than an eval weekend. Let teams play 9 full games and work out the bugs. Maybe add a flight II for the teams that do not make top 12.
I know SCAHA is going to schedule scrimmages for those who do not make the cut, not sure about NorCal.
Anyone want to pick top 12 in order after weekend 4?
-
I know we all poke fun at CAHA but...
I think this system works much better than an eval weekend. Let teams play 9 full games and work out the bugs. Maybe add a flight II for the teams that do not make top 12.
I know SCAHA is going to schedule scrimmages for those who do not make the cut, not sure about NorCal.
Anyone want to pick top 12 in order after weekend 4?
I agree, I would like to see the kids/ teams that don't make it not get punished and be able to play some type of meaningful hockey.
Since the top 4 teams from each bracket are done with the preseason after the Valencia weekend, the records will be skewed, but I think AA will look something like:
Wave 1
Flyers 1
Kings 1
GSE 1
Kings 2
GSE 2
Goldrush
Bears
Saints
Sharks
Blackhawks
Wave 2
-
JagrBomb's assessment seems pretty close to what I would think. I would probably just change out the Sharks with Ducks 1. I think the Kings1/Wave 1 bracket was a little more competitive. Plus, Ducks 1 really depends on if they can score. They have one of the lowest goals against for the two weekends but have had some trouble finding the net. In a prior SCAHA game, they beat Goldrush 5-0 and they hung in there with Wave1 last weekend and lost 2-0. So definitely inconsistent. Got a feeling the lower teams on the Kings2/Flyers 1 side will lose to the other bracket teams except for the Bears.
The upcoming Silver Sticks Vegas tournament should give a little more insight since it will have Kings 1, Flyers 1 and 2, Ducks 1, and SD Saints.
-
I agree with what you stated dmbfan, but I'm still siding with Jagr's picks having Jr. Sharks edge out Jr. Ducks 1. This double-elimination tourney should be an exciting one since any team could have a great or off game. This is a "make it or break it" event, so everyone should be bringing their A-game.
-
Hmm.. Based on the seeding and how I think it's going to go, it looks like dmbfan32 might be right with Ducks 1 edging out the Jr. Sharks. Their seed schedule looks to be harder.
-
Here is the seeding for the top 8 teams based on the two conferences:
Conference 1
Wave 1
Jr. Kings 1
Goldrush
GSE 2
Conference 2
Flyers 1
GSE 1
Jr. Kings 2
Saints
These are the 8 teams going to play-in weekend
Bears
Jr. Sharks
Ice Dogs
Jr. Gulls
Blackhawks
Wave 2
Jr. Ducks 1
Flyers 2
My bet is that the final four teams will be
Blackhawks
Bears
Wave 2
Jr. Ducks 1
-
Question. Will there still be SCAHA games for the teams that didn’t make it into CAHA? What about the teams that did?
-
I hear yes. I think the side effect of playing weekend is having to wait for all the teams to land first
Our club guy said rest of schedule will be out after this weekend ... quickly. I hope
-
I hear yes. I think the side effect of playing weekend is having to wait for all the teams to land first
Our club guy said rest of schedule will be out after this weekend ... quickly. I hope
I'm assuming you're stating this for the teams that didn't make it. What about the teams that made it into CAHA? Will they also have SCAHA games or are they exclusive to CAHA weekends only?
-
I hear both. The trick is 1/2 the teams participating in playins will make it to the State Pool, other 1/2 will be relegated. Both groups get games after playing by SCAHA, but no crossover games between em will happen. Club prez says expect 5-6 more games to be pushed this coming Monday for all AA teams.
-
I hear both. The trick is 1/2 the teams participating in playins will make it to the State Pool, other 1/2 will be relegated. Both groups get games after playing by SCAHA, but no crossover games between em will happen. Club prez says expect 5-6 more games to be pushed this coming Monday for all AA teams.
Thanks! Should be a fun weekend with the double elim tourney going on for the last few CAHA spots.
-
It will be a key weekend. I think I like the playin process. You can play yourselves into a chance - or be forced out of a chance. Then you get to do it all over again in Feb to see who goest to States.
I was never super happy with the Labor Day Tourney to cut teams before the season starts. This seems to give younger teams a chance to gel and make a run for it in November
-
All set.
Flyers 1
Wave 1
Wave 2
Goldrush
Ducks 1
Kings 1
Kings 2
Bears
Saints
GSE 1
GSE 2
Blackhawks
-
All set.
Flyers 1
Wave 1
Wave 2
Goldrush
Ducks 1
Kings 1
Kings 2
Bears
Saints
GSE 1
GSE 2
Blackhawks
Pretty much what this forum projected. I think it would have worked out better for the Jr. Sharks if they lost that first game to Jr. Ducks 1. Jr. Ducks 1 took that route to making the CAHA cut. Hopefully, the lower ranks improve to make it a competitive season.
-
Anyone else confused with the one SCAHA game per month schedule? Some teams didn’t even get that released. Through Feb 2022, some teams get 4 games, some get only 3. On top of increased CAHA fees this year, left wondering a bit what we are paying for.
-
All non relegated teams get 3 games in SCAHA scrimmages. Relegated teams get up to 6 SCAHA scrimmages. There are no additional CAHA fees as all teams have already played the equivalent of an entire season. In a standard CAHA season a team would get 4 CAHA weekends. All teams got 4 CAHA weekends to date. Some got 5 if they didn't make the top 4 from each bracket. Remaining teams will be assed the cost of the regular season to continue playing... makes sense. The relegated teams got to play more hockey than ever before. No playdowns this season. You play 11 games and top 4 teams go straight to state championship. That is the only down side in my opinion, no room for some wild card teams to beat the odds.
-
(4) Caha weekends to date? I could only count (3) if you don't count last weekend's play in session.
San Jose, Valencia and Lakewood come to mind.
-
For non relegated teams here is what is coming down the pipe. So 4 shots at getting SCAHA Games in. I heard another game will be added to 14/16 AA at end of week. So 4 games for all
11/20 SCAHA Open Weekend 1
11/27 Thanksgiving Weekend Off
12/04 CAHaA Weekend 1
12/11 SCAHA Select Camp Weekend Off
12/18 SCAHA Open Weekend 2
12/25 XMASS Off
01/01 New Years Off
01/08 CAHA Weekend 2
01/15 MLK Weekend Off
01/23 CAHA Select Camp
01/30 SCAHA Weekend #3
02/06 SCAHA Weekend #4
02/13 CAHA Weekend #3
02/20 Presidents Day Weekend
Season over
-
For non relegated teams here is what is coming down the pipe. So 4 shots at getting SCAHA Games in. I heard another game will be added to 14/16 AA at end of week. So 4 games for all
11/20 SCAHA Open Weekend 1
11/27 Thanksgiving Weekend Off
12/04 CAHaA Weekend 1
12/11 SCAHA Select Camp Weekend Off
12/18 SCAHA Open Weekend 2
12/25 XMASS Off
01/01 New Years Off
01/08 CAHA Weekend 2
01/15 MLK Weekend Off
01/23 CAHA Select Camp
01/30 SCAHA Weekend #3
02/06 SCAHA Weekend #4
02/13 CAHA Weekend #3
02/20 Presidents Day Weekend
Season over
This helps explain the why. Thanks.
-
I heard the below are where the CAHA weekends will be for Bantam for the rest of the season. The Feb 25-27 date is for Peewee. Please confirm if anyone else heard anything similar.
Dec. 3-5, 2021 Vacaville
Jan. 7-9, 2022 Valencia
Feb. 11-13, 2022 San Jose
-
I heard the below are where the CAHA weekends will be for Bantam for the rest of the season. The Feb 25-27 date is for Peewee. Please confirm if anyone else heard anything similar.
Dec. 3-5, 2021 Vacaville
Jan. 7-9, 2022 Valencia
Feb. 11-13, 2022 San Jose
Same. States would then be held Mar 4-6, 2022 back up in Vacaville.
-
So ... 9 of 12 teams are from SoCal, but you are going to have 2 of 3 CAHA weekends in NorCal + States in Norcal? 🤑
-
Pretty much what this forum projected. I think it would have worked out better for the Jr. Sharks if they lost that first game to Jr. Ducks 1. Jr. Ducks 1 took that route to making the CAHA cut. Hopefully, the lower ranks improve to make it a competitive season.
Aside from Flyers 1 (clearly the best team), Kings 1 and Wave 1, all of the other teams are roughly equal. Guess now the biggest question will be who will get that 4th spot in the finals. I would probably give a slight nod to GSE but all of these teams have shown to be inconsistent at times. Ducks1 finally found the net but blew a 4-0 lead vs the Sharks in their first game and lost in the shootout, Wave2 just did not look like themselves vs the Ice Dogs but did well in their remaining games, Blackhawks played well but even they had a scare early on vs the Gulls and went down 3-0 to start their game, etc. The one thing you can count on for 13 and 14 yr olds = consistently inconsistent.
-
Pretty much what this forum projected. I think it would have worked out better for the Jr. Sharks if they lost that first game to Jr. Ducks 1. Jr. Ducks 1 took that route to making the CAHA cut. Hopefully, the lower ranks improve to make it a competitive season.
Aside from Flyers 1 (clearly the best team), Kings 1 and Wave 1, all of the other teams are roughly equal. Guess now the biggest question will be who will get that 4th spot in the finals. I would probably give a slight nod to GSE but all of these teams have shown to be inconsistent at times. Ducks1 finally found the net but blew a 4-0 lead vs the Sharks in their first game and lost in the shootout, Wave2 just did not look like themselves vs the Ice Dogs but did well in their remaining games, Blackhawks played well but even they had a scare early on vs the Gulls and went down 3-0 to start their game, etc. The one thing you can count on for 13 and 14 yr olds = consistently inconsistent.
Pretty accurate assessment IMO and I was going to post something similar about the Sharks also. The results might have been better for them if they lost that first game.
-
With only 4 teams advsncing to next round makes it tough for lower level still not peaked teams advance. Really, 3 lost games and your pretty much out. Like plsydown format, always a few surprises. Let the games begin !! VERY small margin for error !!
-
With only 4 teams advsncing to next round makes it tough for lower level still not peaked teams advance. Really, 3 lost games and your pretty much out. Like plsydown format, always a few surprises. Let the games begin !! VERY small margin for error !!
Seems like it ended up being a trade off of more play-in opportunity to sort out bottom bubble teams and less opportunity for solid but maybe 2nd tier teams to play-in to States
Not sure why they couldn't keep both.
-
Awfully quiet here lately. Clean slate with the regular season kicking off this Friday. With only 11 games to advance from here, any takers for season-ending top 4? Lots of injuries this year affecting multiple, if not all teams, and some "upsets" during this preseason play could make for an interesting outcome.
Flyers 1, Wave 1 and Kings 1 all seem to be a solid top 3 IMO still. Toss up for the 4th spot, thinking either GSE team, Bears, Kings 2?
-
The top 3 you have appear to be pretty solid. I'm not clear on the injuries, so I'm not sure if any of them would be impacted by that. My 4th spot would be Kings 2 or GSE 1. Do you have any darkhorse pick or would that 4th spot be it? We might have a better indication after this weekend's CAHA. Best of luck to all the teams.
-
The top 3 you have appear to be pretty solid. I'm not clear on the injuries, so I'm not sure if any of them would be impacted by that. My 4th spot would be Kings 2 or GSE 1. Do you have any darkhorse pick or would that 4th spot be it? We might have a better indication after this weekend's CAHA. Best of luck to all the teams.
Like JK2 for the 4th spot. BUT they are 08 and a bit on the small side. That and that GSE has nor cal home ice advantage ( not that the refs are partial...cough...cough) will make ir difficult
-
WRATH OF CAHN LIVES !!!!
-
That and that GSE has nor cal home ice advantage ( not that the refs are partial...cough...cough) will make ir difficult
The scheduling is pretty bad when you compare across all 4 AA age groups for the CAHA weekends. I get that it comes down to which rinks put bids to host in, but come on...
12U - 2 of the 12 teams are NorCal but not 1 of their 3 league weekends is up north with Riverside, Riverside and Valencia penciled in. SoCal teams lucked out for sure. ???
14U - 3 of the 12 teams are NorCal, yet 3 of the 4 weekends (if you count States) are up north with Vacaville, Valencia, San Jose and then Vacaville (States) all schedule. SoCal got screwed here. >:(
16U - 2 of the 12 teams are NorCal. They drew Irvine, Anaheim, Vacaville and then Vacaville (States). ::)
18U - 4 of the 12 teams are NorCal but they drew no Norcal regular season weekends with the schedule showing Anaheim, Irvine and then Vacaville (States). :o
CAHA needs to do better here. Why not balance this out a bit more between the divisions? 1 NorCal trip in the reg season per age group instead of 12U getting none and 14U getting 2. Hell, swap Vacaville with Irvine and send 18U up to Vacaville once in the reg season and use Irvine for States. The vast majority of teams are from down here anyways.
-
Looks to be a little more even competition after day 1 with some unexpected wins & a tie. Here were the resukts;
Bears tied Flyers1
JrDucks 1 beat Kings1
Blackhawks beat Kings2
Saints over Wave2
GSE1 beat GSE2
Wave1 beat Goldrush
-
Lots of interesting outcomes and results for sure. When you look across all games comparatively, some don't make sense but I guess that is 13-14 year old hockey for ya. With over a third of the season now completed, some teams are sitting pretty already with other having major holes to try and dig out of.
Wave 1 - 7 pts
Kings 1 - 6 pts
Bears - 6 pts
Flyers 1 - 5 pts
GSE 1 - 5 pts
Goldrush - 5 pts
Saints - 4 pts
Ducks 1 - 3 pts
GSE 2 - 3 pts
Blackhawks - 2 pts
Kings 2 - 2 pts
Wave 2 - 0 pts
-
That and that GSE has nor cal home ice advantage ( not that the refs are partial...cough...cough) will make ir difficult
The scheduling is pretty bad when you compare across all 4 AA age groups for the CAHA weekends. I get that it comes down to which rinks put bids to host in, but come on...
12U - 2 of the 12 teams are NorCal but not 1 of their 3 league weekends is up north with Riverside, Riverside and Valencia penciled in. SoCal teams lucked out for sure. ???
14U - 3 of the 12 teams are NorCal, yet 3 of the 4 weekends (if you count States) are up north with Vacaville, Valencia, San Jose and then Vacaville (States) all schedule. SoCal got screwed here. >:(
16U - 2 of the 12 teams are NorCal. They drew Irvine, Anaheim, Vacaville and then Vacaville (States). ::)
18U - 4 of the 12 teams are NorCal but they drew no Norcal regular season weekends with the schedule showing Anaheim, Irvine and then Vacaville (States). :o
CAHA needs to do better here. Why not balance this out a bit more between the divisions? 1 NorCal trip in the reg season per age group instead of 12U getting none and 14U getting 2. Hell, swap Vacaville with Irvine and send 18U up to Vacaville once in the reg season and use Irvine for States. The vast majority of teams are from down here anyways.
There should really be a minimum standard also with the rinks. The Vacaville one is in disarray with glass that's broken, cloudy/dirty, and covered in holiday paintings.
-
Completely agree, inside 4 minutes of the game, there were piles of ice around the blue lines impacting the puck the entire game
-
The ice conditions were horrendous. How they have games of importance at this rink is laughable; especially considering the fees we pay for CAHA.
The Mason Rink (I believe) had ice so thick that you could not even see a blue crease near the nets and not much of the dasher was visible above the ice. And the nets on that rink came off with any little push or contact with the goalies. I saw at least 3 goals disallowed in different games since the net was off. And with just 2 officials, they were not looking for that until after it was too late. And then to hear that the finals will be in Vacaville......ridiculous. They need a much better venue with preferably 3 officials per game. The ref shortage was very apparent this past weekend.
-
The ice conditions were horrendous. How they have games of importance at this rink is laughable; especially considering the fees we pay for CAHA.
The Mason Rink (I believe) had ice so thick that you could not even see a blue crease near the nets and not much of the dasher was visible above the ice. And the nets on that rink came off with any little push or contact with the goalies. I saw at least 3 goals disallowed in different games since the net was off. And with just 2 officials, they were not looking for that until after it was too late. And then to hear that the finals will be in Vacaville......ridiculous. They need a much better venue with preferably 3 officials per game. The ref shortage was very apparent this past weekend.
The Ref situation isn't going to get better anytime soon. Refs have been quitting in droves, citing the antagonistic environment they feel they are being subjected to, although I also think the lack of adequate remuneration has a lot to do with it. Not a lot of experienced refs want to spend their weekend making a few bucks (after travel and gas costs) so they can get verbally abused by parents. They will need to pay refs a lot more to turn that around, and those costs are going to flow back to the teams. With that said I have no idea if SCAHA/CAHA are even looking at the issue, other than knowing that it exists.
-
Just curious, now that the caha season is on, how do playoffs work? Top 4? 6? Round robin? Thx
-
Just curious, now that the caha season is on, how do playoffs work? Top 4? 6? Round robin? Thx
I believe the remaining 12 teams all play each other once over the 3 CAHA weekends. Then the top 4 advance to the semi's and then finals. Not sure what the tie breaker rules are.
-
I am hearing a few teams lost last players last minute to AAA? Any validity to this?
-
I am hearing a few teams lost last players last minute to AAA? Any validity to this?
yes
-
Regular season over four teams remain.
Who will advance to Nationals, Kings, Wave, GSE, or Flyers?
-
GSE and Kings seem to trending at the right time, though Wave and Flyers didn't really need to win over the weekend. Should be a pick 'em!
-
Regular season over four teams remain.
Who will advance to Nationals, Kings, Wave, GSE, or Flyers?
I think all of the 4 are capable obviously with the records/ points they all posted compared to the rest of the field but I guess I would have to look to Kings1 or Wave1 right now. I'll say Kings1 just based on the momentum they seem to be riding. All 4 teams can clearly score (Flyers are the top dogs here with 61 GF this season, 19 more goals than any of the other 3 teams) but I think it will come down to keeping pucks out of the net.
Looking at CAHA regular season stats and based on what I have seen:
Kings1 - on a 6 game regular season win streak going into the playoffs and they came storming back to take 1st place in regular season play. They may have the best goaltending of the 4 teams.
2-1-0 against these 3 teams this season.
Wave1 - very good team but have faltered to some lower contending teams this season in losing to Kings2, tying GSE2 and just beating the Saints by 1 goal.
2-1-0 against these 3 teams this season.
Flyers - no question they can score goals, but even with almost 20 more goals than any other team this season, I think the team defense/ backstops will be the question mark.
1-1-1 against these 3 teams this season.
GSE1 - fast, physical team but also beatable IMO.
1-2-0 against these 3 teams this season.
-
Looks like the Flyers put it together at the very end. Seemed like the Kings were going to take it all but perhaps the Flyers benefited by winning some close games and had momentum into the final. Would assume Kings came out flat and gave up a quick goal or two and just couldn't come back?
-
Anyone know of any good Bantam AA clinics or scrimmages going on?
-
My son did several camps over the years through https://proambitions.com/[font=var(--typeHeaderPrimary)][size=var(--typeHeaderSize)][/size][/font]