I'm not sure why we are talking about the '06 Brick team in the 2016 Peewee AA thread, but since that's been happening I'll throw in my 2 cents.Seems like the last few years there has been a lot of criticism of the process, the approach compared to other teams, and the on ice product. For example last year, several people that watched the games complained that there was not enough "team play" despite a number of highly talented kids. I saw a portion of one practice for that team last year, and it was certainly impressive in terms of the 1 on 1 abilities of many of the kids who were selected but team chemistry never emerged.
From the box scores, and shot totals, this years team was certainly competitive. They put up nearly the same number or more shots in most of the games they played. Ironically their sole win vs Montreal suggests that the goalie might have stole them one there as they were substantially outshot in that game.For example, against the undefeated Minnesota 3 team, they lost 3-1 with 16 to 18 shots. In other games, they surrendered 3 empty net goals. This is not a team that is out of their depth. It seems they were short on puck luck and perhaps some seasoning that could have won several of the close games they lost. Apparently they suffered a setback or two surrendering leads late in a game.
I have many questions about the Brick system here, and the very idea that we send a "Team California" when it essentially ends up being a team SoCal, without representation from either SD or NorCal, who both produce competitive teams. I question the franchise aspect of the system, the amount of time the team has to prepare, and the fact that the coaches are typically coming to it with fairly extreme bias towards the players they know the best.
I know a lot of the kids at this age group, and it's pretty clear that unless your child played for either the kings or ducks, their chances to make the team are exceedingly slim. This year the 2nd best predominantly 06 team was the Ice Dogs, who were neck and neck with the Ducks, so there's understandably some really good kids from that team that made the roster and should have, but this season seems to be an anomaly, and the team is still heavy with players from the Ducks which was a short bench team with a AA caliber 05 on it as well.
Let's just say hypothetically that you have 2 kids who are quite similar at first blush. The Brick clinics offer a few opportunities for kids to show what they can do, but like most teams, they are already about 90% picked before anyone steps on the ice. If you are the coach, and have 2-3 seasons with a player you've coached, how likely are you to pick the player you don't know that well? What are the tryouts actually for then?
From what people have told me, many of the other teams are more seasoned and prepared to play together, because they are put together earlier, and get in more tournament play. Again I don't have all the facts, so I take these statements with a grain of salt, but if we look at a program like the Jr. Bruins for example, they are basically grooming kids to play for a team 4 years in advance of the Brick. I find that a little bit crazy but it does indicate some of what you have to compete with. Maybe that's not anything we should care about competing with?
At the end of the day, it seems to me that hockey is doing just fine in California, and by the time these kids are college age, we should see a lot of california born players continuing into the higher levels the sport offers. California born players are being recruited by prep schools and western colleges, and as more California and western US universities add Division 1 programs, there will be a lot of opportunity. I was recently corresponding with someone back east about the Squirt divisions last season, and the fact that there were over 50 teams in scaha. The sport is extremely healthy, and the Brick is simply a sideshow that means very little in terms of how much talent and how competitive our kids are nationally. One would hope that at very least the experience of playing in a prestigious international tournament on a regional all star team is its own reward for those kids and their families. From what I've heard, the cost is certainly astronomical for a single tournament. At 9-10 they are little boys, not little mini professionals.
The saddest thing to hear is that a kid would literally drop off the team at the end of the tournament. Nothing gets people more upset than the subject of ice time and usage of their kids, or lack thereof. I didn't see the games, so I have no idea how much the various lines were played, but unless we were talking about a first line player walking off the team in a huff over results, I'm guessing that the family that made the painful decision to walk off the team and not have their kid finish things out, might very well have been doing that because their kid has been riding the bench for the majority of the tournament.
These are the types of situations that are high up on the list of reasons that kids quit the sport entirely, despite having a AAA pedigree. Too much pressure and focus on competition and winning at too early an age is something that USA Hockey has been trying to address for years now, and is the reason for Mite ADM, and the fact that there is no sanctioned Squirt national championship tournament anymore. My biggest concern for my child is that they develop confidence and essential skills in all aspects of the game. My fear would be a situation where the coach tries to turn my son into a 3rd line grinder at the expense of his development. All the talk about honoring a commitment and seeing something through, sounds good to the adult mind, but isn't something I'd expect to be received by a kid who has had their ego and self confidence trashed. Again, not saying I agree, or would have done what those parents chose to do myself, but I'm not going to rush to condemn the family when I wasn't party to what happened.
This is a team that is going to essentially disband at this point anyways. Once again, realization that your kid is seen by the coaches as being at the bottom of the roster is a difficult pill to swallow when you are in the midst of the tournament, and this perhaps goes back to the fact that if the team had a larger window of preparation and played in more highly competitive tune-ups than they do, this might have become evident earlier before it was too late for the family to back out gracefully if they couldn't accept the situation.
The brick is franchised, so I'm not sure what could be done about the situation that didn't involve a lot of soul searching and perhaps the investment in it by a larger group of people than those currently controlling the team and everything having to do with it.
