16AA for 2018-19

[Strawman]

was wondering what happened to the AAA teams? Meaning, just a few years ago the Heat, Wave, Wildcats and others all seemed to have AAA teams at PW up through Midget. I'm guess CAHA shut that down, consolidating talent to Kings/Ducks, but why? While that might make better big program teams, wouldn't that drive lots of kids out of state and to prep schools? Additionally, less kids playing Tier = less money, right? I'm sure it's complicated and nuanced... just curious, though.

There is zero complication or nuance to what happened.

1. CAHA board is dominated by reps from Kings, Ducks & Sharks.

2. Three years ago, they passed a new rule limited AAA to 5 teams per birth year, instituted a whole host of requirements that must be met each season to qualify (most of which only the largest and best financed clubs -- i.e. Kings, Ducks & Sharks -- could meet), required any club wishing to field an AAA to go through an "approval" process each year, except that the three "NHL sponsored clubs (Kings, Ducks and Sharks) all get automatic approval. Ain't that rare?

3. Predictably, all of the clubs not named the Kings, Ducks and Sharks have given up on AAA rather than going through the onerous and obviously biased process.

4. The three clubs pushed this through in an effort to create an AAA monopoly up north (Sharks) and duopoly in SoCal. They succeeded.

5. The non unexpected result is that a lot of families who don't like limited choice at home are moving out of state. I predicted months ago that around three dozen of the top minor Midget kids in So Cal (2003s) will be playing out of the region next season (THA, Shattuck or back East).  From what I am hearing lately, I may be low on my prediction. By getting greedy, the Kings and Ducks have wrecked the chances of building a quality Midget AAA hockey circuit in the southwest USA for this generation.

Most insightful post I've read here in a while.

[The N00B]

Before CAHA implemented the limit on AAA teams, much of the talk was how "AAA is watered down in California". Lots of folks on this site were complaining that clubs were taking advantage of parents who were willing to pay-for-an-A and the end result was a number of teams that should not be playing at this level. You had real AAA caliber players sprinkled across many different teams and no one single team could compete with the better AAA teams from out of state.


At that point, CAHA could have either:
 a. Done nothing
 b. Try to implement a system that improves the situation


After years of getting roasted for choosing "a", they decided to try "b". Did they implement a perfect solution? Obviously not, but at least they're trying.


Look at 16AAA last season. 5 teams, of which only 2 ended the season in the top 100 nationally. I could argue that 5 AAA teams is too many. Are there really many more than 40 kids in this state born in 2001 that *should* be playing AAA.


Now - how do you pick which clubs get AAA teams? That's the tough one. If you're trying to build long-term national recognition, then I would think you would want to select clubs that have the highest probability of being around for a long time. Financial stability, name recognition, coaches with last names someone from the east coast would recognize. To me, that sounds like the clubs that have NHL backing. Is that *always* the case across every age group? Nope. But as a "brand", I think you need to have some consistency.


Does this system result in more kids leaving CA? I'm not sure that any more kids would stay if this situation was different. I don't think people are leaving for the sole reason of limited choices. If you live in Bakersfield, and you're kid is a true AAA player - what is more impacting? Driving to LA/OC or having your kid live with a different family across the country? I think people are leaving because they want their kid in a different (hockey) environment altogether.


The problem I *do* have is how some of the clubs allow their AAA teams to be run. Out of state recruiting should not be allowed if CAHA is going to put a hard limit on the number of teams. And you either tighten the PDR rules so that clubs are forced to develop more AA/A players or you eliminate the PDR all together.

Thoughts?

[JackBender]

The problem I *do* have is how some of the clubs allow their AAA teams to be run. Out of state recruiting should not be allowed if CAHA is going to put a hard limit on the number of teams. And you either tighten the PDR rules so that clubs are forced to develop more AA/A players or you eliminate the PDR all together.

Thoughts?

Very thoughtful and well stated. I'd argue that the 16AAA teams weren't very competitive because the top kids left long ago, which leads back to why? No one "wants" to leave. Every parent and kid looks to Minnesota with awe. Those kids are able to play locally through high school, staying with all their friends, their families, and the state has the highest number of NHL players. Their system works. Proven fact.


California has a lot of kids playing hockey. Travel around. Go out of state. We have athletes. Our kids can hang with every state.  Look at the younger birth years. When they stay together, they're competitive throughout all of North America. A lack of kids playing is not the problem.  Which leads us back to the governing body.


Your final point brings up something interesting. NoCal teams continue to grow weak every year as SoCal teams poach their top players.  It's too easy, yet very short sighted. Teams consolidate, making for no competition, so kids leave. Very simple. So what if CAHA implemented boundaries like Minnesota, does that help?   

[coachbombay]

the ducks 16AAA was ranked #1 in the country most of last year!

[RW]

Leaving town is certainly becoming popular but so is ADHSL.  I have a son who played both D1 ADHSL and 16AA club last season, so we had a unique perspective.  The level of play in the D1 ADHSL games was every bit as competitive as 16AA and/or 18AA and often times more so.  In fact, his D1 team was middle of the road and they beat a couple of 18AA teams in tournaments without much difficulty.  D2 had some very good teams as well.  Point being, more and more tier level Midget kids are choosing the ADHSL route and the level of play is rising because of it.  I hear Santa Margarita has 13 incoming freshman hockey players this year.

The exodus of both 2002 and 2003 kids out of Midget AA (for whatever reason) is going to make for a very watered down club season.

[JackBender]

the ducks 16AAA was ranked #1 in the country most of last year!

Good point. I'd say the Jr Ducks have done a much better job of retention and creating more options (from Mites through Midgets). Additionally, the ADHSHL has done great things over the past decade to promote HS hockey. With the new rink down in Irvine, I imagine it'll even improve.


Question remains, though, how many kids are able to use their HS experience to get into college hockey? If this becomes a successful path, people will do it.   

[The N00B]

Every parent and kid looks to Minnesota with awe. Those kids are able to play locally through high school, staying with all their friends, their families, and the state has the highest number of NHL players. Their system works. Proven fact.   

Agreed. The Minnesota/Wisconsin model is great! But the reason it works for them and not for CA is that the *density* of kids in those states that play ice hockey is exponentially higher. Each of the high schools in those states can ice 2 or 3 full teams because the sport is part of their culture growing up. Its just not like that here. My son's school has like 2,500 kids, of which there are maybe 15 total that play ice hockey at any level. Contrast that to the 3 full boys soccer teams (not including kids that get cut from all 3 teams) the school has. We are a ***LONG*** way off from having more than 1 or 2 nationally competitive pure high school teams. And those high schools in CA now that are competitive at hockey are basically "clubs" anyway. There's a reason only the private schools do well - they are not subject to district boundary rules. If I had to guess, I would say at least 1/2 of the kids on SM and O-Lu do not live near those schools and one of the top reasons they go there is to play on the team.


Now take a look at Michigan & Illinois. Everyone knows about Little Caesars, Compuware, Mission, CYA, etc... AFAIK These are just regular club teams similar to the S/CAHA model. What causes a CA kid to want to leave and go play for Little Caesars?

[The N00B]

I'd say the Jr Ducks have done a much better job of retention and creating more options... 

LOL - It was the Ducks I was thinking of when talking about restricting the PDR. I believe their 16AAA team last season had a couple kids previously from GSE and also a few kids from out of state. And guys flip-flop back and forth between Kings and Ducks every year.


I've talked to coaches from other states who specifically singled out the Ducks 16AAA coaches as doing a bad job of developing from within. On the other hand, I don't think its a crime to come right out and say "We're going to build a team to make a run at a national championship". As long as you know what the plan is ahead of time.

[JackBender]

I'd say the Jr Ducks have done a much better job of retention and creating more options... 

LOL - It was the Ducks I was thinking of when talking about restricting the PDR. I believe their 16AAA team last season had a couple kids previously from GSE and also a few kids from out of state. And guys flip-flop back and forth between Kings and Ducks every year.


I've talked to coaches from other states who specifically singled out the Ducks 16AAA coaches as doing a bad job of developing from within. On the other hand, I don't think its a crime to come right out and say "We're going to build a team to make a run at a national championship". As long as you know what the plan is ahead of time.

Right, I just meant they were really trying to ice competitive teams at a higher age group than other programs. Plus, they have wrangled a lot of ice and seem to be trying to expand the game through a comprehensive in-house program and HS system. The Jr Kings seem to mainly care about their birth year teams.

[JackBender]

Every parent and kid looks to Minnesota with awe. Those kids are able to play locally through high school, staying with all their friends, their families, and the state has the highest number of NHL players. Their system works. Proven fact.   

Agreed. The Minnesota/Wisconsin model is great! But the reason it works for them and not for CA is that the *density* of kids in those states that play ice hockey is exponentially higher. Each of the high schools in those states can ice 2 or 3 full teams because the sport is part of their culture growing up. Its just not like that here. My son's school has like 2,500 kids, of which there are maybe 15 total that play ice hockey at any level. Contrast that to the 3 full boys soccer teams (not including kids that get cut from all 3 teams) the school has. We are a ***LONG*** way off from having more than 1 or 2 nationally competitive pure high school teams. And those high schools in CA now that are competitive at hockey are basically "clubs" anyway. There's a reason only the private schools do well - they are not subject to district boundary rules. If I had to guess, I would say at least 1/2 of the kids on SM and O-Lu do not live near those schools and one of the top reasons they go there is to play on the team.


Now take a look at Michigan & Illinois. Everyone knows about Little Caesars, Compuware, Mission, CYA, etc... AFAIK These are just regular club teams similar to the S/CAHA model. What causes a CA kid to want to leave and go play for Little Caesars?

That's the big question, right? Most would say exposure and it makes life easier (less travel, etc.). I suppose that's what CAHA will always be up against, and it's a bit of a circular discussion.

[Rub One Out]

A friend here has an 03 that is working out with a MN high school team over the summer.  The skating program is six weeks, on-ice 4 days w/dryland after. Cost? $425.  6-week strength and conditioning program before ice practice.  Cost? $88.  That's $513 for 2 hours of gym/dryland and 1.5 hours of ice practice/scrimmage, 4 days a week for 6 weeks.  Both facilities are 5-10 minute bike ride.  No brainer.  Not even sure what a season costs for HS hockey.  I saw an invoice for Damien next season: $4200.  Yep, no brainer.


BTW, the coach he's practicing with took last year's varsity team to final 8 in MN State Hockey tournament.


Not sure if the HS leagues in Illinois or Michigan or Wisconsin compare, but California certainly does not.

[lcadad]

Right, but any place that has cheaper Ice is going to have less expensive programs.

[JackBender]

People aren't leaving California because ice is expensive. Compared to other states, it's really not that expensive. The sport on a whole is expensive, but it doesn't have to be as expensive if CAHA would do their job and solely focus on California and what's good for all of California. Creating boundaries and not allowing kids to play would be a start. For example, if all 09/08s were in Squirt, the division would be dynamite. But the 08s are all over the place, including PWAA. This creates a class system and fractures the foundation going forward, and the migration out of state at Bantams will continue. The problem starts early, and CAHA allows it.  [size=78%]  [/size]

[Rub One Out]

I think the cost of ice absolutely impacts the overall cost of the sport on a whole.  There are a number of contributing factors, but ice is probably the largest expense in any program.  It's worse here because I don't think there's a single sheet of ice that is municipally-owned (i.e. subsidized).  Privately-owned ice means there's gotta be a profit, no matter how small.  Add that to the fact that we live in a friggin desert, AND electricity costs a fortune, cost of ice certainly has an impact.  Now, when you get to Tier 1 and 2 hockey, depending on the program, travel probably nudges ahead of ice in terms of cost, and coaching doesn't come cheap either.  Plus, why the hell doesn't CAHA allow teams to get sponsors??? Walk into any rink in MN and the boards/walls are covered in them.  It's all about control...

[lcadad]

I think the cost of ice absolutely impacts the overall cost of the sport on a whole.  There are a number of contributing factors, but ice is probably the largest expense in any program.  It's worse here because I don't think there's a single sheet of ice that is municipally-owned (i.e. subsidized).  Privately-owned ice means there's gotta be a profit, no matter how small.  Add that to the fact that we live in a friggin desert, AND electricity costs a fortune, cost of ice certainly has an impact.  Now, when you get to Tier 1 and 2 hockey, depending on the program, travel probably nudges ahead of ice in terms of cost, and coaching doesn't come cheap either.  Plus, why the hell doesn't CAHA allow teams to get sponsors??? Walk into any rink in MN and the boards/walls are covered in them.  It's all about control...

There actually is one that I know of -- Bakersfield.  The cost to play in Bakersfield is significantly less than any other club thanks to the subsidized cost of the ice.