CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II

[#4BobbyOrr]

Bobby... we already debunked this myth over and over. Kings/Ducks always competitive nationally. Nothing has changed post-limits. Not sure why you’d be scared of more competition, more opportunities.... and LESS bureaucratic restrictions, but here we are.

And the 03 player you highlight would have been gone before but his entire team played up his Bantam Minor year... he’s playing up this year to 16U... and he will be gone next year. Just about every recognizable name from that 03 group will be gone. And I’d bet you that if there were still 10 16U AAA teams in California, a few would be staying. But there won’t be 10 teams. Or 8. Or 6.  There will be 3 teams. The same 3 teams the 03s have been amongst for the past 6 years... so the kids will all be gone.


Nice job, CAHA.

He will be gone next year because he will be playing Juniors at 16.  Isn't that called development?  Most of those other "recognizable" names will also be playing juniors.  You make it sound like it's a bad thing.


There will be 6 teams in midget AAA next year. The 15AAA division didn't exist until 2016.  They moved the minor birth year teams into their own division at the recommendation of USA Hockey.  Back in this supposed "Golden Age" of California youth hockey when they were making it to the Nationals final there were also only 6 or 7 midget aaa teams.  In 2010 there were 7, in 2011 there were 6, in 2012 there were 7. Now there are 6.  In the years 2013 through 2016 when there were a total of 9,7,10, and 9 midget AAA teams none of them made the finals at Nationals. 

[JackBender]

Him/Them playing Juniors is an awesome thing.


For your second part... then nothing has changed.  So then we don't need restrictions?  It has done nothing.  Ducks/Kings will continue to do their thing.  They don't need outside help. They have the best facilities and top notch coaches.  So... the supposedly unbiased governing body doesn't need to be suppressing the rest of the state.  It's not CAHA's job to ice national teams.  That's up to the clubs.  Freedom now. 


Not sure why you would have a problem with that.

[#4BobbyOrr]

Total PeeWee AAA teams by year:


2010 2
2011 3
2012 6
2013 6
2014 5
2015 8 (first year they added 11 u PeeWee minor separate division)
2016 7
2017 6
2018 6
2019 7


Doesn't strike me as rigged

[#4BobbyOrr]

Him/Them playing Juniors is an awesome thing.


For your second part... then nothing has changed.  So then we don't need restrictions?  It has done nothing.  Ducks/Kings will continue to do their thing.  They don't need outside help. They have the best facilities and top notch coaches.  So... the supposedly unbiased governing body doesn't need to be suppressing the rest of the state.  It's not CAHA's job to ice national teams.  That's up to the clubs.  Freedom now. 


Not sure why you would have a problem with that.

They're not being suppressed.  The top 16AA team in California wouldn't even be in the top 100 in AAA.  If these clubs were being suppressed there would be a bunch of California teams in the top 10 of the 16AA rankings. The highest ranked team is 32nd. Aren't they better off trying to win the Tier 2 nationals?

[JackBender]

Oh boy... whatever AA team you're referencing wouldn't be a AAA team.  Read the past posts.  Starting in 2016, smaller clubs applied to ice AAA teams and they were rejected. Based on nothing.  While the Kings/Ducks/Sharks were given automatic bids based on their names.   


That's the definition of suppression.  It's a monopoly.  It's why antitrust laws exist. 


As for number teams at Peewee, look at the initial post... and the whole picture. 35 AAA teams in 2015/16 season.  22 AAA teams today.  That's a 3rd less.  AAA hockey is shrinking when the NHL and the game nationally is EXPANDING.  It's going in the wrong direction... and NOT naturally.  CAHA is rigging the AAA application process.  Wake up.

[Hockey sophist]

Him/Them playing Juniors is an awesome thing.


For your second part... then nothing has changed.  So then we don't need restrictions?  It has done nothing.  Ducks/Kings will continue to do their thing.  They don't need outside help. They have the best facilities and top notch coaches.  So... the supposedly unbiased governing body doesn't need to be suppressing the rest of the state.  It's not CAHA's job to ice national teams.  That's up to the clubs.  Freedom now. 


Not sure why you would have a problem with that.

They're not being suppressed.  The top 16AA team in California wouldn't even be in the top 100 in AAA.  If these clubs were being suppressed there would be a bunch of California teams in the top 10 of the 16AA rankings. The highest ranked team is 32nd. Aren't they better off trying to win the Tier 2 nationals?

Hey Bobby Orr, that is a lame argument.   Considering 16AA teams now ignores the flight of 15 and 16 year olds to the east in the last few years.   Yes, of course, take a 100 or 150 players out of that age group and it will be diminished.   Why would that be noteworthy?

[#4BobbyOrr]

I highly doubt 100 to 150 kids in one or two birth years have left to go play back east or elsewhere if you are going to make an argument based on that number you are going to have to prove you're not pulling it out of your ass.  You're saying enough midget aged players have left that we could fill up to 10 whole teams. C'mon!

[NotfromSoCal]

There are a LOT of kids in hockey prep schools that would never make the roster of a AAA team.  $20K/year will buy yo ua roster spot.  There are other talented kids that could make AAA that are choosing not to play AAA for various reasons.  If there were more options (AAA teams) it would actually be something to shoot for rather than a novelty.  There are kids that improve during the year, but when they could make AAA the next year, the roster is nearly full before tryouts.  Others simply choose to play AA for various reasons who could compete on AAA teams.  Players who play A and don't have an opportunity to play at a higher level reach a point they can never catch up with the speed which means if kids were given that opportunity, their game would naturally elevate.  I will never be convinced that having 3 teams is goods for anyone, not even the players on those 3 teams.

[#4BobbyOrr]

There are a LOT of kids in hockey prep schools that would never make the roster of a AAA team.  $20K/year will buy yo ua roster spot.  There are other talented kids that could make AAA that are choosing not to play AAA for various reasons.  If there were more options (AAA teams) it would actually be something to shoot for rather than a novelty.  There are kids that improve during the year, but when they could make AAA the next year, the roster is nearly full before tryouts.  Others simply choose to play AA for various reasons who could compete on AAA teams.  Players who play A and don't have an opportunity to play at a higher level reach a point they can never catch up with the speed which means if kids were given that opportunity, their game would naturally elevate.  I will never be convinced that having 3 teams is goods for anyone, not even the players on those 3 teams.

There are at least 6 AAA teams in every age group except 18AAA. 6 midget, 6 bantam, 6 peewee. Next year there will be 7 bantam AAA teams

[lcadad]

There are at least 6 AAA teams in every age group except 18AAA. 6 midget, 6 bantam, 6 peewee. Next year there will be 7 bantam AAA teams

So now you're trying to make your point by combining birth years?   



I'll jump ahead for you:  SOCAL AAA IS DOING GREAT WITH OVER ....ummm ...  20 TEAMS! 


This is getting dumber by the minute.  Why not just stick to your original assertion that the system is great as it is and we can all agree to disagree.  Otherwise you need to actually make an argument with some facts and analysis to elaborate on your points, as others have done. 

[5lap5hot]

This whole thing is dumb.  To points that cannot be argued


1)  AAA teams are limited by CAHA.  Whether its a USA Hockey count of registered players or not they are limiting AAA team and the fact that the NHL jr teams get them is political and financial.  This decision may not be wrong because these teams aren't sitting with a worrisome budget.  They have the money and will draw the players.  I'm not saying I like it or that its right for the long term, but having a AAA team one year and losing it the next year seems to be a bad decision.


2)  California AA teams continue to show that they can compete with the AAA teams.  Look at the minor year teams playing against the combined teams.  There is talent and some come on later or choose not to drive make the drive. 


3)  AAA teams in California have to play 2 others teams only with 6-9 game season.  That is a joke so why would you want to play AAA.


4)  AA teams if they're good enough can do what the AAA teams do and fly to play in the tournaments up north and back east.


I suggest that the AAA people just agree that this is picked not because there are better players at the NHL jr teams, but simply those organizations have the $ to be there from year to year.  AAA teams are not necessarily the best teams that can be formed and that AA has kids that either choose not to play for the NHL jr teams or cannot afford the $25k, but are as good as some of the AA players.


CAHA is a problem when it comes to decisions like they did with the Wave team.  At PW spending $50k for two years plus the Quebec tournament costs is probably the biggest waste of money besides the Bullet Train. 

[JackBender]

It is dumb... not sure why CAHA has to restrict AAA teams when there is demand, past success, and current clubs desiring to organize teams, but they do. The harm comes as Hamacher points out... scouts/recruiters/preps don't look at AA kids the same way they look at AAA kids. They trust the system. If a kid plays AA, they assume he wasn't good enough to make AAA. He made this very clear, supported with data. They don't even look at the kid, and kids miss out on opportunities.


This is unnecessary, and for anyone to support the clearly laid out, systematic suppression of AAA hockey in California by CAHA, it's disappointing. These people have an agenda or a very cynical view of the world.  Smaller clubs should be afforded the same opportunities as the big ones.  And the point of an independent governing body is to create a level playing field for everyone.  Not just the wealthy.


Oh, and Bobby... come on, you know these are birth year teams... each age group has 3 teams. Don't be coy.   

[Landshark]

I totally agree with many of your points, but I don’t want the Hockey governing boards to forget that it’s not all about aaa. It’s about more quality games for aa too. Maybe an all star game
For each birth year for every level. It’s about encouraging a players to move into tier.  Why not have the a teams in the top four slots play the aa teams in the bottom four?  The more vibrant the hockey community the better.

[#4BobbyOrr]

Oh, and Bobby... come on, you know these are birth year teams... each age group has 3 teams. Don't be coy.

Not being coy before 2015 or 2016 the minor birthyear teams were in the same division as the major teams. There was no minor division. So these age groups didn't drop from 10 or 8 or 7 teams to 3 teams they dropped to 6. Or 7. It's not that drastic of a difference.

[JackBender]

AAA teams have dropped by more than 1/3 since the 2015-2016 season. That's drastic... especially when the sport is expanding everywhere else. It's not like less kids are playing hockey in California. More are. So the opportunities should be expanding as well. This isn't complicated. And whoever doesn't see that is either being stubborn or operating with an agenda.