Author Topic: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II  (Read 11768 times)

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #75 on: February 25, 2019, 08:38:14 AM »
The problem with focusing on Norcal and the Sharks is that it is the exception and not the rule.  There's less population, fewer teams and less kids to pick from.  I also don't think the Sharks are terrible -- just not capable of beating the Kings or Ducks 9 games out of 10.  Depending on the division, some teams are just a few goals away when you look at the results.


If the Sharks weren't part of the triad of teams that have the AAA franchise, there would be less animosity, because the rules that were used to deny other clubs a place at the AAA table are the same rules that don't get applied to the Sharks. 


Quote
Look...not gunna rehash pages of mud here...and years of posts actually. But to be quick...I AGREE there should be no Monopoly with the big three in terms of AAA teams. I AGREE that there should be as many AAA teams as the "market" can bear.

What I DON'T agree with is clubs should be able to field AAA teams willy nilly and put teams out there that lose 0-10 day in and day out. This helps no one and hurts everyone. I just disagree with how big the "market" actually is....


That's not the way it works.  You either leave the teams to the clubs or you don't.  Over time the viability of clubs will take care of itself, and if the cost of that is the occasional blow out, so be it.  Stop with the fantasy that there's perfect parity where every game is going to be a 50/50 coin flip.


No...what you describe is NOT how it works. It has been shown that parents and clubs are all too willing to put their kids and teams up into levels they probably shouldn't belong. The entire reason the Flight system is in place is to avoid teams spending your precious travel dollars running all over the state to play a bunch of games that are blowouts. I am not saying the Flight system is right, but it IS an attempt to combat clubs/parents from fielding teams for the "extra A" or more dollars in terms of the clubs...it happens....it can be shown even today.


I already described why blowouts are not productive...for either the blowoutees or the blowouters...

PutYourFootOnTheGas

  • Mite
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • LR Justice +6/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #76 on: February 25, 2019, 08:40:03 AM »
“No parent, player, club or coach is wandering in to AAA willy nilly.”


JB, you make some argument worthy points and I honestly enjoy the back and forth but I totally disagree with your statement above. I’ve been around minor hockey for 10+ years. I can tell you that most parents don’t have a grip on reality. Hell, many of us are flying all over the country watching 11, 12, 13, etc. year old kids play hockey REGULARLY. It’s not sane. This drives clubs to offer anything and everything even if they are not positioned to do it (in my opinion) properly because they know there is always a group of crazies ready to buy in. Perhaps what all this boils down to is do you trust the CAHA shills or the Anaheim Wildcats of the world to do what’s right for little kid hockey??? I know your answer. I know mine.

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #77 on: February 25, 2019, 08:41:43 AM »
Pretty new to this board here, and read the entire thread.  I'm from the Simi Valley area where the Titans played, and always wondered why they no longer exist....guess I can sort of understand now.  What I don't get is, at all of their tryouts they usually had kids lined up outside the door waiting to sign up and try out.  If they are able to field a team, why not let them?  If they end up doing poorly, but people still want to play for the Titans, should that not be a decision made by the parents (customers)?





Gas/Race/Bobby... waiting for an answer.  Heck, Mac can jump in as well.  Please explain. 🤔🤔🤔


Look...not gunna rehash pages of mud here...and years of posts actually. But to be quick...I AGREE there should be no Monopoly with the big three in terms of AAA teams. I AGREE that there should be as many AAA teams as the "market" can bear.


What I DON'T agree with is clubs should be able to field AAA teams willy nilly and put teams out there that lose 0-10 day in and day out. This helps no one and hurts everyone. I just disagree with how big the "market" actually is....


There has to be a bar....we can discuss whether or not CAHA has the bar set correctly or even measures the standard that the bar is based on correctly, but there has to be a bar.  My son would like to be a professional race car driver....but he doesn't know how to drive. Should he get a ride in a pro series just because I say that he deserves an "opportunity" to experience it for himself??? (actually this is EXACTLY how pro racing works...but that is another story ;-) ) This is NOT what we need or should want. Buying the kid a ride or another "A" does nothing but lighten your pocketbook and give the kid a false sense of how good they are....look at how many financed race car drivers struggle and dissappear when daddies money runs out...


LATE EDIT (Sorry) As for letting "parents (customers)" decide if there kids is AAA or not is absolutely silly. I know as many hockey parents as any of you, and if there is one thing I know 99% of parents think their little Gretzky is far better than he actually is...hence the problem we should all be acknowledging "buying the extra A" in hockey. I agree CAHA needs to set a bar and walk away...but coaches and clubs need to be deciding what level they should play at....at least coaches are somewhat more objective.




I understand, I looked back at other posts, and this seems like a very hot topic in the past.  I suppose there will never be agreement between and among the interested groups...I don't see how hockey is "hurt" by allowing other clubs to field AAA teams.  If the Kings/Ducks/Sharks have to play an extra game or two against the Titans (or any other club), I fail to see the collapse of California hockey.  Using the Titans as the example, they didn't always bottom feed.  There were season where they did quite well, which is pretty much how sports go.


Like I said, I am all for more QUALITY AAA teams. It would make life so much easier....less travel, more games, better opportunities, etc. However, the teams MUST meet a minimum standard. Nobody wants to trek up here to NorCal to play a new AAA team that you smoke 10-0 a few times a year. It does nobody any good--the true AAA players learn to play at 85% and get away with it and the "overextended" players learn frustration and dissappointment and are likely to struggle or fail because of it. There MUST be a bar set somewhere/somehow. I will agree our current system is clunky and needs a lot of work...but given what I see out there the "system" is not that far off in terms of how many teams there are...



Just curious as to how a "minimum standard" is defined.....and now this has come full circle for me as a prior fellow noted, in bold, the rules for AAA status and how to maintain it.  I forget who the guy was, but now that makes sense.  I did a cursory look at the standings for the 12-18 AAA major teams.  The standings show (when combined) the Sharks went 4-31?  Does that mean they will lose their AAA program?  That does not seem very competitive....I think other clubs could field AAA teams and do just as bad


I am not saying a minimum standard is easy to define or regulate. If it was CAHA would have done it by now. Obviously, by requiring all the AA team rules in order to have an AAA team is an attempt to set a "bar". I would agree that the attempt here is probably not working. Unfortunately, I don't have an answer that is better either, which is why I normally keep my mouth shut.

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #78 on: February 25, 2019, 08:49:51 AM »
The problem with focusing on Norcal and the Sharks is that it is the exception and not the rule.  There's less population, fewer teams and less kids to pick from.  I also don't think the Sharks are terrible -- just not capable of beating the Kings or Ducks 9 games out of 10.  Depending on the division, some teams are just a few goals away when you look at the results.


If the Sharks weren't part of the triad of teams that have the AAA franchise, there would be less animosity, because the rules that were used to deny other clubs a place at the AAA table are the same rules that don't get applied to the Sharks. 


Quote
Look...not gunna rehash pages of mud here...and years of posts actually. But to be quick...I AGREE there should be no Monopoly with the big three in terms of AAA teams. I AGREE that there should be as many AAA teams as the "market" can bear.

What I DON'T agree with is clubs should be able to field AAA teams willy nilly and put teams out there that lose 0-10 day in and day out. This helps no one and hurts everyone. I just disagree with how big the "market" actually is....



I AGREE with you that the Sharks ARE an anomaly however. All of what you say in regards to that is true. There are much more limits in the north that prevent a free market from working well.


Yes, some rules may get bent in CAHA's system to allow SJ to have a AAA team year in and year out. But, for those of you who are only interested in opportunity for the kids, where would north players have the "opportunity" to play if there was no Sharks AAA? Given the climate, and situation up here, the Sharks make the most sense to have the AAA team given all of our differences to the south and other reasons--facilities, resources, etc. Now, if GSE, or any other team up here could field a competitive AAA team...I would welcome that in a heartbeat. Spending thousands on travel weekends to play ANY game gets old fast...

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #79 on: February 25, 2019, 08:54:49 AM »
“No parent, player, club or coach is wandering in to AAA willy nilly.”


JB, you make some argument worthy points and I honestly enjoy the back and forth but I totally disagree with your statement above. I’ve been around minor hockey for 10+ years. I can tell you that most parents don’t have a grip on reality. Hell, many of us are flying all over the country watching 11, 12, 13, etc. year old kids play hockey REGULARLY. It’s not sane. This drives clubs to offer anything and everything even if they are not positioned to do it (in my opinion) properly because they know there is always a group of crazies ready to buy in. Perhaps what all this boils down to is do you trust the CAHA shills or the Anaheim Wildcats of the world to do what’s right for little kid hockey??? I know your answer. I know mine.


ABSOLUTELY....believing that parents are able to make rational decisions regarding is insanity...it just doesn't happen as a rule and can be shown in AA today...why make AAA as big a mess as AA is???

JackBender

  • Peewee
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • LR Justice +46/-11
    • Tom's Chuckle Barn
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #80 on: February 25, 2019, 10:11:32 AM »
Yeah, uh... I'm an adult, and I don't need a governing body telling me what I should be spending by time, money and energy on.  If you don't want to play, don't play.  But don't push your own agenda onto someone else.  Freedom and opportunity is the backbone to our society, so you can't let one club do as they please (the Sharks) and then not allow others.  That's hypocrisy.


Oh, and no one answered 805. He lives in Simi and is wondering why he'll have to drive three hours to Irvine to play AAA, even though there is a program in his backyard that has two sheets of ice, coaches, kids, and an organization ready to field AAA teams.
I'll be your Huckleberry

TheFourthA

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 60
  • LR Justice +7/-3
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #81 on: February 25, 2019, 10:18:38 AM »
So a lot of venting about CAHA across multiple threads, age levels and tier levels, but not a lot of concrete ideas.  I don’t share all the concerns here, but this is my current take.


1.  At tier 1, allow the three “NHL” clubs’ automatic entries to continue, but allow up to three more teams per birth year based on a showing of demonstrated competitiveness  the prior season against AAA tournament competition and/or disparity with other CAHA AA teams/standard of play.  Eliminate artificial limitations so if one of these was an “NHL” team it is not trapped at AA and small clubs aren’t barred by the size of their club. Each tier 1 team would be required to play one home and one road game against each of the other teams. 


2.  At tier 2, move to major and minor year birth year divisions in place of Flighting.  (Major year teams could include minor year players). Provide state playoffs for both.  Eliminate artificial limitations on number of Tier 2 teams one club can have.


3.   Eligibility for tier 2 status to be determined on basis of demonstrated competitiveness against tier 2 level birth year teams and/or disparity with A level teams the prior season or during pre tryout spring tournaments.  Play-up teams would have to demonstrate success against older California teams or disparity against birth year teams on nationwide basis.  Consider the possibility of a challenge tournament for Labor Day weekend where A teams could compete for an AA bid.


4.   Prohibit recruitment of players outside of California, and establish regional residency requirements.


5.   Consider feasibility of standardizing the number of games per CAHA weekend per team or alternatively, allow teams within a certain distance of each other the option of relocating games between themselves to a more convenient rink on the Thursday, Friday or Sunday of that weekend.  For example, two Kings teams should have the option of playing each other at TSC instead of in Vacaville.


6.  Require tier teams to adhere to USAH program recommendations with regard to roster size, ice sessions and off ice training. 


7.  Require that all skaters receive a minimum Average TOI of 10 minutes a game or be eligible for release and refund.

















Strawman

  • Peewee
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
  • LR Justice +26/-29
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #82 on: February 25, 2019, 10:23:08 AM »
Remember the word opportunity? Well, it paid off in an interesting way this weekend.  Not for a player or parent or club... but for a coach.

The LA Jr Kings 06AAA team won the Quebec International Peewee AAA tournament this weekend.  Pretty great achievement.  It’s like the world championship for Peewee AAA.  It has only been done once before by a California team... several years ago by an LA Selects team (pre-limits, mind you 😉).

The interesting part is the coach, Brett Beebe.  He’s a young guy, with limited coaching experience, and this is his first year coaching the team.  Clearly, though, he’s a very gifted and terrific coach... and guess where his first AAA coaching opportunity came from?

The California Titans.  Opportunity.

Beebe coached the Titans 16U AAA team for a year, and it could be argued that without that opportunity, he wouldn’t have been considered to have enough experience to take over a AAA team for a big club like the LA Jr Kings.  The opportunity allowed him to check a box on his resume, and, sadly, that opportunity no longer exists in California for some other potentially great coach.

No parent, player, club or coach is wandering into AAA willy nilly.  That doesn’t exist.  It never did.  Everyone understands the stakes.  But if a club like the Wildcats isn’t being competitive and some parent feels taken advantage of... then CAHA should talk to that club directly.  Solve the issue directly. 

But don’t hamstring an entire state, and don’t inorganically suppress opportunity.

P.S. Sir 805… keep asking your questions.  You’re exactly right, it's not fair and doesn't make sense... but don’t expect the CAHA shills to answer.


Good point regarding coaching opportunity. Remember that most of the "top" Jr Kings AAA coaches actually came from the Wave.

805hockey

  • Mite
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • LR Justice +1/-1
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #83 on: February 25, 2019, 10:46:52 AM »
Yeah, uh... I'm an adult, and I don't need a governing body telling me what I should be spending by time, money and energy on.  If you don't want to play, don't play.  But don't push your own agenda onto someone else.  Freedom and opportunity is the backbone to our society, so you can't let one club do as they please (the Sharks) and then not allow others.  That's hypocrisy.


Oh, and no one answered 805. He lives in Simi and is wondering why he'll have to drive three hours to Irvine to play AAA, even though there is a program in his backyard that has two sheets of ice, coaches, kids, and an organization ready to field AAA teams.


That is pretty much what I was thinking.  Most people in Ventura/Santa Barbara/San Luis Obispo and North LA County are pretty much screwed from playing AAA, heck, even AA hockey.  The same argument mac made for the Sharks, applies to many kids in socal.  Mac does make a valid point about allowing the Sharks to keep fielding teams (even though they may stink some years and do better other years) due to travel constraints..... but let that happen at other rinks too.



« Last Edit: February 25, 2019, 10:48:12 AM by 805hockey »

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #84 on: February 25, 2019, 11:05:45 AM »
Yeah, uh... I'm an adult, and I don't need a governing body telling me what I should be spending by time, money and energy on.  If you don't want to play, don't play.  But don't push your own agenda onto someone else.  Freedom and opportunity is the backbone to our society, so you can't let one club do as they please (the Sharks) and then not allow others.  That's hypocrisy.


Oh, and no one answered 805. He lives in Simi and is wondering why he'll have to drive three hours to Irvine to play AAA, even though there is a program in his backyard that has two sheets of ice, coaches, kids, and an organization ready to field AAA teams.


I could be like everyone else here and type "this has already been debunked" over and over....but, I don't know you, so, you may, in fact, be able to properly decide what level your kid is and where he should play. That would put you in the .01% of hockey parents who have this ability...congratulations! But...this has already been discussed and debunked  :o [size=78%]---sorry. Heck...why do we need limits??? Let's all sign our kids up for Division 1 NCAA right now!!! Our kids DESERVE the opportunity after all!!! I will be AMAZING!![/size]

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #85 on: February 25, 2019, 11:08:34 AM »
So a lot of venting about CAHA across multiple threads, age levels and tier levels, but not a lot of concrete ideas.  I don’t share all the concerns here, but this is my current take.


1.  At tier 1, allow the three “NHL” clubs’ automatic entries to continue, but allow up to three more teams per birth year based on a showing of demonstrated competitiveness  the prior season against AAA tournament competition and/or disparity with other CAHA AA teams/standard of play.  Eliminate artificial limitations so if one of these was an “NHL” team it is not trapped at AA and small clubs aren’t barred by the size of their club. Each tier 1 team would be required to play one home and one road game against each of the other teams. 


2.  At tier 2, move to major and minor year birth year divisions in place of Flighting.  (Major year teams could include minor year players). Provide state playoffs for both.  Eliminate artificial limitations on number of Tier 2 teams one club can have.


3.   Eligibility for tier 2 status to be determined on basis of demonstrated competitiveness against tier 2 level birth year teams and/or disparity with A level teams the prior season or during pre tryout spring tournaments.  Play-up teams would have to demonstrate success against older California teams or disparity against birth year teams on nationwide basis.  Consider the possibility of a challenge tournament for Labor Day weekend where A teams could compete for an AA bid.


4.   Prohibit recruitment of players outside of California, and establish regional residency requirements.


5.   Consider feasibility of standardizing the number of games per CAHA weekend per team or alternatively, allow teams within a certain distance of each other the option of relocating games between themselves to a more convenient rink on the Thursday, Friday or Sunday of that weekend.  For example, two Kings teams should have the option of playing each other at TSC instead of in Vacaville.


6.  Require tier teams to adhere to USAH program recommendations with regard to roster size, ice sessions and off ice training. 


7.  Require that all skaters receive a minimum Average TOI of 10 minutes a game or be eligible for release and refund.


FINALLY, someone with thoughts and ideas on how to move forward and not re-hash old wounds and call out names....a step in the right direction!

JackBender

  • Peewee
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • LR Justice +46/-11
    • Tom's Chuckle Barn
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #86 on: February 25, 2019, 11:11:10 AM »
Mac... you're conflating two different ideas. A 13 year old can't play D1... they have to play 13U.  And if a club has the coaches, kids and ice, they should be able to ice a AAA team if they want to. The Sharks do it... and everyone else should have the same opportunity.
I'll be your Huckleberry

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #87 on: February 25, 2019, 11:13:05 AM »
Yeah, uh... I'm an adult, and I don't need a governing body telling me what I should be spending by time, money and energy on.  If you don't want to play, don't play.  But don't push your own agenda onto someone else.  Freedom and opportunity is the backbone to our society, so you can't let one club do as they please (the Sharks) and then not allow others.  That's hypocrisy.


Oh, and no one answered 805. He lives in Simi and is wondering why he'll have to drive three hours to Irvine to play AAA, even though there is a program in his backyard that has two sheets of ice, coaches, kids, and an organization ready to field AAA teams.


I could be like everyone else here and type "this has already been debunked" over and over....but, I don't know you, so, you may, in fact, be able to properly decide what level your kid is and where he should play. That would put you in the .01% of hockey parents who have this ability...congratulations! But...this has already been discussed and debunked  :o [size=78%]---sorry. Heck...why do we need limits??? Let's all sign our kids up for Division 1 NCAA right now!!! Our kids DESERVE the opportunity after all!!! I will be AMAZING!![/size]


I'll admit, I know next to nothing about SoCal's constraints on "getting to the club/rink" other than that it probably sucks REAL bad!!! So, there is probably an argument to "space out" the AAA teams down there better than they are...I'm sure you SoCal folks could figure that part out. I STILL don't think the "market" is as big as most here do however. Maybe one more team on average per age group down there would do it--NONE up here.

rmackintosh

  • Squirt
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • LR Justice +9/-18
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #88 on: February 25, 2019, 11:19:09 AM »
Mac... you're conflating two different ideas. A 13 year old can't play D1... they have to play 13U.  And if a club has the coaches, kids and ice, they should be able to ice a AAA team if they want to. The Sharks do it... and everyone else should have the same opportunity.


Sorry, it was frustration on how it is so hard to understand WHY we can't just all decide where our little Gretzky's should play. Bad analogy.


I AGREE with your second sentence entirely...but you left out the most important part "appropriate level" should be placed before "Coaches and kids".


The Sharks do it BY NECESSITY...like I have already have discussed. NO ONE would suggest that AAA level kids should be billetting in LA in order to have the "opportunity" to play AAA. And yes, because of this, the Sharks get to bend a rule or two and put out a team or two that gets beat worse than one would want due to the logistics of the North.

JackBender

  • Peewee
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • LR Justice +46/-11
    • Tom's Chuckle Barn
Re: CAHA's biased leadership and AAA sham PART II
« Reply #89 on: February 25, 2019, 12:01:25 PM »
Appropriate level?  And who decides that?  You?  Or the unbiased, independent governing body known as CAHA?  Terrific.  We'll continue to get McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy's... and we'll like it!!!  Because CAHA knows what's best for us!!!


Oh, and the Jr Sharks aren't just bending one or two rules... they're breaking the only rule (be competitive!).  If the 11U-14UAAA Jr Shark teams were forced to play at their "appropriate level" they'd be playing AA, chief.  Can't have it both ways.


Want some more rules?  How about not allowing NorCal kids to go down to SoCal?  If you live in a district... that's your district.  Bet those NorCal teams improve rather quickly and organically.  Same thing for San Diego.
I'll be your Huckleberry