AAU

[trans4761]

You had me listening until you felt the need to bash me as person/ parent. Nothing to learn here. Thanks for your time.

Come on Vag-B-REAL....
YOU need to develop a much thicker skin than that.
That may be another reason for you.
Don't be the parent that walks in carrying your kids hockey bag.

[Oilers1966]

Here are more reasons not to play up ( I will be nice about it)




More of a leadership roll from your son or daughter. If he or she stays , He will be at the bottom if he or she moves up. less ice time, Less learning development.


More chances for concussions ( yes last season a kid played up ) he had 3 in one season and yes he is still playing.


If he stays, he will learn how to make other players better on his team.( this is important)
 He will learn when and how to set up players. if he moves up he will be 3rd line, no PP or no PK.  He needs to learn this. 




"He will be picked on , Yes he will ( by teammates and kids on other teams)


You will not hear about it. They will be mean to him or her. Why put him or her thru this?
BTW other parents will not be happy either.


"He will have more ice time"  if he plays were he should.   


Many organizations will not even allow players to play up for many of these reasons".  He is getting by on his skating alone at this age.


Average weight of a 8 yr old is 56 lbs- Anywhere from 75 -85 lbs.   "This is not good numbers in the corners."


If they do play up its more money for less ice time and setting it up for a very un happy experience.


I know from experience. 

[Puck Yeah]

Or like in my Son's experience playing up.  (He was asked, I didn't seek it) He lost a lot of confidence.  He went from being the fastest Squirt skater to low middle skater at PW.  He got way too defensive trying to compensate for the bigger boys speed.  He couldn't stick handle through the bigger boys like he had previously.  They were also 20lbs heavier and stronger on the puck.  It took a lot to get his confidence back.


My son played up and the NHL still hasn't called.  Unless your son truly is a phenom and can dominate and stand out even while playing up, it is in all likelihood a bad idea.  But if you are anything like my Ex Wife, you don't actually want "advice" you want "agreement".


Best of luck to your boy where ever he plays.  It is the best game on the planet.

[#4BobbyOrr]

In my experience playing up was a great experience for my kid, but he played on a birth year team that played up from mites to squirt bb as a group. Since they were all the same age there were no locker room issues.  If we are talking about an individual playing up on a team with older kids then a good rule of thumb that I once read is as follows: if the kid will be in the top 25% producers at the older level then playing up could be a good idea.  If not, then there is no reason for him to play up. That means he would be a top line or key 2nd line forward or top pair type defenseman on the older team.  My younger kid is a good player and I would play him up if I could but by no means do I think that playing another year of mites will hobble his future prospects (if he even has any to begin with).  He has played in some high level out of town full ice spring tournaments and played well but since he has a good core group of teammates I am not too concerned with what level they play on 15 Sundays next year. The development will happen more in the practices in which they are pushing each other to get better. When my older kid played up some of the kids that got "left behind" are now on his team and I see no difference in their skill level that can be attributed to not playing up.

[nuffsed]

Reasons why not ?


They are not as good as you think they are and a 10 yr old will hurt them in the boards.
You really want your 8yr with locker room talk from the older players.
They at 8 do not know how to block shots and the gear is youth side not Jr.
They have no idea who to go into the corners properly( heads down, ( your superstar is not exception) they go with their heads down and they are going to get hurt.
Oh and maybe we wont enjoy it ( have you even asked your kid) odds are no.  He will develop with players he will skate with for the next 5 or 6 years, 


Maybe cause you will never listen to what anyones says, Anyways so do what ever you want, But do not ask if you do not want a answers you do not like.  Stop living thur your kids.


There is a fine line between crazy parent and not involved- you have already crossed over to the dark side. 


Why dont  you listen to people who have been thru it already.


I could ask you whats the rush?

     Oilers1966 -  you mentioned “10 yr olds will hurt them,” is that what you guys are coaching down there in San Diego?  I’m sure there’s ZERO tolerance on CHECKing in Squirt and last I checked, the Oilers didn’t carry a SquirtA team, which if the 10 yr old was any good, he would have played up with the good/BIG boys. 
Ok, you may not be playing out of San Diego, but if you’re seeing 8U players skating in the corners with their heads down… it’s the Coach, NOT the kid.  Maybe your club needs new/better Coaches, because NOT all 8U players skate into the corner with their heads down.  Plus, what "locker room talk" are 10 year olds having that is SO inappropriate for an 8 year old... maybe some parents need to have a sit down with their kids and check some browsing history.
DELETE DELETE CLEAR ALL...

Or like in my Son's experience playing up.  (He was asked, I didn't seek it) He lost a lot of confidence.  He went from being the fastest Squirt skater to low middle skater at PW.  He got way too defensive trying to compensate for the bigger boys speed.  He couldn't stick handle through the bigger boys like he had previously.  They were also 20lbs heavier and stronger on the puck.  It took a lot to get his confidence back.


My son played up and the NHL still hasn't called.  Unless your son truly is a phenom and can dominate and stand out even while playing up, it is in all likelihood a bad idea.  But if you are anything like my Ex Wife, you don't actually want "advice" you want "agreement".


Best of luck to your boy where ever he plays.  It is the best game on the planet.

     
Puck Yeah – I believe there’s a huge difference in playing up from Mite age to Squirt vs. Squirt age to PeeWee.  Game speed difference is surely faster from Squirt to PeeWee.  From Track1 to SquirtB…NOT so much.  I agree that if Mite player "truly is a phenom and... stand out" then player may have a case to play up, however, I disagree with "dominate."  Mite age player does not have to score every other goal or assist, but if the Mite age kid makes an impact on the team... by all means, let the kids play.
Maybe you both (Oilers1966 & Puck Yeah) forgot this was the MITE Hockey Discussion Group. 
 

[nuffsed]

     B-Real -  it’s a terrible rule, but your child was born a year (maybe 2) too late.  I despise promoting rink hopping/club jumping, what ever the term crazy parents use these days... but maybe it's time to look elsewhere for development growth.  I didn't look through the thread to read if you mentioned where you were from, but it's already May and tryouts are next month.  Good luck.
 

[Puck Yeah]

Reasons why not ?


They are not as good as you think they are and a 10 yr old will hurt them in the boards.
You really want your 8yr with locker room talk from the older players.
They at 8 do not know how to block shots and the gear is youth side not Jr.
They have no idea who to go into the corners properly( heads down, ( your superstar is not exception) they go with their heads down and they are going to get hurt.
Oh and maybe we wont enjoy it ( have you even asked your kid) odds are no.  He will develop with players he will skate with for the next 5 or 6 years, 


Maybe cause you will never listen to what anyones says, Anyways so do what ever you want, But do not ask if you do not want a answers you do not like.  Stop living thur your kids.


There is a fine line between crazy parent and not involved- you have already crossed over to the dark side. 


Why dont  you listen to people who have been thru it already.


I could ask you whats the rush?

     Oilers1966 -  you mentioned “10 yr olds will hurt them,” is that what you guys are coaching down there in San Diego?  I’m sure there’s ZERO tolerance on CHECKing in Squirt and last I checked, the Oilers didn’t carry a SquirtA team, which if the 10 yr old was any good, he would have played up with the good/BIG boys. 
Ok, you may not be playing out of San Diego, but if you’re seeing 8U players skating in the corners with their heads down… it’s the Coach, NOT the kid.  Maybe your club needs new/better Coaches, because NOT all 8U players skate into the corner with their heads down.  Plus, what "locker room talk" are 10 year olds having that is SO inappropriate for an 8 year old... maybe some parents need to have a sit down with their kids and check some browsing history.
DELETE DELETE CLEAR ALL...

Or like in my Son's experience playing up.  (He was asked, I didn't seek it) He lost a lot of confidence.  He went from being the fastest Squirt skater to low middle skater at PW.  He got way too defensive trying to compensate for the bigger boys speed.  He couldn't stick handle through the bigger boys like he had previously.  They were also 20lbs heavier and stronger on the puck.  It took a lot to get his confidence back.


My son played up and the NHL still hasn't called.  Unless your son truly is a phenom and can dominate and stand out even while playing up, it is in all likelihood a bad idea.  But if you are anything like my Ex Wife, you don't actually want "advice" you want "agreement".


Best of luck to your boy where ever he plays.  It is the best game on the planet.

     
Puck Yeah – I believe there’s a huge difference in playing up from Mite age to Squirt vs. Squirt age to PeeWee.  Game speed difference is surely faster from Squirt to PeeWee.  From Track1 to SquirtB…NOT so much.  I agree that if Mite player "truly is a phenom and... stand out" then player may have a case to play up, however, I disagree with "dominate."  Mite age player does not have to score every other goal or assist, but if the Mite age kid makes an impact on the team... by all means, let the kids play.
Maybe you both (Oilers1966 & Puck Yeah) forgot this was the MITE Hockey Discussion Group. 

There will always be parents that insist how important it is that their Mite play up just like there will be parents that pay $15K/year for elite private Kindergartens.  Both are convinced that it is going to make a difference in the kid's success.  To each his own.  I believe it will not make a ounce of difference in either case and I believe the numbers strongly favor that belief.

[Puck Yeah]

It looks like Canada is moving to the ADM model as well.  I think most people that do not have an emotional investment in their 7 year old being a phenom are starting to agree that it is a good idea.


https://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/news/2017-coach-policy-puts-emphasis-on-development

[#4BobbyOrr]

I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).

[Puck Yeah]

I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).

I think you missed the bigger point. 


So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development.   Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.

[#4BobbyOrr]

I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).

I think you missed the bigger point. 


So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development.   Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.

I am not missing the bigger point, the fact is many of these kids will be 9 years old before the half ice season is over, not 7.  Most mite A kids for this year are already 8.  There is a huge difference between a 6 yr old and a 9 yr old.  I don't deny that small area games have some value as well but you can't tell me that full ice games for 8 and 9 yr olds have no value.  The bigger point (which you have apparently missed) is that USA Hockey and the local associations are mandating a long term development plan so they can have a better chance of picking the best 24 guys at 18 and up and beating Canada without any consideration for what parents of 7, 8, and 9 year olds and those kids actually want.  What about the kids that just want to play A/B hockey and aren't gunning for the USNTDP and the NHL?  Who the hell cares if they play full ice if that is what they want?  Why do you even care?


A kid can play one year of Mite level inhouse at 8 and then play full ice Squirt B at 9 but a kid that started inhouse mini mites at 4, mites at 5, travel track 2 at 6 and track 1 at 7 isn't ready for ANY full ice at 8?  Many of these kids have been playing in full ice spring tournaments against the best of their age group in places like Chicago (won Chitown Shuffle), Toronto (lost in OT to the Toronto Bulldogs in semis of a Brick Series tournament), and Minnesota (won the MN Brick Series tournament). 


 In my son's baseball little league there is a 6 year old playing Minors with 9 and 10 year olds and nobody cares because he is a hell of a player. He even pitches.  Nobody is trying to say that because of his age he should still be hitting off of a tee ONLY.  And this is a league that regularly sends it's all star teams to regionals and states, it is a very competitive league.


Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.

[Puck Yeah]

I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).

I think you missed the bigger point. 


So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development.   Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.

Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.

The fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight.  I just find it silly that so many people believe that it is imperative that a mite or squirt have the utmost in competition and skill level to develop. Hockey is a a late developing sport.   How many 18-19 y.o. defenseman do you see going in the first round?  There are so many more factors that go into who makes it to high level hockey than if the kid plays full ice or not at 8 years old.  The funnel gets tighter and tighter, interest wanes, GPA becomes important, girls, and unfortunately for some the mighty 6 pack becomes more attractive.


Parents need to ask themselves "are you doing what you thought you would be doing when you were 12, 13, 14 or 15?  Are you doing what your parents wanted for you at that age?" 


It has nothing to do with zero tolerance.  It has to do with overall agenda and perspective.

[#4BobbyOrr]

My perspective is these kids may be playing another sport by the time they get to high school, who knows? Why put such drastic limitations on them at the early stages? Why not mix it up? At the older levels they have a mixture of small area games (in practice) and full ice games in season and tournaments. When it comes down to it I think the local associations are on board more because it makes the ice more profitable with more kids on the ice than for anything having to do with development.

[trans4761]

I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).

I think you missed the bigger point. 


So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development.   Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.

Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.

The fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight.  I just find it silly that so many people believe that it is imperative that a mite or squirt have the utmost in competition and skill level to develop. Hockey is a a late developing sport.   How many 18-19 y.o. defenseman do you see going in the first round?  There are so many more factors that go into who makes it to high level hockey than if the kid plays full ice or not at 8 years old.  The funnel gets tighter and tighter, interest wanes, GPA becomes important, girls, and unfortunately for some the mighty 6 pack becomes more attractive.


Parents need to ask themselves "are you doing what you thought you would be doing when you were 12, 13, 14 or 15?  Are you doing what your parents wanted for you at that age?" 


It has nothing to do with zero tolerance.  It has to do with overall agenda and perspective.

Well said.


If I had to do it all again, at 7/8 years old I'd put them in roller.  Much less expensive and developed their hands.

[Falcons Hockey]

I didn't see any mention of 7 year olds in that article, just 5 and 6 year olds at the "initiation" level which is analogous to our "mini mite" level in the states (under 7 years old).

I think you missed the bigger point. 


So, there is still the possibility of turning out the next Gretzsky by age seven? The bigger point is that thinking people are realizing the lack of importance that full ice has on development.   Even in traditional hot beds of hockey.

Just like anywhere else in life, these zero tolerance like zero exception rules are almost always a bad idea.

The fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight.  I just find it silly that so many people believe that it is imperative that a mite or squirt have the utmost in competition and skill level to develop. Hockey is a a late developing sport.   How many 18-19 y.o. defenseman do you see going in the first round?  There are so many more factors that go into who makes it to high level hockey than if the kid plays full ice or not at 8 years old.  The funnel gets tighter and tighter, interest wanes, GPA becomes important, girls, and unfortunately for some the mighty 6 pack becomes more attractive.


Parents need to ask themselves "are you doing what you thought you would be doing when you were 12, 13, 14 or 15?  Are you doing what your parents wanted for you at that age?" 


It has nothing to do with zero tolerance.  It has to do with overall agenda and perspective.

Well said.


If I had to do it all again, at 7/8 years old I'd put them in roller.  Much less expensive and developed their hands.

Both my boys played both ice and roller.  One stayed in roller and plays weekly now in adult leagues the other stayed with Ice and now plays juniors and is looking for that college spot.    I have learnt that being the very best Squirt/PW/Bantam whatever means nothing.   


Your son needs to develop to be the very best 18/19 year old player.