View Single Post
02-05-2012, 11:37 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 527
vCash: 500
Dickie, I agree bantam is absolutely a developmental level of hockey. All players deserve a fair process throughout the entire season. The coaches mind set should be to reach a level where he/she feels comfortable rolling 3 lines. Absolutely agree that PK and PP are different scenarios. Unfortunately some games are penalty filled and thus players miss shifts. You may be closer to the SV situation than I. We do agree that Warman has put through a fair number of decent hockey players and yes natural talent is easy to coach. Again, I go back to this, if the situation has been presented to the player/parents (at beginning of season) and they accept it then it can't fall back on the coach. It's encumbant on that coach to still be fair to that player. The alternative is to play tier II. Nothing wrong with that. Some parents have said it was the wisest decision they ever made. I would rather see a marginal tier I player play down in tier II and be confident, get some good coaching then for him/her to see the ice on a limited role in tier I. Very hard for a 13 year old to maintain focus on the bench with a limited role. Then they go out and risk injury because they are not mentally prepared because they haven't seen the ice in 10 mins. But, there are parents (and we both know they are out there) who accept that. There are so many talented kids in the rural areas that choose not to play elite for the simple fact they want to play with their friends back home. What a novel idea heh; For the fun of it.

As far as coaches resumes go... If someone is coaching to pad their resume, they shouldn't be coaching. Last time I checked it was still largely a volunteer position with few exceptions. It's really simple in my mind, if people do not like the coaching speak up to the centre's executive. Unfortunately most don't, so the status quo remains. No one wants to rock the boat because heaven forbid it will reflect negatively on their kid and blacklist them in the ever important "draft year." As I mentioned, folks get too wound up with AA, AAA, etc, etc. If the coach is not focused on skill development then the executive needs to move in another direction the following year. That's the role of the coach, teach the skills.

As far as wasting parents money I don't think this will ever change. There's more and more money being spent by parents on their kids each year; Winter, spring, summer, fall. They'll spend $10, 000 on hockey with zero going to an RESP or savings bond for the kid. This is sad. See no one wants to say it but everyone believes their kid will play pro hockey. So really, before one can chastise coaches, we need to step back and analyze parents perspectives. After all, these are the same folks who accept the status quo, don't rock the boat and pretend to be content with fancy flow based practices that do nothing to re-enforce skill.

It would be nice to line match in the manner you're speaking of, unfortunately that would last about 5 seconds in a high tempo game. A coach must focus on his bench not watching the other teams bench to make sure it's 1st on 1st, 2nd on 2nd, 3rd on 3rd. I mean, for pete sake, there's bench shortening at SASK FIRST zone tournaments. There will always be frustrations. Especially for those of us who truly are passionate about the game, coach without an agenda and are not content with the status quo. Excellent conversation.

PokeCheck101 is offline