AAA Hockey — I call. Who is from what program accepted into WLC and TM — and please list the birth year —

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

While the development model at TM and WLC is pretty bad, there is absolutely zero development at most AA teams in this area - at least in our experience. Too many Dad coaches or coaches who have no idea what they are doing. I have 2 players and between them we’ve hit AA, WLC and TM. I’d say it’s about equally bad at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

Some years you get a team with a lot of talent. My DS played WLC for a couple of years, and at the end of one of those years, 75% of the team left for juniors and prep school. They all went on to play in college. Not sure what happened to WLC teams after that since it was a pretty big exodus on that team (no shade on WLC, it was the next step. They should have celebrated it frankly, but didn't). Anyway, they've all graduated college now so maybe irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

Having experienced both of these in this area there is simply no comparison between the level of competition. Yes, AAA in this area is not the same as AAA in Michigan, Minnesota, New England or Canada but AA in this area is also not the same as AA in those places. If your kid is good enough to make a AAA roster here it gives them the most exposure to higher level competition which is key to development and growth. Short of moving north, there really isn't more you can do in this area to give them the opportunity to explore their potential. If they dominate while playing on one of those teams then you can think about what the next steps might be beyond this area for continued growth. That also doesn't mean there is not development path through AA but ultimately you grow through being challenged at a higher level of competition. In general there is just too much negativity and bitterness in these threads. If someone wants to spend their time and money on their kid playing travel hockey at this level or that, who cares. If they are enjoying it, good for them. If not, that's their problem.

Fully agree with this but as a region DC needs to do a better job making the AAA programs enticing to the top players in the area. That will make practices more competitive, the teams more competitive, the overall quality of hockey here better. The difference between having a team of nearly all the top 20 players in the area and a team of 20 of the top 40/50 players in the area is night and day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

While the development model at TM and WLC is pretty bad, there is absolutely zero development at most AA teams in this area - at least in our experience. Too many Dad coaches or coaches who have no idea what they are doing. I have 2 players and between them we’ve hit AA, WLC and TM. I’d say it’s about equally bad at all.

I see a lot of complaints about dad coaches and I agree parents can be hit or miss but for most of the teams out there there just aren't that many good paid coaches to be found. I use St James as an example - every time we play them they have 1 or 2 coaches on the bench and they hit the exit as soon as the game ends. They are usually college kids who played ACHA, it's not like they have years of coaching experience or played D1 or pro. Our team's coach is a dad who played D1 and has been coaching 10 year+. I'd rather him than one of those "pro" coaches who play in C level beer league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

While the development model at TM and WLC is pretty bad, there is absolutely zero development at most AA teams in this area - at least in our experience. Too many Dad coaches or coaches who have no idea what they are doing. I have 2 players and between them we’ve hit AA, WLC and TM. I’d say it’s about equally bad at all.

I see a lot of complaints about dad coaches and I agree parents can be hit or miss but for most of the teams out there there just aren't that many good paid coaches to be found. I use St James as an example - every time we play them they have 1 or 2 coaches on the bench and they hit the exit as soon as the game ends. They are usually college kids who played ACHA, it's not like they have years of coaching experience or played D1 or pro. Our team's coach is a dad who played D1 and has been coaching 10 year+. I'd rather him than one of those "pro" coaches who play in C level beer league.

This. This. 100% this. It's insane how many people just see "professional coach" and don't realize it's someone who played on an ACHA D3 team with no tryouts and they have zero years of coaching experience. Just because you pay someone do do something doesn't mean they are good at it. If the best coach available is one of my son's teammate's parents, I'm fine with that. If they aren't doing a good job or are unfair, I'll talk to the organization and make them aware. But I've had much better experience around here with parent coaches than professional ones. Heck, Little Caesars has one of the best AAA programs in the country and they have a lot of parent coaches (granted, they are former NHLers).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

While the development model at TM and WLC is pretty bad, there is absolutely zero development at most AA teams in this area - at least in our experience. Too many Dad coaches or coaches who have no idea what they are doing. I have 2 players and between them we’ve hit AA, WLC and TM. I’d say it’s about equally bad at all.

I see a lot of complaints about dad coaches and I agree parents can be hit or miss but for most of the teams out there there just aren't that many good paid coaches to be found. I use St James as an example - every time we play them they have 1 or 2 coaches on the bench and they hit the exit as soon as the game ends. They are usually college kids who played ACHA, it's not like they have years of coaching experience or played D1 or pro. Our team's coach is a dad who played D1 and has been coaching 10 year+. I'd rather him than one of those "pro" coaches who play in C level beer league.

This. This. 100% this. It's insane how many people just see "professional coach" and don't realize it's someone who played on an ACHA D3 team with no tryouts and they have zero years of coaching experience. Just because you pay someone do do something doesn't mean they are good at it. If the best coach available is one of my son's teammate's parents, I'm fine with that. If they aren't doing a good job or are unfair, I'll talk to the organization and make them aware. But I've had much better experience around here with parent coaches than professional ones. Heck, Little Caesars has one of the best AAA programs in the country and they have a lot of parent coaches (granted, they are former NHLers).

My kid's first travel coaches (at what was then Caps Academy) were two recent ACHA players who were just learning to coach. I think they did a fine job, and one thing that one of them taught my kid still sticks with me, almost 15 years later: "Its not a penalty if they don't call it...."

[Anonymous]

The problem with dad coaches isn’t their lack of hockey experience. It’s their tendency to give preferential treatment to their kids and friends, both in team selection and ice time. This is rampant on the girls side. Whenever i see parent coaches i get an uneasy feeling. IMO it’s too risky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem with dad coaches isn’t their lack of hockey experience. It’s their tendency to give preferential treatment to their kids and friends, both in team selection and ice time. This is rampant on the girls side. Whenever i see parent coaches i get an uneasy feeling. IMO it’s too risky.

+1000. I suspect many more parents feel this way than those who claim to favor dad coaches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Nobody’s going to answer this.

I will. No one from the Caps Hockey program in my child’s age group got into WLC.

So stick that in your pipe and smoke it previous post.

Which age group? My kid was not interested but maybe of his teammates were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

While the development model at TM and WLC is pretty bad, there is absolutely zero development at most AA teams in this area - at least in our experience. Too many Dad coaches or coaches who have no idea what they are doing. I have 2 players and between them we’ve hit AA, WLC and TM. I’d say it’s about equally bad at all.

I see a lot of complaints about dad coaches and I agree parents can be hit or miss but for most of the teams out there there just aren't that many good paid coaches to be found. I use St James as an example - every time we play them they have 1 or 2 coaches on the bench and they hit the exit as soon as the game ends. They are usually college kids who played ACHA, it's not like they have years of coaching experience or played D1 or pro. Our team's coach is a dad who played D1 and has been coaching 10 year+. I'd rather him than one of those "pro" coaches who play in C level beer league.

This. This. 100% this. It's insane how many people just see "professional coach" and don't realize it's someone who played on an ACHA D3 team with no tryouts and they have zero years of coaching experience. Just because you pay someone do do something doesn't mean they are good at it. If the best coach available is one of my son's teammate's parents, I'm fine with that. If they aren't doing a good job or are unfair, I'll talk to the organization and make them aware. But I've had much better experience around here with parent coaches than professional ones. Heck, Little Caesars has one of the best AAA programs in the country and they have a lot of parent coaches (granted, they are former NHLers).

The difference between a "professional coach" and a dad coach is that the professional coach is someone else's dad or isn't a dad yet and gets paid for the gig. But let's be real here, you don't need NHL or D1 or even DIII playing experience to coach mites, squirts and peewees at almost all levels of competition. There are plenty of people with that experience who suck at coaching. With those ages, the job is more child psychology than the Xs and Os. At a higher level yes, it would be great to have more coaches in this area who have higher level experience and are also good at coaching but this area just doesn't have a lot of those people like other areas up north do. Maybe that will change over time. But if a 20 something with ACHA experience is a good human being who knows how to communicate and motivate children then they will be a great coach for 95% of the kids in the age group playing in this area. If a dad coach has the same qualities and doesn't favor or seem to favor his kid, then they should be allowed to coach too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem with dad coaches isn’t their lack of hockey experience. It’s their tendency to give preferential treatment to their kids and friends, both in team selection and ice time. This is rampant on the girls side. Whenever i see parent coaches i get an uneasy feeling. IMO it’s too risky.

This is exactly the same with paid coaches. The ones who pay those coaches for private lessons end up making the team and get more playing time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t TM or WLC brag up their new recruits like any school program would . . . E.g., “We get students from NYC to Seattle.”

Partial because with all of the 24-25 rosters on the tier 2 program websites, it would become obvious that many of the new recruits were 2nd liners on their old AA teams and not true AAA talent.

Wow, what a rude thing to say, and based on the kids I know, not true at all.

Don't get me wrong, you can build a solid team by putting together the 4th and 5th best players of every AA team in the area plus a few first liners, since you get good average talent. But it's not a AAA level team, which is why TM and WLC play AA in legit tournaments like Quebec Peewee.

If you took every eligible player in the area at a birth year, ranked them, then equally split the top ones onto two equal teams (WLC and TM), you'd have pretty solid teams. But that never happens, so many of the best players stick on AA rosters because WLC and TM are not convenient and haven't historically had the best development models.

While the development model at TM and WLC is pretty bad, there is absolutely zero development at most AA teams in this area - at least in our experience. Too many Dad coaches or coaches who have no idea what they are doing. I have 2 players and between them we’ve hit AA, WLC and TM. I’d say it’s about equally bad at all.

I see a lot of complaints about dad coaches and I agree parents can be hit or miss but for most of the teams out there there just aren't that many good paid coaches to be found. I use St James as an example - every time we play them they have 1 or 2 coaches on the bench and they hit the exit as soon as the game ends. They are usually college kids who played ACHA, it's not like they have years of coaching experience or played D1 or pro. Our team's coach is a dad who played D1 and has been coaching 10 year+. I'd rather him than one of those "pro" coaches who play in C level beer league.

This. This. 100% this. It's insane how many people just see "professional coach" and don't realize it's someone who played on an ACHA D3 team with no tryouts and they have zero years of coaching experience. Just because you pay someone do do something doesn't mean they are good at it. If the best coach available is one of my son's teammate's parents, I'm fine with that. If they aren't doing a good job or are unfair, I'll talk to the organization and make them aware. But I've had much better experience around here with parent coaches than professional ones. Heck, Little Caesars has one of the best AAA programs in the country and they have a lot of parent coaches (granted, they are former NHLers).

The difference between a "professional coach" and a dad coach is that the professional coach is someone else's dad or isn't a dad yet and gets paid for the gig. But let's be real here, you don't need NHL or D1 or even DIII playing experience to coach mites, squirts and peewees at almost all levels of competition. There are plenty of people with that experience who suck at coaching. With those ages, the job is more child psychology than the Xs and Os. At a higher level yes, it would be great to have more coaches in this area who have higher level experience and are also good at coaching but this area just doesn't have a lot of those people like other areas up north do. Maybe that will change over time. But if a 20 something with ACHA experience is a good human being who knows how to communicate and motivate children then they will be a great coach for 95% of the kids in the age group playing in this area. If a dad coach has the same qualities and doesn't favor or seem to favor his kid, then they should be allowed to coach too.

This would be great if true, but if you look at the standings in CBHL the programs with more paid coaches tend to underperform those who use less paid coaches. Paid coaches are a waste of money unless it's Tier 1 and you are hiring the best available coaches.

[Anonymous]

lol WLC had a coach like that when my kid played for them. ACHA is not professional and they are unqualified to be coaching a AAA team. The guys mom would show up to all of the games, it was really weird. If I'm paying the costs of AAA hockey, there better be a highly qualified coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Nobody’s going to answer this.

I will. No one from the Caps Hockey program in my child’s age group got into WLC.

So stick that in your pipe and smoke it previous post.

Which age group? My kid was not interested but maybe of his teammates were.

Several kids from our CHA year made it, both Little Caps and Team Maryland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol WLC had a coach like that when my kid played for them. ACHA is not professional and they are unqualified to be coaching a AAA team. The guys mom would show up to all of the games, it was really weird. If I'm paying the costs of AAA hockey, there better be a highly qualified coach.

Yep. This is exactly it. Sure, if the coach you are paying is an elite-level coach who knows how to teach kids, sure. But if I'm just paying for some 22 year old who has no passion or experience coaching, then I'll save my money. The cost of paid coach works out to be the same cost of 15-20 extra practices per year...I'd rather my son had that ice time instead.