Minor Hockey Talks - Hockey Forum

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:49 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:37 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:25 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:18 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 12:35 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:56 am

100% whiny board member that's lost their power. We can hear you crying from the OMHA boardroom :lol:

Exactly, I would say crazy bench staff is the major problem, ppl who know enough to not be the head coach but put themselves in positions to cause grief for ppl they don't like. Happens all the time, hopefully open borders will put a stop to this, because ppl will be able to speak out against these whack jobs that take advantage. Without the fear of reprisal.

My opinion; the G becomes a powerhouse of AAA. The best of AAA players with 100km will be playing G. Weakening all other AAA leagues.

Creating a vacuum for any top aaa talent stragglers to search for more competitive hockey and will head to the G via school and team funding.

The G money will also draw the better coaches from all leagues and again funding will pay better money to coaches.
Which will draw the best players.

Thats not going to happen... 95% of AAA quality players from OMHA areas will stay there. No one wants to travel to practice in Toronto 4 nights a week. Will some parents? Yeah probably. But, just because Watts responds to every other post doesn't mean that everyone thinks like him.

Its one thing to have your kid on the ice 5 or 6 days a week - year 'round trying to burn them out. Its another thing having them on the ice 5 or 6 nights a week and having to drive them into Toronto an hour each direction every time too.

yeah the arrogance of the people from Toronto, mixed with the parents who are complete weirdos from the surrounding area make it sound like on this board that there is a queue of people from outside of Toronto waiting to get in.

Its not like that at all. I am sure the people on the very edge of the city are taking it more serious, but anyone more than 30 or 40km away would be stupid to try so hard to get into the G. People realize there are more shit teams in the G than good ones right? At least in OMHA all the teams are solid. Sure the top 4 (outside of WW) might usually come from the G, but after that there is a HUGE drop in talent. So you need to think LONG and HARD about if you really want to drive THAT far so many nights a week. Games are a long drive no matter where you play. But, you want to do that 5 times a week? Crazy. Especially if your kid is bottom 3 or bottom pair? getting 4 or 5 minutes a game?

Thanks 2015 dad. You know there is more to this than one year. Look at every other year. The G is already so far and away ahead of the OMHA and Alliance. Top 4 teams in 2013, 5 or top 6 in 2012, 3 of top 4 in 2011, top 7 in 2010. Will only get more concentrated in the G.

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 5:03 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:49 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:37 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:25 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 3:18 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 12:35 pm

Exactly, I would say crazy bench staff is the major problem, ppl who know enough to not be the head coach but put themselves in positions to cause grief for ppl they don't like. Happens all the time, hopefully open borders will put a stop to this, because ppl will be able to speak out against these whack jobs that take advantage. Without the fear of reprisal.

My opinion; the G becomes a powerhouse of AAA. The best of AAA players with 100km will be playing G. Weakening all other AAA leagues.

Creating a vacuum for any top aaa talent stragglers to search for more competitive hockey and will head to the G via school and team funding.

The G money will also draw the better coaches from all leagues and again funding will pay better money to coaches.
Which will draw the best players.

Thats not going to happen... 95% of AAA quality players from OMHA areas will stay there. No one wants to travel to practice in Toronto 4 nights a week. Will some parents? Yeah probably. But, just because Watts responds to every other post doesn't mean that everyone thinks like him.

Its one thing to have your kid on the ice 5 or 6 days a week - year 'round trying to burn them out. Its another thing having them on the ice 5 or 6 nights a week and having to drive them into Toronto an hour each direction every time too.

yeah the arrogance of the people from Toronto, mixed with the parents who are complete weirdos from the surrounding area make it sound like on this board that there is a queue of people from outside of Toronto waiting to get in.

Its not like that at all. I am sure the people on the very edge of the city are taking it more serious, but anyone more than 30 or 40km away would be stupid to try so hard to get into the G. People realize there are more shit teams in the G than good ones right? At least in OMHA all the teams are solid. Sure the top 4 (outside of WW) might usually come from the G, but after that there is a HUGE drop in talent. So you need to think LONG and HARD about if you really want to drive THAT far so many nights a week. Games are a long drive no matter where you play. But, you want to do that 5 times a week? Crazy. Especially if your kid is bottom 3 or bottom pair? getting 4 or 5 minutes a game?

Thanks 2015 dad. You know there is more to this than one year. Look at every other year. The G is already so far and away ahead of the OMHA and Alliance. Top 4 teams in 2013, 5 or top 6 in 2012, 3 of top 4 in 2011, top 7 in 2010. Will only get more concentrated in the G.

Hahaha, so far off buddy. They are top teams because the G is wide open and they can poach kids from bad teams. If the 2013 QRD team picks up top players from Kingston/Peterborough/COW, they will wipe the floor with those “top 4” teams. Open borders levels the playing field, although it is definitely a lot more difficult to recruit in large geographic areas. The OMHA has more ice, lower costs and better development. The only thing the G had was the ability to build super teams with kids developed elsewhere. Nobody is spending 3x as much to practice in Chesswood and deal with Toronto arrogance that you have so finely put on display here.

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 4:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:49 am

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 9:48 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2024 8:25 pm As I understand it , associations cannot add any new teams (ie, adding a BB rep team where it doesn’t already exist this season ). How would this apply to associations where they plan to move up a level(ie, B centre currently , moving up to single A as an association)? That isn’t “adding” a new rep team and only competing at a higher level of rep than the current season .

My understanding for the upcoming season is that no category changes will be allowed.

The wording says "no new teams" but does not specify whether "moving up a level" applies the same way. If a B centre already has only one rep team at all age groups and they are just moving up to single A, that is not adding a new team per say.

I was basing my reply from the meeting a couple weeks ago as you are correct that nothing was included in the most recent release. At the meeting they said "members and associations will not be able to recatagorize a team or association to a higher category than what was offered in 2024-2025" This could have changed since then as there is currently no further reference to it.

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 4:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:49 am

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 9:48 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2024 8:25 pm As I understand it , associations cannot add any new teams (ie, adding a BB rep team where it doesn’t already exist this season ). How would this apply to associations where they plan to move up a level(ie, B centre currently , moving up to single A as an association)? That isn’t “adding” a new rep team and only competing at a higher level of rep than the current season .

My understanding for the upcoming season is that no category changes will be allowed.

The wording says "no new teams" but does not specify whether "moving up a level" applies the same way. If a B centre already has only one rep team at all age groups and they are just moving up to single A, that is not adding a new team per say.

I was basing my reply from the meeting a couple weeks ago as you are correct that nothing was included in the most recent release. At the meeting they said "members and associations will not be able to recatagorize a team or association to a higher category than what was offered in 2024-2025" This could have changed since then as there is currently no further reference to it.

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:18 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 4:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:49 am

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 9:48 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2024 8:25 pm As I understand it , associations cannot add any new teams (ie, adding a BB rep team where it doesn’t already exist this season ). How would this apply to associations where they plan to move up a level(ie, B centre currently , moving up to single A as an association)? That isn’t “adding” a new rep team and only competing at a higher level of rep than the current season .

My understanding for the upcoming season is that no category changes will be allowed.

The wording says "no new teams" but does not specify whether "moving up a level" applies the same way. If a B centre already has only one rep team at all age groups and they are just moving up to single A, that is not adding a new team per say.

I was basing my reply from the meeting a couple weeks ago as you are correct that nothing was included in the most recent release. At the meeting they said "members and associations will not be able to recatagorize a team or association to a higher category than what was offered in 2024-2025" This could have changed since then as there is currently no further reference to it.

The last 3 years OMHA has had more draft picks in the O then the G. Give your head a shake , if it was that much better of a league wouldn’t most picks come from the G. Just tells you if your good they will find you .

Guest wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 4:30 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:18 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 4:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:49 am

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 9:48 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2024 8:25 pm As I understand it , associations cannot add any new teams (ie, adding a BB rep team where it doesn’t already exist this season ). How would this apply to associations where they plan to move up a level(ie, B centre currently , moving up to single A as an association)? That isn’t “adding” a new rep team and only competing at a higher level of rep than the current season .

My understanding for the upcoming season is that no category changes will be allowed.

The wording says "no new teams" but does not specify whether "moving up a level" applies the same way. If a B centre already has only one rep team at all age groups and they are just moving up to single A, that is not adding a new team per say.

I was basing my reply from the meeting a couple weeks ago as you are correct that nothing was included in the most recent release. At the meeting they said "members and associations will not be able to recatagorize a team or association to a higher category than what was offered in 2024-2025" This could have changed since then as there is currently no further reference to it.

The last 3 years OMHA has had more draft picks in the O then the G. Give your head a shake , if it was that much better of a league wouldn’t most picks come from the G. Just tells you if your good they will find you .

I just looked back 2 years and indded your are correct, the stats are very compeling.

Guest wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 5:10 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 4:30 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:18 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 4:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:49 am

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 9:48 am

My understanding for the upcoming season is that no category changes will be allowed.

The wording says "no new teams" but does not specify whether "moving up a level" applies the same way. If a B centre already has only one rep team at all age groups and they are just moving up to single A, that is not adding a new team per say.

I was basing my reply from the meeting a couple weeks ago as you are correct that nothing was included in the most recent release. At the meeting they said "members and associations will not be able to recatagorize a team or association to a higher category than what was offered in 2024-2025" This could have changed since then as there is currently no further reference to it.

The last 3 years OMHA has had more draft picks in the O then the G. Give your head a shake , if it was that much better of a league wouldn’t most picks come from the G. Just tells you if your good they will find you .

I just looked back 2 years and indded your are correct, the stats are very compeling.

Math 12 G teams 45 O teams

Guest wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 5:15 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 5:10 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 4:30 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:18 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 4:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:49 am

The wording says "no new teams" but does not specify whether "moving up a level" applies the same way. If a B centre already has only one rep team at all age groups and they are just moving up to single A, that is not adding a new team per say.

I was basing my reply from the meeting a couple weeks ago as you are correct that nothing was included in the most recent release. At the meeting they said "members and associations will not be able to recatagorize a team or association to a higher category than what was offered in 2024-2025" This could have changed since then as there is currently no further reference to it.

The last 3 years OMHA has had more draft picks in the O then the G. Give your head a shake , if it was that much better of a league wouldn’t most picks come from the G. Just tells you if your good they will find you .

I just looked back 2 years and indded your are correct, the stats are very compeling.

Math 12 G teams 45 O teams

45 O teams??? Check again. Also if all the best players are in the G by definition they should have all the picks.