Ice Hockey DBoard

The Official New England Ice Hockey DBoard 

Visit The DBoard Online Store - https://www.cafepress.com/icehockeydboard

Click Here to Visit Our Facebook Page

email: icehockeydboard@yahoo.com

Return to Website  > Index  > Youth Hockey  > Youth Hockey  > Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and...
Recent Posts
 
Youth Hockey
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
a
Anon
Nov 12, 2016 - 7:54AM
Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and The Falcons, Generally Speaking, Always Bad?

Anon
Top Gun was one of the model NE programs back in the MBHL days. An earlier derevation of the Falcons, the Pics (Olympics before the USOC objected) were also stronger back in the day.

I think Top Gun suffers from poor management. The Icenter is being allowed to go to s#it, too.

I don't think it's a matter of fewer people in WMA, because there are far fewer teams, too. Hockey's expensive, the Hartford/Springfield corridor is heavily dependent on financial services, especially insurance, and WMA was harder hit by the 2008 Recession. The tornado didn't help, either - it destroyed Cathedral HS, which USED to be a real power in MA HS hockey. Maybe it will be again as Pope Francis HS.


In that area your 2 options are Rifles and Falcons, if they could ever come together it would be much more competitive hockey across all age levels, but the owner of the Falcons also owns the rink ETR, where the owner of the Rifles dosent own Olympia. Too much money to loose on either end. Merging the teams and playing out of Olympia would have a better draw of customers. But hey, I just write the checks and drive the car.

a
Anon
Nov 12, 2016 - 3:56PM
Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and The Falcons, Generally Speaking, Always Bad?

They are in the EHF so they are awesome.

a
anon
Nov 13, 2016 - 8:17AM
Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and The Falcons, Generally Speaking, Always Bad?

Anon
Top Gun was one of the model NE programs back in the MBHL days. An earlier derevation of the Falcons, the Pics (Olympics before the USOC objected) were also stronger back in the day.

I think Top Gun suffers from poor management. The Icenter is being allowed to go to s#it, too.

I don't think it's a matter of fewer people in WMA, because there are far fewer teams, too. Hockey's expensive, the Hartford/Springfield corridor is heavily dependent on financial services, especially insurance, and WMA was harder hit by the 2008 Recession. The tornado didn't help, either - it destroyed Cathedral HS, which USED to be a real power in MA HS hockey. Maybe it will be again as Pope Francis HS.


Western MA is loaded with soccer and baseball talent with lacrosse catching up primarily do to the expense of hockey. The talented hockey players are spread out over Falcons, Rifles, and a few that travel outside the area. Pope Francis is the goal for most of these kids if they can afford it.

a
anon
Nov 14, 2016 - 12:06PM
Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and The Falcons, Generally Speaking, Always Bad?

anon
I think TG is hurt by having other, more reputable, programs nearby, so their numbers suffer. And NEF suffers from being out west where there are fewer people...and they play in a tough league. Rifles seem to compete fine in the E9, I bet most Falcons teams would too.


Agreed about Top Gun - they give some kids exposure, but if the player is decent the kids and parents realize the org as a whole is borderline town hockey with poor management and coaches and they end up going to Warriors, Islanders, etc.

As another poster said the Ice Center is going to sh*t as well.

a
anon
Nov 13, 2016 - 2:35PM
Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and The Falcons, Generally Speaking, Always Bad?

And just like that the 04 Falcons going to the Q and the 03's win their first game.

a
anon
Nov 13, 2016 - 5:57PM
Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and The Falcons, Generally Speaking, Always Bad?

And both Falcons mite teams are in the top3 so maybe it goes in waves

Return to Website  > Index  > Youth Hockey  > Youth Hockey  > Re: Why Are Programs Like Top Gun and...