About as worthless as this entire thread. if your kid isn't in Silver, why on EARTH would you care what parents whose kids are think?

#potstirrer

Pretty sure that's the same in all divisions. Aren't you going to Manchester to play the Flames if you're in Black or Merrimack to play the Islanders? Or Top Gun and Monarchs in other divisions? I don't understand people who think there is way more travel in some divisions than others. I see lots of double header days happening which actually provides more off days and some off weekends during the season. I find that to be preferable.

What would you be doing otherwise with all your spare time? If you wanted to do whatever THAT is more than you wanted to go to your kids hockey, you already would be.

Travel only to Manchester and in years past CT and Top gun so no, I don't consider 3 out of 10 teams unreasonable.

I have a 06 in the Silver. Certainly more driving then what was in the Valley league last year but not so much to sway me away from the good instruction/improvement progression and uptick in competition. Is what it is.

Definitely depends on if you are north and south of Boston. 06 as well and I think if you are North, a couple of NH teams aren't a big deal. It's only CT/Springfield. If you are South it's more of an issue and those may be the teams that complain. Next year maybe you will see a team or two of those make it in white, although most of the newer further teams are in the lower half of silver for our division so may not have a great chance of making it up a division

I have an 04 and hate going to Springfield/ CT. Long drive and never competitive.

If you have an 04 in Silver you are full of ****. A quick look at the EHF website shows the Spfld Thunderbirds are undefeated in that division.

And most in this thread are full of ****. No games are played in Spfld. All games in Enfield where if your little benders could handle Elite they would be playing there already. Bunch of douchebags

Don't you think he meant that it's never competitive because they drive there and lose? No?

Enfield is actually tougher to get to than Springfield.

They are literally minutes apart. It's Western Mass, Northern Ct , there's maybe what 6 rinks out there. Still a bunch of douchebags on here.

Not really sure what your point is is for or against the OP but if you have multiple kids who have played over the year in the EHF, you had 2-3 teams at the most that were significant travel. 5-10 years ago most travel was rarely over an hour. Now there are a good 7-8 teams that depending on which direction out of Boston you are in, you have significantly more than driving time than that nice hour mark we used to be happy with. How many more are going to be added in? Maybe their goal is to have North and South Divisions or East and West Next location might be the Cape. They seem to be the only area not represented. Doesn't seem like the poster is a pot stirrer but asking for feedback. Not really something that should get so many people worked up....unless the ones worked up have some hurt feelings because they are on the new teams added that some are considering geographically undesirable. Used to listen to a family a couple of years years ago complain about driving an hour and 20 minutes to top gun to play 15 minutes.

Not one person on here owns up to taking a beating , so I would think they are implying it's the other way around.

It seems pretty apparent that he hates driving to Springfield because they....lose.

s[/quote]It seems pretty apparent that he hates driving to Springfield because they....lose. [/quote]

Either way (winning or losing) the talent varies greatly from the top teams to the bottom teams. The rides aren't that bad for 06 but if you're winning or losing by 7 a game its a parity issue.

It seems pretty apparent that he hates driving to Springfield because they....lose. [/quote]

Either way (winning or losing) the talent varies greatly from the top teams to the bottom teams. The rides aren't that bad for 06 but if you're winning or losing by 7 a game its a parity issue.

[/quote]
Parity issues will always exist and are in all of the divisions. If you look at the 06 division I believe there are 30 teams total. 10 in each division and each one has non performs at the bottom and out performers at the top and it has always been that way. Bottom black and top white can probably compete and bottom white and top silver the same, but there has to be some cut off. It's always the ones at the top of the white ( and now the top of the silver) who always complain. Can't blame them but what they never seem to understand is if they were in the upper division they would more than likely be the bottom and loosing 80-90% of your games can damper development as well. No perfect answer when parity is involved.

Either way (winning or losing) the talent varies greatly from the top teams to the bottom teams. The rides aren't that bad for 06 but if you're winning or losing by 7 a game its a parity issue.

[/quote]
Parity issues will always exist and are in all of the divisions. If you look at the 06 division I believe there are 30 teams total. 10 in each division and each one has non performs at the bottom and out performers at the top and it has always been that way. Bottom black and top white can probably compete and bottom white and top silver the same, but there has to be some cut off. It's always the ones at the top of the white ( and now the top of the silver) who always complain. Can't blame them but what they never seem to understand is if they were in the upper division they would more than likely be the bottom and loosing 80-90% of your games can damper development as well. No perfect answer when parity is involved. [/quote]

I think we are missing the issue that the OP was trying to raise.

Is it worth it to travel all over to get the same level of hockey ( worse in some cases) than your local town rink ?


I would say no, I think most would say no, when the question is phrased like that , however is it worth it to drive all over to say your kids play for the ____________ and leave out the silver part ? That is obvious !

Either way (winning or losing) the talent varies greatly from the top teams to the bottom teams. The rides aren't that bad for 06 but if you're winning or losing by 7 a game its a parity issue.

[/quote]
Parity issues will always exist and are in all of the divisions. If you look at the 06 division I believe there are 30 teams total. 10 in each division and each one has non performs at the bottom and out performers at the top and it has always been that way. Bottom black and top white can probably compete and bottom white and top silver the same, but there has to be some cut off. It's always the ones at the top of the white ( and now the top of the silver) who always complain. Can't blame them but what they never seem to understand is if they were in the upper division they would more than likely be the bottom and loosing 80-90% of your games can damper development as well. No perfect answer when parity is involved. [/quote]

If you did 6 divisions of 5 in EHF Tier 1 you would have much better parity. You can see that across the board. Even Elite should be split in 2. If they really cared about parity, travel should be a secondary consideration.