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

Youth Hockey
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Checking

Anon
Heard that USA Hockey was taking checking out at bantams. Is that true?


Yes

Re: Checking

Troll! Post then answer your own question. You are an ass.

Re: Checking

Anon
Troll! Post then answer your own question. You are an ass.


Your wife's a troll.

Re: Checking

First responder is an a$$. I'm no troll just asking. Is this for next season? Why? By the way, responder F off, why would someone troll this? Why not talk pluses and minuses? Sorry for kid got cut and my kid flattened him.

Re: Checking

Awful idea. They should check in peewee. I would even advocate body contact for squirts at Tier 1 level (EHF Elite and E9 around here).

Re: Checking

Anon
Awful idea. They should check in peewee. I would even advocate body contact for squirts at Tier 1 level (EHF Elite and E9 around here).
Absolutely agree. It will expose all these so-called "superstars" skating around untouched. Playing field will even out and make kids appreciate hockey for what it should be, a great and physical game. Will never happen, though, USA hockey won't jeopardize millions of lost revenue from kids dropping out.

Re: Checking

Checker
Anon
Awful idea. They should check in peewee. I would even advocate body contact for squirts at Tier 1 level (EHF Elite and E9 around here).
Absolutely agree. It will expose all these so-called "superstars" skating around untouched. Playing field will even out and make kids appreciate hockey for what it should be, a great and physical game. Will never happen, though, USA hockey won't jeopardize millions of lost revenue from kids dropping out.


never happen in todays concussion culture. Also USA hockey is not taking it out of bantams. They are going to promote lower levels to play no check for the next couple years. This is for the kids who wont play in HS or would essentially ride the pine on a HS so they can continue to play without the increased risks. They believe it will keep more kids in the game thus promote more revenue.

Re: Checking

Anon
Checker
Anon
Awful idea. They should check in peewee. I would even advocate body contact for squirts at Tier 1 level (EHF Elite and E9 around here).
Absolutely agree. It will expose all these so-called "superstars" skating around untouched. Playing field will even out and make kids appreciate hockey for what it should be, a great and physical game. Will never happen, though, USA hockey won't jeopardize millions of lost revenue from kids dropping out.


never happen in today's concussion culture. Also USA hockey is not taking it out of bantams. They are going to promote lower levels to play no check for the next couple years. This is for the kids who wont play in HS or would essentially ride the pine on a HS so they can continue to play without the increased risks. They believe it will keep more kids in the game thus promote more revenue.


You guys are so clueless. The rule for pee wee is no checking, but USA hockey does in fact promote body contact at Squirts and they even go so far as to promote coaching checking at the Pee Wee level.

Where it falls apart is the coaches who say there is no longer coaching in PeeWees, so they can not coach it with the assumption they will teach them at the next level when-it is too late, or too intimidating for kids. If your kids coach is not teaching proper checking, doing some drills which involve checking at the pee wee level, then they are doing your kid a disservice.

Re: Checking

Anon
Anon
Checker
Anon
Awful idea. They should check in peewee. I would even advocate body contact for squirts at Tier 1 level (EHF Elite and E9 around here).
Absolutely agree. It will expose all these so-called "superstars" skating around untouched. Playing field will even out and make kids appreciate hockey for what it should be, a great and physical game. Will never happen, though, USA hockey won't jeopardize millions of lost revenue from kids dropping out.


never happen in today's concussion culture. Also USA hockey is not taking it out of bantams. They are going to promote lower levels to play no check for the next couple years. This is for the kids who wont play in HS or would essentially ride the pine on a HS so they can continue to play without the increased risks. They believe it will keep more kids in the game thus promote more revenue.


You guys are so clueless. The rule for pee wee is no checking, but USA hockey does in fact promote body contact at Squirts and they even go so far as to promote coaching checking at the Pee Wee level.

Where it falls apart is the coaches who say there is no longer coaching in PeeWees, so they can not coach it with the assumption they will teach them at the next level when-it is too late, or too intimidating for kids. If your kids coach is not teaching proper checking, doing some drills which involve checking at the pee wee level, then they are doing your kid a disservice.


This is definitely the problem. The coaches don't know how to coach body contact at the lower levels. Also, the refs don't know how to officiate it either. It's supposed to be played and officiated like a girls/womens league, no full checks but plenty of contact in the corners and bumping off the puck to stop a rush. There can be plenty of contact at the younger ages if the game is coached correctly and officiated correctly.

Re: Checking

Checker
Anon
Awful idea. They should check in peewee. I would even advocate body contact for squirts at Tier 1 level (EHF Elite and E9 around here).
Absolutely agree. It will expose all these so-called "superstars" skating around untouched. Playing field will even out and make kids appreciate hockey for what it should be, a great and physical game. Will never happen, though, USA hockey won't jeopardize millions of lost revenue from kids dropping out.

To be clear, I'm advocating checking at the highest level only. The vast majority of players would still be playing a non-checking game until bantam. Shoot, take it out of bantam for all I care, just let the kids who are supposedly at the top tier play the game the way it was meant to be played at an earlier age, as opposed to waiting until the age when player size differential is at its greatest.

Re: Checking

USA Hockey should just start a 'Powder Puff' no checking league as they think it would make the participation numbers swell. The problem will be most kids would never do it. Kind of like how popular would Flag Football be at the high school level...the stigma of being a wussy is too great at that age.

Re: Checking

anon
USA Hockey should just start a 'Powder Puff' no checking league as they think it would make the participation numbers swell. The problem will be most kids would never do it. Kind of like how popular would Flag Football be at the high school level...the stigma of being a wussy is too great at that age.


have you seen intramural flag football at most high schools. about half the school plays because it is fun and there is little chance of getting hurt. if USA hockey promoted the no checking league numbers would not fall off even remotely like they do now. that being said i agree that for the higher levels they need it and should have kept it at pee wee. I see many bantam players not knowing how to check and then play in HS and get crushed because they dont skate with their head up and/or dont expect to take a hit in the corner. I think that is more dangerous than what they are trying to prevent with the concussion issues.

Re: Checking

"have you seen intramural flag football at most high schools"

Glad our high school isn't one of the 'most.'

Re: Checking

anon
"have you seen intramural flag football at most high schools"

Glad our high school isn't one of the 'most.'


your kids school must be real manly then. hope it works out for him.

Re: Checking

anon
USA Hockey should just start a 'Powder Puff' no checking league as they think it would make the participation numbers swell. The problem will be most kids would never do it. Kind of like how popular would Flag Football be at the high school level...the stigma of being a wussy is too great at that age.


Actually, not a bad idea but how about USA Hockey does the exact opposite and start a 'Goon Meathead' league so all the kids with size and/or little hockey skill and IQ can beat the sh*t out of each other. Their parents will feel good, the kids will still think they're playing hockey, and the players with real skill will actually get to play hockey and learn the tactics of checking in the way it was intended to be played. In fact, USA Hockey can make more money because I'd pay to watch two teams of all meatheads beat the shi*t out of each other, and you could be a coach!

Re: Checking

Genius
anon
USA Hockey should just start a 'Powder Puff' no checking league as they think it would make the participation numbers swell. The problem will be most kids would never do it. Kind of like how popular would Flag Football be at the high school level...the stigma of being a wussy is too great at that age.


Actually, not a bad idea but how about USA Hockey does the exact opposite and start a 'Goon Meathead' league so all the kids with size and/or little hockey skill and IQ can beat the sh*t out of each other. Their parents will feel good, the kids will still think they're playing hockey, and the players with real skill will actually get to play hockey and learn the tactics of checking in the way it was intended to be played. In fact, USA Hockey can make more money because I'd pay to watch two teams of all meatheads beat the shi*t out of each other, and you could be a coach!


already have it. its called "Midgets"