Girls Prep Hockey

[BKDad]

Now that's interesting....why is that so???
Consider playing short stop or third base. You have to react to the ball coming at you, adjust for bad hops, position yourself by moving your feet, and use your glove hand.

At one time, during the age of stand-up goalies, a lot of North American experts said that the reason European goalies weren't as prepared for the NHL compared to the North Americans was because they didn't play baseball as a kid. So, they didn't develop those skills as well.

As the goalie techniques have developed, that may not be quite so true, but I can't think of any other sport where the idea is to position yourself well and make yourself as large as possible. Sumo, maybe? :D

[vas]

Consider playing short stop or third base. You have to react to the ball coming at you, adjust for bad hops, position yourself by moving your feet, and use your glove hand.

At one time, during the age of stand-up goalies, a lot of North American experts said that the reason European goalies weren't as prepared for the NHL compared to the North Americans was because they didn't play baseball as a kid. So, they didn't develop those skills as well.

As the goalie techniques have developed, that may not be quite so true, but I can't think of any other sport where the idea is to position yourself well and make yourself as large as possible. Sumo, maybe? :D

Thanks for the great insight. My kid plays forward most of the time, but is also a pretty good goalie. In softball she only played as pictcher, so I didn't immediately see the advantage, but it really makes sense.

[nut_case]

I had been thinking that I might send a post asking the question "what's up with Vas?" and then I read the last post by Hux. I have to agree with the general thrust of that post. Vas, it may not be your intention, but it seems to me that you are fairly critical of specific programs, and that it is hard for anyone to give you an answer with which you are satisfied. I also think you misunderstood the likely reasons why the Taft coach would refrain from responding in detail to rumors which he may know to be false. At one point you indicated that you were asking for the names of some good coaches. I then mentioned Waddy Rowe, Chuck Vernon and Ned Parsons, to name only a few. You then asked what may or may not have been a combative question, to which I responded. I have only been involved(as a player, coach and parent) in organized sports since 1958, so I may not know what I am talking about. My daughters(all better athletes than me) have played for state and New England championship teams, have played in NCAA tournaments in several sports, and have received various individual honors, including being named to several All- American teams. Somewhere along the line I think that we have all been exposed to some pretty good coaches , and I happen to think that I might have been able to recognize a few of them. I think that you would find, if you were able to look at any particular prep school sport over a period of time, that many of these coaches are good coaches who will be remembered in a positive light by most of their players long after the very short-lived frenzy of a girl's hockey career is over. Hopefully, most kids who choose the prep school route will feel the same way about their experience, for reasons which extend far beyond hockey. By the way, I would be curious to know whether you have coached and, if so, whether you have any sense of the way your players remember the experience.

[torontoe1970]

For what its worth my 8 cents. Many times when a parent or player do not agree with a coaches decision they instantly become a bad coach.

[toots]

I was just surprised that more people didn't offer up more positive comments on any other coaches. Can you help me with this?
Do you realize that many parents and players on national bound teams are just finishing up with USA Hockey national championships in Buffalo? They are simply not on this board at this time. They'll be back soon and maybe some more will pipe up.
By the way, Assabet Valley made the finals in 12, 14, 16 and 19 and won all but the 19s, which was a repeat win by Shattuck St. Marys.

[Radar3535]

Do you realize that many parents and players on national bound teams are just finishing up with USA Hockey national championships in Buffalo? They are simply not on this board at this time. They'll be back soon and maybe some more will pipe up.
By the way, Assabet Valley made the finals in 12, 14, 16 and 19 and won all but the 19s, which was a repeat win by Shattuck St. Marys.What does that make them experts?I would venture to say that percentage is not as big as you think it is.The percentage of prep school players at the Nationals compared to all of the prep school players is probably only 20%.Are you trying to say the other 80% can't participate in this discussion?That they don't have a clue?

[vas]

I had been thinking that I might send a post asking the question "what's up with Vas?" and then I read the last post by Hux. I have to agree with the general thrust of that post. Vas, it may not be your intention, but it seems to me that you are fairly critical of specific programs, and that it is hard for anyone to give you an answer with which you are satisfied. I also think you misunderstood the likely reasons why the Taft coach would refrain from responding in detail to rumors which he may know to be false. At one point you indicated that you were asking for the names of some good coaches. I then mentioned Waddy Rowe, Chuck Vernon and Ned Parsons, to name only a few. You then asked what may or may not have been a combative question, to which I responded. I have only been involved(as a player, coach and parent) in organized sports since 1958, so I may not know what I am talking about. My daughters(all better athletes than me) have played for state and New England championship teams, have played in NCAA tournaments in several sports, and have received various individual honors, including being named to several All- American teams. Somewhere along the line I think that we have all been exposed to some pretty good coaches , and I happen to think that I might have been able to recognize a few of them. I think that you would find, if you were able to look at any particular prep school sport over a period of time, that many of these coaches are good coaches who will be remembered in a positive light by most of their players long after the very short-lived frenzy of a girl's hockey career is over. Hopefully, most kids who choose the prep school route will feel the same way about their experience, for reasons which extend far beyond hockey. By the way, I would be curious to know whether you have coached and, if so, whether you have any sense of the way your players remember the experience.

I don't know why you and a few others are trying to read so much into my posts. I am just asking straight forward questions and I am asking for sraight forward responses. If people don't want to do that, thats fine, you don't have to But some did and I am very appreciative. I don't know how many times I have to say that.

I was satisfied with whomever it was that did give me information for which he gave me reasons for recommending these coaches, such as Tom Resor, Laurie Mutch and Kennedy. I have not been critical of specific programs except to say whatever people have told me as I spoke to them at the NE final games. I asked if anyone could confirm them and no one responded.

I could see that people were upset because I challenged the Taft Hockey coach so, I tried to change the subject and asked about how people feel about which sport is the best for hockey players to play on their off seasons, but only a couple of people were interested in that subject. I know my daughter has to choose two other sports for prep school.

Now we are back to dealing with an issue that is apparently a VERY sensitve one with some of you on this post.

For clarification, I have a son, I make a good living but I am not rich, I cannot afford to VISIT every school up there, I have a daughter, she is in 8th grade, and is an honor student, I am considering boarding school for her, I have been hoping to learn more about the schools from parents (from their kids) who have already had some experience at a prep school, I don't know why some of you find issue with that.

I have been advised to visit the schools and talk to the coach and the teachers etc. Of course I will do that, but as I mentioned before, I believe you can get a more accurate assessment by talking to the customers, in this case the parents who get info from their kids, before I visit the schools. There are so many I just wanted to narrow it down. I have also done some research on the internet. Its amazing what you find on it. For example, did you know that there is a prep school whose headmaster was accused of sexual harrassment just 4 years ago? I know that people accuse people unjustly and that may have been the case. What shocked me is the way the Trustees decided to handle the situation. I would not have approved if I was a parent at that school

I appreciate your expertise as you have deliniated here, is it so terrible that I ask you why these coaches are good coaches? I can't believe that you would think that just because you say it is so, everyone should believe it.

Consider me as you would an English teacher who asks his students to write a paper with a thesis, support paragraph and a conclusion.

So far some of you have stated your thesis; so and so is a good coach, with no support.

I am sorry if I have offended anyone on this site for asking direct questions, my intentions are only to gather information from the ppeople I thought would have the most first-hand experience with prep schools.

[vas]

Do you realize that many parents and players on national bound teams are just finishing up with USA Hockey national championships in Buffalo? They are simply not on this board at this time. They'll be back soon and maybe some more will pipe up.
By the way, Assabet Valley made the finals in 12, 14, 16 and 19 and won all but the 19s, which was a repeat win by Shattuck St. Marys.

I understand, thank you very much for the information.

[toots]

What does that make them experts?I would venture to say that percentage is not as big as you think it is.The percentage of prep school players at the Nationals compared to all of the prep school players is probably only 20%.Are you trying to say the other 80% can't participate in this discussion?That they don't have a clue?
a lot of assumptions, there, radar3535. I really said no such thing if you read my post again. Where do you possbily get that I said the other 80% (your percentage, not mine) could not participate? Vas has been asking for input from people and seemed a bit frustrated that more people have not offered their opinions. I was just offering a possible explanation. I am glad that vas understood my intent.

[Hux]

I expected that at some point someone like you would enter this forum. A skeptic, always looking for a negative side.

Yup, that will usually happen when a thread starts running amok, amd has all the makings of a flame fest. One of the more level headed veterans will make a post and try to get things back on track.

Priorities have not been a problem for me. My children are still too young for me to be thinking about which college they should go to, but they are still my priority.

Hmmm, sounds like a Bushism since you have specifically asked which coaches at which schools run practices designed to develop players, and then promote their players to college coaches, and the Ivies in particular.

You should know that IVYS don't give athletic scholarships.

Ah, yeah...see that is why I used the term "Aid In Grant" which is IVY speak for financial aide, which is what coaches dangle to prospective student athletes. I should know, I spent a nice lunch with Joe Restic going over the possibilities.

I am not rich by any means, but I will sacrifice, like most parents to provide my children with the best education I can. After being tested, my daughter has the potential to excell academically. So, I am being realistic in my expectations.

I know some parents are not, and that is too bad, but we are not all "flawed" in our thinking as you suggest.

I have yet to meet a parent who has kids in youth sports who isn't willing to sacrifice and doesn't have their kid's best interest at heart. However, and as is the case here, there are many who put the cart before the horse. You have come to this forum looking for information with the sole intent of fast tracking your daughter to an IVY through hockey. Not one question has been asked regarding academic programs, extra curricular activities, quality of living, etc. etc. etc.

The flaw is in your thinking that hockey is the route to hallowed halls of ivy, and is further compouned by your rationale that you must shop for the coach that will best accomplish your goals. To top it all off your methodology certainly leaves something to be desired, as you question us, get a response, and then act as though there is some conspiracy, or wall of silence, when a littany of complaints, recommendations, playbooks, and Thanksgiving recipes haven't poured forth from forum members.



This thread was started on page 21. Its obvious you have not read the information before making the attacks you have made.

Dude, I have been reading the info posted here, in this thread for years. It gets restarted every season.

I don't know why you are so negative and offensive, but I guess you need to be that way to get your message across, and everyone has a right to express themselves any way they wish.

Actually I am quite an upbeat person, and prefer to post only happy thooughts about my favorite sport, unless it involves poor television coverage of said favorite, and then I get a bit cranky. Tools also bring out my ire.

Hey Hux;

You dream in Maroon and white? Aren't those Harvard colors??

Ah, wrongo! If I recall, the Harvard color is the same as that of the team NICKNAME! And last I checked, it wasn't the Maroons.

[dumpitin]

Just getting back from nationals in Buffalo and wanted to add some insights to a good thread about different routes to take to prepare your child both hockey-wise and educationally for college. Lots of great debate already, but will throw in my two cents as well for things to consider.

First off, Taft coach mentions about the benefits of the prep experience. Educationally, most public schools simply do not have the resources to provide the same educational value of many of the preps. However, there are numerous public schools that do a great job and most importantly, many public schools students that maximize there public school experience and would thrive in most educational settings. There are surely many other areas that would be worth considering, but for now. I’ll compare just the educational and hockey areas. Educationally though, it's hard to top the preps.

In the hockey comparison, let me first point out, I joined the forum to chime in on the USA hockey development challenges after the past Olympic failures. My post was long and worth looking at if you have a few minutes and want to think about hockey development in general. Been around and involved in the game a long time and would like to add some thoughts on the prep hockey experience.
First off the preps do have numerous talented players and the hockey can be good at times. In comparing them to the top club teams the biggest difference is in the drop off in the top preps after the first 5-7 players. The top clubs simply have more quality throughout the roster. The other difficulty the preps face in comparison to the top clubs in the short prep season and small game schedule. The preps also have their seasons chopped up early in the year with the Thanksgiving and winter holidays and really don’t get going until mid January with a consistent schedule for development. By that point the club teams already have 30-40 game under their belt and 5 months of practice. Developmentally, it’s hard to argue that the prep player, playing on that team only can be anywhere near the club player. Keep in mind though, that there is always the factor of how good the coaching is at either situation can make a huge difference.

Let me also point out that there was some discussion on if only playing prep hockey without the club supplement like the Polar Bears, Assabet, Ct Stars and others is enough hockey to keep improving. There were some thoughts that the prep experience would be enough. This might be true, from my perspective, but only for the most gifted of athletes and even then understand that these players are losing ground rather than growing at the same pace as those choosing the two team options. How some prep coaches have dealt with that question probably goes a long way in proving my point. Tom Resor, Moe Tarrant, Paul Kennedy and John Cooper, all prep coaches had their kids involved with outside clubs and I’m pretty sure actually coached their kids on these club teams.

The preps also come up short with the number of games they allow and the lack of consistent competition in a number of those games. Having just returned from nationals, I was truly impressed with the improvement of many of the top club teams. Having seen many of them throughout the year it was impressive to see the growth in their play. On the other hand the club teams made up of mostly prep players that play on both lacked the same improvement from my perspective. One of the reason for this is the lack of times the prep/club players to actually practice with their club teams and their play was much less organized than that of the top club teams. Individually, I also thought the prep players had not developed at the same pace. Throw out Assabet, who continues to have great success, because they are unique situation where most of their players are trained with the same model throughout their Assabet experience and also generally have a much wider base to choose from than any other club organization.

Tying into the above thought on development, you must understand that we are losing ground to the Canadian players. Those players play a 7 month season, usually have 2-3 qualified coaches working with their players and play 60 plus games against quality competition. To think a 3 month season with 24-28 games which the preps play can match up with that is simply not true. We do have a lot of talent in the USA, but unfortunately we also have far too many athletes that are not in situations to give themselves the best chance to compete at a high level. In the boys prep level you are seeing more and more players opting for the junior experience with the Canadian model and opting out of the preps. There are still a number of talented prep teams, but not nearly the level from past years. I see the same thing evolving in the near future in the women’s prep game. Sure there will still be a number of top women’s teams with top players who will get to the top college teams, but the numbers will drop in my mind. Keep in mind these top players were mostly developed in the top club team situations, proof in point they do a great job of developing talent.

[vas]

[QUOTE=Hux]QUOTE]


Just to clarify, I never asked about which coaches send kids to Ivy's. There was one post which offered information about girls going to Ivy's and I asked how a coach can do that, cause even the college coaches can't guarantee a spot. I hope I will be able to afford a regular college let alone an Ivy.

I have talked about academics, I think you may have missed those posts. But, I thought since this website is about hockey, I'd concentrate on coaches, rather than teachers; I'll work on another site for that.

Do you know of a "forum" about prep schools in general I could look into?

I know you sound like a busy guy, I visited your website, and I have noticed that from the 2300 plus posts that you have a lot of time on your hands, although it seems as though you might be a game announcer. Are you? You sound like you are VERY knowledgable about Girls Prep hockey.

Do you know anything about which prep programs have good coaches and if you do, can you explain why they are good coaches? I would really appreciate your help. Thank you in advance for your help.

[BKDad]

[Lots more good comments...]

Tying into the above thought on development, you must understand that we are losing ground to the Canadian players. Those players play a 7 month season, usually have 2-3 qualified coaches working with their players and play 60 plus games against quality competition. To think a 3 month season with 24-28 games which the preps play can match up with that is simply not true. We do have a lot of talent in the USA, but unfortunately we also have far too many athletes that are not in situations to give themselves the best chance to compete at a high level. In the boys prep level you are seeing more and more players opting for the junior experience with the Canadian model and opting out of the preps. There are still a number of talented prep teams, but not nearly the level from past years. I see the same thing evolving in the near future in the women’s prep game. Sure there will still be a number of top women’s teams with top players who will get to the top college teams, but the numbers will drop in my mind. Keep in mind these top players were mostly developed in the top club team situations, proof in point they do a great job of developing talent.
One of the real challenges now in my mind is that the prep school situation is driving the club system. An awful lot of the club teams' top U16 and U19 teams are either "split season" or they only get together once a week (or less) and for tournaments.

So, given all your good observations, just what are the choices?

From an educational standpoint, either a public school or prep school sounds like they would be equally suitable on balance, with the key being to match the kid up to the right situation. All schools aren't equally suited for all kids.

For hockey, it seems like you're kind of left in the cold somewhat if you choose a public school since many of the club programs are built around prep students. If you choose the prep route, there's a number of flaws that you've pointed out.

Assuming that the local public school is a good match educationally for the kid, what is a good hockey solution? If you are limited by the choices available at the club level (one practice a week and so on), what are good supplemental activities? If a kid was a musician in the school jazz band, it's most probable that they'd also be taking some kind of private lessons on their instrument of choice. Any good hockey suggestions?

[whfan]

(QUOTE) Having just returned from nationals, I was truly impressed with the improvement of many of the top club teams. Having seen many of them throughout the year it was impressive to see the growth in their play. On the other hand the club teams made up of mostly prep players that play on both lacked the same improvement from my perspective. One of the reason for this is the lack of times the prep/club players to actually practice with their club teams and their play was much less organized than that of the top club teams. Individually, I also thought the prep players had not developed at the same pace.(QUOTE)

dumpitin,

I just returned from nationals myself, and while I agree with most of your statements on your post, I don't agree with your quote here - at least at the 19u level. (those were the games I watched the most). 3 of the final 4 teams in this age bracket were made up of girls from prep schools - the one lone club team was knocked out in a 5-1 defeat.

The best game of the weekend that I saw was the 19u SSM vs the Polarbears. Again, a team of prep school girls that rarely play together (the Polarbears) took a SSM team that plays together everyday, and very nearly beat them in regulation. (SSM scored on a 5 on 3 with about 40 seconds left in regulation). SSM went on to score in OT. Still, not bad for a group of prep school girls that rarely practice together.

Most of the club teams suffered a defeat in the 19u level when they were playing teams with prep girls on them. However, I'm not trying to make any statements about prep hockey vs club hockey (settle down vas), but rather give the prep school girls who won gold, silver and bronze medals in this age bracket their due. They earned their medals with solid effort and great team play.

[vas]

I'd like to welcome the parents back from Nationals! Congratulations to all of the girls for making it that far.

Is SSM as good as they seem to be judging by the scores? they beat Assabet 6-1? but, then again I think only 2-1? Can anyone give us some info on how those games went?

[whfan]

I'd like to welcome the parents back from Nationals! Congratulations to all of the girls for making it that far.

Is SSM as good as they seem to be judging by the scores? they beat Assabet 6-1? but, then again I think only 2-1? Can anyone give us some info on how those games went?


vas,

The scores or records didn't always justify the talent level. One case in point was the Princeton 19u team. This is a solid team that played well throughout the tournament, but they had one of the toughest schedules at the nationals. They're just a few girls away from being a real threat to getting a gold medal.

SSM is a solid team with alot of depth, but they take too many penalties - it only a matter of time before that costs them an important game. Some of their girls need to get control of their tempers. Still, it's obvious in there play that these girls practice alot together. Just as an aside, I was surprised at how mediocre their 16u team looks.

Wisconsin was led by Long and Lormes - great players but the team needs more depth overall to compete when they get to the quarters and semi's.

The Poarbears were led by Knight, Ragen and Rybinski. Murphy and Bellonio were solid as well. Knight was played to exhaustion in the SSM game, and they may have cost them the game. (especially when their other center, Ragen, was having a good game, scoring both goals and fore and backchecking well - she could have taken some of the burden off of Knight).

The Honeybaked team probably should have been in the semi's instead of Assabet. Their game against Assabet was a great one to watch as well. Honeybakeds Rachel Davis fired a slapshot in the last 24 seconds of the game to send it into overtime. Even with Honeybaked totally outplaying Assabet in the third and overtime periods, they still came up short. I think their goalie, Bishop, just wasn't seeing enough shots to get a good rhythm going.

The Troy team also played as well as their talent will take them - they still need to find more talent before they will be a serious contender.

I wasn't impressed with Ohio, Washington or Colorado. (I only saw the Colorado team once however). The number 1 goalies for Ohio and Washington had some bright spots over the weekend though. The only 19u team that I didn't get a chance to see was the Cal selects team. I thought they would be a good team this year since they had the huge goalie from last years 16u team move up to 19u this year. She was great in last years Nationals.

I think USA hockey should rethink allowing a host team to compete just because they are a host team. The rest of the teams have to earn their spot, and host teams should as well. Games against these teams are almost always blowouts.

At any rate congratulations to all the girls at the nationals - they should be proud of themselves!

[Hux]

Assuming that the local public school is a good match educationally for the kid, what is a good hockey solution? If you are limited by the choices available at the club level (one practice a week and so on), what are good supplemental activities? If a kid was a musician in the school jazz band, it's most probable that they'd also be taking some kind of private lessons on their instrument of choice. Any good hockey suggestions?

A lot of that will depend on location, and proximity to high end training and/or club teams to play on. If you live in the Boston, Detroit, or Minneapolis areas you have more resources than you will know what to do with. Where you go to school shouldn't matter where you play, assuming you have the talent to compete.

Of course the problem that arises is Catch22 in nature. If you want to develop great talent a lot of time has to be spent working towards becoming great. The cost is that you may well end up with superior athletes, but less well rounded young women. (assuming that you focused on hockey and little else rather than going the prep route and the limited season and multi-sport requirements)

[dumpitin]

WHFAN
My points about the club/prep team players are this.
First off yes those teams are comprized of the best 1 or 2 players from numerous prep schools. Those players are an elite few that can have their development hampered by the lack of games, practices and quality competition throughout the prep hockey season. They do realize that to stay with the high club teams they must supplement the prep seasons with additional hockey. For many of these players it's a difficult thing to do with the demands of the prep schools with fall and spring sports that overlap the club hockey season. Keep in mind that many of these club teams play a minimum number of games and often find themselves in the situation like the Polar Bear 19s found themselves this year. Having to play a number of games late in the year, sometimes as many as three in on day, to get the players all eligible. Much more of a situation of jumping thru USA hockey hurdles than developmental hockey.
Lets face it many if not most prep parents send their kids to the elite educational prep schools with the hopes that their child will have what it takes educationally to be a candidate for the Ivy's or Nescac's. The reality is if you are one of those elite players this is a good option educationally. However, hockey-wise the preps simply do not provide the opportunities to develope that many people think. There is also talk of some preps not allowing their kids to play on the clubs, which will further put hockey devel in a bad position.
The other reality is that the canadian presence is growing. Last year alone the ECAC freshman class was made up of 70% Canadians. Princeton as an example was a team that was much more American in the past and is almost 50/50 right now.
The preps are a good option for the Ivy/Nescac route, but even here it's mostly for the elite player. Many of their players are not at that level and would have been much better served in the hockey preps or elite clubs hockey-wise.
The other thing to consider is that many more excellent non-Ivy's are giving out scholarships and they will take away their share of top end kids. My guess is that we are seeing the non-Ivy's pulling away hockey-wise and that trend will only get worse for the Ivy's.
Lastly to think that the preps can develope players, like the hockey academys and top club teams with 1/2 the season, competition and schedule they play is simply impossible. The preps are a good option for some kids, but as a said already we are seeing that model be challenged already and it will only get worse in the future in my opinion.

[vas]

WHFAN
My points about the club/prep team players are this.
First off yes those teams are comprized of the best 1 or 2 players from numerous prep schools. Those players are an elite few that can have their development hampered by the lack of games, practices and quality competition throughout the prep hockey season. They do realize that to stay with the high club teams they must supplement the prep seasons with additional hockey. For many of these players it's a difficult thing to do with the demands of the prep schools with fall and spring sports that overlap the club hockey season. Keep in mind that many of these club teams play a minimum number of games and often find themselves in the situation like the Polar Bear 19s found themselves this year. Having to play a number of games late in the year, sometimes as many as three in on day, to get the players all eligible. Much more of a situation of jumping thru USA hockey hurdles than developmental hockey.
Lets face it many if not most prep parents send their kids to the elite educational prep schools with the hopes that their child will have what it takes educationally to be a candidate for the Ivy's or Nescac's. The reality is if you are one of those elite players this is a good option educationally. However, hockey-wise the preps simply do not provide the opportunities to develope that many people think. There is also talk of some preps not allowing their kids to play on the clubs, which will further put hockey devel in a bad position.
The other reality is that the canadian presence is growing. Last year alone the ECAC freshman class was made up of 70% Canadians. Princeton as an example was a team that was much more American in the past and is almost 50/50 right now.
The preps are a good option for the Ivy/Nescac route, but even here it's mostly for the elite player. Many of their players are not at that level and would have been much better served in the hockey preps or elite clubs hockey-wise.
The other thing to consider is that many more excellent non-Ivy's are giving out scholarships and they will take away their share of top end kids. My guess is that we are seeing the non-Ivy's pulling away hockey-wise and that trend will only get worse for the Ivy's.
Lastly to think that the preps can develope players, like the hockey academys and top club teams with 1/2 the season, competition and schedule they play is simply impossible. The preps are a good option for some kids, but as a said already we are seeing that model be challenged already and it will only get worse in the future in my opinion.

As I have been saying, I am considering prep school for my daughter, and you have really given me a lot to think about.

What u are saying makes a lot of sense and I did not look at it that way. I have always been concerned about the idea of a kid playing in prep school AND playing on a club team...cutting into her education, activities and such. The car ride alone back and forth takes up a lot of time.

Thanks

[vas]

vas,

The scores or records didn't always justify the talent level. One case in point was the Princeton 19u team. This is a solid team that played well throughout the tournament, but they had one of the toughest schedules at the nationals. They're just a few girls away from being a real threat to getting a gold medal.

SSM is a solid team with alot of depth, but they take too many penalties - it only a matter of time before that costs them an important game. Some of their girls need to get control of their tempers. Still, it's obvious in there play that these girls practice alot together. Just as an aside, I was surprised at how mediocre their 16u team looks.

Wisconsin was led by Long and Lormes - great players but the team needs more depth overall to compete when they get to the quarters and semi's.

The Poarbears were led by Knight, Ragen and Rybinski. Murphy and Bellonio were solid as well. Knight was played to exhaustion in the SSM game, and they may have cost them the game. (especially when their other center, Ragen, was having a good game, scoring both goals and fore and backchecking well - she could have taken some of the burden off of Knight).

The Honeybaked team probably should have been in the semi's instead of Assabet. Their game against Assabet was a great one to watch as well. Honeybakeds Rachel Davis fired a slapshot in the last 24 seconds of the game to send it into overtime. Even with Honeybaked totally outplaying Assabet in the third and overtime periods, they still came up short. I think their goalie, Bishop, just wasn't seeing enough shots to get a good rhythm going.

The Troy team also played as well as their talent will take them - they still need to find more talent before they will be a serious contender.

I wasn't impressed with Ohio, Washington or Colorado. (I only saw the Colorado team once however). The number 1 goalies for Ohio and Washington had some bright spots over the weekend though. The only 19u team that I didn't get a chance to see was the Cal selects team. I thought they would be a good team this year since they had the huge goalie from last years 16u team move up to 19u this year. She was great in last years Nationals.

I think USA hockey should rethink allowing a host team to compete just because they are a host team. The rest of the teams have to earn their spot, and host teams should as well. Games against these teams are almost always blowouts.

At any rate congratulations to all the girls at the nationals - they should be proud of themselves!

Your report is excellent! Thanks for the bird's eye view!