New England Select Festival, Women

[Black Bear]

Am I alone in thinking that it's time to change the format of the NE Select Festival? After watching games (U16 more than any others) that were almost painful to watch and, in my opinion, made it almost impossible to discern who the top players really were, I'm thinking that there needs to be a change. My suggestion is to scrap the 4 games scenario, where too many players are primarily thinking about how to showcase themselves, and go to a more practice oriented format. How about 3 sessions, ninety minutes each, of two teams on the ice at a time following a "scripted" series of drills designed to show players core skills, competitiveness and work ethic more clearly. Finish the weekend (to keep the parents happy) with a round robin, 15 minute periods, among the 4 teams. Thoughts anyone?

[BKDad]

One obvious line of questioning: If the "showcase thyself" approach really works, why would the kids do anything different? Could that be an issue? Are players actually chosen on the basis of a festival like this, or are factors involved?

How do other districts do this process?

How are the players chosen to attend this Festival? Does the self-showcase mode prevail there too?

Basing selections to any team around controlled practices and controlled competition seems very sensible, at least to me. You might think that "coachability" is an important criteria, but I guess it depends on what the purpose of the program is.

[uvmcats]

My understanding of the process is the girls are selected at a tryout in the fall. Just prior to the festival, each state then provides the festival evaluators with a ranking on how the girl stacks up with in the state, ie: #1 forward, #2 forward, etc. In Vermont, the girls have 8 or 9 practice sessions run by high school and college coaches prior to the festival where some of the ranking occurs, I believe. The girls are then distributed over teams by the rankings, hopefully balancing the depth on each team. The girls are then evaluated during the games and several are selected to move on to the next level. In addition others are invited to the regional development camps at their age levels. They did have an drill style evaluation session on Saturday night in the older levels when my daughter attended the festivals. They stopped doing that in 2002 I think. Having watched that session a couple of times I can see why, there was such a disparity between the top kids and the bottom kids that it was totally the luck of the lines whether you were able to skate with a skilled player or had to wait while the other skater went to retrieve the puck or keep up. If your are interested I will ask the new women's director of NE hockey if there are any changes being proposed for the future.

[WFR]

Am I alone in thinking that it's time to change the format of the NE Select Festival? After watching games (U16 more than any others) that were almost painful to watch and, in my opinion, made it almost impossible to discern who the top players really were, I'm thinking that there needs to be a change. My suggestion is to scrap the 4 games scenario, where too many players are primarily thinking about how to showcase themselves, and go to a more practice oriented format. How about 3 sessions, ninety minutes each, of two teams on the ice at a time following a "scripted" series of drills designed to show players core skills, competitiveness and work ethic more clearly. Finish the weekend (to keep the parents happy) with a round robin, 15 minute periods, among the 4 teams. Thoughts anyone?


It is a tough job to find a perfect format. If I were to try to improve the process I would start at the beginning. When you have a tryout for the Festival you cannot judge over 100 kids in one age group in a couple of hours. My thought is if you want a fair evaluation utilize the whole weekend for tryouts. Give the players ample opportunity to show their talents. There should be skating,passing and shooting. Defensmen should be able to show backward skating, pivoting to either side, and their ability to handle 1 x1"S,
2x1's etc.
There should also be some scrimmaging on the second day.
Anyone who is interested in the Festival will have to attend the tryouts for the entire weekend. This will cut down on players just showing up for the hell of it.
After they are evaluated, there should be 4 teams of 10 players and 2 goalies selected to play in the Festival. This will cut down on the disparity between players within the same team. (I saw one game where a player stood out by scoring 3 goals in one game all against the same pair of defensemen. Against the other 2 sets of defensemen on that team that same forward was non existent.)

At the Festival on Friday there should be many of the same drills as held at the tryout but at a more intense pace. Players should be in shape and come ready to play. Maybe shorten the games to 2 12 minute periods. They should play 3 Games on Saturday and 2 games on Sunday.

Remember, the whole purpose in having the Festival is to identify players that can compete at a National Level. Reducing the rosters to 10 skaters will allow for a competive format in an effort to send the right players to the National Camp.

And PLEASE, this is a Festival/Tryout, if your team is losing by a goal in the last few minutes of a game, DO NOT PULL THE GOALIE, DO NOT SHORTEN THE BENCH, EACH GOALIE AS WELL AS PLAYERS SHOULD HAVE EQUAL TIME TO SHOWCASE THEIR TALENTS. THIS FESTIVAL IS NOT ABOUT WINNING,IT IS A TRYOUT.

[BKDad]

Brookyone just posted in the thread "Minnesota Girls High School Hockey" that the whole process will change, apparently starting next season.

So, send your suggestions to the people in your district who are responsible for such things! It probably isn't too early.

[WFR]

New England District released the names of the players going to the National Festivals. Any comments or observations. Does anybody know what an at large choice means?

[Black Bear]

As I said when I started this thread, I think the format used for selection, i.e. four games, is not the best way that it could be done. Any criticism of the process that I might make has nothing to do with any thoughts that there is bias or any kind of unfairness in the process, I just think that a more "practice" oriented format would really allow the evaluators to see more easily what each player can really do. Having followed two kids through a variety of hockey venues, US and Canada, for ten years, I can't think of any tryouts that either my son or my daughter has been involved in, with the exception of girl's Festival, where selections are made solely from scrimmages. Wouldn't it be best to have all your defensemen showing how they play one on ones, two on ones, three on twos, etc., in an easy to see what's happening practice session? Who really wants to battle in the corners? Who has stamina and competitiveness? Ditto for the forwards. For the goalies, they would at least get ninety minutes of shots as opposed to very few in the game type format. And, their evaluation is pretty hit or miss. The shooters for the U14 had about two girls who could shoot the puck. The others would have had a hard time flipping a rock through a pane of glass. U16's had a great group of shooters but how do you know what you're going to have until the players start shooting? I'll certainly not criticize any girl who was selected under the current format but looking at the names in the ages I'm familiar with, U16 and U18, there are some girls who have been to National Festival who were not selected this year. If they really didn't deserve it, so be it. But, for one of those for sure, I think she was probably as good or better than any other player in her age group at her position. Just couldn't seem to be in the right place at the right time with the group of girls she was with. (No, it wasn't my daughter, lol.) Here's one vote for trying something different in the future.

[slapshot2]

New England District released the names of the players going to the National Festivals. Any comments or observations. Does anybody know what an at large choice means?

Are the names of those who made it for the National Festivals from the New England District published anywhere?

[ref11]

Are the names of those who made it for the National Festivals from the New England District published anywhere?

www.nedistricthockey.com

Good luck!
:cool:

[NHDad]

As I said when I started this thread, I think the format used for selection, i.e. four games, is not the best way that it could be done. Any criticism of the process that I might make has nothing to do with any thoughts that there is bias or any kind of unfairness in the process, I just think that a more "practice" oriented format would really allow the evaluators to see more easily what each player can really do. Having followed two kids through a variety of hockey venues, US and Canada, for ten years, I can't think of any tryouts that either my son or my daughter has been involved in, with the exception of girl's Festival, where selections are made solely from scrimmages. Wouldn't it be best to have all your defensemen showing how they play one on ones, two on ones, three on twos, etc., in an easy to see what's happening practice session? Who really wants to battle in the corners? Who has stamina and competitiveness? Ditto for the forwards. For the goalies, they would at least get ninety minutes of shots as opposed to very few in the game type format. And, their evaluation is pretty hit or miss. The shooters for the U14 had about two girls who could shoot the puck. The others would have had a hard time flipping a rock through a pane of glass. U16's had a great group of shooters but how do you know what you're going to have until the players start shooting? I'll certainly not criticize any girl who was selected under the current format but looking at the names in the ages I'm familiar with, U16 and U18, there are some girls who have been to National Festival who were not selected this year. If they really didn't deserve it, so be it. But, for one of those for sure, I think she was probably as good or better than any other player in her age group at her position. Just couldn't seem to be in the right place at the right time with the group of girls she was with. (No, it wasn't my daughter, lol.) Here's one vote for trying something different in the future.

Were you talking about my daughter? She was as frustrated as I was! Oh well, maybe in two years.....

[Black Bear]

Were you talking about my daughter? She was as frustrated as I was! Oh well, maybe in two years.....

The two girls that I was primarily thinking about were not from NH but in looking at the names again, I can find one girl from NH that has been to National Festival and will be playing D1 hockey next year who was not selected. Of the two girls I was thinking about most, neither of which is my daughter, one has been to National Festival at least twice already and has a D1 scholarship offer. If the U18 pool was that deep that she did not deserve a spot, then I guess I missed it. To be honest, I only watched a few periods of U18 as my daughter was in U16. Maybe the girl I'm thinking about just didn't play well but to me, a red flag should be waving that maybe we need to take a look at the process. From the first game my daughter and her friend, who has been to National Festival, expressed their frustration that the level of play was nowhere near what they had played at all year. Not a knock on any girl who was at Festival but, when you try and mix players that might have been playing U14B this past season with girls the same age who have been playing on school teams that played against all the top U18 or U19 programs, it's tough to have them all function as a team in a game situation. So, what are girls supposed to do? Freelance? Just try and skate the puck every time? Great if that's your game, but if you've just finished a season on a team where you've been schooled to play a role on that team, maybe as a stay at home defenseman, it's tough to just flick the switch and now be a rushing defenseman. I really hope that in the future USA Hockey changes the format of Festival for the girls. To the girls selected, good luck, represent NE well.

[BKDad]

So, what are girls supposed to do? Freelance? Just try and skate the puck every time? Great if that's your game, but if you've just finished a season on a team where you've been schooled to play a role on that team, maybe as a stay at home defenseman, it's tough to just flick the switch and now be a rushing defenseman. I really hope that in the future USA Hockey changes the format of Festival for the girls. To the girls selected, good luck, represent NE well.
Maybe it would be helpful to understand what the evaluation criteria is/was.

It would seem that "freelancing" (nice choice of descriptive terms) is what it takes to be noticed and advance; then maybe that should be said.

Many, many kids are drilled by their coaches all year, and before, that they should play their position and work as part of a team. Some even get benched and talked to for "freelancing."

Imagine this: A kid plays on a line or pairing with another kid who is a freelancer. Unfortunately, the freelancer isn't one of the standout kids, so she gives the puck up a lot. The kid who is doing her job, playing her position and everything she's been taught never gets near the puck and when she's on the ice her team does poorly. Now, is this kid supposed to steal the puck from the other kid?

This format must make the evaluator's job very challenging.

[uvmcats]

Not saying there couldn't be a better mousetrap but the theme of the complaints seems to be that the evaluators are not hockey savvy. I suspect the evaluators are very experienced hockey persons. I suspect they can tell a puck hog when they see one and I suspect they can notice whether a kid is playing her position. I suspect they notice who hustles and who doesn't. I suspect they notice who steps up to the format and who doesn't. Are their deserving kids left behind each year, probably. More the reason to get a fire in your belly and come back next year.

I have heard about previous national camp players not making it the next year. It seems reasonable to me that it would happen naturally. My observation is the younger kids are getting better training than the kids who went before so it makes sense to me that new kids at the level might perform better than some of the returnees.

There has been talk in another thread suggesting that these tryouts should be more limited. I think I would go a different direction. I would not be so happy with the cleaver at this level. I have heard that at a couple of the levels there were 4 to 5 kids who were the equal or close in skills to those selected and the evaluators would have been very comfortable recommending them on. Who knows if the 8th best player from this tryout might be better than the 5th best player from another region. It seems to me that USA Hockey ought to widen the spigot at this level and give a larger group advanced training and evaluation. The priority goal should be development not elimination. It seems to me the larger the group of similarly skilled athletes to work with, the better the resulting product will be.

[Hux]

As I said when I started this thread, I think the format used for selection, i.e. four games, is not the best way that it could be done. Any criticism of the process that I might make has nothing to do with any thoughts that there is bias or any kind of unfairness in the process, I just think that a more "practice" oriented format would really allow the evaluators to see more easily what each player can really do. Having followed two kids through a variety of hockey venues, US and Canada, for ten years, I can't think of any tryouts that either my son or my daughter has been involved in, with the exception of girl's Festival, where selections are made solely from scrimmages. Wouldn't it be best to have all your defensemen showing how they play one on ones, two on ones, three on twos, etc., in an easy to see what's happening practice session? Who really wants to battle in the corners? Who has stamina and competitiveness? Ditto for the forwards. For the goalies, they would at least get ninety minutes of shots as opposed to very few in the game type format. And, their evaluation is pretty hit or miss. The shooters for the U14 had about two girls who could shoot the puck. The others would have had a hard time flipping a rock through a pane of glass. U16's had a great group of shooters but how do you know what you're going to have until the players start shooting? I'll certainly not criticize any girl who was selected under the current format but looking at the names in the ages I'm familiar with, U16 and U18, there are some girls who have been to National Festival who were not selected this year. If they really didn't deserve it, so be it. But, for one of those for sure, I think she was probably as good or better than any other player in her age group at her position. Just couldn't seem to be in the right place at the right time with the group of girls she was with. (No, it wasn't my daughter, lol.) Here's one vote for trying something different in the future.


I agree that using scrimmage performance as a benchmark is flawed. Having been to college and professional practices where Small Area Games (SAGs) are used extensively with great effect, I think a case could be made for SAGs to be used instead of full ice scrimmages for evaluations.

SAG based drills utilze likely game scenarios in confined areas to force players to perform at maximum output for short durations. Most SAGs use limited numbers in odd man situations resulting in lots of touches of the puck in a high intesity environment. And with the confined nature the goalies tend to see way more action than they would in a normal scrimmage, so evaluating them is improved as well.

Additionally SAGs allow for a wider range of game scenarios to be planned and integrated into the evaluations rather than hoping that one arises during a scrimmage. The short duration of the drill allows for larger numbers of players to get focused looks, and the increased repetitions enable players to learn from, and improve their response to, specific game situations.

All in all SAGs give a much better picture of a player's abilities than traditional "cone" drills and scrimmages to evaluate a player's strengths and weaknesses.

[uvmcats]

I agree that using scrimmage performance as a benchmark is flawed. Having been to college and professional practices where Small Area Games (SAGs) are used extensively with great effect, I think a case could be made for SAGs to be used instead of full ice scrimmages for evaluations.

SAG based drills utilze likely game scenarios in confined areas to force players to perform at maximum output for short durations. Most SAGs use limited numbers in odd man situations resulting in lots of touches of the puck in a high intesity environment. And with the confined nature the goalies tend to see way more action than they would in a normal scrimmage, so evaluating them is improved as well.

Additionally SAGs allow for a wider range of game scenarios to be planned and integrated into the evaluations rather than hoping that one arises during a scrimmage. The short duration of the drill allows for larger numbers of players to get focused looks, and the increased repetitions enable players to learn from, and improve their response to, specific game situations.

All in all SAGs give a much better picture of a player's abilities than traditional "cone" drills and scrimmages to evaluate a player's strengths and weaknesses.

I have heard they are discussing a concept like this or a reduced number on the ice at one time for one or two of the game periods at next year's festival.

[Black Bear]

The intention of this thread was never to imply that the evaluators are not hockey savvy people. The intention was to raise the issue of creating a format that would make it much more challenging for the girls and at the same time make the distinctions between players much more evident to everyone, not just the evaluators. Let me ask you this. Why do the boys at Festival have an evaluation session where college coaches run them through a variety of drills and the girls don't? (At least they did the two years that my son went.) How many tryouts have you ever been to, at any level, where selections are based solely on scrimmages? As my daughter was trying to express her frustration with the level of play, she said, "This is like playing a pickup game but you're playing for something that is very important." Last year my son attended a tryout camp for a Canadian Junior team, coached by a former Canadian Women's Olympic team assistant. This gentleman had also coached at the University level in Canada, winning several national titles. His on ice sessions consisted of lots of high speed, complex, extremely competitive drills that simulated game situations but allowed you to see players get many opportunities to show what they could do. Gosh, I wonder where he picked up all of those drills and if he ever used them with the girls that he coached. Did they ever scrimmage? Yes they did, but as the coach told me afterwards, they were more for fun and to give the fans a chance to see new players. His decisions, and those of his evaluators, were essentially done after the skills sessions. Does anyone here know any of the evaluators well enough to ask them what they would do if asked to change the format of Festival? Would they say, this is perfect and doesn't need to change or might they say that they would like to try something else? There are more and more quality players in the pool today and I'm firm in my belief that the format has to be changed to really challenge the girls. Let's face it, playing a shift about every three or four minutes over four games is not the best way to identify players with the potential to move on to National level. Let's get rid of the "luck of the draw" nature of this format and go to one where the girls know they are going to get their chances to touch the puck and really be challenged to compete with the other girls there in a format that allows plenty of opportunity.

[Black Bear]

I have heard they are discussing a concept like this or a reduced number on the ice at one time for one or two of the game periods at next year's festival.

Here's hoping that's true...........

[BKDad]

There are more and more quality players in the pool today and I'm firm in my belief that the format has to be changed to really challenge the girls. Let's face it, playing a shift about every three or four minutes over four games is not the best way to identify players with the potential to move on to National level. Let's get rid of the "luck of the draw" nature of this format and go to one where the girls know they are going to get their chances to touch the puck and really be challenged to compete with the other girls there in a format that allows plenty of opportunity.
Would it make sense to eliminate the Festival try-out in favor of this kind of event?

Instead of having a big game event the week before Nationals where kids get beaten up and miss even more school, something could be held either in April or maybe even in January along the lines of what's been described. Perhaps the time chosen could be based around some traditional prep school breaks so that kids who are out of the area won't be travelling so much during school, and less school would be missed.

You could have some general skating and fundamentals type drills as kind of a warm-up and initial evaluation tool. Then do the small area games. Another advantage of the small area games is that none of the players would be "held back" or conversely "pushed too much" by having players on their lines or pairing who have a much different skill level.

Ideally, all the players would be "scored" on a form of some kind with that report card given to the kid afterwards. In a perfect world, an evaluator would sit down with the player for 10 or 15 minutes and discuss the results before the end of the event. That way the player could go away with an idea of what she has to work on and where she fits regardless of where that is. I know some of this happens at the Festival, but it doesn't after the try-out; you get a postcard telling you yea, nay, or maybe.

Massachusetts has their try-outs in April, so timing at the National level can't be a problem. If the reports posted at various web bulletin boards are accurate (it is the internet, after all), it's also clear that Massachusetts uses a similar process to what New England does, but the selection criteria is different.

[Radar3535]

Then do the small area games. Another advantage of the small area games is that none of the players would be "held back" or conversely "pushed too much" by having players on their lines or pairing who have a much different skill level. "Small area" games are great for those looking forward to the goal.How about the goalies who use reference points and creases to develop proper angles?None of that exists in these type of drills.Some of the goalies are at a disadvantage when being evaluated this way.Those who don't use these advanced techniques will probably look better in these type of drills.

[BKDad]

"Small area" games are great for those looking forward to the goal.How about the goalies who use reference points and creases to develop proper angles?None of that exists in these type of drills.Some of the goalies are at a disadvantage when being evaluated this way.Those who don't use these advanced techniques will probably look better in these type of drills.
I'm sure there could be additional activities to help the goaltenders, who often are pretty much ignored in most events. Obviously, they have a much different job to do that requires different skills than the other players.

This is really all a moot point, since this is just an entertaining debate over what we'd like to see happen. I don't imagine many if any of us have any influence whatsoever over the process in any way. The best we can do is help out our daughter, niece, or even ourself in whatever way we can. Hopefully this board might be a good source of information for that.