Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zac911

The high cost of sports

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, JunkyardAthletic said:

A large part of travel hockey costs are the association dues that go to pay for coaches making 6 figures. #disgusting

This. There was an "Elite" Travel Baseball coach in our area, when I was growing up, that worked full-time as a middle school geography teacher, but pulled a six-figure salary from running Travel Baseball program. Literally had parents mortgaging their homes to send their kids to tournaments all over the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JunkyardAthletic said:

A large part of travel hockey costs are the association dues that go to pay for coaches making 6 figures. #disgusting

When compared to the costs of the actual travel, association fee's are a small fraction of the total cost more often than not. 

Most paid coaches in amateur hockey aren't making a living solely on coaching. I don't doubt that there is a portion of the coaching community who exploits the process. Cash grabs are everywhere - but most of these guys are getting compensated fairly for their time and travel expenses. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my wheelhouse.

 

Kids better be driving where/what they are playing.

 

If you somehow are paying to find an means to an end, (financial aid) ,rethink.

 

I think sacrificing future education to play sport today(gambling the college fund), is a poor decision.  Meaning if you are going to spend thousands of dollars to play a game today, but cannot afford to send your pup to college, that may be shortsighted IMO.  But it's their money, not mine, who am I to tell someone how to spend their money or raise their children. 

 

Traveling all around playing hockey is REALLY fun and turns into a bunch of mini vacations for the family.

 

(edited for TLDR)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least half my town associations budget is ice time.  Ice is expensive as hell.  And the more teams (elite this, AAA that, etc) want it the more the more the rinks can charge.  Since the private teams charge families more anyway (for real or imagined benefits) they have the financial power to buy up all that ice time and resell it.  For example, there's a state rink in the city and nearly all the ice was bought up by a large private organization and nearly none is left for the town/neighborhood association.  It certainly makes it difficult to make fees affordable (and the sport accessible) to ordinary people.  To a certain degree you can defray gear costs, but ice is more complex.  

League fees are also a big cost.  There is one large league in my area and every team at every level in every organization has to pay an entry fee.  (My town has say 3 teams at each level mite through bantam, plus half-season midget teams, and that adds up. The league can charge what they like, as they are the only game in town (so to speak).  So the fees get passed from the league to the organization to the families.

Granted, my only experience is with nonprofit town teams, and at young levels with slightly less panic over college ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very true on so many levels. I have twin boys who I would love to see play Hockey growing up but it's almost unrealistic to imagine the costs for that to happen. When they are little, it's not as bad but when they hit like the 8-10yr old range it gets astronomically expensive. I was lucky to have a school team that I played on so my parents didn't have to break the bank for me to play but if that's not an option, this is a killer for a family budget.

I remember going to my Niece's game and then looking at the flyer for the Junior Flyers Mites and saw the costs attached... I was jaw-dropped. Mites were $1250 per player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, it's a nasty game.  

 

Pay for ice and coaching, vs limited ice and dads.  That's the pull.  Getting 3-5 practices a week(ice time) vs 1 practice a week and hope you can keep up.  

 

As as stated above, then paying for travel(the big cost), it's tough.  Tougher with young kids, where parents have to travel with them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the money spent on travel hockey is absurd given the odds of any scholarship down the road. The one positive takeaway from playing hockey as a kid though is that hockey is a sport for life. I have watched fathers that watched their sons play hockey turn into grandfathers watching their grandchildren play hockey as their sons continue to play mens league hockey. It's not about the destination, it's about the journey. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/6/2016 at 0:48 AM, EJB said:

Agreed, it's a nasty game.  

 

Pay for ice and coaching, vs limited ice and dads.  That's the pull.  Getting 3-5 practices a week(ice time) vs 1 practice a week and hope you can keep up.  

 

As as stated above, then paying for travel(the big cost), it's tough.  Tougher with young kids, where parents have to travel with them.

 

 

Where I live, the actual logistical cost of travel isn't so bad as, say, where you are, because the rinks are all pretty close together.  But there's also fundamentally no house league to speak of - even on town teams, it's 3 or 4 travel teams placed in the all-encompassing fungus that is the primary youth league in the area.  There's learn to play, which only covers ages 4 - 10, or travel, and the associated costs and stress.  Some of the older kids I coached in learn to play dropped out of hockey because they weren't into the stress of travel, but there just wasn't anywhere else for them to go. 

Sometimes it seems as if parents want the fancy trappings, the uniforms and the full ice and the travel and tournaments, because they want it to look like "real" hockey.  Similar to hardcore preschool programs - it has to look like "real" school, or it's somehow a waste of time and money.  The idea of "I'm paying for it, so it should be appealing to me".  There's not necessarily a direct goal of "kid will be successful/professional at [x] because we did [y]" but some parents (adults) have their own biases about what hockey, swimming, baseball, softball, school, etc., should look like, and frankly young children doing any of those things looks absolutely nothing like the adult notion of those things.  I've certainly encountered parents who get grouchy because their kids are not learning "real" hockey in Learn to Play or cross-ice, and I've seen leagues that prey on those parents.  My local organization had a poll, recently, as a matter of fact on whether parents would be interested in having an option available for a no-check Bantam team (there is a super tiny newly-established no-check Bantam league nearby) - not "should all our bantams be no-check" or anything, but "should we make this option available" and the result was an avalanche of NO.  That's the attitude, I think, of "that's not real hockey" talking, and it disregards the needs or desires of the actual players.

So because there is this lack of middle-of-the-road options, I think it both discourages players and parents, and at the same time traps them - like Bakum's comment above about wanting their kids to play hockey but the cost being a problem, or their niece's game and the mite cost alone.  If you want to play at all, you have to pay some exorbitant sum, and it might be far more commitment than you want, and everyone is miserable monetarily or experience-wise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2016 at 8:49 AM, badger_14 said:

 

Where I live, the actual logistical cost of travel isn't so bad as, say, where you are, because the rinks are all pretty close together.  But there's also fundamentally no house league to speak of - even on town teams, it's 3 or 4 travel teams placed in the all-encompassing fungus that is the primary youth league in the area.  There's learn to play, which only covers ages 4 - 10, or travel, and the associated costs and stress.  Some of the older kids I coached in learn to play dropped out of hockey because they weren't into the stress of travel, but there just wasn't anywhere else for them to go. 

Sometimes it seems as if parents want the fancy trappings, the uniforms and the full ice and the travel and tournaments, because they want it to look like "real" hockey.  Similar to hardcore preschool programs - it has to look like "real" school, or it's somehow a waste of time and money.  The idea of "I'm paying for it, so it should be appealing to me".  There's not necessarily a direct goal of "kid will be successful/professional at [x] because we did [y]" but some parents (adults) have their own biases about what hockey, swimming, baseball, softball, school, etc., should look like, and frankly young children doing any of those things looks absolutely nothing like the adult notion of those things.  I've certainly encountered parents who get grouchy because their kids are not learning "real" hockey in Learn to Play or cross-ice, and I've seen leagues that prey on those parents.  My local organization had a poll, recently, as a matter of fact on whether parents would be interested in having an option available for a no-check Bantam team (there is a super tiny newly-established no-check Bantam league nearby) - not "should all our bantams be no-check" or anything, but "should we make this option available" and the result was an avalanche of NO.  That's the attitude, I think, of "that's not real hockey" talking, and it disregards the needs or desires of the actual players.

So because there is this lack of middle-of-the-road options, I think it both discourages players and parents, and at the same time traps them - like Bakum's comment above about wanting their kids to play hockey but the cost being a problem, or their niece's game and the mite cost alone.  If you want to play at all, you have to pay some exorbitant sum, and it might be far more commitment than you want, and everyone is miserable monetarily or experience-wise. 

You just touched on a wide spread problem that George Carlin liked to rail on-  Professional Parenting.  It's everywhere... And it's a damn disgrace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2016 at 11:49 AM, badger_14 said:

So because there is this lack of middle-of-the-road options, I think it both discourages players and parents, and at the same time traps them

This pretty much spot on topic. A full in-house league would be perfect for kids but that's assuming that a rink has a large number of kids to play and separate them into 6-8 teams. Or if some local Rinks worked together to schedule games against one another. Similar to how something like a community baseball program would work. Like you drive one township over to play a game. 10-15min drive tops as opposed to weekend getaways to different states every week.

For me, it's more about the experience my kids would have with the game and how much fun it would be for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just reading the latest USAH mag with my boys this weekend about the introduction by USA HOCKEY about " Flex Hockey"  I for one plan to talk to my local rinks about it, and help out any way I can.  I know my boys don't have the drive (or the talent) to play at the higher levels, but that doesn't mean they should be shut out of hockey until they are grown and playing in Adult Leagues. 

this however was the only online link i could find on the subject. 
http://mihockeynow.com/2016/06/usa-hockey-announces-record-numbers-new-flex-hockey-program-and-new-quick-change-youth-goalie-gear/

 

that said, we also have a large selection of house leagues i can get my boys into, but the time commitment may not be feasible.  :/ 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Las Vegas is an island for travel hockey. When my son played the majority of the cost was to travel. The closest places were in LA but we would travel to Phoenix, Salt lake, Dallas, Seattle, Denver and other places to play at a competitive level. We were always realistic about how far hockey can take you. Even though my son was pretty good he wasn't going to be in that small percentage that will have a chance. If you know you won't make it to the show why play at the highest level possible? Our answer was so our son could push his limits and be pushed to do as well as he can. Did we spend a lot of money? Yes we did. Was it worth it? Every cent. My some learned a lot about life, succeeding, failing, getting knocked down to getting back up again. respecting authority, respecting others and the game. How to work as a team and that no one person is bigger than a team. He has become a fine young man from what he learned in hockey and it is reflected in how he handles himself in the Air Force. All the money we spent would be cheaper than an attorney if he hadn't been so involved in hockey (not just playing but teaching little kids, reffing, working at the rink) and he had free time to get in trouble. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Professional parenting" hah, I like that phrase.  Mind you I don't think it's (largely) malicious, just that sometimes parents have forgotten what it is actually like to be four and not know how to skate.  

I really don't think it would be so hard to arrange a rec program within a small consortium of towns (not unlike regional school districts that draw from multiple communities).  In my town last year there were FIVE peewee teams.  Do they all need a full scale travel schedule of games and practices?  Do they all want it? Maybe not.  If you had six towns and siphoned off one or two teams at each level, you could.  The trick above is parents wanting it.  Personally, I will advocate ferociously for rec hockey (rec sports) and learning programs for all ages.  If you want kids to be active there have to be opportunities, and I will mud-wrestle every single regional director in USA Hockey to prove my point if I have to.  

What chk hrd said of his son is pretty much what my goal for any kid I coach is- regardless of what level they end up at, I want them to be people I would be pleased and proud to have on my own team.  And it doesn't have to cost 10K a year to do that.  (Again, applies to whatever sport the kid is into.)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 800 lb gorilla in the room is USA Hockey. It is not in their business interests to have/support house league hockey. So many kids and parents would benefit from centralized rink house league hockey instead of driving 2 hours one way on Sunday morning for a Squirt B game. USA Hockey thrives and survives on the money maker that is travel hockey across Tier 1 and Tier 2 in USA. I can't speak for Hockey Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

1 hour ago, DarkStar50 said:

The 800 lb gorilla in the room is USA Hockey. It is not in their business interests to have/support house league hockey. So many kids and parents would benefit from centralized rink house league hockey instead of driving 2 hours one way on Sunday morning for a Squirt B game. USA Hockey thrives and survives on the money maker that is travel hockey across Tier 1 and Tier 2 in USA. I can't speak for Hockey Canada.

 

Why do you say that?  The house league my son is a part of is completely affiliated with USA Hockey... He's got to be a member and the coaches have to be, plus get training, etc.

I would think USA Hockey would like to encourage house leagues that require affiliation?

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Travel hockey feeds the bear. USAH makes more $$ off travel organizations with district and national fees they charge. Yes, all house league players must be registered to USAH but there is no upcharge a rink has to pay USAH to run a house league, I believe. In my rink, the house leagues have lost a lot of players because of the cache of little Johnny Hockey convincing his parents he wants to play travel hockey with his friends. Little Johnny Hockey would be better served playing house league with his friends and then possibly, thinking outside the box, have other area close by rinks run crossover schedules with these various house league teams to support more competition without the  2 hour one way ride for Squirt B games. I know in the end, this is all a business, travel hockey, masquerading as  youth sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with just local Township leagues and no connection to a wider area has a problem of local adequacy so to speak. In other words, if you dominate you local pond it could be because you are pretty BA, but it also can be because everyone at your pond sucks ass and you just suck a little less. I think the latter is more common. Without facing a competition from a larger pool, you do not really know neither your strengths nor your weaknesses. Obviously this applies to more advanced age and skill levels. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2016 at 7:10 PM, Kgbeast said:

Problem with just local Township leagues and no connection to a wider area has a problem of local adequacy so to speak. In other words, if you dominate you local pond it could be because you are pretty BA, but it also can be because everyone at your pond sucks ass and you just suck a little less. I think the latter is more common. Without facing a competition from a larger pool, you do not really know neither your strengths nor your weaknesses. Obviously this applies to more advanced age and skill levels. 

I think you are 110% correct.  But for the majority of kids, I don't care whether they ever find out their strengths and weaknesses relative to elite hockey players their age.  Travel hockey fills that option very well.  All I care about is that the kids have an opportunity to play the game they enjoy, learn the lessons that come with playing on team, get some exercise, some competition, and improve their skills a bit.  And those are ranked in my order of importance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...