Midget Coaching

[bpmd210 0]

Hi there. Currently the head coach for a U16A travel team. There is no house team at our rink, so everybody gets on a travel team. I have 4 solid D, and 2 solid lines. My problem comes in with 4 other players I have, who should not be playing Midget hockey. Problems run from skating, simply knowing what to do and where to be, to basic hockey skills. These are also the kids not as dedicated to hockey. I ahve trouble giving them as much ice-time as the other players. The top ten guys all hustle their butts off, are smart with the puck, and have the skills. It's greatly frustrating to these guys when the others go out and our team gets simply pummelled. They were all told, along with the parents, that ice-time will be given out on skill, hustle, dedication, and the needs of the team. Needless to say, as the season goes on, the grumbling is increasing.

My feeling is that as mites, squirts, peewees, etc., ice-time should be pretty even. As you go up in age, it becomes more a matter of your skill and dedication to the game and team.

2-2 game yesterday, only the top two lines got on the ice for the last 8 minutes or so. I'm waiting for the calls and e-mails this morning.

Am I pretty much in line here? Does this sound reasonable to you guys?

Dave

[chk hrd 164]

It's always the same with every travel team. Parents pay alot of money and expect thier kid to play. The parents with the biggest problems are the ones who either have not played hockey or been around travel hockey. I here the parents grumble on my son's team. I am always saying that this is tier level hockey, not house or A/B hockey where everyone gets equal time. At this level the team is out to win as one of the top priotities. The kids usually understand that but the parents have an issue because they are footing the bill. Some games that are easier, or not as close (winning or losing) the "less talented" kids get more time. The close games, the coach has to ride his horses more for a win. It's a no win situation for the coach and the players and parents who complain do nothing but bring the team down.

How many of the weaker players are doing anything to get better. My son's coach does a private clinic every week that you have to pay for. Even though my son is one of the top players on the team he goes to it because he wants to get better. I rarely see the weak players there trying to get better. I don't even see them at stick and puck.

At the beginning of the season you need to make it clear: Coaches coach, players play and parents watch. Have a 24 hour rule. If they have a problem with your coaching then they can talk with you with the manager present (that keeps it civil and no he said...). Ask them if you are suppose to sacrifice the TEAM to pacify one player and which player you are suppose to pacify because they are not the only one getting shorted. The parents feelings are being hurt because they feel like thier kid is not being treated as an equal (many think thier kid is the next great one, but you just can't see it) and no parent wants to see thier kid get hurt. The only thing you can do is try to keep the unhappy kids positive by a little extra encouragement during practices.

You are in a no win situation. Thats part of coaching. Now you see why a tier level head coach can't really be friends with the parents or associate much with them.

[Chadd 916]

You are in a no win situation. Thats part of coaching.

Absolutely spot on.

You have to put your players in a position to succeed, not hang them out to dry. What is worse, having them stapled to the bench or having them on the ice and being the reason you lost the game? There have to be times when you can use those players to get your other guys a little bit of rest. Spot them as best you can

All of that said, the biggest sign as to how good of a coach you are is how you develop the talent at the bottom of your roster. It's easy to coach kids that already have talent and were developed by someone else. I'm not saying you should be able to make them to line material, but you should be able to bring them up to a level where you don't cringe any time they head out on the ice.

[bpmd210 0]

, but you should be able to bring them up to a level where you don't cringe any time they head out on the ice.

That's my hope. We have off-ice twice a week, and that's almost all conditioning, which is greatly needed.

Thanks for the replies. I agree with all that's been said.

[slacker76 3]

9 years ago I moved back home after college. The association I played my youth hockey with was looking for a midget coach. It was for a Midget A team. I was pretty excited for the opportunity and was really looking forward to it. Then came the first few practices. I quickly learned that I was now the head coach of a team from the land of misfit toys. My team was comprised of about 5 players that didn't make the cut from the AA team. 5 players that were average A level and 5 that needed a tremenous amount of work. Things were going well and all the players were working hard. When it came time for the games...then the problems with the parents began. I had parents in the stands with stop watches timing their childs shifts and making complaints about their childs playing time. This parent would argue why his son did not get to skate as much as the other kids. The parent thought that their child should be seeing time on the penalty kill and power play when in reality....their child was the weakest player on the team. I tried to politely explain that the other players were stronger skaters and players and that their son was making progress. Every week this same parent would come and complain. In practices I kept on trying to encourage and work with the weaker players with more to bring them up to speed. Eventually during the second half of the season the weak skater with the annoying parent had improved tremendously. This player began to see more playing time as a result of the hard work the player put in and I'm sure the extra attention at practices didn't hurt..lol. I was quite pleased to see the kid playing well. Though of course the parent, never happy, came up to me after a game to say that "he told me so" that his kid should have seen more playing time and that the team may have won more games if his kid played more early on. It pissed me off that the parent totally disregarded the fact that his kid worked his ass off and finally got better and realized the payoff for the hard work. Instead that father made such a production that it appeared that the only reason the player was getting more ice time was because his dad bitched and complained. That was my last year coaching hockey.

A couple of years ago I bumped into the player at a local bar. He was in college and came over to talk to me. The player wanted to express his gratitude for all the effort and time that I had spent with him in making him a better player. He appreciated someone donating their time and taking an interest in working with "the worst kid on the team" as he put it. In the end it was nice to hear that someone appreciated what I had done. It wasn't how many shifts the player got or how many goals that stuck with him...it was that someone took the time to teach them a little bit about hockey.

Do what you have to do with your players. Midget level is competitive and unfortunately expensive for the parents. When all is said and done do whats best for the kids and the team. The parents mean well but will get over it.

[Law Goalie 147]

The implicit point in the above post is a good one: any time a parent of a weak player (or the player him/herself) complains about a lack of ice-time in games, the coach should be able to say honestly that they receive twice as much attention in practice situations, and invite the parent(s) to bring their stopwatches out then too. If the kid is a lazy timewaster, the parent will get to see that showcased in the practise.

I've heard the same thing from parents of goalies I coach - which is especially rich given that they're paying a grand total of nothing for the goalie clinics, and I have (quite by my own design) absolutely zero involvement with the teams they play for. One guy thought he'd dazzle me by pointing out that with one instructor and ten goalies on the ice for an hour, his kid only received about five minutes of my direct and exclusive personal attention. I asked how much direct and personal attention he'd receive per hour of instructional time in a university course: no response. My estimate was about thirty seconds. None of this passed with any animosity or il humour, but I never heard a peep of anything other than positivity out of the parent after that.

[chk hrd 164]

A, B and House level hockey is about developing the players and to learn the game. Tier hockey (AA/AAA) is about developing the team to win. I completely agree that Tier hockey is about developing your 3rd and 4th lines to compete with the top lines. I have seen to many coaches (one of my sons old coaches is famous for it) that only work on the top 5-8 players and not caring about the others. He would rather skate his top horses all three periods until thier legs fail in the 3rd then run his 3rd and 4th lines to give the 1st and 2nd a breather so they could be stronger at the end. This is a perfect example of why an orginization that should have 3 or 4 national titles only has 1. at Tier level if you can't trust the 3rd or 4th lines to be out there grinding and not cost you a goal then they should not be on the team And if you do get a goal out of them it is icing on the cake, they did thier job and more. In an ironic way, my kid is a better player now because of the bad coach. He has made a vow to never be put in a bench warming position and works like mad on his game. With the coach he has now he has alot of confidence (it is a miracle what NOT wondering how long you will have to sit if you make a mistake does to your game) and combined with his hard work he is one o the top players on his team.

The best coaches do it for the love of the game and to see thier players progress. I coached until I got sick of the bullshit that goes with it, but there is nothing better than hearing a past player still call me coach, thanking me for helping them or still asking me for advice. The coaches who do it for the glory and paycheck are the narsasitic, egotists that hurt the game. And believe me, parents and ESPECIALLY players know who they are.

[jeffw 1]

We were in the same boat the past couple years. Tryouts were a joke as we were lucky to get enough kids to fill out a roster.

We mixed the lower skilled players in the lines (like one weak kid on each line) & used the top guys on the power plays with varying degrees of success. Won a championship at pee wee A and got killed at Midget AA (should've gone A)

[frankie56 0]

16A team should be fun. Player development is good, but it's unlikely you will develop anyone enough to move up the ranks. If the parents don't get that by the time their kid is a midget, thats very sad.

[chippa13 1844]

Coaching isn't just about trying to develop the next Crosby, it is about taking any player and having him finish the season a better player than when he/she started.

As for the problem of the OP, it is a tough situation to balance out team performance and fairness. One of the best things I've seen is coaches who will put it to the team at the beginning of the season and let them decide if they want to be a win at all costs team or a fun/fair team. A good coach can make it both but all teams have limitations.

One suggestion for the OP, in order to mitigate the impact of the lesser players on a game, pair the weak line with the better D and vice versa, maybe sprinkle the weaker players around the lines, try to find a way to hide the weaker players in the lineup.

[shotty 7]

The implicit point in the above post is a good one: any time a parent of a weak player (or the player him/herself) complains about a lack of ice-time in games, the coach should be able to say honestly that they receive twice as much attention in practice situations, and invite the parent(s) to bring their stopwatches out then too. If the kid is a lazy timewaster, the parent will get to see that showcased in the practise.

true. funny how there's barely any parents in the seats at practice.

[chk hrd 164]

The implicit point in the above post is a good one: any time a parent of a weak player (or the player him/herself) complains about a lack of ice-time in games, the coach should be able to say honestly that they receive twice as much attention in practice situations, and invite the parent(s) to bring their stopwatches out then too. If the kid is a lazy timewaster, the parent will get to see that showcased in the practise.

true. funny how there's barely any parents in the seats at practice.

It's just like in school, the parent expects the teacher/coach to teach them, that is what they are paid for...I hate that friggin attitude. Coaches are with players for a very limited time. The player and parent both need to commit for the player to get better. Very few players are "naturals" as soon as players/parents understand that it makes it easier to learn. My kids works his ass of to play at a tier level and I help him every way possible.

I disagree about letting the players decide if they want to be a win at all costs team or a fun/fair team. They are still kids and it is hard for them to say what they want rather than fall to peer pressure and say what people want to hear. It is the orginization and coaches decision where they want the team to play. If they have enough talent they may want to field a tier level team. If they don't have enough quality players then there is no shame playing A/B. It is sad when an orginization and/or coach has to play at the highest level for ego and status. Those are the teams that get beat becuase they don't have the right talent to compete and would do much better at a lower level. The kids get frustrated from losing and it makes for a miserable seaon.

[chippa13 1844]

It's just like in school, the parent expects the teacher/coach to teach them, that is what they are paid for...I hate that friggin attitude. Coaches are with players for a very limited time. The player and parent both need to commit for the player to get better.

Who the hell is supposed to teach the kid if it isn't the teacher/coach? There is a reason that people teach/coach and that is to pass knowledge on. Otherwise, what the $Z%& is the point?

[chk hrd 164]

It's just like in school, the parent expects the teacher/coach to teach them, that is what they are paid for...I hate that friggin attitude. Coaches are with players for a very limited time. The player and parent both need to commit for the player to get better.

Who the hell is supposed to teach the kid if it isn't the teacher/coach? There is a reason that people teach/coach and that is to pass knowledge on. Otherwise, what the $Z%& is the point?

It is the parents responsibility to support the teachers and coaches. If parents don't support them then that is a far as the learning will go. It's usually the parents who just drop off with no interest that complain the most if thier kid isn't learning/advancing like they think they should. I am not saying that parents are the only teachers, but they are a big part of it. To many people expect others to do everything for them.

[Law Goalie 147]

It's a fine line. Teachers have skills and tools that most parents simply don't; on the other hand, what happens in the years before kindergarten is VASTLY more important in terms of neurological and physiological development than anything that happens in schools. The problem is that in order to really get to the kids in time to do some major good, you'd have to train the parents long before conception - and good luck with that.

Coaching isn't just about trying to develop the next Crosby, it is about taking any player and having him finish the season a better player than when he/she started.

About the only thing I would add to this is that the player should, ideally, finish a better human being -- although that's almost implied by 'better player', I'd argue.