USA hockey puts adults on 310'x130' ice surface, to represent the scale of 8 year olds on a full size rink

[dsjunior1388 81]

http://mihockeynow.com/2014/02/usa-hockey-video-offers-a-look-at-the-playing-surface-an-8-year-old-sees-on-full-ice/

In my opinion, this is a brilliant and accurate portrayal of little kids on big ice. Especially when they talk about taking one wrong step and being out of the play for the remainder of the shift, never being able to get back into the flow of things. As well as the excess chasing. I'm not expecting 3rd graders to pass like the Soviet Red Army in the 70s, but it also might be nice if everyone got to touch the puck more than once.

[donkers 31]

if i ever get the chnace to play with those nets i'd dust off my ol' 5030 coffey curve and go top shelf all day erryday

[Souldriver 64]

I can see the rink being way too big but the net size shouldn't be too out of control.

Changing the net size on a goalie can cause a lot of problems and getting scored on can take away a lot of confidense from a young tike. Plus most 8 year olds can't lift the puck too much so the height isn't a problem. I can see a downsizing of rink size but then there must be some title of compensating for kids of different sizes and ones that are in different stages of growth. An 8 yr old born in Jan is way different than one born in Nov.

[boo10 323]

I think that's a bit exaggerated to emphasize the point. I started organized hockey on full size ice as a 4 year old, playing with 8 year olds. I had no problem being involved in the play. I think the key was that I was a pretty good skater for my age. We need to stop making things too easy for our kids. I actually think putting kids on smaller ice will have a negative impact on their skating development, because they won't have to work to get involved in the play.

[Kevin 5]

I think that's a bit exaggerated to emphasize the point. I started organized hockey on full size ice as a 4 year old, playing with 8 year olds. I had no problem being involved in the play. I think the key was that I was a pretty good skater for my age. We need to stop making things too easy for our kids. I actually think putting kids on smaller ice will have a negative impact on their skating development, because they won't have to work to get involved in the play.

I think skating should be taught separately from hockey. I see way too many kids playing hockey when they really should be learning the fundamentals of skating prior to playing hockey.

[MatthewRoach7 130]

This is a big push for the USAH ADM right now. I can see a lot of value in it. Being a coach the kids have a lot of fun spending less time chasing a puck and more time stick handling and shooting. Full ice is just too big for small kids. I think the sizing of the goal makes sense as well if an NHL goalie cover 60% of the net then a youth goalie should too. Yeah with a full size net the kids at not going top shelf but the goalie still needs to cover side to side. I also don't think that we are making it too easy for kids with this change. We are helping them become more engaged and grow a love for the sport of hockey.

[Souldriver 64]

This is a big push for the USAH ADM right now. I can see a lot of value in it. Being a coach the kids have a lot of fun spending less time chasing a puck and more time stick handling and shooting. Full ice is just too big for small kids. I think the sizing of the goal makes sense as well if an NHL goalie cover 60% of the net then a youth goalie should too. Yeah with a full size net the kids at not going top shelf but the goalie still needs to cover side to side. I also don't think that we are making it too easy for kids with this change. We are helping them become more engaged and grow a love for the sport of hockey.

Yeah but like i said you get that one big kid that covers way more than 60%. also smaller kids with less accuracy will have less chance hitting a smaller target as well, i just dont think it should be scaled down as much.

[Speedz98 15]

I think that's a bit exaggerated to emphasize the point. I started organized hockey on full size ice as a 4 year old, playing with 8 year olds. I had no problem being involved in the play. I think the key was that I was a pretty good skater for my age. We need to stop making things too easy for our kids. I actually think putting kids on smaller ice will have a negative impact on their skating development, because they won't have to work to get involved in the play.

I've been working as a coach at a rink that is operating under the US Development programs ADM. The smaller ice for mites (we play half ice games) is tremendous for their skating and development.

1. They turn more and are using their edges.

2. More forwards to backwards transitions.

3. Always involved in the play (4-on-4).

4. Less likely for the one really good kid to go end-to-end and score 10 goals (it still happens but less often, less space for them to avoid the defending the team)

5. The less space there is the more they have to use their stick handling skills to get around opposing defenders.

Smaller ice surface and small area games for mite hockey isn't entirely about making the game easier for the kids. It's putting them in a position to succeed and utilize their training. The games are significantly more entertaining too. There's more action, the pace is quicker, scoring chances are traded more often. It's just a better game for youth players that young. Squirt is the perfect time to learn the full ice game.

Remember skill development takes priority over full-ice strategy up until the kids are about peewees. Then the focus shifts slowly from skills to team-play.

[Crossen463 8]

Soccer, basketball, and football are all huge with American youth. One thing they have in common at the youth level is that they all play on scaled down playing fields to keep all the kids involved, and get them to play the game properly. Big ice isn't even good for the best player that skates around the other team, because then he won't know how to handle having the opposing team all over him once everyone gets bigger. I\This is a long needed adjustment to youth hockey.

[chrisehyoung 14]

When I played as a kid we played half ice games for the first few years. Same size nets though.

I also remember there being a video similar to this done for soccer a couple years ago.

[boo10 323]

As a 7 year old living in the GTA, I used to practice on a couple of scaled down rinks, (McCormick & Forest Hill for those that know the area). Even at that age, the entire team agreed that the rink was too small for us and we hated it. I'm sure there are pros and cons to both small and large ice surfaces, but to say that smaller is better in every way; well I just respectfully disagree.

[bunnyman666 445]

The nets in the video gave me a chuckle.

I grew up playing in a pretty small rink and there was still a lot of dump and chase.

I admit that I'm on the fence about shrinking the ice size, seeing both pros and cons with it. Under 10? Definitely half ice, IMO.

[Hordie Gowe 17]

Like the idea from a financial perspective. Helps to keep youth costs down and maximize facility use.

[McDugan 89]

I played as a kid on a small rink. It was at Lasker Rink in Central Park, NYC. They used to have one big circular skating rink and when the facility was renovated they cut the size of the circle and put in a hockey shaped rink. But the place is a pool in the summer, so there wasn't enough space for a full-sized sheet.

It was great for what the program was doing - basically it was a skills clinic more than anything, not enough kids playing hockey in the city at the time (especially not in Harlem and northern Manhattan!) to field a league. The trouble was, the few times we went and played games against teams from other programs, we always got smoked because we'd suddenly be forced to play on a full-sized sheet and weren't accustomed to it at all. Plus, we were pretty much the Bad News Bears of hockey to begin with.

[Souldriver 64]

Soccer, basketball, and football are all huge with American youth. One thing they have in common at the youth level is that they all play on scaled down playing fields to keep all the kids involved, and get them to play the game properly. Big ice isn't even good for the best player that skates around the other team, because then he won't know how to handle having the opposing team all over him once everyone gets bigger. I\This is a long needed adjustment to youth hockey.

Unless we were really young they didn't cut down the soccer fields all that much for us (if at all) and definetely not the nets as I could verify as I played goalie. I think they used smaller balls for a while but we moved up to regulation pretty quick. Our towns soccer club travel team won states with regularity on all levels and the high school teams , especially women's made it their job to crush everything else. I can't say that it was all from playing on larger fields when little but it didn't seem to hurt but soccer is fundamentally an up and down game.

[badger_14 601]

Smaller ice surface and small area games for mite hockey isn't entirely about making the game easier for the kids. It's putting them in a position to succeed and utilize their training. The games are significantly more entertaining too. There's more action, the pace is quicker, scoring chances are traded more often. It's just a better game for youth players that young. Squirt is the perfect time to learn the full ice game.

Exactly this - it's not making it 'easy', it's scaling down the environment to meet physical and developmental needs. Not only are 8 & under kids physically smaller, they think differently, they haven't developed the same brain connections as adults, or even as squirt-aged kids. It's the same as scaling down a soccer ball or basketball for young kids, or lowering the baskets, or having shorter races in swim meets.

From my observations (and yes, I know, the plural of anecdote is not data), coaching learn-to-play, the bigger kids (9, 10, 11) adapt very quickly to full ice (end of season scrimmages). It's not just because they're bigger physically, but because they're cognitively able to understand how to use that space, and how to use each other (strategy) better than 5, 6 and 7 year olds. If I give my 5 and 6 year olds instructions like "hop over the sticks, skate around the cone twice, get a pass from the coach, and take a shot" their brains get lost somewhere around "cone". It's not because they're dumb - it's just because their brains haven't grown enough to handle that many instructions. They get frustrated. They do get better (you can observe this over a season as they get older, especially as their physical coordination improves - gross motor skills settle, fine motor skills improve, so more effort can be devoted to 'what is coach asking'). But if I give the 8+ year old kids the same set of instructions, they get it much more quickly. And the biggest kids - 10, 11, and 12 - will not only understand the instructions, but come up with suggestions to make it more challenging if you ask. (or, even if you don't ask...)

There are, of course, kids who develop faster, or who develop more slowly, but a bulk of the kids in each age group are about on the same level. It's a process, but they do grow, and they do learn, and they make the switch pretty easily. A few full-ice scrimmages in practice at the start of the season and a little instruction on the finer points of lining up for a face-off and the concept of off-sides, and they sort themselves out.

[Crossen463 8]

Unless we were really young they didn't cut down the soccer fields all that much for us (if at all) and definetely not the nets as I could verify as I played goalie. I think they used smaller balls for a while but we moved up to regulation pretty quick. Our towns soccer club travel team won states with regularity on all levels and the high school teams , especially women's made it their job to crush everything else. I can't say that it was all from playing on larger fields when little but it didn't seem to hurt but soccer is fundamentally an up and down game.

That's pretty odd to me. Not that your team was good, but that the fields weren't smaller at all. Just about every US Youth Soccer program either uses small-sided games (much smaller field and fewer players) or partial small-sided.

[SCBlueLiner 19]

I've been working as a coach at a rink that is operating under the US Development programs ADM. The smaller ice for mites (we play half ice games) is tremendous for their skating and development.

1. They turn more and are using their edges.

2. More forwards to backwards transitions.

3. Always involved in the play (4-on-4).

4. Less likely for the one really good kid to go end-to-end and score 10 goals (it still happens but less often, less space for them to avoid the defending the team)

5. The less space there is the more they have to use their stick handling skills to get around opposing defenders.

Smaller ice surface and small area games for mite hockey isn't entirely about making the game easier for the kids. It's putting them in a position to succeed and utilize their training. The games are significantly more entertaining too. There's more action, the pace is quicker, scoring chances are traded more often. It's just a better game for youth players that young. Squirt is the perfect time to learn the full ice game.

Remember skill development takes priority over full-ice strategy up until the kids are about peewees. Then the focus shifts slowly from skills to team-play.

We are on our 3rd year of ADM in our association. There are positives and there are negatives to cross-ice hockey. The positives are the kids are learnign to play in tight spaces where they need to make quick decisions and there is alot of edge work. One of the negatives is they are never really out of the play (given as a positive in the quoted post) which results in them not skating hard to get back in the play. The biggest negative is these kids are not fully developing their skating skills.

I see it right now in our second and first year squirts who went through the ADM/cross-ice program for U8 . There is way too much floating around the ice. The kids have a difficult time skating hard on the full ice and their skating is underdeveloped.

This season our older mites (7 & 8 yr olds) have been doing some of both. We utilize ADM station work, we play half ice and cross ice games as well as Small Area Games, but we have also incorporated full ice skating drills into the practices plan as well as full ice scrimmages 1 to 2 times a month in January and February. The full ice scrimmages we play 6 on 6 with goalies (add an extra player on the ice) which helps to take away time and space. It gives the game that tight feeling where there is a lot of puck battles in the corners and along the boards while also forcing the kids to skate longer distances. I've seen tremendous improvement in our older Mites this year and can't wait until they move to squirts to see how they do. Next season we are going to have some reduced size nets made as well, probably cut the dimesnions down by 1/3.

The younger mites (U6) we keep exclusively on cross-ice and station work. They are nowhere near ready for full ice, nor shold they be.

[smcgreg 81]

I think skating should be taught separately from hockey. I see way too many kids playing hockey when they really should be learning the fundamentals of skating prior to playing hockey.

I'd "like" this, but it needs more than a like. This is one of the biggest problems in youth hockey development, not enough skating focus. My 9 yr (2nd year mite) is likely the best skater in our association for mites. The primary reason is that he didn't come through the USAH system of minimites. We did learn to skate and learn to play before going into mites. Now, everybody asks me what we did to get my son's skating so well. As I think back to when I was a kid, my parents made me do two full years of power skating before playing novice, in Canada, I believe. They may have told me it was mandatory, but now as a parent I realize not everything they told me was true, that's parenting. Even with a 30 yr gap in my playing, I am still a pretty good skater for my age in the local rec leagues.

For my son, now, as we go into travel system, there are many kids who are good athletes and have decent hands, but can't skate their way out of a paper bag. They'll be left behind if they don't do significant remedial skating work. Most of these kids went through minimite, where they skated a bit, but played lots of games and used the stick a lot. When I was in power skating before novice, we weren't allowed to tough a stick. I'm not saying this is the best approach, but in general, there isn't enough focus on skating for many kids in the youth programs. They get by on their athleticism, but that will only take them so far as other good athletes are becoming better and better skaters.

So, as Kevin says, if they're going to "play", they probably need to work on their skating separately. For our SQ A travel team, we plan to have supplementary power skating on top of the standard ice. Still, the weaker skaters at the start will still likely be behind the good skaters, but overall, the team will skate better as a whole.

Unless we were really young they didn't cut down the soccer fields all that much for us (if at all) and definetely not the nets as I could verify as I played goalie. I think they used smaller balls for a while but we moved up to regulation pretty quick. Our towns soccer club travel team won states with regularity on all levels and the high school teams , especially women's made it their job to crush everything else. I can't say that it was all from playing on larger fields when little but it didn't seem to hurt but soccer is fundamentally an up and down game.

Dude, we're talking about U8s. Of course they shrink the field in soccer, football, baseball, pretty much every other sport. I coached youth soccer when I played in college and at that time, 25 yr ago, we had the U8s on cross field, essentially like cross ice for hockey. A U8 playing soccer on a full pitch is probably more ridiculous than a U8 playing hockey on a full sheet, although they're both ridiculous.

This season our older mites (7 & 8 yr olds) have been doing some of both. We utilize ADM station work, we play half ice and cross ice games as well as Small Area Games, but we have also incorporated full ice skating drills into the practices plan as well as full ice scrimmages 1 to 2 times a month in January and February. The full ice scrimmages we play 6 on 6 with goalies (add an extra player on the ice) which helps to take away time and space. It gives the game that tight feeling where there is a lot of puck battles in the corners and along the boards while also forcing the kids to skate longer distances. I've seen tremendous improvement in our older Mites this year and can't wait until they move to squirts to see how they do. Next season we are going to have some reduced size nets made as well, probably cut the dimesnions down by 1/3.

The younger mites (U6) we keep exclusively on cross-ice and station work. They are nowhere near ready for full ice, nor shold they be.

We're doing the same thing. Late in Dec, we did a full ice "scrimmage" just for fun. It wasn't a game, but wanted to start exposing the older kids to full ice since they'll be playing it in a few months. The 6 and 7 yr olds were pretty outclassed, but the 8 yr olds still weren't totally adept at it. The last two months, we've done one full ice practice/scrimmage per week to prep the 8 yr olds who will go into Sq for spring and get schooled by the AAU kids who have been playing full ice as mites. The older kids are picking it up quick, but you can see the frustration for the 6 and 7 yr olds who are being left behind while the older kids skate circles around them. So, we've started splitting into the older mites full ice games, and the younger mites staying cross ice in separate practices.

[SCBlueLiner 19]

The reason they incorporate so many "games" into the ADM is to make hockey fun. Fun hockey means happy hockey players and more kids playing. While I totally agree with you about Learn to Skate and power skating instruction, those drills can be very tedious and boring. Boring leads to "not interested" which leads to kids dropping hockey. I'd rather (and I'm sure USA Hockey is of this mindset) have more kids playing hockey than less. We do power skating & edgework drills every practice from Squirts to now Pee Wees (and beyond). The players range from tolerating doing it because they know it's necessary to become a better player to downright hating it and giving a poor effort during the drills. We've developed drills and games that trick them into working on their skills. I guinnea pig my own kid, talk to him after practice, ask him how he liked a drill/game, then reveal to him how we just tricked him and his teammates into learning X, Y, or Z skill. He laughs about it because he is a good natured kid who would practice every day, twice a day if you let him, because he loves to be on the ice. On days with no hockey he has told my wife that he feels bored and empty, like a hole inside him.

Unfortunately, those little details like working on edge work, power skating, even stickhandling and shooting are hard for most kids to do because they are not fun. Kids want to play, and there is not a kid around who believes they will someday grow up and their playing days will be over. For them it is hard to imagine, so why not play today? I don't need to do those drills since this ride will never end. This is the reason I was so amazed at watching 15 yr old girl figure skaters at the Olympics. I watched it with my 11 yr old son and asked if he'd be able to do those things in 4 years. I challenged him to become half as good of a skater as those girls and that he could not begin to imagine how much work those kids put in to get to the Olympics. Kind of makes me laugh when I get emails from USA Hockey warning of "burnout". Really? Have they ever watched figure skating?

[smcgreg 81]

The reason they incorporate so many "games" into the ADM is to make hockey fun. Fun hockey means happy hockey players and more kids playing. While I totally agree with you about Learn to Skate and power skating instruction, those drills can be very tedious and boring. Boring leads to "not interested" which leads to kids dropping hockey. I'd rather (and I'm sure USA Hockey is of this mindset) have more kids playing hockey than less. We do power skating & edgework drills every practice from Squirts to now Pee Wees (and beyond). The players range from tolerating doing it because they know it's necessary to become a better player to downright hating it and giving a poor effort during the drills. We've developed drills and games that trick them into working on their skills. I guinnea pig my own kid, talk to him after practice, ask him how he liked a drill/game, then reveal to him how we just tricked him and his teammates into learning X, Y, or Z skill. He laughs about it because he is a good natured kid who would practice every day, twice a day if you let him, because he loves to be on the ice. On days with no hockey he has told my wife that he feels bored and empty, like a hole inside him.

Unfortunately, those little details like working on edge work, power skating, even stickhandling and shooting are hard for most kids to do because they are not fun. Kids want to play, and there is not a kid around who believes they will someday grow up and their playing days will be over. For them it is hard to imagine, so why not play today? I don't need to do those drills since this ride will never end. This is the reason I was so amazed at watching 15 yr old girl figure skaters at the Olympics. I watched it with my 11 yr old son and asked if he'd be able to do those things in 4 years. I challenged him to become half as good of a skater as those girls and that he could not begin to imagine how much work those kids put in to get to the Olympics. Kind of makes me laugh when I get emails from USA Hockey warning of "burnout". Really? Have they ever watched figure skating?

Yep, I get that. As the parent of a 9 yr old, I constantly wrestle with the fun vs tedious. Ironically, I have a 6 yr old daughter in figure skating and she is already better than more than half the mites at skating. I hope she gets into hockey at some point, she has the athleticism and attitude, but I'm quite happy to have her focusing on skating right now because she can pick up a stick and learn the game of hockey anytime down the road. Learning to skate like a figure skater,.... not so much. Since girls hockey is so thin (sorry to sound sexist, but it's a fact), she can probably be near the top of her level pretty quickly if she decides to play hockey in 3, or even 5 yr, based on her athleticism.

For my son, I would love to have him interested in drills etc. as opposed to games. For now, as long as an authority figure (other than myself) tells him to do a drill, he will do it and focus on doing it well. He is in the great minority at his age though, and probably another reason he got so much out of his learn to skate experience. All this being said, tricking the kids into working on their edges is the best use of time if you can find a way to make it fun for them. I know it's a constant battle though, I'm in the middle of it myself. What I've found though is that, as long as there are other kids doing it, the drills aren't so tedious. We go to a stickhandling clinic on fake ice occasionally and he doesn't mind since there are other kids there. If I had him do those same drills in our driveway though.... fugetaboutit. Similarly, he does a hockey camp over the summer, of which, very little is actually "hockey". Lots of skating drills (a bit of fun at the end) and off ice "playing". Still, on the ice is pretty much drills. There are other kids, the instructors are good, so, it works. It's definitely not "playing" when they're on the ice other than the few minutes at the start and end of the one hour on ice session. In fact, of the 10 weeks the camp runs, they have a grand total of two actual hockey games and they are basically scrimmages.

One way that I've tried to make the on ice skating drills "fun" for our mites is to make a competition out of it. "How many of these can you do? The most wins".. Wins what? It doesn't seem to matter. It doesn't even matter if it's something that's really quantifiable, it just seems to be interpreted as more "gamelike". Why? Who the hell knows.

At the end of the day, I think just being on the ice is fun, and probably fun enough if we don't spoil them too much. Look at swimmers. Holy crap, what is fun about doing stroke drills up and down the pool for an hour? Both our kids are in swimming too. To me, it's drudgery, but they both seem to like it. Why? They shouldn't if we buy into the fact that everything has to be a game or playing. Don't get me wrong, I don't think the alternative, the hyperdrive AAA mite hockey parent approach is the way to go either, but sometimes I think the emphasis on fun at all costs in the ADM is a bit overblown. Another example might be music. There are tons of kids who practice the violin, or piano, or clarinet or.... for an hour a day, every day. What is really fun about that? What is the game? They seem to be ok when they grow up though. Some may quit playing the instrument, but lots of kids quit hockey regardless.

At the end of the day, I personally like most aspects of the ADM, but I think the emphasis on "playing" at the cost of skating development is costly from an overall player development approach.

[SCBlueLiner 19]

We're on the same page here. Take the best of ADM and leave the rest. That's what good coaches have been doing from the beginning of time, plagerizing drills, ideas, whatever from wherever they can get them and see how they can use them to better teach their players. I don't see this as anything different.

In fact, talk to any higher ups at USA Hockey in a private conversation and they'll tell you the same thing. That's why they don't impose ADM on Minnesota Hockey, because the people in that state know what the heck they are doing and they are producing hockey players. ADM and the programs they are putting out are a playbook for non-traditional hockey markets who don't have the experience with the game.