Small town hockey amalgamations

All Team and Association topics here
Guest

Re: Small town hockey amalgamations

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote: Fri Dec 20, 2024 2:52 pm
Guest wrote: Fri Dec 20, 2024 1:39 pm People protect their small town organizations.

In Kawartha Lakes we have 6 centres that operate as BB to C rep centres with double cohort years and they dont seem to want to merge and create one centre for rep programming with AA and A hockey. Same number of kids would be playing rep hockey and they would be playing with equal talent at a higher level. Makes no sense not to.

If 15 players on a team playing rep hockey the numbers are like this

U11, U13, U15 & U18 Rep teams
Woodville - 0 Players (no rep teams)
Sturgeon - 60 Players
Kawartha - 60 players
Lindsay - 60 Players
Mariposa - 60 Players
Manvers - 0 Players (no rep teams)

If Merged (U10 AA & A, U11 AA & A, U12 AA & A, U13 AA & A, U14 AA & A, U15 AA & A, U16 AA & A, U18 AA & A)
U10 - 30 Players
U11 - 30 players
U12 - 30 players
U13 - 30 players
U14 - 30 Players
U15 - 30 players
U16 - 30 players
U18 - 30 players

Both scenarios have 240 players playing rep but pooling the best with teh best at each age. Think of how much better development for the kids would be and then COW woudl have two feeder AA programs and help strengthen their program at AAA as well.

Just a no brainer as each of the centres would keep their Local League programming and their U9 and below development.
More likely to end up with only 3 teams per group instead of 4. Something like U10 A, U11 A, and U11 B.

Those 6 goalies will now only play half a season each, instead of full seasons to themselves accross 6 teams. Some families will opt out of rep (or hockey all together) now as the travel will increase significantly from merging with practices accross multiple arena locations and away games are all significantky further now as well.

Don't focus on the letter or number of kids. Focus on the experience and joy they are having. Borders are open, if a family really needs that special letter A, they can go to a proper established A center.
W.O.A.A. League in the OMHA is doing this in 6 regions right now to build 6 new A centers. They in fact only get the 3 teams U10 A, U11 A, and U11 B. Pretty conflicted among the memberships, the strongest centers are excited and expect all their kids to make the A teams, other centers expect 1-2 kids per age group to make the teams at best.

With open borders there seems to be real concern about retaining players in the A Zones now, lots of border centers players are talking of leaving for the established AA/A centers. W.O.A.A. is locking down their league to not let any players in as an attempt to ensure their 6 teams are all equal as the border A zones could attract quite a bit of extra talent and blow up their little pilot project with super teams.
Guest

Re: Small town hockey amalgamations

Post by Guest »

Lots of Owen Sound families are talking of jumping ship into Collingwood. If WOAA (Owen Sound/Shallow Lake/ Bruce Peninsula) is locking down imports it's going to kill their A zone.
TCDMHA (LL only) is in a brutal A zone as well (not combined with Owen Sound, where several of their players have been going for Rep) and lots of those families are also talking moving to Collingwood as well.
Guest

Re: Small town hockey amalgamations

Post by Guest »

Is there something wrong with Georgian Shores? Why would they jump so far to Collingwood?
Guest

Re: Small town hockey amalgamations

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote: Fri Dec 20, 2024 3:47 pm Is there something wrong with Georgian Shores? Why would they jump so far to Collingwood?
They are not an A center.
Guest

Re: Small town hockey amalgamations

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote: Fri Dec 20, 2024 1:39 pm People protect their small town organizations.

In Kawartha Lakes we have 6 centres that operate as BB to C rep centres with double cohort years and they dont seem to want to merge and create one centre for rep programming with AA and A hockey. Same number of kids would be playing rep hockey and they would be playing with equal talent at a higher level. Makes no sense not to.

If 15 players on a team playing rep hockey the numbers are like this

U11, U13, U15 & U18 Rep teams
Woodville - 0 Players (no rep teams)
Sturgeon - 60 Players
Kawartha - 60 players
Lindsay - 60 Players
Mariposa - 60 Players
Manvers - 0 Players (no rep teams)

If Merged (U10 AA & A, U11 AA & A, U12 AA & A, U13 AA & A, U14 AA & A, U15 AA & A, U16 AA & A, U18 AA & A)
U10 - 30 Players
U11 - 30 players
U12 - 30 players
U13 - 30 players
U14 - 30 Players
U15 - 30 players
U16 - 30 players
U18 - 30 players

Both scenarios have 240 players playing rep but pooling the best with teh best at each age. Think of how much better development for the kids would be and then COW woudl have two feeder AA programs and help strengthen their program at AAA as well.

Just a no brainer as each of the centres would keep their Local League programming and their U9 and below development.
Cause somewhere little Johnny gets cut and loses his "rep" status in the community. The parents worse nightmare!!! lol Joke
Guest

Re: Small town hockey amalgamations

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote: Fri Dec 20, 2024 2:06 pm I think some of these decisions or lack there of, come from old school board members not wanting to lose that team name at the rep level through amalgamation. There are some smaller associations that have been around for 50+ years with the same team name. Not justifying whatsoever but i think that plays a part
Keep your name, be a LL centre like you truly should be. Larger rep centres. BB C CC DD should not have a independent rep team
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post