Matt,

Don't know the answer on the LaSalle vs Lansdale Catholic thing, maybe it's because LaSalle is considered a better school??? (No offense to anyone at LC). My son's choice and mine was LaSalle over McDevitt, hockey wasn't the reason, we felt LaSalle would give him a better education and had more to offer than McDevitt did (again no offense to anyone at McDevitt - it's a personal choice), maybe those parents in Lansdale thought the same thing as we did. Again you are making the assertion that hockey was the reason, how many non- hockey playing students at LaSalle come from Lansdale (I don't know, but I'm sure it's more than 6 or 7), and chose LaSalle over Lansdale Catholic???? I'm sure there are many, and I'm sure they had reasons similar to mine.

I know of one boy who played at LaSalle for two years and transferred out and played for LC this past year, he transferred out due to academics.

And in terms of what the team is called or where it plays, I have no problem if they played in an elite JV league, if the level of competition is there, what is the point for "JV" teams to get beat 10 - 0, nothing good becomes of that for either team. Suburban split up JV into three divisions (AA, A, B) to try and make teams competitive, so does intercounty. If your "JV" team is beating the best JV teams out there by large margins, where should they play???? I said in another post maybe there should be a division/league of second varsities and unpure teams, it sounds like the proposal of an AAA tier 2 league fits that bill.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ralphy,

Addressing the issue of teams with second varsities: I would first have to say that I feel that ALL second varsities should be done away with. Secondly, I agree with Matt about forming an Elite JV division if that is what you so chose to do.

Just because LaSalle or Malvern or any other school (large public schools too - WCEast had a Varsity 2 team at one point) may have the talent to create a second varsity team, why do these schools feel as if they are owed the right for all of the other schools (1st varsities) to help develop these school's varsity 2 teams (and subsequently their program) just because they can compete at that level? The public schools should just flat out refuse to play what is these schools FIRST JV team. No HS varsity team accepts games with JV teams, so why should varsity 1 teams play varsity 2 teams? Why should public schools do them this favor?

matt,

never did I say that you said "all' players,so relax. however, your comments clearly targeted malvern,lasalle etc. and their second varsity teams. your bias is yours, however, as evidenced by Ralphy and his posts, the old adage "don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" seem appropriate.

whatthepuck,

V2 hockey teams have existed for a long time, should they exist???, under the philosophy of HS sports, no. This isn't the only area that has them, NY does (St Joes in Buffalo for example, they have 3 varsity teams). Should they be in a JV elite league - sure, someone needs to organize that as a league, a division in a league on it's own etc. In this area there are 5 second varsity teams (LaSalle, Malvern, Roman, SJP and Ohara) - all AAA schools. So a tier II AAA league looks like the place for them.

It looks like it may happen now if the 4 local leagues get together as one, the public schools would be separate from the non-publics and teams can be competing against teams on the same playing field (so to speak). Do I think it's the right of these schools to play a second team as a varsity team, no, but it currently is allowed to exist and in reality it's the most practical thing right now until a better option for these teams is created.

If you eliminate second varsities, then teams should have only one JV team as well. There is at least one public school in Suburban that has 3 JV teams (AA, A & B). But with the number of schools that don't have enough players to field JV teams, that would only lessen the size of the pool and the amount of competition. But if that's what we are going to do, then do it all the way.

What does that do to grow HS hockey, I don't know that it does.

If we are to grow HS hockey and make it like other HS sports, alot has to happen. Like the schools sanctioning the programs, like one set of rules (could be coming), like a midget/hs split season etc.....

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ralphy,

Ralphy,

Why do you say you must limit the number of JV teams? I have never seen anyone mention that until you brought it up. Again, as far as varsity 2 teams are concerned, they are the 1st JV teams of those particular schools, and other schools' varsity teams should not do them the favor of playing games against these teams.

It is very likely that alot of the players that populate the varsity 2 teams would not play HS if they had to play in a JV league (unless it is a JV elite). Many of these players would very likely opt to just play for their club team for that year and tryout again the following year for the varsity team. The line of thinking is that JV hockey is just not worth their time based on the quality of play. I say this because I have coached at one of these open enrollment schools, and have been told as much by some of these players.

EDIT: Long read here...

That's about right, whatthepuck. (In regards to JV hockey not being worth it...)

Let's say for a moment I'm playing on my team's "second varsity team" or "first JV team." For this example, they are the same thing.

Now, am I going to go to my friends and say, "I play Junior Varsity Elite," or I play on our "Varsity II Team." I would definitely say Varsity II, and I think a lot of you are losing sight of what's really important here, the players... the kids. Everyone wants to play Varsity, even if it's Varsity II. An elite JV might be easier for scheduling or even make more sense, but why should kids who are good enough to play varsity be forced to play JV just because we (being those of you who make these decisions) don't like dealing with conflicts that come with Varsity II teams?

And whatthepuck, I don't know why you are saying Varsity I teams do other schools a service by playing Varsity II teams. I totally disagree with that. Players my age want to play. It's not about helping one school's program develop or saying, "Wow. We have to go play Ridley II. Why can't they just have a JV team so we can sit home tonight and/or play the same opponent more often?" It's not a favor, it's a game versus a Varsity capable opponent. Marple and O'hara II add some great games this year at Eastern A. You think D'Urbano and the other players thought they were doing O'hara a favor by helping their second varsity team develop? That's not how it works.

Varsity I teams want to play whenever and wherever they can, for the most part, and since many, MANY varsity II teams can compete with Varsity I teams, I don't see the need to banish these kids to JV Elite so things are less complicated. Think of the players, fellows. I would rather be on a Varsity II team than a JV elite team if I had to pick one, and I think most would agree with me.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Boraske33,

Whatthepuck,

Why should JV be any different, why should a teams second or third JV team play against a school's first JV team, just because they have the numbers to create multiple teams???? Same rationale isn't it???

Isn't the format of HS sports set up as Varsity, JV, and Freshman teams. Then if we are trying to make hockey follow that system (and I'm not arguing that we shouldn't). Then that's all teams that should be allowed.
How many teams could field pure Freshman teams??? Very few.

I agree with you on the point of Varsity 2 players, they probably wouldn't play JV because of the level of play. In this area (right now) Varsity 2 teams feed AAA teams, so if we do away with V2 teams does the level of play at the AAA level suffer??? I would think it would have some effect. If they create a league for these teams to play and be competetive (elite JV, AAA tier II call it whatever you want), that's fantastic. Everybody wins!!! Someone needs to do it. On another note, you can't tell me good teams like the West Chester teams, Methacton, and Perk Valley didn't enjoy playing against LaSalle's V2 team, that level of competition only helped them, not hurt them, if the end goal in Varsity HS hockey is a flyers cup and a shot at states, why not play a very talented V2 team to hone your skills????

Crusader,
I don't know how you can call me bias. I have no affiliation with any school, league or program. I have the utmost respect for LaSalle, malvern and thier programs.

I feel that V2 should not exist (with the exception of a V2 league where they all play each other), my opinion on that is strong.....why does that opinion make me bias? I don't feel that Cherokee, Ridley or W.C. East should be allowed to field a V2 team either.

you are inclined(biased) not to want varsity II teams. varsity II teams are of necessity because of the great vagarity of talent in all high school hockey. it is an attempt to provide valid and meaningful opportunities for all players no matter what school you attend. if your goal is to provide the highest quality experience for the largest number of boys i believe this is the better option. that of course would include the opportunity to compete for the Flyers Cup, which provides a lifetime of memories for the boys. your insistence on limiting access to opportunity seems misguided to me and quite frankly in the case of other coaches who hold this view i believe it is somewhat draconian. just one man's honest opinion.

Crusader,

Matt is correct. Having multiple varsity teams, particularly in the case of open enrollment schools, leads to a hoarding of talent by those schools. With open enrollment schools, much of the talent follows the successful schools. Don't tell me that the disproportional number of talented hockey players in the area wind up at LaSalle for educational purposes. Please. Why not Roman Catholic or St. Joe's which for sure is on equal or better footing academically as LaSalle. Though these programs are on the rise somewhat as well. These kids go there to help guarantee themselves of a championship, much like pro players taking less money to go to a "contender". Let's face it, not all AAA teams are on equal footing. My guess is that if you do away with the V2 teams, some of those players will perhaps play for their public school, and some may stay, but some may also go to a Roman, or Wood or St. Joe's because they can still get the quality education you allude to AND also get the opportunity to play for a legit varsity team.

Boraske,

I understand what you are trying to say when you say that more kids playing varsity hockey helps to grow hockey. However, we are talking about schools (and for the most part open enrollment schools) that are not hurting to field a team. These kids are for want of money or a place to play. They can play JV if they want. You may not see that by other schools V1 teams playing these V2 teams helps these schools, but it flat out does. It provides higher competition for them for which they can more easily restock their V1 team the following year. Do away with the V2 teams, and some of those players will help to repopulate other teams. THAT will actually help to grow the sport because it will help to make more programs stronger. Some (and I believe that number to be a handful about 3-5 say from each V2 team - not 1 or 2 like crusader seems to think). You take 3 players from each V2 team and put them in other places, that will have a significant impact.

Crusader, believe it or not I rspect your oppinion and I welcome it.

Why is it that Baseball, football and Basketball teams don't allow EVERY student athlete the oppurtunity to play varsity sports? The answer is: They do. If you are one of the top 12 basketball players you will make the basketball team....if you aren't in the top 12 at LaSalle as a basketball player, your options as Whatthepuck said, are many.

A-Play JV at LaSalle
B- Play Varsity (potentially) at your local public school
C- Play Varsity (potentially) at a different private school
D-Play local AAU basketball

I'm sure LaSalle has many talented B-Ball players that exceed the # of 12.....but we still don't see a V2 basketball team.

The arguement that has been made that kids are going for the education not hockey is fine.....but if education IS the deciding factor....why all this resistance to being called (And playing)JV hockey? It shouldnt really matter now should it?

As far as the Flyers Cup goes, we have gotten away from teiring teams based on percieved strength (Thankfully)and they are teired with size of school being the main factor.

If LaSalle is deemed to be a AAA school, then V2, V3 and V4, in my mind, would also be AAA teams (for Flyers Cup purpopses)the fact that they are second varsities does not change the fact that they come from a very large private school that has open enrollment advantages, does it?

matt,

if the goal of high school hockey is afford the boys opportunity and and competitive balance i stand by my point. your desire to push them into jv will lead to a disaster . your point that bb, football, etc. do not have them(v2) is true, yet hockey in this area( do to th e demographics of the sport) has had a tradition of multiple teams and in doing so has made the sport more inclusive .
of interest, North penn has an enrollment greater than any high school in the area(since they have chosen not to split like cr, cb,downingtown, wc) why is it that they do not have the player numbers of lasalle and malvern? brings me back to my point of economics (read earlier post) .
in the end the league will do what they want by restricting opportunity . yet this is not the main problem with high school hockey, that is for another day.

One other point I think is being overlooked here. LaSalle has one advantage that almost all of the other schools don't have and that is, it's a full fledged varsity school sport, so it goes on the kid's transcript. That alone tips the balance in LaSalle's favor when comparing schools.

find it interesting that the boys want to play thebest competition availble(read Boraske) but it is the coaches and parents who want to restricyt the competition. just a thought.