For real, seriously, this time...

[DannyG]

Having been accused by people I trust of bashing others (bummer), let's see if anybody wants to get at this for real:

Step 1. Before anybody says anything positive about how good their choice for NGB is, let's all get on the table our criteria for selection. Okay, I'll start...

Here's mine:


Operations Standards for National Governing Body (NGB) sports organization:

1. Registration. The organization sanctions leagues and facilities, using a published set of criteria for minimum standards?registers all players as individuals?registers coaches and officials, with multiple-registrants receiving a price break.

2. Staff?has a full-time, paid staff to administer, develop, and promote the sport. Points-of-contact within the organization are available direct to the participant.

3. Non-profit Status? is registered and operates on a not-for-profit basis.

4. Tournaments?offers defined, regional and national tournament competitive opportunities in Open, Competitive, and Recreation levels of play. Additional opportunities are offered for Girls/Women, and older age group tournament play?sanctions local/regional tournament opportunities.

5. Level-playing-field Philosophy?establishes regulations and mechanisms that give fair opportunity for success to all participants.

6. General Player Development?offers education materials for players, coaches, designed to develop skill, tactical, physical, and psychological component knowledge of the game.

7. Elite Player Development?offers a step-by-step, open participation, set of opportunities for elite players to develop and participate in national and international levels of play.

8. Insurance?offers a landlord and third-party group liability insurance coverage to leagues, players, facilities.

9. Inclusion?provides mechanisms of input and response into its operation processes that participants have access to.

10. Geographic Inclusion?offers program opportunities to all parts of the country.

11. Mass Communications?develops and maintains mass communications media to inform at the participant level.

12. The Future?looks ahead at trends, growth opportunities, and options?hosts local-level communications sessions regarding the future?actively works toward continuously expanding opportunities for all participants.

Now, I can tell you two things about this process...everybody knows that my choice, USAHIL, does not meet every one of these criteria presently.

Second thing, before you are going to tell me that your choice does all these, you had better be prepared to tell me exactly how, and cite examples...I will not be accepting, "yeah, my choice does that..." as a non-validated assertion.

Okay, guys, please feel free to put up or shut up (sorry). If we are going to have a positive discussion, rather than a negative debate, and/or shouting/namecalling match, then we need to get everybody's cards on the table...

you are not allowed to assert a choice until you have proffered your list of evaluative criteria, eh?

Let's see what you got...



<font color=purple>DannyG</font color=purple>

[MDE3]

Basically the same but with more specifics

1) Registration...as you define it, but with original birth certificates required.......raised stamp present.

2)Staff: As defined but with regional directors located strategically around the country, to reduce travel cost and delays in having face to face interaction with the local region.

3)Non Profit Status.....properly audited.

4)Leagues as foundations for Tournaments: suggest that regional inter club play be primary developmental thrust... as in leagues. This will help develop interest in the sport at local high school and lower levels, while giving players a venue to execise their developing skills on a regualar but non tournament basis. Longer games should be instituted to justify the travel between clubs. This will provide a foundation for the "fair and equitable" regional and then national tournaments to evolve on a tiered basis. Obviously some transition plan must be made as this organization will not simply pop up over night, and existing tournament "for profit" organizations may resist this type of development. There are under developed regions who will be limited by population and geography as well and some variation of league play may be required.

5) Level Playing Field Philosophy: easier to control in league play than in large tournaments....but the philosophy remains the same.

6) General Player Development......same, and requires progressive training for coaches to advance towards elite level coaching. This will help keep more qualified coaches involved with the sport.

7)Elite Player Development: Same.....no change. This will become a natural extension of more advanced coaching as well.

8)Insurance........as described with optional and reasonable primary player health insurance coverage to be offered..as in AMA.

9)Inclusion: as described...aided by the assignation of regional directors, who canvas their region regularily. Needs will vary geographically and must have a regional director who is "in touch".

10)Geographic Inclusion: a program flexible enough to work with varying population bases and travel requirements so that it CAN be truly applied on a National basis.

11)Mass communications.....and credible access to public media for promotional input.

12)The Future.....as defined, but with the absolute determination that the development of Inline Hockey is it's true and only absolute long term goal.

13) Independant Board of overseeing directors elected from across the country with no allegiance to any other sport.

Because the transition to a more regulated form of competition in any format, will require a great deal of experience to initiate and administer fairly, the choice of organizations with this type of back ground is indeed limited.

[RichardGraham]

Hi Danny,

Good post. You took a couple of shots earlier and didn't retaliate in kind, and I respect that. I didn't get the sense you were bashing anyone, so don't sweat it. I think this is a great topic for the message board, and as long as everyone can keep civil about it, I look forward to more discussion.

Sincerely,

Richard Graham
Editor
Inline Hockey Central

[DannyG]

The above comes from another internet debate site where tournament organization is the main topic under discussion.

Fellahs, I really suggest that you stop the cur-and-paste practice...bring your own ideas, or leave it alone, eh?

For the record, the above pays attention only to what an NGB can do for a given player or league is relation to tournament management...an NGB has so many other areas of responsibility, not just tournaments and insurance...

I stand by my original list, and assert that I do not have to re-think nor re-write...

<font color=purple>DannyG</font color=purple>

[Rebecca]

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

...it NOT the highest level of hockey for inline.

<hr></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

...know what GREAT tournament Hockey...

<hr></blockquote>

Can somebody please define "highest level" and "great tournement hockey"? I don't believe a qualification of an NGB has to be or should be a 'tournement series'. Governing hockey and having a 'series based organization' are two different issues.

Curious to know what people define 'the best hockey' as. Certainly there are teams who have extreme talant, but if I owned a rink, I don't know if I would want them representing us with their certain behavior. /wtimages/icons/wink.gif

Rebecca

http://thumbs.webshots.com/s/thumb3/8/3/85/67580385LGfyvC_th.jpg

[DannyG]

Geez, Roy, let's call it what it is, eh?

1. The highest team skills are displayed each year in the North American Roller Hockey Championships tournament series. There, happy? You need not continue marching out your third party testimonials regarding this fact, everybody knows it...okay???

2. Now, Coach, which is the most challenging:

a. picking your best ten hotshots from anywhere in the universe you can get them through try-out and cut-selction process,

-or-

b. Take the seven skaters and a goalkeeper that are in your small league, and instill in them a dedication, comitment, and work ethic that will enable them to succeed as a team beyond their own individual abilities, as well as stand them in good stead down the road of life as well...

In other words, can you, as a coach, just collect a good team, or are you good enough a coach to develop, or make a good team???

Roy, you and I don't know each other at all, so I am not going to suppose that you are either the former or the latter in the above comparison...

-however-

You really don't seem to see the difference in the above comparison, and you obviously don't realize what the difference is in comparing the NARCh and the USAHIL levels of play, how these differences have come about over the last five years, nor the fact that both levels of opportunity are necessary for our sport to continue to grow dynamically in this country.

In fact, and please do go check: It used to be Huntington Beach Paradise Beach Boys, Labrea Bullbogs, Orange County Blades, Empire Snipers, and Honeybaked Rollin Hogs all the time in USAHIL, too...it isn't anymore, and if you still can't see that NARCh and USAHIL tournament levels are two different (and both good and necessary) things, then I guess this discussion ends here...

Do you skate, coach? Maybe we can play on the same fifty-and-over team this year at the UAHIL Cup...look forward to it...

<font color=purple>DannyG</font color=purple>

[psfye]

You got a good point there coach: make all those guys work together would be the best thing ever happen to inline hockey in the US....

[DannyG]

In your latest post here, I'm buying everything you're selling...I cannot find a single point that you just made that I disagree with...could I now impose upon you to help us out, and make that list of criteria on which we are to evaluate candidates for NGB???

I would value your input on this point..

Uh, no big deal, but didn't catch the fact that you qualify for the 50 & older age division...do you??? I would be glad to skate on the same line as yourself, please point toward the USAHIL Inline Cup, probably in Vegas, Columbus Day weekend in October next year (2004)...look forward to working/playing with you...

<font color=purple>DannyG</font color=purple>

[Rebecca]

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

Yes there does need to be levels of competition correctly defined from Club to Elite.

<hr></blockquote>

OK, for starters, my comment is NOT on behalf of NCRHA or ECRHA, this is just me speaking (if anyone can ever seperate the two/wtimages/icons/wink.gif):

Roy, I hear your frustrations completely. I used to have them also. As a person who has chosen this lifestyle and supports the future of inline hockey, I couldn't possibly disagree with most of your post. The one organization that remains in neutral grounds though has to be NCRHA. Although a partner now with USAHIL, NCRHA continues to maintain a relationship with NARCh and a friendship with AAU. Through the regions, there are also other relationships with great people such as Patty Twogood. However, there is definately a circle looming around NCRHA. NCRHA holds the market on college inline now and ANY organization who attempts to do the same, works AGAINST NCRHA NOT WITH NCRHA and only will divide the one classification that is united after 7 years, and IS the future of the sport. Yet, just about every organization, from the major names everyone knows to the basic local rec rinks contacts us to help THEM start a college division. WHY? Because they too want to offer the next level? or because they think there is money in it? (I won't pass judgement). Regadless, I know I am not too quick to run to assist someone build a college division. There are many reasons, but why would you even contact the very people who you would eventually compete against and thus fragment things even more??? Those who contact us to support us, stand out right away and we work with them on some level. On the same dime, as an NPO, people are not jumping to our side to assist us, and this is simply because there is NO money to make off of us. No one is getting rich, (no less even supporting themselves) from NCRHA. And thats one thing that keeps us humble.

Over the summer of 2003, eight SEPERATE organizations came together to form ONE organization - the NCRHA. (OK well there were road bumps and it was not all peaches and cream and is not without imperfection) but the end result is that 8 organizations (who could have been viewed as competitors) came together to benefit ALL the members and end users and and also strengthend the company. Why could 8 orgs do this yet others cannot? There are soooo many reasons - but my thought still remains that none of us are competing for profit. (A few of these organizations probably could have put the others out of business if they really wanted to.)

I don't mean to sound arrogant by thinking or saying this but I really think that if any of these organizations wish to work with the collegiate 'client', then certainly they will have to work together or show us more value to our members in forming a relationship with 'their' organization specifically. I think it will be obvious in the next 1-2 years who they will be, if any.

For now though, I just don't see the need [for those who cannot get along], to 'infringe' on the college base that IS trying to be united. If you want to support a future and collegiate inline, support NCRHA and send your high school players their direction.

Again, my comment is NOT on behalf of NCRHA or ECRHA, this is just me speaking.


Rebecca

http://thumbs.webshots.com/s/thumb3/8/3/85/67580385LGfyvC_th.jpg

[DannyG]

That's pretty impressive...I am ill presently, will get back to you soon..good job...

<font color=purple>DannyG</font color=purple>

[MDE3]

This discussion while finally fruitfull, was too bogged down by a **** measuring contest(sorry Rebecca)......sorry to say &quot;Bench Man&quot; mostly by you.....although Danny too with his &quot;meet me on the floor&quot; challenge. LOL

In fact as I know a bit about Danny's attitude on here....you repeatedly missed his point until your last post anyway. You Narch guys are so hung up on the &quot;Narch is the best&quot; that you take anyone's promotion of another organization as somehow a personal affront to Narch.

As a footnote to the USAHIL tryouts, I can only speak for the East. Kids were chosen irrespective of which tournaments they participated in, and from what I saw based soley on their performance over the weekend evaluation process. Without debating if this is really the best way to choose or not.....I can only say what I saw was pretty fair. For the 10 skaters chosen in the East there might have been 10 more who were on the cusp and depending on who got attention during the process, some got picked over others. All I can say is that with that much talent on the floor, of course it was hard to pick. I'm gald it was not up to me.

BUT concerning USAHIL YOU HAVE MISSED THE POINT (until your last post anyway)....no one here would dispute the quality of play at Narch nor is comparing it to any other organization even the issue here.

The issue is which organization is best equipped with tools at hand, to be the administrator of a National Inline Hockey Program. Personally I would not care if USAHIL never ran a tournament.......their qualifications are NOT to be measured by their ability to attract kids to play in their tournaments, but by their ability to offer and administer a well structured INLINE hockey development program. This program to include in-house, inter-club, interdivisional, Regional and National play, as well as provide coaching and player development frameworks that are proven and functional. Should Tournament venues be used as Regional qualifiers and National Competions, then these could be subcontracted to the various tournament groups. With the whole administrative machine from USA Hockey to borrow from, why would USAHIL not be the leading candidate?

Needless to say opposition to this format may be very strong from the &quot;for profit&quot; organizations, as it would seriously impinge their earnings. So any talk of a National Organization to these groups is totally counterproductive, unless they see themselves as the &quot;one&quot;.

[MDE3]

Hi ..you are penning a lot of thoughts parelleled in here by others, so it's good to see the feedback and the suggestions too. The whole concept of "Nationals" and "National Governing Body" needs to be divorced.

No issues with you about which tournament group fields the best teams overall, never was, but.......the issue is who is most qualified to develop and expand the sport in the best way for long term growth. "Nationals" for, and "National Development" of, the sport are related but a true nationals will only evolve from a well structured developmental program with one governing body.

It will probably happen if you have a well administered, and properly developed sport, that the best players will reach the pinnacle of the pyramid at "nationals".....a la ice hockey. The problem is without the rest of the tools in place...there will be no pyramid!!!!!

This is the problem now in the sport, where too many are focussed on "who has the best tournaments" and which tournaments have the best players etc, etc. This is all ego!!!!

All the elements you have mentioned and Danny too are key to the success of the sport. But having the carrot of playing in the "top tournament" will never be enough to create a foundation that will grow the sport as it needs. What will continue to happen will be what is going on now. Teams will be created from a collection of select elite players to go to compete at regional and national level tournaments. If there is enough clamoring.......read enough other bodies to make up lower divisions, it makes profit sense to the organizers to have these lower divisions too. While there is nothing wrong with profit, it is not the stimulus that will grow and create all the tools necessary to really have a true national program. There are too many "lost losers" to achieve this on a "profit only" basis. It's like trying to grow the sport from the top down instead of from the bottom up.

You have probably been involved with ice hockey and are familiar with the paranoia that exists in Inline Hockey about turning over the reins to an organization whose focus is "ice hockey".ie USA Hockey. But..who else is more qualified to bring the structure and developmental elements to fruition? That's the dilemna.

[midwestrh]

Coach Roy,
MARK (IRISH) ELLIS is a factor in roller hockey, what a joke
His message board is nothing more than a propaganda site for him to poison the sport, and you my friend are missing the whole point of this thread. No one cares about your teams and where they are from and your Team USA, Team International and so on. I see here that you are now a rep for factory wheels? what happen to the greatest roller hockey wheel &quot;rinkrat&quot; you got so much bs it's unbelievable.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by midwestrh on 10/30/03 00:03 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

[RichardGraham]

Hi Roy,

Good to see your passion. Continue to keep the thread on topic and away from personal comments like you have been. Thanks. It's a great discussion.

Sincerely,

Richard Graham
Editor
Inline Hockey Central

[MDE3]

I know everyone get's hung up on the whole Nationals question, but that is my point.........I don't care who has the best teams at their "Nationals" Nor does the development of the sport. That there IS a meaningfull National Championship is an important element in the big picture but it is only one of the elements, and not the most important one.

That the kids who play, and parents who watch, feel that the effort, time and money they spend is rewarding........at the grass roots level..... is the most important element.

That the kids and their parents feel like there is somewhere to go with the sport....whether that be a meaningfull playing experience at a house level, at a league level, at a regional level or at a National level does not really matter. What is important is the emotional joy and satisfaction gained from competing successfully against a range of teams. Winning is fun, but even losing is ok once the intitial dissapointment has passed, if you can see your own(or your own child's) and your team's improvements. So being able to compete on a fairly even playing field becomes one of the critical elements.

That is why tournament play by it's nature is not a solution to the problems. The tournament operators at every level are measuring their primary success by earnings, not breadth of participation.

I listen to a friend of mine whose kids I taught years ago, and who runs one of the tournament series which will go unnamed.....and am totally discouraged when he explains how he is beating this group or that group in this region with his levels of participation and the quality of the teams he is drawing. This non exclusive attitude(meaning not limited to him) is very much the root of the problem. This is his living, and the success of his tournaments is his measure of personal achievement, measured in both dollars, and personal satisfaction derived from beating his competitors.

So what does this do for the sport? It means everyone else who is running a tournament series is doing the same things....better teams, more better teams etc. etc. This is the carrot that is used by all. We have the best players.....we run the best tournaments etc. etc. But what happens to those who are not the "best" (a relative term if you get my gist).......if they show up as players from a house league level, they are trashed.......verbally on some of these boards, and physically in the games. Wow! says the mother and father of the beaten kids....how did these kids get so good. Come to find out his kid's team is playing a stacked team of all-stars who regularily plays on the tournament circuit, and so where does his/her kid go to get better? In-house hockey? Pro-run clinics, a rink that has a true development program administered by hockey professionals? League hockey?.........you know that the answers to these questions is ultimately.....nowhere for 85% of the potential playing population. Unless he finds out like so many others did...... maybe if my kid plays ice hockey like these other kids (or many of them) he can move up the ladder........

A structured development (I say for the 100th time) must be administered by an organization whose existance does not depend on tournament earnings, but on widespread participation at all levels of play. With something genuine to offer at all levels, this group would even be profitable, based on the widespread participation of all levels paying annual dues.

You say you have never been involved with ice hockey, and hold that up as a bit of a "badge". I understand that, but what you may have missed is the exposure to the details that go into making ice hockey a successfull sport on a National basis. It's not really a question of public popularity and attitude about the sport, but mostly the levels of committment and detailed organization at all levels, from player training, to coaching training, to referree training which exists, that makes ice hockey such a dominant sport.

For fun contact USA Hockey (not inline) and ask for a list of available publications, and AV media works on all aspects of hockey development which are available to the general public (or at least those who pay their small annual fee). Maybe this will give you some insight into why all this noise is being made about USAHIL being better qualified to administer the development of roller hockey than other organizations.

Their tournaments are only a tiny part of their potential for growth given all of their available assets which come from being related to USA Hockey.

I really do not care who runs the best tournaments......that issue is for the moment not only irrelevant, but actually harmfull to the sport as we know it.

[johnny2suede]

Danny, no matter how much pimpin you do on this board for USA Inline the fact remains that they haven't done much for the sport of inline. NARCH has helped to make inline a legitimate respected sport while USA Hockey on the ice side has continuosly ripped this sport, I mean the ice coaches have done more damage by ripping on our sport than any other group.

Look at American Hockey Magazine and the one or two pages every issue they dedicate to inline. It's a pathetic token mention just to keep them in the insurance game.

USA Inline hung their reputation on "House League Teams" at their Nationals and now they have abandoned that becuase they claim they don't have ability to properly "police" it to make sure the rosters are legit.

Come on, you want an organization who can't even do that minimal amount of due delignece to someohow be the NGB of this sport?

Where or where does all that money go that USA Hockey makes from their insurance scheme??

[MDE3]

As another who might stand accused of "pimping" for USA Hockey Inline, I cannot totally disagree with your analyses of ice hockey coaches and their attitude. Having been certified as an ice hockey coach at various levels, as well as being an inline coach and inline hockey clinic operator on a minor scale over the years, I know of what you speak from first hand experience. I have been trashed(humorously but vigorously) during coaches meetings(USA Hockey) for even bringing up inline hockey at these meetings. I have also coached ice hockey over a period of 35 years on and off.

However I also know that if supportive of Inline Hockey, USA Hockey could do more good for this sport than any other group, through USA Inline......and therein lies the dilemna.

Maybe as a collective group we could set up a checks and balance structure that would insure USA Hockey could not trash or hold the keys to the future of Inline Hockey, but at the same time allow us to borrow elements of development from their ice hockey program.

Maybe a legal and binding agreement to share resources, but with a separate board of directors chosen totally independantly from those of USA Hockey to administer the execution and deployment of those resources, could provide this.