One NGB

[Huck]

Something I believe we could benefit from discussing and excuse my ignorance for asking this question...

What are the benefits of establishing one NGB?

Some people feel that the sport has come this far without one, so why does it need one?

I believe a lot of people support the concept, but no one has taken the time to detail the pros and cons, etc.

Anyone care to share their thoughts?

Any insight will be much appreciated.

Thank you for your time.

Huck

[DannyG]

two thoughts...

1. the two non-profit, national organizations with international sanction: USA Hockey Inline w/International Inline Hockey Federation(IIHF) and USA Roller Sports (USARS) w/Federation Internationale de Roller Sports (FIRS), have both done a capable job of providing regional, national, and international opportunities. There is indeed enough participation to go around in terms of players, etc.

2. Were we to get everything "under one roof," the resultant power structure would enable more to happen than ever before.

example: We(locally) have successfully eliminated all the YMCA, private enterprise, and independent league organizations. We are now the only game in town.

We have done this by being the best. We are the highest level of play, but our recreation play structure allows all level players to achieve success. We are the best value, more games for less money. We have first rate facilities. We have competitive as well as recreation play opportunities. We have eliminated the competition by being the best value, period.

With the added allegiance of all the local players, we are able to offer more teams, more competitive opportunities, more variety of recreation levels of play, etc., etc, etc. More hockey for everybody once we all get together.

For the last three years or so, it would always gall me when some guy would call me up and suggest that "our leagues work together, and interplay, for the good of the kids." My response, although phrased somewhat more diplomatic, was always, "Why am I supposed to give your poor-value program a greater value by subsidizing it with quality games at my place? How about you shut down your crummy, poor-value of a program, and encourage your kids to get over here to a real hockey program?

Our program slowly but surely became the best value in town by offering more and more for less money. Any other program could have done the same, but didn't follow the standard we set. As a result, we now have all the players, and with the resources that greater numbers bring, we can offer even more...

The same principle is at work at the national/international level. We must, however, insist that the National Governing Body deliberately choose to operate programs that meet all strata of the sport, not just the chosen few at the top of the pyramid...

With all due respect to Jake Mersberger (sp?) whom I have only spoken to via telephone, not personally, until the Congress of the United States, or the USOC, THROUGH FORMAL PROCEDURE, designates an NGB, then for USARS to continue to publicly note itself as the NGB of roller hockey is neither valid nor appropriate. A single member of the USOC denoted USARS (on letterhead) to the Pan American Games organization as the national organization responsible for putting our national team together for the Pan Am Games competition. That is a far cry from a formal, official designation, and USARS needs to get a reality check.

Frankly, since the USOC has a proprietary interest in USARS, who got them off the hook by handling the Pan Am team for them, it would be appropriate for the U.S. Congress to establish criteria for selection, go through the process, and select, darn it.

I would support either USARS or USAHIL wholeheartedly. To date, I have evaluated USAHIL as the group that has consistently made decisions regarding programs, growth and development that are for the benefit of everybody, at at every level of the game. If we are voting, or testifying, then my vote goes for USAHIL.

I would also willingly serve Congress as a citizen committee member regarding any such selection process, especially regarding the criteria for selection.

Thanks! for listening.

[Oldtimer33]

Huck,
You might want to go to sealweenies.com. There are a lot of comments regarding an NGB and why there is a need for such a body.

[columbus_RHstar]

With one NGB comes a unified sport. One NGB can control all aspects of the game, and unifies everyone. Right now you have most of the best players playing NARCH. But you also have countless organizations handing out national champions award, how do we know that the runner-up in NARCH can't beat the champion in USAHIL. When you have one NGB you know that you are the outright champion of your sport, you don't wonder, could we be national championships in NARCH (if you played USAHIL) and things tlike that.

[missionhockey21]

As much as I do enjoy playing in various tourneys, just because I like the variation in life I do think it would be wise to have one NGB, to as you said unify the sport. I mean with MLRH teams dropping like flies (or so it seems) it would be nice to have some stability in one aspect of roller hockey.

[socalhckyplyr93]

to be honest i think narch is the hardest to win, i think thats where the better teams play in, i've played a couple of usa hockey tourneys and some of the others and they didnt seem that it was as competitive. yeah there should be one NGB instead of a lot...if you win their respective tournys you would know you are the best in the country

[DannyG]

however...regarding national championship tournaments:

The fact that NARCh and USARS/AAU nationals are an all-comers, make your team however you can, pick up anybody from anywhere situation makes the playing field level and equally open to any organization anywhere to put together the best team possible...

USA Hockey Inline insists that all tournament teams must be bona fide representative, either league-leader or select, from a sanctioned league. That is also a level playing field, but places restriction on recruiting.

Neither method of qualification is better than the other, but they do serve two distinctly different groups...one for no-holds-barred recruited teams, and one for local rec league rep teams.

Frankly, this makes both national championships perfectly legitimate in my eyes. The two different tournaments recognize that there are two different ways that tournament teams are developed, and having a legitimate tournament for each is perfectly viable.

If we do get a single NGB, I would hate to see a single level of play (either of 'em) adopted exclusively, while discarding the other. We need both.

[DannyG]

You are right...NARCh and USAHIL are two different tourneys, for two different types of teams...please refer to my post above...thanks!

[Rebecca]

Danny

You are right on the money.

There are a number of different perspectives involved. You have to have been on all sides to see in all the doors. Players will feel differently then Directors. Parents will disagree with children. And those outside the hockey industry will disagree with those inside of it. The picture is so much larger.

One definate thing is that, as someone previously stated, we can have an NGB and still have variety as well.

The term "National Governing Body" cannot be trademarked but ethically it is the term utilized by the Olympics in terming those who they recognize. The term has completely lost all meaning as every league uses it like they do a 'delay of game' penalty.

My personal thoughts (not on behalf of the ECRHA or CRHL) are that a true NGB must have experience in the general field of sports management and also must be soley committed and involved for the general welfare and betterment of the sport; to build atheletes and build futures, NOT just competition. And as much as I have respect for business, a 'for profit' company is not just in it for the reasons I stated. It's dynamic.

Under my ethics stated above, I could never support certain organizations in the roller hockey race to be the NGB. They can partner with an NGB and use their values, but they can still offer variety under their own guidelines.

For this reason, I could only support USAHIL and AAU (now merged with USARS) as the true NGB. I cannot state at this time who I would like to see prevail.

While NARCh, TORHS, ECHO, TOPCAT, whoever, and all those referred to on sealweeneies thrive and offer variety (as I hope they all do), they cannot be allowed to become the NGB of this sport until they have proven to be in allignment with the Olympics and their moral and ethical values of building atheletes and creating futures, this would largely include focus on values as opposed to money and a non-for-profit stance. These are all fine organizations on their own and great opportunities for atheletes to compete, but they don't build futures (CRHL does ok, a little plug which is why we are now involved with USAHIL and as of last week, ECRHA has also become a member of the AAU. One region in CRHL is also a member of USARS)

Danny, you are right on it!

Rebecca