The State of Youth Hockey in Illinois

By Paul O'Donnell

Several months ago, during a conversation with a nationally respected hockey colleague concerning general youth hockey issues around the country, our talk eventually evolved into a discussion about the state of youth hockey in Illinois. With an impressive understanding and knowledge of youth hockey throughout the U.S. he began asking questions, trying to gain a deeper insight into the youth hockey of our state. His name is unimportant, but since our conversation there hasn’t been a significant period of time that goes by where one or two of his queries or insights about youth hockey in Illinois has failed to enter my thoughts.
 

For anyone who’s been around Illinois youth hockey since its early inception, this question probably isn't very surprising. But, I'm sure for many others who have little knowledge of Illinois hockey’s history and how it has affected us through the years and possibly into the future it will probably require further explanation.

To better understand how this State’s hockey has gotten to where it is today one has to go back to its earliest roots, which extend over four decades, just after the National Hockey League doubled in size during the late 1960s.  Back then Chicago, like any other ravenous NHL city at that time, was caught up in a hockey feeding frenzy of the greatest hockey boom in our country’s history.

For almost a decade, beginning in 1967, fledgling youth hockey organizations began springing-up in every area of the country where an NHL television broadcast could be received.  In the early days of the boom Chicagoland wasn’t much different from other NHL cities that had successful franchises. All of these metropolitan areas were experiencing similar growing pains and infrastructure problems during this time period, trying to keep pace with hockey enrollments and ice time demands. Even in hockey rich cities such as Boston, believe it or not, prior to 1968 there were only 9 hockey rinks in the entire Greater Boston Area. However, since Massachusetts and more traditional hockey states, had a longer history of club programs, sanctioned high school teams, not to mention, college programs than Illinois, the integration of youth hockey was much smoother for “them” during this crucial phase of development.

In the late 70s, supply was beginning to catch up to demand. New hockey rinks were popping up all over Chicago providing ice to new or growing youth hockey and high school organizations. But, the boom turned to bust when the supply of ice increased so much that rinks began running after hockey clubs, offering cut rate prices to organizations that agreed to “house” their program with them.  Rather than growing the sport, these rinks were merely taking from Peter to feed Paul, all the while driving down ice prices.  Yes, it was great for the clubs, but in the late ‘70s the “Great Hockey Boom” turned to bust when rinks couldn’t meet their mortgages because a lack of demand for their ice.  Coupled with a recession and OPEC’s oil embargo numerous rinks closed their doors, leaving organizations with no place to play.

While other hockey states had similar issues it didn’t have the same effect that it had on Chicagoland because in states like Massachusetts hockey at the high school and college levels was a sanctioned sport completely paid for at taxpayer expense. Hockey parents there didn’t have the burden of worrying about expenses like, ice time, coach’s salaries, uniforms, bus travel and even hockey sticks.  Indeed, that still is the case to this date.

It wasn't until the early 1980s when youth hockey in Chicago and elsewhere began to get back on track.  The economy began to improve and youth hockey was gaining popularity again as a result of a reenergized Chicago Blackhawks team. Armed with players like Dennis Savard, Al Secord and Steve Larmer in 1982-83 the Blackhawks had an excellent season, coming in first place in their division and making it to the conference finals. Unfortunately, the Blackhawks success didn't rub off on youth hockey.  While hockey was reestablishing its footing in our area, the taxpayer funded states were climbing to even higher levels of success.

Another important reason for the surge in states such as Michigan, Massachusetts and Minnesota, was that more than a decade earlier the more progressive thinking hockey areas of the country’ began taking a radical turn in their methods of training.  After the legendary ”Summit Series” between the Canadian NHL All-Stars and the Soviet Union National Team in September of 1972, many forward thinking coaches immediately understood the significance of this new hockey style.  Hockey administrators and coaches in these hockey rich states began reinventing the youth hockey training wheel that resulted in a much greater emphasis on Russian theory and methods of training, systems and tactics; something Chicago youth hockey organizations were not in a position to consider at that time.

Training players, in what we now know as the European method, required more highly skilled coaches who could demonstrate the more difficult edge and balance training and who also had a command of the nuances of the game that Chicago coaching, to a large extent, didn’t have.   The inability, during those early years, to recognize the changing hockey landscape allowed us a limited ability to exploit the renewed and growing popularity of the game.

It’s been almost 30 years since then and although the overall competency of our players and coaches has improved over the years, so has everyone else’s. While making progress, our youth hockey programs continue to lag behind in cultivating experienced homegrown Illinois coaching talent.

In some respects, Illinois is still a first-generation hockey state because of this disparity. By that I mean, even though we have a long history hockey in our area, the vast majority of our hockey players are children of parents who have little or no playing experience.

If Illinois really wants to be a serious player at the national youth hockey level, we are going to have to radically change the way we train the coaches who teach our children. The USA hockey’s coaches’ training methods that we currently use today don’t even begin to scratch the surface that can satisfy our own needs. While their cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all method of coaching instruction, may be fine for some areas of the country, in states like ours, we need to find better ways of coaching which will be more tailored to the specific needs of our coaches.

In the United States, USA hockey’s coaching certifications range from levels 1 through 5 with five being the highest possible coaching achievement in our country. In our country, a level I certification requires an eight hour class; in Finland to get a diploma as a level I instructor, a coach is required complete 100 hours of mandatory study.

To obtain a level V coaching certification in Finland, the applicant is required to have a college degree from the Department of physical education-in the study of hockey. Our own, USA hockey’s’ level V certification, consists of a five day seminar, that usually, takes place once every other year and requires the applicant to write a 15 page thesis. While I do believe Finland’s level V certification is somewhat extreme and probably unworkable for most of our hockey coaches in our country, I hope I’ve made my point.

Much to do has been made of the recently instituted American Developmental Model of training.  Yet, while excellent in concept (although European in origin), its execution leaves much to be desired.  Requiring coaches to go onto the internet and teach themselves the model lacks a realistic view of how one learns.  Who, for example, is available to immediately answer a question a coach might have when reviewing the internet material?  How does one monitor the learning or whether, in fact, a busy volunteer coach even has peeked at the material on the web?  I’ll leave it to your imagination to think of other problems that these types of unmonitored, hands off approach to coach’s training might present.

If there was ever a time during Illinois’ 40 year youth hockey history that is better suited to a complete overhaul of training methods it’s now! With the miraculous resurrection of the Chicago Blackhawks over the past few years, it is quite possible that the State’s youth hockey ranks will expand tremendously.  With greater enrollment will come a need for more trained coaches.

And with USA Hockey’s proclaimed goal of developing more great ice hockey players, it is incumbent upon our governing leaders, both nationally and particularly in our own state, to develop and establish new methods of coaches training which will be focus on the specific needs of our current hockey coaches as well as those who will choose to take up the mantle in the future.

I read somewhere that the difference between a complainer and a problem solver is that the latter will suggest answers.  I am not a complainer and to that end I’ll provide my common sense solutions to our coaching dilemma next time.

About the Author

Paul O’Donnell writes a syndicated column called Hockey from the Neck up for Chicagoland’s Hockey Stop Magazine and is currently coaches for Robert Morris University in Chicago. If you wish to read more of Paul’s articles, you can find them on his website.