Generally speaking we are much better at recognizing problems than finding solutions.  Complaining about what is wrong takes minimal thought or effort.  Seeking out the root causes by peeling away the layers of excuses and misinformation gets us to the raw truth that we often don’t want to confront.  Creating practical solutions that appease everyone are rare, because solutions most always include change.

Finding a fix to appease the current discontent regarding the growth of WIAA co-op hockey teams wouldn’t seem to be that challenging.  Implementing, which starts with convincing the WIAA of the validity of the solution, is an all together different problem.  Change within the WIAA almost always comes at a pedestrian pace and not without exasperating debate.

Truth Number One: 

Most hockey people don’t believe the WIAA has hockey’s best interest in mind when they make decisions affecting the sport.

Fueling that bonfire is their refusal to consider a state tournament venue other than the Alliant Energy Center, the exclusive DQ rule that can prevent teams from participating in the playoffs and the annual debate over a two tier state tournament.  Those are the headliner issues that have the potential to turn every annual meeting into the Jerry Springer Show.

I must admit there are times when their logic escapes me.  However, I do not believe leaving the Alliant Energy Center will do anything to increase state tournament attendance.

I believe the main issue driving the perception that the WIAA is indifferent to hockey is the lack of hands-on hockey experience in the WIAA office.  Dating back to my early encounters with Matt Otte, there has never been a time when the hockey coaches have felt they truly had someone there who was advocating for them.  The belief is that hockey was put under a microscope many years ago because of some bad behavior and has never been able to escape.

Come June I will be retired and I would offer my services should those in power at Vern Holmes Drive be looking for a hockey persons perspective.  

None of the current menu of solutions to fix the co-op conundrum inspires me.  Under consideration is streamlining boys and girls co-ops to match each other, allowing sectionals to review the approval/disapproval of co-ops (currently that power belongs to conferences) or adopting the gymnastics rule which states that the combined enrollment of a co-op cannot exceed the largest stand alone school.

The proposed solutions would either have no impact or cause complete chaos.  None will serve to move the sport forward.  Trying to match boys and girls co-ops with each other is a logistical and geographical nightmare not worth pursuing.  Granting power to sectionals would not be any more effective than conferences, which has been completely ineffective.  Limiting the size of co-ops would be disastrous for the quality and quantity of girl’s hockey.

The original intent of the cooperative program established in 1982 was to provide opportunities for players to play sports not offered by their own high schools.  The idea was to allow schools the time to grow and eventually add those sports.  That intended growth has simply not been a by-product of the experiment.  The unintended consequences of going down the co-op road are now surfacing.

Establishing a shelf-life for co-ops is an idea that could provide a long term answer without the short term bedlam.  Co-op programs would be given set amount of time to move forward and split their program.  Maybe it is six years, maybe it is eight years, but there is a timetable to independence.  When teams apply for a co-op they would have to submit a plan that would include the establishment of separate U-10 girl’s programs at each of the youth programs involved.  A timetable would be established to allow high schools and youth programs to build youth numbers, raise money and secure administrative support. 

After witnessing twenty-five years of expensive in-service gadget programs to solve schools woes, I don’t want to hear how schools cannot afford to add any sports.  Athletic costs are a minuscule portion of any schools budget.  The argument that districts can’t add sports is weak and irrational when you consider the immeasurable benefits of athletics to both the athletes and the community.  A school administrator told me many years ago, there is always money, you just have to know where to look.

Truth Number Two: 

The perception and treatment of girl’s hockey by many youth organizations is archaic and unfair.

While Title Nine is there to ensure equality at the high school level, it does nothing to guarantee it at the youth level.  There are still far too many youth associations that view girl’s hockey as a nuisance.  They are seen as less important and stealing ice away from the boy’s programs.  Girl’s teams are often handed poor and infrequent ice times.  Eliminating this stereotype and providing girl’s teams with comparable ice times and coaches is a step that must be taken. 

If girl’s hockey is going to grow and prosper it must happen from the ground floor of youth hockey.  Every youth association must find ambassadors for their girl’s programs that will stand up and fight for the equality and work to recruit more girls.  Aligning youth programs to feed high school programs is also imperative.

Girls’ playing on boys teams is also a situation that stymies the girl’s credibility and causes turmoil from season to season in the make-up of teams.  When girls jump over to the boy’s side it is at the expense of the girl’s program.  If we are serious about growing the girls game that practice needs to be regulated.

Truth Number Three: 

The majority of the co-op programs don’t want to sacrifice their winning ways to split into two separate teams that might struggle. 

The current rules regulating co-ops provide absolutely no push or incentive to split apart.  Separation for most co-ops will be painful, in terms of wins and losses.  Staying together assures more success, while splitting only guarantees uncertainty.  It is not difficult to see why co-ops don’t want to split.  Current proof exists in the success and struggles of the West Salem (68-16-4) and Sparta (12-76-1) programs that split four years ago.  It is the thirst for winning and playing in the state tournament that drives co-ops to continue.

Closer regulation of co-ops could also prove to be an incentive.  It has been a can of worms the WIAA has been reluctant to open, but as the governing body they can no longer ignore the festering problem.  Requiring co-ops to publically disclose their current status and projected future numbers would put more pressure on them to move forward.  The accusations thrown around regarding co-ops are too often inaccurate and based solely on the scorn from other teams.  Transparency is in order.

Former WIAA & college women’s head coach Mike Cowan believes it is time for a female hockey summit to discuss these issues.  It is an idea with great merit that could produce solutions and put an end to the finger pointing and demonizing of co-op programs.   

While these three truths are indeed major contributors to the issues plaguing WIAA hockey, it is truth number four that may cause the most damage.

Stay tuned…