Dropping the Puck and Dropping Out of the Sport of Hockey
Dropout rates in youth sports continue to be a major issue, perhaps nowhere more so than in the sport of hockey. In my job as a collegiate hockey coach, I also work with youth players during summer camps, and I volunteer with local youth hockey organizations. Those of us who care about the sport of hockey have spent and will continue to spend a lot of time researching why so many kids drop out of youth hockey—even in hockey-crazed northern Michigan towns with deep histories in the sport.
We must try to identify the problems. One problem may be perception. Many people feel that the game changes as kids get older; we asked youth players, and they seemed to agree. When children first join hockey teams, the sport is relatively inexpensive for them to play. For instance, there is very little if any travel involved. In addition, there is no physical contact during games. Then, at age 11, players reach a level of play at which body checking becomes legal, a change that scares away some players and parents. With body checking comes a more protective, and also more expensive, set of gear; significant costs for ice time and travel furthermore begin to be part of playing the sport.
Hockey players’ issues, however, differ from those of the parents of hockey players. Costs associated with the sport may give parents pause, but direct questioning of young players seemed to suggest deeper problems. Some said there was too much pressure coming from their parents. An answer of that type seemed especially associated with players whose parents had never played hockey themselves. As soon as a parent began to live through his or her child, the pressure on that child became uncomfortable. In addition (and perhaps related to this first reason), young players too often reported feeling a total lack of fun in organized hockey. Some kids felt physically outmatched on the ice and complained they were ridiculed too often by teammates. Some felt their coaches or parents liked the game more than they did. Some believed organized play was just too much work.
Interestingly, while the dropout rate in youth hockey is increasing, hockey’s fan base to date has a good retention rate. The many kids who do not drop out fall in love with the game and become lifelong fans. Ice hockey—a regional or niche sport—needs kids like this in order to survive. Today’s players are tomorrow’s fans, and thus the more dropouts from youth hockey, the worse the sport’s future prospects, across the entire hockey community. Hockey is holding on, for now, but we must ask how the trend in the dropout rate can be reversed.
In general, I would suggest that the key is making youth hockey fun. Play should be taken back to its roots, to what it once was and still in fact is: a game. Try conducting a one-day “Hockey Is Fun Clinic,” inviting first-timers onto the ice to skate and have fun with collegiate and even professional players. Lunch, and even a jersey and stick, can be provided for each new player by clinic sponsors (retailers, food-service companies, etc.).
Hockey should be fun for youth who play the sport. Part of keeping it fun is keeping its requirements simpler, longer. The competitive progression in hockey, which sees players asked over time to commit more and more time, sweat, and money, needs to be slowed down. I believe that an introductory program should be followed by a developmental house recreation league, and only then by travel-level team participation. Introductory hockey programs should be low-cost, learn-to-play programs open to any child of any age, for up to two years’ participation. No travel should be involved. When a player has completed two years in the introductory program, there should be a developmental house recreation league available to him or her for further opportunity to play. Travel should be limited, if it is necessary at all, and ice costs should be carefully controlled. The developmental house recreation league provides those who prefer to be casual players with a place to continue playing hockey, developing skills but more importantly having fun. Players more deeply committed to the sport would follow such league play with participation on a recreational travel-level team, where competition becomes more serious and expenses rise.
Reducing costs for relatively casual play and keeping the emphasis on fun will create a better opportunity for young hockey players and their parents, not to mention coaches, to remain involved. In my talks with players and coaches, I have learned that more and more kids are experiencing burnout at earlier levels of competition. USA Hockey, the national governing body for the sport of ice hockey, has implemented parent education programs (which youth directors consider mandatory) in hopes of easing pressure on kids. An important fact needs to be impressed on families making the move from a developmental house recreation league to a more competitive travel-level team. It is that when the parent wants it more than the player, problems lie ahead. When the child decides he or she wants it, the parent’s support can then follow.
We must also be prudent about time devoted to playing the sport. When hockey takes over a player’s time to such an extent that normal social interaction—being a normal kid—becomes impossible, a burnout problem is not far away. With team time kept at a manageable level and hockey players encouraged to have other interests away from the rink, hockey should be able to remain available as an enjoyable hobby for each generation as it grows into adulthood.