Ice Time and Winning
The allocation of ice time is directly related to how important winning is. On all teams some kids are better than others. If you play the good kids more, the probability of winning is increased. It is critical to outline your view of ice time/winning at the opening meeting, and then stick too it. I see coaches all the time who tell kids "winning isn't that important", but then certain kids hardly play at all in "big games". This is hypocritical, and the kids know it.
I believe that "playing to win" should have a different emphasis on teams depending on the game and the age of the kids. Let’s look at three alternatives:
Ice Time Equal - Winning is not emplasized
Ice time based only on talent Play 100% to Win
Mixed approach Play to Win Games AND Developmental Games
Ice Time Equal - Winning is not emplasized
One team philosophy is the "play equal time", even if this means we don't win. This is usually appropriate for little kids. When I coach mini-mites we never keep score in games. And all the kids play equally.
The "equal ice time" philosophy may also be appropriate for older kids, perhaps a "B" team. However, if you elect this philosophy for older kids, be prepared. It is very tough to execute. For example, assume you have a Bantam team that is "play equal". You will probably find when you get into a tournament, and it is the championship game, there will be an enormous temptation to play the good kids more, particularly at the end of the game. In fact, the weaker kids will probably want the stronger ones to play in a critical time of a championship game.
I've noticed that some coaches tell kids that winning isn't that important...but then they play all the good kids more. Be consistent - if you tell the kids that you are an "equal ice time" coach, then be "equal" - even if this means you lose.
I would not suggest the "equal ice time" philosophy for older kids - the kids really don't like it. They want to win.
Ice time based only on talent Play 100% to Win
One end of the "ice time" continuum is "play equal even if you lose". The other end is to base ice time 100% on winning. In a close game certain kids do not play at all. Other kids play a little early in the game, and not at all in the third period.
This philosophy is appropriate for high school, Division I college, or the NHL. It also may have a place in some games in youth hockey, depending on your philosophy. But it has no place in youth hockey as a steady diet. I believe in the "mixed approach" below.
Mixed approach Play to Win Games AND Developmental Games
I believe most older youth hockey teams should use a mixed approach to ice time/winning. Teams always have a mix of talent, and the coach should be concerned with winning, but also developing all the kids, and making sure they all have a great time. I accomplish this goal by having a different philosophy for ice time/winning for different games, as follows:
Play to Win Games:
We have some games that are "play to win". In these game the ice time is allocated based on winning. The weaker kids do not play as much, unless we get ahead or behind a great deal. If the game is close the "Best 5" will always play at the end. I make it clear that any kid is eligible to be one of the "Best 5" who play at the end of the game. The "best 5" are often different from game to game, or from the beginning of the year to the end.
I expect all the players to have a good attitude during the game, even if they are not playing as much. I make sure the kids who aren't playing as much understand that they have the opportunity to play more if they improve, and that there will be other games when they will play a great deal (see below).
Development games
I make sure to schedule many "development games" during the year. These are extra games that are not league games. During these games everybody plays. In fact, some of the weaker players will play much more than the best players. I look at these games as "making up" for the ice time lost by some players who didn't get to play much in "play to win" games.
Winning just isn't that important in these games. All the kids are TRYING to win, but the ice time is not allocated based on winning. Some tournament games are "developmental games". For example, if we lost the first two games of a tournament and have no chance to get into the finals, the last 2 games would be "developmental". We would still try to win, but the weaker players would get much more ice time.
I make it very clear to the good players that I expect them to have a good attitude about "developmental games". They have to understand they won't get as much ice time, and may not play in critical times as they usually do. But they have an important role to encourage their teammates to play well. Just as those same teammates have to encourage the "star" players during critical games. It goes both ways.
Winning & Ice Time Summary
It is important to make it very clear what your ice time philosophy is before players commit to your team. If you are always going to allocate ice time "to win", then tell the kids. Give the weaker kids the chance to go play for somebody else. If you tell them you are going to "play equally", then do it, even in a big game.
If you are going to try the mixed approach, which I suggest, then make sure you get enough extra games so the weaker kids can get "make up" ice time. During the course of a year my kids all get about the same number of total minutes on the ice. They may get 30 minutes in one game and 10 in another...but I'll make sure they all get about the same total over the course of the season. I tell everybody this before the season starts, in a written hand out. This way there are no surprises.