Fall Hockey

Discussion of Minnesota Girls High School Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

Lace'emUp
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:37 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Lace'emUp » Mon Aug 08, 2022 10:43 am

skatez wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 2:53 pm
So MNHockey essentially denies any club or program that could compete with their product?

As Phunnsie says there are limited options on the girls side. Why would MNHockey limit them even further?
Yes, MNH holds the "golden ticket" for granting a club or any entity Tier 1 or Tier 2 status, except for SSM, who maintains their status via written agreement. That's why I noted "one of these days, some MN club team will win that court battle". One could look the girls Elite League as an extension of OS. Why should OS (Elite League) be granted Tier 1 status, but not the Ice Cougars?

j4241
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 2:38 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by j4241 » Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:37 am

The reason seems clear - to protect high school hockey.

Lace'emUp
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:37 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Lace'emUp » Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:58 am

j4241 wrote:
Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:37 am
The reason seems clear - to protect high school hockey.
Bingo!
But would that argument be reasonable in a court case?

jg2112
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:36 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by jg2112 » Mon Aug 08, 2022 12:38 pm

Lace'emUp wrote:
Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:58 am
j4241 wrote:
Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:37 am
The reason seems clear - to protect high school hockey.
Bingo!
But would that argument be reasonable in a court case?
The answer is obvious - it depends. Who has a copy of the Tier 1 agreement?

j4241
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 2:38 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by j4241 » Mon Aug 08, 2022 1:19 pm

I'm not a lawyer, but there are obvious parallels with the Minnesota Made lawsuit from years ago which was rooted in anti-trust law, if I recall. Not sure the content of the agreement would be dispositive if that were the argument. It would like be an expensive and uphill battle. And since the payoff would be two or three teams competing at Tier 1 (u14, 16 and 19), I'm not sure the stakes would be as high as they were for Bernie defending a whole league across 10 age years, and so probably not high enough to justify the time and expense.

PhunnsieMcHockeyDad
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2019 8:02 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by PhunnsieMcHockeyDad » Mon Aug 08, 2022 1:40 pm

I'm surprised Mira hasn't tried to jump into the Tier 1 program with her Winter 19U team. I suspect they may play in the NIT event in October in Blaine with the Elite teams and others from around the country. That team plays a Tier 1 schedule during the HS season, and the girls in the program come from all over the place so their absence from the HS teams doesn't really have an impact.

I suppose allowing the Ice Cougars to participate in the playoffs would open the door to all sorts of enterprising hockey people starting their own program, and the fear is we turn into Massachusetts (although our community numbers are too strong for that to ever happen). I don't hate having an alternative for high school aged players....there are girls not playing in some of the big programs that deserve something better than JV or being cast aside and I don't think you'll ever see top girls jumping to a Tier 1 team - they'll transfer to Minnetonka or Stillwater before that happens.

**side note** I just had a great idea, as a real estate agent maybe I should make that my niche - helping families move to communities with powerhouse HS programs so the kids don't have to sit out a season!

The whole dynamic is odd - and I've been a Tier 1 GM and my daughter played 2 years in that league and will be playing her 2nd season of Elite League. I still don't understand how MN Hockey controls the teams that are eligible, when around the country it seems anyone can play their way into the National Tournament.

I'm approaching the off ramp on the hockey highway with just one last HS season ahead of me. I think this is mystery I'm going to leave unsolved.

Lace'emUp
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:37 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Lace'emUp » Tue Aug 09, 2022 5:09 pm

PhunnsieMcHockeyDad wrote:
Mon Aug 08, 2022 1:40 pm
I'm surprised Mira hasn't tried to jump into the Tier 1 program with her Winter 19U team. I suspect they may play in the NIT event in October in Blaine with the Elite teams and others from around the country. That team plays a Tier 1 schedule during the HS season, and the girls in the program come from all over the place so their absence from the HS teams doesn't really have an impact.

I suppose allowing the Ice Cougars to participate in the playoffs would open the door to all sorts of enterprising hockey people starting their own program, and the fear is we turn into Massachusetts (although our community numbers are too strong for that to ever happen). I don't hate having an alternative for high school aged players....there are girls not playing in some of the big programs that deserve something better than JV or being cast aside and I don't think you'll ever see top girls jumping to a Tier 1 team - they'll transfer to Minnetonka or Stillwater before that happens.

**side note** I just had a great idea, as a real estate agent maybe I should make that my niche - helping families move to communities with powerhouse HS programs so the kids don't have to sit out a season!

The whole dynamic is odd - and I've been a Tier 1 GM and my daughter played 2 years in that league and will be playing her 2nd season of Elite League. I still don't understand how MN Hockey controls the teams that are eligible, when around the country it seems anyone can play their way into the National Tournament.

I'm approaching the off ramp on the hockey highway with just one last HS season ahead of me. I think this is mystery I'm going to leave unsolved.
Phunnsie - I hear ya. You hit the nail on the head, "the whole dynamic is odd". As noted, if we're trying to protect HS hockey, then why in recent years has the MSHSL seem to be more "relaxed" with all the player movement from school to school? I will not imply any specific situation, but the MSHSL has allowed the schools to self govern themselves regarding eligibility. With that, I agree top players will make the move to Tonka, Stillwater, Andover, etc, before moving to a Tier 1 club team. And I also agree that there are many good players not playing in some of the big programs, and they DO deserve something better than JV or being cast aside. Tier 1 or Tier 2 could offer that alternative. More so, JV is a complete waste of time, and shouldn't be offered at the girls level. 99% of the varsity coaches couldn't give two craps about their JV team. There's your controversial comment for the day.

j4241
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 2:38 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by j4241 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:21 am

"Shouldn't be offered" is a bridge too far for me. JV is rec hockey - there is a place in the world for rec hockey, and many kids want to play with classmates. We should try to keep these casual players in the game, and offer an intro to kids that want to try it late.

No high school coach should mis-lead kids about what it is ("work hard and you can make varsity!" - no, almost never), and players that can't make varsity but want to keep progressing should have another option (like a more robust u19 offering with teams spanning communities). But I don't think removing options is the solution.

Lace'emUp
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:37 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Lace'emUp » Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:11 am

j4241 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:21 am
"Shouldn't be offered" is a bridge too far for me. JV is rec hockey - there is a place in the world for rec hockey, and many kids want to play with classmates. We should try to keep these casual players in the game, and offer an intro to kids that want to try it late.

No high school coach should mis-lead kids about what it is ("work hard and you can make varsity!" - no, almost never), and players that can't make varsity but want to keep progressing should have another option (like a more robust u19 offering with teams spanning communities). But I don't think removing options is the solution.
I understand the part about playing with friends and late starters, but that's where U19 should take the place of JV. Jr Gold gives this very same option to the guys. The opportunity play and compete with their classmates. U19 might allow for an extra night off (or two) during the week, and less expense to both the families and school (coach salaries, ice time, etc). With JV, you're going 6 days a week like varsity, and for what? The same thing U19 can offer, but U19 can offer more. More, meaning that games actually mean something - standings, District and Region playoffs, and a State Championships to play for. With JV, there's nothing. No scores are recorded, no standings, no playoffs, just the opening act to Varsity. U19 could be a Tier 2 option and path to Nationals, which would give it even more meaning. PP and U19 could both send their champions to Tier 2 Nationals.

Eagles93
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 5:04 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Eagles93 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:50 am

I agree that JV is very anticlimactic with no results or stats posted, no playoff or tournament; and most coaches care very little about JV. And the hockey is generally crap, basically equivalent to 15UB. But for many schools (i.e. not Tonka, Edina, Andover, etc.) JV is important. It depends on numbers and how strong the community's 15U program is. Sure, the superstars will never touch the ice for JV but many girls play JV for a year or two and move up to varsity eventually.

Eagles93
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 5:04 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Eagles93 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:53 am

Lace'emUp wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:11 am
U19 might allow for an extra night off (or two) during the week, and less expense to both the families
JV is practically free. 19U can be thousands of dollars factoring travel, tourneys, etc.

jg2112
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:36 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by jg2112 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:02 am

Eagles93 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:53 am
Lace'emUp wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:11 am
U19 might allow for an extra night off (or two) during the week, and less expense to both the families
JV is practically free. 19U can be thousands of dollars factoring travel, tourneys, etc.
JV is practically free for the participants, but I suspect it's a huge loss generator for most high schools that don't own their own rink. Something to watch for in the future - perhaps the merging of JV programs will become more commonplace.

j4241
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 2:38 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by j4241 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:32 am

Merging JV programs would be enormously sensible, which of course means the MSHSL forbids it unless the whole program merges.

Eagles93
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 5:04 pm

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Eagles93 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:34 am

jg2112 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:02 am
JV is practically free for the participants, but I suspect it's a huge loss generator for most high schools that don't own their own rink. Something to watch for in the future - perhaps the merging of JV programs will become more commonplace.
Hockey is definitely more expensive than most sports but at least it sells tickets. Imagine the losses on the books for many other sports. I don't see school districts cutting back sports anytime in the near future. Not saying they shouldn't for John Q. Taxpayer but don't see it happening.

Also, owning a rink is irrelevant, it's ice time they could rent to other users.

Lace'emUp
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:37 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Lace'emUp » Wed Aug 10, 2022 12:34 pm

jg2112 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:02 am
Eagles93 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:53 am
Lace'emUp wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:11 am
U19 might allow for an extra night off (or two) during the week, and less expense to both the families
JV is practically free. 19U can be thousands of dollars factoring travel, tourneys, etc.
JV is practically free for the participants, but I suspect it's a huge loss generator for most high schools that don't own their own rink. Something to watch for in the future - perhaps the merging of JV programs will become more commonplace.
I don't know what each school charges for their hockey "activity fee", but ours was getting up toward $500 (to register). Doesn't matter if you're varsity or JV, everyone pays. Some schools pay for their entire JV staff, some don't. In those cases, booster clubs have to pay through fundraising or assessment. Not to mention parents having to pay $8 a game to watch their kid play JV. Over 25 games, that's $400 for a set of parents to watch their kid play JV. I only recall a couple schools not charging for JV games - maybe private schools. At our local association, they charge half-price for Jr Gold and U19 over the fees paid for by their Bantam and U15 counterparts (which equates to less than the $900 counted above). Sure, less ice time is included, but if they want more, they can pay on their own. In the end, the saving to play U19 over JV might not be huge, but as jg2112 stated, it's a loss for the school.

jg2112
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:36 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by jg2112 » Wed Aug 10, 2022 3:50 pm

Eagles93 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:34 am
jg2112 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:02 am
JV is practically free for the participants, but I suspect it's a huge loss generator for most high schools that don't own their own rink. Something to watch for in the future - perhaps the merging of JV programs will become more commonplace.
Hockey is definitely more expensive than most sports but at least it sells tickets. Imagine the losses on the books for many other sports. I don't see school districts cutting back sports anytime in the near future. Not saying they shouldn't for John Q. Taxpayer but don't see it happening.

Also, owning a rink is irrelevant, it's ice time they could rent to other users.
You're right about both points. I guess I would clarify that sports programs are eliminated by stealth. Apple Valley and Burnsville look to merge (did on the boys' side, rejected on girls' side). Mounds View and Irondale girls are now one program - there go 34 spots for high schoolers.

Did I also see correctly that Roseville and Mahtomedi girls have merged for this upcoming year?

Lace'emUp
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:37 am

Re: Fall Hockey

Post by Lace'emUp » Wed Aug 10, 2022 6:08 pm

jg2112 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 3:50 pm
Eagles93 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:34 am
jg2112 wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:02 am
JV is practically free for the participants, but I suspect it's a huge loss generator for most high schools that don't own their own rink. Something to watch for in the future - perhaps the merging of JV programs will become more commonplace.
Hockey is definitely more expensive than most sports but at least it sells tickets. Imagine the losses on the books for many other sports. I don't see school districts cutting back sports anytime in the near future. Not saying they shouldn't for John Q. Taxpayer but don't see it happening.

Also, owning a rink is irrelevant, it's ice time they could rent to other users.
You're right about both points. I guess I would clarify that sports programs are eliminated by stealth. Apple Valley and Burnsville look to merge (did on the boys' side, rejected on girls' side). Mounds View and Irondale girls are now one program - there go 34 spots for high schoolers.

Did I also see correctly that Roseville and Mahtomedi girls have merged for this upcoming year?
You hit the nail on the head here: "there go 34 spots for high schoolers". It's not about playing for your HS at this point. It's the high school or MSHSL's need to preserve Varsity AND JV hockey for both programs. Get rid of JV, and the co-op isn't needed. Even if each program was struggling with, lets say, 25 players each, 17 of those players will be cut (50 tryout, 34 make it) and will probably not play U15's or U19's. They will quit. Instead of retaining players, you lose more player in a sport that might have already peaked with it's numbers. More the reason that the MSHSL needs to work with MNH to promote U19, and rid themselves of JV. Or, let players go to club teams and play Tier 2. OR, like I said, make Tier 2 available to associations and PP at the U19 level, and even at the U15/16 level (PP already does). I think this helps solves the problem of JV hockey, having the need for co-ops to preserve JV, and allowing for kids to play some meaningful hockey.

Post Reply