A teams playing AA at youth levels

The Latest 400 or so Topics

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

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:56 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:07 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:16 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:26 pm

My point was that class A is functioning as it is designed to. It was designed with enrollment as the parameters. Not resources.

I’m not worried about that under the current system. I’m worried what it would look like under your system. What is your ideal system anyway? Somehow I have the feeling it involves you “kicking out” the above listed programs.

By the way the HTown haters were adamant last year that once Hermantown was gone nobody could replicate that and you would rest your case. I hope you get your way and after HTown is gone they move SCC into 7A. Won’t hear a peep right? Just making sure because you are commenting on 4 programs now so I’m confused.

You aren’t simply pointing anything out. You have an agenda and you’re trying to poison this thread without it getting moved for not following the HTown thread rule.

In some ways I wish you would get your way and everyone in Hibbing’s way gets moved to AA just so I can hear some Ely (sorry to use you as an example Ely) can whine that they don’t have Hibbings resources and it’s not fair.
You are entitled to as many angry hallucinations as you can muster, but here is why I made my original post: I noticed the other day that Orono was playing AA at youth levels. I don't know if this is a new thing or what. Then, when I looked at these rankings, it stood out to me that a bunch of the top teams (Htown, Mahtomedi, Orono) were all playing AA at youth, but A in HS. Then I realized that it was very likely most if not all SCC players played AA at youth. It struck me as a dismaying trend that to be a top team in Class A, you have to play AA at youth levels.

And since you asked, my ideal system would be to send every team from a big city (Twin Cities, Duluth, St. Cloud, Rochester, Mankato) to AA. Then, if any schools from those areas want to go down to A, they could petition, something which is already done anyway. Then, if one of these "opting down" teams wins an A title, they are moved up to AA. These rankings would look very different if this system were in place, and, I imagine, would be much closer to what was intended when Class A was created.

Are you still confused?
That is a cute way to end your post but I have to say that I am. First you should decide if this was just a random observation ("simply stating") or if it is something that bothers you and should be remedied ("dismayed")? Everything that you say points to you implying that you do in fact think those 4 programs should be moved up (if not then please explain what you mean by "these rankings would look very different").

If you are in fact "dismayed" I am a little confused on that as well. If I were a person that wanted other quality A programs to opt up I would probably be encouraged by the youth association deciding to "opt up" as it likely indicates a shift in mentality that may get passed on to the high school. Instead apparently it signifies that the high school is a bunch of little wussies. I guess I will have to ask my buddy that lives in Orono if he has too caught the easiertothexitis bug.

Almost too many holes in your plan to speak to but a few right off the bat.

1. No chance to defend your title? Seriously?
2. Who gets to decide who can opt down and who can't? And based on what criteria? If they are good? So say Duluth Denfeld, they are in a metro area but they are going to be pretty good in a couple years. They get denied same as Orono or Mahtomedi right? But Warroad who also has a good group coming through gets to stay in A because they have a low population density around them? (Never mind if a Roth/Bethune move in).
3. How long does a team get moved up for after winning a title? One year? So Hermantown wins the title and goes up a year then they can come back down? Or is it a longer period like say 5 years? So then let's say Hibbing gets their magical group to come through and wins a state title. Then Hibbing is moved to AA for say 5 years. Are those kids at the bantam level sticking around for high school? Or do they realize that they now have to go through Andover, DE, Rapids, Htown(who was moved up as well due to winning), CEC, Elk River, etc so they just jump ship over to Virginia, Eveleth, etc to have a chance at an A title themselves?

I guess you can call these more hallucinations but really I am just trying to get some real world applicability here. I want to make sure this plan isn't just some person arbitrarily deciding who gets to plan A and who can't.
I moved this discussion to its own topic.

It's hilariously ironic that you accused me of trying to "poison" the thread when my original post was nine words long, and you have been losing your mind in long-winded posts since.

Nevertheless, I'm your huckleberry.

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:58 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:37 pm
Or how about this scenario. Greenway finishes off their magical run last year and wins state. How long are they pushed to AA? Do players like Troumbly and Miller even stick around? How to the underclassmen parents feel about that?
Go back and read my post about my idea. I said that any city teams would get put into AA, then they could petition to A, but once they won an A title, they would have to go to AA again. Greenway, and any other non-big city team, would NOT have to go to A after winning a title.

Reading comprehension is fun, you should try it. :D

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:12 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:07 pm

Almost too many holes in your plan to speak to but a few right off the bat.

1. No chance to defend your title? Seriously?
2. Who gets to decide who can opt down and who can't? And based on what criteria? If they are good? So say Duluth Denfeld, they are in a metro area but they are going to be pretty good in a couple years. They get denied same as Orono or Mahtomedi right? But Warroad who also has a good group coming through gets to stay in A because they have a low population density around them? (Never mind if a Roth/Bethune move in).
3. How long does a team get moved up for after winning a title? One year? So Hermantown wins the title and goes up a year then they can come back down? Or is it a longer period like say 5 years? So then let's say Hibbing gets their magical group to come through and wins a state title. Then Hibbing is moved to AA for say 5 years. Are those kids at the bantam level sticking around for high school? Or do they realize that they now have to go through Andover, DE, Rapids, Htown(who was moved up as well due to winning), CEC, Elk River, etc so they just jump ship over to Virginia, Eveleth, etc to have a chance at an A title themselves?

I guess you can call these more hallucinations but really I am just trying to get some real world applicability here. I want to make sure this plan isn't just some person arbitrarily deciding who gets to plan A and who can't.
My responses:
1. If the team is "opting down" to A, then no, they don't get to defend their A title, they go up to AA.
2-3. I would imagine any team that doesn't have an A title could opt down until they win one. Then they are in AA for good, or at least until they could show that their program had fallen off so sharply that the MSHSL let them opt down again.

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:13 pm

I'm moving this over from the A ranking post also
Section 8 guy wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:53 pm
Three observations:

1)). Nate Werner played his youth hockey in St Cloud so he did play AA in youth...just since that came up. I believe most of the SCC kids did but don’t have the data. Just remember the history.
2). Some kind of relegation system has been talked about several times on here and many think it makes sense. 5 years is probably too long but maybe two. And maybe it’s after two titles in three or four years or something. But there is a version there that is reasonable that protects what many think the A tourney was intended for. To grow smaller market hockey.
3). There are several programs that opt up or down now. Someone decides who gets to so that part wouldn’t be new at all.
4). Playing AA at youth and A at high school doesn’t pass the smell test. If it’s preparing for the high school team to move up. Great! Let’s see if that applies to any of the 3 (SCC is different in that regard). For now I’m skeptical outside of Maht getting forced to.
5). Love the Rankings! Agree with all of it! :D

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:01 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:56 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:07 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:16 pm


You are entitled to as many angry hallucinations as you can muster, but here is why I made my original post: I noticed the other day that Orono was playing AA at youth levels. I don't know if this is a new thing or what. Then, when I looked at these rankings, it stood out to me that a bunch of the top teams (Htown, Mahtomedi, Orono) were all playing AA at youth, but A in HS. Then I realized that it was very likely most if not all SCC players played AA at youth. It struck me as a dismaying trend that to be a top team in Class A, you have to play AA at youth levels.

And since you asked, my ideal system would be to send every team from a big city (Twin Cities, Duluth, St. Cloud, Rochester, Mankato) to AA. Then, if any schools from those areas want to go down to A, they could petition, something which is already done anyway. Then, if one of these "opting down" teams wins an A title, they are moved up to AA. These rankings would look very different if this system were in place, and, I imagine, would be much closer to what was intended when Class A was created.

Are you still confused?
That is a cute way to end your post but I have to say that I am. First you should decide if this was just a random observation ("simply stating") or if it is something that bothers you and should be remedied ("dismayed")? Everything that you say points to you implying that you do in fact think those 4 programs should be moved up (if not then please explain what you mean by "these rankings would look very different").

If you are in fact "dismayed" I am a little confused on that as well. If I were a person that wanted other quality A programs to opt up I would probably be encouraged by the youth association deciding to "opt up" as it likely indicates a shift in mentality that may get passed on to the high school. Instead apparently it signifies that the high school is a bunch of little wussies. I guess I will have to ask my buddy that lives in Orono if he has too caught the easiertothexitis bug.

Almost too many holes in your plan to speak to but a few right off the bat.

1. No chance to defend your title? Seriously?
2. Who gets to decide who can opt down and who can't? And based on what criteria? If they are good? So say Duluth Denfeld, they are in a metro area but they are going to be pretty good in a couple years. They get denied same as Orono or Mahtomedi right? But Warroad who also has a good group coming through gets to stay in A because they have a low population density around them? (Never mind if a Roth/Bethune move in).
3. How long does a team get moved up for after winning a title? One year? So Hermantown wins the title and goes up a year then they can come back down? Or is it a longer period like say 5 years? So then let's say Hibbing gets their magical group to come through and wins a state title. Then Hibbing is moved to AA for say 5 years. Are those kids at the bantam level sticking around for high school? Or do they realize that they now have to go through Andover, DE, Rapids, Htown(who was moved up as well due to winning), CEC, Elk River, etc so they just jump ship over to Virginia, Eveleth, etc to have a chance at an A title themselves?

I guess you can call these more hallucinations but really I am just trying to get some real world applicability here. I want to make sure this plan isn't just some person arbitrarily deciding who gets to plan A and who can't.
I moved this discussion to its own topic.

It's hilariously ironic that you accused me of trying to "poison" the thread when my original post was nine words long, and you have been losing your mind in long-winded posts since.

Nevertheless, I'm your huckleberry.
Lol at this whole post. Losing my mind? Is that what you say about anyone that chooses to argue with you? I’m good, really. Go back and read your posts. You are constantly trying to find a way to get your little agenda into threads that aren’t really related to it. It got so bad at one point that they had to make a special rule for you. Now you just try do it more discretely.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:09 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:58 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:37 pm
Or how about this scenario. Greenway finishes off their magical run last year and wins state. How long are they pushed to AA? Do players like Troumbly and Miller even stick around? How to the underclassmen parents feel about that?
Go back and read my post about my idea. I said that any city teams would get put into AA, then they could petition to A, but once they won an A title, they would have to go to AA again. Greenway, and any other non-big city team, would NOT have to go to A after winning a title.

Reading comprehension is fun, you should try it. :D
I guess I missed that seeing as it has no logic (which you should try). Every “city” team does not have the same resources, making this a totally discriminatory rule. So just to put this into perspective if Warroad wins the title this year they could stay class A but if Orono wins they have to move to AA (where they would likely be a 4 seed this year). I’m sure all the “city” A schools would be thrilled with this. It is basically an arbitrary rule and something the mshsl would never go for.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:14 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:12 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:07 pm

Almost too many holes in your plan to speak to but a few right off the bat.

1. No chance to defend your title? Seriously?
2. Who gets to decide who can opt down and who can't? And based on what criteria? If they are good? So say Duluth Denfeld, they are in a metro area but they are going to be pretty good in a couple years. They get denied same as Orono or Mahtomedi right? But Warroad who also has a good group coming through gets to stay in A because they have a low population density around them? (Never mind if a Roth/Bethune move in).
3. How long does a team get moved up for after winning a title? One year? So Hermantown wins the title and goes up a year then they can come back down? Or is it a longer period like say 5 years? So then let's say Hibbing gets their magical group to come through and wins a state title. Then Hibbing is moved to AA for say 5 years. Are those kids at the bantam level sticking around for high school? Or do they realize that they now have to go through Andover, DE, Rapids, Htown(who was moved up as well due to winning), CEC, Elk River, etc so they just jump ship over to Virginia, Eveleth, etc to have a chance at an A title themselves?

I guess you can call these more hallucinations but really I am just trying to get some real world applicability here. I want to make sure this plan isn't just some person arbitrarily deciding who gets to plan A and who can't.
My responses:
1. If the team is "opting down" to A, then no, they don't get to defend their A title, they go up to AA.
2-3. I would imagine any team that doesn't have an A title could opt down until they win one. Then they are in AA for good, or at least until they could show that their program had fallen off so sharply that the MSHSL let them opt down again.
It could (and likely would) take a long time to get through all of the “has never won an A title but wants to” teams before you get it to where you want it. And new teams would pop up along the way. All I’m saying is that once you put your plan into action I think you’ll find all that it is is picking and choosing favorites. And it has the feeling of let’s all just pass around the trophy and take a turn, everyone is a winner! Feel to it.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:21 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:13 pm
I'm moving this over from the A ranking post also
Section 8 guy wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:53 pm
Three observations:

1)). Nate Werner played his youth hockey in St Cloud so he did play AA in youth...just since that came up. I believe most of the SCC kids did but don’t have the data. Just remember the history.
2). Some kind of relegation system has been talked about several times on here and many think it makes sense. 5 years is probably too long but maybe two. And maybe it’s after two titles in three or four years or something. But there is a version there that is reasonable that protects what many think the A tourney was intended for. To grow smaller market hockey.
3). There are several programs that opt up or down now. Someone decides who gets to so that part wouldn’t be new at all.
4). Playing AA at youth and A at high school doesn’t pass the smell test. If it’s preparing for the high school team to move up. Great! Let’s see if that applies to any of the 3 (SCC is different in that regard). For now I’m skeptical outside of Maht getting forced to.
5). Love the Rankings! Agree with all of it! :D
While the MSHSL does have experience with teams opting down the only one that I can think of that had any success was MAML and that one did generate a little bit of discussion with just an appearance at state.

Call it opting up or opting down essentially what this plan calls for is current A teams to be forced into opting up based on them being too good. That the mshsl has no experience with.

I just think it will be tough telling programs that would be mid level seeds in their AS section that they have to opt up.

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:57 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:09 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:58 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:37 pm
Or how about this scenario. Greenway finishes off their magical run last year and wins state. How long are they pushed to AA? Do players like Troumbly and Miller even stick around? How to the underclassmen parents feel about that?
Go back and read my post about my idea. I said that any city teams would get put into AA, then they could petition to A, but once they won an A title, they would have to go to AA again. Greenway, and any other non-big city team, would NOT have to go to A after winning a title.

Reading comprehension is fun, you should try it. :D
I guess I missed that seeing as it has no logic (which you should try). Every “city” team does not have the same resources, making this a totally discriminatory rule. So just to put this into perspective if Warroad wins the title this year they could stay class A but if Orono wins they have to move to AA (where they would likely be a 4 seed this year). I’m sure all the “city” A schools would be thrilled with this. It is basically an arbitrary rule and something the mshsl would never go for.
Not all AA teams have the same resources, yet they were all put in AA. How many discrimination lawsuits have you seen over it? Has Robbinsdale Armstrong or Coon Rapids filed suit because they don't have the resources of Wayzata or EP?

When they first made the AA/A split, how thrilled were the teams just above the cutoff? Putting all city teams in AA, isn't arbitrary at all, it's keeping them in the larger class...because they are located in big cities!!!

Are you saying you don't like my idea?

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:13 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:21 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:13 pm
I'm moving this over from the A ranking post also
Section 8 guy wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:53 pm
Three observations:

1)). Nate Werner played his youth hockey in St Cloud so he did play AA in youth...just since that came up. I believe most of the SCC kids did but don’t have the data. Just remember the history.
2). Some kind of relegation system has been talked about several times on here and many think it makes sense. 5 years is probably too long but maybe two. And maybe it’s after two titles in three or four years or something. But there is a version there that is reasonable that protects what many think the A tourney was intended for. To grow smaller market hockey.
3). There are several programs that opt up or down now. Someone decides who gets to so that part wouldn’t be new at all.
4). Playing AA at youth and A at high school doesn’t pass the smell test. If it’s preparing for the high school team to move up. Great! Let’s see if that applies to any of the 3 (SCC is different in that regard). For now I’m skeptical outside of Maht getting forced to.
5). Love the Rankings! Agree with all of it! :D
While the MSHSL does have experience with teams opting down the only one that I can think of that had any success was MAML and that one did generate a little bit of discussion with just an appearance at state.

Call it opting up or opting down essentially what this plan calls for is current A teams to be forced into opting up based on them being too good. That the mshsl has no experience with.

I just think it will be tough telling programs that would be mid level seeds in their AS section that they have to opt up.
Do you have an idea? Or is having big city teams win Class A every year completely acceptable for you?

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:57 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:09 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:58 pm


Go back and read my post about my idea. I said that any city teams would get put into AA, then they could petition to A, but once they won an A title, they would have to go to AA again. Greenway, and any other non-big city team, would NOT have to go to A after winning a title.

Reading comprehension is fun, you should try it. :D
I guess I missed that seeing as it has no logic (which you should try). Every “city” team does not have the same resources, making this a totally discriminatory rule. So just to put this into perspective if Warroad wins the title this year they could stay class A but if Orono wins they have to move to AA (where they would likely be a 4 seed this year). I’m sure all the “city” A schools would be thrilled with this. It is basically an arbitrary rule and something the mshsl would never go for.
Not all AA teams have the same resources, yet they were all put in AA. How many discrimination lawsuits have you seen over it? Has Robbinsdale Armstrong or Coon Rapids filed suit because they don't have the resources of Wayzata or EP?

When they first made the AA/A split, how thrilled were the teams just above the cutoff? Putting all city teams in AA, isn't arbitrary at all, it's keeping them in the larger class...because they are located in big cities!!!

Are you saying you don't like my idea?
You are right nobody does and you are right they do not have the same resources. You should be very well equipped to answer this question then. Why is there so much whining in class A and not AA? You’re basically arguing my point now.

Just as a side note I didn’t mean discriminatory in a legal way like you mention. I was saying you’re just picking and choosing favorites because you like schools not in metro areas more. If you had two schools with similar demographics (similar enrollment and financial situations) I don’t see how you can treat them differently because one is located closer to a population center.

Say the Jake Hale group had put a run together with Minneapolis and won a title. Would it be fair to then make all the kids in subsequent classes play AA? I don’t care if it is for a short time even, you are screwing someone.

Lol sorry to say I don’t. It is maybe a nice thought to make up rules until you get to a spot that you like for your team (or teams) but not my favorite approach.

I apologize I do have to get to work so I won’t be able to continue this discussion for a while. I realize that I’m likely not changing your mind and want you to know I’m not an SCC or Hermantown person either. I just feel that you oversimplify the solution and want to tweak it to your liking or benefit, even if this means the system is no more equitable than it was before. It will be screwing someone (mid sized city teams) but it’s not me so I don’t care!

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:29 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:13 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:21 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:13 pm
I'm moving this over from the A ranking post also

While the MSHSL does have experience with teams opting down the only one that I can think of that had any success was MAML and that one did generate a little bit of discussion with just an appearance at state.

Call it opting up or opting down essentially what this plan calls for is current A teams to be forced into opting up based on them being too good. That the mshsl has no experience with.

I just think it will be tough telling programs that would be mid level seeds in their AS section that they have to opt up.
Do you have an idea? Or is having big city teams win Class A every year completely acceptable for you?
If they are under the enrollment cutoff then yes. Determine a cutoff(ideally in the middle) and that is it. Actually I would prefer one tournament with more teams if possible but know that won’t happen.

The class system doesn’t take away the ability for anyone to play or enjoy the game. The state tournament is for the best. It isn’t for everyone to take turns holding the trophy. I realize that in today’s culture that probably isn’t a popular opinion but I am entitled to it nonetheless.

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:14 pm

7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:57 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:09 pm


I guess I missed that seeing as it has no logic (which you should try). Every “city” team does not have the same resources, making this a totally discriminatory rule. So just to put this into perspective if Warroad wins the title this year they could stay class A but if Orono wins they have to move to AA (where they would likely be a 4 seed this year). I’m sure all the “city” A schools would be thrilled with this. It is basically an arbitrary rule and something the mshsl would never go for.
Not all AA teams have the same resources, yet they were all put in AA. How many discrimination lawsuits have you seen over it? Has Robbinsdale Armstrong or Coon Rapids filed suit because they don't have the resources of Wayzata or EP?

When they first made the AA/A split, how thrilled were the teams just above the cutoff? Putting all city teams in AA, isn't arbitrary at all, it's keeping them in the larger class...because they are located in big cities!!!

Are you saying you don't like my idea?
You are right nobody does and you are right they do not have the same resources. You should be very well equipped to answer this question then. Why is there so much whining in class A and not AA? You’re basically arguing my point now.
There is no whining in AA because AA teams don't have a choice! A teams do, and when some of them have plenty of trophies and are perfectly capable of moving up and competing in AA, so much so that they play AA throughout youth, yet don't because they prefer the easy route, then forgive some of us for saying that is in violation of the spirit in which Class A was created.

Just as a side note I didn’t mean discriminatory in a legal way like you mention. I was saying you’re just picking and choosing favorites because you like schools not in metro areas more. If you had two schools with similar demographics (similar enrollment and financial situations) I don’t see how you can treat them differently because one is located closer to a population center.
How is this any different than the AA/A split the MSHSL already did? They put the largest 64 teams in AA. I'd call that treating teams differently. You've tried to make this point several times, but it's not working. They divided schools by the number of students within the school, so there's no reason they couldn't divide them by the number of students that live around the schools.

Say the Jake Hale group had put a run together with Minneapolis and won a title. Would it be fair to then make all the kids in subsequent classes play AA? I don’t care if it is for a short time even, you are screwing someone.
Who'd be getting screwed? The incoming bantams? All the returning players on that title team would have a title!! I think they could handle the promotion to AA. Maybe winning an A title boosts the program even more, so they are able to compete in AA on a regular basis. Why don't you consider this a possibility?


Lol sorry to say I don’t. It is maybe a nice thought to make up rules until you get to a spot that you like for your team (or teams) but not my favorite approach.
Well, as much as you dislike my idea, it's still more of a possibility than your idea of going back to one tournament, so do you have any other ideas?

I apologize I do have to get to work so I won’t be able to continue this discussion for a while. I realize that I’m likely not changing your mind and want you to know I’m not an SCC or Hermantown person either. I just feel that you oversimplify the solution and want to tweak it to your liking or benefit, even if this means the system is no more equitable than it was before. It will be screwing someone (mid sized city teams) but it’s not me so I don’t care!
You're right, you're not changing my mind. Here are the teams that have played in the Class A title game the last 20 years:
Hermantown (9)
Breck (5)
STA (5)
Warroad (4)
Duluth Marshall (3)
Totino-Grace (2)
EGF (2)
Orono (2)
SCC
Greenway
BSM
Rochester Lourdes
Red Wing
Alexandria
Monticello
Simley

33 out of a possible 40 spots were taken by teams located in metro areas. If you don't think taking big city teams out of Class A would make the A tourney more equitable, then I don't know what to tell you. :roll:

bardown27
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:20 am

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by bardown27 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:00 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:14 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:57 pm


You are right nobody does and you are right they do not have the same resources. You should be very well equipped to answer this question then. Why is there so much whining in class A and not AA? You’re basically arguing my point now.
There is no whining in AA because AA teams don't have a choice! A teams do, and when some of them have plenty of trophies and are perfectly capable of moving up and competing in AA, so much so that they play AA throughout youth, yet don't because they prefer the easy route, then forgive some of us for saying that is in violation of the spirit in which Class A was created.

This is really only case with one team, Hermantown, who we all know you have a problem with.

I apologize I do have to get to work so I won’t be able to continue this discussion for a while. I realize that I’m likely not changing your mind and want you to know I’m not an SCC or Hermantown person either. I just feel that you oversimplify the solution and want to tweak it to your liking or benefit, even if this means the system is no more equitable than it was before. It will be screwing someone (mid sized city teams) but it’s not me so I don’t care!
You're right, you're not changing my mind. Here are the teams that have played in the Class A title game the last 20 years:
Hermantown (9)
Breck (5)
STA (5)
Warroad (4)
Duluth Marshall (3)
Totino-Grace (2)
EGF (2)
Orono (2)
SCC
Greenway
BSM
Rochester Lourdes
Red Wing
Alexandria
Monticello
Simley

33 out of a possible 40 spots were taken by teams located in metro areas. If you don't think taking big city teams out of Class A would make the A tourney more equitable, then I don't know what to tell you. :roll:
Idk what kind of math you did here, but I wouldn’t consider Warroad (4), EGF (2), Greenway, Red Wing, Monticello, or Alex to be from metro areas.

rainier2
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:24 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by rainier2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:39 pm

bardown27 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:00 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:14 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 pm
Idk what kind of math you did here, but I wouldn’t consider Warroad (4), EGF (2), Greenway, Red Wing, Monticello, or Alex to be from metro areas.
I counted EGF and Monticello as metro teams, so combining the remaining teams gives 7 title game appearances to non-metro teams. (40 total-7 non-metro=33 title game appearances by metro teams.)

goldy313
Posts: 3549
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by goldy313 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:40 pm

EGF is in a metro area in my opinion. With population base of over 60,000 it is larger than the outstate AA area of Owatonna and Northfield. I won’t count Hastings and New Prague but could.

I think the 7 non metro of the 40 include Warroad (4), Greenway (1), Alexandria (1), and Red Wing (1). MAML opted down as they were assigned AA. The rest come from large population bases, largely affluent...... we are not talking Columbia Heights, Fridley, Edison, or Brooklyn Center here, let alone John Marshall or Henry Sibley.

bardown27
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:20 am

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by bardown27 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:15 am

goldy313 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:40 pm
EGF is in a metro area in my opinion. With population base of over 60,000 it is larger than the outstate AA area of Owatonna and Northfield. I won’t count Hastings and New Prague but could.

I think the 7 non metro of the 40 include Warroad (4), Greenway (1), Alexandria (1), and Red Wing (1). MAML opted down as they were assigned AA. The rest come from large population bases, largely affluent...... we are not talking Columbia Heights, Fridley, Edison, or Brooklyn Center here, let alone John Marshall or Henry Sibley.
I wouldn’t consider EGF metro considering 57,000 of the 65,000 “metro” area is in a different state. Besides Panzer, name someone who has come over from The ND side

Slap Shot
Posts: 796
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 4:44 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by Slap Shot » Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:52 am

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:14 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:57 pm


Not all AA teams have the same resources, yet they were all put in AA. How many discrimination lawsuits have you seen over it? Has Robbinsdale Armstrong or Coon Rapids filed suit because they don't have the resources of Wayzata or EP?

When they first made the AA/A split, how thrilled were the teams just above the cutoff? Putting all city teams in AA, isn't arbitrary at all, it's keeping them in the larger class...because they are located in big cities!!!

Are you saying you don't like my idea?
You are right nobody does and you are right they do not have the same resources. You should be very well equipped to answer this question then. Why is there so much whining in class A and not AA? You’re basically arguing my point now.
There is no whining in AA because AA teams don't have a choice! A teams do, and when some of them have plenty of trophies and are perfectly capable of moving up and competing in AA, so much so that they play AA throughout youth, yet don't because they prefer the easy route, then forgive some of us for saying that is in violation of the spirit in which Class A was created.

Just as a side note I didn’t mean discriminatory in a legal way like you mention. I was saying you’re just picking and choosing favorites because you like schools not in metro areas more. If you had two schools with similar demographics (similar enrollment and financial situations) I don’t see how you can treat them differently because one is located closer to a population center.
How is this any different than the AA/A split the MSHSL already did? They put the largest 64 teams in AA. I'd call that treating teams differently. You've tried to make this point several times, but it's not working. They divided schools by the number of students within the school, so there's no reason they couldn't divide them by the number of students that live around the schools.

Say the Jake Hale group had put a run together with Minneapolis and won a title. Would it be fair to then make all the kids in subsequent classes play AA? I don’t care if it is for a short time even, you are screwing someone.
Who'd be getting screwed? The incoming bantams? All the returning players on that title team would have a title!! I think they could handle the promotion to AA. Maybe winning an A title boosts the program even more, so they are able to compete in AA on a regular basis. Why don't you consider this a possibility?


Lol sorry to say I don’t. It is maybe a nice thought to make up rules until you get to a spot that you like for your team (or teams) but not my favorite approach.
Well, as much as you dislike my idea, it's still more of a possibility than your idea of going back to one tournament, so do you have any other ideas?

I apologize I do have to get to work so I won’t be able to continue this discussion for a while. I realize that I’m likely not changing your mind and want you to know I’m not an SCC or Hermantown person either. I just feel that you oversimplify the solution and want to tweak it to your liking or benefit, even if this means the system is no more equitable than it was before. It will be screwing someone (mid sized city teams) but it’s not me so I don’t care!
You're right, you're not changing my mind. Here are the teams that have played in the Class A title game the last 20 years:
Hermantown (9)
Breck (5)
STA (5)
Warroad (4)
Duluth Marshall (3)
Totino-Grace (2)
EGF (2)
Orono (2)
SCC
Greenway
BSM
Rochester Lourdes
Red Wing
Alexandria
Monticello
Simley

33 out of a possible 40 spots were taken by teams located in metro areas. If you don't think taking big city teams out of Class A would make the A tourney more equitable, then I don't know what to tell you. :roll:
Let’s look at Class A finalists between 2010-19:

Team, Appearances, Titles:
Breck 2 - 1
Hermantown 8 - 2
STA 3 - 3
EGF 2 - 2
Monticello 1 - 0
Alexandria 1 - 0
Orono 1 - 1
SCC 1 - 1
Greenway 1 – 0

STA opted up so that is taken care of. Aside from Hermantown how many of those programs (even if limiting it to title winners) would have sustained success in AA and subsequently how exciting would a now watered-down A tournament be by moving up more teams to AA?

What would be the time requirement for the move to A? Clearly as you move more teams to AA after a title the A pool would be reduced over time. You can't just keep moving title winners up. My apologies if you’ve explained that process but I couldn’t find it.

zooomx
Posts: 463
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:34 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by zooomx » Tue Jan 21, 2020 9:24 am

This is all an interesting debate, and I will toss in some thoughts about the title of this thread using Alexandria as an example. I am no longer directly involved in the youth program, but these are some discussions we have had.

Our youth district (15) consists of 2 AA programs. Moorhead and Brainerd. Then we have Alexandria, Little Falls, Detroit Lakes and Fergus Falls who typically have A and B teams. After that we have smaller programs like Sauk Centre, Wadena, etc who only have one team, but occasionally go "A" as they think they have a stronger squad and want to challenge themselves.

Alexandria has contemplated going AA at youth for the following reasons:

1) Moorhead and Brainerd AA squads have, at times, refused to schedule Alexandria's A teams in Bantams or Pee Wees. Doesn't make sense as Alexandria is always a very strong team at both levels and geographically is a convenient match up for both. I figure they refuse to schedule due to the risk of losing to an A team for ratings purposes. Silly, but I got nothing else.

2) Our District 15 "A" leagues often have a few A teams that are not too strong and we end up winning 10-0. Those games aren't fun for either team and we sometimes ask to play one game for double points rather than play the team twice. The other association often refuses to do so, and we end up with 2 blow out games. Usually, our competitive "A" games are with Little Falls and Detroit Lakes. Most of our out of district games are with very strong A teams and other AA teams that are willing to schedule us. If we went AA, we would be able to craft a schedule that is competitive all the way through. I mean no disrespect to the weaker A teams in our district. We are just a larger association with 3 or 4 teams at both Bantams and Pee Wees. We want to be good partners to our other associations in the district, so it is tough to go AA and then refuse to schedule these teams at all.

3) So we are kind of caught in between a few scenarios. If we go AA, we possible leave some other programs behind and it might create some hard feelings. We also would incur more travel to fill a schedule which can be a hardship on families. We would then draw the ire of people around the state that think we are acting like Hermantown (though this really doesn't bother me personally). If we stay A, we have a handful of games that are blowouts that just are not good for either team. I think most of our decision makers really don't care about chasing down an A state title and would rather have a tough, competitive schedule to develop our players.

So, my thoughts on teams like Hermantown, or other strong programs, playing AA at youth is that it makes sense. If they play A at youth they deal with the same situations I describe above. I feel the youth aspect of this discussion is irrelevant. Youth programs do whats best for their families and district partners. I understand the argument of High School teams that should make the jump to AA, but lets not bang on the youth programs for doings whats best. The youth boards do not decide what the high school teams will do. It's a complicated decision these youth programs make. Imagine the crap a Hermantown youth program would take if they stayed A in youth and destroyed everyone in their path.

Deathblow
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:26 am

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by Deathblow » Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:24 am

bardown27 wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:15 am
goldy313 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:40 pm
EGF is in a metro area in my opinion. With population base of over 60,000 it is larger than the outstate AA area of Owatonna and Northfield. I won’t count Hastings and New Prague but could.

I think the 7 non metro of the 40 include Warroad (4), Greenway (1), Alexandria (1), and Red Wing (1). MAML opted down as they were assigned AA. The rest come from large population bases, largely affluent...... we are not talking Columbia Heights, Fridley, Edison, or Brooklyn Center here, let alone John Marshall or Henry Sibley.
I wouldn’t consider EGF metro considering 57,000 of the 65,000 “metro” area is in a different state. Besides Panzer, name someone who has come over from The ND side
For what it's worth, I think Lovens moved up to EGF, from Fargo. There could have been a conscious decision on that.

SCBlueLiner
Posts: 639
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by SCBlueLiner » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:10 am

I remember when the AA/A split happened at the youth levels. The spin at the time was that there was no split, all teams were considered A teams and would regularly schedule each other and attend the same tournaments. Nothing would change except there would be a AA and A designation for state tournament play to allow more teams a chance to participate in the state tournament. What a lie that turned out to be. Almost immediately the two classifications became separate. AA teams refused to schedule A teams. Association tournaments started fielding AA brackets, and wouldn't allow A teams into the AA bracket. But I thought they were all considered the same? Everybody knew this would happen all the way back then.

Now to see this discussion about the youth feeder programs as it relates to HS. Programs like Alexandria caught in no man's land. Programs like Hermantown taking massive heat for "playing up" at AA in youth and "playing down" at A in HS.

How about this solution? The Youth Districts actually enforce the original intent of the AA/A split as being for State Tournament play only. No association tournaments can use the AA bracket anymore, it's all A. That would allow programs who are stuck in the middle to have some flexibility in scheduling. Or maybe just go back to A, B, C and get rid of all the AA, B1, B2, etc., etc....I've even heard some programs are designating teams as A2.

http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=29267

That topic is a blast from the past. Has it been 8 years already? Back when the Youth Hockey board actually had activity and spirited discussions. I suppose those have all gone to Twitter or someplace else. Seems like just yesterday.

zooomx
Posts: 463
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:34 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by zooomx » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:21 am

SCBlueLiner wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:10 am
I remember when the AA/A split happened at the youth levels. The spin at the time was that there was no split, all teams were considered A teams and would regularly schedule each other and attend the same tournaments. Nothing would change except there would be a AA and A designation for state tournament play to allow more teams a chance to participate in the state tournament. What a lie that turned out to be. Almost immediately the two classifications became separate. AA teams refused to schedule A teams. Association tournaments started fielding AA brackets, and wouldn't allow A teams into the AA bracket. But I thought they were all considered the same? Everybody knew this would happen all the way back then.

Now to see this discussion about the youth feeder programs as it relates to HS. Programs like Alexandria caught in no man's land. Programs like Hermantown taking massive heat for "playing up" at AA in youth and "playing down" at A in HS.

How about this solution? The Youth Districts actually enforce the original intent of the AA/A split as being for State Tournament play only. No association tournaments can use the AA bracket anymore, it's all A. That would allow programs who are stuck in the middle to have some flexibility in scheduling. Or maybe just go back to A, B, C and get rid of all the AA, B1, B2, etc., etc....I've even heard some programs are designating teams as A2.

http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=29267

That topic is a blast from the past. Has it been 8 years already? Back when the Youth Hockey board actually had activity and spirited discussions. I suppose those have all gone to Twitter or someplace else. Seems like just yesterday.
Agree with lots of this, although I will say that Alexandria has had pretty good luck being accepted into some very good "AA" tournaments. Actually, we have pretty good luck getting a fair amount of AA teams on our schedule, just not always the ones that are most convenient.

MWS coach
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:31 am

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by MWS coach » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:28 am

You're right, you're not changing my mind. Here are the teams that have played in the Class A title game the last 20 years:
Hermantown (9)
Breck (5)
STA (5)
Warroad (4)
Duluth Marshall (3)
Totino-Grace (2)
EGF (2)
Orono (2)
SCC
Greenway
BSM
Rochester Lourdes
Red Wing
Alexandria
Monticello
Simley

33 out of a possible 40 spots were taken by teams located in metro areas. If you don't think taking big city teams out of Class A would make the A tourney more equitable, then I don't know what to tell you. :roll:
[/quote]
[/quote]
Interesting, aside from Hermantown (which we all know this is the prime target) Look at how many are now AA. STA, Marshall, TG BSM.... Stats are stats and can be viewed in many different ways to suit the argument you are trying to make. Looks to me that many of these programs when they have built a competitive team have moved up on their own....

bardown27
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:20 am

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by bardown27 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:15 pm

Interesting, aside from Hermantown (which we all know this is the prime target) Look at how many are now AA. STA, Marshall, TG BSM.... Stats are stats and can be viewed in many different ways to suit the argument you are trying to make. Looks to me that many of these programs when they have built a competitive team have moved up on their own....
I took a little bit different view on this in terms of teams returning to the tournament. I wanted to see if those teams had been in the tournament the year prior to making the finals, and if they returned the following year, moreso focusing on the teams who have only been in the finals once. Obviously teams like Hermantown, STA, DM, Breck and Warroad (for the most part) put together some nice consecutive runs. In the 20 years, there have been 16 teams (as pointed out above) who have played in 20 state championship games.

For those 8 teams that have appeared in ONE state championship game (SCC, Greenway, BSM, Lourdes, Red Wing, Alex, Monticello, and Simley) only one of them was there the year before AND after (that being Rochester Lourdes appearing in the '00, '01 and '02 tournaments). 37% of them (Red Wing, Alex, and Simley) weren't there the year before OR after their finals appearance.

BSM and Monticello both returned to the tournament the year after they appeared in the finals, but weren't there the previous year.

It's pretty safe to say SCC will return this year and Greenway will not, which would put SCC in the grouping with BSM and Monticello, and Grenway with the 3 teams who weren't there the year before OR after their finals appearance.

7TIMECHAMPS
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:58 pm

Re: A teams playing AA at youth levels

Post by 7TIMECHAMPS » Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:39 pm

rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:14 pm
7TIMECHAMPS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 pm
rainier2 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:57 pm


Not all AA teams have the same resources, yet they were all put in AA. How many discrimination lawsuits have you seen over it? Has Robbinsdale Armstrong or Coon Rapids filed suit because they don't have the resources of Wayzata or EP?

When they first made the AA/A split, how thrilled were the teams just above the cutoff? Putting all city teams in AA, isn't arbitrary at all, it's keeping them in the larger class...because they are located in big cities!!!

Are you saying you don't like my idea?
You are right nobody does and you are right they do not have the same resources. You should be very well equipped to answer this question then. Why is there so much whining in class A and not AA? You’re basically arguing my point now.
There is no whining in AA because AA teams don't have a choice! A teams do, and when some of them have plenty of trophies and are perfectly capable of moving up and competing in AA, so much so that they play AA throughout youth, yet don't because they prefer the easy route, then forgive some of us for saying that is in violation of the spirit in which Class A was created.

Just as a side note I didn’t mean discriminatory in a legal way like you mention. I was saying you’re just picking and choosing favorites because you like schools not in metro areas more. If you had two schools with similar demographics (similar enrollment and financial situations) I don’t see how you can treat them differently because one is located closer to a population center.
How is this any different than the AA/A split the MSHSL already did? They put the largest 64 teams in AA. I'd call that treating teams differently. You've tried to make this point several times, but it's not working. They divided schools by the number of students within the school, so there's no reason they couldn't divide them by the number of students that live around the schools.

Say the Jake Hale group had put a run together with Minneapolis and won a title. Would it be fair to then make all the kids in subsequent classes play AA? I don’t care if it is for a short time even, you are screwing someone.
Who'd be getting screwed? The incoming bantams? All the returning players on that title team would have a title!! I think they could handle the promotion to AA. Maybe winning an A title boosts the program even more, so they are able to compete in AA on a regular basis. Why don't you consider this a possibility?


Lol sorry to say I don’t. It is maybe a nice thought to make up rules until you get to a spot that you like for your team (or teams) but not my favorite approach.
Well, as much as you dislike my idea, it's still more of a possibility than your idea of going back to one tournament, so do you have any other ideas?

I apologize I do have to get to work so I won’t be able to continue this discussion for a while. I realize that I’m likely not changing your mind and want you to know I’m not an SCC or Hermantown person either. I just feel that you oversimplify the solution and want to tweak it to your liking or benefit, even if this means the system is no more equitable than it was before. It will be screwing someone (mid sized city teams) but it’s not me so I don’t care!
You're right, you're not changing my mind. Here are the teams that have played in the Class A title game the last 20 years:
Hermantown (9)
Breck (5)
STA (5)
Warroad (4)
Duluth Marshall (3)
Totino-Grace (2)
EGF (2)
Orono (2)
SCC
Greenway
BSM
Rochester Lourdes
Red Wing
Alexandria
Monticello
Simley

33 out of a possible 40 spots were taken by teams located in metro areas. If you don't think taking big city teams out of Class A would make the A tourney more equitable, then I don't know what to tell you. :roll:
Equitable in who’s eyes? Do the above listed teams think your idea is equitable? Many of those schools are a small fraction of the big AA schools you are telling them they now have to compete with. You go tell EGF (who is apparently a “city” school) that they are basically the equivalent of EP and Edina so they have to move up to be more equitable to the likes of Hibbing. I have a feeling that by the time your “system” has done its work I’d just as soon stay home and watch the squirt b tournament.

Post Reply