Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

The Latest 400 or so Topics

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

Odds of a season happening

Yes 100%
37
42%
50-50
34
39%
probably not
14
16%
no way
3
3%
 
Total votes: 88

goldy313
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by goldy313 » Sat May 30, 2020 1:28 am

Political or not.....we as a state are about to have an interdiction of federal troops, this has not happened since the Civil War. (This is Constitutional stuff here) Our state Government had better figure this out. High school sports are irrelevant, school is irrelevant. Hiding the National Guard in West St. Paul is not going to help. Conceding ground to 100 rioters against 600 police and NG is not a winning strategy.

Our Government and Director of Public Safety both just admitted they did not anticipate that appeasement would not appease a he rioters.
Last edited by goldy313 on Sat May 30, 2020 10:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

grindiangrad-80
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:00 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by grindiangrad-80 » Sat May 30, 2020 4:38 am

Minneapolis is burning itself to the ground.

U of M is severing some ties with Minneapolis Police Department. ( What could go wrong with that?)

Hockey isn’t even visible right now through the smoke and ash.

ClassAGuy
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:51 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ClassAGuy » Sat May 30, 2020 9:41 am

Going to try and move this thread back on track of the question above will there be hockey next winter. Sad events this week yes many of which we will grow from and learn and become stronger in the end. Again it is still the Month of May.

On June 15th the HS Summer Programs will begin.

I think we will see Youth Sports making progress in the phased approach moving forward.

I am more hopeful then ever we will have Hockey Next winter. I think MN Hockey at the Youth level will lead the way and help show the path to playing the game we love to watch and debate. They will lay a great foundation for the State High School League to build off of by November which I remind you is still FIVE months away.

Again no offense to Goldy or anyone else on here highlighting the sad events of the last week in the Great State we live in.

We are the State of Hockey and we will hopefully be playing the game we all love on here in the coming months!

goldy313
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by goldy313 » Sat May 30, 2020 10:38 am

Double post

goldy313
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by goldy313 » Sun May 31, 2020 12:47 am

The second largest teachers union, the AFT, just announced they will not go back to work without a vaccination. Is the MEA that far behind? Walz will not oppose the MEA.

goldy313
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by goldy313 » Sun May 31, 2020 12:53 am

Iowa starts baseball practice on Monday, Minnesota will not allow playing catch. Snapping a football is a misdemeanor. How will hockey proceed?

FWIW the second largest teachers union said they will not go back to work until there is a vaccination. Teachers just were paid to not work for 3 months....anyone really think they will agree to go back to work for the wage they bargained for? Or Walz will make them stick to their contracts? Nobody does.

ClassAGuy
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:51 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ClassAGuy » Sun May 31, 2020 6:38 am

We will see how this plays out yet.

June 1st is tomorrow you are making long-range predictions.

Teacher and students both expressed hardship and sadness about the long-distance learning. Many Teachers wanted to be with their students during that time. Many teachers worked very hard during the last 3 months. The statement that they got paid to not work for 3 months is not true.

Yes, Iowa is playing high school baseball this summer. We will get a good read on them how it goes. In MN you are allowed to play catch and you are allowed to snap a football as well another not true statement above. However, the restrictions of just 10 people are excessive but again its a start to more things coming. On June 15th our Summer Programs start here and I have been told by that time I have been told the feeling is in the youth sport meeting the regulations will be looser and baseball will be able to play games in this state by then. That is why the MSHSL waited 2 weeks to help coaches with better restrictions.

Not saying I will be right but I have a feeling things are gonna turn the corner.

Lets hope to see progress this summer.

Good points by Goldy but I think we don't know yet on many variables to make proclamations about what teachers and schools are gonna do in 3 months based on many reasons. I am skeptical on Fall sports but hoping but I know many will try their hardest to get things going.

jg2112
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:36 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by jg2112 » Sun May 31, 2020 11:37 am

It's pretty hard to square what's been going on around the country with some sort of proclamation that youth hockey should be limited to 2 pods of 10 skaters on the ice. Or that there should be any kind of non-social distancing restriction on in-person restaurant dining. I think any attempt to contain the virus in major metropolitan areas has been given up in the past week.

I am making no political statement on what has occurred this week. For this board, my concern is that outbreaks of COVID would cause harm to the 2020-21 winter hockey season.

I think all 2020-21 youth sports are now in much bigger trouble. At the same time virus counts are going up in Georgia, Minnesota, Texas, North Carolina, California, etc. we are adding in violent protests involving tens of thousands of people. News reports claiming people are driving multiple states to take part in these demonstrations. If true, these people protesting will go back to their home states or stay in-state, visit their families, relatives, grandparents.

We've been averaging about 20,000 new cases a day for 2 months. Conservatively, 1,000 people a day are dying from the virus. Now we have had 15-20 virus "superspreader" events the past 2 nights. I don't think things look good virus-wise at all. Late June going forward could be a big problem. That, of course, will play havoc with fall and winter sports.

Stang5280
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 1:12 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Stang5280 » Sun May 31, 2020 1:47 pm

ClassAGuy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 6:38 am
Teacher and students both expressed hardship and sadness about the long-distance learning. Many Teachers wanted to be with their students during that time. Many teachers worked very hard during the last 3 months. The statement that they got paid to not work for 3 months is not true.
I agree, that seems like an unwarranted low blow at teachers. I know that Goldy was frustrated with the poor implementation of distance learning in his district, but that was certainly not the case statewide. I know that my sister, a special ed teacher, worked extremely long hours to help students and parents this spring. She is fearful, and rightly so, of returning to the classroom this fall, particularly given the lack of progress in reducing spread of the virus in recent weeks. I’m sure that is a common sentiment among many educational professionals.

Wise Old Man
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 8:11 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Wise Old Man » Sun May 31, 2020 7:12 pm

Stang5280 wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 1:47 pm
ClassAGuy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 6:38 am
Teacher and students both expressed hardship and sadness about the long-distance learning. Many Teachers wanted to be with their students during that time. Many teachers worked very hard during the last 3 months. The statement that they got paid to not work for 3 months is not true.
I agree, that seems like an unwarranted low blow at teachers. I know that Goldy was frustrated with the poor implementation of distance learning in his district, but that was certainly not the case statewide. I know that my sister, a special ed teacher, worked extremely long hours to help students and parents this spring. She is fearful, and rightly so, of returning to the classroom this fall, particularly given the lack of progress in reducing spread of the virus in recent weeks. I’m sure that is a common sentiment among many educational professionals.
I have to a agree with ClassAGuy, Goldy's shot at teachers not having to do any work the last three months is just simply not true. I'm good friends with both an assistant principle and a guidance counselor at a local high school, along with having numerous close friends that are teachers in districts around the state including Roseau, the Range, Twin Cities, Duluth area, and Rochester. I've spoken with all of them at least once since we closed the schools and I promise you, almost every teacher has put in more hours per week doing distance learning than they did prior to it. Remember, most of these people had to learn how to structure and implement distance learning for the first time as well. I promise, it wasn't easy for the vast majority of them.

As for whether we'll have youth or high school hockey this fall; I'll repeat what I stated in a previous post. First, I have a vested interest as I'm a member of my local youth hockey association board. I've also served in numerous youth/adult athletics association leadership/board positions for the last 25 years. And, it's my opinion that recreational youth/adult sports leaders have never faced a challenge like this before. I've already stated what my high school assistant principle friend said recently when I asked him about next fall, in regards to both in class attendance or the possibility of fall/winter athletics and, his response was that it didn't look very good.

Remember, we live in a very litigious society. Over the last 20 years, this has forced administrators of all types and in all organizations involving kids (high school and below) to err on the conservative side of the "ledger" whenever the safety or health of participants/students is involved. And, the vast majority of us -- especially the volunteers at the youth levels --are going to rely on the best data/research/recommendations from state and national departments of health in how they decide which direction to go in relation to return-to-play decision making. The latest Covid research is showing that as many as 40% of those infected are asymptomatic carriers. And, the most recent research involving how Covid spreads shows it is probably being aerosolized (Science Magazine, May 27) to a point where it can linger in the air for up to hours at a time in an indoor environment. Versus the previous 6-8 minutes stated from previous research. The following are a number of excerpts the article. I've included a fair amount and I encourage all of you to read it. Lot's of very good info:

"However, a large proportion of the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appears to be occurring through airborne transmission of aerosols produced by asymptomatic individuals during breathing and speaking (1–3). Aerosols can accumulate, remain infectious in indoor air for hours, and be easily inhaled deep into the lungs. Humans produce respiratory droplets ranging from 0.1 to 1000 μm. A competition between droplet size, inertia, gravity, and evaporation determines how far emitted droplets and aerosols will travel in air (4, 5). Respiratory droplets will undergo gravitational settling faster than they evaporate, contaminating surfaces and leading to contact transmission. Smaller aerosols (≤5 μm) will evaporate faster than they can settle, are buoyant, and thus can be affected by air currents, which can transport them over longer distances. Thus, there are two major respiratory virus transmission pathways: contact (direct or indirect between people and with contaminated surfaces) and airborne inhalation."

"In addition to contributing to the extent of dispersal and mode of transmission, respiratory droplet size has been shown to affect the severity of disease. For example, influenza virus is more commonly contained in aerosols with sizes below 1 μm (submicron), which lead to more severe infection (4). In the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it is possible that submicron virus-containing aerosols are being transferred deep into the alveolar region of the lungs, where immune responses seem to be temporarily bypassed. SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to replicate three times faster than SARS-CoV-1 and thus can rapidly spread to the pharynx from which it can be shed before the innate immune response becomes activated and produces symptoms (6). By the time symptoms occur, the patient has transmitted the virus without knowing."

"Identifying infected individuals to curb SARS-CoV-2 transmission is more challenging compared to SARS and other respiratory viruses because infected individuals can be highly contagious for several days, peaking on or before symptoms occur (2, 7). These “silent shedders” could be critical drivers of the enhanced spread of SARS-CoV-2. In Wuhan, China, it has been estimated that undiagnosed cases of COVID-19 infection, who were presumably asymptomatic, were responsible for up to 79% of viral infections (3). Therefore, regular, widespread testing is essential to identify and isolate infected asymptomatic individuals."

"Airborne transmission was determined to play a role during the SARS outbreak in 2003 (1, 4). However, many countries have not yet acknowledged airborne transmission as a possible pathway for SARS-CoV-2 (1). Recent studies have shown that in addition to droplets, SARS-CoV-2 may also be transmitted through aerosols. A study in hospitals in Wuhan, China, found SARS-CoV-2 in aerosols further than 6 ft from patients with higher concentrations detected in more crowded areas (8). Estimates using an average sputum viral load for SARS-CoV-2 indicate that 1 min of loud speaking could generate >1000 virion-containing aerosols (9). Assuming viral titers for infected super-emitters (with 100-fold higher viral load than average) yields an increase to more than 100,000 virions in emitted droplets per minute of speaking."

"The World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for social distancing of 6 ft and hand washing to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 are based on studies of respiratory droplets carried out in the 1930s. These studies showed that large, ~100 μm droplets produced in coughs and sneezes quickly underwent gravitational settling (1). However, when these studies were conducted, the technology did not exist for detecting submicron aerosols. As a comparison, calculations predict that in still air, a 100-μm droplet will settle to the ground from 8 ft in 4.6 s whereas a 1-μm aerosol particle will take 12.4 hours (4). Measurements now show that intense coughs and sneezes that propel larger droplets more than 20 ft can also create thousands of aerosols that can travel even further (1). Increasing evidence for SARS-CoV-2 suggests the 6 ft WHO recommendation is likely not enough under many indoor conditions where aerosols can remain airborne for hours, accumulate over time, and follow air flows over distances further than 6 ft (5, 10)."

As an aside, as a fan of Michael Olsterholm, I've been surprised to hear him downplay the importance of wearing even surgical masks as a means of limiting spread. In doing so, he has pointed to studies done during the 1918 pandemic, as well as those in 1930's referenced above. However, after reading this, my opinion on mask use is "evolving" and I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with Michael. :shock: Here's a bit more from the article;

"In outdoor environments, numerous factors will determine the concentrations and distance traveled, and whether respiratory viruses remain infectious in aerosols. Breezes and winds often occur and can transport infectious droplets and aerosols long distances. Asymptomatic individuals who are speaking while exercising can release infectious aerosols that can be picked up by air streams (10). Viral concentrations will be more rapidly diluted outdoors, but few studies have been carried out on outdoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, SARS-CoV-2 can be inactivated by ultraviolet radiation in sunlight, and it is likely sensitive to ambient temperature and relative humidity, as well as the presence of atmospheric aerosols that occur in highly polluted areas. Viruses can attach to other particles such as dust and pollution, which can modify the aerodynamic characteristics and increase dispersion. Moreover, people living in areas with higher concentrations of air pollution have been shown to have higher severity of COVID-19 (11). Because respiratory viruses can remain airborne for prolonged periods before being inhaled by a potential host, studies are needed to characterize the factors leading to loss of infectivity over time in a variety of outdoor environments over a range of conditions."

"Given how little is known about the production and airborne behavior of infectious respiratory droplets, it is difficult to define a safe distance for social distancing. Assuming SARS-CoV-2 virions are contained in submicron aerosols, as is the case for influenza virus, a good comparison is exhaled cigarette smoke, which also contains submicron particles and will likely follow comparable flows and dilution patterns. The distance from a smoker at which one smells cigarette smoke indicates the distance in those surroundings at which one could inhale infectious aerosols. In an enclosed room with asymptomatic individuals, infectious aerosol concentrations can increase over time. Overall, the probability of becoming infected indoors will depend on the total amount of SARS-CoV-2 inhaled. Ultimately, the amount of ventilation, number of people, how long one visits an indoor facility, and activities that affect air flow will all modulate viral transmission pathways and exposure (10). For these reasons, it is important to wear properly fitted masks indoors even when 6 ft apart. Airborne transmission could account, in part, for the high secondary transmission rates to medical staff, as well as major outbreaks in nursing facilities. The minimum dose of SARS-CoV-2 that leads to infection is unknown, but airborne transmission through aerosols has been documented for other respiratory viruses including measles, SARS, and chickenpox (4)."

"Airborne spread from undiagnosed infections will continuously undermine the effectiveness of even the most vigorous testing, tracing, and social distancing programs. After evidence revealed that airborne transmission by asymptomatic individuals might be a key driver in the global spread of COVID-19, the WHO recommended universal use of face masks. Masks provide a critical barrier, reducing the number of infectious viruses in exhaled breath, especially of asymptomatic people and those with mild symptoms (12) (see the figure). Surgical mask material reduces the likelihood and severity of COVID-19 by substantially reducing airborne viral concentrations (13). Masks also protect uninfected individuals from SARS-CoV-2 aerosols (12, 13). Thus, it is particularly important to wear masks in locations with conditions that can accumulate high concentrations of viruses, such as health care settings, airplanes, restaurants, and other crowded places with reduced ventilation. The aerosol filtering efficiency of different materials, thicknesses, and layers used in properly fitted homemade masks was recently found to be similar to that of the medical masks that were tested (14). Thus, the option of universal masking is no longer held back by shortages."

"From epidemiological data, countries that have been most effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19 have implemented universal masking, including Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea. In the battle against COVID-19, Taiwan (population 24 million, first COVID-19 case 21 January 2020) did not implement a lockdown during the pandemic, yet maintained a low incidence of 441 cases and 7 deaths (as of 21 May 2020). By contrast, the state of New York (population ~20 million, first COVID case 1 March 2020), had a higher number of cases (353,000) and deaths (24,000). By quickly activating its epidemic response plan that was established after the SARS outbreak, the Taiwanese government enacted a set of proactive measures that successfully prevented the spread of SARS-CoV-2, including setting up a central epidemic command center in January, using technologies to detect and track infected patients and their close contacts, and perhaps most importantly, requesting people to wear masks in public places. The government also ensured the availability of medical masks by banning mask manufacturers from exporting them, implementing a system to ensure that every citizen could acquire masks at reasonable prices, and increasing the production of masks. In other countries, there have been widespread shortages of masks, resulting in most residents not having access to any form of medical mask (15). This striking difference in the availability and widespread adoption of wearing masks likely influenced the low number of COVID-19 cases."

Obviously, (and based on the information from this article -- which I admit could change in the next three months) if we really acknowledge the realities of how much virus is being expelled by an infectious player in the course of even a practice (let alone an actual game) AND, we multiply that by who knows how many others may be infected, it could result in a significant viral load hanging in the air from the middle of that practice or game til the end. At the professional level, they have the financial wherewithal to do the level of consistent testing required to be able to quickly and consistently identify infected individuals and ensure they quarantine themselves for the required time frame.

Unfortunately, there is no way that can be accomplished at the high school level. Add in to the equation that, at the moment, the state health department guidelines require anyone who has had close contact with any infected individual, has to quarantine for 14 days. Thus, what happens when a player tests positive? Even if you're adhering to strict social distancing in the locker room, every teammate will have met the definition of "close contact" thru practices and game play. Meaning, for a youth team, the whole team (including coaches, managers, and parents) should now go into quarantine for 14 days! And, since the high school JV and Varsity often practice together, both of those teams, their coaches, managers, and parents will should now go into quarantine for 14 days. For either case, they now are unable to play those 3 or 4 games they have scheduled over that time frame. Or, go to that tournament that next weekend. What about if either team played a game two to five days prior to the player testing positive? I'm pretty sure the health department would strongly recommend/require THAT team's players, coaches, managers, and parents to quarantine as well! Talk about playing havoc with scheduling... And how are players and coaches going to social distance on the bench? Or, the penalty bench when there's more than one player in there? What about puck battles along the boards, or battles in front of the net? What about gatherings after whistles? Do you realize how much spittle is accidentally exchanged in those trash talking fests? :mrgreen:

Next, if you really look at the recent document released by USA Hockey regarding return to participation, they don't even attempt to address the possibility of playing games. And, Hockey Canada's leadership is also being extremely conservative about any type of return to "normal" game play. Since Goldy brought up baseball, let's look at that sport in regards to the challenges of having even high school aged kids play it and maintain social distancing, as well as minimize potential community spread. First, how do the batter, catcher, and umpire social distance? I suppose we could have balls and strikes called from behind the pitcher, especially at the younger levels. Think about when the ball is hit into the infield. Although it's usually only three players (pitcher, SS, and 1st), as many as 4-6 players might touch the ball on a given ground ball play. Obviously, you'd require each player to have his own helmet and bat and water bottle. Is the organization going to provide all of the bats and helmets? Either way, it adds significant more cost to each player/parent -- probably $100 on the low end and as much as $250+ on the higher end. Now, let's see how well any coach/manager is able to prevent the amount of usual "grab-ass" going on in a youth baseball or softball dugout.

Finally, if you think we have an officiating shortage now, wait until you try to play any of these sports without a vaccine or proven therapeutic that literally keeps 99.999% of those infected from going to the ICU or put on a ventilator. Especially the baseball and softball umpires. The average age in most associations is usually 65+ and, most of those have preexisting conditions (in the very least being somewhat over-weight). But, even in hockey you'll have a few of those folks choose not to work. Think about the official whose proper position requires he stand just outside a blue line that's directly in front of a bench with players huffing and puffing after a shift, potentially expelling large amounts of virus right in the direction of said official. Believe me, I'm a pretty positive person and am willing to consider any reasonable changes or adjustments that would allow us to safely play this fall. However, as an administrator, I also have to consider and avoid the worst case scenario as well. Which, in this case, could lead directly to the significant illness of one or even a number of players (chances of death at that age are pretty minuscule) OR, even worse yet, the death of a coach, official, or family member of one or more players. That's why that no matter which way I look at this situation, it's very difficult to envision a path to allowing players to even practice as a team, let alone play games.

ThatMNHockeyGuy62
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:44 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ThatMNHockeyGuy62 » Sun May 31, 2020 9:11 pm

Wise Old Man why don’t we see how summer training in sports and hockey specifically go, along with the schools that have already been open for a month in Europe with so far zero known outbreaks within the schools, before we start making conjectures about our winter. I guess the purpose of the thread is to make guesses, but at this point, now that there are enough examples for us to start using, keeping an eye on those might be our best avenue in making educated guesses going forward.

goldy313
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by goldy313 » Sun May 31, 2020 11:54 pm

Wise Old Man, that may be longest post in the history of this bored or the old bored, a good post and a good read to say the least.

To clarify..... my frustration is not with the teachers, rather the teachers union. Education Minnesota will (in my opinion) decide when in school education starts. Gov. Tim Walz has advocated a One Minnesota policy, right or wrong, he has been steadfast in that. If Minneapolis is not in school neither will Medford and Montevideo. Oh, of my daughters 6 classes, she never had an assignment or test she had to turn in in 4 of them. There were videos she was to watch or reading assignments but no verification was needed. In our district you could not fail a class for the second semester, you were given a A or a pass. They did not want to hurt your GPA

Masks.....🤯, I have worked in ER’s and surgery for 25 years. If I work in an OR utilizing a laser I have to wear a specific mask because normal surgical masks do not filter out smoke particulates. Smoke is exponentially bigger than a virus. Surgical masks filter out more than cloth masks, cloth masks may filter out something. Bad breath may be the most important thing.

Maybe my experience is unusual, I can accept that. However I have heard the same from many people in other districts. There is some personal responsibility that is not the same from person to person. My neighbor is a teacher, a great person but she went to work 4 hours a week. The district put out the lessons for 2nd graders.

Also, my comment on not being able to snap, pass, or handoff a football came from a quote in the Star Tribune from the Elk River high school football coach who is about as a stand up guy as there is. It could be a school district rule but that is how I read the rules as well. Not only me but the powers that run the 7 on 7 games this summer I am supposed to work.

It is now June 1st I have zero faith football will be played in high schools this fall. I do think non contact sports have a chance. I do think the University of Minnesota will play football. I am sure the Vikings will play.

jg2112
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:36 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by jg2112 » Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:09 am

ThatMNHockeyGuy62 wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 9:11 pm
Wise Old Man why don’t we see how summer training in sports and hockey specifically go, along with the schools that have already been open for a month in Europe with so far zero known outbreaks within the schools, before we start making conjectures about our winter. I guess the purpose of the thread is to make guesses, but at this point, now that there are enough examples for us to start using, keeping an eye on those might be our best avenue in making educated guesses going forward.
In Europe, there is testing, tracing and isolation.

Here? Chaos. Doesn't matter what we're talking about anymore. The default is chaos. It's exhausting. I just want to watch my daughter skate.

Hunters1993
Posts: 310
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Hunters1993 » Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:52 pm

All this rioting and chaos. New report came out from autopsy. No structural damage or trauma to indicate inability to breath.

Check it out on WCCO!
How many c-chip games will it take Hawks?

nu2hockey
Posts: 640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by nu2hockey » Mon Jun 01, 2020 1:43 pm

Hunters1993 wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:52 pm
All this rioting and chaos. New report came out from autopsy. No structural damage or trauma to indicate inability to breath.

Check it out on WCCO!

To be clear, the preliminary autopsy report noted lack of evidence of physical asphyxiation,......but noted restraint, underlying health problems, and possible intoxicants in subject....

Not surprising that media and criminal/rioter/arsonist/looter/protester(s) are avoiding report....

I would say interesting times we now live in and find ourselves faced with,but, I don't find them interesting at all...stay safe everyone

elliott70
Posts: 13633
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by elliott70 » Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:50 pm

Family autopsy shows the opposite.

elliott70
Posts: 13633
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by elliott70 » Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:51 pm

More chaos.

elliott70
Posts: 13633
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by elliott70 » Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:52 pm

Moorhead officer definitely killed by a gun shot.

nu2hockey
Posts: 640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by nu2hockey » Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:14 pm

elliott70 wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:50 pm
Family autopsy shows the opposite.

Yeah,unfortunately, we don't have corroborating opinions about how to interpret the results,which ever way the results pointed..this is the least desirable result...

Didnt know about the Moorehead situation...crap..


Hey, on another subject, anyone know what is being done to the old field attached to Vadnais ...passed it today and saw construction

Wblhcky2424
Posts: 278
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:53 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Wblhcky2424 » Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:33 pm

nu2hockey wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:14 pm
elliott70 wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:50 pm
Family autopsy shows the opposite.

Yeah,unfortunately, we don't have corroborating opinions about how to interpret the results,which ever way the results pointed..this is the least desirable result...

Didnt know about the Moorehead situation...crap..


Hey, on another subject, anyone know what is being done to the old field attached to Vadnais ...passed it today and saw construction

They are making a new turf facility with a roof instead of a dome

Section 8 guy
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Section 8 guy » Tue Jun 02, 2020 5:02 am

Do you mean the Grand Forks officer Elliott? I don’t believe there has been an officer shot in Moorhead.

Also, how about if we drop all the hyperbole and drama. Good time for the 24 hour rule. Don’t blow your credibility on the board. Calm down. It will be fine.

elliott70
Posts: 13633
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by elliott70 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:23 am

Section 8 guy wrote:
Tue Jun 02, 2020 5:02 am
Do you mean the Grand Forks officer Elliott? I don’t believe there has been an officer shot in Moorhead.

Also, how about if we drop all the hyperbole and drama. Good time for the 24 hour rule. Don’t blow your credibility on the board. Calm down. It will be fine.
Yes grand forks

But 83 years ago a Moorhead officer was murdered

Duluthguy
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:30 pm

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by Duluthguy » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:46 pm

Things--at least as of this moment--seem to be trending in the right direction:

--the Governor is about to announcing the "opening" of more of the state as of June 10th (indoor restaurants, movie theaters, etc.--with limitations)
--Here in St. Louis County, we've had just one new COVID case in the last week
--According to the StarTribune, the U's president is recommending on-campus instruction this fall:

https://www.startribune.com/university- ... 571050202/

Still, it's a long way to September....and a long way to hockey season in November. But the signs are encouraging....as of today.

elliott70
Posts: 13633
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by elliott70 » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:20 pm

But in Beltrami county we have doubled in the last week

ThatMNHockeyGuy62
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:44 am

Re: Will there be high school hockey for 2020-2021?

Post by ThatMNHockeyGuy62 » Fri Jun 05, 2020 7:40 pm

Also Minnesota hockey announced they are having a fall tier 1 season. Obviously things can change and that decision isn’t tied to schools being in session, but that combined with the U of M info is encouraging.

When looking to what will happen in the fall/winter school and sports seasons, look less to case counts and more to public policy trends and the impacts of those said policies.

Locked