98 Machine vs 98 Blades

Bruins · Post by **Bruins** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:47 pm

Anyone know the score from this game (4/15)

imaloserbaby · Post by **imaloserbaby** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:25 pm

Bruins wrote:Anyone know the score from this game (4/15)

Machine 3 and the Blades 2

Moontana · Post by **Moontana** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:08 am

0-2?

Bring Brian Back!

puckfan · Post by **puckfan** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:25 am

anybody with details on the game?

0-2?

Bring Brian Back!

Was there more success with him behind the bench? If I remember the Brick didn't go very well.

Moontana · Post by **Moontana** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:14 am

They are going to Prospects?

Can't imagine that will be a Cakewalk

"The Brick II" ?

westervillego19 · Post by **westervillego19** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:43 am

I saw the game. It was a good PeeWee hockey game. It was tied 1-1 and 2-2. Lots of scoring chances for both sides. Both teams passed the puck well (although I have seen both move it better). Great goaltending both ways. Both goalies stopped breakaways in the third period. Shots looked about even. Machine scores with 2:08 left to win, jammimg it in off of a scramble in front.

puckfan · Post by **puckfan** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:00 am

thanks for the info on the game, sounds like they carried over from last years Easton cup OT game

iwearmysunglassesatnight · Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:03 am

[quote="Moontana"]They are going to Prospects?

Can't imagine that will be a Cakewalk

"The Brick II" ?[/quote]

"They" are 10/11 years old, they seem to upset you.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:53 pm

Too bad the Machine and the Icemen won't be able to meet in the Meltdown.

ThePuckStopsHere · Post by **ThePuckStopsHere** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:17 pm

Moontana wrote:0-2?

Bring Brian Back!

Does anyone know what program Bellows is a part of now?

stupidiswhatstupiddoes · Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:28 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:Too bad the Machine and the Icemen won't be able to meet in the Meltdown.

Guess we can blame the Alliance for that one. Icemen website shows they are going to Chicago instead.

SmallTownBigStick · Post by **SmallTownBigStick** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:56 pm

ThePuckStopsHere wrote:
Moontana wrote:0-2?

Bring Brian Back!
Does anyone know what program Bellows is a part of now?

Edina Squirt A??

100percenteffort · Post by **100percenteffort** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:44 pm

puckfan wrote:thanks for the info on the game, sounds like they carried over from last years Easton cup OT game

Puckfan, I believe the Blades won the Easton
Cup, you are making it sound like the Machine won. Just wanted to verify.

puckfan · Post by **puckfan** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:05 pm

Puckfan, I believe the Blades won the Easton
Cup, you are making it sound like the Machine won. Just wanted to verify.

Not saying anything about who won; rather that they had another good game just like the one they played last fall that's all.

Hockeyguy_27 · Post by **Hockeyguy_27** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:00 am

stupidiswhatstupiddoes wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:Too bad the Machine and the Icemen won't be able to meet in the Meltdown.
Guess we can blame the Alliance for that one. Icemen website shows they are going to Chicago instead.

How pathetic for Showcase to try to create a monopoly like this and exclude good hockey teams from playing in their tournament. Isn't it supposed to be about the kids?

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:22 am

Hockeyguy_27 wrote:
stupidiswhatstupiddoes wrote:
InigoMontoya wrote:Too bad the Machine and the Icemen won't be able to meet in the Meltdown.
Guess we can blame the Alliance for that one. Icemen website shows they are going to Chicago instead.
How pathetic for Showcase to try to create a monopoly like this and exclude good hockey teams from playing in their tournament. Isn't it supposed to be about the kids?

What they are trying to do is open up the tournament to more out of town teams. If they allow any and all Metro teams, than it just becomes another metro tournament. Enough with the "supposed to be about the kids" cliche...I'm so sick of that phrase, it's way over-used.

Showcase IS a business and the point of a business is to make money. They aren't the only business around that makes money off youth athletics, that genie is out of the bottle and no amount of complaining will put it back in.

There are many other tournaments that metro area teams can choose from.

Hockeyguy_27 · Post by **Hockeyguy_27** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:36 am

muckandgrind wrote:
Hockeyguy_27 wrote:
stupidiswhatstupiddoes wrote: Guess we can blame the Alliance for that one. Icemen website shows they are going to Chicago instead.
How pathetic for Showcase to try to create a monopoly like this and exclude good hockey teams from playing in their tournament. Isn't it supposed to be about the kids?
What they are trying to do is open up the tournament to more out of town teams. If they allow any and all Metro teams, than it just becomes another metro tournament. Enough with the "supposed to be about the kids" cliche...I'm so sick of that phrase, it's way over-used.

Showcase IS a business and the point of a business is to make money. They aren't the only business around that makes money off youth athletics, that genie is out of the bottle and no amount of complaining will put it back in.

There are many other tournaments that metro area teams can choose from.

That is a bit disingenuous. Showcase is vindictively not allowing any teams which don't join its alliance to participate in their tournaments. The arguement that excluding the Machine and Icemen because they want to open it up to more out of town teams is not true.

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:28 am

Hockeyguy_27 wrote:
muckandgrind wrote:
Hockeyguy_27 wrote: How pathetic for Showcase to try to create a monopoly like this and exclude good hockey teams from playing in their tournament. Isn't it supposed to be about the kids?
What they are trying to do is open up the tournament to more out of town teams. If they allow any and all Metro teams, than it just becomes another metro tournament. Enough with the "supposed to be about the kids" cliche...I'm so sick of that phrase, it's way over-used.

Showcase IS a business and the point of a business is to make money. They aren't the only business around that makes money off youth athletics, that genie is out of the bottle and no amount of complaining will put it back in.

There are many other tournaments that metro area teams can choose from.
That is a bit disingenuous. Showcase is vindictively not allowing any teams which don't join its alliance to participate in their tournaments. The arguement that excluding the Machine and Icemen because they want to open it up to more out of town teams is not true.

Who's says they are excluding the Machine and Icemen? Have you even looked at the tournament brackets??

Hockeyguy_27 · Post by **Hockeyguy_27** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:04 pm

All I can say is remember what happened to Randolph and Mortimer when they tried to corner the frozen orange juice market.

Doglover · Post by **Doglover** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:54 am

Hockeyguy27 is right. This is going to backfire in a big way for TH and MM. The talk I've heard is exactlly what hockeyguy says and people are not buying the out of town teams argument. It's strictly about trying to limit access to local tournaments to force families to choose "Alliance" (read Showcase and MM) teams to play on so they don't lose all the talent to the more respected and flexible independent teams. The end result is they are watering down their tournaments and the out of town teams they covet so badly, will figure this out. Ultimately trying to monopolize youth summer hockey in MN is a bad idea but one that they have attempted to do for many years. Parents are smarter than they give them credit for.

And MG it IS about the kids - not the money, except to the ones trying to cash in on them...

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:52 am

Doglover wrote:Hockeyguy27 is right. This is going to backfire in a big way for TH and MM. The talk I've heard is exactlly what hockeyguy says and people are not buying the out of town teams argument. It's strictly about trying to limit access to local tournaments to force families to choose "Alliance" (read Showcase and MM) teams to play on so they don't lose all the talent to the more respected and flexible independent teams. The end result is they are watering down their tournaments and the out of town teams they covet so badly, will figure this out. Ultimately trying to monopolize youth summer hockey in MN is a bad idea but one that they have attempted to do for many years. Parents are smarter than they give them credit for.

And MG it IS about the kids - not the money, except to the ones trying to cash in on them...

I realize that, in principle, but I hate that saying because it's become an overused cliche that people use to win an argument. Personally, I don't know anyone (including MM and TH) who wouldn't disagree. Just because someone doesn't agree with you, or has a different perspective, doesn't mean that they don't feel the same way...that's IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS.

You can say they are trying to "corner the market" all you like, but it doesn't make it true. They are restricting access to metro teams to their tournaments, big deal, they ARE their tournaments, right? They are giving first dibs to the out of town teams and if space is available, than additional local teams can play in them. If that doesn't work for you, there are many other tournaments this summer to choose from. If you can't get into the Meltdown, register your team for one of a hundred other tournaments. Why get your undapants all in a bind over this?

hillbilly1 · Post by **hillbilly1** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:47 am

muckandgrind wrote:
Doglover wrote:Hockeyguy27 is right. This is going to backfire in a big way for TH and MM. The talk I've heard is exactlly what hockeyguy says and people are not buying the out of town teams argument. It's strictly about trying to limit access to local tournaments to force families to choose "Alliance" (read Showcase and MM) teams to play on so they don't lose all the talent to the more respected and flexible independent teams. The end result is they are watering down their tournaments and the out of town teams they covet so badly, will figure this out. Ultimately trying to monopolize youth summer hockey in MN is a bad idea but one that they have attempted to do for many years. Parents are smarter than they give them credit for.

And MG it IS about the kids - not the money, except to the ones trying to cash in on them...
I realize that, in principle, but I hate that saying because it's become an overused cliche that people use to win an argument. Personally, I don't know anyone (including MM and TH) who wouldn't disagree. Just because someone doesn't agree with you, or has a different perspective, doesn't mean that they don't feel the same way...that's IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS.

You can say they are trying to "corner the market" all you like, but it doesn't make it true. They are restricting access to metro teams to their tournaments, big deal, they ARE their tournaments, right? They are giving first dibs to the out of town teams and if space is available, than additional local teams can play in them. If that doesn't work for you, there are many other tournaments this summer to choose from. If you can't get into the Meltdown, register your team for one of a hundred other tournaments. Why get your undapants all in a bind over this?

Let me start by saying, I'm not for the "Alliance" but I also don't believe there will much negative impact to the "invite" level non- Alliance teams. They have all found other tournaments to play and in some cases had the opportunity to play in Alliance tournaments.
MG they are restricting the access to their tournament but adding to your point, these are Invite level tournaments- they are intended to be restrictive by definition.
Where I have a problem with the concept is that being part of an Alliance program automatically gets you an invite even if the team at a specific age group is not worthy. And conversely, being part of a non- alliance program, even if the team at a specific age group is capable and local, you most likely won't get the invite.

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:56 am

hillbilly1 wrote:
muckandgrind wrote:
Doglover wrote:Hockeyguy27 is right. This is going to backfire in a big way for TH and MM. The talk I've heard is exactlly what hockeyguy says and people are not buying the out of town teams argument. It's strictly about trying to limit access to local tournaments to force families to choose "Alliance" (read Showcase and MM) teams to play on so they don't lose all the talent to the more respected and flexible independent teams. The end result is they are watering down their tournaments and the out of town teams they covet so badly, will figure this out. Ultimately trying to monopolize youth summer hockey in MN is a bad idea but one that they have attempted to do for many years. Parents are smarter than they give them credit for.

And MG it IS about the kids - not the money, except to the ones trying to cash in on them...
I realize that, in principle, but I hate that saying because it's become an overused cliche that people use to win an argument. Personally, I don't know anyone (including MM and TH) who wouldn't disagree. Just because someone doesn't agree with you, or has a different perspective, doesn't mean that they don't feel the same way...that's IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS.

You can say they are trying to "corner the market" all you like, but it doesn't make it true. They are restricting access to metro teams to their tournaments, big deal, they ARE their tournaments, right? They are giving first dibs to the out of town teams and if space is available, than additional local teams can play in them. If that doesn't work for you, there are many other tournaments this summer to choose from. If you can't get into the Meltdown, register your team for one of a hundred other tournaments. Why get your undapants all in a bind over this?

Let me start by saying, I'm not for the "Alliance" but I also don't believe there will much negative impact to the "invite" level non- Alliance teams. They have all found other tournaments to play and in some cases had the opportunity to play in Alliance tournaments.
MG they are restricting the access to their tournament but adding to your point, these are Invite level tournaments- they are intended to be restrictive by definition.
Where I have a problem with the concept is that being part of an Alliance program automatically gets you an invite even if the team at a specific age group is not worthy. And conversely, being part of a non- alliance program, even if the team at a specific age group is capable and local, you most likely won't get the invite.

I suppose that having your own tournament gives you the authority to put your teams into your own tournament. I agree that, at some levels currently, there are more "worthy" metro area "invite" teams they could bring in. Although, I think that it's very possible that in a few years these so-called "Alliance" teams will be worthy and all this discussion will be moot.

Personally, I like what the Magicians and Icemen did ...instead of complaining about not getting into the Meltdown (although the Icemen are playing in it) or AAA Classic, they just formed their own tournaments.

hillbilly1 · Post by **hillbilly1** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:41 pm

I agree with on the Magicians and Icemen starting there own tournaments as being good for all. Although, the Magicians tournament was clearly an Open level tournament, they did have some Invite level teams participating.
Interestingly they are in somewhat of the same situation the mighty Alliance was set up to avoid.

Doglover · Post by **Doglover** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:00 pm

hillbilly - I don't think the Alliance is really all that mighty and they were definitely NOT set up to guarantee a quality level of hockey in the invite levels of their tournaments. There's no way to accomplish that by restricting the best local teams from participating unless they are willing to pay a per player membership fee. Don't be fooled.

Showcase historically filled a nice niche in summer hockey and fielded many fun AA/AAA teams. It appears they weren't satisfied with this niche and wanted to become more elite or competitive so they tried to use their size to reduce the attraction of joining non-showcase or MM teams by restricting access to the Meltdown. MG is right - it's their tournament and they can make any rules they want. I just don't want anyone to think that this is in the best interest of the kids in MN playing summer hockey. From what I've heard from those close to the situation, it's all about getting back at families that left showcase when they were invited to join more competitive teams, and about making money (per player fees). I just wish they had been happy with the wonderful niche they had carved out because they provided a much needed place for kids to become acclimated to summer hockey. It was well organized and well run. They still have great coaches and teams - dont' misunderstand. I just don't want people to believe the rhetoric or think that this will all somehow improve MN hockey. I can't think of even one reason this is an improvement to what we had with the possible exception that there will now be more local tournaments.

Now...How bout those 98 teams?

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com