8AA section seeding prediction

[CornerBar]

1. Moorhead
2. STMA
3. Brainerd
4. St. Cloud
5. Roseau
6. Bemidji
7. Buffalo
8. Rogers

Can't say I agree with these, but I don't get a say. I hope to see the voting to see where everybody voted.

I don't really see any issues, what would've you changed?

[7TIMECHAMPS]

1. Moorhead
2. STMA
3. Brainerd
4. St. Cloud
5. Roseau
6. Bemidji
7. Buffalo
8. Rogers

Can't say I agree with these, but I don't get a say. I hope to see the voting to see where everybody voted.

I don't really see any issues, what would've you changed?

Brainerd had a far better body of work both in the section and overall. The last two years STMA has received the benefit of playing fewer section games against top opponents. And don't give me the BS that all Brainerd had to do was beat them head to head like all the STMA fans said last year. Given that logic Roseau should have been seeded ahead of STMA. Also, teams in this section should look at scheduling easier opponents. At least I think Roseau should look into that. Why drive all over the place scheduling these difficult games when it ends up hurting you in section seedings.

[7TIMECHAMPS]

https://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/regions.asp?region=8AA

Scroll down until you see Hockey 8AA. Interesting that Moorhead pounds STMA in their only meeting and splits with Brainerd but gives STMA the nod.

[Green and White Fan]

Moorhead's vote was surprising. Roseau gave them 2 good games, outplaying them for alot of the game in Roseau yet they give STMA the nod and St. Cloud a higher rank. I agree about the tougher schedule using Pagestat2 rankings, St. Clouds opponents have an average ranking of 58, STMA an average of 51 and Roseau's an average of 38. I am not surprised the south half voted Roseau lower, but am surprised the north 3 did also. I feel Brainerd shouldn't have been judged on one game and dropped to #3 especially with a win over the #1 seed. The Rams shot themselves in the foot losing a one goal game at home to St. Cloud after beating STMA the night before. They win that one and everything would have been different. Jumping a bit ahead, Brainerd fans if all falls into place and you travel to STMA, you may want to start lining up soon for a seat as the rink holds about 350 people.

[March Madness]

It appears the Russians tapped into tators voting process....

[7TIMECHAMPS]

Moorhead's vote was surprising. Roseau gave them 2 good games, outplaying them for alot of the game in Roseau yet they give STMA the nod and St. Cloud a higher rank. I agree about the tougher schedule using Pagestat2 rankings, St. Clouds opponents have an average ranking of 58, STMA an average of 51 and Roseau's an average of 38. I am not surprised the south half voted Roseau lower, but am surprised the north 3 did also. I feel Brainerd shouldn't have been judged on one game and dropped to #3 especially with a win over the #1 seed. The Rams shot themselves in the foot losing a one goal game at home to St. Cloud after beating STMA the night before. They win that one and everything would have been different. Jumping a bit ahead, Brainerd fans if all falls into place and you travel to STMA, you may want to start lining up soon for a seat as the rink holds about 350 people.

http://www.minnhock.com/strength.htm

The pagestat page I am looking at has Roseau 21, STMA 46, and St Cloud 58. Am I missing something?

[CornerBar]

1. Moorhead
2. STMA
3. Brainerd
4. St. Cloud
5. Roseau
6. Bemidji
7. Buffalo
8. Rogers

Can't say I agree with these, but I don't get a say. I hope to see the voting to see where everybody voted.

I don't really see any issues, what would've you changed?

Brainerd had a far better body of work both in the section and overall. The last two years STMA has received the benefit of playing fewer section games against top opponents. And don't give me the BS that all Brainerd had to do was beat them head to head like all the STMA fans said last year. Given that logic Roseau should have been seeded ahead of STMA. Also, teams in this section should look at scheduling easier opponents. At least I think Roseau should look into that. Why drive all over the place scheduling these difficult games when it ends up hurting you in section seedings.

Okay I 100% agree with everything you said about STMA. I suppose I just assumed Green and White was going to complain about Roseau not getting the 4 seed over STC. STMA consistently gets seeded higher than they should be. I thought they were a 3/4 seed talent wise when I’ve seen them.

[Green and White Fan]

I am complaining about the 5 seed, but not just that! It seems coaches gave us a much bigger hit for a St. Cloud loss than a boost for an STMA win. I wasn't talking about the ranking of our schedule, but the average ranking of the teams each team plays.

[March Madness]

STMA's recipe for success.... avoid playing anyone good outside the section, play as few section games as possible, come up big in a winner take all game the night before seeding. Then sit back and laugh as oppposing teams try to fit in the used lumber shed that they call a hockey arena...well played.

[TheHockeyDJ]

8AA should go to back to back semi-finals at the Sanford Center instead of higher seed. Kinda lame for 8AA fans they have to choose one game instead of seeing both in the same building.

[backcheck9]

STMA's recipe for success.... avoid playing anyone good outside the section, play as few section games as possible, come up big in a winner take all game the night before seeding. Then sit back and laugh as oppposing teams try to fit in the used lumber shed that they call a hockey arena...well played.

You are incorrect. STMA does not avoid playing top competition out of the section. Normally when you play Burnsville, BSM, Prior Lake, Breck, Hermantown, and Maple Grove you can expect to be facing quality competition. This happened to be a year when all of these teams were down. Go ahead and argue they knew this when they scheduled them but I really doubt it. They also got their butts kicked by Edina, HF, and EP but at least they played them. The part of this where you can make your case is that they get the benefit of playing in the "Mississippi 8" conference. They get gimme games against North Branch, Chisago Lakes, SF, CI, and Monticello. However, these games carry no weight come seeding time! Buffalo and Rogers appear to be even worse than normal this year as well. (Although, I would not be surprised to see Buffalo upset STMA in the quarters. It's a rivalry game and Buffalo has a big coaching advantage!)
The AD at STMA needs to get them out of that conference in all sports as soon as possible! They have the biggest enrollment of all of those schools. They should be embarrassed if they don't win the conference every year! Also, they don't "avoid playing as few section games as possible". That's laughable. It's regionally/conference based....figure it out!
That's probably the first time STMA has "come up big" in any meaningful game in the last 4 years of having a competitive team when they beat Brainerd. The way I see this section, you have 1 quality team, 4 mediocre teams that could beat each other on a given day, and 3 weak teams. Your team lost out on a home game. So what....deal with it and quit whining!
At least it will be the last season of having to play STMA in the "lumber shed"!

[7TIMECHAMPS]

STMA's recipe for success.... avoid playing anyone good outside the section, play as few section games as possible, come up big in a winner take all game the night before seeding. Then sit back and laugh as oppposing teams try to fit in the used lumber shed that they call a hockey arena...well played.

You are incorrect. STMA does not avoid playing top competition out of the section. Normally when you play Burnsville, BSM, Prior Lake, Breck, Hermantown, and Maple Grove you can expect to be facing quality competition. This happened to be a year when all of these teams were down. Go ahead and argue they knew this when they scheduled them but I really doubt it. They also got their butts kicked by Edina, HF, and EP but at least they played them. The part of this where you can make your case is that they get the benefit of playing in the "Mississippi 8" conference. They get gimme games against North Branch, Chisago Lakes, SF, CI, and Monticello. However, these games carry no weight come seeding time! Buffalo and Rogers appear to be even worse than normal this year as well. (Although, I would not be surprised to see Buffalo upset STMA in the quarters. It's a rivalry game and Buffalo has a big coaching advantage!)
The AD at STMA needs to get them out of that conference in all sports as soon as possible! They have the biggest enrollment of all of those schools. They should be embarrassed if they don't win the conference every year! Also, they don't "avoid playing as few section games as possible". That's laughable. It's regionally/conference based....figure it out!
That's probably the first time STMA has "come up big" in any meaningful game in the last 4 years of having a competitive team when they beat Brainerd. The way I see this section, you have 1 quality team, 4 mediocre teams that could beat each other on a given day, and 3 weak teams. Your team lost out on a home game. So what....deal with it and quit whining!
At least it will be the last season of having to play STMA in the "lumber shed"!

I will disagree with you on a couple of points. First of all it is not mandatory to play all of the teams in your conference and it certainly isn’t mandatory that you play them twice. Moorhead is in the mariucci and didn’t play a game with Crookston, Warroad, or TRF and only one game with EGF. When prioritizing who to get on the schedule quality section opponents should take priority over low level conference opponents........One point that you made was that their section scheduling isn’t intentional. You may be correct that intent did not exist, however they certainly have benefitted from their section schedule regardless of intent. For example at the start of the year say you were given two choices of paths to the section 2 seed and they were as follows....

Option 1-You must
Split with Moorhead
Sweep Roseau
Sweep Bemidji
Go 1-0 vs St Cloud
Go 1-0 vs STMA
Go 1-0 vs Buffalo

Option 2-You must
Sweep Buffalo
Go 1-0 against Rogers(second game is after seeding)
Go 3-2 against Roseau, St. Cloud, Moorhead, Brainerd, and Bemidji

Option 1 is essentially what the coaches said Brainerd would have had to do to get 2 and option 2 is what STMA did to get the 2. Which do you choose? Most people would say option 2 because options allows 1 fewer losses while simultaneously playing fewer games against top teams. If the scheduling is the same next year I would say STMA has an advantage before the season even begins. Where you are possibly correct is that fault does not lie with the scheduler but more with how the coaches vote. We may have to ask Moorhead, Rogers, Buffalo, and St Cloud coaches what they saw in STMA that they didn’t see in Brainerd. (Side note the regional biases in this section are irritating).

An additional point here is that I would argue the wins against lower teams do in fact count for something because in most of the computerized rankings wins and goal differential are weighted higher than SOS. You can bet coaches are looking at these, especially with other sections using them(QRF is what I am thinking of)

My final point is this. Is STMA(or St. Cloud) really trying to get more difficult opponents?(most notably in section) And if they are how does Roseau who is 10 miles from the Canadian border and 130 miles away from the closest AA school end up with a significantly more difficult schedule than teams in the backyard of the metro? (Where everyone knows quality teams are all over the place). Roseau likely puts on by far the most miles in the section so people saying good section teams are out of their “region” or whatever gets no sympathy from me.

All of this said each team (Brainerd, STMA, St. Cloud and Roseau) will have the opportunity to prove they are the better team and should have been seeded higher in a short time. Should be fun to watch.

[backcheck9]

STMA's recipe for success.... avoid playing anyone good outside the section, play as few section games as possible, come up big in a winner take all game the night before seeding. Then sit back and laugh as oppposing teams try to fit in the used lumber shed that they call a hockey arena...well played.

You are incorrect. STMA does not avoid playing top competition out of the section. Normally when you play Burnsville, BSM, Prior Lake, Breck, Hermantown, and Maple Grove you can expect to be facing quality competition. This happened to be a year when all of these teams were down. Go ahead and argue they knew this when they scheduled them but I really doubt it. They also got their butts kicked by Edina, HF, and EP but at least they played them. The part of this where you can make your case is that they get the benefit of playing in the "Mississippi 8" conference. They get gimme games against North Branch, Chisago Lakes, SF, CI, and Monticello. However, these games carry no weight come seeding time! Buffalo and Rogers appear to be even worse than normal this year as well. (Although, I would not be surprised to see Buffalo upset STMA in the quarters. It's a rivalry game and Buffalo has a big coaching advantage!)
The AD at STMA needs to get them out of that conference in all sports as soon as possible! They have the biggest enrollment of all of those schools. They should be embarrassed if they don't win the conference every year! Also, they don't "avoid playing as few section games as possible". That's laughable. It's regionally/conference based....figure it out!
That's probably the first time STMA has "come up big" in any meaningful game in the last 4 years of having a competitive team when they beat Brainerd. The way I see this section, you have 1 quality team, 4 mediocre teams that could beat each other on a given day, and 3 weak teams. Your team lost out on a home game. So what....deal with it and quit whining!
At least it will be the last season of having to play STMA in the "lumber shed"!

I will disagree with you on a couple of points. First of all it is not mandatory to play all of the teams in your conference and it certainly isn’t mandatory that you play them twice. Moorhead is in the mariucci and didn’t play a game with Crookston, Warroad, or TRF and only one game with EGF. When prioritizing who to get on the schedule quality section opponents should take priority over low level conference opponents........One point that you made was that their section scheduling isn’t intentional. You may be correct that intent did not exist, however they certainly have benefitted from their section schedule regardless of intent. For example at the start of the year say you were given two choices of paths to the section 2 seed and they were as follows....

Option 1-You must
Split with Moorhead
Sweep Roseau
Sweep Bemidji
Go 1-0 vs St Cloud
Go 1-0 vs STMA
Go 1-0 vs Buffalo

Option 2-You must
Sweep Buffalo
Go 1-0 against Rogers(second game is after seeding)
Go 3-2 against Roseau, St. Cloud, Moorhead, Brainerd, and Bemidji

Option 1 is essentially what the coaches said Brainerd would have had to do to get 2 and option 2 is what STMA did to get the 2. Which do you choose? Most people would say option 2 because options allows 1 fewer losses while simultaneously playing fewer games against top teams. If the scheduling is the same next year I would say STMA has an advantage before the season even begins. Where you are possibly correct is that fault does not lie with the scheduler but more with how the coaches vote. We may have to ask Moorhead, Rogers, Buffalo, and St Cloud coaches what they saw in STMA that they didn’t see in Brainerd. (Side note the regional biases in this section are irritating).

An additional point here is that I would argue the wins against lower teams do in fact count for something because in most of the computerized rankings wins and goal differential are weighted higher than SOS. You can bet coaches are looking at these, especially with other sections using them(QRF is what I am thinking of)

My final point is this. Is STMA(or St. Cloud) really trying to get more difficult opponents?(most notably in section) And if they are how does Roseau who is 10 miles from the Canadian border and 130 miles away from the closest AA school end up with a significantly more difficult schedule than teams in the backyard of the metro? (Where everyone knows quality teams are all over the place). Roseau likely puts on by far the most miles in the section so people saying good section teams are out of their “region” or whatever gets no sympathy from me.

All of this said each team (Brainerd, STMA, St. Cloud and Roseau) will have the opportunity to prove they are the better team and should have been seeded higher in a short time. Should be fun to watch.

I understand your point but let let me ask you this, do you know if the coaches from Moorhead, Brainerd, Roseau, and Bemidji have or are pushing hard for an annual home and home series rather than 1 game that changes location every year? If you know this for sure, than your point would be much more valid IMO. Otherwise, if those teams are OK with just playing once a year, what are we debating? This will continue to be an issue every year. I get that they benefit from that weak M8. I'd love to know who requires them to play those conference games? I have my thoughts but I don't know for sure. Yes STMA should schedule many more difficult teams out of section and get rid of M8 opponents except Buffalo and Rogers.
I really don't believe it's about avoiding or being afraid to step up and play everyone twice in section though.

[7TIMECHAMPS]

I am not sure where the fault lies as far as getting a home and home with other top teams in the section. (I would tend to say one team and not 4 but I have no idea) But really I don't even care if they just want to play other section teams once. Mostly I have a problem with how some of the coaches vote. Against the other top 5 teams(the teams I consider having a chance to win a section game) Brainerd is 6-2 and STMA is 2-2. If they just play once then essentially the count for their section record should be doubled. Meaning they got swept by Roseau and Moorhead and had four loses. Would I love to see a larger sample size for them? Sure, but if that can't happen I would like to see coaches think of it in this way. The only logical explanation that I can come up with as to why coaches would vote STMA over Brainerd is that they see both teams with two section loses and STMA won the head to head. The obvious(to me anyway) differentiator should have been number of games played against other top teams. Like I eluded to in an earlier post I would love to hear the logic behind some of the coaches votes but obviously that isn't going to happen. And the only other explanation that I can come up with is north/south bias. It has always seemed like the metro area teams give the edge to other metro area teams(Buffalo,Rogers,STMA, St Cloud) and I am guessing they would argue that the northern teams do the same(Roseau, Bemidji, Brainerd). This year that is how the vote went if I remember correctly and Moorhead broke the tie with the vote for STMA(again this is off the top of my head), which was puzzling because Moorhead saw them both within a week in January and smoked one and got smoked by the other. I am assuming you know which is which. Was Ammerman trying to give STMA the edge because he would rather see them in the final than Brainerd? I don't know. And either way you have to win the games to move on no matter who has home ice advantage so seeding only does so much.

[warriors41]

I am not sure where the fault lies as far as getting a home and home with other top teams in the section. (I would tend to say one team and not 4 but I have no idea) But really I don't even care if they just want to play other section teams once. Mostly I have a problem with how some of the coaches vote. Against the other top 5 teams(the teams I consider having a chance to win a section game) Brainerd is 6-2 and STMA is 2-2. If they just play once then essentially the count for their section record should be doubled. Meaning they got swept by Roseau and Moorhead and had four loses. Would I love to see a larger sample size for them? Sure, but if that can't happen I would like to see coaches think of it in this way. The only logical explanation that I can come up with as to why coaches would vote STMA over Brainerd is that they see both teams with two section loses and STMA won the head to head. The obvious(to me anyway) differentiator should have been number of games played against other top teams. Like I eluded to in an earlier post I would love to hear the logic behind some of the coaches votes but obviously that isn't going to happen. And the only other explanation that I can come up with is north/south bias. It has always seemed like the metro area teams give the edge to other metro area teams(Buffalo,Rogers,STMA, St Cloud) and I am guessing they would argue that the northern teams do the same(Roseau, Bemidji, Brainerd). This year that is how the vote went if I remember correctly and Moorhead broke the tie with the vote for STMA(again this is off the top of my head), which was puzzling because Moorhead saw them both within a week in January and smoked one and got smoked by the other. I am assuming you know which is which. Was Ammerman trying to give STMA the edge because he would rather see them in the final than Brainerd? I don't know. And either way you have to win the games to move on no matter who has home ice advantage so seeding only does so much.

You might be disappointed. Logic doesn’t always play a role in these votes. I know for a fact some teams have changed their votes purely for political reasons to get back at other coaches in the section.

[grindiangrad-80]

Even though some combination of Edina/East/Minnetonka/St. Thomas is a pretty likely final in March by most - My gut says Moorhead this year.

[alcloseshaver]

Time for the QRF fellas...

[Section 8 guy]

Seems kind of odd to take issue with someone seeding the teams in the exact order the overall final results had them seeded in..........doesn't it?

[7TIMECHAMPS]

I am assuming you are referring to my post about Ammerman. Earlier in the post I commented that I don't like how year after year it appears that the metro or southern teams in the section really seem to stick together come seeding time(Buffalo, Rogers, St Cloud, STMA). I then pointed out Moorhead's vote specifically because of what I thought was very unusual logic(again saw both Brainerd and STMA within a week in January with a 5-0 loss to Brainerd and 5-0 win over STMA). So not just an issue with Moorhead's vote but also Rogers, St Cloud, and Buffalo. But as to Moorhead's vote maybe he doesn't factor in how a team looks against him because if he did he would have had to seed Roseau over St Cloud. Roseau took Moorhead down to the wire in the second matchup with shots about even. St Cloud hardly got it out of their zone the second two periods against Moorhead mustering 2 shots in 2 periods for a game total of 9. I don't think it is outrageous that Roseau got the 5 though. Could it have went another way? Yes, but not outrageous ni my opinion. Now if somebody can make a logical case for STMA over Brainerd I am all ears. Especially with Brainerd getting another quality win last night outshooting St Cloud 2-1 in a 4-0 victory.

[Green and White Fan]

So Section 8 guy, using your logic, 8AA hit a homerun with their seedings because they matched the final rankings? If that is the case then section 8A better have a redo as this should be the section 8A seedings:

Section 8A Standings

1. EGF
2. Crookston
3. Warroad
4. TRF
5. DL
6. LOW

[Doc Holliday]

Total outside guy from the city question: Did they possibly just say "2 & 3 are pretty close" so they set it up with travel & location in mind? Instead of sending Buffalo up to Brainerd & Bemidji down to STMA, let's send them to the closer opponent?

Not that travel should ever be a determining factor for playoff seedings, but is that at all possible? I'll hang up & listen.....

[pipersniper12]

Time for the QRF fellas...

8AA seeds are all in sync with how QRF would have seeded this section.

[March Madness]

Didn't Roseau beat STMA in a game that counts double as far as section play goes?

[7TIMECHAMPS]

They did but as I eluded to in an earlier post it doesn't seem like the coaches treat the results of one game in this way. Meaning if they only play once it is worth double value.........On that weekend Roseau beat STMA Friday and then lost to St Cloud Saturday. Looking back Roseau would trade the Friday win(STMA) for a Saturday win against St Cloud as this would likely have given them a home game. I think Green and White mentioned earlier that Roseau got punished more for a loss to St Cloud than rewarded for the STMA win that weekend. That is what he meant. If Roseau had beaten St Cloud that day seedings would have gotten very interesting and likely very different.

[mulefarm]

I WOULD SAY THE COACHES WERE RIGHT ON!