I agree, but we had that with an 8-team tourney pre-classes/tiers. There must be more to the goal list.xk1 wrote:OK, the simple goal is to determine state champion. That means you have to win 6 games (or 7 if a playin). To achieve that goal it doesn't matter what round you lose in or how many top 10 teams are in 1 section.
Crazy Pills
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
I can see this possibility as a driving force, but this wasn't openly stated obvioulsy. What then were the reasons that the public should believe were behind the move to tiers/classes?unbelievable wrote:GHS,ghshockeyfan wrote:
I disagree however about there being a lack of a "goal" for the State Tourneys. Some thought had to have been put into Classes vs. Tiers, etc. So, there must be a goal. But, what is it?
I concur. I believe there is a goal and IMHO, it boils down to economics. For better or worse, the goal is REVENUE. More games, more venues, more tickets, therefore more revenue. In it's simplest form, the MSHSL boys hockey tournament is nothing more than a product. A product that just happens to have a higher demand than almost all other tourneys combined. How high? Shoot, during the one class era, Hollywood stars would come to watch the crown jewel of all HS events. Name one other HS event in the country that had movie stars showing up to see what the buzz was about. It is a money making machine, a diamond mine. With such a high demand, it's very easy to replicate (via classes/tiers) to meet that demand and maximize the revenue. I'm afraid the girls tourney just came along for the ride.
Now a lot of good has come out of the 2 class tournament, for all of the other HS sports that it helps fund. I truly believe that is a good thing. Did the tournament lose some prestige by going to 2 classes? Absolutely. It was no longer an exclusive club. And there lies the very real danger of taking things too far. Flood the market and overrun demand, and the value of your product will decline quickly. Not unlike the diamond market, the supply/demand ratio for this product must be watched carefully.
And, as to the girls along for the ride, I would agree - and gender equity (as far as venue) played a role in that too I assume.
-
unbelievable
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:53 pm
I believe the tiers/classes movement was proposed under the guise of more opportunity, for more schools.ghshockeyfan wrote: I can see this possibility as a driving force, but this wasn't openly stated obvioulsy. What then were the reasons that the public should believe were behind the move to tiers/classes?
And, as to the girls along for the ride, I would agree - and gender equity (as far as venue) played a role in that too I assume.
And agree with the gender equality role as well... as it keeps it out of a losing battle in court.
FWIW, I enjoyed the girls tournment games more in the smaller venues. To me it seemed more size appropriate, louder, more festive. Don't get me wrong, I love the X... when it's full of screaming fans.
Classes were created for fairness to smaller schools. No requirement exists for fairness to better teams although is must have been important in the earlier days of back-door sections.
As far as movie stars, they could get them now if they wanted to, there is always a star pushing some project.
Actually I think people are getting too carried away with this, we are acting like the section 6AA setup is a travesty when in fact this situation has existed from day 1 for all the tournaments.
As far as movie stars, they could get them now if they wanted to, there is always a star pushing some project.
Actually I think people are getting too carried away with this, we are acting like the section 6AA setup is a travesty when in fact this situation has existed from day 1 for all the tournaments.
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
Agreed x3.unbelievable wrote:I believe the tiers/classes movement was proposed under the guise of more opportunity, for more schools.ghshockeyfan wrote: I can see this possibility as a driving force, but this wasn't openly stated obvioulsy. What then were the reasons that the public should believe were behind the move to tiers/classes?
And, as to the girls along for the ride, I would agree - and gender equity (as far as venue) played a role in that too I assume.
And agree with the gender equality role as well... as it keeps it out of a losing battle in court.
FWIW, I enjoyed the girls tournment games more in the smaller venues. To me it seemed more size appropriate, louder, more festive. Don't get me wrong, I love the X... when it's full of screaming fans.
I didn't want the tourney to move to the X as I was worried about the atmosphere concerns. Yes, great facility, yes, there is an awe at first due to the surroundings alone, but after that wears off does it seem a little empty? I just don't feel that any $100 million building can compensate for the atmosphere of a packed venue, but that's just my personal feeling.
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
Agreed again x3xk1 wrote:Classes were created for fairness to smaller schools. No requirement exists for fairness to better teams although is must have been important in the earlier days of back-door sections.
As far as movie stars, they could get them now if they wanted to, there is always a star pushing some project.
Actually I think people are getting too carried away with this, we are acting like the section 6AA setup is a travesty when in fact this situation has existed from day 1 for all the tournaments.
Through the years the tourney has evolved as the sport/MSHSL has. Similarly, that is what leads me to question what the current goals are and how we may best address them. If the goal is to see the most of the best teams make it, then the current system isn't working. If the goal is to maintain geographic representation in each class - then the current system is fine.
Is there a desire to create a hybrid of these two - maintaining the N & S MN representation, while trying to get the best metro teams to state? Maybe not. But, if so, a better system may be possible.
Also, I have to say that I too agree that rivalry games, etc. are great - but is much of this largely dead now that our kids routinely travel all over? I don't know. Years ago it seemed to me that there was far more emphasis & pride in these sorts of things, but with all the talk of transfers, all the traveling the kids do year round in sports, etc. it just doesn't seem the same as how things were even maybe only 15-20-25 years ago...
With this thought I come back to my initial consideration. What's best for promoting the sport? Is it the best teams in teh state heading to one top tourney (AA seeded using a computer model) or is it having the geographic representaiton as is? Would more games be televised if it was more of the very best teams? Or would it be less due to a less diverse geographic representation possible under usch a metro-seeded setup?
GHS,
I think it is a valid question to ask what "should" be the goal. In the face of declining numbers perhaps packaging a more sale-able product should be looked at. ALthough many don't like the X, using it is part of that attempt, the build it and they will come method.
If you want the tournament to be more exciting you need to get the student body there, without them the venue will always be boring.
I think it is a valid question to ask what "should" be the goal. In the face of declining numbers perhaps packaging a more sale-able product should be looked at. ALthough many don't like the X, using it is part of that attempt, the build it and they will come method.
If you want the tournament to be more exciting you need to get the student body there, without them the venue will always be boring.
If you want to fill the building you have to sell the sport, TV does a horrible job of selling girls high school hockey, the MSHL does a bad job of promoting the sport and fans are responding to the type of product presented to them, My god I see th band and cheerleaders at the boys game and at the girls games some parrents don't even want to be there, if you make it exiting and make it a fun place to be the students will come
hockeygod wrote:If you want to fill the building you have to sell the sport, TV does a horrible job of selling girls high school hockey, the MSHL does a bad job of promoting the sport and fans are responding to the type of product presented to them, My god I see th band and cheerleaders at the boys game and at the girls games some parrents don't even want to be there, if you make it exiting and make it a fun place to be the students will come
I also wonder if they reduced the student price if more would come and watch. I have seen students not stay to watch because of the cost. At least for the JR High and lower. I know that is where most programs attempt to brake even.
But I also believe it has to do with kids from the community who know kids on the local HS team, But when kids are on the move from school to school you lose some of that.
I was actually refering more to the studens who are younger that do not drive.xk1 wrote:Has anyone polled students to see why they don't attend school sporting events anymore? I doubt if the $4 is a key factor, most are looking for an excuse to get the car and get away from the parents.
Not saying it's a bad idea, just questioning how much it would really matter.
Also how well do the schools sell (Advertise) the sports any more are there frequent pepfests?
-
pondhockey
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:27 pm
I agree that the $4 probably isn't a factor for most families. If I could get away with having my child entertained for an evening for the low cost of $4, plus maybe another buck or two for the concession stand, with the knowledge that they are doing a safe activity I'd think it was a bargain.xk1 wrote:Has anyone polled students to see why they don't attend school sporting events anymore? I doubt if the $4 is a key factor, most are looking for an excuse to get the car and get away from the parents.
Not saying it's a bad idea, just questioning how much it would really matter.
This thread has been pulled off the original topic a bit, but I wondering how many Girls High School hockey teams have an evening set aside to "honor" the U-10,12,14 teams, where they are brought out between periods to be recognized? That's at least 3 nights right there where you will get extra fans to attend. With the hopefully added benefit of showing them what fun it is to come to a high school game. I also remember a night when my boys were in youth hockey that the high school boys team signed autographs on the programs for any youth that came to the game. My boys thought that was the best thing ever at the time!
-
Twinnesota
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:48 pm
- Location: Faribault
I will preface this by saying that I have had four daughters play hockey and have enjoyed every minute watching them play.
A couple of previous posters have mentioned the boys game in this thread and have lamented the fact that the girls game and the state tourney have not caught the the public's eye. It is very simple: the girls game does not come close to the speed and excitement of the boy's game. The girl's game is interesting and exciting to the girl's fans and parents. And that really is the extent of it. The non-related hockey fan thinks that this type of hockey is boring; and I can understand this type of fan thinking this way. It doesn't bother me. I feel the same way about most girls HS basketball games.
The best way to get interest in the State Tourney is to make it more diffcult to attend; this obviously means moving it back to Ridder. Keep it there until demand for tickets mandates a move to a bigger venue. The move to the X was a big step backward for girls hockey.
Related to the section 6 situation; this could be solved by creating a "back-door" section. Many years ago there used to be a back-door section up north that allowed an additional team from the north to play in the state boys tourney. This was created because there were many more good teams up north as compared to the south part of the state.
But none of this will happen. The powers at be are not interested in an exciting atmosphere at State (move to X); are interested in diminishing the exclusiveness of making it to State (Expanding to 2 classes); they are interested in allowing more teams to enjoy making it to state - but doesn't allowing more teams into state diminish the specialness (prob. not a word) of making it to state?
I would be in favor of creating 8 super-sized sections made up of A & AA teams. Perhaps one or two smaller A teams might make it to State. Then you would have a possible David v Goliath match-up at State. This type of game the general public might be interested in watching. This scenario would make the season longer; but who cares, it's more hockey to enjoy.
Perhaps I would like this scenario because my daughter's team is done for the year. Now, what the heck are we going to do? Hop on the EP bandwagon, I suppose.
A couple of previous posters have mentioned the boys game in this thread and have lamented the fact that the girls game and the state tourney have not caught the the public's eye. It is very simple: the girls game does not come close to the speed and excitement of the boy's game. The girl's game is interesting and exciting to the girl's fans and parents. And that really is the extent of it. The non-related hockey fan thinks that this type of hockey is boring; and I can understand this type of fan thinking this way. It doesn't bother me. I feel the same way about most girls HS basketball games.
The best way to get interest in the State Tourney is to make it more diffcult to attend; this obviously means moving it back to Ridder. Keep it there until demand for tickets mandates a move to a bigger venue. The move to the X was a big step backward for girls hockey.
Related to the section 6 situation; this could be solved by creating a "back-door" section. Many years ago there used to be a back-door section up north that allowed an additional team from the north to play in the state boys tourney. This was created because there were many more good teams up north as compared to the south part of the state.
But none of this will happen. The powers at be are not interested in an exciting atmosphere at State (move to X); are interested in diminishing the exclusiveness of making it to State (Expanding to 2 classes); they are interested in allowing more teams to enjoy making it to state - but doesn't allowing more teams into state diminish the specialness (prob. not a word) of making it to state?
I would be in favor of creating 8 super-sized sections made up of A & AA teams. Perhaps one or two smaller A teams might make it to State. Then you would have a possible David v Goliath match-up at State. This type of game the general public might be interested in watching. This scenario would make the season longer; but who cares, it's more hockey to enjoy.
Perhaps I would like this scenario because my daughter's team is done for the year. Now, what the heck are we going to do? Hop on the EP bandwagon, I suppose.
I am sorry Gopher, but Hopkins would lose games to 8AA and 8A teams.
During the season, Bemidji would have trouble beating EP (so does everyone). Edina and Benilde are good, too. But Bemidji would play with them.
Wayzata and Hopkins are decent teams but NOT as good as Bemidji.
And bottom line still is that Bemidji still has a chance to beat EP.
That is what the state tourney is all about.
And, to be honest, my friend Tim stated it would make a great championship game (he wishes he had them on the regular season schedule).
You need to be a little more open-minded and get out of the 494 ring sometime.
Enjoy the 6AA sections and state tourney.
During the season, Bemidji would have trouble beating EP (so does everyone). Edina and Benilde are good, too. But Bemidji would play with them.
Wayzata and Hopkins are decent teams but NOT as good as Bemidji.
And bottom line still is that Bemidji still has a chance to beat EP.
That is what the state tourney is all about.
And, to be honest, my friend Tim stated it would make a great championship game (he wishes he had them on the regular season schedule).
You need to be a little more open-minded and get out of the 494 ring sometime.
Enjoy the 6AA sections and state tourney.