District 6 Bantam A

Puckhead2 · Post by **Puckhead2** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:19 am

FREDFLINTSTONE wrote:Pondy,

Do you (or anyone) know what the shots were in the Edina and Jefferson game? If Jefferson outplayed them for 2-1/3 periods, Jefferson should have out shot Edina by a good margin.

Jefferson out-shot Edina by a few shots, maybe something like 32-26. Jefferson had quite a few more good chances though it seemed, with most of Edina's shots being lower quality. It was a very good game, Jefferson did keep the pressure on the Hornets for most of the 2nd and 3rd periods though and had a couple solid chances to win it during the last minute of regulation.

Doglover · Post by **Doglover** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:29 am

Great point Falcon. I think they should look at this rule. After one loss teams should play it out to see who goes to regions and who goes home.

FREDFLINTSTONE · Post by **FREDFLINTSTONE** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:38 am

I like the tie rule, higher seed moves on. Coming into the tournament, the higher seed has proved what they can do by having a higher seed. If the lower seed wants to advance, they have too beat the higher seed, and if they can't beat the higher seed in 3 periods, and 3 overtimes, the winner is the team that has played better over the course of the year.

gongshow006 · Post by **gongshow006** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:18 am

so what happens to the loser of the burnsville edina game 3rd seed to regions or....

RFFalcon22 · Post by **RFFalcon22** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:32 am

If they truly were the higher seed they shouldn't have lost in the first place. If higher seeds are going to get the benefit of the doubt what's the point if have a play-off in the first place; just have the top three seeds advance to regions and send everyone else home.

FREDFLINTSTONE · Post by **FREDFLINTSTONE** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:49 am

I'm all for scrappin the district tournament, but it does give certain teams a chance. If the district tournament was scrapped, Jefferson, Apple Valley, and Minnetonka would have been done last week. It gave these teams one last chance. It gave that chance to Jefferson last night for 3 periods and 3 ot's. Why should a team like Jefferson be rewarded for a mediocre year, and not getting it done in playoffs. If Jefferson was the better team it wouldn't have ended in a tie.

FREDFLINTSTONE · Post by **FREDFLINTSTONE** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:21 pm

Correction: the above should have been Apple Valley and not Jefferson, as the Apple Valley game used the higher seed rule.

RFFalcon22 · Post by **RFFalcon22** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:46 pm

Actually if the higher seed was in fact the better team the game shouldn't have ended in a tie.

FREDFLINTSTONE · Post by **FREDFLINTSTONE** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 2:25 pm

Well actually, if the higher seeded team is missing one of its top players because of a suspension, I can see a tie, and if the lower seeded team would have played better during the regular season and gotten a higher seed, they wouldn't be thinking of baseball and lacrosse right now.

RFFalcon22 · Post by **RFFalcon22** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:04 pm

That's why they call the play-offs a "new season," it gives every team an "equal" chance to keep playing. As for the suspension...that's just lack of discipline, but we all know where that comes from.

demongoed · Post by **demongoed** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:15 pm

I don't like the idea of scrapping the tournamet and letting the top 3 advance because of the effect the FPP points have on league standings. We all know that FPPs are not always related to skill. . .

FREDFLINTSTONE · Post by **FREDFLINTSTONE** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:35 pm

They call it a new season because people and coaches call it that. The disrict 6 rule book doesn't call it a new season. If it is viewed as a new season by you, why do you not a have a problem with the ranking system going into the tournament. If it was a new season, all teams should go in as the same seed. Bottom line is the lower seed has 3 periods and 3 ot's to prove they get to move on to the next round by winning. If they cannot "win", the team that has proven they can win over the length of a season gets to move on. I don't make the rules, I just like them.

Puckhead2 · Post by **Puckhead2** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:56 pm

Lets get serious fellas...All sports at all levels have playoffs (except Squirts or Mites) right? I can't come up with another sport at any level, weather it's pro, collegiate, high school or youth where one team is declared the loser because of a tie. In every single other sport's playoffs that I can think of, they have a way for the players to play until a winner is determined......to say that regular season results should determine who advances and who goes home during playoffs is ludicrus. Why even have playoffs then ? The #1 and #2 seeds are already handsomely rewarded (and rightfully so) with a bye in the first round.., all they need to do to advance currently is to tie. That, my friends, is a joke.

FREDFLINTSTONE · Post by **FREDFLINTSTONE** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:05 pm

Well actually, I would like to see the regular season champion get an automatic bid into the regionals (like it did 2 years ago)
Because other leagues (NBA, NHL, College, High School) don't know about the great playoff system that district 6 has. I can only wait until the NFL finds out about it. It will change sports as you know it.

pondyplayer93 · Post by **pondyplayer93** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:07 pm

i think there are a couple people that are confused here, edina never scored in overtime against applevalley, they did however score against jefferson

but i feel it is a bad rule, they should play until someone scores. in my opinion if they had done this, apple valley would have won the game cause they were out playing edina for the last period and the 3 overtimes

Puckhead2 · Post by **Puckhead2** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:10 pm

D6 playoffs are a blast though, weather it's A or B, Bantam or Peewee it's always great to watch and there usually is an upset or two. For all intents and purposes, the current system does provide the #1 seed a bye into regions, all they have to do is not lose their first game against either a #4 or WC team and they move on. Again, they have earned the right for something but holy cow.....

Doglover · Post by **Doglover** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:48 pm

Puckhead 2 you're the only one on here that makes sense and does not appear to be driven by self interest (#1 seeded Flintstone). I agree with everything you said. The rest of you should pay attention.

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:19 pm

Wow, some puzzling comments. How ties are decided is often pretty arbitrary. In the NHL a short overtime is played, with fewer skaters than normal, and a game goes to shootout. If you think only relatively meaningless NHL games go to shootout, you're wrong. An Olympics were decided by shootout. (Forsberg the hero.)

It wasn't like the game was declared a tie prematurely. The teams had played a regulation game. An overtime. Another overtime. And finally a third overtime. It sure seems like there was a process in place that did everything within reason to see a winner.

I don't think youth hockey players can just be left out forever until a goal is scored. When was that going to be? Would you have preferred they play two overtimes and go to shootout? I'm guessing they could do that and you'd still have people saying they don't think an important playoff game should end in shootout.

We're talking about something pretty rare. A hockey game tied after three periods that was still tied after three sudden-death sessions. How often has this come up?

foshodangles · Post by **foshodangles** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:53 am

Just to bring up the subject again who do you guys think would have won the AV vs Edina game if more time was given?

Doglover · Post by **Doglover** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:30 am

Stay on the topic foshodangles. No one knows who would've won because they didn't get to find out and no one cares who you think would've won - it doesn't matter. The question is whether it's fair for a higher seed to go on or if they should've played until one team won. I heard both teams played a great game. We're discussing the rule and whether it's fair. Sure it doesn't happen often, but I can't think of another sports venue that uses this rule. I don't love shoot outs but at least there's a winner. These are not puzzling comments - Clown - just a solid discussion which is missing from much of this board. Way too many threads with people taking shots at teams/communities - we're talking about 15 year old kids. Use the forum for good, solid discussion like it's meant to be. This is a good topic for discussion. Let's hear all the view points.

AverageHockeyJoe · Post by **AverageHockeyJoe** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:45 am

I'd rather go with the 3 OT periods, with 5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3, followed by a 3 man shootout, and then a sudden death shootout.....

Seems more decisive than the lame "higher seed goes".....

skatehardordie · Post by **skatehardordie** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:50 am

Who won Friday night?

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:25 pm

Doglover wrote: We're discussing the rule and whether it's fair. Sure it doesn't happen often, but I can't think of another sports venue that uses this rule. I don't love shoot outs but at least there's a winner. These are not puzzling comments - Clown - just a solid discussion which is missing from much of this board.

Dog, the puzzling part - for me - is where the tone implies a game was stopped early and they had the coaches arm wrestle. Isn't the "higher seed" pretty much a last resort?

I don't see a change being a problem at all. It could be changed to anything. "Fair" is a fuzzy concept for me. Life is neither fair nor unfair. Some people might think it is more fair to go to shootout while others might argue for the 3rd overtime option followed by the shoulder shrug you have.

You want ideas? I've got plenty.

* District champion automatically gets into Section, thus increasing the meaning of all those regular-season games.
* Keep eliminating players one-by-one like Dodgeball or Musical Chairs so it goes from 5-on-5 to 4-on-4 to 3-on-3 etc... If it is still tied after a couple minutes at 1-on-1 with a goaltender in each net the coaches will have the critical decision whether they go with just a netiminder or keep a skater. Who wouldn't want to watch this drama?
* Reserve a block of ice where there is nothing on the back end so you can keep playing overtime after overtime into the night even though kids have school the next day. (Hey, I didn't say they were all good ideas.)
* Leave it as is. Why shouldn't a higher-seeded team have a slight advantage in a playoff format? And this one is ever so slight. It only kicks in after a game has been played and three overtimes.
* Coin flip. Hey, the NFL uses it to break ties if the first 7 or 8 tiebreaks didn't work so it can't be all bad. After all, that's the most popular American pro team sport. Also, the NBA uses it for draft position when two teams have the same record.
* Rock-Paper-Scissors if you don't like the coin flip. Both ways seem more "fair" than having the coaches arm wrestle.

I think the easiest one to find support for is a shootout at some point, perhaps after just one overtime. With its use in NHL games it has surely increased acceptance. Any World Cup soccer fan can tell you it offers unmatched drama. I don't know if it meets your "fair" standard.

Good luck with changes. I don't think you can go wrong.

Funny how in you post you don't think I should feel that some comments were odd and then you proceed to tell FO SHO DANGLES that he needs to stay "on topic" by not speculating as to what would have happened had the kids just stayed on the ice and kept playing. I have no idea who would have won, or how much longer they would have played. Still, it seems relevant to a thread on District 6 Bantam A.

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:38 pm

Puckhead2 wrote:All sports at all levels have playoffs (except Squirts or Mites) right? I can't come up with another sport at any level, weather it's pro, collegiate, high school or youth where one team is declared the loser because of a tie.

A widely held misbelief. English soccer has a league season that awards its championship based on your finish in standings. An apples to apples comparison isn't easy, because top clubs also play somewhat simultaneously in European-wide leagues and there is also a separate tournament stuck inside the season that is played. It is not, however, a "playoff" that culminates after a "regular season". The two are independent.

Also, I don't need to point out that college football doesn't have a playoff for its highest level.

In America we accept trial by jury, but it isn't the only form justice can take. Similarly, there is a comfort level with playoffs here, so much so that even sports like golf and motorsports have adopted some form.

You can argue that playoffs are more fair than league standings, but it can never be proven. What is a better measure, how you are playing at the end of the year or how you've played throughout? There is no correct answer, just opinion.

Finally, something that I find odd is that while the PGA Tour has tried to create a playoff atmosphere with the FedEx Cup, they've done quite the opposite regarding how new players join the Tour.

The annual Qualifying Tournament ("Q-School") is a playoff-like event while play on its developmental Tour (now called Nationwide but also Nike, Buy.com, and Hogan Tour) is more like the regular season. Each year sees fewer spots granted for the Q-School attendees and more for the Nationwide.

The second part of your comment isn't that tricky. Sometimes teams can tie and it doesn't help their cause as much as another team. Edina's Pee Wees would have finished second to Eden Prairie with a tie so they pulled their goalie. Eden Praire was District champ with or without the tie. College football teams have won National Championships with a tie. Pat Dye is famous for his decision not to play for a win. Or infamous, depending how you see it.

I'd like to see the system changed, but I don't think it is critical. How often has this happened? It sure seems fair to advance based on a higher regular season finish to me.

foshodangles · Post by **foshodangles** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:58 pm

imagine the super bowl this year being tied 17 to 17 at end of regulation and they go into overtime and no one scores then the NFL says "the super bowl goes to New England because they were the better team in the regular season". Could you imagine how angry people would be?

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com