MSHL 2 Class system

[DL44]

Here are some observations on the state of High School hockey since the decision to go to a Tier and then class system. The tier system failed because it was only based on record and not school size, so while there was small schools in it, you also had a school like Rosemount make it. Now the Class system, the MSHL divided the schools by enrollments. With the option of going up in class if your school chose to do so. Hill-Murray and Roseau opted up from the start and never chose to Play Class A. The intention of going to the 2 Class system has worked by getting smaller sized schools a chance to play at State level, it also built up non-traditional hockey schools into competitors. But the at the same time that towns like Red Wing, Mahtomedi, Little Falls, Litchfield, and Hermantown were able to compete small private schools like Breck, Blake, and BSM also had an opportunities that they never had before either. So while I would rather see the Class A tourney be made up of small schools from smaller communities, I can't fault the small private schools for taking advantage of their opportunity to compete at the State level that their enrollment allows.

I think that having Class A level has improved the Overall talent of hockey being played throughout the state. I just think that these mean-spirited attacks on private schools don't really do much for anybody. They are playing within the rules and to be honest the only reason that any body talks about them, is because the class system was adopted. In the years between 1975-1991 while private schools competed with public schools in the one class tourney, only Hill-Murray and Cretin(once) made the State Tournament. Hill-Murray won it twice, but since the 2 class system came about private schools have won 4 AA Titles and I think 8 or 9 A titles(not sure exactly).

I realize that the Private Vs Public is a big issue at the Class A level but l think it came about do to the rules put in place and not by the private schools trying to create their own way to build hockey powerhouses by getting a 2 class system. I would prefer a Sweet 16 Format that would mix the 2 Classes together that would get a fair distribution of small schools that could be competitive at the State Tourney Level.

[Red Ice]

Not very well known but Roseau was in class A for the 1st 5 years after the tier system.

[DL44]

Are you sure? They made the the AA tourney in 1998! Did they play Class A for 4 years and move up in 98'. I thought they played AA while Warroad played A and made the Tourney from 94'-97'.

[paulsonj72]

Are you sure? They made the the AA tourney in 1998! Did they play Class A for 4 years and move up in 98'. I thought they played AA while Warroad played A and made the Tourney from 94'-97'.

They were Class A and lost in the 8A finals to Warroad from 1995-97 and lost to to East Grand Forks in the 1994 8A semis

[HShockeywatcher]

I realize that the Private Vs Public is a big issue at the Class A level but l think it came about do to the rules put in place and not by the private schools trying to create their own way to build hockey powerhouses by getting a 2 class system. I would prefer a Sweet 16 Format that would mix the 2 Classes together that would get a fair distribution of small schools that could be competitive at the State Tourney Level.

The biggest observation I have made is that "the best state tournament in the nation" is the Class AA state hockey tournament, not the MSHSL State Hockey Tournament, which is really sad. I don't need to go into specifics, especially in hockey; smaller enrollment doesn't mean less talent. Taken further, the tournament you play in, shouldn't have anything to do with your overall ability. It doesn't in any other sport in the nation, it shouldn't in hockey.

We hear discussions all the time of how hockey is different from other sports, that small communities can compete with big ones more so than any other sport. Why then do we only hold the bigger enrollment tournament on such high regard? The idea that a Class A team running the table could be considered the best in state is thrown aside for two reasons usually; a) the teams they play aren't as good and b) the number of quality opponents they play on their road are not as many. I would contend that because of hockey's uniqueness, were all teams in the class they were assigned, many of these teams may have an equally difficult or possibly more difficult time in the Class A tournament. Imagine section 7 or 8, for example.

Private schools are an issue. Another unique part of hockey is that unlike most mainstream sports, it requires money. And usually a good deal of it. This is why, generally speaking, only schools in wealthy communities, schools in areas with hockey tradition, and private schools succeed. Private schools definitely have an unfair advantage, especially bigger ones. Should enrollment of students who for the most part are well off be counted the same as schools where that is not the case in a sport where economics plays a huge role?

I do not like what happens with co-ops. They are formed because their school cannot form a team, but yet their whole enrollment is used. If a small school is co-oping with a program that can sustain a team themselves, they should be in the class that school would be assigned to, otherwise, Class A, imo.

My idea:
I count 20 private schools. There are two classes. The top 10 by enrollment in AA and the bottom 10 in A. The next 54 largest schools in the state in AA, for 8 sections of 8 teams, the rest in Class A. There would be two very high quality tournaments every year. Imagine one championship followed by the other in front of two sell out crowds.

That was longer than I intended. Without name calling or turning anything nasty, what are thoughts on this?

[The51]

I realize that the Private Vs Public is a big issue at the Class A level but l think it came about do to the rules put in place and not by the private schools trying to create their own way to build hockey powerhouses by getting a 2 class system. I would prefer a Sweet 16 Format that would mix the 2 Classes together that would get a fair distribution of small schools that could be competitive at the State Tourney Level.

The biggest observation I have made is that "the best state tournament in the nation" is the Class AA state hockey tournament, not the MSHSL State Hockey Tournament, which is really sad. I don't need to go into specifics, especially in hockey; smaller enrollment doesn't mean less talent. Taken further, the tournament you play in, shouldn't have anything to do with your overall ability. It doesn't in any other sport in the nation, it shouldn't in hockey.

We hear discussions all the time of how hockey is different from other sports, that small communities can compete with big ones more so than any other sport. Why then do we only hold the bigger enrollment tournament on such high regard? The idea that a Class A team running the table could be considered the best in state is thrown aside for two reasons usually; a) the teams they play aren't as good and b) the number of quality opponents they play on their road are not as many. I would contend that because of hockey's uniqueness, were all teams in the class they were assigned, many of these teams may have an equally difficult or possibly more difficult time in the Class A tournament. Imagine section 7 or 8, for example.

Private schools are an issue. Another unique part of hockey is that unlike most mainstream sports, it requires money. And usually a good deal of it. This is why, generally speaking, only schools in wealthy communities, schools in areas with hockey tradition, and private schools succeed. Private schools definitely have an unfair advantage, especially bigger ones. Should enrollment of students who for the most part are well off be counted the same as schools where that is not the case in a sport where economics plays a huge role?

I do not like what happens with co-ops. They are formed because their school cannot form a team, but yet their whole enrollment is used. If a small school is co-oping with a program that can sustain a team themselves, they should be in the class that school would be assigned to, otherwise, Class A, imo.

My idea:
I count 20 private schools. There are two classes. The top 10 by enrollment in AA and the bottom 10 in A. The next 54 largest schools in the state in AA, for 8 sections of 8 teams, the rest in Class A. There would be two very high quality tournaments every year. Imagine one championship followed by the other in front of two sell out crowds.

That was longer than I intended. Without name calling or turning anything nasty, what are thoughts on this?

I like your idea a lot for the AA and A. My only question for you is would you keep the sections based on location, or since you have a perfect number of teams in AA (64) would you do an NCAA style tournament?

[HockeyMN1]

I realize that the Private Vs Public is a big issue at the Class A level but l think it came about do to the rules put in place and not by the private schools trying to create their own way to build hockey powerhouses by getting a 2 class system. I would prefer a Sweet 16 Format that would mix the 2 Classes together that would get a fair distribution of small schools that could be competitive at the State Tourney Level.

The biggest observation I have made is that "the best state tournament in the nation" is the Class AA state hockey tournament, not the MSHSL State Hockey Tournament, which is really sad. I don't need to go into specifics, especially in hockey; smaller enrollment doesn't mean less talent. Taken further, the tournament you play in, shouldn't have anything to do with your overall ability. It doesn't in any other sport in the nation, it shouldn't in hockey.

We hear discussions all the time of how hockey is different from other sports, that small communities can compete with big ones more so than any other sport. Why then do we only hold the bigger enrollment tournament on such high regard? The idea that a Class A team running the table could be considered the best in state is thrown aside for two reasons usually; a) the teams they play aren't as good and b) the number of quality opponents they play on their road are not as many. I would contend that because of hockey's uniqueness, were all teams in the class they were assigned, many of these teams may have an equally difficult or possibly more difficult time in the Class A tournament. Imagine section 7 or 8, for example.

Private schools are an issue. Another unique part of hockey is that unlike most mainstream sports, it requires money. And usually a good deal of it. This is why, generally speaking, only schools in wealthy communities, schools in areas with hockey tradition, and private schools succeed. Private schools definitely have an unfair advantage, especially bigger ones. Should enrollment of students who for the most part are well off be counted the same as schools where that is not the case in a sport where economics plays a huge role?

I do not like what happens with co-ops. They are formed because their school cannot form a team, but yet their whole enrollment is used. If a small school is co-oping with a program that can sustain a team themselves, they should be in the class that school would be assigned to, otherwise, Class A, imo.

My idea:
I count 20 private schools. There are two classes. The top 10 by enrollment in AA and the bottom 10 in A. The next 54 largest schools in the state in AA, for 8 sections of 8 teams, the rest in Class A. There would be two very high quality tournaments every year. Imagine one championship followed by the other in front of two sell out crowds.

That was longer than I intended. Without name calling or turning anything nasty, what are thoughts on this?

I like your idea a lot for the AA and A. My only question for you is would you keep the sections based on location, or since you have a perfect number of teams in AA (64) would you do an NCAA style tournament?

Wow, the real March Madness, I like it. Too bad none of this will ever happen MSHSL could do a lot to improve upon what is already in place.

[The51]

The biggest observation I have made is that "the best state tournament in the nation" is the Class AA state hockey tournament, not the MSHSL State Hockey Tournament, which is really sad. I don't need to go into specifics, especially in hockey; smaller enrollment doesn't mean less talent. Taken further, the tournament you play in, shouldn't have anything to do with your overall ability. It doesn't in any other sport in the nation, it shouldn't in hockey.

We hear discussions all the time of how hockey is different from other sports, that small communities can compete with big ones more so than any other sport. Why then do we only hold the bigger enrollment tournament on such high regard? The idea that a Class A team running the table could be considered the best in state is thrown aside for two reasons usually; a) the teams they play aren't as good and b) the number of quality opponents they play on their road are not as many. I would contend that because of hockey's uniqueness, were all teams in the class they were assigned, many of these teams may have an equally difficult or possibly more difficult time in the Class A tournament. Imagine section 7 or 8, for example.

Private schools are an issue. Another unique part of hockey is that unlike most mainstream sports, it requires money. And usually a good deal of it. This is why, generally speaking, only schools in wealthy communities, schools in areas with hockey tradition, and private schools succeed. Private schools definitely have an unfair advantage, especially bigger ones. Should enrollment of students who for the most part are well off be counted the same as schools where that is not the case in a sport where economics plays a huge role?

I do not like what happens with co-ops. They are formed because their school cannot form a team, but yet their whole enrollment is used. If a small school is co-oping with a program that can sustain a team themselves, they should be in the class that school would be assigned to, otherwise, Class A, imo.

My idea:
I count 20 private schools. There are two classes. The top 10 by enrollment in AA and the bottom 10 in A. The next 54 largest schools in the state in AA, for 8 sections of 8 teams, the rest in Class A. There would be two very high quality tournaments every year. Imagine one championship followed by the other in front of two sell out crowds.

That was longer than I intended. Without name calling or turning anything nasty, what are thoughts on this?

I like your idea a lot for the AA and A. My only question for you is would you keep the sections based on location, or since you have a perfect number of teams in AA (64) would you do an NCAA style tournament?

Wow, the real March Madness, I like it. Too bad none of this will ever happen MSHSL could do a lot to improve upon what is already in place.

Although you are probably 99.9% right, I personally think it would be really cool

[HShockeywatcher]

I like your idea a lot for the AA and A. My only question for you is would you keep the sections based on location, or since you have a perfect number of teams in AA (64) would you do an NCAA style tournament?

Wow, the real March Madness, I like it. Too bad none of this will ever happen MSHSL could do a lot to improve upon what is already in place.

Although you are probably 99.9% right, I personally think it would be really cool

I would stick with location. Everything the same as is now aside from how teams are put into their classes. We'd see the teams who have far fewer less privileged in the same class as big schools and teams who need to co-op to exist in the lower class. A true class system.

Sure, it may not happen. But why not?
People on here have said that each sport is looked at differently; anyone have any knowledge of different states that do/do not allow teams to change classes in systems based on enrollment?

[Doc Holliday]

So while I would rather see the Class A tourney be made up of small schools from smaller communities, I can't fault the small private schools for taking advantage of their opportunity to compete at the State level that their enrollment allows.

To me, personally, the issue isn't with them taking advantage of their opportunity, it's wanting to challenge themselves at the next level. Benilde is a good example: They won a few titles at A, and then took the next step and challenged themselves at the next level.

I don't begrudge Breck & St. Thomas Academy for starting & playing A....but they then won a few titles each, and they're still content. This is the point where they should say "we've built the program to a good level...now we're ready to take the next step."

[DL44]

So while I would rather see the Class A tourney be made up of small schools from smaller communities, I can't fault the small private schools for taking advantage of their opportunity to compete at the State level that their enrollment allows.

To me, personally, the issue isn't with them taking advantage of their opportunity, it's wanting to challenge themselves at the next level. Benilde is a good example: They won a few titles at A, and then took the next step and challenged themselves at the next level.

I don't begrudge Breck & St. Thomas Academy for starting & playing A....but they then won a few titles each, and they're still content. This is the point where they should say "we've built the program to a good level...now we're ready to take the next step."

I agree with you on challenging themselves, and I like the Benilde opted up.

[greybeard58]

Rather than 8 regions/sections we got to 6 then have the section runner up from sec.1,2,3 play to represent sec 4 then have sec 6,7,8 play to represent 5. This is bringing back the backdoor regions and would make for a more exciting state tournament and yes there is time to get the games in and also the team of each 3 groups with the best record would get the bye in this 2 game series.

[ozzie679]

Both classes put on an unusually good show this year.