Minnesota Hockey Board Meeting Notes (A/AA)

YouthHockeyHub · Post by **YouthHockeyHub** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:36 pm

To learn more about decisions made and discussion from today's MH board meeting visit our site.

Very interesting discussions to say the least.

If you have questions, please comment/ask on our site and I will be more than happy to answer.

TS

http://youthhockeyhub.com/

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:28 am

They're passing through something that they have no idea of what it even is?
- Might base it on high school enrollment?

- If the option is up to associations then won't it be the same cast of characters that opt to play A now?
- Are they going to tell the Hermantowns, Warroads, Mahtomedis that they have to stay down and play A because "their" high school plays A?
- They have no idea what they're doing, but figure might as well do it going in blind?
- Should we let private schools have youth associations since youth Hockey has this definate tie with high school now?
- Is Minnesota Hockey saying that private schools do steal kids from the "High School's youth associations?"

The simple mindedness is stunning.

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:31 am

I'm having trouble following the reasoning too, mainly because I don't know (or can't tell) what problem they are trying to solve.

* are the strong associations tired of beating up on the lesser teams in their district?
* are the smaller associations tired of getting blasted by the teams from the mega-associations?
* is there another consideration I haven't considered?

In our state, a rough rule of thumb is 40% of your games are in league, 30% in tournaments, and 30% are friendlies. This means a team is in control of 60% of their schedule, and on the other 40% you have some say in what level you enter.

Isn't that pretty much true in Minnesota too?

Any clarity on the matter is appreciated. Bo's spot-on. It doesn't seem like there is enough agreement on the salient points to merit change. At this time.

YouthHockeyHub · Post by **YouthHockeyHub** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:27 pm

My spidey senses - just reading between the lines (no factual data or confirmed comments from my sources) - is that this new plan serves the big associations next tier player (instead of a B player, Johnny is an A player). Now a big association will have 30 A players playing A hockey (wearing "A" hoodies), no matter what. It also assures the smaller associations a fighting chance in region and state tourneys playing against the big association's 16-30 kids.

The only loser in this thing is a small minority, the average size associations with AA high school affiliations (Eastview, LVN, Jefferson, etc).

If what I heard yesterday by reading between the lines is going to happen, it will probably make for 4 pretty good State Tourneys. Being an opponent of the 2 class HS system, I truly hope true A associations (Hermantown, Warroad, Roseau, and EGF) opt up and go after the big boys.

Toomuchtoosoon · Post by **Toomuchtoosoon** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:42 pm

It has a lot to do with the imbalance at the B1 level and the number of blowouts at the hands of the mega associations. The megas could have 25 A level kids, but only spots for 15. The other A level kids get split on two or three B1 teams. Those B1 teams usually dominate. Smaller associations give up on having an A team and try to compete at B1. I think this will give more deserving kids a chance to develop at the right level, and allow the top kids to still compete against the best.

I think AA should be limited to less than 30 teams, and that the AA teams should not be forced to have an A team. I think the associations the go AA/A should be those that traditionally go with multiple B1 teams. They probably have the depth to handle it. EP could be an example of AA/B1 since they may not be able to have a competitive A team in D6, but the AA team is solid.

YouthHockeyHub · Post by **YouthHockeyHub** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:38 pm

Nice summary...this is what I believe the vision is by the board.

I think in order to hit 32+ AA MN Hockey will have to allow the mediums to play AA and B. That is based on a cursory count by Frederick and I a couple weeks ago.

Toomuchtoosoon · Post by **Toomuchtoosoon** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:54 pm

My guess is that there is only 5 or 6 associations that can go AA/A in a given year. D6 will be the most difficult district to do both. Edina may be the only one. Wayzata, Woodbury, ER, OMG, Rochester and Moorhead may be the other associations

YouthHockeyHub · Post by **YouthHockeyHub** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:19 pm

Add: Stillwater, WBL, and in the next couple years, Minneapolis (their Squirt and Mite numbers are swelling).

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:54 pm

So FL would be allowed AA/B ????

YouthHockeyHub · Post by **YouthHockeyHub** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:23 pm

That is still unknown, OG.

I can't see how they could force the mandatory AA/A without a major revolt from the proverbial middle class (LVS, LVN, Eastview, Jefferson, Burnsville, FL, Anoka, etc).

Stay tuned.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:55 pm

YouthHockeyHub wrote:That is still unknown, OG.

I can't see how they could force the mandatory AA/A without a major revolt from the proverbial middle class (LVS, LVN, Eastview, Jefferson, Burnsville, FL, Anoka, etc).

Stay tuned.

Probably trying to form an Elite core knowing that very few could go AA/A

BadgerBob82 · Post by **BadgerBob82** » Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:25 pm

If done by association size, AA-A should be easy to adminster. Winning records will get in the way of common sense from the sounds of things.