That sounds great but I think associations should have to petition up to the top level. Otherwise the new AA will just become the current A.
For example here is the mentality for my association: We are a AA school with a mediocre at best hockey program. The varsity coaches push the idea that if our kids don't learn to play at the level of the top teams in youth hockey we can't expect them to play at that level in high school. They say we need to take our lumps now and it will pay off in the future. I see associations like ours still opting up to the highest level and continuing to dilute the quality of play at both AA and A levels because what is now a B1 team will then become an A team.
To be honest though we do see reults; where we used to lose to the top teams by scores like 10-0, we now lose 7-1. So I guess that justifies our kids enduring all the loses in youth hockey.
I agree that playing at the proposed AA level would need to be managed or the current problems will continue. Playing at a AA level should not be solely up to the local association, or for that matter, a single person, such as a coach, or a single DD. That route will only ensure that decisions continue can be made inconsistently from district to district, or from year to year within the same district.
I also agree that some associations have a "take our lumps now" philosophy, but that could be addressed through inter-level play (e.g., 25% of games for a year played against a higher level), without dumping everyone into a single A category, regardless of ability or numbers.
So I guess that justifies our kids enduring all the loses in youth hockey.