HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Posted: **Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:18 pm**

thestickler07 wrote:
rainier wrote:How is it not the principle?
Because if you remove the word plenty from my post your point is still refuted. You are moving the goalposts by going from "don't compete at all" to "don't compete enough consistently". One is provable (I have done so), one is your deeply held opinion which I'm guessing isn't going to change.
(First of all, I can't find anywhere in this discussion where I said small schools "don't compete at all". What I can find is where I listed statistics such as metro privates winning 18 of 25 total in girls and boys Class A and 11 of 14 in boys. I'm not sure how listing numbers that actually show small schools winning a couple titles would back up a claim of "don't compete at all". And you are conveniently avoiding the real issue here, which is that it is true that small schools "don't compete enough consistently", something made rather obvious by the Class A title statistics I provided. Is it really a deeply held opinion that small school "don't compete enough consistently" when metro privates have won 11 of the last 14 Class A titles? Are you saying 3 out of 14 is competing consistently enough? I know you have an aversion to applying actual judgement to these types of things, but I would imagine very few people would consider 3 titles in 14 years competing consistently. But if you do, then hey, go for it.)

rainier wrote:You're good.
Thanks. You couldn't have expected me to avoid highlighting that you went against your own point before ending that sentence though right?

(Yes, you caught me in an inconsistency, a very slight one that has little to do with our overall discussion, but an inconsistency nonetheless. But I also see you neglected to say anything about your huge error of admitting that STA has a .660 winning percentage against AA teams. I didn't know this and now it is even more insane that STA didn't move up sooner. You have got yourself so turned around that you don't even know when you are serving me up argument winning info on a silver platter. You couldn't have expected me to avoid highlighting that again, right? Perhaps at some point you can just take over for me and write my entire side of the argument. Nice work, Perry Mason. I hope you're not a lawyer, because if your client had a speeding ticket they'd end up in the electric chair.)

rainier wrote:But instead of being forced to be wrong, you weasel out by pulling a third candidate out of thin air.
I take it you agree with me that coaching means getting more out of a team than a sum of its parts? Glad we finally have closure on what it means to be a good coach.
(Okay, we agree on what a good coach is. Now let's look at some more actual historical facts to see how great those guys patrolling the bench at STA have been at "getting more out of a team than the sum of its parts. It would appear that in 2009 as a #1 seed and with a PageStat rating of 11, the STA coaches got so much out of their troops that they lost to the #3 seed 4-1! And this #3 seed had a PageStat rating 18 spots lower than STA! Wow, what a freak accident right? Not quite, because it appears that it happened again the very next season, when #1 STA with a PageStat rating of 11 once again lost to a lower seed. Those guys were really squeezing blood out of a rock there, weren't they? Remember the part where I told you the Hibbing coach never lost to a lower seed during his 10 year 7A title game streak? I wonder who was getting more out of their team? According to PageStat, since 2007, STA was the #1 rated Class A team 4 times and the #2 rated Class A team 2 times. And they ended up winning 4 titles during this span? Wow! The overachievement meter is off the charts. Those guys really know how get those kids to play beyond their talent.)

In regards to your hypothetical "would you rather have a D1 player vs a nobody with all else equal" doesn't really contribute to the discussion does it? You already admitted to not knowing the specifics of the hiring situation in Hibbing and neither do I.

(You said playing D1 didn't make someone a better coach, and I agreed, but I was using this example to show that if we are going to compare coaches, the fact that someone played D1 has to at least factor in somewhat, right? I just wanted to show you that if given only two options, a former D1 player or non-former D1 player and everything else were equal, you would select the former D1 player. But you avoided it and magically added a third candidate to the question to avoid having to admit it.)

Of course past accomplishments can have positive externalities for people.
But you have already stated that their coaching abilities are the same. What do you perceive the advantage of hiring the former D1 guy to be?

(The advantage is that he has played hockey at a very high level. It is no guarantee, but you can't guarantee the success of any coach. I really hope you are never in the position of hiring a coach for a high school hockey team. You will end up with the janitor running your squad.)

rainier wrote:What are you saying about yourself? And it took a whole 2 minutes for someone to come on here and second my claim that the Hibbing coach is very good.
What's your point? Because you aren't the only person that holds that opinion it must be true? That surely can't be the your ace in the hole on this one...

(Just saying that his reputation is so good that immediately someone came to his defense. This happens in minutes, yet, ironically, I still don't see anyone coming to the defense of the STA guys, even though the Sandbag Patrol is out in full force today.)

rainier wrote:Fair enough, but I would take the guy who has actually competed in AA playoffs before. I'm not saying the Vannellis are bad coaches, but I sure as heck don't think they are significantly better than DeCenzo. I don't think anybody does.
Clarify something for me. On one hand you say that you'd take the coach who has competed in the AA playoffs before(DeCenzo), but then you go on to say that you don't think that the Vannellis are "significantly better" than him. By saying you don't think they are "significantly better" you are saying that the Vannellis are better, do you understand that? My last question would be why would you want a coach that isn't as good?

(The original argument you had was that in order for a small school team to become as good as STA, they should hire better coaches. What I am saying is that I refute this claim because the Hibbing coaches are good enough so that no one could classify the STA coaches as being "significantly better". You are taking that statement out of context. And not only do I not think the STA guys are "significantly better", I don't think they are "better" at all. )

rainier wrote:It seems to factor enough for you to keep commenting on them.
What can I say? You entertain me. (And own you.)

And I deal with people that stonewall more than you do on a daily basis in my line of work so its not something I mind.

(And I don't mind people who stray away from the salient points in order to get out of losing debates. Keep on reverting back to semantics and other things that have nothing to do with the content of the argument, it's apparently all you got.)

rainier wrote:My point was that I don't think they would have beaten STA more than once or twice over the last 6-7 years. I know it's an assertion, but given STA's consistently high PageStat ratings, I think it's supported by what little evidence is out there. You are free to disagree without anything to back up your claim.
You can use whatever predictive or hypothetical metric you want, I'm just looking at the actual results of games. Warroad/Roseau are hardly lambs being led to the slaughter against STA, I give their programs a lot more credit than that. STA vs Richfield/Simley? Not so much.

(I am also looking at the actual results of games. Specifically, Class A title games, in which 11 of the last 14 have been won by team from a major metropolitan area of 2.5 million people. This is what leads me to believe these schools enjoy an enormous advantage over schools like Warroad and Roseau. You don't appear to think this is the case. Fine.)

And its funny that you would say "without anything to back up your claim" when I'm the only one that actually posted a score or record.
(Wow, you finally added a stat to your argument, it only took you 10 posts to start. Did you notice the PageStat ratings, section final scores, names of players, and Hibbing playoff stats I have been using on a regular basis? Now which one of us would be using opinion more and which one of us would be using actual facts to back up our argument more? I would say you are embarrassing yourself, but I don't feel like typing it right now. Keep trying sticky buns!)

Posted: **Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:28 pm**

rainier wrote:First of all, I can't find anywhere in this discussion where I said small schools "don't compete at all".

I've addressed this before, stop scraping the fringes and get at the core of your point. And leave out the girls hockey ffs, there is a separate forum for that if you are so interested in it.

rainier wrote:And you are conveniently avoiding the real issue here, which is that it is true that small schools "don't compete enough consistently", something made rather obvious by the Class A title statistics I provided. Is it really a deeply held opinion that small school "don't compete enough consistently" when metro privates have won 11 of the last 14 Class A titles? Are you saying 3 out of 14 is competing consistently enough? I know you have an aversion to applying actual judgement to these types of things, but I would imagine very few people would consider 3 titles in 14 years competing consistently. But if you do, then hey, go for it.

Yes. This is actually the definition of an opinion.

rainier wrote:Yes, you caught me in an inconsistency, a very slight one that has little to do with our overall discussion, but an inconsistency nonetheless. But I also see you neglected to say anything about your huge error of admitting that STA has a .660 winning percentage against AA teams. I didn't know this and now it is even more insane that STA didn't move up sooner. You have got yourself so turned around that you don't even know when you are serving me up argument winning info on a silver platter. You couldn't have expected me to avoid highlighting that again, right? Perhaps at some point you can just take over for me and write my entire side of the argument. Nice work, Perry Mason. I hope you're not a lawyer, because if your client had a speeding ticket they'd end up in the electric chair.

Its not really a slight inconsistency when it shows that you tried to pass off a fundamental disconnect about everything humanity has learned about instruction/coaching throughout history. This is no hyperbole. Good coaching elevates a group further than they could as individuals. This is basic stuff and you tried to slip this by in a futile attempt to defend your coach. Stop trying to partially deflect and own this fully.

I've already apologized that STA didn't opt up on your terms, they didn't opt up on the timeline I wanted either. What can you do?

rainier wrote:Okay, we agree on what a good coach is. Now let's look at some more actual historical facts to see how great those guys patrolling the bench at STA have been at "getting more out of a team than the sum of its parts. It would appear that in 2009 as a #1 seed and with a PageStat rating of 11, the STA coaches got so much out of their troops that they lost to the #3 seed 4-1! And this #3 seed had a PageStat rating 18 spots lower than STA! Wow, what a freak accident right? Not quite, because it appears that it happened again the very next season, when #1 STA with a PageStat rating of 11 once again lost to a lower seed. Those guys were really squeezing blood out of a rock there, weren't they? Remember the part where I told you the Hibbing coach never lost to a lower seed during his 10 year 7A title game streak? I wonder who was getting more out of their team? According to PageStat, since 2007, STA was the #1 rated Class A team 4 times and the #2 rated Class A team 2 times. And they ended up winning 4 titles during this span? Wow! The overachievement meter is off the charts. Those guys really know how get those kids to play beyond their talent.

So because the expectations for Hibbing were so much lower you were never disappointed with the Bluejacket's performance? You got me there I guess...

And I like upsets happening, its what makes the game fun. I'm not going to complain about a top seed going down to a gritty lower ranked team. Upsets make some of the most memorable moments in sports.

rainier wrote:You said playing D1 didn't make someone a better coach, and I agreed, but I was using this example to show that if we are going to compare coaches, the fact that someone played D1 has to at least factor in somewhat, right? I just wanted to show you that if given only two options, a former D1 player or non-former D1 player and everything else were equal, you would select the former D1 player. But you avoided it and magically added a third candidate to the question to avoid having to admit it. The advantage is that he has played hockey at a very high level. It is no guarantee, but you can't guarantee the success of any coach. I really hope you are never in the position of hiring a coach for a high school hockey team. You will end up with the janitor running your squad.

Do you see the disconnect here? First sentence: "we agree that playing D1 doesn't make someone a better coach", then you go on to call it an advantage "that he has played hockey at a very high level." Which is it?

rainier wrote:Just saying that his reputation is so good that immediately someone came to his defense. This happens in minutes, yet, ironically, I still don't see anyone coming to the defense of the STA guys, even though the Sandbag Patrol is out in full force today.

All it shows is that two people from Hibbing are on this forum at a given time.

And the Vannellis' record speaks for itself.

rainier wrote:The original argument you had was that in order for a small school team to become as good as STA, they should hire better coaches. What I am saying is that I refute this claim because the Hibbing coaches are good enough so that no one could classify the STA coaches as being "significantly better". You are taking that statement out of context. And not only do I not think the STA guys are "significantly better", I don't think they are "better" at all.

"Good enough?" I cringed man, what happened to the pride of a great hockey town like Hibbing when mediocrity is accepted? You didn't get your word twisted around you spoke the truth and looking back on it didn't like it so much.

rainier wrote:I am also looking at the actual results of games. Specifically, Class A title games, in which 11 of the last 14 have been won by team from a major metropolitan area of 2.5 million people. This is what leads me to believe these schools enjoy an enormous advantage over schools like Warroad and Roseau. You don't appear to think this is the case. Fine.

So are the goalposts in the second deck now?

Posted: **Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:56 pm**

rainier wrote:
Ogie wrote:
HShockeywatcher wrote:Ultimately, you are taking first hand accounts of multiple people with them to make and saying they are wrong. If you want my opinion, or Sticklers, Ogie, or anyone else's, ask and be constructive in your response. Most of us are trying to have an informed discussion on the topic. You have a perspective that some of us don't have, and cannot have. If you were able to be more respectful and actually accept our experiences for what they are, you could get much farther in this.
There is no having any kind of informed constructive conversation with uninformed puerile bigots.....They know it all and you are either an idiot, evil or both.

I'll just stick to pointing and laughing at his rambling incoherent text walls and nutty conspiracy theories, thankyouverymuch.
You will "stick to pointing and laughing at his rambling incoherent text walls and nutty conspiracy theories" because that's all you got. If not, then please answer these two questions:

1. Do metro private schools in A enjoy an overall advantage over outstate public schools?

It seems you are very interested in having an "informed constructive conversation", so let's begin, shall we?

What you refer to as an advantage, in my opinion, is simply the result of how they have responded to a disadvantage they have. Like it or not, by nature, private schools are at a distinct disadvantage from the get go. They are a business and have to recruit to stay open. There are some that may be able to stay open if they stopped, but most wouldn't be able to stay open if they didn't actively recruit students. I can't explain everything (because I don't know everything) but there is a lot that goes on in the way of advertising a school, from actively advertising in private grade schools to making their product the best it can be. This includes everything from having the highest quality academic and athletic facilities to the the highest quality teachers and coaches they believe they can, among other things.
Having to do all of this, along with having to attract students from more than the immediate vicinity of their school, is a disadvantage.

This is one, among others, I have discussed. What you keep referring to, the people at the school, is the result of how they have responded to the challenge. For some, they end up with good students/athletes and have good teams, and for others, they don't.

Is it an advantage in a game to have a more talented team? Yes. And in that regard I agree with the advantage view as you see it. But I don't agree with the overall point you are making. Being from the metro isn't an advantage. And it is clear, as only schools with success are the ones you are after, while others without success are okay with you.

pekyman wrote:I for one am waiting patiently for HSHW’s “Rags to Riches” plan.
This plan will enable any small community hockey program to be transformed into an elite small community program in a short order.
With this plan, small community teams will quickly be able to ramp up their programs and compete with the AA big boys as STA did.
Keep up the good work Rainier! I am sure it is just a matter of time before HSHW has his detailed plan out for all of us to implement.

I'm still not sure why you (or rainier) think I have such a plan. I have even posted multiple times that I don't have this plan, or have first hand knowledge of the going ons of places who have done what you want. I also don't know why you would make a silly statement that any program could simply do this.
I have multiple times highlighted the positive things I admire about Hermantown, which are many of the things that definitely make a difference.

But I'll bite...

rainier wrote:2. If not, then please describe to me how an outstate public school can reach the pinnacle of success that STA and Breck have.

I know nothing of Breck's program. Additionally, I don't think things at a private school can be directly applied to public schools as they are completely different entities. I will respond to your questions about STA, but the rest of my response will be about public schools in general. Like thestickler07, I could really care less about Hibbing. I have never been there in my life, don't have near future plans of visiting, but do think some of the same principles can be used at schools all over.

What STA did is simple. Donors and the school partnered with UST to finance building a new hockey arena, which, from what I hear, is pretty nice. In the same year, they hired new coaches, who are apparently pretty decent at coaching.
After that, the school let the coaches coach, more players came to a school where there was a hockey rink on campus. Only a couple more players came to the school the following year, and they achieved much more success. The following year, two young, talented players came to the school. From there, they have been able to attract players to come to the school ever since.
Ultimately, that's what happened. From what I hear there is word of mouth advertising of the program, as there is and should be of good programs everywhere.

Now, can this be directly applied to an outstate school? I doubt it.
Maybe another similar metro school, but not likely an outstate school, as there are other dynamics at play.

Academics. I don't know how often there are academic concerns with hockey players, as they don't seem to come up often, but every year there are players "lost" due to being academically ineligible. These issues happen less at private schools, as well as schools with "better academics." That that term to mean what you want, as it means different things different places, but at the end of the day parents generally aren't going to keep their child in a poor academic situation despite the athletics if they can send them to a better one.

As has been mentioned multiple times on this board, jobs are important. I can't speak first hand, but there is mention of how the job market has changed around the range, which has an impact on the people that choose to move there. Many of the the communities that I have seen and read about around the country that do well have factories of different types that employ many of the people.
The jobs that people have offer time and money for different aspects of their child's life.

Community involvement is huge. However you want to take that, whether that is people going to games at all levels, people having their kids play the specific sports, or parents getting directly involved in the coaches and development of kids, it all plays a role. In small towns and communities, most people know most people. A supportive community feeds itself, regardless of success. I have seen some very unsuccessful communities that are very supportive of their members.

I know many on here seem to want to ignore it, but being attractive to potential homebuyers is key. Whether it's the previous things I've mentioned or the couple I'm about to list, school district information is one of the the top things people look at when they buy houses. I know it was one of the big ones every realtor brought up with me in every area I was looking for my house. This extends to outstate areas as well. There are plenty of areas that have renowned programs that people do move into because of; it wasn't likely the only factor, but in many cases it can be the deciding factor.

Coaches are huge. Whether it is knowledge of the sport, or the way they interact with people, or any of many other attributes coaches have, having good ones (or bad ones) can be the difference between a successful program and one that crumbles.

Facilities are big. I don't necessarily understand the idea that "a nice arena" is dramatically different from an old one, or the similar with a basketball court or a football field. Plenty of good teams play and practice in not the best conditions. But I do think in hockey (and swimming and similar where facilities aren't standard at schools) that proximity can play a role. "Nice" training facilities are a plus as well, as we see with certain schools around that have better facilities and others that don't. While a 30 year old weight weighs the same as a brand new one, I suppose flashy sells as it does with arenas as well.

Systems are huge in team sports. Whether it is hockey, football, basketball, or another sport, being in a program where you are taught the same style of play from an early age to the time you are in high school is a nice advantage community programs have. If a young player can just fill a role because they have been taught and coached the same way for their whole life how something is going to be done, it is an advantage. This may be more or less applicable to hockey than it is other sports, but hockey is a team game. One player can make a difference, yes, but the team working together with the same game plan is the end result.

I know this may seem to some as a bit extreme, but I don't see why alumni from public schools couldn't put together a fund for donations to be directed toward places there is need. Colleges, both public and private, do this, as well as private high schools, and it is a part of why they are able to keep prices where they are and provide different amenities they do. Why can't public communities do the same? I know they have boosters, and some may be doing this, but why isn't it done more?
While it is true that there are successful graduates of private schools, sheer numbers would suggest those at public school are more successful on the whole. My alma mater is in the process of completing an $18M project adding both academic and athletic facilities funding 100% by donors, likely mostly alumni.
I know cost of the sport is an issue. Well, I highly doubt it would be out of the question for the alumni to help supply equipment for young students who would like to play the sport but are unable to afford it, for example. I could see something like this being successful in the metro specifically, with not only alumni giving into it. I, for example, would donate money on a regular basis to a program based around providing underprivileged youth in Minneapolis with equipment and travel expenses so those interested/unable could play hockey.

Anyway, I still haven't connected the dots on why some of you think I have some secret formula that I have been keeping secret from the state but I'm honored that you have turned to me for help. Do I think I have all the right answers? Do I think they can be applied to every corner of the state? No and no.

That being said, my guess is that if you were to stroll into some region of the state that doesn't currently have hockey success, find (or magically start) a school with "good academics," build "a nice arena," hire coaches with proven success, build a factory of some sort with good jobs, involve the community in the athletic programs on the school, and fund some program to help financially struggling families you would likely eventually be able to have a successful program.

Another big issue, though, is that at the end of the day the primary concern of the vast majority of communities out there isn't what they can do so their hockey program can grow. It is to do the best they can for their people as a whole. Some work toward better, others do not. Can this be attained partly through things that will advance the hockey program? Sure. Do they need to be? No.

I don't know if this is exactly what anyone was looking for, but that wouldn't be out of the ordinary. I'm not interested in debating whether I'm right or not, as I'm not claiming to be an expert. Many of you are actually claiming I am the expert, so hopefully we don't have to spend pages and pages discussing it.

I suspect you will quote it all and point by point tell me why my opinion is wrong. Have fun.

Posted: **Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:19 pm**

I have one question HSHW, if the facility that you talk of is funded 100% by donations, is this for the school or the community and what about referendums? How is the school district doing financially?
I know in my school district, every year they are asking for more money.

Posted: **Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:27 pm**

HShockeywatcher wrote: I know this may seem to some as a bit extreme, but I don't see why alumni from public schools couldn't put together a fund for donations to be directed toward places there is need.

These sorts of things do exist: http://www.dulutheastfoundation.org/index.shtml

East's just got going in the past two years, and I'm not sure how successful it has been/will be, but it has potential. I went to their hall of fame event a few months ago, which was well-done, and after my experience at East, I'll be happy to throw a few pennies their way when I can.

I hope these sorts of things take off. It's a good way to regain community support and influence over "government" schools, and help fill some of the cracks that come up due to tight budgets or other such issues.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:54 am**

karl(east) wrote:These sorts of things do exist: http://www.dulutheastfoundation.org/index.shtml

East's just got going in the past two years, and I'm not sure how successful it has been/will be, but it has potential. I went to their hall of fame event a few months ago, which was well-done, and after my experience at East, I'll be happy to throw a few pennies their way when I can.

I hope these sorts of things take off. It's a good way to regain community support and influence over "government" schools, and help fill some of the cracks that come up due to tight budgets or other such issues.

This is pretty badass.

A school centered alumni group stripped of the normal red tape; dedicated to preserving what's good about their experience at East and the things the community values.

I couldn't pretend to hate on East after seeing this. Hope the foundation accomplishes its goals.

Damn all this good East karma makes me want to pull for the Hounds to make it down St. Paul.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:02 am**

karl(east) wrote:
HShockeywatcher wrote: I know this may seem to some as a bit extreme, but I don't see why alumni from public schools couldn't put together a fund for donations to be directed toward places there is need.
These sorts of things do exist: http://www.dulutheastfoundation.org/index.shtml

East's just got going in the past two years, and I'm not sure how successful it has been/will be, but it has potential. I went to their hall of fame event a few months ago, which was well-done, and after my experience at East, I'll be happy to throw a few pennies their way when I can.

I hope these sorts of things take off. It's a good way to regain community support and influence over "government" schools, and help fill some of the cracks that come up due to tight budgets or other such issues.

Just buy it!

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:18 pm**

thestickler07 wrote:
karl(east) wrote:These sorts of things do exist: http://www.dulutheastfoundation.org/index.shtml

East's just got going in the past two years, and I'm not sure how successful it has been/will be, but it has potential. I went to their hall of fame event a few months ago, which was well-done, and after my experience at East, I'll be happy to throw a few pennies their way when I can.

I hope these sorts of things take off. It's a good way to regain community support and influence over "government" schools, and help fill some of the cracks that come up due to tight budgets or other such issues.
This is pretty badass.

A school centered alumni group stripped of the normal red tape; dedicated to preserving what's good about their experience at East and the things the community values.

I couldn't pretend to hate on East after seeing this. Hope the foundation accomplishes its goals.

Damn all this good East karma makes me want to pull for the Hounds to make it down St. Paul.

Welcome aboard the bandwagon.

There are reasons why that school's community keeps people coming back to support it long after graduation, whether through donations or posts on hockey forums.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:35 pm**

When it comes to hockey, DEAST is just another private school.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 5:20 pm**

Zamman wrote:I have one question HSHW, if the facility that you talk of is funded 100% by donations, is this for the school or the community and what about referendums? How is the school district doing financially?
I know in my school district, every year they are asking for more money.

It will be for the school, much like many (most?) school facilities are, public or private. Not sure what point you are trying to make in asking about a private school's "school district"...

It is unfortunate how much budgets get cut yearly. It really takes a toll on the schools. My guess, I could be totally wrong, is that if people had more control over where their money was going, they'd be more likely to fund programs to help keep class sizes low, or to keep facilities up to date.

thestickler07 wrote:
karl(east) wrote:These sorts of things do exist: http://www.dulutheastfoundation.org/index.shtml

East's just got going in the past two years, and I'm not sure how successful it has been/will be, but it has potential. I went to their hall of fame event a few months ago, which was well-done, and after my experience at East, I'll be happy to throw a few pennies their way when I can.

I hope these sorts of things take off. It's a good way to regain community support and influence over "government" schools, and help fill some of the cracks that come up due to tight budgets or other such issues.
This is pretty badass.

A school centered alumni group stripped of the normal red tape; dedicated to preserving what's good about their experience at East and the things the community values.

I couldn't pretend to hate on East after seeing this. Hope the foundation accomplishes its goals.

Damn all this good East karma makes me want to pull for the Hounds to make it down St. Paul.

Agreed with thestickler07 here, this is great to see. Wish there was more of it.

Ideally with an organization like this you may have some say in where your money is going.

elliott70 wrote:When it comes to hockey, DEAST is just another private school.

They are private just as much as Edina, Eden Prairie, Tonka, Wayzata, and a handful of others are private. Public school in an affluent area whose top students do well academically and athletically regularly. Not likely as much because of the likely better funding and support, but they still have to deal with many of the same things, positive and negative, other public schools do.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:44 am**

When WHITE BEAR knocks off Joey Anderson's Pioneers, is there really going to be an ALL PUBLIC AA state tourney? WHo is anyone going to hate...oh, Edina, my bad....

Will an all public AA tourney stop any of the Private hating? (reel in the water)

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:19 pm**

Tenoverpar wrote:When WHITE BEAR knocks off Joey Anderson's Pioneers, is there really going to be an ALL PUBLIC AA state tourney? WHo is anyone going to hate...oh, Edina, my bad....

Will an all public AA tourney stop any of the Private hating? (reel in the water)

Nope.

The hating is primarily rooted in emotional response (envy, covetousness, intolerance), not dispassionate observation and reason.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:51 pm**

Ogie wrote:
Tenoverpar wrote:When WHITE BEAR knocks off Joey Anderson's Pioneers, is there really going to be an ALL PUBLIC AA state tourney? WHo is anyone going to hate...oh, Edina, my bad....

Will an all public AA tourney stop any of the Private hating? (reel in the water)
Nope.

The hating is primarily rooted in emotional response (envy, covetousness, intolerance), not dispassionate observation and reason.

Not quite, Slowgie, the emotional response comes as a consequence of dispassionate observation and reason. A full report on this forthcoming.

Stay tuned...

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:11 pm**

Rationalization and reason are two different animals....The former is the province of churlish intellectual adolescents, while the latter is that of adults.

There's little doubt as to which group you find yourself a member.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:10 pm**

Ogie wrote:
Tenoverpar wrote:When WHITE BEAR knocks off Joey Anderson's Pioneers, is there really going to be an ALL PUBLIC AA state tourney? WHo is anyone going to hate...oh, Edina, my bad....

Will an all public AA tourney stop any of the Private hating? (reel in the water)
Nope.

The hating is primarily rooted in emotional response (envy, covetousness, intolerance), not dispassionate observation and reason.

A bit on the (arrogant, elitist, ego) side of things isn't it ?

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:07 pm**

Even though some may find such an ambiguous rejoinder somewhat witty, there are many more who find such a tad maladroit and pedantic.

Notwithstanding, the nut of the matter is outcomes.

As I mentioned a couple posts back, we are emotional beings who can reason....Some people go around as though they're mere meat puppets to their emotional responses and rationalize their reactions through them afterwards, while others use the emotional response as a cue to step back, dissociate themselves from the situation that had them in the emotion-reaction mobius loop, ask questions and gather more information...Information like, for example, "do I have any control over this situation?" or "what is going on here that I can use to my advantage?"

Again, what is the end game?

Are you going to interpret the things that have had you in the emotional response as clues as to how you yourself may do better, or as a way to denigrate and scapegoat those who do better than you have done so far?....As a method of observation and introspection as to how you may improve, or as your rationalization for wanting those who have done better than you knocked down a peg or two?

Are you a hater locked in helplessness and hopelessness, or a hopeful striving observer who seeks to take action make yourself better in "evening the odds"?

Therein, lie some important distinctions.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:18 pm**

Who are you posting to ?

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:20 pm**

Anyone who would read it, yourself included.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:39 pm**

Ogie wrote:Even though some may find such an ambiguous rejoinder somewhat witty, there are many more who find such a tad maladroit and pedantic.

Notwithstanding, the nut of the matter is outcomes.

As I mentioned a couple posts back, we are emotional beings who can reason....Some people go around as though they're mere meat puppets to their emotional responses and rationalize their reactions through them afterwards, while others use the emotional response as a cue to step back, dissociate themselves from the situation that had them in the emotion-reaction mobius loop, ask questions and gather more information...Information like, for example, "do I have any control over this situation?" or "what is going on here that I can use to my advantage?"

Again, what is the end game?

Are you going to interpret the things that have had you in the emotional response as clues as to how you yourself may do better, or as a way to denigrate and scapegoat those who do better than you have done so far?....As a method of observation and introspection as to how you may improve, or as your rationalization for wanting those who have done better than you knocked down a peg or two?

Are you a hater locked in helplessness and hopelessness, or a hopeful striving observer who seeks to take action make yourself better in "evening the odds"?

Therein, lie some important distinctions.

This post can be summed up in 5 words: "The ends justify the means".

Not everyone lives by this motto. And it's especially not the motto the private schools claim to teach.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:47 pm**

No, that's what your posts add up to....It's called projection.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:36 pm**

Ogie wrote:Anyone who would read it, yourself included.

In that case, you also know very little about out state hockey if you think we're envious, etc. of metro hockey.

The opposite would be closer to the truth.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:42 pm**

Mailman wrote:
Ogie wrote:Anyone who would read it, yourself included.
In that case, you also know very little about out state hockey if you think we're envious, etc. of metro hockey.

The opposite would be closer to the truth.

The thread is about privates and government-run schools, not outstate v. metro....And the post in question wasn't about your particular personal mindset.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:49 pm**

Ogie wrote:
Mailman wrote:
Ogie wrote:Anyone who would read it, yourself included.
In that case, you also know very little about out state hockey if you think we're envious, etc. of metro hockey.

The opposite would be closer to the truth.
The thread is about privates and government-run schools, not outstate v. metro....And the post in question wasn't about your particular personal mindset.

Coulda fooled me.............

Don't follow the second sentence of your reply.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:55 pm**

That you were fooled and confused is your challenge to overcome.

Understandable, though, given that other posters have had to steer the thread back from several metro v. outstate derail attempts.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:03 pm**

Ogie wrote:That you were fooled and confused is your challenge to overcome.

Understandable, though, given that other posters have had to steer the thread back from several metro v. outstate derail attempts.

Not fooled or confused at all.

But it is time to hit the rack for me.

See ya tomorrow.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Private School Trash talk thread

w

Re: w

Re: w

Re: w