I just saw East Ridge HS Roster--OUCH!!

Older Topics, Not the current discussion

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

wbmd
Posts: 3926
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:51 pm

Post by wbmd »

youngblood08 wrote:I guess I was reffering to Gorg hyping up St Francis as a team to watch in Class A. Yes they are Varsity but the WHOLE team is new not 1 player on the roster has Varsity experience. How many teams can say that?
Except that Gorg and LaPanta have to learn that St. Francis is actually in Section 7AA.
hockeydad
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 9:57 pm

Post by hockeydad »

I'm surprised they didn't try to get the Tartan and Stillwater parts of Woodbury into either of the schools. To me it would have made sense for I94 to be the dividing line between the school districts and would have relieved the pressure on Stillwater.[/quote]

Thanks.

You think a school board or three would do something logical? Bwhahahah! 8)[/quote]



It would be next to impossible to change school district boundaries, and that is what it would take to get the Tartan and Stillwater kids who live in Woodbury into one of the other schools. There is a provision for doing it... But it would take all school districts involved to agree to it, and no fiscally responsible district would agree to give up part of its property tax base and its student population. A group of people in Savage tried to get the legislature to change the law a few years ago and that went nowhere
youngblood08
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:04 pm

Post by youngblood08 »

wbmd wrote:
youngblood08 wrote:I guess I was reffering to Gorg hyping up St Francis as a team to watch in Class A. Yes they are Varsity but the WHOLE team is new not 1 player on the roster has Varsity experience. How many teams can say that?
Except that Gorg and LaPanta have to learn that St. Francis is actually in Section 7AA.

Good point I missed that also.
slapstkhound
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:27 pm

Re: Tender

Post by slapstkhound »

northwoods oldtimer wrote:
USHLTender wrote:I agree with the above poster regarding the quality of this game. Lets be honest it was pretty weak. Benik was on the ice 75% of the game against a team that couldn't sustain any offensive pressure nor break out of their own zone. I was not impressed with either of these teams and I hope not to have to watch them in person or on the tube again in the future.
USHLTender, You sir are very observant on the game in question. Some folks like to get caught up in the emotion of it all (we are on FSN) and get defensive by the mere comment regarding the fact that this simply was not good team hockey.
Tender and Northwoods Old Timer.....all you needed to do was turn off your TV. For some of us, this was a much better game than watching Edina maul Burnsville 4-0. Give these kids a break. They deserved the opportunity they were given, played hard and provided a decent game to watch. Perhaps you should focus on something more current and stop trying to relive your supposed glory days of hockey.
northwoods oldtimer
Posts: 2679
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:01 pm

Re: Tender

Post by northwoods oldtimer »

slapstkhound wrote:
northwoods oldtimer wrote:
USHLTender wrote:I agree with the above poster regarding the quality of this game. Lets be honest it was pretty weak. Benik was on the ice 75% of the game against a team that couldn't sustain any offensive pressure nor break out of their own zone. I was not impressed with either of these teams and I hope not to have to watch them in person or on the tube again in the future.
USHLTender, You sir are very observant on the game in question. Some folks like to get caught up in the emotion of it all (we are on FSN) and get defensive by the mere comment regarding the fact that this simply was not good team hockey.
Tender and Northwoods Old Timer.....all you needed to do was turn off your TV. For some of us, this was a much better game than watching Edina maul Burnsville 4-0. Give these kids a break. They deserved the opportunity they were given, played hard and provided a decent game to watch. Perhaps you should focus on something more current and stop trying to relive your supposed glory days of hockey.
I did turn it off after 2 periods. :wink:
cclavin
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: Delivering

Post by cclavin »

hockeydad wrote:It would be next to impossible to change school district boundaries, and that is what it would take to get the Tartan and Stillwater kids who live in Woodbury into one of the other schools. There is a provision for doing it... But it would take all school districts involved to agree to it, and no fiscally responsible district would agree to give up part of its property tax base and its student population. A group of people in Savage tried to get the legislature to change the law a few years ago and that went nowhere
Bingo. Most of the Woodbury development near I94 & Cnty. 19 is in the Stillwater disctrict. No way they give that up.
Faceguard79
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:43 pm

Post by Faceguard79 »

cclavin wrote:
hockeydad wrote:It would be next to impossible to change school district boundaries, and that is what it would take to get the Tartan and Stillwater kids who live in Woodbury into one of the other schools. There is a provision for doing it... But it would take all school districts involved to agree to it, and no fiscally responsible district would agree to give up part of its property tax base and its student population. A group of people in Savage tried to get the legislature to change the law a few years ago and that went nowhere
Bingo. Most of the Woodbury development near I94 & Cnty. 19 is in the Stillwater disctrict. No way they give that up.
Yep, no way they give up those tax dollars. What's good for the kids or makes sense financially or environmentally doesn't matter. :roll:
Post Reply