HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

observer wrote:

Some of the folks on the MNH board need to be tested for brain activity......

I don't think this was their idea and that is generally not their role. Members present the ideas and make the decisions in voting.

I presume it was presented by dads from the large association B1 teams as they didn't like being labeled B and MN Hockey approved it as a pilot. We do know that the very top few B1 teams could have beaten all but the top 10-15 A teams the last several seasons.

I think opening up some scheduling would have been the best idea but the top B1 teams may have had difficulty finding A teams that wanted to play them. So they decided to call them A and open up the scheduling options. It turns out they just moved the problem to another level.

Elliot mentioned he doesn't think it is going away so I'll guess more Districts will go to the D6 model next year, AA uber leagues, and we'll have yet another set of issues next year.

Exactly what I said about this pilot all last summer, "AA uber leagues" that everyone will flock to. The movement of kids from A to AA will only multiply in numbers in coming years.

District 6 is probably going to have the most movement since they're being told A is really B-1 and not being told by Jimmy Jones(District 10) that A and AA are the same. The talented kids on A(B-1) in District 6 that understood before the season already bailed. The floodgates will pour open after this season.

Limit associations to one strong B-1 team(2 for Edina/Wayzata).

Add a B-2 tournament if MNH wants more.....

loveitorleaveit wrote:

REalhockey17 wrote:

loveitorleaveit wrote: Of course you'd say that - maybe you should look at the coaching aspect of your team - not the talent level

I didn't know cottage grove and coon rapids opted down, but Hermantown A's lost 3-2 to cottage grove at the beginning of the year, and beat coon rapids 4-1 around Christmas

If Coon Rapids would get some better coaching, they would easily be AA.

easily AA? really? you have to start with more #'s first. 30 skaters total at bantams makes it nearly impossible to form a AA team, let alone a competetive "A" team. Coaching is the least of the problems.

Hermantown A over Spring Lake Park AA 6-4. Hawks played their first game with a full roster since early December, came back from down 3-0 in the first

Had a chance to watch Edina A & Wayzeta A teams play this weekend and both [in my opinion] would beat our AA team.

REalhockey17 wrote:Hermantown A over Spring Lake Park AA 6-4. Hawks played their first game with a full roster since early December, came back from down 3-0 in the first

SLP is an "A" team

the_juiceman wrote:

REalhockey17 wrote:Hermantown A over Spring Lake Park AA 6-4. Hawks played their first game with a full roster since early December, came back from down 3-0 in the first

SLP is an "A" team

SLP had 9 skaters (one being their Starting goalie)
Flu (5) Injuries (2)

helightsthelamp wrote:Stats compiled from district 10 website:

Bantam AA record vs A in D10 games - 13-0-1
AA has out scored A 89-15

Pee Wee AA record vs A in D10 games - 16-2-2
AA has out scored A 118-17
The two wins both belong to SLP A team and the same AA association has both of the ties on their record

Those involved in the decision to have a split schedule for D10 AA/A games should resign out of embarrassment.

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

Tonight at Bantams Elk River AA plays Elk River A, can anyone give me any rationale as to why this game makes any sense?????

Bleedmaroon+gold, Here is your "no difference between your AA/A designations during the regular season".

99% of living humans are able to see the "difference".

Ignorance must be blissful.

Someone is going to win the B tournament. Should they be A? If so, then the next team down wins the B tournament... Should they be A?

MrBoDangles wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:Stats compiled from district 10 website:

Bantam AA record vs A in D10 games - 13-0-1
AA has out scored A 89-15

Pee Wee AA record vs A in D10 games - 16-2-2
AA has out scored A 118-17
The two wins both belong to SLP A team and the same AA association has both of the ties on their record

Those involved in the decision to have a split schedule for D10 AA/A games should resign out of embarrassment.

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

Tonight at Bantams Elk River AA plays Elk River A, can anyone give me any rationale as to why this game makes any sense?????

Bleedmaroon+gold, Here is your "no difference between your AA/A designations during the regular season".

99% of living humans are able to see the "difference".

Ignorance must be blissful.

I disagree it is not the districts fault that these associations decided to field an A and AA team. That would be the Associations fault not the districts. The district gave warning they were keeping the schedule how it was from their pilot last season before associations needed to designate their teams. I see that Spring Lake Park and North Country have both beaten AA teams this season. So how is this such a bad thing for those associations?

Maybe the associations that wanted AA and A teams should have looked at whats going on before fielding both teams. Maybe the associations that had AA teams should have put their second team at the B1 level instead. Not the Districts fault the Associations fault. In years past both Blaine and Elk River have had 2 B1 teams. One was usually at the top of the district the other was at the bottom. I blame the associations not the district.

Bleed Maroon and Gold wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:Stats compiled from district 10 website:

Bantam AA record vs A in D10 games - 13-0-1
AA has out scored A 89-15

Pee Wee AA record vs A in D10 games - 16-2-2
AA has out scored A 118-17
The two wins both belong to SLP A team and the same AA association has both of the ties on their record

Those involved in the decision to have a split schedule for D10 AA/A games should resign out of embarrassment.

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

Tonight at Bantams Elk River AA plays Elk River A, can anyone give me any rationale as to why this game makes any sense?????

Bleedmaroon+gold, Here is your "no difference between your AA/A designations during the regular season".

99% of living humans are able to see the "difference".

Ignorance must be blissful.

I disagree it is not the districts fault that these associations decided to field an A and AA team. That would be the Associations fault not the districts. The district gave warning they were keeping the schedule how it was from their pilot last season before associations needed to designate their teams. I see that Spring Lake Park and North Country have both beaten AA teams this season. So how is this such a bad thing for those associations?

Maybe the associations that wanted AA and A teams should have looked at whats going on before fielding both teams. Maybe the associations that had AA teams should have put their second team at the B1 level instead. Not the Districts fault the Associations fault. In years past both Blaine and Elk River have had 2 B1 teams. One was usually at the top of the district the other was at the bottom. I blame the associations not the district.

Please tell me you've recently had a bump to the head.

[quote="MrBoDangles"][quote="Bleed Maroon and Gold"][quote="MrBoDangles"][quote="helightsthelamp"]Stats compiled from district 10 website:

Bantam AA record vs A in D10 games - 13-0-1
AA has out scored A 89-15

Pee Wee AA record vs A in D10 games - 16-2-2
AA has out scored A 118-17
The two wins both belong to SLP A team and the same AA association has both of the ties on their record

Those involved in the decision to have a split schedule for D10 AA/A games should resign out of embarrassment.

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

Tonight at Bantams Elk River AA plays Elk River A, can anyone give me any rationale as to why this game makes any sense?????[/quote]

Bleedmaroon+gold, Here is your "no difference between your AA/A designations during the regular season".

99% of living humans are able to see the "difference".

Ignorance must be blissful.[/quote]


I disagree it is not the districts fault that these associations decided to field an A and AA team. That would be the Associations fault not the districts. The district gave warning they were keeping the schedule how it was from their pilot last season before associations needed to designate their teams. I see that Spring Lake Park and North Country have both beaten AA teams this season. So how is this such a bad thing for those associations?

Maybe the associations that wanted AA and A teams should have looked at whats going on before fielding both teams. Maybe the associations that had AA teams should have put their second team at the B1 level instead. Not the Districts fault the Associations fault. In years past both Blaine and Elk River have had 2 B1 teams. One was usually at the top of the district the other was at the bottom. I blame the associations not the district.[/quote]

Please tell me you've recently had a bump to the head.[/quote]


Yes a big one!!!

D10 Bantam A scores
Elk River A 4, Princeton A 3
Centennial AA 7, Coon Rapids A 0
NCBD A 4, Elk River A 2
Anoka AA 9, Champlin Park AA 1
Elk River AA 5, Anoka AA 0
Spring Lake Park A 4, Coon Rapids A 1
Elk River AA 11, St. Francis/Irondale AA 2
Elk River AA 6, Coon Rapids A 2
Blaine AA 3, Andover AA 0
NCBD A 5, Spring Lake Park A 5
Coon Rapids A 7, St. Francis/Irondale AA 6
Centennial AA 2, Blaine AA 2
Champlin Park AA 7, Blaine A 3
Rogers AA 5, Centennial A 1
Princeton A 4, Spring Lake Park A 2
Elk River AA 3, Andover AA 2
Blaine AA 8, St. Francis/Irondale AA 0
Anoka AA 4, Rogers AA 1
Anoka AA 8, Centennial A 2
Centennial AA 7, Champlin Park AA 0
Blaine AA 7, Blaine A 1
Champlin Park AA 3, Blaine AA 3
Anoka AA 6, Andover AA 0
Centennial AA 5, Rogers AA 1
Centennial AA 6, Andover AA 1
Centennial A 4, Elk River A 2
Andover AA 4, Rogers AA 2
Centennial AA 6, Anoka AA 3
Coon Rapids A 3, Centennial A 2
Andover AA 2, NCBD A 1
Spring Lake Park A 5, Elk River A 2
Centennial AA 5, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Elk River AA 12, NCBD A 0
Coon Rapids A 4, Blaine A 2
Princeton A 5, Blaine A 0
Blaine AA 4, Elk River A 1
Rogers AA 1, St. Francis/Irondale AA 0
NCBD A 8, Blaine A 2
Elk River AA 7, Blaine AA 1
Champlin Park AA 5, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Champlin Park AA 4, Rogers AA 0
Elk River A 3, Coon Rapids A 2
Blaine AA 6, Spring Lake Park A 2
Anoka AA 14, Elk River A 1
Elk River AA 4, Centennial AA 1
Andover AA 1, Champlin Park AA 0
NCBD A 6, Princeton A 4
Spring Lake Park A 9, Centennial A 2
Andover AA 8, Centennial A 1
Princeton A 3, Coon Rapids A 1
Centennial AA 4, Princeton A 0
Andover AA 8, Spring Lake Park A 6
NCBD A 6, Coon Rapids A 1
Centennial AA 7, NCBD 0
Anoka AA 3, Blaine AA 2
Andover AA 4, Blaine A 2
Coon Rapids A 2, Spring Lake Park A 2
Centennial AA 6, Andover AA 1
Elk River AA 10,Centennial A 0
Anoka AA 8, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Princeton A 4, Elk River A 2
Elk River A 6, Blaine A 5
Centennial AA 13, Elk River A 0
Champlin Park AA 5, Elk River A 0
Centennial AA 6, Champlin Park AA 2
Centennial A 3, Princeton A 1
Champlin Park AA 7, NCBD A 3
Anoka AA 5, NCBD A 0
NCBD A 3, Princeton A 1
Blaine AA 6, Centennial A 0
Champlin Park AA 5, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Coon Rapids A 2, Princeton A 1
Centennial AA 5, Anoka AA 1
Centennial A 4, NCBD A 0
Champlin Park AA 4, Spring Lake Park A 3
Blaine AA 4, Anoka AA 3
Champlin Park AA 9, Princeton A 3
Elk River AA 6, Rogers AA 0
Centennial AA 11, Spring Lake Park A 3
NCBD A 4, Rogers AA 2
Elk River AA 3, Andover AA 2
St. Francis/Irondale AA 4, Centennial A 1
Coon Rapids A 6, Elk River A 0
Blaine AA 3, Champlin Park AA 2
Centennial A 4, Elk River A 2
Centennial AA 6, Blaine A 0
Andover AA 4, Anoka AA 2
Rogers AA 6, Coon Rapids A 0
Andover AA 6, Princeton A 2
St. Francis/Irondale AA 4, Blaine A 1
Rogers AA 6, Princeton A 0
Blaine AA 2, NCBD A 1
Rogers AA 5, Blaine AA 3
Spring Lake Park A 7, NCBD A 5
St. Francis/Irondale AA 6, Princeton A 4
Elk River AA 8, Elk River A 0
Blaine AA 4, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Centennial A 5, Coon Rapids A 4
Anoka AA 8, Blaine A 1
Elk River AA 9, Princeton A 0
Champlin Park AA 3, Andover AA 2
Spring Lake Park A 3, St. Francis/Irondale AA 2
Anoka AA 7, Princeton A 1
Rogers AA 9, Elk River A 0
Elk River A 2, NCBD A 1
Blaine A 4, Centennial A 3
Rogers AA 5, Spring Lake Park A 1
Anoka AA 4, St. Francis/Irondale AA 0
Andover AA 5, Rogers AA 1
Spring Lake Park A 5, Princeton A 2
Andover AA 5, Coon Rapids A 1
Elk River AA 3, Blaine AA 0
Centennial AA 10, Rogers AA 0
Andover AA 4, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Anoka AA 4, Champlin Park AA 1
Spring Lake Park A 4, Elk River A 3
Elk River AA 10, Champlin Park AA 1
Elk River A 3, Blaine A 3
St. Francis/Irondale AA 0, Rogers AA 0
St.Francis/Irondale AA 7, Elk River A 1
Centennial AA 5, Elk River AA 3
Anoka AA 9, Coon Rapids A 1
Centennial AA 5, Blaine AA 1
Champlin Park AA 5, Coon Rapids A 0
Elk River AA 7, St. Francis/Irondale AA 1
Centennial AA 6, Centennial A 0
Rogers AA 6, Blaine A 3
Elk River AA 4, Anoka AA 0
Blaine AA 3, Andover AA 2
Centennial A 7, Princeton A 4
Champlin Park AA 2, Rogers AA 0
Blaine A 3, Princeton A 2
Champlin Park AA 2, Centennial A 2
NCBD A 5, St. Francis/Irondale A 1
Coon Rapids A 7, Blaine A 6
Blaine AA 5, Princeton A 1
Spring Lake Park A 6, Blaine A 2
Centennial A 4, NCBD A 3
Elk River AA 15, Spring Lake Park A 2
NCBD A 6, Coon Rapids A 3
Centennial A 5, Spring Lake Park A 4
Elk River AA 9, Rogers AA 0
Anoka AA 15, Spring Lake Park A 0
Centennial AA 9, St. Francis/Irondale AA 0
Blaine AA 6, Coon Rapids A 3
Andover AA 8, Elk River A 1
Elk River AA 10, Blaine A 0

District 10 Peewee A scores
Centennial AA 2, Elk River AA 0
Irondale/STF AA 4, Rogers AA 2
Blaine AA 9, Blaine A 0
NCBD A 3, Irondale/STF 2
Irondale/STF AA 4, Blaine A 0
Elk River AA 4, Centennial A 2
Anoka AA 1, Rogers AA 1
Centennial A 10, Chisago A 0
Champlin AA 5, Blaine AA 5
Elk River A 2, Andover A 2
Blaine AA 10, Andover A 0
Anoka AA 4, SLP A 2
Centennial AA 8, Coon Rapids A 0
Elk River AA 6, Andover A 0
Andover AA 8, Elk River A 0
SLP A 7, Coon Rapids A 1
Champlin AA 7, Andover A 1
Elk River AA 2, Anoka AA 0
SLP A 8, Elk River A 0
Blaine AA 8, Irondale/STF 1
Coon Rapids A 5, Blaine A 0
Champlin AA 6, Elk River A 0
Irondale/STF AA 5, Andover A 0
Blaine AA 2, Elk River AA 1
Andover AA 12, NCBD A 1
SLP A 4, Centennial A 1
Centennial AA 6, Rogers AA 0
NCBD 4, Chisago 0
Elk River AA 6, Champlin AA 0
Andover AA 7, Chisago A 0
NCBD A 1, Coon Rapids A 1
Champlin AA 5, Centennial A 2
Elk River AA 4, Rogers AA 0
Andover AA 6, Anoka AA 0
Coon Rapids A 2, Centennial A 0
Blaine AA 4, Anoka AA 0
Centennial AA 13, Chisago A 0
Andover AA 8, Blaine A 0
SLP A 4, Andover A 0
Irondale/STF AA 4, Blaine AA 3
Centennial A 7, Elk River A 2
Elk River AA 5, SLP A 0
Chisago A 5, Elk River A 1
Andover AA 6, SLP A 2
Anoka AA 6, Andover A 1
Centennial AA 6, Anoka AA 1
Blaine A 1, Chisago A 1
Elk River AA 3, Andover AA 2
Centennial AA 4, SLP A 1
Rogers AA 8, Chisago A 2
Andover A 1, Blaine A 1
Centennial A 4, Andover A 1
Andover AA 5, Centennial AA 3
Blaine AA 3, Rogers AA 2
Elk River AA 4, Coon Rapids A 2
ELk River A 6, Blaine A 1
Rogers AA 4, Champlin AA 2
Irondale/STF AA 4, Centennial A 1
Blaine A 2, NCBD A 2
Andover AA 6, Champln AA 2
Elk River A 3, Rogers AA 3
SLP A 6, Chisago A 3
Elk River AA 4, NCBD A 1
Andover AA 1, Blaine AA 0
Coon Rapids A 4, Chisago A 3
Champlin AA 3, Irondale/STF AA 1
Andover AA 4, Rogers AA 1
Centennial AA 12, Elk River A 0
Centennial A 2, NCBD A 1
Centennial AA 10, Blaine A 1
Elk River AA 8, Irondale/STF A 1
Andover AA 9, Coon Rapids A 2
Champlin AA 4, Chisago A 1
Andover A 4, Chisago 1
Centennial A 3, Chisago A 3
NCBD A 2, Andover A 0
Irondale/STF AA 5. Anoka AA 1
SLP A 3, Champlin AA 3
Anoka AA 7, Blaine A 1
Centennial AA 8, Rogers A 1
Blaine AA 5, Centennial A 2
Rogers AA 4, Andover A 1
Centennial AA 6, Champlin AA 3
Andover AA 3, Centennial A 0
SLP A 5, Chisago A 1
Chisago A 5, Elk River A 0
Elk River AA 3, Irondale /STF AA 1
Andover AA 4, Champlin AA 3
Coon Rapids A 4, SLP A 4
Anoka AA 1, NCBD A 0
Irondale/STF AA 3, Rogers AA 0
Elk River AA 7, Andover AA 0
Andover A 2 Coon Rapids A 1
SLP A 2, Elk River A 1
SLP A 2, Andover A 1
Andover AA 3, Irondale /STF AA 2
Coon Rapids A 5, Centennial A 2
Rogers AA 3, Blaine A 1
Anoka AA 4, Elk River A 1
Elk River AA 2, Champlin AA 0
Centennial AA 3, Irondale/STF AA 1
Blaine AA 10, NCBD A 0
Elk RIver AA 4, Centennial 2
Elk River AA 3, Rogers AA 0
Centennial A 4, Blaine A 1
Elk River AA 8, Elk River A 1
Centennial AA 3, Blaine AA 2
Champlin AA 4, Coon Rapids A 1
SLP A 5, Blaine A 0
Andover AA 4, Andover A 0
NCBD A 6, Elk River A 1
Anoka AA 3, Centennial A 2
Irondale/STF AA 5, Chisago A 1
Blaine AA 7, Champlin AA 4
Chisago A 3, Blaine A 2
Rogers AA 1, NCBD A 1
Anoka AA 5, Chisago A 1
Centennial A 5, SLP A 4
Andover AA 6, Blaine AA 3
Elk River A 2, Andover A 0
SLP A 3, Irondale/STF 1
Blaine A 2, Andover A 0
Anoka AA 5, Coon Rapids A 2
Blaine AA 2, Elk River A 0
Champlin AA 7, NCBD A 0
Elk River AA 15, Blaine A 1
Centennial AA 15, Andover A 0
Coon Rapids A 2, Elk River A 1
Champln AA 6, Anoka AA 4
Irondale/STF AA 8, Coon Rapids A 1
Champln AA 5, Blaine A 0
Centennial AA 5, Champlin AA 3
Irondale/STF AA 4, Anoka AA 3
Centennial AA 8, Anoka AA 3
Coon Rapids A 5, Blaine A 0
Blaine AA 4, SLP A 0
NCBD A 1, Andover A 1
Centennial AA 5, NCBD A 1
Chisago A 2, Coon Rapids A 2
Rogers AA 1, Centennial A 1
Centennial AA 5, Centennial A 0
Blaine AA 13, Chisago A 0
Rogers AA 4, Coon Rapids A 1
NCBD 2, Chisago 0
Blaine AA 6, Rogers AA 0
NCBD A 4, Blaine A 2
Andover AA 2, Anoka AA 1
SLP A 3, NCBD A 2
Champlin AA 3, Iron/STF AA 1
Centennial A 4, Andover A 0
Elk River AA 8, Blaine AA 2
Centennial AA 5, Andover AA 3
Anoka AA 1, Rogers AA 0
Irondale/STF AA 5. Elk River A 2
Centennial A 5, NCBD A 0
Elk River AA 8, Chisago A 0
Coon Rapids A 3, Andover A 0
Coon Rapids A 2, NCBD A 2
Chisago Lks A 2, Andover A 2
Champlin AA 5, Rogers AA 1
NCBD A 2, Elk River A 1
SLP A 4, Rogers AA 1
Elk River AA 10, Anoka AA 2
Centennial A 4, Elk River A 0
Elk River A 5, Blaine A 1
Blaine AA 4, Anoka AA 2
Centennial AA 6, Irondale/STF 2
Andover AA 7, Rogers AA 1
Blaine A 0, SLP A 5
Blaine AA 8, Coon Rapids A 0

helightsthelamp wrote:Stats compiled from district 10 website:

Bantam AA record vs A in D10 games - 13-0-1
AA has out scored A 89-15

Pee Wee AA record vs A in D10 games - 16-2-2
AA has out scored A 118-17
The two wins both belong to SLP A team and the same AA association has both of the ties on their record

Those involved in the decision to have a split schedule for D10 AA/A games should resign out of embarrassment.

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

Tonight at Bantams Elk River AA plays Elk River A, can anyone give me any rationale as to why this game makes any sense?????

Are you blind to this?

D10 Bantam A vs AA wins/tie (2012-2013)
North Country 5, Irondale/St.francis 1
Champlin Park 2, Centennial 2
Spring Lake Park 3, Irondale/St.francis 2
North Country 4, Rogers 2
Coon Rapids 7, Irondale/St.francis 6 ot

Overall stats
AA 365 goals
A 80 goals

Record AA 51-4-1

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

I remember after it came out that the discussion wasn't included in the minutes, the response from the district was "not part of the official discussion".

Maybe they put it in the obamacare bill and we just need for it to become law before we get to read all about it.

loveitorleaveit wrote:

What I find even more interesting is a review of D10 board meeting minutes from December meeting makes no mention of this ill decided disparity.... Lets just close out eyes and pretend this isn't happening...

I remember after it came out that the discussion wasn't included in the minutes, the response from the district was "not part of the official discussion".

Maybe they put it in the obamacare bill and we just need for it to become law before we get to read all about it.

Perfect!!! Let's have a discussion, but it's not an official discussion... Really so we have some super duper top secret discussions going on that no one should be allowed to know happened unless you attend the meeting??? What is the point of keeping meeting minutes if they are not accurate? That instills a lot of trust in the membership....

I have seen several posts on here and have heard from many which all have resulted in fingers being pointed in other directions.

MNH points at the districts, districts point at the associations, associations point at the districts, districts point at MNH.... In my opinion there is enough "issues" to go around on all fronts...

I started to write all the reasons this has been a disaster on many different levels, but in the end, it is not about what is wrong, or whom is at fault, but how does this get fixed?

If the intent is to just add another tournament at year end, add a B2 tournament and have districts classify teams in accordance.

I keep hearing at least a part of the new level was to have a state tournament for the smaller associations. Having large assocations have both A and AA teams does not fit into this model.

I don't think this is rocket science, but if it really is about having a small association state tournament, then the A level needs to be only for small associations.

Keep AA/A format

Provide guidelines as to which class you fall into by number of skaters at level. If you skate AA, you cant have an A team. (not sure these are the right numbers, but just for example)

100+ - recommended field two AA teams. They do not need to be balanced
51 - 99 - field an AA team
< 50 - recommended field A team
< 30 - B1 is top team

AA can play A, B1 can play A, however, they are not combined leagues and are not forced to play each other as part of league play. Tournaments carry either AA or A classification so teams know what competition they will be facing.

This will truly create a "small association" state tournament without the smaller association's having to get by Edina/Wayzata to win it (if Edina/Wayzata want to sandbag the B1 tourney, so be it, bad for their development). Top A teams will have the ability to play AA teams, but does not force the issue with top 10 AA teams playing lower level A teams. Top B1 teams can still play the smaller association A team's that they are competitive with.

helightsthelamp wrote:I have seen several posts on here and have heard from many which all have resulted in fingers being pointed in other directions.

MNH points at the districts, districts point at the associations, associations point at the districts, districts point at MNH.... In my opinion there is enough "issues" to go around on all fronts...

I started to write all the reasons this has been a disaster on many different levels, but in the end, it is not about what is wrong, or whom is at fault, but how does this get fixed?

If the intent is to just add another tournament at year end, add a B2 tournament and have districts classify teams in accordance.

I keep hearing at least a part of the new level was to have a state tournament for the smaller associations. Having large assocations have both A and AA teams does not fit into this model.

I don't think this is rocket science, but if it really is about having a small association state tournament, then the A level needs to be only for small associations.

Keep AA/A format

Provide guidelines as to which class you fall into by number of skaters at level. If you skate AA, you cant have an A team. (not sure these are the right numbers, but just for example)

100+ - recommended field two AA teams. They do not need to be balanced
51 - 99 - field an AA team
< 50 - recommended field A team
< 30 - B1 is top team

AA can play A, B1 can play A, however, they are not combined leagues and are not forced to play each other as part of league play. Tournaments carry either AA or A classification so teams know what competition they will be facing.

This will truly create a "small association" state tournament without the smaller association's having to get by Edina/Wayzata to win it (if Edina/Wayzata want to sandbag the B1 tourney, so be it, bad for their development). Top A teams will have the ability to play AA teams, but does not force the issue with top 10 AA teams playing lower level A teams. Top B1 teams can still play the smaller association A team's that they are competitive with.

HLTL - Clearly you have not been educated enough in bureaucracy and politics. Your common sense approach is way too simple for the idiots opps sorry I meant Directors at the District & State level.

Be patient you have not seen the worst yet. It will be the laughs of all laughs to see how the Bantam A and AA State Tournament pairings look. There are Districts like #10 that has a better chance of sending their 4th & 5th place team from Districts to state rather than their 1st & 2nd place team.

That's embarrassing

ThePuckStopsHere wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:I have seen several posts on here and have heard from many which all have resulted in fingers being pointed in other directions.

MNH points at the districts, districts point at the associations, associations point at the districts, districts point at MNH.... In my opinion there is enough "issues" to go around on all fronts...

I started to write all the reasons this has been a disaster on many different levels, but in the end, it is not about what is wrong, or whom is at fault, but how does this get fixed?

If the intent is to just add another tournament at year end, add a B2 tournament and have districts classify teams in accordance.

I keep hearing at least a part of the new level was to have a state tournament for the smaller associations. Having large assocations have both A and AA teams does not fit into this model.

I don't think this is rocket science, but if it really is about having a small association state tournament, then the A level needs to be only for small associations.

Keep AA/A format

Provide guidelines as to which class you fall into by number of skaters at level. If you skate AA, you cant have an A team. (not sure these are the right numbers, but just for example)

100+ - recommended field two AA teams. They do not need to be balanced
51 - 99 - field an AA team
< 50 - recommended field A team
< 30 - B1 is top team

AA can play A, B1 can play A, however, they are not combined leagues and are not forced to play each other as part of league play. Tournaments carry either AA or A classification so teams know what competition they will be facing.

This will truly create a "small association" state tournament without the smaller association's having to get by Edina/Wayzata to win it (if Edina/Wayzata want to sandbag the B1 tourney, so be it, bad for their development). Top A teams will have the ability to play AA teams, but does not force the issue with top 10 AA teams playing lower level A teams. Top B1 teams can still play the smaller association A team's that they are competitive with.

HLTL - Clearly you have not been educated enough in bureaucracy and politics. Your common sense approach is way too simple for the idiots opps sorry I meant Directors at the District & State level.

Be patient you have not seen the worst yet. It will be the laughs of all laughs to see how the Bantam A and AA State Tournament pairings look. There are Districts like #10 that has a better chance of sending their 4th & 5th place team from Districts to state rather than their 1st & 2nd place team.

That's embarrassing

Like I said, could have listed many "shortcomings" of the season..... yes playoff picture is one of them.

More important is what this change has done to many 11-15 year old hockey players from a mental aspect... embarrassing is not the word I would use

helightsthelamp wrote:

ThePuckStopsHere wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:I have seen several posts on here and have heard from many which all have resulted in fingers being pointed in other directions.

MNH points at the districts, districts point at the associations, associations point at the districts, districts point at MNH.... In my opinion there is enough "issues" to go around on all fronts...

I started to write all the reasons this has been a disaster on many different levels, but in the end, it is not about what is wrong, or whom is at fault, but how does this get fixed?

If the intent is to just add another tournament at year end, add a B2 tournament and have districts classify teams in accordance.

I keep hearing at least a part of the new level was to have a state tournament for the smaller associations. Having large assocations have both A and AA teams does not fit into this model.

I don't think this is rocket science, but if it really is about having a small association state tournament, then the A level needs to be only for small associations.

Keep AA/A format

Provide guidelines as to which class you fall into by number of skaters at level. If you skate AA, you cant have an A team. (not sure these are the right numbers, but just for example)

100+ - recommended field two AA teams. They do not need to be balanced
51 - 99 - field an AA team
< 50 - recommended field A team
< 30 - B1 is top team

AA can play A, B1 can play A, however, they are not combined leagues and are not forced to play each other as part of league play. Tournaments carry either AA or A classification so teams know what competition they will be facing.

This will truly create a "small association" state tournament without the smaller association's having to get by Edina/Wayzata to win it (if Edina/Wayzata want to sandbag the B1 tourney, so be it, bad for their development). Top A teams will have the ability to play AA teams, but does not force the issue with top 10 AA teams playing lower level A teams. Top B1 teams can still play the smaller association A team's that they are competitive with.

HLTL - Clearly you have not been educated enough in bureaucracy and politics. Your common sense approach is way too simple for the idiots opps sorry I meant Directors at the District & State level.

Be patient you have not seen the worst yet. It will be the laughs of all laughs to see how the Bantam A and AA State Tournament pairings look. There are Districts like #10 that has a better chance of sending their 4th & 5th place team from Districts to state rather than their 1st & 2nd place team.

That's embarrassing

Like I said, could have listed many "shortcomings" of the season..... yes playoff picture is one of them.

More important is what this change has done to many 11-15 year old hockey players from a mental aspect... embarrassing is not the word I would use

for the most part, in D10, Associations that have both AA & A teams, The AA's are destroying the small association "A" teams, but their "A" teams are getting beat by the small association "A" teams. So the small associations can't hang against the 1-15's but are better than the 16-30's. The major problem with D10, was having the AA's play the A's

helightsthelamp wrote:I have seen several posts on here and have heard from many which all have resulted in fingers being pointed in other directions.

MNH points at the districts, districts point at the associations, associations point at the districts, districts point at MNH.... In my opinion there is enough "issues" to go around on all fronts...

I started to write all the reasons this has been a disaster on many different levels, but in the end, it is not about what is wrong, or whom is at fault, but how does this get fixed?

If the intent is to just add another tournament at year end, add a B2 tournament and have districts classify teams in accordance.

I keep hearing at least a part of the new level was to have a state tournament for the smaller associations. Having large assocations have both A and AA teams does not fit into this model.

I don't think this is rocket science, but if it really is about having a small association state tournament, then the A level needs to be only for small associations.

Keep AA/A format

Provide guidelines as to which class you fall into by number of skaters at level. If you skate AA, you cant have an A team. (not sure these are the right numbers, but just for example)

100+ - recommended field two AA teams. They do not need to be balanced
51 - 99 - field an AA team
< 50 - recommended field A team
< 30 - B1 is top team

AA can play A, B1 can play A, however, they are not combined leagues and are not forced to play each other as part of league play. Tournaments carry either AA or A classification so teams know what competition they will be facing.

This will truly create a "small association" state tournament without the smaller association's having to get by Edina/Wayzata to win it (if Edina/Wayzata want to sandbag the B1 tourney, so be it, bad for their development). Top A teams will have the ability to play AA teams, but does not force the issue with top 10 AA teams playing lower level A teams. Top B1 teams can still play the smaller association A team's that they are competitive with.

Makes way too much sense to ever happen.

One adjustment I'd make, the bottom classification of less than 30 top team B1. Associations of less than 30 should be given the choice of whether to classify their top team as A or B1. Right now our association has less than 30 travel squirts yet fields an A and B1 team and competes well with the non-mega associations.

the_juiceman wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:

ThePuckStopsHere wrote: HLTL - Clearly you have not been educated enough in bureaucracy and politics. Your common sense approach is way too simple for the idiots opps sorry I meant Directors at the District & State level.

Be patient you have not seen the worst yet. It will be the laughs of all laughs to see how the Bantam A and AA State Tournament pairings look. There are Districts like #10 that has a better chance of sending their 4th & 5th place team from Districts to state rather than their 1st & 2nd place team.

That's embarrassing

Like I said, could have listed many "shortcomings" of the season..... yes playoff picture is one of them.

More important is what this change has done to many 11-15 year old hockey players from a mental aspect... embarrassing is not the word I would use

for the most part, in D10, Associations that have both AA & A teams, The AA's are destroying the small association "A" teams, but their "A" teams are getting beat by the small association "A" teams. So the small associations can't hang against the 1-15's but are better than the 16-30's. The major problem with D10, was having the AA's play the A's

The issue isn't with A team's playing A teams, for the most part, those games are competitive... While the record of A teams that also have AA is less then stellar majority of games are close. Yes, the issue is having the AA play the A that in general has resulted in blowouts... Not good for either team.

SCBlueLiner wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:I have seen several posts on here and have heard from many which all have resulted in fingers being pointed in other directions.

MNH points at the districts, districts point at the associations, associations point at the districts, districts point at MNH.... In my opinion there is enough "issues" to go around on all fronts...

I started to write all the reasons this has been a disaster on many different levels, but in the end, it is not about what is wrong, or whom is at fault, but how does this get fixed?

If the intent is to just add another tournament at year end, add a B2 tournament and have districts classify teams in accordance.

I keep hearing at least a part of the new level was to have a state tournament for the smaller associations. Having large assocations have both A and AA teams does not fit into this model.

I don't think this is rocket science, but if it really is about having a small association state tournament, then the A level needs to be only for small associations.

Keep AA/A format

Provide guidelines as to which class you fall into by number of skaters at level. If you skate AA, you cant have an A team. (not sure these are the right numbers, but just for example)

100+ - recommended field two AA teams. They do not need to be balanced
51 - 99 - field an AA team
< 50 - recommended field A team
< 30 - B1 is top team

AA can play A, B1 can play A, however, they are not combined leagues and are not forced to play each other as part of league play. Tournaments carry either AA or A classification so teams know what competition they will be facing.

This will truly create a "small association" state tournament without the smaller association's having to get by Edina/Wayzata to win it (if Edina/Wayzata want to sandbag the B1 tourney, so be it, bad for their development). Top A teams will have the ability to play AA teams, but does not force the issue with top 10 AA teams playing lower level A teams. Top B1 teams can still play the smaller association A team's that they are competitive with.

Makes way too much sense to ever happen.

One adjustment I'd make, the bottom classification of less than 30 top team B1. Associations of less than 30 should be given the choice of whether to classify their top team as A or B1. Right now our association has less than 30 travel squirts yet fields an A and B1 team and competes well with the non-mega associations.

Simple, easy, good for the players...

anyone notice a differnce in games if it is a 1-17 "A" team or a 17-35 "A" team? Seems some of the top 1-17 "A" teams are pretty solid and could give most of the AA teams a good game, while some of the 17-35 "A" teams are a bit farther away yet.

I think once everyone learns how to schedule games it may work pretty good.

No matter how many A's, B's, C's etc you have, there is going to be some overlapping in talent. I have seen some good games this year that would not have been able to happen under the old A / B format.

[quote="black sheep"]anyone notice a differnce in games if it is a 1-17 "A" team or a 17-35 "A" team? Seems some of the top 1-17 "A" teams are pretty solid and could give most of the AA teams a good game, while some of the 17-35 "A" teams are a bit farther away yet.

I think once everyone learns how to schedule games it may work pretty good.

No matter how many A's, B's, C's etc you have, there is going to be some overlapping in talent. I have seen some good games this year that would not have been able to happen under the old A / B format.[/quote]

I agree with you. But you better watch out for Bo he will come hunting you down for even suggesting that an A team was able to compete with a AA team.