HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

During the 1st intermission of the Edina/Cloquet game the commentators discussed the seeding process. The organizer of the tourney said they had all the coaches on a conference call. They then showed 4 coaches (LF, BSM, and Edina) complaining about seeding only 4 teams. The organizer then talked again and at no time responded to the comments about seeding only 4 teams. They started seeding because coaches wanted it, so hopefully they will listen and seed all 8 next year.

Anyone know what the Tourney would look like if they still did the Section rotation?

Pucknutz69 wrote:Anyone know what the Tourney would look like if they still did the Section rotation?

Prior to 2005 they were paired up on a seven-year rotation. In other words, if section 7 played section 5 in 1995, then they did in 2002. They changed that in 2005 so that Class A and AA were "in sync", rearranges the pairings at the same time. Example; section 7 played section 3 in both classes. This only lasted for two years until the seeding process began in 2007. I know the future pairings used to be posted on the mshsl.org site, but am sure those no longer are available because they don't mean anything now that they seed the top four in each class.

Which brings me to my opinion...seed them all or don't seed at all.

Lee

I have a hard time understanding why anybody cares. Ya sure the top seed could get as high as the 5th seed, but so what? I think the objective for seeding was so the top seeds don't meet the first day and thats been accomplished.

I heard that when they seeded, they always has seeds 100 years in advance. Fact or fiction?

or faction?

NumberCruncher wrote:I heard that when they seeded, they always has seeds 100 years in advance. Fact or fiction?

or faction?

Faction is the section 7AA seeding process...

Neutron 14 wrote:I think the objective for seeding was so the top seeds don't meet the first day and thats been accomplished.

I agree with this. I think seeding only the top 4 has worked out great. I would have hated to see Marshall vs. STA or Edina vs. Roseau in the first round.

I don't remember what coach said you should seed the top 5 so the #1 seed doesn't play the next best team is stupid to say. He should realize that the seeding is so that the potential top 2 teams don't square off in round 1. If the #1 seed loses in the first round, I think that makes the tournament better and makes that team the cinderalla story.

Seems to me it was Edina coach who liked the seed the top 5 teams. However it is kind of stupid just to seed 4 teams. Yes it keeps from haveing the top two teams up against eachother right away but it also is silly only to seed half a tourney and not the whole thing. Seems to me the only right thing to do is seed it all or dont do it

Warroad97 wrote:Seems to me it was Edina coach who liked the seed the top 5 teams. However it is kind of stupid just to seed 4 teams. Yes it keeps from haveing the top two teams up against eachother right away but it also is silly only to seed half a tourney and not the whole thing. Seems to me the only right thing to do is seed it all or dont do it

Hmm ... I'm almost positive it wasn't Giles. I thought it was maybe Pauley.

Here's why I like only seeding the top 4--apparently I'm in the minority here.

I think it sets up the possibility for more upsets. Bad if your team is upset, but it is exciting. Your team won't be there every year, and lets face it I (at least) love watching an upset.

It puts less emphasis on what seed you receive. If there is a large gap in talent from #5 to #8 seeding you're relying on other coaches opinions on what team you need to face. Random (for the first round at least) #4 is just as good #1.

No team wants to receive #8. Some teams deserve it, but do you want to be that team?

I agree with Lee. Either seed all of the teams or don't seed them at all. All of the teams were seeded in the section tourneys, top to bottom, so there's no reason not to do it for the state tourney.

This argument that there might be some hurt feelings of the teams getting the bottom seeds is just a stupid argument. I would think a team that was seeded 8th in the state tourney and they felt like they got a raw deal, it would give the team some serious motivation and incentive to show everybody how wrong they were.

CitiesSpudsGuy wrote:I agree with Lee. Either seed all of the teams or don't seed them at all. All of the teams were seeded in the section tourneys, top to bottom, so there's no reason not to do it for the state tourney.

This argument that there might be some hurt feelings of the teams getting the bottom seeds is just a stupid argument. I would think a team that was seeded 8th in the state tourney and they felt like they got a raw deal, it would give the team some serious motivation and incentive to show everybody how wrong they were.

CSG its not that tough to seed sections, since they play each other and have many common opponants. State is different, and if they want to seed the top 4 to prevent the top teams from playing each other the first day thats fine. I think it works now, and you dont get the howling from the coach and fans of the team who got the 8 seed.

I don't know why they think the teams would get upset about getting the eighth seed. As pauley said there are at least 8 other teams out there that would have loved to be the 8th seed. I think they should seed them all and think that it would actually provide more inspiration for the 8th seed to show that they belong there.

They have 8-9 seeds in sections. What's the big deal if you're an 8 seed at the state. Might even be a motivator.

Neutron 14 wrote:

CitiesSpudsGuy wrote:I agree with Lee. Either seed all of the teams or don't seed them at all. All of the teams were seeded in the section tourneys, top to bottom, so there's no reason not to do it for the state tourney.

This argument that there might be some hurt feelings of the teams getting the bottom seeds is just a stupid argument. I would think a team that was seeded 8th in the state tourney and they felt like they got a raw deal, it would give the team some serious motivation and incentive to show everybody how wrong they were.

CSG its not that tough to seed sections, since they play each other and have many common opponants. State is different, and if they want to seed the top 4 to prevent the top teams from playing each other the first day thats fine. I think it works now, and you dont get the howling from the coach and fans of the team who got the 8 seed.

No matter how they do the state tourney (seeding vs the rotation), you're going to have some unhappy people. Isn't the whole point of the pairings to make it as fair for everybody as possible? When you only seed the top 4, how is it fair then that the #1 seeded team might have to play the #5 seed while the #2 seed might end up playing the #8 seed? And I find it hard to believe that seeding only 8 teams would be as difficult as you seem to make it sound.

I don't think randomizing the bottom four is meant to be unfair, certainly not more unfair than section rotation. I think it prevents alot of problems that could arise with the seeding process.

And mostly I think its much ado about nothing.

ovechkid wrote:I don't know why they think the teams would get upset about getting the eighth seed. As pauley said there are at least 8 other teams out there that would have loved to be the 8th seed. I think they should seed them all and think that it would actually provide more inspiration for the 8th seed to show that they belong there.

Exactly, I'm sure any team who reached the section final wouldn't care less to have the chance to play in the state tournament even seeded 8th.

Neutron 14 wrote:I don't think randomizing the bottom four is meant to be unfair, certainly not more unfair than section rotation. I think it prevents alot of problems that could arise with the seeding process.

And mostly I think its much ado about nothing.

I'm guessing the 'problems' you're talking about are coaches possibly complaining about getting the 8th seed. But if the coaches are the ones clamoring for a change, as HShockeywatcher mentioned above, then how would it cause more problems? You're giving them what they want (and making it more fair, IMO), so they have nothing to complain about. It also seems to me that the majority of fans that are posting here are in favor of seeding all teams too. So again, how is that causing more problems?

east hockey wrote: Which brings me to my opinion...seed them all or don't seed at all.

Lee

I concur...seeding 4 is stupid. Seeding is stupid.

Neutron 14 wrote:

CitiesSpudsGuy wrote:I agree with Lee. Either seed all of the teams or don't seed them at all. All of the teams were seeded in the section tourneys, top to bottom, so there's no reason not to do it for the state tourney.

This argument that there might be some hurt feelings of the teams getting the bottom seeds is just a stupid argument. I would think a team that was seeded 8th in the state tourney and they felt like they got a raw deal, it would give the team some serious motivation and incentive to show everybody how wrong they were.

CSG its not that tough to seed sections, since they play each other and have many common opponants. State is different, and if they want to seed the top 4 to prevent the top teams from playing each other the first day thats fine. I think it works now, and you dont get the howling from the coach and fans of the team who got the 8 seed.

No, instead you get the howling from the fans of the team who got the #2 seed. As in Class A. As in....

Lee

Seed them all. Seeding four is still a thousand times better than a rotation but seeding them all would remove the unecessary probability.

Remember, the idea of the tourney is to determine the best team in the state for each class. By putting Edina v. Roseau in the first round due to a section rotation doesn't achieve that in any way.

east hockey wrote:

Neutron 14 wrote:

CitiesSpudsGuy wrote:I agree with Lee. Either seed all of the teams or don't seed them at all. All of the teams were seeded in the section tourneys, top to bottom, so there's no reason not to do it for the state tourney.

This argument that there might be some hurt feelings of the teams getting the bottom seeds is just a stupid argument. I would think a team that was seeded 8th in the state tourney and they felt like they got a raw deal, it would give the team some serious motivation and incentive to show everybody how wrong they were.

CSG its not that tough to seed sections, since they play each other and have many common opponants. State is different, and if they want to seed the top 4 to prevent the top teams from playing each other the first day thats fine. I think it works now, and you dont get the howling from the coach and fans of the team who got the 8 seed.

No, instead you get the howling from the fans of the team who got the #2 seed. As in Class A. As in....

Lee

No system will stop whining from some people...

61ache, yes, it leaves more possibility of upsets. But that's not the point of seeding. Teams work all season to earn a spot. Doesn't seem fair if the #1 team pairs up with the #5 team and the #2 pairs with the #8.

Also, as they commented, I really don't think anyone would care about getting the #8 seed. Sure, it wouldn't be the greatest, but if you're the 8th best team to make it, you're just happy to be there. You're at state, you have at least two games left, you should be happy to be there.

Neutron, what problems could arise? These coaches probably follow hockey all season and know what teams are like from scores and such. People may not agree with how sections end up being seeded, I know I don't always, but that's what happens.

I don't at all see the argument for not seeding. Look at something like a Grand Slam in tennis. If Federer and Nadal were to play in the first round sometime that would be quite silly. There's a reason they don't do it.

Don't seed anyone. It's to judgemental, let the players decide it. 1A and 1AA has sent darn good hockey teams up there the last 2 years, this year 23-2 and they will never get seeded, maybe Lourdes would but no public school ever will. It's crap. Unless the MSHSL is willing to pay for some southern teams to take some northern excursions they have no chance of being seeded, they just can't play enough quality teams.

Yes, you're right, they won't get seeded with those two losses. Undefeated they probably would've been seeded, but losing to the teams they did show they aren't worthy of a seed.

If they want to go places, there are many things they can do. Just a few ideas: have parents pay (as they do at many schools), get into a good holiday tourney, petition for more money, just a few, but there's many more ways.

There have been plenty of reasons stating why seeding is good, which it is. Just because of week section exists, doesn't mean they deserve more than they do.