HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

So their reasoning is more state champs = success?

Why don't we just go ahead and expand again and again and again?

Then we could be super duper ultra successful!!!!!!!

What a joke.

DrGaf wrote:So their reasoning is more state champs = success?

Why don't we just go ahead and expand again and again and again?

Then we could be super duper ultra successful!!!!!!!

What a joke.

Happy to know that there are others out there that show signs of brain activity.

It may have worked for some, but for FL it sucked because our B teams didn't stand a chance vs WBL/Still due to the fact that they chose not to have an AA and A team.

Oh I know it's such a drag that Johnson/Como got three teams to a state tournament, that Hallock and Luverne made it to state even though they clearly didn't deserve it, and it sucks that Edina didn't actually win every championship at every level this year, and it's totally bogus that kids in small northern and southern programs are being given this "equal opporunity" b.s. just at the point when they'd normally be quitting the game and moving on to a sport more their speed like basketball.

old goalie85 wrote:It may have worked for some, but for FL it sucked because our B teams didn't stand a chance vs WBL/Still due to the fact that they chose not to have an AA and A team.

This I do agree with though, OG. These programs are known to be lame as a result of this decision.

But wouldn't it have been exactly the same without the new designations?

It didn't help FL, but it didn't hurt either. Still, MNH should tweak the program by requiring large associations to run both AA and A, while small legacy schools and brave ones like Roseau or STMA can be allowed to field just one AA team.

As an observer at the DD meeting, what frustrated me the most with this decision was that they did not address WBL and STW type associations.

Minneapolis should also be given an extra look this year as well (I believe they had 9 PW teams last year...none at AA). They also had a finalist in Fargo at the Squirt level, too.

Those would be the only major fixes, I'd like to personally see.

OG - FL PWAA made it Regions this year...had there been one class, it is likely they wouldn't have made it. The AA/A has been good to a lot of programs in the middle class, not just the Luverne and Hallock of the world. Eastview qualified both Bantam AA and PeeWee AA to regions...until this year they had never made it.

Why didn't they just pass a rule that if you have X many teams at a level then you are required to field a AA team at that level. If you have Y number of teams you are required to field an A team at that level.

- An argument could be made that "team" is not AA level caliber, to that I say "so what, you have the numbers, do a better job of developing them". Sure, some associations will have up and down years based on the quality of their class. That's normal. Playing that class down only exacerbates the problem.

- Forces development instead of sandbagging.

- Solves problems like WBL, STW, and Minneapolis.

-Only forces the top team placed based on association size. Other teams could be placed based on talent, B1, B2, C.

Bottom line is the 1-15 kids should be playing at the right level based on that associations size.

SCBlueLiner wrote:Why didn't they just pass a rule that if you have X many teams at a level then you are required to field a AA team at that level. If you have Y number of teams you are required to field an A team at that level.

- An argument could be made that "team" is not AA level caliber, to that I say "so what, you have the numbers, do a better job of developing them". Sure, some associations will have up and down years based on the quality of their class. That's normal. Playing that class down only exacerbates the problem.

- Forces development instead of sandbagging.

- Solves problems like WBL, STW, and Minneapolis.

-Only forces the top team placed based on association size. Other teams could be placed based on talent, B1, B2, C.

Bottom line is the 1-15 kids should be playing at the right level based on that associations size.

Part of the problem is the fact that MNHockey requires the entire association to declare the same class. This makes sense as an exercise in cognitive symmetry, but no sense at all in the real world when you compare the size and strength of a Peewee class versus the same association's Bantam class.

I personally think that constantly tweaking the system in order to increase parity is a fine thing, and this is a good though imperfect start.

I think the new system is more fair, but needs to be tweaked on an Association by Association basis. Some years within a town are very strong, others not so much. Some ability to adjust to these realities must be allowed.

No problem with MPLS not having an AA team. It's not like they were blowing out the other top A teams. They won, but by close scores. I think there will be pressure within the associations to field a team at the highest reasonable level. I'm pretty sure that Edina will be fielding two B1 teams next year, if not two A teams.

Conversely, I don't think a town should be forced to move up of they don't have the talent. I saw some teams playing at a higher level than they should've last year with predictable, and rather ugly, results.

Shinbone_News wrote:Oh I know it's such a drag that Johnson/Como got three teams to a state tournament, that Hallock and Luverne made it to state even though they clearly didn't deserve it, and it sucks that Edina didn't actually win every championship at every level this year, and it's totally bogus that kids in small northern and southern programs are being given this "equal opporunity" b.s. just at the point when they'd normally be quitting the game and moving on to a sport more their speed like basketball.

These programs could have dropped down to certain level and done the same thing in the old format.......... Could have just added a B-2 State Tournament.

Mega associations having two A (even a 1-17 and then a 18-34 team) teams and then having to have certain number of B-1 teams based on their numbers, would have solved most of the BALANCE problems. The best could still face the other best and the rest would be pushed to become better........ But then we'd have to hear the Edina folks whine that the second A team kids weren't in the upper half of the standings... Couldn't have that.

A is now B-1. B-1 is now B-2. People are starting to understand that.

57special wrote:I think the new system is more fair, but needs to be tweaked on an Association by Association basis. Some years within a town are very strong, others not so much. Some ability to adjust to these realities must be allowed.

No problem with MPLS not having an AA team. It's not like they were blowing out the other top A teams. They won, but by close scores. I think there will be pressure within the associations to field a team at the highest reasonable level. I'm pretty sure that Edina will be fielding two B1 teams next year, if not two A teams.

Conversely, I don't think a town should be forced to move up of they don't have the talent. I saw some teams playing at a higher level than they should've last year with predictable, and rather ugly, results.

"More fair"? Programs could have dropped to B-1 at any time in the old format. Why didn't they? Because they wanted to compete against the best..

It's only a matter of time until the A equals AA mirage wears off.

Will D10 still have the 1-17 against 18-34 slaughter fest?