Great 8

bstarr15 · Post by **bstarr15** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:48 am

Does anyone know if rosters or schedule has been posted for the Ted Brill Great 8 coming up this weekend in St. Paul???

Ready2GoYet · Post by **Ready2GoYet** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:08 am

They are on the Minnesota Hockey website

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... ll-great-8

bstarr15 · Post by **bstarr15** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:57 am

Thanks much, wow some sections are going to be really loaded.
4A/4AA with STA players and 2 of the top goalies. should be some good games though.

puckster15 · Post by **puckster15** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:54 am

A coaches dream for 4A / 4AA. Should I play Dougas or Zevnik.

hockeyfan893 · Post by **hockeyfan893** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:28 pm

Section 4 is stacked. Three Mr. Hockey nominees and the two Brimsek nominees. Hard to identify a single weakness on this squad.

Bonehead · Post by **Bonehead** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:13 pm

section 5 not exactly limping in either!

Roy01 · Post by **Roy01** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:52 pm

It looks like there are a lot more notable names on the rosters this year than in the past couple. Should make for a great tournament!

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:26 pm

7 is loaded . [w/Duluth kids]

Nuts&Bolts · Post by **Nuts&Bolts** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:40 pm

Probable advantage to any section that doesn't have 3A. Two players added from 3A schools and looks like no Glienke or Willox from Eagan? I'll take Section 4 with two solid goalies especially since this is likely the format where you get a penalty shot instead of powerplays.

Where's the bracket contest? Should be a good opportunity to see some top end seniors anyway.

nosoupforyou · Post by **nosoupforyou** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:31 pm

3A/3AA couldn't fill a full roster so they had to add a player from Section 4A? Not questioning the player, he's a very nice player. Just surprised they couldn't get enough kids from all of those teams.

Also, no Bischoff on the Section 7 team???

Sartellcelly · Post by **Sartellcelly** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:36 pm

Lots of fresh faces on the Section 2 roster.

Slap Shot · Post by **Slap Shot** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:13 pm

6 looks weak.

north_bear · Post by **north_bear** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:42 pm

nosoupforyou wrote:3A/3AA couldn't fill a full roster so they had to add a player from Section 4A? Not questioning the player, he's a very nice player. Just surprised they couldn't get enough kids from all of those teams.

Also, no Bischoff on the Section 7 team???

I would assume he is busy playing for Omaha.

GR3343 · Post by **GR3343** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:02 am

When this tournament was the Maroon & Gold series it used to be for the top uncommitted players. Looks like they've gone away from that idea in recent years.

preferhockey · Post by **preferhockey** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:53 am

Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.

Yep, quite a changed from Advanced 17 group last year. The prior two years Section 6 has won Advance 17 and Advance 16 with about 12 players off team advancing to Final 54.

Then again new players may add some additional incentive to win.

Would be all for eliminating penalty shot for every penalty.

bstarr15 · Post by **bstarr15** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:58 pm

Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.

I wouldn't go to light on section 6, Schuldt, Thei both on the SW Elite team and nice players, Stumpf and Newman Little Falls play well although not against the competition of others. Section 5 has a full boat for sure, Section 1 hard for me to tell,don't know many of these players, might not be a good sign.

Metrohockeyfan · Post by **Metrohockeyfan** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:35 pm

Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.

The thing that is going to hurt 6 is no juniors. They had a very deep team in 16 and 17's but now the skill, along with goaltending, is being spread out between the 18's and Great 8.

Sartellcelly · Post by **Sartellcelly** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:19 pm

Section 2's best, and then some, are not there: Mork, Nelson, Reno, Zins, Bianchi, and others who were on the U18 roster last year.

OnFrozenPond · Post by **OnFrozenPond** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:18 pm

Metrohockeyfan wrote:
Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.
The thing that is going to hurt 6 is no juniors. They had a very deep team in 16 and 17's but now the skill, along with goaltending, is being spread out between the 18's and Great 8.

While there are some strong Juniors in Section 6, it's the fact that some strong seniors chose not to participtate that hurts this teams depth. If you added Labosky, Moore, Vanelli, Besse, Cotta and Dingmann to Shuldt, Thie, Bergh, Knudsen, etc they would be considered a very strong team.

D3Referee · Post by **D3Referee** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:26 pm

OnFrozenPond wrote:
Metrohockeyfan wrote:
Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.
The thing that is going to hurt 6 is no juniors. They had a very deep team in 16 and 17's but now the skill, along with goaltending, is being spread out between the 18's and Great 8.
While there are some strong Juniors in Section 6, it's the fact that some strong seniors chose not to participtate that hurts this teams depth. If you added Labosky, Moore, Vanelli, Besse, Cotta and Dingmann to Shuldt, Thie, Bergh, Knudsen, etc they would be considered a very strong team.

Yup. 6 coulda been loaded

Slap Shot · Post by **Slap Shot** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:55 am

OnFrozenPond wrote:
Metrohockeyfan wrote:
Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.
The thing that is going to hurt 6 is no juniors. They had a very deep team in 16 and 17's but now the skill, along with goaltending, is being spread out between the 18's and Great 8.
While there are some strong Juniors in Section 6, it's the fact that some strong seniors chose not to participtate that hurts this teams depth. If you added Labosky, Moore, Vanelli, Besse, Cotta and Dingmann to Shuldt, Thie, Bergh, Knudsen, etc they would be considered a very strong team.

Exactly.

preferhockey · Post by **preferhockey** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:36 am

OnFrozenPond wrote:
Metrohockeyfan wrote:
Slap Shot wrote:6 looks weak.
The thing that is going to hurt 6 is no juniors. They had a very deep team in 16 and 17's but now the skill, along with goaltending, is being spread out between the 18's and Great 8.
While there are some strong Juniors in Section 6, it's the fact that some strong seniors chose not to participtate that hurts this teams depth. If you added Labosky, Moore, Vanelli, Besse, Cotta and Dingmann to Shuldt, Thie, Bergh, Knudsen, etc they would be considered a very strong team.

Hmm, no outstate kids on your list that you consider are either missing or already on the team. The best goalie in all of Section 6 is missing yes a 6A player Stumpf.

OnFrozenPond · Post by **OnFrozenPond** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:48 am

preferhockey wrote:
OnFrozenPond wrote:
Metrohockeyfan wrote: The thing that is going to hurt 6 is no juniors. They had a very deep team in 16 and 17's but now the skill, along with goaltending, is being spread out between the 18's and Great 8.
While there are some strong Juniors in Section 6, it's the fact that some strong seniors chose not to participtate that hurts this teams depth. If you added Labosky, Moore, Vanelli, Besse, Cotta and Dingmann to Shuldt, Thie, Bergh, Knudsen, etc they would be considered a very strong team.
Hmm, no outstate kids on your list that you consider are either missing or already on the team. The best goalie in all of Section 6 is missing yes a 6A player Stumpf.

Certainly didn't mean to imply that there were not other worthy players that passed up the opportunity. Just rattled off some names of good players that I am familiar with.

bemused · Post by **bemused** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:33 am

old goalie85 wrote:7 is loaded . [w/Duluth kids]

and what a surprise!! No one from State participant Duluth Marshall. Not sure if it is the standard complete lack of effort by Coach Flaherty to promote his kids or the usual shut out job by the coaches of the year..and skip the BS about them not having at least one deserving player...

preferhockey · Post by **preferhockey** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:16 am

OnFrozenPond wrote:
Certainly didn't mean to imply that there were not other worthy players that passed up the opportunity. Just rattled off some names of good players that I am familiar with.

Understand

Would be nice for players from outside metro or with small programs to be given equal chance to be recognized. At least Section 6 did for Great 8. May be other sections will do so in future.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Great 8

Great 8

great 8

great 8