New Region Format

[Night Train]

Now don't even get me started on the District playoffs such as District 8 with 14 A peewee teams vs District 1 that had 4 peewee A teams yet gets to send 2 teams to Regionals that the 14th team in D8 would have had a good game with.

Sounds like a few teams from District 8 should move to District 1.

How about Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Cottage Grove and Sibley move to District 1 and battle Highland and Minneapolis for the Regional berths.

You're also wrong with your snide little comment regarding the strength of the top teams in D1. Mpls-Park handled several teams that you're suggesting are the chosen ones.

Mpls-Park PWA ranked over,

IGH
Rogers
Apple Valley
Jefferson
Lakeville South
North St. Paul

Mpls-Park PWA beat,

Rosemount (5-1)
Eagan (10-4)
Jefferson
East Grand Forks @ State (5-1) ranked 14th
lost to Woodbury in OT at State

You need to get out and watch a little more hockey. Cut down on your driving, get out of District 8 and join District 1.

[Hockeydaddy]

Given that pretty much every team has some travel at playoff time, I think it would be best to start the cross-district play earlier rather than later. In effect, create one giant bracket. If I decipher the Minnesota Hockey site, there are 12 districts having anywhere between 8 and 20 associations in them. Obviously not every association has a team at every level, so there really aren't the 146 teams, but even if there were, this would work.

After regular season play, each district would be seeded based on regular season play. Then you basically break them up and send them to all different regions (if you have more than 8 you'd have two or more teams in a region tournament.) So a regional site might have seeds that look like this - remember every team gets into the playoffs, but this would spread the top district seeds out.

Sample Region:

D1 Seed 1
D11 Seed 1
D5 Seed 2
D3 Seed 3
D16 Seed 4
D10 Seed 4
D12 Seed 5
D8 Seed 5
D4 Seed 6
D2 Seed 7
D15 Seed 7
D6 Seed 8
D1 Seed 9
D16 Seed 9
D15 Seed 10
D8 Seed 12
D10 Seed 14
D4 Seed 16

(Each region looks similiar, with similar #s of 1 seeds, 2 seeds, etc.)

In this case you'd need two play-in games.

Run these teams in a bracket, and come out with a winner. Takes all the geographic bias out of it. There are teams from all over, so anyone could emerge. (I actually did the seeding for each region, and it's fair across the regions. Very retentive, yes.) Then you take your 8 regional winners, have those coaches re-seed them, and there's your state bracket. If you wanted to do double elimination brackets, it might take longer (unless you had a lot of rinks), but it could be done.

There's some travel involved, but most teams travel at the end of the year anyway if they're lucky.

Blow up the argument that the best teams don't get in - blow up the argument that Northern teams don't get the proper respect.

[Air Force 1]

I do not think that the levels need to be added to. I do think that some associations need to take a hard look at their program and request to their district a realistic classification if they should skate as an "A" or a "B".

And I agree that you cannot fix perceived problems at region and state levels until you fix the districts.

I have an issue with the annual realignment of the regions. I agree with the poster that said "region is geographic". For the upcoming season the region alignments are:

North - D11, D12, D2 (I know when I think "north", North St. Paul is not the first thing that comes to mind) Contenders in this one are Grand Rapids, Duluth East, White Bear Lake
South - D3, D5, D4 (Not too bad an alignment here although the D5 teams stike me as being more East or West, but overall, pretty decent) Contenders being Wayzata, OMG, Mound/Westonka, Buffalo, Owatonna
East - D8, D6, D1 (Geographically a pretty good combination) Contenders being about 10 D6 teams, Minneapolis Park, Woodbury, Lakeville
West - D15, D16, D10 (Nothing says West like Blaine! or Chisago.) Contenders being Moorhead, Little Falls, Fergus Falls, Roseau, EGF, Blaine, Coon Rapids, St. Cloud

Under the current district setup and 3 districts advancing to each of 4 regionals, the regions should be set and locked at:

North - D11, D12, D16 (If your district boundary touches Canada, you should be in the North Region)
South - D8, D4, and D6 (If you district boundary touches Iowa, you should be in the South Region)
West - D3, D5, and D15
East - D1, D2, and D10

[My_Kid_Loves_Hockey]

Why not call them Region 1, Region 2, Region 3 and Region 4 and then where teams are really from doesn't matter.

[Bronc]

Why not call them Region 1, Region 2, Region 3 and Region 4 and then where teams are really from doesn't matter.

The Regions are a different issue, but I believe the key to the balancing is two things:

- Associations put teams at the levels where the kids will have the proper competition for their team (going into the season believing they can be .500 or better). If that is A then A, if it is B then it is B. Manage to the entire teams talent not one or two kids/parents. Do it like soccer if you finished in last or .250 or less you have no choice but to move down the upcoming year, etc.

- The number of teams in each District. Sending 2 out of 4 vs 1 of 15 to 18 to regions (depending on the year) is hard for anyone to digest especially when they come from a large very competitive district that may have 5-6 of the top 15 teams in the state in it.

Not sure how you fix the # of teams in a district (they would either have to split or you combine the smaller ones).

[Air Force 1]

It will all have to start with redistricting.

We have 12 now, cut it down to 8 (contrary to my earlier post) with balanced numbers of associations (12-13 each), hold a larger "district" tournament and ONLY the 8 district champions advance to state.

[northwoods oldtimer]

MKLH,

You choose to live where you do for many reasons other than the size of the association and their chance to win a state title so why bash them just because they live in Wayzata, Rochester, OMG, Edina, Roseau, Bemidji, Duluth or Woodbury?

I am sighting O-MG, Rochester, St. Cloud for the reason that their associations are bypassing development in the hopes of getting titles or perhaps competing with the huge associations (Wayzata type programs). If I am not mistaken Rochester youth association feeds Mayo, John Marshall, Century and Lourdes, St Cloud feeds Apollo, Tech, Cathedral as well Osseo still has a high school hockey team and Maple Grove the same. Combining youth offers up a very small pool of players equipped to play high school hockey. In Osseo especially and for sure in Rochester and St. Cloud that ends up a rather small pool of players to choose from who have played at A level. Not often on this forum do I see folks from Blaine, Apple Valley, Centennial, Woodbury moaning about the current system. Wayzata could easily split to make 2 A level clubs if they chose to do so. There high school would benefit from it and so would Edina. That is just an opinion the programs are free to choose their own course.
I am in favor of Federick61's revamp for Districts/Regions that he highlighted in another thread.

[InigoMontoya]

I do not think that the levels need to be added to. I do think that some associations need to take a hard look at their program and request to their district a realistic classification if they should skate as an "A" or a "B".

I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind forcing teams to stand down. If there are around 100 A teams and we force 25 of them to B's, what have we accomplished, other than reducing the number of kids who play A hockey? Robinsdale Armstrong went 0-9 in football last season; is anyone calling for them to play a JV schedule in 09-10? District 5 is much maligned on this forum - at the bottom of the district you find Litchfield and Hutchinson - in 08 Litchfield was at the state high school tournament, in 09 you would have been able to watch Hutchinson - yet this argument calls for those kids to be kicked out of the cool kids club at 12 and 14.

I'm not sure how it affects a single individual within the 494-694 loop whether Albert Lea plays A or B hockey in D4.

[Air Force 1]

I do not think that the levels need to be added to. I do think that some associations need to take a hard look at their program and request to their district a realistic classification if they should skate as an "A" or a "B".

I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind forcing teams to stand down. If there are around 100 A teams and we force 25 of them to B's, what have we accomplished, other than reducing the number of kids who play A hockey? Robinsdale Armstrong went 0-9 in football last season; is anyone calling for them to play a JV schedule in 09-10? District 5 is much maligned on this forum - at the bottom of the district you find Litchfield and Hutchinson - in 08 Litchfield was at the state high school tournament, in 09 you would have been able to watch Hutchinson - yet this argument calls for those kids to be kicked out of the cool kids club at 12 and 14.

I'm not sure how it affects a single individual within the 494-694 loop whether Albert Lea plays A or B hockey in D4.

High school football and youth hockey are two different things. With fluctuating enrollment numbers in this area, poor football teams get reclassified all the time and usually move down a class and do very well in that class. AND there is a team in the area that has seen rough times for so long they did play a JV schedule for a couple years until they could reclassify down. We also have the local situation where Roseau voluntarily plays up to AA in high school hockey and do very well, in fact their girls program is also opting up to AA.

There are advocates on here all the time for Minnesota Hockey to add AA levels, Elite levels, or even sanction Tier 1 AAA to give the hockey families a choice to not have to play the substandard "A" programs where the scores routinely are 10+ goal differentials. Appartently it does matter to some people whether programs like Albert Lea plays "A" hockey in D4.

Under you HS football premise, nobody would expect 9 man Northstar to compete in the AAAAA Classic Lake Conference so why do we expect or even offer the chance for EVERY youth hockey association to skate at the "A" level.

As for your Litchfield/Hutchison anecdote, they are A, not AA, so it sounds to me like they will be kicked out of the cool kids club when they get to high school.

[sorno82]

I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind forcing teams to stand down. If there are around 100 A teams and we force 25 of them to B's, what have we accomplished, other than reducing the number of kids who play A hockey? Robinsdale Armstrong went 0-9 in football last season; is anyone calling for them to play a JV schedule in 09-10? District 5 is much maligned on this forum - at the bottom of the district you find Litchfield and Hutchinson - in 08 Litchfield was at the state high school tournament, in 09 you would have been able to watch Hutchinson - yet this argument calls for those kids to be kicked out of the cool kids club at 12 and 14.

I'm not sure how it affects a single individual within the 494-694 loop whether Albert Lea plays A or B hockey in D4.

The fact is there are many classifications at the high school level that should be considered for the youth level. Coming from a school district that has a lot of success in athletics, it is obvious it is due to numbers and resources.

In your exaample, you brought up Armstrong, which does not have to play a JV schedule, but they are getting booted out of the Classic Lake since they are not very competitive. They should be playing against schools with similar resources and numbers for a majority of their games. Nothing wrong with what they do in soccer, and some form of that system should be in place for those programs that cannot compete on any level due to the fact they want an "A" program. So you have 5 legitimate "A" players and you fill the roster with "B" level players. The whole association is impacted most of each team is playing up a level and they get smoked in most games. Big associations have the opposite issue with a majority of their B1 team being A level players, but have to compete with teams comprised of B1/B2 players. Coming from a large association, playing these games is just a waste of everyones time and money.

I do care if we have to play an Albert Lee if they cannot compete. I would hate to have to travel 4 hours round trip to have the game over in the first 5 minutes. They may not post that they hate us, but they do.

The solution is going with the class system like they do in high school and let teams play up if they can compete.

I will say though that the big associations should quit trophy chasing and add an "A" team at certain levels. It will help more kids develop and let some of the late bloomers catch on, which I think is an advantage in a smaller association. Edina did it wrong last year at the squirt level. They should have either balanced them or stuck with one due to the talent level. This year, Edina should go with 2 "A" teams at the PeeWee level (Balance or unbalanced shouldn't matter with that group). Instead, we should see Edina Green and White battling it out for the PeeWee B title next March and Edina should easily win PeeWee A.

When people can put aside their egos and do what is best for the game, we will continue to have circular arguments on this subject.

[youngblood08]

I disagree.

I see many more metro posts complaining about how their studs don't all go to state becuase the hacks from out-state undeservedly take their place. District and Region are defined geographically. The metro, though very populous and chocked-full-o-culture, is very tiny geographically compared to the remainder of the state. I don't see Little League baseball shipping teams from FL, LA, TX, and CA to the Northwest and Midwest regionals because there are lots of good teams in those states - region is geographic.

In addition, most of the posts I've read regarding creating AA for big and traditional programs, or moving all the rest down to B, come from folks from those bigger associations. I can't recall ever seeing a post from Pequot bemoaning the fact that they played a bigger, better program. I think they, and almost every other smaller association enjoy the challenge and the experience. Those that don't want to play those teams can find plenty of tournaments in southern and western MN that get snubbed by the metro.

I agree with you a town like Peuquot or any other smaller town outside the metro lacks the demographics to sustain competing at that level. Thats why you give them the option to step up to the AA level when they have a special group come through. Keep the A level but force large metro teams to create AA teams. Your not punishing anyone just creating an even playing field, if you force small towns that could compete at the A level with 75% of the associations in the state to drop to the B level you are creating a total different situation. Town A drops to B they are 75% 10TH GRADERS playing bantams due to the rosters size at the high school, Town B is an average size town but the B team is filled with 8th graders as the A team has the 9th and 10th graders. The AA and A teams would play each other during the season and in any tournament but for regionals and state create the AA level give A teams that have shown thier worth during the season a shot at the big boys, you can do it on a year to year basis.

[youngblood08]

Now don't even get me started on the District playoffs such as District 8 with 14 A peewee teams vs District 1 that had 4 peewee A teams yet gets to send 2 teams to Regionals that the 14th team in D8 would have had a good game with.

Sounds like a few teams from District 8 should move to District 1.

How about Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Cottage Grove and Sibley move to District 1 and battle Highland and Minneapolis for the Regional berths.

You're also wrong with your snide little comment regarding the strength of the top teams in D1. Mpls-Park handled several teams that you're suggesting are the chosen ones.

Mpls-Park PWA ranked over,

IGH
Rogers
Apple Valley
Jefferson
Lakeville South
North St. Paul

Mpls-Park PWA beat,

Rosemount (5-1)
Eagan (10-4)
Jefferson
East Grand Forks @ State (5-1) ranked 14th
lost to Woodbury in OT at State

You need to get out and watch a little more hockey. Cut down on your driving, get out of District 8 and join District 1.

Hey Thanks for supporting my thoughts for a strong A program to move up if they think they can hang.

Sorry it wasn't meant to be a snide comment. How will the peewee and bantam teams do this year?

[youngblood08]

Why not call them Region 1, Region 2, Region 3 and Region 4 and then where teams are really from doesn't matter.

The Regions are a different issue, but I believe the key to the balancing is two things:

- Associations put teams at the levels where the kids will have the proper competition for their team (going into the season believing they can be .500 or better). If that is A then A, if it is B then it is B. Manage to the entire teams talent not one or two kids/parents. Do it like soccer if you finished in last or .250 or less you have no choice but to move down the upcoming year, etc.

- The number of teams in each District. Sending 2 out of 4 vs 1 of 15 to 18 to regions (depending on the year) is hard for anyone to digest especially when they come from a large very competitive district that may have 5-6 of the top 15 teams in the state in it.

Not sure how you fix the # of teams in a district (they would either have to split or you combine the smaller ones).

DON"T EVER BRING UP SOCCER ON THIS FORUM AGAIN!! THATS YOUR LAST WARNING!

[elliott70]

When people can put aside their egos and do what is best for the game, we will continue to have circular arguments on this subject.

There are the problems. People are provincial (regardless of their ego), that will not change.

"What is best for the game" is defined how and by whom? You can easily get ten different answers if you ask ten different people. Even from the same community (whatever community means).

Each of the 12 different districts with their similarities and differences operate differently to try and accomodate 'what is best for the game'.

What is best for the game? Perhaps we need a different thread (or several volumes of text) to find that answer.

[sorno82]

What is best for the game? Perhaps we need a different thread (or several volumes of text) to find that answer.

My answer is rather straightforward. Create a competitive balance for all levels. Kids playing kids at similar levels. I think this creates a more enjoyable experience for all involved and creates the best environment for development.

[InigoMontoya]

As for your Litchfield/Hutchison anecdote, they are A, not AA, so it sounds to me like they will be kicked out of the cool kids club when they get to high school.

Wow...

I do care if we have to play an Albert Lee if they cannot compete. I would hate to have to travel 4 hours round trip to have the game over in the first 5 minutes. They may not post that they hate us, but they do.

Wow...

When is the last time, if ever, that any of your kids have played Albert Lee, Hutchinson, or Litchfield? If not, then you are, as I posted earlier, unaffected by whether they are A or B.

It would be my guess that the kids don't hate your kids, the parents don't hate your kids, but when you post stuff like this, I'm sure the parents do find you to be smug and pretentious.

[sorno82]

I'm sure the parents do find you to be smug and pretentious.

Usually its preconceived stereotypes that drive the feeling. You hear it before they even know who you are-in the stands, concessions, and bathrooms. It is actually kind of funny and does not bother me in the least.

When is the last time, if ever, that any of your kids have played Albert Lee, Hutchinson, or Litchfield? If not, then you are, as I posted earlier, unaffected by whether they are A or B.

Usally in a midseason tourney. Gets old. Those kids may be better than ours 5 years from now when they hit puberty so the worm can always turn.

[InigoMontoya]

I thought the thoroughbreds only played in each others' tourneys, with a trip to Roseau and Duluth. I don't recall Litchfield being invited to the BIG or Braemar. Were your boys left out, so you had to go slummin'?

Perhaps if you didn't walk into the arena wearing a T-shirt that says, "The only thing that stinks worse than your hockey team is your musty hotel room and your flavorless pizza" they wouldn't be talking about you in the restroom.

[Air Force 1]

a T-shirt that says, "The only thing that stinks worse than your hockey team is your musty hotel room and your flavorless pizza"

That's priceless! Can I print that on a t-shirt this year? I can wear that with my "Refs Suck" hat I bought off the advertisement on this site!

[sorno82]

Were your boys left out, so you had to go slummin'?

The B1 teams have to do some slummin' each year.

Perhaps if you didn't walk into the arena wearing a T-shirt that says, "The only thing that stinks worse than your hockey team is your musty hotel room and your flavorless pizza" they wouldn't be talking about you in the restroom.

The truth hurts sometimes.

[hesabaddmann]

Be careful people....The next thing you know hockey will follow the other sports and have multiple state tournaments every year to appease all of you......Look at soccer as an example......Factor in the new residency rules and the obligatory " club " teams which are sure to follow.....


Change is not often a good thing to me anymore ......Just a badmans opinion ......

[youngblood08]

We are just evolving with the times. Metro communities are getting bigger, inner city teams are getting smaller, older communities are getting older. With the economy the way it is club teams will be the only chance some kids get to play on a team. Don't be afraid of change, even thou we have a good system i here in Minnesota we still we have to conform in one way shape or form.

Make the AA level to accomodate the larger communities and level the playing field for the smaller ones. so we create another State tournament level does it hurt or help? It will never solve the "who's better crowd" anyways.

[Pens4]

We are just evolving with the times. Metro communities are getting bigger, inner city teams are getting smaller, older communities are getting older. With the economy the way it is club teams will be the only chance some kids get to play on a team. Don't be afraid of change, even thou we have a good system i here in Minnesota we still we have to conform in one way shape or form.

Make the AA level to accomodate the larger communities and level the playing field for the smaller ones. so we create another State tournament level does it hurt or help? It will never solve the "who's better crowd" anyways.

The state tournament has always been a reward for the unexpecting....it has never been a given for the best teams. In the 1900's I played in the Peewee state tournament with a team from Friendly Fridley...we didn't win it and I can't tell you who did. Leave the restructuring for the gearboxes at MN hockey and just beat the teams you need to advance.

[youngblood08]

One of those special groups of kids that comes along in some communities every so often. I am sure you guys had a blast. There would still be a chance for that to happen for even a few more teams, but if you look at the landscape of youth hockey we are getting the same towns every year. And good for them but there are no more Hickory teams anymore and the chances for it are getting slimmer everyday.

Adding another layer hurts no one helps everyone.

[Chuck Norris Fan]

This forum has changed from ideas about new ways to do regions .... to The metro vs out state. I think if you ask most teams across the state there is no animosity between out state and Metro teams, they just like good competition.

With that said I am torn between the arguments that have come up here. Do we make changes (as i proposed earlier in the thread) that have goals to ensure the top teams (or those who beat them) are playing for the title. Or do we leave things as they have been and limit the amount of teams from certain areas so that the entire state is represented at the tourney.

In the past we are ensured 3 from the north , 4 from the metro, 1 from the south. That changed over the last three seasons for better or worse is up for argument. I think that for some teams no matter what the situation they are going to find their way to state (eg Centennial 6 title games in 8 years, East something like 8 straight appearances, Eden Prairie 3 titles and a handful of appearances. Edina, Wayzata, etc.

However their have been years that one or more of those teams did not make it to the show because 3 or more of them have been in the same region. And other regions provide an opportunity for one or two teams to make it to state that have proven nothing. It is not the birthright of the Metro teams to make it to state because they are from the metro, or the out state teams deserve to be there to make sure it is truly a "state" tourney.

The simple fact is No one deserves to be there, it is no ones right to make it to state or to play for a state title. What they do have a right to is a fair opportunity to get there, that is it. what is Fair is the big question.