Minnesota Hockey Needs A Geography Lesson

PuckRanger · Post by **PuckRanger** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:43 am

This is very true and speaks to my point. I am going to point out that I am not affiliated with this person or the team she speaks of in any way. It does, however, echo the sentiments of almost all of the northern associations that participated in the North Region this year at all A & B levels.

An open letter to Minnesota Hockey and USA hockey:

“Minnesota is the state of Hockey” We hear it over and over – it’s everywhere. Yes, Minnesota is the state of hockey, but why?

Two days ago I watched my son’s team lose a heart breaking game in OT to St. Paul Highland Central in the Bantam A northern regional tournament in the final elimination game. I felt nothing but pride, even though they lost. It was a hard fought game played with grit and determination; those boys left it all on the ice. They had no more to give. It was fantastic hockey. The previous game against the North Shore Storm was also competitive hockey at its finest down to the final seconds. The disappointment came only from that the elimination, and third place finish, of Virginia ended the chance for a northern team to represent the northern region. This disappointment was not only from our players and fans, but from fellow players and fans of the other northern teams. The boys got a taste of the politics that go into the tournaments. The northern suburbs are not “northern teams”. Our districts don’t even border one another. Somehow, Minnesota Hockey has adopted the belief that dividing the twin cities metro area teams amongst the regions makes for a more competitive state tournament by allowing more “better associations” to advance to the state tournament. This gets away from the “State of Hockey” title that Minnesota Hockey keeps promoting. To truly be a state tournament, the best teams from each region of the state should come together to crown a champion for the “State of Hockey”.

All is not lost, because the state tournament is not what makes Minnesota the “State of Hockey”. Any metro area in the country can pour money into programs and rinks where only those who can afford the thousands of dollars in association fees, ice time and traveling expenses get to compete. Minnesota is the “State of Hockey” because of the small communities that pour their hearts and souls into their programs. The truth of the matter is that most of our players could never afford to play for metro associations. Metro teams head north to our rinks, and we hear the snickers and complaints. They’re right, it’s cold and some rinks are lacking in amenities and are in desperate need of upgrades. That’s OK because it doesn’t matter if your parents make $30,000 or $300,000, you still get to play.

Minnesota is the “State of Hockey” because our youth skate at Ridgewood – an old rickety set of boards, a small warming shack that the city can only afford to keep open a few hours each week, a play area flooded by a fire hose and hydrant - all lit by a street light. That’s OK, they shovel it themselves and skate past dark. It’s home. It’s a familiar site in small towns across the state.

Minnesota is the “State of Hockey” because a local rink had a recent structure problem. Did they cancel the Mite tournament that weekend? No, they opened the tiny warming shack and a nearby building, trailered in a Zamboni from a neighboring community and played it on the local outdoor rink.

Minnesota Hockey is the “State of Hockey” because of the local businesses and communities that pour their hearts and souls into their programs. Some communities are fortunate to have benefactors who can build them rinks and locker rooms. Just as important are the benefactors who donate prizes for raffles, offer discounts and otherwise simply give what they can. It’s looking into the stands and seeing not only family, but others from the community who have come to support the teams.

The most heart-warming moment of the year came at a high school game between rivals Virginia and Eveleth-Gilbert. The PA system failed while announcing the home starting line-up to a packed house. The players simply skated to their respective blue line, but now what? The recorded National Anthem would normally play, but only silence. That is until someone started singing in the student section, then a few more fans joined. Our youth players joined and soon the whole arena joined. No direction, just impromptu. Pure class and inspiration, followed by a great game.

As my son finishes his last year of youth hockey and now moves on to high school to finally have the opportunity to don the coveted blue and white VHS jersey, I’d like to say thank you to all the communities that have welcomed us. And we’ve seen a few. Thank you to the hotel staff who opened up their kitchen to feed the boys pizza when the entire city shut down due to a snow storm. Thank you to all the patient wait staff who took orders and divided checks by jersey numbers and rearranged tables. Thank you to the parents who worked countless hours at tournaments to make sure we had a great weekend. Thank you to the fellow families who shared rides, rooms, and meals so all kids are able to travel, even if their parents didn’t have the schedule or money to make the journey. You all make up a wonderful hockey family, and this is what makes Minnesota the “State of Hockey”. It’s not about fancy rinks and high dollar associations. It’s about kids in all corners of the state playing the game. It’s used skates and hand-me-down breezers. It’s triumph and defeat. It’s playing for the communities that have supported you through the years. It’s the sound of skates of ice and rattling boards. Thank you!

Sincerely,

Bobbi Jean Greenwalt
Virginia, MN

bestgameever · Post by **bestgameever** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:31 am

PuckRanger, I understand your point, but I disagree. You want to mandate geographic diversity for the final eight teams at each level. I prefer providing equal opportunities (via district and "regional" tournaments) to all teams regardless of location to earn their way into the final 8. The current setup is not going to make everyone happy, but I suspect making everyone happy is not possible. Maybe the youth levels could do what the Fargo Squirt tournament does... have a mega bracket with 64 seeded teams (or however many teams there are) and play it down to a Champion. This could be done instead of districts, regions, and state weeks/weekends. I am sure there are many logistical issues with this, but...

I can't help but think about the "Metro" associations that rarely make it to the final 8. Should there be a separate "regional" tournament to ensure Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Mounds View, Roseville,... and 20 other associations can make it to State? [NOTE: I say NO... let them earn it] What is the difference from them and the Northern teams you are advocating for?

What about those associations that have a AA and a A team? Should the #16-30 skaters on the A team have a separate "regional" tournament to give them opportunities to make state against the #1-15 skaters from associations that don't have a AA team? [NOTE: I say NO... let them earn it].

Where does the mandated participation stop?

I'm not from the North, so I don't know what affect participating in the final 8 has on keeping youth hockey alive and well. I do know from experience the kids locally don't play because of the medals they might win (that's icing on the cake). They simply love the game, the comradery, the uniqueness of the locker room, competing as a team... Would Richfield (a first-ring Mpls suburb) still have a youth program if they were granted a spot in the final 8 regularly? I doubt it.

I get the frustration of Virginia losing to a St. Paul team. That same disappointment was felt by 24 other teams that lost last weekend. Sounds like a great game that went into OT. Equally matched and fairly played. One team wins and earns the right to play 2 weeks later. Both had an opportunity to win. On that particular night, the better team earned it.

Anyway, I doubt there is any RIGHT answer to this debate... but it feels good to voice an opinion. The passion felt within youth hockey is in part what makes it a great sport and a great experience for the kids.

ramstein · Post by **ramstein** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:37 pm

upnorthfan wrote:A couple of things. Why play the Regions then, just pick your best 8 as the metro sees it and go with that. The Peewee AA North Region was set up pretty well, with no metro teams in it as it should be. I don't care what level, youth or high school, state tournament participants should come from every area of the state. Do you always get the best 8 there, heck no, but that is the way it is. You are the best from your Region of the state and you belong there. For the person who mentioned recruiting and put Roseau in the same sentence, please refrain. Don't mix us up with anything that Warroad does.

Careful up northfan.....People will have to start to show the newspaper article where Yon was the stud playing in Crookston in Squirts. To bad you made a lot of great points about the way the North Region should be the North and had to make sure to cast shots at Warroad.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:55 pm

bestgameever wrote:PuckRanger, I understand your point, but I disagree. You want to mandate geographic diversity for the final eight teams at each level. I prefer providing equal opportunities (via district and "regional" tournaments) to all teams regardless of location to earn their way into the final 8. The current setup is not going to make everyone happy, but I suspect making everyone happy is not possible. Maybe the youth levels could do what the Fargo Squirt tournament does... have a mega bracket with 64 seeded teams (or however many teams there are) and play it down to a Champion. This could be done instead of districts, regions, and state weeks/weekends. I am sure there are many logistical issues with this, but...

I can't help but think about the "Metro" associations that rarely make it to the final 8. Should there be a separate "regional" tournament to ensure Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Mounds View, Roseville,... and 20 other associations can make it to State? [NOTE: I say NO... let them earn it] What is the difference from them and the Northern teams you are advocating for?

What about those associations that have a AA and a A team? Should the #16-30 skaters on the A team have a separate "regional" tournament to give them opportunities to make state against the #1-15 skaters from associations that don't have a AA team? [NOTE: I say NO... let them earn it].

Where does the mandated participation stop?

I'm not from the North, so I don't know what affect participating in the final 8 has on keeping youth hockey alive and well. I do know from experience the kids locally don't play because of the medals they might win (that's icing on the cake). They simply love the game, the comradery, the uniqueness of the locker room, competing as a team... Would Richfield (a first-ring Mpls suburb) still have a youth program if they were granted a spot in the final 8 regularly? I doubt it.

I get the frustration of Virginia losing to a St. Paul team. That same disappointment was felt by 24 other teams that lost last weekend. Sounds like a great game that went into OT. Equally matched and fairly played. One team wins and earns the right to play 2 weeks later. Both had an opportunity to win. On that particular night, the better team earned it.

Anyway, I doubt there is any RIGHT answer to this debate... but it feels good to voice an opinion. The passion felt within youth hockey is in part what makes it a great sport and a great experience for the kids.

Sorry bestgameever but I have to completely disagree with you. I am not from Minnesota at all but I've been around this big country and other states and one of the great things about state tournaments is that is DOES bring different regions together to crown a state title, and every single team that gets there earns it but they earn it against other teams from their region. It's done this way virtualy everywhere at all levels of sport. To say that it doesn't matter insults the history and tradition of youth and high school sports who have used this model for generations. The state tournament serves a far greater purpose than pitting "the best" teams againast eachother, the fact you do not see or understand that is actually sort of unfortunate. Is it "tough" that alo tof tyhe better teams reside in the same area of the state yep it is, but that doesn't mean you create artificial regions. Actual "up north" teams should be repsented in every state tournament, that doesn't mean the same team by any means and no one is saying that everyone should get a medal and all that nonsense, that isn't what is being talked about here. Let's just say it this way, if everyone embraced the way you think all the way back to when this suff began, well it's pretty safe to say we'd never have the movie Hoosiers or the real life events it's based on......

PuckRanger · Post by **PuckRanger** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 4:24 pm

bestgameever wrote:PuckRanger, I understand your point, but I disagree. You want to mandate geographic diversity for the final eight teams at each level. I prefer providing equal opportunities (via district and "regional" tournaments) to all teams regardless of location to earn their way into the final 8. The current setup is not going to make everyone happy, but I suspect making everyone happy is not possible. Maybe the youth levels could do what the Fargo Squirt tournament does... have a mega bracket with 64 seeded teams (or however many teams there are) and play it down to a Champion. This could be done instead of districts, regions, and state weeks/weekends. I am sure there are many logistical issues with this, but...

I can't help but think about the "Metro" associations that rarely make it to the final 8. Should there be a separate "regional" tournament to ensure Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Mounds View, Roseville,... and 20 other associations can make it to State? [NOTE: I say NO... let them earn it] What is the difference from them and the Northern teams you are advocating for?

What about those associations that have a AA and a A team? Should the #16-30 skaters on the A team have a separate "regional" tournament to give them opportunities to make state against the #1-15 skaters from associations that don't have a AA team? [NOTE: I say NO... let them earn it].

Where does the mandated participation stop?

I'm not from the North, so I don't know what affect participating in the final 8 has on keeping youth hockey alive and well. I do know from experience the kids locally don't play because of the medals they might win (that's icing on the cake). They simply love the game, the comradery, the uniqueness of the locker room, competing as a team... Would Richfield (a first-ring Mpls suburb) still have a youth program if they were granted a spot in the final 8 regularly? I doubt it.

I get the frustration of Virginia losing to a St. Paul team. That same disappointment was felt by 24 other teams that lost last weekend. Sounds like a great game that went into OT. Equally matched and fairly played. One team wins and earns the right to play 2 weeks later. Both had an opportunity to win. On that particular night, the better team earned it.

Anyway, I doubt there is any RIGHT answer to this debate... but it feels good to voice an opinion. The passion felt within youth hockey is in part what makes it a great sport and a great experience for the kids.

Here is the thing... The whole point of this rotating districts among different regions was to get a supposedly more competitive state tournament. I just don't see that. Using this example, (Virginia losing to Highland Central in overtime) does that really mean we improved the field at the state tournament? An overtime winner will represent that much better than an overtime loser at the state tournament? I just don't see it. The other regions are similar. Those teams didn't need to be shuffled in to get competitive teams to the state tournament. Maybe there is an occasional off year for some areas, but I just haven't seen much of that at the youth levels... especially with the AA/A/B system. There is no need for this rotation anymore with the addition of the AA class.

There are plenty of very good teams in the Duluth, Iron Range, and Northwest part of the state that will not go 0-2 at the state tournament... yet there are no teams at the Peewee level from any of those areas in the state tournament.

When you speak of the Richfield's of the metro and those type of teams, we have them up north, too. (See Eveleth, Ely, Proctor, etc...) Those teams still have to find a way to buck up and find a way if they want in. But the consistently more competitive programs like Hermantown, Virginia, Hibbing, Duluth East, Cloquet, Grand Rapids, Duluth Denfeld, Warroad, East Grand Forks, Roseau, etc. should have at least ONE representative at the state tournament. There is NEVER a year where they are all that weak that at least TWO of them will not compete at all of these levels. Keep in mind, I am not including AA in this discussion. That is completely different the way its set up.

Just think if the north did this to the metro area back in the 60's and 70's when they were pretty much dominant. Would metro hockey ever have even grown to what it is today? I am fairly certain there were years where 8 of the top 10 teams in the state were all from towns north of Hinckley. Hell, I bet there were years where the top 5 teams were all on the Iron Range. My guess is we didn't get to send 7 teams to the state tournament from up north back then. Somehow, its good for hockey to do that now?

bestgameever · Post by **bestgameever** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 9:53 pm

Thank you guys.... All good points. In the end there will be teams disappointed in not making it to state. I suspect in a typical season there maybe 2-3 teams that stand above all the others. Then there are 10-15 teams that on any given night could win or lose versus the others. That leaves a lot of teams disappointed in not making state and thinking they should have.

Upon further thought, if there were a pure North region I'd be ok with that. Add a pure South region and 16 metro teams goto the East/West region.

Good luck to everyone who made it to state this year. It should be a fun weekend and a great experience for everyone!

zooomx · Post by **zooomx** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 8:47 am

I also understand what everyone is saying. However, the fact still remains that our outstate programs are given over-representation to Regional tournaments. A fact that upsets some metro associations. I think the system we have is a good compromise. When both outstate and metro groups claim it is unfair, then it might just be a good compromise. Outstate teams are given a good chance to earn their way to state.

The other option? If "north of Hinkley" gets their own region to send a team to state, then should we have a "south of Owatonna" region. Well, then we need a "west of Delano" region. So, should outstate get 3/4 of the teams at state. Or even if it is 3 out of 8 is that fair?

Also, looking at the regional breakdowns the last 4 years, the North was comprised of 11,12,16 last year and 12,15,16 in 2011, so it looks like every other year there are no metro teams in your region.

Lastly, I agree that Virginia is a very good team. Very surprised they did not emerge from that Region as they should have. But remember, they had to lose 2 games to get disqualified, so they had their chance. Looking back over past tournaments it seems pretty rare that a state tournament did not include someone from the Northern half of the state. Almost every single year, at least one northern team earns their way in to each level's state tournament. Seems fair to me.

bestgameever · Post by **bestgameever** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:57 pm

A blog from Youth HockeyHub:

The Minnesota state tournaments have been drawing winners for a long, long time. Many of them been won by the well known, always a top team, Edina Hornets, the team for most teams to beat in Minnesota. The other years that are not won by the Hornets is usually won by a different metro-area team, such as the Eden Prairie Eagles or the Wayzata Trojans. The Northern teams (meaning Roseau, Grand Rapids, Duluth, etc.) usually don't get to win the big trophy, but there have been cases were those types of teams have got the chance to raise the state title trophy. The district 6 teams are usually the big time champs, but not always. Lets take a glance at which teams have won the state championships since 2007.

** Note that the Bantam AA, Bantam A, Peewee AA, and Peewee A divisions were divided into those last year, so every year before last years (2013) tournament will be only classed as a Bantam A and Peewee A division.**

2013
Bantam AA: The Winner- Edina, with wins over White Bear Lake (9-0), Wayzata (4-2), and Duluth East (4-3 OT).

Bantam A: The Winner- Mahtomedi, with wins over Hutchinson (7-3), Crow River (4-2) and Edina (6-0).

Bantam B: The Winner- Wayzata (Navy), with wins over International Falls (5-0), Stillwater Red (4-2), North Metro (4-3 OT).

Peewee AA: The Winner- Edina, with wins over St. Cloud (10-2), Duluth East (4-3) and Wayzata (7-0).

Peewee A: The winner- Minneapolis Storm, with "W's" over East Grand Forks (6-3), Luverne (4-2), and Orono (5-4).

Peewee B: The winner- Edina, with wins over Sartell (3-2 OT), Minneapolis Purple (5-2) and Johnson Como (5-0).

U12A: The winner- Edina, with wins over Eagan (3-2 OT), White Bear Lake (2-1), and Shakopee (3-2).

2012
Bantam A: The winner- Edina, with wins over White Bear Lake (1-0), Andover (3-2 OT), East Grand Forks (5-1).

Bantam B: The winner- Duluth Denfeld, with wins over East Grand Forks (2-1), Wayzata Blue (2-1 OT), and Osseo-Maple Grove (2-1).

Peewee A: The winner- Prior Lake, with wins over Osseo-Maple Grove (5-4 OT), Elk River (2-1) and Hermantown (9-4).

Peewee B: The winner- Prior Lake, with wins over Woodbury Black (4-2), North Shore (3-2) and Osseo-Maple Grove Crimson (5-4 TRIPLE OT)

U12A: *STATS UNAVAILABLE*

2011
Bantam A: The winner- Eden Prairie, with wins over Blaine (7-3), Rochester (6-1), and Woodbury (4-3).

Bantam B: The winner- Osseo-Maple Grove Crimson, with wins Chisago Lakes (4-1), Woodbury Royal (9-0), and Edina White (3-0).

Peewee A: The winner- Edina, with wins over Blaine (7-2), Rosemount (10-1), and Farmington (7-3).

Peewee B: The winner- Wayzata Blue, with wins over Centennial Red (6-0), Woodbury White (3-2), and Rosemount (6-1).

U12A: The winner- Centennial, with wins over Duluth (5-1), Minnetonka (3-0), and Wayzata (2-1).

2010
Bantam A: The winner- Woodbury, with wins over Cloquet (6-3), Wayzata (2-1), and Grand Rapids (2-1).

Bantam B: The winner- Tartan, with wins over Woodbury Blue (2-1), Wayzata (4-2), and Blaine (3-2).

Peewee A: The winner- Edina, with their "W's" over White Bear Lake (7-4), Wayzata (3-2), and Elk River (5-3).

Peewee B: The winner- Edina Green, with wins over Stillwater Black (11-1), Wayzata Blue (7-1), and Edina White (3-0).

U12A: The winner- Eden Prairie, with wins Stillwater (3-1), NWC (2-0), and Edina (3-2).

2009
Bantam A: The winner- Wayzata, with wins over Apple Valley (3-2), Bemidji (6-3), and Rochester (3-1).

Bantam B: The winner- Duluth East, with wins over Minneapolis Park (2-1), Elk River (8-6), and Wayzata Blue (3-2).

Peewee A: The winner- Roseau, with wins over Owatonna (7-1), Edina (4-3), and Woodbury (6-1).

Peewee B: The winner- Elk River, with wins over Roseville (5-1), Duluth East Black (6-0) and Edina Green (5-2).

U12A: The winner- Edina Green, with wins over Thief River Falls (9-1), Burnsville (3-1), and Anoka (5-0).

2008
Bantam A: The winner- Eden Prairie, with wins over Roseau (5-1), Wayzata (5-2), and Centennial (2-0).

Bantam B: The winner- Blake, with wins over Centennial Red (6-4), Minnetonka (4-3), and Wayzata Blue (2-1 OT).

Peewee A: The winner- Edina, with wins over East Grand Forks (7-0), Wayzata (4-3) and Grand Rapids (5-2).

Peewee B: The winner- Edina Green, with wins over Moorhead Black (4-1), Wayzata Blue (4-0), and Edina White (2-1 OT).

U12A: The winner- Shakopee, with wins over Andover (6-3), Roseau (6-1) and Minnetonka (6-5 OT).

2007
Bantam A: The winner- Eden Prairie, with wins over Roseau (8-3), Duluth East (3-0) and Centennial (3-2).

Bantam B: The winner- WBL Orange, with wins over Blaine (2-1 TRIPLE OT), Wayzata Blue (2-1) and Eden Prairie Red (2-0).

Peewee A: The winner- Wayzata, with wins over Bemidji (5-3), Duluth East (4-3 OT) and Apple Valley (3-2).

Peewee B: The winner- Wayzata Gold, with wins over Red Lake Falls (9-4), Minneapolis Park (6-1) and Wayzata Blue (3-2).

U12A: The winner- Centennial, with wins over Shakopee (4-3 OT), Eagan (3-2), and Stillwater (3-2).

Title Counts
Edina: 11 State Championships since 07', outscoring their opponents fifty one to fifteen in the those Championship games.

Wayzata: 5 State Championships since 07', outscoring their opponents nineteen to nine in those Championship games.

Eden Prairie: 4 State Championships since 07', outscoring their opponents twelve to seven in those Championship games.

NORTHERN* MINNESOTA TOGETHER: 3 State Championships since 07', outscoring their opponents eleven to four in those games.

* Northern meaning Roseau and the Duluth Area

MWS coach · Post by **MWS coach** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 7:08 pm

So what is your point BGE? Metro teams have won more state championships since 2007? This started with North Region should be only north teams. How regions are set up, the opportunity for teams from the north to make it to state and win it all gives each region the same number or more teams that make it to regions.

So what is your solution?

PuckRanger · Post by **PuckRanger** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 2:08 am

zooomx wrote:I also understand what everyone is saying. However, the fact still remains that our outstate programs are given over-representation to Regional tournaments. A fact that upsets some metro associations. I think the system we have is a good compromise. When both outstate and metro groups claim it is unfair, then it might just be a good compromise. Outstate teams are given a good chance to earn their way to state.

Maybe. I see where you're coming from, but I don't entirely agree with that. I don't know what you mean by over-representation at regions. Our districts send the same number of teams to regions (2 or 3 on a rotating basis) as every other district.

zooomx wrote:The other option? If "north of Hinkley" gets their own region to send a team to state, then should we have a "south of Owatonna" region. Well, then we need a "west of Delano" region. So, should outstate get 3/4 of the teams at state. Or even if it is 3 out of 8 is that fair?

I definitely would not want 3/4 of the teams at state from outstate. I do think half would be fair though. One each NW, NE, W, S outstate and one each NW, NE, SW, SE metro teams (or as close to that as you can realistically get) seems ideal to me. Maybe the solution is to get rid of regions entirely and put more emphasis on district play... something maybe like this:

All District tournaments will be bracketed true double elimination tournaments. No round robin/pool play, single elimination, or consolation bracketed tournaments. (Bantam and Peewee A & B only)

D2, D3, D6, and D8 district tournament winners advance directly to the state tournament.
D4 and D9 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.
D5 and D10 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.
D11 and D12 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.
D15 and D16 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.

zooomx wrote:Also, looking at the regional breakdowns the last 4 years, the North was comprised of 11,12,16 last year and 12,15,16 in 2011, so it looks like every other year there are no metro teams in your region.

That still seems ridiculous to me. Not having the Duluth teams and the Iron Range teams in the same region as it was in 2011 just does not make any more sense to me than having White Bear Lake and International Falls in the same region as it was this year. You have to also remember that the A/AA thing was added to the mix last year. The same teams are not in many of those A and B regions anymore as programs shift teams from level to level. Since we are talking pretty much about Virginia, I would say that if Virginia Peewee A's played AA this year, they might have had an easier path to the state tournament, and that shouldn't be the case either.

zooomx wrote:Lastly, I agree that Virginia is a very good team. Very surprised they did not emerge from that Region as they should have. But remember, they had to lose 2 games to get disqualified, so they had their chance. Looking back over past tournaments it seems pretty rare that a state tournament did not include someone from the Northern half of the state. Almost every single year, at least one northern team earns their way in to each level's state tournament. Seems fair to me.

This isn't just a Virginia thing... they just happened to be the team that got nipped twice at the A level this year. The problem was that in Peewee A, Virginia lost to Mahtomedi twice, and in Bantam A, they lost to Tartan and Highland Central. All those games were closely contested. They did not lose to any non-metro teams, which is why there is so much controversy. Grand Rapids lost twice to Mahtomedi in the Peewee B tourney as well and suffered the exact same fate. Throw in the 1-2 finish of North St. Paul and White Bear Lake in Bantam B's and the issue gets amplified even more. I personally watched the Peewee A games as they were in my back yard. This wasn't just Virginia complaining, it was pretty much all of the D11 and D12 teams and it started as soon as the draw with the actual teams in the tournament was released. I don't think many people realized that D2 was in this region this year until that point. Most teams up north are geared up to beat the traditional northern powers, and when they finally manage to do so are not too pleased to have top end metro teams shoved in their path as well. Especially when those two teams are now the #1 and #2 ranked Peewee A teams in the state.

Since we were talking Virginia, lets look at their Peewee A team (keep in mind that open letter was written from a Virginia Bantam parent about the Bantam A tournament) and take it from their perspective. Virginia's only losses to Minnesota Peewee A teams all season long were both one goal losses to Warroad until they lost to #2 ranked Mahtomedi twice in regions. Mahtomedi's only loss in regions was to #1 ranked Highland Central. A season like that should not come to a screeching halt because of who was rotated into their region. Those two teams could very easily have met in a state championship game. Even further, Warroad gets shifted into a region that is home to the #3 and #4 ranked teams in the state. Guess who their two losses came at the hands of? Yep, #3 Spring Lake Park (2-1) and #4 Alexandria (4-2). If this is last year's alignment (like it probably always should be), Virginia and Warroad are playing for the #1 and #2 seed from the North region in Crookston. Instead, they sit home while three metro teams and a team hundreds of miles away from both play in their stead. Virginia and Warroad should have gotten their shot at the state tournament. These teams have heavy turnover from year to year and last year's teams did not have that obstacle. How is it fair to the kids on those teams this year? That is why I don't agree at all when you say it seems fair to you.

This is nuts! · Post by **This is nuts!** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 8:07 am

PuckRanger wrote:
zooomx wrote:I also understand what everyone is saying. However, the fact still remains that our outstate programs are given over-representation to Regional tournaments. A fact that upsets some metro associations. I think the system we have is a good compromise. When both outstate and metro groups claim it is unfair, then it might just be a good compromise. Outstate teams are given a good chance to earn their way to state.
Maybe. I see where you're coming from, but I don't entirely agree with that. I don't know what you mean by over-representation at regions. Our districts send the same number of teams to regions (2 or 3 on a rotating basis) as every other district.

zooomx wrote:The other option? If "north of Hinkley" gets their own region to send a team to state, then should we have a "south of Owatonna" region. Well, then we need a "west of Delano" region. So, should outstate get 3/4 of the teams at state. Or even if it is 3 out of 8 is that fair?
I definitely would not want 3/4 of the teams at state from outstate. I do think half would be fair though. One each NW, NE, W, S outstate and one each NW, NE, SW, SE metro teams (or as close to that as you can realistically get) seems ideal to me. Maybe the solution is to get rid of regions entirely and put more emphasis on district play... something maybe like this:

All District tournaments will be bracketed true double elimination tournaments. No round robin/pool play, single elimination, or consolation bracketed tournaments. (Bantam and Peewee A & B only)

D2, D3, D6, and D8 district tournament winners advance directly to the state tournament.
D4 and D9 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.
D5 and D10 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.
D11 and D12 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.
D15 and D16 winners will play a best of 3 series to advance to the state tournament.

zooomx wrote:Also, looking at the regional breakdowns the last 4 years, the North was comprised of 11,12,16 last year and 12,15,16 in 2011, so it looks like every other year there are no metro teams in your region.
That still seems ridiculous to me. Not having the Duluth teams and the Iron Range teams in the same region as it was in 2011 just does not make any more sense to me than having White Bear Lake and International Falls in the same region as it was this year. You have to also remember that the A/AA thing was added to the mix last year. The same teams are not in many of those A and B regions anymore as programs shift teams from level to level. Since we are talking pretty much about Virginia, I would say that if Virginia Peewee A's played AA this year, they might have had an easier path to the state tournament, and that shouldn't be the case either.

zooomx wrote:Lastly, I agree that Virginia is a very good team. Very surprised they did not emerge from that Region as they should have. But remember, they had to lose 2 games to get disqualified, so they had their chance. Looking back over past tournaments it seems pretty rare that a state tournament did not include someone from the Northern half of the state. Almost every single year, at least one northern team earns their way in to each level's state tournament. Seems fair to me.
This isn't just a Virginia thing... they just happened to be the team that got nipped twice at the A level this year. The problem was that in Peewee A, Virginia lost to Mahtomedi twice, and in Bantam A, they lost to Tartan and Highland Central. All those games were closely contested. They did not lose to any non-metro teams, which is why there is so much controversy. Grand Rapids lost twice to Mahtomedi in the Peewee B tourney as well and suffered the exact same fate. Throw in the 1-2 finish of North St. Paul and White Bear Lake in Bantam B's and the issue gets amplified even more. I personally watched the Peewee A games as they were in my back yard. This wasn't just Virginia complaining, it was pretty much all of the D11 and D12 teams and it started as soon as the draw with the actual teams in the tournament was released. I don't think many people realized that D2 was in this region this year until that point. Most teams up north are geared up to beat the traditional northern powers, and when they finally manage to do so are not too pleased to have top end metro teams shoved in their path as well. Especially when those two teams are now the #1 and #2 ranked Peewee A teams in the state.

Since we were talking Virginia, lets look at their Peewee A team (keep in mind that open letter was written from a Virginia Bantam parent about the Bantam A tournament) and take it from their perspective. Virginia's only losses to Minnesota Peewee A teams all season long were both one goal losses to Warroad until they lost to #2 ranked Mahtomedi twice in regions. Mahtomedi's only loss in regions was to #1 ranked Highland Central. A season like that should not come to a screeching halt because of who was rotated into their region. Those two teams could very easily have met in a state championship game. Even further, Warroad gets shifted into a region that is home to the #3 and #4 ranked teams in the state. Guess who their two losses came at the hands of? Yep, #3 Spring Lake Park (2-1) and #4 Alexandria (4-2). If this is last year's alignment (like it probably always should be), Virginia and Warroad are playing for the #1 and #2 seed from the North region in Crookston. Instead, they sit home while three metro teams and a team hundreds of miles away from both play in their stead. Virginia and Warroad should have gotten their shot at the state tournament. These teams have heavy turnover from year to year and last year's teams did not have that obstacle. How is it fair to the kids on those teams this year? That is why I don't agree at all when you say it seems fair to you.

Virginia and Warroad did have a shot at the state tourney. They just got beat in close games.. Warroad ran into a very good Spring Lake park who rairly even makes it to the regional tourny and I don't think has ever made it to the the state tourny.. A team like that should petition to get out of D10 so they don't have to get thru elk river, Blaine, centennial, to get to regions. But instead they got better and earned a spot..

I keep hearing Warroad didn't have a shot at state. They actually had two shots and lost them both in good games.. Shouldn't Warroad have made it based on beating a good team not just cuz their from the north.. SLP had to knock off Alexandria and Warroad to earn their spot..

MWS coach · Post by **MWS coach** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 8:28 am

Exactly Nuts! Each of these teams did have their shot at making state. It really shouldn't matter the geography of where each team is from. Win and you are in. Geography and who you play against should make no difference. Regions start with 32 teams and end up with 8 going to state, of the 24 teams that didn't make it many had close losses and many going to OT, but if they would have not had so and so in their region, then they might just have made it..... Teams from 11,12,15,16 get more opportunties as there are less teams in each district (in general) then the cities teams yet still send rotating 2-3 teams from each district, just like every other district. Each district rotates on a predetermined basis. How can this not be fair? The only issue I see is the regions are named by geography which they don't actually represent.

The thinking that a "north" team should always make it no matter the results on the ice is the same as thinking a D6 team should automatically make it because it is generally the strongest district and pays the most in MN Hockey fee's due to having the largest number of participants.

This is nuts! · Post by **This is nuts!** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 8:57 am

MWS coach wrote:Exactly Nuts! Each of these teams did have their shot at making state. It really shouldn't matter the geography of where each team is from. Win and you are in. Geography and who you play against should make no difference. Regions start with 32 teams and end up with 8 going to state, of the 24 teams that didn't make it many had close losses and many going to OT, but if they would have not had so and so in their region, then they might just have made it..... Teams from 11,12,15,16 get more opportunties as there are less teams in each district (in general) then the cities teams yet still send rotating 2-3 teams from each district, just like every other district. Each district rotates on a predetermined basis. How can this not be fair? The only issue I see is the regions are named by geography which they don't actually represent.

The thinking that a "north" team should always make it no matter the results on the ice is the same as thinking a D6 team should automatically make it because it is generally the strongest district and pays the most in MN Hockey fee's due to having the largest number of participants.

Thx, northern teams need realize that metro teams want to make it to state just as bad as they do.. They are all just kids that have the same dream. And
they have tough road to get there.. Maybe even tougher as they often have to get thru the perennial juggernauts in their districts just to get to the regional tourny. Most metro teams feel its a huge accomplishment just to go to regions.. The north is taking it a step further and demanding a state spot.. Really?

I thought it was great to watching closely contested region games between the north and metro teams. What an experience for all the kids regardless of where u are from.. Hell, if Warroad beats park and virginia wins u have 3 northern teams in the tourny to include Alexandria.. Just win and you re in.. Maybe next year it goes that way.. That's the Beauty of it.

We live in a world of entitlement .. I m sorry but it sounds like whining. Take it for what it is. Earn your spot. Instead of telling your kids they got screwed cuz you weren't just given a spot. Tell them great game we need to get
better.

When my kids complain about playing time. I tell them to get better. Most parents hug them and blame the coach and scream foul cuz of politics. I tell my them to earn their time.. North teams earn your spot! You have good teams you just lost close games.

MWS coach · Post by **MWS coach** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:04 am

One other thought, didn't the AA/A/B split give more opportunities for all smaller associations to make state? I do think northern teams certainly got more opportunity as a result. As PWA two years ago did Virgina send a team to regions? IDK but my guess is no, I do know they were not one goal away from state.

mnhockey2019 · Post by **mnhockey2019** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:08 am

The makeup of the districts playing in each region is well known at the start of the season, so no one should be surprised at which Districts are slotted into each Region. Virginia, Warroad and any other association had until December to change their A designation to AA, at either Bantam or PeeWee, if they thought getting to State would be easier at the AA level. None of them did. The games were played, the Northern teams didn't win. Hats off to associations like Roseau for playing at the AA level.

Broke · Post by **Broke** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:52 am

Let's go back to the original suggestion of a geography lesson and see if we can ease the tension. At the risk of committing sacrilege, I note that D11 and 12 are as much in the East as they are the North. D2 is also East, so lets relabel. The current East has D6, D8 and D9, which can also be called South, just as the current South (D3, D4, D5) can be called West. Lastly, current West is comprised of D15 and 16, which I think can safely be called North, and D10 is at least north of D2 so I can relabel with less controversy. More importantly, my relabeled North is sending EGF to state at the Bantam A level, so there is representation. Alexandria also advanced at the Bantam A and Peewee A levels, so at least there is another out-state, and we can just argue about whether they are north enough to be North. That is much less interesting, though. [/url]

ILTG · Post by **ILTG** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:14 pm

Hats off to associations like Roseau for playing at the AA level.[/quote]
How about a shout out too to the AA associationns who made the A State Tournament

Geographic regions are good for hockey. The greatest hockey tournament in the country does it this way too.

This is nuts! · Post by **This is nuts!** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 1:39 pm

My last two cents... Wether or not the state tourny was set up so every part of the state is represented, I don't know. But, I think it's fair to say it should be set up every team has the OPPORTUNITY to get there and I think we are doing that..

In an earlier post someone mentioned how back in the day northern teams had a majority of the their teams in the tourny. Well what argument would you have made if the metro cried foul and said u can only have two teams in instead of six, because we should be able to send teams cuz we r important too. Now you would have four northern teams that belong in tourny watching from home while other non deserving teams are playing.. Bet that would not make u happy.. Reverse the situation and you would probly have a different opinion.

PuckRanger · Post by **PuckRanger** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 9:23 pm

This is nuts! wrote:My last two cents... Wether or not the state tourny was set up so every part of the state is represented, I don't know. But, I think it's fair to say it should be set up every team has the OPPORTUNITY to get there and I think we are doing that..

In an earlier post someone mentioned how back in the day northern teams had a majority of the their teams in the tourny. Well what argument would you have made if the metro cried foul and said u can only have two teams in instead of six, because we should be able to send teams cuz we r important too. Now you would have four northern teams that belong in tourny watching from home while other non deserving teams are playing.. Bet that would not make u happy.. Reverse the situation and you would probly have a different opinion.

I think that earlier post you are referring to was mine, and that is exactly the opposite of what I said. I said Northern teams COULD HAVE HAD the majority of the teams in the tourney. They did not. They were afforded the same representation as the rest of the state. Nor did they didn't attempt to switch everything around to get more of their teams in it, even though there were far more "superior" teams up north back then. The situation WAS reversed and they did not ask for more representation and allowed hockey to grow in the rest of the state as a result. Here is what I said so you don't have to sift through and find it again:

Just think if the north did this to the metro area back in the 60's and 70's when they were pretty much dominant. Would metro hockey ever have even grown to what it is today? I am fairly certain there were years where 8 of the top 10 teams in the state were all from towns north of Hinckley. Hell, I bet there were years where the top 5 teams were all on the Iron Range. My guess is we didn't get to send 7 teams to the state tournament from up north back then. Somehow, its good for hockey to do that now?

I feel like I am beating my head against a brick wall because you are all missing the point! I am not lobbying for more "Northern" teams to be in the state tournament. Just geographic representation FROM ALL AREAS of the state. Metro teams don't need to be in outstate regions. I argue that you don't deserve to be in the state tournament if you can't get out of your geographical region... adjusting the regions to allow more metro opportunities is just not good for hockey in general. And even if you don't get only top teams in the state tourney, so be it... Heaven forbid you have a Cinderella story at a state tournament now and then...

There have been plenty of them in our state's hockey history. That can't happen now, its too hard for an underdog to rattle off that many wins. But hey, there's nothing quite like watching Edina in the championship of every level of every state hockey tournament in Minnesota every year.

Can't help but notice nobody commented on my suggestion on eliminating regions entirely and how it could be done with fair representation. Perhaps because everyone wants that #2 seed available to them in case their team has a juggernaut team in their district??? (But it OK to rotate two of them into an outstate region right now, right?)

This is nuts! · Post by **This is nuts!** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:51 am

PuckRanger wrote:
This is nuts! wrote:My last two cents... Wether or not the state tourny was set up so every part of the state is represented, I don't know. But, I think it's fair to say it should be set up every team has the OPPORTUNITY to get there and I think we are doing that..

In an earlier post someone mentioned how back in the day northern teams had a majority of the their teams in the tourny. Well what argument would you have made if the metro cried foul and said u can only have two teams in instead of six, because we should be able to send teams cuz we r important too. Now you would have four northern teams that belong in tourny watching from home while other non deserving teams are playing.. Bet that would not make u happy.. Reverse the situation and you would probly have a different opinion.

I think that earlier post you are referring to was mine, and that is exactly the opposite of what I said. I said Northern teams COULD HAVE HAD the majority of the teams in the tourney. They did not. They were afforded the same representation as the rest of the state. Nor did they didn't attempt to switch everything around to get more of their teams in it, even though there were far more "superior" teams up north back then. The situation WAS reversed and they did not ask for more representation and allowed hockey to grow in the rest of the state as a result. Here is what I said so you don't have to sift through and find it again:
Just think if the north did this to the metro area back in the 60's and 70's when they were pretty much dominant. Would metro hockey ever have even grown to what it is today? I am fairly certain there were years where 8 of the top 10 teams in the state were all from towns north of Hinckley. Hell, I bet there were years where the top 5 teams were all on the Iron Range. My guess is we didn't get to send 7 teams to the state tournament from up north back then. Somehow, its good for hockey to do that now?
I feel like I am beating my head against a brick wall because you are all missing the point! I am not lobbying for more "Northern" teams to be in the state tournament. Just geographic representation FROM ALL AREAS of the state. Metro teams don't need to be in outstate regions. I argue that you don't deserve to be in the state tournament if you can't get out of your geographical region... adjusting the regions to allow more metro opportunities is just not good for hockey in general. And even if you don't get only top teams in the state tourney, so be it... Heaven forbid you have a Cinderella story at a state tournament now and then... There have been plenty of them in our state's hockey history. That can't happen now, its too hard for an underdog to rattle off that many wins. But hey, there's nothing quite like watching Edina in the championship of every level of every state hockey tournament in Minnesota every year.

Can't help but notice nobody commented on my suggestion on eliminating regions entirely and how it could be done with fair representation. Perhaps because everyone wants that #2 seed available to them in case their team has a juggernaut team in their district??? (But it OK to rotate two of them into an outstate region right now, right?)

I m beating my head too. Let's do it your way. We ll have 8 regions, draw lines thru the state and make sure every corner is represented.. That would be great for hockey, then all the "underdogs" can battle it out. And bunch of teams can be at home can be scratching their heads wondering what happened, why did we work so hard all year.

Let that happen a few years and the metro teams will put together their own tourny which will give the teams that earn a spot a chance.. Then there will a true out state tourny with 8 regions which the winner more than likely be the top metro team that made it. And a metro state tourny which will have an obvious metro winner as well..

Again the tourny should be set up so all have CHANCE to get there.. I think that's happening..

Puck I do see your point, in a perfect world it would be great to have all parts the represented. But it is the state tourny and the best teams should be there..

MWS coach · Post by **MWS coach** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:55 am

It does not matter what part of the state you are from, win 3-5 games in regions and you make it to state. Simple as that. Every year the districts that represent the regions change. Some years some regions are stronger then others. PROVE YOU BELONG ON THE ICE. Pretty simple.

I do get what you are saying in that every year north should have representation at state. Sorry, I can't see how that is fair compared to the existing system. If the opportunity did not exist, ok I think you have a valid gripe. The opportunity did exist, unfortunately your team did not make it as they lost in regions. Yes, very close games and I am sure the sting that it was to a cities team that they lost to makes it even harder to swollow.

BAA and PWAA do have a seperate true north region. It works because the number of teams playing at those level is much lower. Many more teams at A and B, thus win your district bid to make it to regions. Win your regions games to make it to state.
Guess what, cinderella teams happen in the metro as well.

See Woodbury BAA. How did they make it? By getting to regions and winning, not whining.

I know you are talking about A and B, but look at BAA, the 4,5,6,8,9 seeds are no longer playing. The point. Win on the ice and you make it to state. I guess those teams should be complaining about who they had to face? Maybe if "north" didn't get two seeds one or two of them would have made it... I have not heard that once. I have not even heard any say that the seeding and playdown was not fair, why?

Sorry, I just don't agree that making it to state is about where on the map you are. You make it by winning no matter who you face.

bestgameever · Post by **bestgameever** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:24 am

I am from D3, but was talking to a bantam A father who won up "north" last weekend. I shared the open letter above with him. He understood, but pointed out that the two metro teams that moved on could make the same argument... They rarely make it to state because they always need to go through other metro teams every year. They apreciated the opportunity to play competitive games and earn the right to state.

Two sides to the story.

Chaz Barknarkles · Post by **Chaz Barknarkles** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:39 am

bestgameever wrote:I am from D3, but was talking to a bantam A father who won up "north" last weekend. I shared the open letter above with him. He understood, but pointed out that the two metro teams that moved on could make the same argument... They rarely make it to state because they always need to go through other metro teams every year. They apreciated the opportunity to play competitive games and earn the right to state.

Two sides to the story.

This is my point exactly. As a fan, I respect and appreciate all that the northern teams have done for the sport in this state. But, the system is what it is. The two D2 teams that advanced at Bantam A had to fight just to qualify for regions. There were "up north" teams that made it to regions with sub .500 records. We don't have that luxury. The two associations that qualified (Tartan & Highland) are not metro powers. They are two associations that lose their top guys to high school programs every year. Those kids earned the right to play in the state tournament on the ice, not because they're from the metro.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:50 pm

This is nuts! wrote:
MWS coach wrote:Exactly Nuts! Each of these teams did have their shot at making state. It really shouldn't matter the geography of where each team is from. Win and you are in. Geography and who you play against should make no difference. Regions start with 32 teams and end up with 8 going to state, of the 24 teams that didn't make it many had close losses and many going to OT, but if they would have not had so and so in their region, then they might just have made it..... Teams from 11,12,15,16 get more opportunties as there are less teams in each district (in general) then the cities teams yet still send rotating 2-3 teams from each district, just like every other district. Each district rotates on a predetermined basis. How can this not be fair? The only issue I see is the regions are named by geography which they don't actually represent.

The thinking that a "north" team should always make it no matter the results on the ice is the same as thinking a D6 team should automatically make it because it is generally the strongest district and pays the most in MN Hockey fee's due to having the largest number of participants.
Thx, northern teams need realize that metro teams want to make it to state just as bad as they do.. They are all just kids that have the same dream. And
they have tough road to get there.. Maybe even tougher as they often have to get thru the perennial juggernauts in their districts just to get to the regional tourny. Most metro teams feel its a huge accomplishment just to go to regions.. The north is taking it a step further and demanding a state spot.. Really?

I thought it was great to watching closely contested region games between the north and metro teams. What an experience for all the kids regardless of where u are from.. Hell, if Warroad beats park and virginia wins u have 3 northern teams in the tourny to include Alexandria.. Just win and you re in.. Maybe next year it goes that way.. That's the Beauty of it.

We live in a world of entitlement .. I m sorry but it sounds like whining. Take it for what it is. Earn your spot. Instead of telling your kids they got screwed cuz you weren't just given a spot. Tell them great game we need to get
better.

When my kids complain about playing time. I tell them to get better. Most parents hug them and blame the coach and scream foul cuz of politics. I tell my them to earn their time.. North teams earn your spot! You have good teams you just lost close games.

Nuts, I hate the "enmtitlement" whining in our societya s much as anyone, but I honestly do not think that is what this is. I think you have to earn a state title but you also have to grow the game EVERYWHERE at the youth level. The reality is that have true "regions" gives kdis something realistic to strive for and work for. When you give the metro area even more shots at state by putting metro teams into northern regions you squash many associations realistic ability to ever make state, in turn you squash the desire for many to consinute to participate. I don't disagree with "earning your spot" but you have to earn it once you are there and you also have to keep the dream alive to keep people participating, or else you go down a slippery slope. Is a future where the only hockey teams left in MN reside in the metro area really the road you want taken? I know that is extreme but it's not far from reality when you keep digging into the knickers of outstate associations....

MWS coach · Post by **MWS coach** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:56 am

I understand your point JSR, but the "metro" associations were not the mega Edina, Wayzata, OMG that went up north and won. Isn't it just as important to continue to grow the smaller associations within the metro as it is the outstate associations that likely have a huge hockey history? Zip Code should not matter for whom makes it to state. There is a rotation of districts. Keep in mind that north teams will also have the opportunity to make state by playing outside of the north region due to rotation.

Sorry, it is the state tournament. Every path is tough to make it, this is what makes it extra special.

Going back to one of original posts, didn't the team in question lose a one goal game in OT? A little puck luck and then the world is good? Not a reason in my opinion to over haul a system that already gives teams the opportunity to make it and has a very fair rotation of districts which changes the path of the teams to make it to state every year.