Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:18 am

If you have something post it.

bardown27
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by bardown27 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 2:00 pm

bring back icing on the PK (at least for bantam level, especially Bantam AA)
face-offs automatically to defensive zone of team taking penalty like HS (at least for bantam level, especially Bantam AA))
all boardings, checking from behinds, and head contacts should be auto-5. youth hockey refs are afraid to call the 5 min major and default to 2/10.

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:43 am

thanks

blueline_6
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueline_6 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:42 pm

1) Regarding B level hockey:
Recognize two levels of B, call them BB/B if you want to follow AA/A. Or, conversely, tell districts and associations to stop doing B1/B2 and only declare AA/A/B/C.

2) Regarding C level hockey:
Create regional/state tourneys for Peewee and Bantam C. This might create a little more motivation for some associations to declare C teams. There are associations that declare their bottom team at B1 so that they "have the chance to go to state" only to watch that team have such a poor season that they don't even qualify for district playoffs. Plus, why do we assume kids at the C level don't love the game as much or don't want a full-fledged post-season? C is a travelling level of hockey, it is not house hockey.


Basically I'm looking for an outcome where there are regional/state tourneys for every MN Hockey recognized level.

zooomx
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:34 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by zooomx » Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:50 am

blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:42 pm
1) Regarding B level hockey:
Recognize two levels of B, call them BB/B if you want to follow AA/A. Or, conversely, tell districts and associations to stop doing B1/B2 and only declare AA/A/B/C.

2) Regarding C level hockey:
Create regional/state tourneys for Peewee and Bantam C. This might create a little more motivation for some associations to declare C teams. There are associations that declare their bottom team at B1 so that they "have the chance to go to state" only to watch that team have such a poor season that they don't even qualify for district playoffs. Plus, why do we assume kids at the C level don't love the game as much or don't want a full-fledged post-season? C is a travelling level of hockey, it is not house hockey.


Basically I'm looking for an outcome where there are regional/state tourneys for every MN Hockey recognized level.
Would love to see regional/state tourneys for the B2 and/or C teams. However, class designations somehow need to be monitored and/or spelled out better. I could see associations dropping a legit B1 team down to B2 or C so they can chase a trophy. I could see a big can of worms being opened.

blueline_6
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueline_6 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 11:07 am

zooomx wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:50 am
blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:42 pm
1) Regarding B level hockey:
Recognize two levels of B, call them BB/B if you want to follow AA/A. Or, conversely, tell districts and associations to stop doing B1/B2 and only declare AA/A/B/C.

2) Regarding C level hockey:
Create regional/state tourneys for Peewee and Bantam C. This might create a little more motivation for some associations to declare C teams. There are associations that declare their bottom team at B1 so that they "have the chance to go to state" only to watch that team have such a poor season that they don't even qualify for district playoffs. Plus, why do we assume kids at the C level don't love the game as much or don't want a full-fledged post-season? C is a travelling level of hockey, it is not house hockey.


Basically I'm looking for an outcome where there are regional/state tourneys for every MN Hockey recognized level.
Would love to see regional/state tourneys for the B2 and/or C teams. However, class designations somehow need to be monitored and/or spelled out better. I could see associations dropping a legit B1 team down to B2 or C so they can chase a trophy. I could see a big can of worms being opened.
I completely agree. I think more oversight is needed right now with regard to team declarations, the can of worms is already open in the current system.

O-townClown
Posts: 3672
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Typical homeboy from the O-Town

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by O-townClown » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:47 am

bardown27 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 2:00 pm
bring back icing on the PK (at least for bantam level, especially Bantam AA)
face-offs automatically to defensive zone of team taking penalty like HS (at least for bantam level, especially Bantam AA))
all boardings, checking from behinds, and head contacts should be auto-5. youth hockey refs are afraid to call the 5 min major and default to 2/10.
These are Rule Book items. You need to bring those to USA Hockey for discussion.
Be kind. Rewind.

goldy313
Posts: 3244
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by goldy313 » Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:16 am

These were the final scores of the South Peewee B region.....
6-2
11-1
25-0
13-0

Fix this. Either some standard to classify teams or get rid of B state tournaments.

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:37 am

Everything posted here will be presented to the district directors.

Goldy, I understand what you are saying - there are different approaches to this problem but for some reason we have failed to move on any of them.

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:47 am

goldy313 wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:16 am
These were the final scores of the South Peewee B region.....
6-2
11-1
25-0
13-0

Fix this. Either some standard to classify teams or get rid of B state tournaments.
The south had the worst of the lop-sided games.
Others seemed to be metro vs out state or with the large out-state vs rural programs.
The other category is some small programs with only one team vs programs with both an A and. B.

goldy313
Posts: 3244
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by goldy313 » Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:00 pm

I think once we drop down to the B level things can go awry badly. Take Rochester for example, they have one association that feeds 4 high schools, they do not field a bantam AA team, field one bantam A team and qualified 2 bantam B teams for regionals after being seeded #1 and #2 in districts. That just doesn’t seem right to me. At the bantam A level Dodge County beat both Minnetonka and Edina, Fairmont was even respectable against Edina.

I don’t know what the right answer is and it maybe like what happens in football where at the lower classes sometimes you just forfeit the game against the #1 seed. 25-0 just should never happen.

blueline_6
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueline_6 » Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:10 pm

elliott70 wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:47 am
goldy313 wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:16 am
These were the final scores of the South Peewee B region.....
6-2
11-1
25-0
13-0

Fix this. Either some standard to classify teams or get rid of B state tournaments.
The south had the worst of the lop-sided games.
Others seemed to be metro vs out state or with the large out-state vs rural programs.
The other category is some small programs with only one team vs programs with both an A and. B.
Certainly not just a B level issue. Rogers Peewee A rolled through the North region with scores of 11-5, 8-1 and 6-0. Rogers Bantam A also won their North region with scores of 5-0, 2-0 and 3-0. That's what happens when a District allows a AA hockey program to declare their top teams at A. District 10 has to be one of the worst when it comes to team declaration oversight.

MWS coach
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:31 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by MWS coach » Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:27 pm

blueline_6 wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:10 pm
elliott70 wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:47 am
goldy313 wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:16 am
These were the final scores of the South Peewee B region.....
6-2
11-1
25-0
13-0

Fix this. Either some standard to classify teams or get rid of B state tournaments.
The south had the worst of the lop-sided games.
Others seemed to be metro vs out state or with the large out-state vs rural programs.
The other category is some small programs with only one team vs programs with both an A and. B.
Certainly not just a B level issue. Rogers Peewee A rolled through the North region with scores of 11-5, 8-1 and 6-0. Rogers Bantam A also won their North region with scores of 5-0, 2-0 and 3-0. That's what happens when a District allows a AA hockey program to declare their top teams at A. District 10 has to be one of the worst when it comes to team declaration oversight.
Rogers PWA should have no doubt been AA, you are correct, D10 is terrible at declaring teams at the right level. Interesting tidbit, the team Rogers beat in regional final, Spring Lake Park is also a HS AA program. Not what A level should be in youth.

The Exiled One
Posts: 1727
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:34 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by The Exiled One » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:12 pm

zooomx wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:50 am
blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:42 pm
1) Regarding B level hockey:
Recognize two levels of B, call them BB/B if you want to follow AA/A. Or, conversely, tell districts and associations to stop doing B1/B2 and only declare AA/A/B/C.

2) Regarding C level hockey:
Create regional/state tourneys for Peewee and Bantam C. This might create a little more motivation for some associations to declare C teams. There are associations that declare their bottom team at B1 so that they "have the chance to go to state" only to watch that team have such a poor season that they don't even qualify for district playoffs. Plus, why do we assume kids at the C level don't love the game as much or don't want a full-fledged post-season? C is a travelling level of hockey, it is not house hockey.


Basically I'm looking for an outcome where there are regional/state tourneys for every MN Hockey recognized level.
Would love to see regional/state tourneys for the B2 and/or C teams. However, class designations somehow need to be monitored and/or spelled out better. I could see associations dropping a legit B1 team down to B2 or C so they can chase a trophy. I could see a big can of worms being opened.
MWS coach wrote:
Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:27 pm
Rogers PWA should have no doubt been AA, you are correct, D10 is terrible at declaring teams at the right level. Interesting tidbit, the team Rogers beat in regional final, Spring Lake Park is also a HS AA program. Not what A level should be in youth.
I have a proposal that somewhat addresses all of these issues. I have it written up in a format that could be formally presented to Minnesota Hockey right now, but I don't think the old guard running MH are ready to seriously consider it.

Short version is that we should stop classifying top--->down from AA--->C and instead classify bottom--->up from 1--->5. The proposal goes into way more detail than that with various issues and how relabeling would address them. It also gives Minnesota Hockey a roadmap on how to implement the plan. Simply, they'd just relabel existing Minnesota Hockey sanctioned state and regional tournaments and call them "Level 5", "Level 4", and "Level 3". This would both serve as a guide to districts and associations as well as somewhat forcing their hand.

I expect this proposal would receive massive push back. Sadly, I expect most of the push back to come from parents who want to continue claiming their kid plays on the "AA team" or the "A team" because it sounds better than the "Level 5 team" or the "Level 4 team".

I'd be happy to share the entire proposal with anybody who is interested in exploring this idea. For anybody who wants to criticize it, that's your right, but I won't be engaging in purely negative discourse in a public forum. Feel free to PM me either way.

goldy313
Posts: 3244
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by goldy313 » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:45 pm

Essentially, in naming, that is the road the MSHSL went down in football.
For your proposal just change it from 1-5 to A -AAAAA. So while officially being AAAAA is is just commonplace to call it 5A. Nobody gets their feelings hurt for being a B player.

The Exiled One
Posts: 1727
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:34 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by The Exiled One » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:51 pm

goldy313 wrote:
Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:45 pm
Essentially, in naming, that is the road the MSHSL went down in football.
For your proposal just change it from 1-5 to A -AAAAA. So while officially being AAAAA is is just commonplace to call it 5A. Nobody gets their feelings hurt for being a B player.
I'd be fine with that too.

My only concern is confusing "Minnesota AAA" with "everywhere else AAA", but I could live with it, especially if we went the "3A" versus "AAA" route.

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:33 pm

please email it to me.
elliottm@paulbunyan.net
label it hockey proposal so I see it and can segregate it from all other things I receive as well as the garbage.

blueline_6
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueline_6 » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:36 am

Exiled One - does your plan also include some framework for how many teams an association should declare and what level they should declare them at? That, to me, is the root problem. As long as we continue to leave team declarations up to individual associations we will continue to have this kind of disparity of competition. Everyone needs to be operating under the same guidelines, something like "You have X number of kids at a given age level, then your team declaration options are:" and list out the possibilities, also taking into account if the association feeds a AA or A high school program. Structure the framework so that opting up is a possibility (e.g Hermantown) but opting down is limited (e.g. Rogers). It's never going to create perfect parity, but at least then the sandbaggers would all be limited to a minimum level of sandbagging.

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:15 am

blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:36 am
Exiled One - does your plan also include some framework for how many teams an association should declare and what level they should declare them at? That, to me, is the root problem. As long as we continue to leave team declarations up to individual associations we will continue to have this kind of disparity of competition. Everyone needs to be operating under the same guidelines, something like "You have X number of kids at a given age level, then your team declaration options are:" and list out the possibilities, also taking into account if the association feeds a AA or A high school program. Structure the framework so that opting up is a possibility (e.g Hermantown) but opting down is limited (e.g. Rogers). It's never going to create perfect parity, but at least then the sandbaggers would all be limited to a minimum level of sandbagging.
District 16 rule is your first team is A with the option of playing AA. Bemidji and Roseau play AA.
At the district meeting teams can request to play B level rather than A level. The District board decides with final say belonging to the District Director. Some associations will opt for this as they only have a dozen or so players, some jump back and forth every year or so dependent on their quality.
As an example Bagley peewee B's were pretty good this year but with 12 kids playing A's would have been tough. And since they qualified for state it has generated a lot of excitement in their small town which helps the game grow.

The Exiled One
Posts: 1727
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:34 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by The Exiled One » Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:19 am

blueline_6 wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:36 am
Exiled One - does your plan also include some framework for how many teams an association should declare and what level they should declare them at? That, to me, is the root problem. As long as we continue to leave team declarations up to individual associations we will continue to have this kind of disparity of competition. Everyone needs to be operating under the same guidelines, something like "You have X number of kids at a given age level, then your team declaration options are:" and list out the possibilities, also taking into account if the association feeds a AA or A high school program. Structure the framework so that opting up is a possibility (e.g Hermantown) but opting down is limited (e.g. Rogers). It's never going to create perfect parity, but at least then the sandbaggers would all be limited to a minimum level of sandbagging.
I agree with you, and I do have a plan for that actually, but it's not part of this proposal. That's part two.

The reason I separated them is because stripping associations and/or districts of power is incredibly difficult both politically and technically, but relabeling can be done by Minnesota Hockey unilaterally via the method I outlined above.

O-townClown
Posts: 3672
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Typical homeboy from the O-Town

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by O-townClown » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:09 pm

elliott70 wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:15 am
As an example Bagley peewee B's were pretty good this year but with 12 kids playing A's would have been tough. And since they qualified for state it has generated a lot of excitement in their small town which helps the game grow.
Good. Now I have my team to root for! Go Bagels!
Be kind. Rewind.

blueblood
Posts: 2300
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 8:36 am
Location: Tonka

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by blueblood » Sat Mar 09, 2019 5:14 pm

Calling icing on penalty kills is a joke.

I understand the intent of the rule is to create puck possession, but from my observations at the Bantam A and AA South regional, the coaches are not buying into that theory as all teams looked to ice the puck and take a face-off over risking puck possession and it wasn't even close.

Bantams should be playing hockey similar to MSHSL regulations.

Will that be addressed Mr. E.?
Play Like a Champion Today

elliott70
Posts: 13098
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by elliott70 » Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:33 pm

I brought it up when the issue first arose.
But too many drinking the Colorado kook-aid.

I will get. It on the agenda.

goldy313
Posts: 3244
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by goldy313 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 12:54 am

elliott70 wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:33 pm
I brought it up when the issue first arose.
But too many drinking the Colorado kook-aid.

I will get. It on the agenda.
This is a problem in youth/high school sports.....making a rule that benefits most doesn’t always work. Texas high school football essentially plays under a NCAA rule book, not a NFHS rule book ( generally it is rules concerning legal blocking techniques) Their kids are better prepared for the next level than most other states kids are. Florida baseball does the same type of thing.

MN Hockey should be preparing kids for high school hockey.

yesiplayedhockey
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:33 am

Re: Ideas that should be brought to the Minnesota Hockey Board

Post by yesiplayedhockey » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:44 pm

Get rid of the no icing on penalties rule (pee wee and bantams)

Mandate all AA teams must roster 15 skaters

Tap the number of games Bantams can play at around 60 (and 3 or 4 tournaments). More practices

Neck guards mandated all districts (it may be a rule already)

Take away all icing calls for squirts (Forces these younger kids to always hustle down the ice)

1:30 penalties for all games that have 12- 15 minute periods (this will lead to more ice time for the bottom kids)

Figure out a long range plan to get the middle and lower income families back into hockey...

Tell Minnesota hockey to try to eliminate some of the High Performance stuff in the spring and summer so kids can truly attempt to play a 2nd sport (Hard close all Minnesota Hockey sanctioned events in June and July for all kids under bantams)

Educate ALL city owned facilities that these kids hanging out in the rink are a good thing. (I don't know how many times I see kids getting yelled at by the zamboni guy.... for just being a kid)...We want kids hanging in rinks, stick handling and shooting pucks with their buddies. Not chased away like they are felons.

Post Reply