redistricting

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

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

elliott70
Posts: 13056
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Post by elliott70 » Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:03 am

Johnson and Como will either be moved to D2 or D8.
This will be decided by April.

klulus
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 9:36 am

Post by klulus » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:23 am

As parent of a Rochester player, I am a little concerned about competition level in the new district 9. If you look at the Pee Wee and Bantam A rankings at Minnesota Hockey Rankings you can see

group -- Rochester -- top District 9 competition -- bottom
2010 PeeWee -- 15.69 -- 10.91 (Mankato) -- 2.30 (Waseca)
2009 PeeWee -- 12.39 -- 9.07 (Owatonna) -- 2.43 (Waseca)
2010 Bantam -- 12.57 -- 8.12 (Red Wing) -- 4.69 (New Ulm)
2009 Bantam -- 15.77-- 8.69 (Faribault) -- 3.62 (St. Peter)

The expected win for any of these four teams ranges from +3.32 goals to +13.39 goals. This does neither these teams nor the other district 9 teams any good.

A solution might be to have the top squirt, pee wee, and bantam teams play in District 8 where they are of similar level and have the remaining teams play in District 9 with the top one playing district at the A level. There would be one additional hour long trip for the district 8 A teams. The addition of a competitive team should make that one trip worthwhile.

There is not much data about how a second Rochester team would compete in district 9, but in 2009, there were two Rochester Bantam A teams. The second team was rated at 7.54. This was within a goal of most of the other teams in the district. This was a good year so perhaps Rochester wouldn't do as well, but competition still should be closer.

Jefferson17
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 1:55 pm
Location: Minnesota-Bloomington

Post by Jefferson17 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:49 pm

Yay Minnesota Hockey! You finally got something done! \:D/
Jefferson Jaguars: 1981, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994

elliott70
Posts: 13056
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Bemidji

Post by elliott70 » Fri Feb 05, 2010 3:23 pm

Rochester has been invited to D8 scheduling to assure competitive games for their teams.

goldy313
Posts: 3221
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Post by goldy313 » Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:25 pm

Elliot, it's not teams it's team..1 at each A level.

Here's a thought..have Rochester field more than 1 A team :idea:

Good grief they complain about competition but intentionally slant their association towards an unfair advantage over the rest of the state. How many cities with over 100,000 people field 1 A team? I understand their complaint about competition but at the same time see an oportunity to stop with the nonsense that a town of over 100,000 can only field 1 A team.

Why punish district 8 teams because Rochester wants to be the St. Thomas Academy of youth hockey? Let 'em field a AAA team out of Wisconsin and call it good.

Soulforged
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 6:50 am

Post by Soulforged » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:21 am

The situation in Rochester has always made me chuckle. The youth hockey is constantly complaining about competition, but then they meet their "maker" when they have to divide the kids between four high schools. Maybe they should divide the association like Lakeville. For all the talk, the year Minnesota Hocey tried to combined a D4 and D8 schedule(Rochester had two A teams at the Bantam and Pee Wee levels), Faribault Pee Wee A beat both teams and the Bantams beat both teams. Funny, the next year they went back to one A team at each level.

NIFALTY
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 10:48 am
Location: East Metro

Post by NIFALTY » Sun Feb 14, 2010 11:57 am

Situations change for every youth hockey organization from year to year. The board of directors has to stay as informed as possible and make adjustments mostly based on numbers of participants but with some thought given to talent level. No one wants to be non-competetive year after year. It's nice to have teams at A,B & C levels but sometimes not practical! No one learns from blow-out losses year after year. If the talent level does not support an "A" program the district involved will allow an association to play "down" a level as necessary. This can and will be reviewed on a yearly basis.
As for Rochester, I know from past experience that no one enjoys a trip from the north end of District 8 to Rochester for a one hour game. However, Rochester routinely would set up three games on a week-end when traveling north for District 8 games! I would hope District 8 will follow up as posted by elliot70.

jackstraw
Posts: 315
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 12:58 pm

D9

Post by jackstraw » Mon Feb 15, 2010 7:44 am

Soulforged has some good points. Rochester should wait at least a year to pass judgement. I am not sure that they will dominate like all think. Some of the A bantam teams of the past would have been a dominant force in the new D9, I just don't see that out of Roch. anymore. The A PW's are coached very well and have a couple of very physically mature kids on the team but I am not sure they have that dominant of an entire club to be that over the top kind of group. One of those bigger kids probably won't even be there for his bantam years, the Holy-Grail of Roch will be calling.

bosshard
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:33 pm

Post by bosshard » Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:08 pm

what is happening to district 4? and where is luverne and worthington going to go?

NoExcuses
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:38 pm

Post by NoExcuses » Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:51 pm

Soulforged wrote:The situation in Rochester has always made me chuckle. The youth hockey is constantly complaining about competition, but then they meet their "maker" when they have to divide the kids between four high schools. Maybe they should divide the association like Lakeville. For all the talk, the year Minnesota Hocey tried to combined a D4 and D8 schedule(Rochester had two A teams at the Bantam and Pee Wee levels), Faribault Pee Wee A beat both teams and the Bantams beat both teams. Funny, the next year they went back to one A team at each level.
You need to look at the whole picture. Yes RYHA feeds four high school programs and in order to do that there are players on varsity teams that played B1, B2 & even C level hokey at the youth level. Yes some of the smaller associations in the new D9 might provide some competition at the A level, but will provide no competition at the B1 level and probably do not even field teams at the B2 level.

With that said the D9 schedule is only 16 games and with the Peewee and Bantam teams play over 50 games they should be able to schedule more comtetive teams outside the district.

Mac15
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:48 pm

Post by Mac15 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:19 pm

goldy313 wrote:Elliot, it's not teams it's team..1 at each A level.

Here's a thought..have Rochester field more than 1 A team :idea:

Good grief they complain about competition but intentionally slant their association towards an unfair advantage over the rest of the state. How many cities with over 100,000 people field 1 A team? I understand their complaint about competition but at the same time see an oportunity to stop with the nonsense that a town of over 100,000 can only field 1 A team.

Why punish district 8 teams because Rochester wants to be the St. Thomas Academy of youth hockey? Let 'em field a AAA team out of Wisconsin and call it good.
Goldy, There will be 3 A teams at SQ, PW, BT this winter. First time since '96-'97. It will take a few years to see how it works.

observer
Posts: 2227
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:45 pm

Post by observer » Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:02 pm

Why are they going from 1 A team to 3 A teams? Is it to balance strength with other members of the District?

U2Care
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:49 am

Como Johnson Merger

Post by U2Care » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:05 am

With the merger of these two organizations, MN Hockey did nothing to help the groups by putting them in District 8. How much more inconvenient can you make it for parents. Parents should have the option to waiver their child from the new organization - there should be another option available. The new Board has told parents there will be no waivers. Our next option is to tell our child to find another activity.

Night Train
Posts: 350
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:16 pm

Post by Night Train » Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:30 am

Pretty sure Johnson/Como requested D8. MN Hockey wouldn't have much to do with that decision other than approving the Johnson/Como request. Highland-Central has gone to D2 so I was surprised that Johnson/Como didn't request the same. Think you need to speak with Johnson/Como leadership about that one.

SWPrez
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 8:48 am

Post by SWPrez » Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:40 am

Night Train wrote:Pretty sure Johnson/Como requested D8. MN Hockey wouldn't have much to do with that decision other than approving the Johnson/Como request. Highland-Central has gone to D2 so I was surprised that Johnson/Como didn't request the same. Think you need to speak with Johnson/Como leadership about that one.
Night Train is correct. Minnesota Hockey promised and allowed each District 1 Association to choose which District they wanted to play in. Each District has their own cultures and District 8 had a culture which Johnson-Como leadership must have felt was a good fit.

With the exception of Richfield, all former District 1 associations have been allowed to go where their memberships have requested and Minnesota hockey has honored their moves to their requested Districts.

U2Care
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:49 am

Johnson Como Merger

Post by U2Care » Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:30 am

Thanks Night Train and SWPrez for the info. We were told the new organization was not allowed into D2. The new name "Devils" seems to be a fit considering mixd truths. Another reason to pull our sons from the program and the demise of metro hockey continues. So sad.

SWPrez
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 8:48 am

Re: Johnson Como Merger

Post by SWPrez » Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:45 am

U2Care wrote:Thanks Night Train and SWPrez for the info. We were told the new organization was not allowed into D2. The new name "Devils" seems to be a fit considering mixd truths. Another reason to pull our sons from the program and the demise of metro hockey continues. So sad.
U2Care, I may be wrong, but I think D2 has some strict rules that would have made it difficult for Como/Johnson. May be that all associations must field an A team at all levels to participate? Not sure, but I have heard D2 may be a bit more difficult to deal with if you don't fit the mold. I think your association leaders made the right choice, you probably just need to get a little more info regarding the D2 situation that led them to that decision.

U2Care
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:49 am

Johnson Como Merger

Post by U2Care » Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:29 pm

I believe that there should be an option/grace period for familes to waiver out when associations merge. But Johnson/Como are holding everyone hostage - these are kids! The greater majority will probably not even play hockey beyond Bantams. This merger will probably only last a few years anyways as numbers continue to dwindle....including my children.

observer
Posts: 2227
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:45 pm

Post by observer » Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:10 pm

Way to get on board and apply all your energy to help make the new Johnson/Como Association a success. It all starts with dedicated volunteers and recruiting.

60 new mites, boys and girls, this year.

Mac15
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:48 pm

Post by Mac15 » Thu Sep 02, 2010 10:33 pm

observer wrote:Why are they going from 1 A team to 3 A teams? Is it to balance strength with other members of the District?
Sorry I was napping...
One A team at each level will not play a D9 schedule but focus on playing against metro teams. I think the bantam A metro team will play in the Maroon & Gold program. The other two teams will skate in the D9 league.

RYHA feeds 4 high school teams for boys. (The girls feed 3 Rochester HS teams and a smaller number go to Dodge County). As mentioned earlier, there are varsity players that played C hockey. The intent is to develop more players playing at a higher level.

In '96-'98 RYHA had three squirt A teams.

BadgerBob82
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am

Post by BadgerBob82 » Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:20 pm

Mac15: Don't mean they will have 1 A team and 2 B teams playing in a D9 "A" league?

BadgerBob82
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am

Post by BadgerBob82 » Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:21 pm

Mac15: And there will now be "C" players playing on "A" teams?

Mac15
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:48 pm

Post by Mac15 » Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:02 pm

Last year RYHA had the following number of teams at these levels:
BA - 1, BB - 2, BB2 -2, BC - 2
PA - 1, PB - 2, PB2 - 2, PC(house) - 4

If you are disparaging the skill level of the players I guess you are entitled to your opinion. If you think this years kids are jumping 2 levels then you'd be wrong.

'10-'11 plan:
BA - 3, BB - 3, BB2 (if D9 has it) - 2 [otherwise it will be BC - 2]
At most some kids will play one level up from last year's teams - so no C players will be playing A.

BadgerBob82
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am

Post by BadgerBob82 » Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:20 am

Mac15: I was not putting down "C" players, I thought you were when you said "C" players are playing high school hockey and it almost seems as if you eliminate the "C" level, then no "C" players will be playing in HS?

I would stand corrected that no "C" players would be playing "A", only "B".

Though it was my understanding the southsiders want their own "A" team, which in fact would have "C" level players playing at the "A" level.

goldy313
Posts: 3221
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Post by goldy313 » Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:01 pm

It all comes down to who you classify as a C player.

Is it anyone below the top 34 assuming 1 A and 1 B team?
Who are you comparing them too? A Wayzata C team could be at many A teams.

Mac the only drawback I forsee is cost containment, it's far cheaper to play C hockey than A or even B hockey. Will RYHA do anything to keep costs down for those who need it?

Post Reply