When the golden goose gets aggressive

[almostashappy]

Ken Pauley's contribution to the latest LPH issue (http://www.letsplayhockey.com/teams/hig ... ockey.html) strays from his standard stay-in-school talking points and adopts a fairly aggressive attitude towards the MSHSL. It can be summed up this way:

1. The Tourney is a the MSHSL's "most valuable financial asset."

2. If the MSHSL fails "to implement the changes needed to support (MN high school) hockey," then more of the state's best players will leave high school early.

3. If more of the state's best players leave early, they won't be playing in The Tourney.

4. If The Tourney doesn't feature the best players, then fans will stop attending.

5. If the fans stop attending The Tourney, then the MSHSL is screwed.


It's a "do this or else" strong-arm attempt.

So is the logic right, or is The Tourney resilient enough to survive 80 kids leaving early each year, rather than 40? And if the logic is sound, are the changes that Pauley proposes (e.g. 20min periods, more games, allowing teams to play out-of-state) sufficient to "save" the golden goose?

I tend to believe that the state tournament is on firm ground. It's far more about the teams and the tradition and the competitive spirit than the individuals playing on those teams.

[Froggy Richards]

Ken Pauley's contribution to the latest LPH issue (http://www.letsplayhockey.com/teams/hig ... ockey.html) strays from his standard stay-in-school talking points and adopts a fairly aggressive attitude towards the MSHSL. It can be summed up this way:

1. The Tourney is a the MSHSL's "most valuable financial asset."

2. If the MSHSL fails "to implement the changes needed to support (MN high school) hockey," then more of the state's best players will leave high school early.

3. If more of the state's best players leave early, they won't be playing in The Tourney.

4. If The Tourney doesn't feature the best players, then fans will stop attending.

5. If the fans stop attending The Tourney, then the MSHSL is screwed.


It's a "do this or else" strong-arm attempt.

So is the logic right, or is The Tourney resilient enough to survive 80 kids leaving early each year, rather than 40? And if the logic is sound, are the changes that Pauley proposes (e.g. 20min periods, more games, allowing teams to play out-of-state) sufficient to "save" the golden goose?

I tend to believe that the state tournament is on firm ground. It's far more about the teams and the tradition and the competitive spirit than the individuals playing on those teams.

I would agree. I've never gone to or watched the State Tournament to see any Individual Players. I watch it because of what it is and that isn't going to change.

[SCBlueLiner]

But things change. There is a generation of kids that have never seen Notre Dame win a national title in football. The first time in the history of college football that has happened. Those kids view the SEC as the be all end all conference. And the Big Ten, meh, slow and boring, can't win.

Just saying, YOU may view the HS State Tournament as the best thing going but what about the generation behind you? Do they see the event the same way as you? Will they continue to see it as the premier event if the quality of play diminishes? Will that erode support and attendance over time?

[almostashappy]

But things change. There is a generation of kids that have never seen Notre Dame win a national title in football. The first time in the history of college football that has happened. Those kids view the SEC as the be all end all conference. And the Big Ten, meh, slow and boring, can't win.

Just saying, YOU may view the HS State Tournament as the best thing going but what about the generation behind you? Do they see the event the same way as you? Will they continue to see it as the premier event if the quality of play diminishes? Will that erode support and attendance over time?

Would people stop attending the Kentucky Derby if a half-dozen of the best three-year olds were lured away by richer purses in the "Dubai Derby?"

Would the Indy 500 stop drawing crowds if the best drivers were instead driving in the "Cincinnati 500"?

Do most college basketball fans wait to see which teams make it to The Final Four before they buy their tickets?

I don't think so.

[minnscout]

Great article! Could not agree more.

[SCBlueLiner]

All I'm saying is you can't just assume that everything will remain constant. The world changes and you better be prepared to defend your turf.

I thought this comment summed up my feelings precisely. Nothing will change the current direction unless everybody gets on board.

• The kids aren’t leaving because we have a weak Minnesota high school program. They are leaving because their parents have been told it would serve their child best to leave and go play 100 games somewhere else. This is all hogwash. All of this leaving early and transferring to another school is totally parent driven. If there was a way to convince the parents that loyalty, commitment, unselfishness and growing up at home in a safe high school environment was the best thing for their child, this nonsense would stop. There is always time after high school to pursue their dreams at a higher level. In the end, it really doesn’t matter anyway. Every player is going to end up were they are going to end up, with or without juniors, development programs and being on a top level high school team. Parents are so afraid that their player is going to get left behind. It is just not true. We need more help from the college coaches to convince these kids to stay in school. I believe the only real way to change this momentum of leaving is through a concentrated effort to educate the parents and convince them that this is not always the best thing to do. High school hockey as we have known it is at risk if the parents don’t get on board and help save it and keep it a great and wonderful experience of all.

[NLHockey]

But things change. There is a generation of kids that have never seen Notre Dame win a national title in football. The first time in the history of college football that has happened. Those kids view the SEC as the be all end all conference. And the Big Ten, meh, slow and boring, can't win.

Just saying, YOU may view the HS State Tournament as the best thing going but what about the generation behind you? Do they see the event the same way as you? Will they continue to see it as the premier event if the quality of play diminishes? Will that erode support and attendance over time?

Would people stop attending the Kentucky Derby if a half-dozen of the best three-year olds were lured away by richer purses in the "Dubai Derby?"

Would the Indy 500 stop drawing crowds if the best drivers were instead driving in the "Cincinnati 500"?

Do most college basketball fans wait to see which teams make it to The Final Four before they buy their tickets?

I don't think so.

I think you are wrong, actually, I would not attend those events if there wasn't talent there. I don't go to Cantebury Downs to watch mediocre race horses, but the Kentucky Derby is on my bucket list, for sure. Twins game attendance (and for that matter, the Wild) suck on bad years, but when they are good, they pack the house. Sure, people will attend to some degree whether the talent is there or not, but it sure doesn't hurt the bottom line when the talent is there. It isn't going to be a sudden dramatic change in attendance in one year, but departures of talent will slowly erode away at the allure of the tourney until one day, they look up at mostly empty seats and say, "remember when".....

[NLHockey]

All I'm saying is you can't just assume that everything will remain constant. The world changes and you better be prepared to defend your turf.

I thought this comment summed up my feelings precisely. Nothing will change the current direction unless everybody gets on board.

• The kids aren’t leaving because we have a weak Minnesota high school program. They are leaving because their parents have been told it would serve their child best to leave and go play 100 games somewhere else. This is all hogwash. All of this leaving early and transferring to another school is totally parent driven. If there was a way to convince the parents that loyalty, commitment, unselfishness and growing up at home in a safe high school environment was the best thing for their child, this nonsense would stop. There is always time after high school to pursue their dreams at a higher level. In the end, it really doesn’t matter anyway. Every player is going to end up were they are going to end up, with or without juniors, development programs and being on a top level high school team. Parents are so afraid that their player is going to get left behind. It is just not true. We need more help from the college coaches to convince these kids to stay in school. I believe the only real way to change this momentum of leaving is through a concentrated effort to educate the parents and convince them that this is not always the best thing to do. High school hockey as we have known it is at risk if the parents don’t get on board and help save it and keep it a great and wonderful experience of all.

Some of the accountablity should also go upon making sure the product is valuable. It's a business.....will always be a business. You have business people luring away customers with a better sales pitch. How can you place all the blame on the customer? Bitch all you want about how parents SHOULD BE THIS WAY, OR THINK THAT WAY, OR VALUE THIS OR THAT.... that can't be controlled. It is what it is....hopefully the powers that be have a better plan for keeping the talent locally (whining about parents is getting old)

[almostashappy]

I think you are wrong, actually, I would not attend those events if there wasn't talent there. I don't go to Cantebury Downs to watch mediocre race horses, but the Kentucky Derby is on my bucket list, for sure. Twins game attendance (and for that matter, the Wild) suck on bad years, but when they are good, they pack the house. Sure, people will attend to some degree whether the talent is there or not, but it sure doesn't hurt the bottom line when the talent is there. It isn't going to be a sudden dramatic change in attendance in one year, but departures of talent will slowly erode away at the allure of the tourney until one day, they look up at mostly empty seats and say, "remember when".....

While I understand your viewpoint, I suspect that your answer about Derby attendance might have been different had you been born and raised in Kentucky. And I know just how fiercely loyal and passionate my friend from Indiana is about the Indy 500.

Now, with that said...if you need to see talent at The Tourney, what do you think needs to be done to keep more kids playing high school hockey? Are 20-minute periods and 30 game regular seasons enough, or does the MSHSL have to do something more drastic?

[BodyShots]

I think you are wrong, actually, I would not attend those events if there wasn't talent there. I don't go to Cantebury Downs to watch mediocre race horses, but the Kentucky Derby is on my bucket list, for sure. Twins game attendance (and for that matter, the Wild) suck on bad years, but when they are good, they pack the house. Sure, people will attend to some degree whether the talent is there or not, but it sure doesn't hurt the bottom line when the talent is there. It isn't going to be a sudden dramatic change in attendance in one year, but departures of talent will slowly erode away at the allure of the tourney until one day, they look up at mostly empty seats and say, "remember when".....

While I understand your viewpoint, I suspect that your answer about Derby attendance might have been different had you been born and raised in Kentucky. And I know just how fiercely loyal and passionate my friend from Indiana is about the Indy 500.

Now, with that said...if you need to see talent at The Tourney, what do you think needs to be done to keep more kids playing high school hockey? Are 20-minute periods and 30 game regular seasons enough, or does the MSHSL have to do something more drastic?

Follow in the footsteps of college football and start paying them!

[puckbreath]

All I'm saying is you can't just assume that everything will remain constant. The world changes and you better be prepared to defend your turf.

I thought this comment summed up my feelings precisely. Nothing will change the current direction unless everybody gets on board.

• The kids aren’t leaving because we have a weak Minnesota high school program. They are leaving because their parents have been told it would serve their child best to leave and go play 100 games somewhere else. This is all hogwash. All of this leaving early and transferring to another school is totally parent driven. If there was a way to convince the parents that loyalty, commitment, unselfishness and growing up at home in a safe high school environment was the best thing for their child, this nonsense would stop. There is always time after high school to pursue their dreams at a higher level. In the end, it really doesn’t matter anyway. Every player is going to end up were they are going to end up, with or without juniors, development programs and being on a top level high school team. Parents are so afraid that their player is going to get left behind. It is just not true. We need more help from the college coaches to convince these kids to stay in school. I believe the only real way to change this momentum of leaving is through a concentrated effort to educate the parents and convince them that this is not always the best thing to do. High school hockey as we have known it is at risk if the parents don’t get on board and help save it and keep it a great and wonderful experience of all.

Right on.

Of course, the biggest obstacle, as usual, will be $.

There's a lot of $ being made in the juniors world, and if someone thinks those making it would give it up without a fight, well.................

[ahastars03]

What about kids leaving Bantams early, are the high school coaches ok with that. I know BSM has had some freshman in the past in their program. Well when the kids are leaving Bantams early what do you think they are going to do in high school? High School coaches seem to be ok with them making that jump most of the time if they are ready for it. Not sure why things change for them when the kid is going to be leaving their team.

To me as long as the kids that are leaving are going to JR's or leaving the state to play somewhere else then the state tourny is going to be ok. If AAA teams start popping up for U16 and U18 in the metro and all the top talent is playing on those teams locally then I think we see a bigger slide at the tourny.

As someone who played in the tourny, now a long time ago, I hope that it stays the thing kids strive for and people continue to come to see.

[Goalie-Dad]

Ken Pauley's contribution to the latest LPH issue (http://www.letsplayhockey.com/teams/hig ... ockey.html) strays from his standard stay-in-school talking points and adopts a fairly aggressive attitude towards the MSHSL. It can be summed up this way:

1. The Tourney is a the MSHSL's "most valuable financial asset."

2. If the MSHSL fails "to implement the changes needed to support (MN high school) hockey," then more of the state's best players will leave high school early.

3. If more of the state's best players leave early, they won't be playing in The Tourney.

4. If The Tourney doesn't feature the best players, then fans will stop attending.

5. If the fans stop attending The Tourney, then the MSHSL is screwed.


It's a "do this or else" strong-arm attempt.

So is the logic right, or is The Tourney resilient enough to survive 80 kids leaving early each year, rather than 40? And if the logic is sound, are the changes that Pauley proposes (e.g. 20min periods, more games, allowing teams to play out-of-state) sufficient to "save" the golden goose?

I tend to believe that the state tournament is on firm ground. It's far more about the teams and the tradition and the competitive spirit than the individuals playing on those teams.

I would agree. I've never gone to or watched the State Tournament to see any Individual Players. I watch it because of what it is and that isn't going to change.

I have been lucky enough to attend nearly every state tourney over the last 30 years. Over the last 5-10 years the charm of the games has faded because the stars are not there. People want to watch a superstar kid score goals for the underdog team. The last time people really got excited and on the edge of their seats during the game was when Aaron Ness would take off with the puck for Roseau. The loyal fans will always be at the games. But its the superstars that make the tourney exciting to watch and discuss at the water cooler.

[hawkenjonny]

Wow, as someone who also played in 'the tourney' some time ago, and as someone who has had a kid play in it, I have to say that despite some hockey experience after high school, the MSHST remains a highlight of my hockey life and my players. The drive to get back, regardless of who else is going to be there is tremendous. I suppose if the caliber of the teams really drops that dramatically, that could change things. Don't see it myself. Checkbook hockey all you want. Not the same. At all. Stay in HS.

[Froggy Richards]

I think you are wrong, actually, I would not attend those events if there wasn't talent there. I don't go to Cantebury Downs to watch mediocre race horses, but the Kentucky Derby is on my bucket list, for sure. Twins game attendance (and for that matter, the Wild) suck on bad years, but when they are good, they pack the house. Sure, people will attend to some degree whether the talent is there or not, but it sure doesn't hurt the bottom line when the talent is there. It isn't going to be a sudden dramatic change in attendance in one year, but departures of talent will slowly erode away at the allure of the tourney until one day, they look up at mostly empty seats and say, "remember when".....

While I understand your viewpoint, I suspect that your answer about Derby attendance might have been different had you been born and raised in Kentucky. And I know just how fiercely loyal and passionate my friend from Indiana is about the Indy 500.

Now, with that said...if you need to see talent at The Tourney, what do you think needs to be done to keep more kids playing high school hockey? Are 20-minute periods and 30 game regular seasons enough, or does the MSHSL have to do something more drastic?

I think 20 minute periods and a few more games would be good for High School Hockey. But I'm afraid the reality is that there is nothing the MSHSL can do to keep kids in High School. The decision is about so much more than a few extra games or minutes. As long as College Coaches pretty much require Juniors prior to playing for them, nothing is going to change in my opinion.

[green4]

Ken Pauley's contribution to the latest LPH issue (http://www.letsplayhockey.com/teams/hig ... ockey.html) strays from his standard stay-in-school talking points and adopts a fairly aggressive attitude towards the MSHSL. It can be summed up this way:

1. The Tourney is a the MSHSL's "most valuable financial asset."

2. If the MSHSL fails "to implement the changes needed to support (MN high school) hockey," then more of the state's best players will leave high school early.

3. If more of the state's best players leave early, they won't be playing in The Tourney.

4. If The Tourney doesn't feature the best players, then fans will stop attending.

5. If the fans stop attending The Tourney, then the MSHSL is screwed.


It's a "do this or else" strong-arm attempt.

So is the logic right, or is The Tourney resilient enough to survive 80 kids leaving early each year, rather than 40? And if the logic is sound, are the changes that Pauley proposes (e.g. 20min periods, more games, allowing teams to play out-of-state) sufficient to "save" the golden goose?

I tend to believe that the state tournament is on firm ground. It's far more about the teams and the tradition and the competitive spirit than the individuals playing on those teams.

I would agree. I've never gone to or watched the State Tournament to see any Individual Players. I watch it because of what it is and that isn't going to change.

I have been lucky enough to attend nearly every state tourney over the last 30 years. Over the last 5-10 years the charm of the games has faded because the stars are not there. People want to watch a superstar kid score goals for the underdog team. The last time people really got excited and on the edge of their seats during the game was when Aaron Ness would take off with the puck for Roseau. The loyal fans will always be at the games. But its the superstars that make the tourney exciting to watch and discuss at the water cooler.

The tourney is lacking superstars? I don't buy that at all. The superstars have been at the tournament. The issue is the superstars have been leaving early. Tommy Novak, one of the most exciting players in awhile, went to the tourney twice. Dylan Malmquist has been there the last 3 years and he could be one of the top hornets of all time with a solid senior year. The Hornets were loaded with superstars last year, but they are so deep it can be hard to notice it. Bellows, Wait, and Zuhlsdorf are all very talented.
Same could be said with Lakeville North.
At the tournament EP had superstars in Spinner and Snuggarud. Roseau had Yon. Eagan had one of the best goalies in the state with Lindgren. East maybe didnt have a superstar but Beaulieu was a very good player. That leaves Centennial and Stillwater as teams that lack a player with the caliber as those above, but they also played that underdog role as they had some big upsets to get to the tournament.
The superstars are there if you ask me.

[puckfan]

All of this leaving early and transferring to another school is totally parent driven.

Wow I almost threw up my supper

[SidneysDogHouse]

All of this leaving early and transferring to another school is totally parent driven.

Wow I almost threw up my supper

I ranted about this some time ago. If you honestly think there isn't a problem, you need to dig further or wake up. If something isn't done soon, it will be too late. Yes, things change, but do we want to lose one of the most amazing experiences in HS Hockey?

[WestMetro]

Pauley is right. Times must change to help protect this Minnesota state treasure. To help persuade parents and kids , to the extent possible, to resist the temptations of early departure. Perhaps this year is a turning point, only about 2 dozen kids compared to 40 last year.

But I also agree with almost every response & opinion on this thread so far


Goalie Dad. Aside from Kyle Rau's OT winning goal , Id say the next best tourney excitement for me in recent years was 2012 when the underdog TEAM won every quarterfinal matchup. So it isn't necessarily the underdog superstar, although that was also great to watch for someone like Aaron Ness

[MNHockeyFan]

Kudos to Ken Pauly for telling it like it is. And unlike many who just criticize anything new that might help preserve what over the years has become a true Minnesota treasure for our State, Mr. Pauly offers some very constructive ideas on how the MSHSL can adopt going forward. As a long-time season ticket holder to the MN State High School Tourney, I couldn't agree more with what he espoused in this piece. We can only hope that the MSHSL is progressive enough to seriously consider and then implement the needed changes.

[goldy313]

Ken Pauley's contribution to the latest LPH issue (http://www.letsplayhockey.com/teams/hig ... ockey.html) strays from his standard stay-in-school talking points and adopts a fairly aggressive attitude towards the MSHSL. It can be summed up this way:

1. The Tourney is a the MSHSL's "most valuable financial asset."

2. If the MSHSL fails "to implement the changes needed to support (MN high school) hockey," then more of the state's best players will leave high school early.

3. If more of the state's best players leave early, they won't be playing in The Tourney.

4. If The Tourney doesn't feature the best players, then fans will stop attending.

5. If the fans stop attending The Tourney, then the MSHSL is screwed.

Ken either doesn't understand or is intentionally misrepresenting the MSHSL.

1) The MSHSL is funded by its member schools not ticket revenue. The MSHSL takes all the money it receives and after expenses returns it to its member schools. Rent at the Xcel Energy Center is charged by the Wild and keeps going up and the time the Wild gave the state for free high school use has ended. That has more to do with declining returns than anything hockey will ever do.

2) It's a strawman argument, kids have been leaving and other kids replace them. A far bigger issue is getting kids to start playing and retaining the kids who do play.

3) Most of the states best players won't play in the state tournament anyway, hockey is a team sport and unlike track or golf you need a team to get you there. If this is your argument then a better idea would be to get the best 8 teams there instead of the current section format. (which may be his intent)

4) See #3, People still attend even if Mr Hockey loses in the sectional round. People will stop attending because they have other things to do, you see that at nearly every high school sporting event now. Heck it was a beautiful Saturday evening and I bet there were less than 500 people at the playoff football game I was at, 5 -10 years ago there would have been 3,000.

#5) See #1, the MSHSL's funding doesn't come from state tournaments. If you're a really good gymnast you probably left the state years ago, same with tennis but those sports still have state tournaments and kids still compete and have fun.

If Ken wants to compete with junior hockey then go start a junior league, good luck to him. I find it ironic that a coach who needs kids to leave their home programs to attend his finds it so wrong that kids would leave their home program to attend another league. Most of what he proposes would result in a movement of kids from schools with fewer resources to schools with more resources as many schools have trouble funding sports to begin with and due to ice costs hockey is particularly expensive. Lifting the restrictions would burden the outstate schools far more than the metro schools and would burden the public schools far more than the private ones. Guess which category Mr. Pauly's team falls under?

[almostashappy]

Lifting the restrictions would burden the outstate schools far more than the metro schools and would burden the public schools far more than the private ones. Guess which category Mr. Pauly's team falls under?

Here's the wish list.....

A positive impact would be for the MSHSL to lift scrimmage restrictions, move to 60-minute games at the varsity level and increase the number of regular season contests to 30 games. It also could allow those programs that wish to expose their student-athletes to eastern collegiate programs to do so by lifting travel restrictions.

It's the last item in that list that is the most self-serving. I'm sure he'd love to be able to dangle out-of-state "exposure" trips in front of potential recruits. Figure around $1000/player to fly Out East for a week-end tournament. Not many booster club/programs have the revenue to cover that cost...it'd have to be dumped onto the families to cover the tab. And who are the families who would be best positioned to absorb that cost?

Besides that point, I thought that Minnesota kids were already being "exposed" to scouts from Eastern schools that were flocking to Elite League events?

[wannagototherink]

I don't know if it will matter. I attend quite a few hs games around the state and student attendance is becoming less and less every year. I just don't think the future generations will support it as has been in the past. I think of last years section 7AA final in Duluth last year. They didn't even open up the top bowl of the arena. 20 years ago people would have been sitting in the aisles. What will it look like in another 20 years. Hockey is expensive, demanding and not accessible to the average family anymore. Therefore your fan base goes down. Less and less hockey players, less amd less fans. I hope I'm wrong but I think it goes way deeper than what the MSHSL is doing. With that being said, I would live to see them expand hs hockey.

[puckbreath]

I don't know if it will matter. I attend quite a few hs games around the state and student attendance is becoming less and less every year. I just don't think the future generations will support it as has been in the past. I think of last years section 7AA final in Duluth last year. They didn't even open up the top bowl of the arena. 20 years ago people would have been sitting in the aisles. What will it look like in another 20 years. Hockey is expensive, demanding and not accessible to the average family anymore. Therefore your fan base goes down. Less and less hockey players, less amd less fans. I hope I'm wrong but I think it goes way deeper than what the MSHSL is doing. With that being said, I would live to see them expand hs hockey.

Of all the issues, I believe this one is becoming the biggest one more and more every year.

[alcloseshaver]

Most likely wouldn't be an option in sections but some schools are looking at letting students in the games for free. I like this trend.