Next Years State Tourny

TopShelf4567 · Post by **TopShelf4567** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:21 pm

I know this year just ended but does anyone know when we will find out the pairings and who plays who in next years tourny??? Or where can i find out? Also... who does everyone think will make it from each section? (A and AA)

sjubum · Post by **sjubum** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 9:08 am

MSHSL's <a href="http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/publications ... >projected pairings</a> -- scroll down toward the very bottom.

MNPuckster27 · Post by **MNPuckster27** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:07 am

AA 1- Rochester Century 2- Tartan 3- Centennial 4- Elk River 5- Holy Angels 6- Edina 7- Duluth East (lots of seniors this year... but who else?) 8- Moorhead *Notable first round games... Moorhead vs. Edina<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... ns/eek.gif ALT=":eek"> and Tartan vs. Duluth East<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /tired.gif ALT="|I"> A 1- Albert Lea 2- Duluth Marshall 3- So. St. Paul 4- Little sisters of the poor 5- Breck 6- Orono 7- Hermantown 8- Warroad Notable first round games.... Warroad vs. Albert Lea<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /laugh.gif ALT=":lol"> poor Albert Lea kids are going to be scarred for life after this year and next years first round games.

sjubum · Post by **sjubum** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:33 pm

Was tooling around the HS league web site and came across a link entitled, <a href="http://mshsl.org/mshsl/showadvisory.asp">Winter Coaches Advisory Recommendations</a>. Curious, I popped into it to find a number of recommendations for hockey that were submitted in mid-February. Among them were recommendations to give a short warm-up to teams before the start of the 2nd and 3rd periods, move the girls from Ridder to Xcel, changing the overtime procedure for girls hockey and finally, the one that caught my eye was forming a seeding committee to rank section winners. The intent was to create more excitement around the tournament and eliminate the chance of the favorites meeting in the first round. This <a href="http://mshsl.org/mshsl/showadvisory.asp ...  has been submitted to the MSHSL Board -- when they rule or if they have is unknown to me. I don't recall reading about this on the board, but the proposal seems to have some merit for consideration (put forth by the Minnesota Hockey Coaches Association). Or it's a bunch of crap. How long have the pre-drawn pairings been going on now? Time for a change?

centerman · Post by **centerman** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 8:16 pm

I like the idea of seeding but I'm not sure it will fly. It could be a political nightmare for the State High School League. This year things worked out and we ended with #1 vs. #2, but that seldom happens.<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /happy.gif ALT=":D">

Blackhawk27 · Post by **Blackhawk27** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 9:23 pm

yea er shouldnt even have close to as tough of a time to win the section next year there gunna be good look out for them<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... ns/eek.gif ALT=":eek">

bisketboy · Post by **bisketboy** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 11:28 am

I agree with Centerman on the seeding issue. If you're a non Metro team it is hard to even get ranked because they feel the the Metro area is the Standard of the whole state. You still have to win 3 games to get the trophy so it doesn't matter who or when you play.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:17 pm

Why not seed? We do it for the sectional tournaments. Is there disagreement and controversy... sure but it works out. I like the " you have to win 3 anyway " attitude but why not put that to work after the seeds are determined. What do we have to lose by seeding? Whats the down side?

sjubum · Post by **sjubum** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:22 pm

Decision-Making Process Timeline: • February 15 – Recommendations from sports/fine arts are submitted to the Board for consideration. • March 1 – Recommendations are sent to the sixteen Region Committees for their Review and Comment. • April 15 – The Region Committees return the recommendations to the League office. • May 1 – The Athletic Director’s Advisory Committee meets to discuss the recommendations presented by the coaches and to receive input from the Region Committees. • June 10 – The Board of Directors acts on the Winter Activity recommendations. The Board will have the recommendations and the response from the Region Committee approximately one month prior to the Board meeting. The Athletic Director’s input will be received by the Board at the June meeting. --- Down-side? Haven't thought it through, but one example argument (using AA) against it might be that teams like Lakeville or Tartan may always be ranked in the #7/#8 slots and find themselves routinely faced with the likes of playing the #1/#2 seeds (Moorhead or Centennial -- flip a coin) year in and year out. At least with the pre-drawn method we have now, Lakeville in some year could play Tartan. packerboy, you do raise a good point. It is done for sections -- why not extend that to the tournament?

Green and White Fan · Post by **Green and White Fan** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:23 pm

What do you gain by seeding? You have to win 3 games to be state champ and somewhere you have to beat the best. Section seeding is tough enough. How do you seed 8 teams, when many of them have not played each other. This format has worked for years. Why change something that has worked for years. I'm not sure what you do with the class A tourney. It seems to me that you have 2 or 3 good teams and 5 not so good. I sure don't like going to state tournaments and seeing running time games.

ROYALELK · Post by **ROYALELK** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:48 pm

I say leave it alone,some years ya get the breaks some ya dont.ER would play Centennial next year , assuming they both go ,bring it on!I dont think you can do much more to make the tourny more exciteing or more competitive.Some championship games will be 8-1 and some will be 1-0 no matter how you set it up.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:14 pm

You "gain" the same thing by seeding the state tournament as you do seeding the sections. There will be a better chance that the two best teams will extend their seasons and play for the championship and . Seeding the field in either class would be the same as seeding the sections. You look at records, strength of schedule, common opponenets, head to head, etc etc. Sure, you have to win 3 anyway but which 3 you have to play may be very important in determining your chances of winning 3. Seeding is the fairest way to do it. You can say that the format has worked for years but why not consider the possibiity that seeding would work better. There may be more blowout type games in the first round but its better to have them in the first round than in the championship. What if Moorhead and Centennial would have played each other on Thursday afternoon instead of Sat night? Not a tragedy but not a very desirable set of circumstances either and if that type of thing can be a voided, why not do it?

hockeytape · Post by **hockeytape** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:50 pm

Who ranks who anyway, Isn't it a couple of sportswriters and 3 or 4 experts. I haven't seen a thread, but I actually thought the AHA/Centennial game was a better game thena Moorhead/Centennial the only thing different the Moorhead game had was the finals intensity. Seeding is frought with extreme subjectivity in the state finals

IJasonI · Post by **IJasonI** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:29 pm

why not seed them the same way sections are seeded, where all the head coaches get together and each team ranks the other seven teams from best to worst. Then, the points are accumulated and the seeding is decided. Or even, if subjectivity was a huge concern, a computer ranking system could be used. Sure, there would be questions as to who should be number one or two, but it would give a rough guess for the seeding.

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:34 pm

The major problems as I see it. 1) Provicialism, some teams especially in the A or smaller classes if it is put into all sports, and I assume it would be. Some programs due to location just don't play schools from other areas. Is it fair to compare schools based on that? At least in sections, genarlly, there are plenty of common opponents. Warroad and Orono had no common oppents this year, how do you figure who should be seeded higher, there is no set criteria for that. The computer rankings are derived on provicialism, they have to be. 2) Do you avoid first round match-ups of school from the same conference? That is the NCAA system for seeding for their tournamnets. The Lake Conference covers 3 sections, how do you take that into consideration? 3) Do you take into account every team played or just those in your class? Some schools play many teams either above or below them in class, that can and does skew records, how do you account for that? Or conferences, some teams eat up allot of games playing lesser opponents in conference play. 4) When seeding for sections you have common things for all teams i.e. Conference standings, be it the Big Nine, the Marriucci, what have you. Head to head competition, and the coaches have, in all probability, seen most if not all the teams that they are ranking. How many coaches, especially in the A tournamnet had seen more than 1 or 2 of the other teams? Time and travel just prohibit it. 5) Who do you scout? Teams scout other teams section finals. It is not possible to send out people to all sections to scout them. This isn't the NCAA where there is good film on everybody. I guess, I just don't think that teams can be objectively seeded. There just isn't enough common ties to all teams. Even this year, at the AA level, at least, there were only 3 clear teams that were above the others. I like the computer rankings, they give us something to look at and debate, but much like in the BCS computer polls they have major flaws. Unless the MSHSL takes care of scheduling, I just don't think teams can objectively be compared, the state is just to big. (Boy, that Albert Lea-Warroad game on a tuesday night would be fun for the kids)

centerman · Post by **centerman** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:46 pm

hockeytape: If they would have been seeded AHA and Centennial may have met in the finals instead of the first round. I don't believe Centennial played near their best game on Thursday but found a way to win. Had they been afforded the opportunity to play Tartan it may have been an easier first round for them. Either way we were able to crown the best team and #1 vs. #2 matched up in the finals. Seeding is the way to go but I doubt it will ever happen.<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /happy.gif ALT=":D">

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Sat Mar 20, 2004 12:53 pm

All Ive read is that we dont want to sed because their may be disagreement on who shoud be seeded where. It would take about 5 minutes to seed this years field. Remember, it doesnt matter if a team gets seeded 6 instead of 7 or 1 instead of 2. What we are looking to avoid is a Centennial vs Moorhead game on Thursday. The point is we dont need HAL jr to do this. I think peole are seeing ghosts when they oppose this.

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 1:03 am

Interesting point Joe, but Moorhead was 0-2 going into the state tournament against state tournament teams. There is no way you could have seeded them second. Duluth East was 2-1, Elk River 1-1, AHA 1-1, Lakeville 0-0-1, Wayzata 0-2, Centennial 3-0, Tartan 0-0. Based on that, you would have had to seed Moorhead 4th or 5th, thereby having a semi-final matchup with Centennial. Based on the sectional criteria seedings would have been something like: 1) Centennial 2) East 3) ER or AHA 4) ER or AHA 5) Moorhead or Wayzata Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub33.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUser ... oldy313</A> at: 3/21/04 9:53 am

jr · Post by jr » Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:11 am

Actually Centennial was 5-0 vs. the field going in and ended 8-0 vs. the field!

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:18 am

But goldy, I think there is more to it than that. I have never been to a sectional seeding meeting. Youth baseball is as close as I come. But record against the field isnt the only criteria. If a team is 12-13 and is 1-0 against the field it isnt going to get seeded higher than a team that is 23-2 but 1-2 vs the field. Overal record, strength of schedule, and a little subjectivity is all in the mix. I dont think , for example, that East would have been seeded ahead of Moorhead becasue they beat them in early December.

sjubum · Post by **sjubum** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 8:27 am

Can someone shed some light on what a sectional seeding meeting entails? What criteria gets examined during those discussions? Knowing that might shed light on what seeding the state tournament field might be like...as packerboy indicated, I'm thinking there would be more to it... (goldy313, great list of questions earlier -- I'm sure that's something that will be wrestled with...) Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub33.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUser ... >sjubum</A> at: 3/22/04 10:21 am

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 10:15 am

There are 5 criteria, they are in no specific order of importance. 1) Conference standing 2) Overall record 3) Head to head 4) Common opponents 5) I can't recall for sure, I think it is strength of schedule though

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 11:22 am

I think the criteria posted is probably right. Again, I have never been to a hockey seeding meeting but I would be very surprised if there isnt a lot of subjectivity involved too. In other words people may give lip service to the stats but usually the ranking is close to what it "should be." This year, Centennial would have been 1, Moorhead 2; Wayzata or AHA 3 or 4; East or ER 5 or 6 ; and Tartan/ Lakeville 7 or 8. Who could argue with that?

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Next Years State Tourny

Next Years State Tourny

Re: Next Years State Tourny

My picks... Assuming all underclassmen return

Re: Next Years State Tourny

Like the idea!

er

I AGREE

seeding

Re: Next Years State Tourny

Re: seeding

leave it alone

seeding

leave it the way it is

seeding

Re: seeding

seeding

seeding

Re: seeding

5-0

seeding

Re: seeding

Re: seeding

seeding