redistricting

puckboy · Post by **puckboy** » Wed Feb 15, 2006 5:06 pm

please post your ideas for redistricting. Make sure you add what area you are from and rough size of how many kids tryout at each of the traveling age groups in your association. Hopefully we will come up with some ideas that could be used ny Minnesota Hockey.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:07 am

...please share them.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:10 am

A possible northern change woud be to put Detroit Lakes, Park Rapids and Walker into District 16.

northstarfan14 · Post by **northstarfan14** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:20 am

We need to get St. Paul Johnson out of TC district and into D2 so we can see just how honest they really are.

JOHNSONPREZ · Post by **JOHNSONPREZ** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:27 am

You really have a problem with us. Come to our board meeting but I will bet sinch you are jumping all over this board causing problems that you don't have the nads to be up front like I am. Sounds like you just want company at the bottom of district 2 to me.

Icypalms · Post by **Icypalms** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:30 am

I think the Johnsonprez is calling you out. I bet you won't come out for more reasons than 1. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/alien.gif ALT="0]">

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:20 pm

Anyone care to give me some info on the metro area re: Which teams should be together becasue of rivalry. Which teams should stay together becasue of geography (travel). Comparative size of programs. Other pertinent info. By all of the metro or specific areas or just a few teams. Thank you to anyone willing to help.

JOHNSONPREZ · Post by **JOHNSONPREZ** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:28 pm

Hey Elliott, Here at Johnson we are in the TC district. I know in the past we have been mentioned to be placed in district 2. My concern is that we have fewer and fewer kids playing in the city structure but we feel a better fit for us would be District 8 and make most or all of this district Dakota county teams and add the Saint Paul teams with them and take Rochester and move them South. The longest you woul have to travel is from St. Paul to Farmington. This is just a thought.

JOHNSONPREZ · Post by **JOHNSONPREZ** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:30 pm

At least in District 8 we can compete rather than be at the bottom like say a Tartan or Forest Lake due to numbers.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:57 pm

Thank you Johnson president. Tht is precisely the info we(I) need to make good decisions.

Goldstick · Post by **Goldstick** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:11 pm

Elliott, please consider what an impact redistricting D8 would have on the southern assns. If travel is an issue, redistricting does not do anything for them - it takes the same amount of time to travel from Rochester to Winona or LaCresent as it does to Rosemount. Quite frankly I think the level of competion is worth fighting for...the southern assns want to continue playing the Rosemounts, Woodburys, Cottage Groves. It's good competion for both sides.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:26 pm

District 8 This is a tough one. It is a large district in numbers and miles. Splitting north and south does take some element of the better competition out of it. My theory is you try to find 5 solid Bantam A programs in a District. Of course, how do you define that? But I would like to think that everyone's program is elevating. Unfortunately not all rural communities are able to remain stable let alone have growth. so then you hav edeclining numbers and other resources. But, again, this info is very valuable to me, being a northern guy and harder to get a grasp of what is appropriate in other parts of the state.

Rinkrat95 · Post by **Rinkrat95** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:44 pm

I would like to see more of the regional associations put together. Like the core City teams and the communities that surround. South St. Paul (Hastings/CottageG.) North St. Paul (Tartan/Woodbury) West St. Paul (Highland/Sibly/IGH) East St. Paul (Johnson/Como)

Rinkrat95 · Post by **Rinkrat95** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:50 pm

Or why can't it be broken down like when they pick select teams from the different regions for high school hockey. Get a state map - put all the associations on it and pick major cities like St. Cloud - Duluth - Moorhead - Rochester -ect. and start linking them to the spots. This idea that someone from the iowa line comes all the way up to cottage grove to play, but n. st. paul and s. st. paul don't play in the same district is nonsense.

Post by **east hockey** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:09 pm

We're going to sticky this topic for whatever period of time is deemed useful. Members are asked to post info and ideas only; no bashing of programs, etc. in this topic. Thanks! Lee ____________ Message Board arsonist since 2005 Egomaniac since 2006

JOHNSONPREZ · Post by **JOHNSONPREZ** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:31 pm

I could agree with Rinkrat95 maybe he is on to something here. Maybe you could call this District 1 and work outward from here? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... SONPREZ</A> at: 2/16/06 3:02 pm

JOHNSONPREZ · Post by **JOHNSONPREZ** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:48 pm

SLP/SWcoach being from the Minneapolis side and Hockeymom69 from the Irondale side of the TC district do you at all have any thoughts on redistricting since this April meeting sounds like it could be interesting. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... SONPREZ</A> at: 2/16/06 2:49 pm

SLP Coach · Post by **SLP Coach** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:32 pm

I have NOT researched the Redistricting too Much from a statistical stand point. I know others who have though. I really believe that keeping a strictly inner Metro based district (ie: this year' s TC District) is important. However, I also think there are some associations that could both benifit themselves as well as benifit this "TC/1 District." Current teams in the district are SP Johnson, SP Como, SP Highland Park/Central, Richfield, Mpls Washburn, Mpls Southwest/SLP, Irondale. Just as Irondale and Richfield have benifited from joining the "TC District" I believe others could as well. Some teams/associations include Brooklyn Park, Tri-City, Sibley (W. St. Paul), N. St. Paul, St. Louis Park (completely). Possibly others could be Tartan, Champlin Park, Armstrong, Cooper etc. Basically I could envision this district becoming the majority of the Associations inside of the 494/694 loop. These are the area's that are "land-locked" with NO opportunity to grow. Suburban communties have locked the boundries of many of these cities. Many of which have become almost a "Starter-Home" type city. Once families can afford to, many move a little further out of the "inner-ring" metro area. An Option could be, in a way, like SLP & SW have done this season. Have association come together to "create" A-Level teams and then split apart to host their own B & C level teams. The point of all of this is to get more and more players playing at the level they can compete. The following is JUST a hypothetical example...... Southwest & SLP --- Washburn & Richfield --- Como & Johnson ---- Armstrong & Cooper --- TriCity & Brooklyn Park --- Tartan & N. St. Paul --- Sibley & Champlin..... These associations combine to form A-Level teams and then split back to have B-Level teams. Then the District could split into East & West OR North & South for the B-Level. Play each team in your section twice and each team in the other once. (just an idea) ANYWAY - I have many more thoughts on this ... but I have a difficult time getting then all out in writting.

hockeymom69 · Post by **hockeymom69** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:57 pm

That might be the best idea we've heard here yet. PROBLEM - EGO's Because the people at the top didn't think of it, they wouldn't buy it. We need to get Elliot70 on to see this one. I like the idea of keeping anything in the 494/694 loop together. That would make a lot of sense.

Rinkrat95 · Post by **Rinkrat95** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:59 pm

Thanks JOHNSONPREZ - I'm new to the board, but I've been coaching for quite some time now like you. It's been really frustrating to be in the wrong district with the right team. I've also been President of one association, I know your pains, keep up the fight. It isn't for the parents, its for the kids.

SEMetro · Post by **SEMetro** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:12 pm

What has anyone heard about a south of the river/Dakota County district combining some Dakota County teams in D6 teams and D8: AV, BVille, Eastview, Eagan, Rosemount, Cottage Grove? I heard talk about this last year. Is this accurate?

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:30 pm

This stuff is good. Its actually what we are looking for. New ideas that may not be what everything HAS been based on, but what will make people happy with where they are in hockey.

puckboy · Post by **puckboy** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:32 pm

I think MN Hockey needs to look at every metro association and start putting them where they can compete with similiar associations. You can pick most any metro distrcit and there is typically 2-4 teams that can't really compete with the top teams in their association. So my thought would be come up with a A/AA associations This would solve most if not all issues in the metro. Travel should not be an issue in the metro for the most part.

slapshot 69 · Post by **slapshot 69** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:38 pm

How about breaking up some of the larger associations? Or shrinking there boundaries. White Bear has a huge area that they draw from maplewood kids would surley strenthen johnson and alot of Roseville players would help Como. North st paul would fit nicely into TC. Also Tartan Woodbury is begging to be in D2 And I am not sure but will bet Centenial would like D2 also. Even Blaine! There are alot of options. Just need some creative thinking and people willing to change.

puckboy · Post by **puckboy** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:48 pm

breaking up the larger associations would also solve many of the metro problems. How about mandating if you have over say 80-90 kids at a certain level you need to field 2 A teams.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

redistricting

redistricting

If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)