Mega, A, B, Small B, C and house

[elliott70]

Elliot,
This has some similarities to my "developing skill sets" post currently on page 10 about 25 topics down. If you care to re-read that post it speaks for me well on this idea and will give you some additional points to re-hash per your request.

Thanks for the reminder I will read and print.

[elliott70]

Could Minnesota go with the tier 1 and 2 per age group like all the other states and keep the associations the same?
I know Minnesota does not want to go down the birth year road because of the high school teams and the additional 9th graders it would have.
But will it come to a point when they will look at it?

Yes, all things are open for discussion at this point.
At the January meeting on 'discernemnt' we will probably start narrowing it down.

I am printing all 'realistic' ideas from these pages and putting them in the hands of committee members. Expand if you wish.

[frederick61]

To me the problem being addressed is how to change the organization structure of Minnesota Hockey so that it closely aligns with the state changes in the future. The one demographic forecast I remember (made 3 or 4 years ago) was that the Twin City area would grow in population by 30% by the year 2020 and could go over 5 million. Some that growth will spread to outlying cities.

If that growth were mapped on to the current districts, one can see that D10 and D5 are the strongest districts for growth; D1, D2, D3, D6 are the most constrained much like an a first ring suburb. You can see the effects of this past population growth in D3 and D6 which as resulted in large associations. The other districts are effected also.

D4/D8 are combining and the resulting combination will cover the southern half of Minnesota with D4 having reasonable growth and D8 having strong growth. D15, because of its proximity to D10 St. Cloud, will grow particularly if the light rail line makes it. That leaves D11, D12 and D16 at a disadvantage, population wise, with an unknown growth potential.

A contraint in change is the current infrastructure in place has to be considered. The arenas are the backbone of the current program and represent a significant investment They have community and public school ties that make any decisions more difficult. There is another demographic to deal with, affordability for the parents, but I would set that aside for the moment.

With all this as background, my first question is what is the rational behind the combining of D4/D8. My thought is D4/D8 will be a “mega district” with significant future growth in the future. If so, the rational for its creation should serve as a rational to address other changes.

[council member retired]

Elliot

Do you know yet when the next Mn Hockey meeting is? The 19th or 20th?
Where is it and can anyone attend that is a registered Mn Hockey member or parent of?

Thank you

[elliott70]

Elliot

Do you know yet when the next Mn Hockey meeting is? The 19th or 20th?
Where is it and can anyone attend that is a registered Mn Hockey member or parent of?

Thank you

The meeting is the weekend of 18,19 & 20 of January.
I am pretty sure it is in the hotel about a mile south of the 494/694 junction on the west side in Maple Grove. Perhaps its a Radisson ... the winter meeting has been there the last two years an it is usually a 3 year deal... so that's my guess...
But I will find out.

All people are welcome to attend - most committee meetings the chair(s) will recognize non-committee members to speak. The discernment committee meeting will be a working meeting so we may have set work schedules by groups - little time for discussion.
But I am sure opinions on private school assoications will be heard.

[Gump]

So the idea is to level the competition field among the associations that have the largest to the smallest pools of players.

Great idea, but it does nothing for those stand out players from the smaller associations. They would now be missing out on the opportunity to play against the best overall competition - likely a Mega Association top team. This does nothing for their development or their team's development.

The best option to fix this growing problem is to introduce 3 or 4 regional Tier I options to the state for all to have the option of participation (I know this is a sore topic for many, but structured and managed properly it is the correct solution). This would likely remove some of the top players from the Mega Associations and give new opportunity to the best few in smaller associations. Some disparity will still exist among a few large associations and this can be addressed with the AA (Mega Association), A, B1, B2, ... concept or simply creating a second A team at all levels. It is a winning situation in which more players will be playing against even competition and be able to develop and practice their skills most effectively.

[council member retired]

i have found the agenda for the winter meeting, however it is vague.
Will you be able to provide a more detailed time frame for when the committees will meet ?

Thank you

[DMom]

So, a couple of groups of kids would go by birth year and the rest of minnesota by school year? that's what would have to happen, unless those regional teams only played each other, and didn't travel out of state.

would they be allowed to play in A tournaments like the fire is allowed to by a few districts?

The best thing that ever happened was Mr. McBain's mite league. It freed up mite coordinators all over the metro to concentrate on their programs, and not spend ALL of their free time listening to one or two parents trying to change the rules so that their 7 year old could try out for A squirts.

[5thgraders]

[quote="Gump"]So the idea is to level the competition field among the associations that have the largest to the smallest pools of players.

Great idea, but it does nothing for those stand out players from the smaller associations. They would now be missing out on the opportunity to play against the best overall competition - likely a Mega Association top team. This does nothing for their development or their team's development.

The best option to fix this growing problem is to introduce 3 or 4 regional Tier I options to the state for all to have the option of participation (I know this is a sore topic for many, but structured and managed properly it is the correct solution). This would likely remove some of the top players from the Mega Associations and give new opportunity to the best few in smaller associations. Some disparity will still exist among a few large associations and this can be addressed with the AA (Mega Association), A, B1, B2, ... concept or simply creating a second A team at all levels. It is a winning situation in which more players will be playing against even competition and be able to develop and practice their skills most effectively.[/quote] Gump or I mean Elliott I can't tell who is behind
the mask ? You tell me why this isn't the best idea ever posted or did you
take my idea that you would not post on this site yesterday and come up
with this all on your own ? either way who cares Tier 1 Belongs in Mn...
THE GREAT STATE OF HOCKEY AND NO TIER 1 AAA ? IT IS WRONG
HOCKEYTOWN USA MICHIGAN TIER 1 AAA .. IS TAKING OUR TROPHIES.
U-18 Tier 1 Nationals = 80 games
U-16 Tier 1 Nationals = 70 games
U-14 Tier 1 Nationals = 65 games
U-12 Tier 1 Nationals = 65 games
High School state championship 28 games
elite league I hate to tell you is no Tier 1 Caliber of competition.....
And I know this hurts but neither is High school...........
YOU HAVE ALREADY LET SHATTUCK ST MARYS BE TIER 1
and yes they have brought home a few trophies but I will
go on and talk about what you would not post yesterday and
that is the MONOPOLY OF THE MARKETPLACE.. These are kids
who want to play high caliber hockey and you feel like you OWN
them and that they must fight for you and your Team. We are not
traders we are just looking to provide the best oppurtunities for all
of the kids who play the great game of hockey and can't afford to go
and spend $ 40,000 a year to go to Shattuck. It is called oppurtunities
and why would we want to limit the kids from at least having the chance
to choose what oppurtunities they wish to pursue. Why is it that you need
to decide for them ? are they under contract to you and all of Mn Hockey
NO so what is the problem..

[DMom]

I'd be willing to pay an extra 50 bucks at registration towards a tier one team at each birth year. Than have all of it be free for the kids who make the team. Everything. Get a corporate sponsor and pay for every bit of it. Non-biased evaluators and put together a great minnesota team we could all cheer for at Nationals.

[Gump]

[quote="5thgraders Gump or I mean Elliott I can't tell who is behind
the mask ? You tell me why this isn't the best idea ever posted or did you
take my idea that you would not post on this site yesterday and come up
with this all on your own ? either way who cares Tier 1 Belongs in Mn...
THE GREAT STATE OF HOCKEY AND NO TIER 1 AAA ? [/quote]

I assure you that I am NOT Elliott!!! I would be very interested in hearing what the post that you are referring to said.

Anyway, I agree that Tier I belongs in MN Hockey. The road blocks to this are that too many people are worried that they will lose control over what they think are their players and that too many people are caught up in the nostalgia of the small town hockey team knocking off the big powerhouse in the state tourney.

This isn't the olden days of Broten and others. Off season hockey is taking over and the disparity between players and association is growing. It's time to change with the times, restructure MN Hockey before it becomes nothing more than off season conditioning for Bernie and the many others that are to follow, and allow options for MN Hockey players.

The solution: create more even competition so that players can develop in a challenging environment with the opportunity for success, and give choices to participate Tier I programs if desired. Otherwise, maybe we should just turn the State of Hockey into one big in-house league and give everyone a trophy at the end of the year.

[Gump]

I'd be willing to pay an extra 50 bucks at registration towards a tier one team at each birth year. Than have all of it be free for the kids who make the team. Everything. Get a corporate sponsor and pay for every bit of it. Non-biased evaluators and put together a great minnesota team we could all cheer for at Nationals.

Interesting idea. I can see it now: Schwans vs Compuware for the Natl Title. Schwans 5, Compuware 0!
It could probably be done for a lot less than an extra $50. Maybe $5 MN Hock surcharge with an average player fee to participate.


One step at a time, though. How do we even out the competition at the association levels (like we're supposed to be discussing), preserve MN Hockey, and still get some Tier I action? And without bruising too many egos along the way?

[zboni99]

I agree with what Gump said. I also understand that Tier 1 will primarily benefit the metro area. I'm just guessing but I'll bet there aren't too many Tier 1 associations based in rural areas? My point is so what. How many kids in the metro can skate for free 24/7? That is not fair and should be stopped immediately. Also, how much earlier is outdoor ice available up north? You are not allowed to flood your rinks till the outdoor rinks open in Albert Lea. Also, if you don't like the travel based upon your geographical location then move. I live in the metro and I don't have to drive all over to find competition. Though I have to drive all over for practice time. That is just the nature of the beast.

[DMom]

Here I thought I had leaned so far to the left on that last one that I would fall straight to the cafe, or be banished to New Hampshire.....

alright, if you go with Megas doesn't travel become an issue. Rochester to Duluth to Edina. I thought it had been established that kids don't learn a lot in the backseat with the playstation.

If you go with the multiple A level teams in the big associations at least the kids don't spend hours in vehicles getting to and from their "liked skilled" competition.

[zboni99]

I'm all for Tier 1 but I'm not willing to pay one penny toward subsidizing Tier 1 hockey. If you play Tier 1 you pay for it yourself. If my kid is playing I'll pay my way, but I will not and should not be forced to pay for someone else. If people want to donate that is fine. With all the travel, I'm assuming Tier 1 is very expensive. I never envisioned the Tier 1 kids playing for free. In fact I envision them paying a lot for for the opportunity.

[elliott70]

i have found the agenda for the winter meeting, however it is vague.
Will you be able to provide a more detailed time frame for when the committees will meet ?

Thank you

A new agenda is being produced.
When I see it I will share it.

[WatchDog'sRight]

HOCKEYTOWN USA MICHIGAN TIER 1 AAA .. IS TAKING OUR TROPHIES.

Oh no!!!

[Gump]

Here I thought I had leaned so far to the left on that last one that I would fall straight to the cafe, or be banished to New Hampshire.....

alright, if you go with Megas doesn't travel become an issue. Rochester to Duluth to Edina. I thought it had been established that kids don't learn a lot in the backseat with the playstation.

If you go with the multiple A level teams in the big associations at least the kids don't spend hours in vehicles getting to and from their "liked skilled" competition.

I here that the NH Avalanche are looking for new prospects!

I agree that the Mega Assn idea could likely involve travel around the state - probably mostly metro, though. I like the idea of 2 A teams when necessary. I'm not sure that the largest associations will like that idea, though. It will make it much more difficult for them to claim the trophies - or is that what it is supposed to do?

[wheels]

So the idea is to level the competition field among the associations that have the largest to the smallest pools of players.

Great idea, but it does nothing for those stand out players from the smaller associations. They would now be missing out on the opportunity to play against the best overall competition - likely a Mega Association top team. This does nothing for their development or their team's development.

The best option to fix this growing problem is to introduce 3 or 4 regional Tier I options to the state for all to have the option of participation (I know this is a sore topic for many, but structured and managed properly it is the correct solution). This would likely remove some of the top players from the Mega Associations and give new opportunity to the best few in smaller associations. Some disparity will still exist among a few large associations and this can be addressed with the AA (Mega Association), A, B1, B2, ... concept or simply creating a second A team at all levels. It is a winning situation in which more players will be playing against even competition and be able to develop and practice their skills most effectively.

Gump or I mean Elliott I can't tell who is behind
the mask ? You tell me why this isn't the best idea ever posted or did you
take my idea that you would not post on this site yesterday and come up
with this all on your own ? either way who cares Tier 1 Belongs in Mn...
THE GREAT STATE OF HOCKEY AND NO TIER 1 AAA ? IT IS WRONG
HOCKEYTOWN USA MICHIGAN TIER 1 AAA .. IS TAKING OUR TROPHIES.
U-18 Tier 1 Nationals = 80 games
U-16 Tier 1 Nationals = 70 games
U-14 Tier 1 Nationals = 65 games
U-12 Tier 1 Nationals = 65 games
High School state championship 28 games
elite league I hate to tell you is no Tier 1 Caliber of competition.....
And I know this hurts but neither is High school...........
YOU HAVE ALREADY LET SHATTUCK ST MARYS BE TIER 1
and yes they have brought home a few trophies but I will
go on and talk about what you would not post yesterday and
that is the MONOPOLY OF THE MARKETPLACE.. These are kids
who want to play high caliber hockey and you feel like you OWN
them and that they must fight for you and your Team. We are not
traders we are just looking to provide the best oppurtunities for all
of the kids who play the great game of hockey and can't afford to go
and spend $ 40,000 a year to go to Shattuck. It is called oppurtunities
and why would we want to limit the kids from at least having the chance
to choose what oppurtunities they wish to pursue. Why is it that you need
to decide for them ? are they under contract to you and all of Mn Hockey
NO so what is the problem..

Count me in on this one. People should have options and freedom to do what they want and a tier 1 option should be an option.

[Air Force 1]

Count me in on this one. People should have options and freedom to do what they want and a tier 1 option should be an option.

So what is holding you/people back from doing this now?

[Gump]

Count me in on this one. People should have options and freedom to do what they want and a tier 1 option should be an option.

So what is holding you/people back from doing this now?

The reason people aren't doing it now is because the option isn't available to them in Minnesota.

[skillbuilder]

Gump Said:

The solution: create more even competition so that players can develop in a challenging environment with the opportunity for success, and give choices to participate Tier I programs if desired. Otherwise, maybe we should just turn the State of Hockey into one big in-house league and give everyone a trophy at the end of the year.

Ouch! However it nails the primary issue (even competition) My kid is not tier one level but his current team from top to bottom is not at the level he is capable of playing at. The two A team idea has the superstar skating w/ number 30. (# 38 if you factor in politics) which doesn't challenge him. So here it is in a nutshell. "Fifteen kids per level, multiple levels, proof your team is at that level" Tier one for superstars and a open arms policy and attitude to waivers for very good small assoc. players. Everyone on this post has ideas that can be incorporated into this being a fantastic enhancement to MN Hockey going forward. It's time to eliminate the entitlement which creates the lack of consistency in competition by having hard guidelines and review processes. An even playing field can and needs to be created on behalf of developing more kids at all levels.

[Tenoverpar]

Tier 1 AAA in many parts of the country is a money grab. You have B level players paying the money because they don't want to play in the cruddy local league. The Detroit, Chicago, Ontario based teams are the example in how they are producing kids. For Tier 1 to succeed in Minnesota would be very hard with the current need for more ice as it is.
The costs can get out of control (Colorado Thunderbird 93's 9K this year).
But, there shouldn't be a reason it can't co-exist in a free enterprise market. The issue would be the formation and charter of such a league in Minnesota, and it would have to be a league...Elliott, if you want to make some bank, let me know we can roll this up quick. I believe the Atlantic Youth Hockey League charges a 20K initial franchise fee for ownership rights to a select # of teams approved by the DISTRICT for competition.
Plus an annual fee to the league. The DISTRICT actually controls the league and its members. A disadvantage though is that the DISTRICT President and Charter is held by an owner of one of the franchises. Minnesota would only be able to support maybe 6 programs in a league at most. They would have to play each other 4 x's each, then hopefully apply for a charter as a northern league with the MWEHL with "festival" weekends with Chicago and Detroit teams..doable yes, realistic, maybe not. Food for thought, sure. With the bad press on here about that Fire program, would the Minnesota faithful support such change or is there a new generation of kids coming up that would actually seek to play on another street if it was there.

Tough question. Good luck with this one Mark...will most likely be a debatable argument for years.

[Gump]

Tier I programs in other areas can be a money grab. Many are club teams with an owner - not non-profit as our local associations are.

Costs can be crazy, but they don't have to be. The Fire is something like $2k a year. Not much higher than some local associations.

Travel is a cost adder, but people know this going into it.

Tier I in MN wouldn't have to be it's own league. There are 4 Tier I teams in WI that form a league. Plus, there is the SSM Bantam team. This could be the basis for a league with great competition. There are another 4 teams or so in Chi and something like 6 in Detroit for those teams that want to go on a road trip.

It seems that the infrastructure of MN Hockey is already in place to accomodate Tier I teams if desired. There are sure to be added costs, but that's what the participation fees are for.

I'm not sure that I agree that ice time is an issue. It's still the same number of players, and possibly the same number of total teams looking for ice. Doesn't Bernie have any open ice for sale???

Anyway, it's about choice and options. Give people the option, educate them on the costs, time involved, travel, ... and let them chose.

This isn't a new debate and it is likely to go on for years. But it does offer a solution to some existing problems.

[frederick61]

Tier 1 AAA in many parts of the country is a money grab. You have B level players paying the money because they don't want to play in the cruddy local league. The Detroit, Chicago, Ontario based teams are the example in how they are producing kids. For Tier 1 to succeed in Minnesota would be very hard with the current need for more ice as it is.
The costs can get out of control (Colorado Thunderbird 93's 9K this year).
But, there shouldn't be a reason it can't co-exist in a free enterprise market. The issue would be the formation and charter of such a league in Minnesota, and it would have to be a league...Elliott, if you want to make some bank, let me know we can roll this up quick. I believe the Atlantic Youth Hockey League charges a 20K initial franchise fee for ownership rights to a select # of teams approved by the DISTRICT for competition.
Plus an annual fee to the league. The DISTRICT actually controls the league and its members. A disadvantage though is that the DISTRICT President and Charter is held by an owner of one of the franchises. Minnesota would only be able to support maybe 6 programs in a league at most. They would have to play each other 4 x's each, then hopefully apply for a charter as a northern league with the MWEHL with "festival" weekends with Chicago and Detroit teams..doable yes, realistic, maybe not. Food for thought, sure. With the bad press on here about that Fire program, would the Minnesota faithful support such change or is there a new generation of kids coming up that would actually seek to play on another street if it was there.

Tough question. Good luck with this one Mark...will most likely be a debatable argument for years.

You can't argue about AAA teams in the state and ignore the associations. The reason the Fire exists is because the facilities they use are privately not publicly owned. Minnesota Hockey does not own any facilities, they only make policy because the majority of the associations and communities that own and fund year to year the arenas agree to let them. You need to address the concerns of the community and the associations.

Again, I ask the question what is the rational for merging D4/D8 so that one district covers the lower third of the state of Minnesota. To me a district that size is no longer a district but a section. Soon with in that "Section 4/8" they will organize into subsections which will then group associations.

This creates another governing level in Minnesota Hockey. Why? That rational accepted by Minnesota Hockey should be used as a guide in considering how the remaining districts should be changed.

Once you have an agreement on that, then deal with the resulting regional associations. Reducing this to a pointless potentially negative (for Minnesota Hockey) discussion about AAA serves no purpose until you have addressed the fundation of the Minnesota Hockey organization.