Co-ops in AA

[HShockeywatcher]

"What would it matter anyway? You just said they barely compete in A now. All you would do is bump a few upper Calss A teams to AA and potentially weaken Class A."

Ummm, if I recall correctly there are about as many threads on here talking about how good teams should opt up than as many about other things. Same concept, except in this case it would be based on size.

I think I put boblee's sentence together and it's supposed to say:
"Also, there are 41 A co-ops and AA only has 16. I think your point is rather moot."
*You list 17 AA co-ops.

Yes, you are right the number is supposed to represent "the size of the pool of possible players." My point is that they are co-oping for a reason, if any one of those schools could put a team together by themselves, they wouldn't co-op. So, sure you can say they are possible players, but in reality they aren't. In addition, they co-op with many towns that don't have youth programs. Monticello, for example, co-ops with Annandale and Maple Lake. Neither Maple Lake nor Annandale have youth programs. They contribute less than a handful of players a year. But they have to play against bigger programs.

Schools like Brainerd are already big enough to play AA without the co-op, which wouldn't be what I'm talking about.

[goldy313]

Why are co-oped programs put in AA? I understand using the numbers of all the schools, since they use that many schools, but they don't really draw more than a kid or two from those schools. They are already at a disadvantage by needing to co-op to have a team; when it's at that point why disadvantage them even further by putting them in the high class?

The MSHSL used to use a formula based on percentages, I don't recall exactly how it worked but teams like Dodge County and Fairmont were A teams. The Wrestling coaches had a beef with this as teams were forming co-ops to get a complete roster of 14 and gaining an advantage over schools that didn't co-op and couldn't field a full roster (1 at each of 14 weight classes). If you could only field 11 wrestlers then you were forfeiting 18 points to a full team. State team tournament berths are awarded on a team vs. team basis and obviously there was an advantage to be gained by fielding a full roster. The theory of the MSHSL is participation and by forming co-ops a few wrestling teams were actually eliminating kids from participating. Say if 1 high school had 12 wrestlers and another school had 9 and they combined to field a full roster of 14 you gained a significant advantage over a stand alone team that only fielded 11 wrestlers, more importantly, in the MSHSL's eyes, the co-op was costing 7 kids a chance to wrestle for no other purpose than gaining a team a state tournament berth, because even in the individual section tournament each school can only have 1 enterant per weight class.

The MSHSL has to treat all sports the same and because someone, somewhere will find a loophole and exploit it all co-ops in all sports are treated the same. Most co-ops in hockey are formed to allow more participation, Dodge County needs all 5 of it's schools to field a team, if they couldn't they would have to drop hockey. So they are punished for allowing kids to play, it doesn't make much sense on the outside but without rules teams will take advantage of loopholes.

In this case watcher you are correct and Bob Lee is wrong. A co-op in hockey usually doesn't have a bigger talent pool to draw from, there are a finite number of kids playing hockey and you can't take up hockey for the first time as a sophomore and play. You can do that in nearly every other sport, maybe not be a state champ but in wrestling if you can get a kid to fill a spot and not get pinned you just gained points even if he's a fish.

[SEMinnHockeyNut]

Hockey is probably the toughest sport to start to play in high school, but one would find very little success in the following sports if started at a sophmore:

Basketball - if you have no knowledge of the tactics and cannot shoot or pass, it probably would not work so well...I am assuming this kid has never played pick-up basketball.

Baseball - Assuming you have not fielded balls, swung a bat much, you are not going to make it coming out as a 10th grader.

Golf - Most kids that are successful at the high school level do not just pick up a club in March of 10th grade and contribute to varsity.

Tennis - See golf, but a racket.

Some sports it is pretty easy to contribute right away: Track, CC, wrestling, and maybe even soccer.

Hockey would be the toughest, so they might be hurt a bit by a co-op. Oh well. I don't worry about 'fairness' for co-ops, especially in this era. Perhaps we could just make three or four classes of hockey and make it a watered down sport like they have for wrestling and basketball. As soon as we satisfy everyone and their complaints, things will be perfect.

Only one Rochester school cut kids this year - Mayo. And for several years before that, Mayo did not cut anyone. Such is life, especially with RYHA.

[RLStars]

"What would it matter anyway? You just said they barely compete in A now. All you would do is bump a few upper Calss A teams to AA and potentially weaken Class A."

Ummm, if I recall correctly there are about as many threads on here talking about how good teams should opt up than as many about other things. Same concept, except in this case it would be based on size.

I think I put boblee's sentence together and it's supposed to say:
"Also, there are 41 A co-ops and AA only has 16. I think your point is rather moot."
*You list 17 AA co-ops.

Yes, you are right the number is supposed to represent "the size of the pool of possible players." My point is that they are co-oping for a reason, if any one of those schools could put a team together by themselves, they wouldn't co-op. So, sure you can say they are possible players, but in reality they aren't. In addition, they co-op with many towns that don't have youth programs. Monticello, for example, co-ops with Annandale and Maple Lake. Neither Maple Lake nor Annandale have youth programs. They contribute less than a handful of players a year. But they have to play against bigger programs.

Schools like Brainerd are already big enough to play AA without the co-op, which wouldn't be what I'm talking about.

The teams (STA, Duluth Marshall etc.) that are talked about that should opt up to AA are not close enough in enrollment to be bumped up for the co-op recalculation you are bringing up.

[SEMinnHockeyNut]

STA has an enrollment of 1082 and that is all boys. Most teams in AA don't have that many guys to chose from...plain and simple, STA should be in AA. If you doubled the enrollment to provide for both sexes, STA would be one of the biggest high schools in the state.

[Neutron 14]

STA has an enrollment of 1082 and that is all boys. Most teams in AA don't have that many guys to chose from...plain and simple, STA should be in AA. If you doubled the enrollment to provide for both sexes, STA would be one of the biggest high schools in the state.

1082 is the doubled number Nut...

[SEMinnHockeyNut]

Are you certain? That is what is listed on MSHSL and in the tourney program. Visitation has a separate enrollment.

Even so, 1082 is not a 'small' A enrollment figure.

[Neutron 14]

Are you certain? That is what is listed on MSHSL and in the tourney program. Visitation has a separate enrollment.

Even so, 1082 is not a 'small' A enrollment figure.

I am certain. But it isn't relevant either. Enrollment numbers mean very little in hockey, and even less when it comes to a privates.

[SB24]

all i want to know is if warroad and roseau were to co-op would any team in the state be able to stop them?

[SEMinnHockeyNut]

Sure - Hill Murray and BSM!

[HShockeywatcher]

Is there a list anywhere of the schools in both classes in order of enrollment?

[RLStars]

Is there a list anywhere of the schools in both classes in order of enrollment?

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/enrollments07.asp

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/news/2007-08enrollclass.asp

[Can't Never Tried]

Rogers is over!