So what I would like is an all parochial hockey league. The league plays home and away within the league and then could play out of conference against each of the former district teams. End of the year you get ONE parochial at state representing the parochials. I don't know where this is a flawed look.
Maybe it's really time to look at the 2 tier system that's in place and perhaps consider 4 tiers of hockey for the end of the season based on enrollement. Class 1/2/3/4/parochial. You get 5 Class State Champions. Those 5 all come to the X for a state Tournament of Champions.
Parochial High School Sports League?
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
Neutron 14
- Posts: 5339
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:48 pm
Re: 2 tier
I wouldn't expect a blind person to see it...jancze5 wrote: I don't know where this is a flawed look.
Neutron
Per Wikipedia:
the neutron is a subatomic particle with no net electric charge and a mass slightly larger than that of a proton.
In Minnesota Hockey Forums:
the neutron is a toolshed with no positive statements and a brain slightly larger than that of a parakeet.
the neutron is a subatomic particle with no net electric charge and a mass slightly larger than that of a proton.
In Minnesota Hockey Forums:
the neutron is a toolshed with no positive statements and a brain slightly larger than that of a parakeet.
New England Prep School Hockey Recruiter
-
Can't Never Tried
- Posts: 4345
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:55 pm
-
Neutron 14
- Posts: 5339
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:48 pm
I doubt it.Can't Never Tried wrote:This could get interesting!
We currently have the greatest high school tournament in the world, and the only way to make it better is to get rid of 2 classes based on enrollment (which has nothing to do with fielding a great hockey team - see Roseau). Why stop at 5 State Champions? Why not 50? Everyones a winner!
Your point of separating the privates from the rest is biggoted, and is usually brought up by posters whose teams can't compete with them.
If you can't beat them, kick 'em out? How sad.
-
Tenoverpar
- Posts: 514
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 3:40 pm
Hey
Hey Jancze5, doesn't your kid go to Hill Murray? I thought that was on another post...so much for Neutrons theory.
-
karl(east)
- Posts: 6462
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
I hate beating dead horses, but since this idea never seems to go away, and we have the new wrinkle of a 4-class idea, I'll address it.
First off, hockey isn't football or basketball, and there simply aren't enough teams for that many classes. There are 154 hockey programs, 15 of which are private or all-private co-ops. Dividing the remaining 139 by 4 classes, you get 34-35 teams per class, which makes little to no sense. Also, a few outstate programs co-op publics and privates together...what would you do with those?
The private schools would balk at this arrangement, since right now we're going through a period of private school dominance in high school hockey. Whether this is a long term trend or only a blip this decade remains to be seen, but right now privates are disproportionately better than publics, and they'd be crazy to want to be marginalized like that.
I dislike privates as much as anyone, but this kind of move simply isn't good for the health of HS hockey. There isn't any reason to change a tourney format that is doing very well right now. Maybe that will change sometime in the next few years, but right now there's no reason to mess with something that works. The current system isn't flawless, but it's the best thing available.
First off, hockey isn't football or basketball, and there simply aren't enough teams for that many classes. There are 154 hockey programs, 15 of which are private or all-private co-ops. Dividing the remaining 139 by 4 classes, you get 34-35 teams per class, which makes little to no sense. Also, a few outstate programs co-op publics and privates together...what would you do with those?
The private schools would balk at this arrangement, since right now we're going through a period of private school dominance in high school hockey. Whether this is a long term trend or only a blip this decade remains to be seen, but right now privates are disproportionately better than publics, and they'd be crazy to want to be marginalized like that.
I dislike privates as much as anyone, but this kind of move simply isn't good for the health of HS hockey. There isn't any reason to change a tourney format that is doing very well right now. Maybe that will change sometime in the next few years, but right now there's no reason to mess with something that works. The current system isn't flawless, but it's the best thing available.
-
Can't Never Tried
- Posts: 4345
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:55 pm
Yeah right!!!karl(east) wrote:I hate beating dead horses, but since this idea never seems to go away, and we have the new wrinkle of a 4-class idea, I'll address it.
First off, hockey isn't football or basketball, and there simply aren't enough teams for that many classes. There are 154 hockey programs, 15 of which are private or all-private co-ops. Dividing the remaining 139 by 4 classes, you get 34-35 teams per class, which makes little to no sense. Also, a few outstate programs co-op publics and privates together...what would you do with those?
The private schools would balk at this arrangement, since right now we're going through a period of private school dominance in high school hockey. Whether this is a long term trend or only a blip this decade remains to be seen, but right now privates are disproportionately better than publics, and they'd be crazy to want to be marginalized like that.
I dislike privates as much as anyone, but this kind of move simply isn't good for the health of HS hockey. There isn't any reason to change a tourney format that is doing very well right now. Maybe that will change sometime in the next few years, but right now there's no reason to mess with something that works. The current system isn't flawless, but it's the best thing available.
My eye in the sky told me back in 1974 that the Catholics like Hill and Cretin could never compete in the MSHSL...
Government supported public schools can raise tons through taxes and levys, at least 5 times the funds that Catholics can find though tuition and donations.
Catholics should not be able to compete; therefore, they must be cheating!
I have dedicated my life and my eyes in the sky to catching the Catholic cheaters at Hill and Cretin; I even invented the recruiting complaint; someday my eyes in the sky and I will actually find something!
But until we do... LET'S KICK THE CATHOLICS OUT!
Here's how we do it:
1. First we tell the Catholics, they're not any good!
2. As soon as a Catholic wins too many conference, section, or state championships, we tell them they're too good...
3. Then we give them the boot!
4. Some might wonder if we kick everyone out for winning, won't we be left with a league consisting only of losers?
5. Who cares! I'll finally be rid of Ankles Pierre, Jr. and all his stinking, fish eating, cat-licking friends!
Government supported public schools can raise tons through taxes and levys, at least 5 times the funds that Catholics can find though tuition and donations.
Catholics should not be able to compete; therefore, they must be cheating!
I have dedicated my life and my eyes in the sky to catching the Catholic cheaters at Hill and Cretin; I even invented the recruiting complaint; someday my eyes in the sky and I will actually find something!
But until we do... LET'S KICK THE CATHOLICS OUT!
Here's how we do it:
1. First we tell the Catholics, they're not any good!
2. As soon as a Catholic wins too many conference, section, or state championships, we tell them they're too good...
3. Then we give them the boot!
4. Some might wonder if we kick everyone out for winning, won't we be left with a league consisting only of losers?
5. Who cares! I'll finally be rid of Ankles Pierre, Jr. and all his stinking, fish eating, cat-licking friends!
-
Neutron 14
- Posts: 5339
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:48 pm
Reel, reel, reel...Don Riley wrote:My eye in the sky told me back in 1974 that the Catholics like Hill and Cretin could never compete in the MSHSL...
Government supported public schools can raise tons through taxes and levys, at least 5 times the funds that Catholics can find though tuition and donations.
Catholics should not be able to compete; therefore, they must be cheating!
I have dedicated my life and my eyes in the sky to catching the Catholic cheaters at Hill and Cretin; I even invented the recruiting complaint; someday my eyes in the sky and I will actually find something!
But until we do... LET'S KICK THE CATHOLICS OUT!
Here's how we do it:
1. First we tell the Catholics, they're not any good!
2. As soon as a Catholic wins too many conference, section, or state championships, we tell them they're too good...
3. Then we give them the boot!
4. Some might wonder if we kick everyone out for winning, won't we be left with a league consisting only of losers?
5. Who cares! I'll finally be rid of Ankles Pierre, Jr. and all his stinking, fish eating, cat-licking friends!
Twitch, twitch...
Reel, twitch, reel...
karl(east) wrote:I hate beating dead horses, but since this idea never seems to go away, and we have the new wrinkle of a 4-class idea, I'll address it.
First off, hockey isn't football or basketball, and there simply aren't enough teams for that many classes. There are 154 hockey programs, 15 of which are private or all-private co-ops. Dividing the remaining 139 by 4 classes, you get 34-35 teams per class, which makes little to no sense. Also, a few outstate programs co-op publics and privates together...what would you do with those?
The private schools would balk at this arrangement, since right now we're going through a period of private school dominance in high school hockey. Whether this is a long term trend or only a blip this decade remains to be seen, but right now privates are disproportionately better than publics, and they'd be crazy to want to be marginalized like that.
I dislike privates as much as anyone, but this kind of move simply isn't good for the health of HS hockey. There isn't any reason to change a tourney format that is doing very well right now. Maybe that will change sometime in the next few years, but right now there's no reason to mess with something that works. The current system isn't flawless, but it's the best thing available.
I must admit, during the last round of dominance by northern schools I wondered if the northern half of Minnesota's teams should play state against some southern Canadian teams and leave us southern schools that can't compete alone...
But I took tums instead and the feeling passed.
-
karl(east)
- Posts: 6462
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
Exactly...it's all cyclical. For the first 25 years or so of the state tournament, it was utterly domintated by northern teams and the occasional title from St. Paul Johnson. 1969 was when things more or less turned, with Edina's OT win over Warroad in the championship game. The 70s were very even between the north and the south, and though privates joined the party in 1975, Hill-Murray was the only one that really did anything for the next 25 years. In the 80s the cities teams took over, but it went back to being very even in the 90s with the rise of Moorhead and Duluth East. This decade we've seen the rise of the privates, with CDH, AHA, Hill, and now perhaps Benilde playing big roles at the AA level. The north has been a bit behind (not seriously, mind you) ever since Blaine beat up on East in the 2000 final. Is it just a downswing, or a long-term trend? Who knows. And it would be silly to act as if we know what's going to happen next. Just because the privates are doing well doesn't mean the publics should take up arms and throw people out. I feel the system is healthiest when there's a wide variety of teams with chances to win playing in St. Paul in March, and we more or less have that right now. I'm very happy with the status quo.
High school sports is about participation but the MSHSL is about the money.
Hockey makes a lot of money for the league.
If the Catholics and privates had their own league , the revenue most certainly would be divided.
The Catholics will stay and Class A will stay because of money.
I am OK with that but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that there is some altrusitic goal motivated by a true dedication to competitive balance going on here. The MSHSL doesnt care as long as it sells.
Catholic and Private schools help it sell. So does Class A.
Hockey makes a lot of money for the league.
If the Catholics and privates had their own league , the revenue most certainly would be divided.
The Catholics will stay and Class A will stay because of money.
I am OK with that but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that there is some altrusitic goal motivated by a true dedication to competitive balance going on here. The MSHSL doesnt care as long as it sells.
Catholic and Private schools help it sell. So does Class A.
Doesn't change the ideal of the high school league. We all know 99% of athletes will never win a state title. The idea of high school sports is participation. Nothing more. And I don't think it should be anything more. What really matters, in the greater scheme, is that kids get to play sports, compete against other kids and create memories to last a lifetime. I'm happy for any kid who gets a chance to play varsity. That alone is suceeding. Your team not being the best is okay, because that doesn't preclude you from being the best you can be. I know, I'm idealistic, but I really think that is and should be the #1 goal.packerboy wrote:High school sports is about participation but the MSHSL is about the money.
Hockey makes a lot of money for the league.
If the Catholics and privates had their own league , the revenue most certainly would be divided.
The Catholics will stay and Class A will stay because of money.
I am OK with that but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that there is some altrusitic goal motivated by a true dedication to competitive balance going on here. The MSHSL doesnt care as long as it sells.
Catholic and Private schools help it sell. So does Class A.
-
karl(east)
- Posts: 6462
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
[quote="Sparlimb"][quote="packerboy"]High school sports is about participation but the MSHSL is about the money.
Hockey makes a lot of money for the league.
If the Catholics and privates had their own league , the revenue most certainly would be divided.
The Catholics will stay and Class A will stay because of money.
I am OK with that but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that there is some altrusitic goal motivated by a true dedication to competitive balance going on here. The MSHSL doesnt care as long as it sells.
Catholic and Private schools help it sell. So does Class A.[/quote]
Doesn't change the ideal of the high school league. We all know 99% of athletes will never win a state title. The idea of high school sports is participation. Nothing more. And I don't think it should be anything more. What really matters, in the greater scheme, is that kids get to play sports, compete against other kids and create memories to last a lifetime. I'm happy for any kid who gets a chance to play varsity. That alone is suceeding. Your team not being the best is okay, because that doesn't preclude you from being the best you can be. I know, I'm idealistic, but I really think that is and should be the #1 goal.[/quote]
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive, though. There's no reason the MSHSL can't encourage participation without hurting the bottom line. While the ultimate goal may be to make money, the MSHSL isn't filled with soul-less people; they want to see kids succeed too. I'd even argue that a more open, accepting state high school league that gets everyone involved and feeling good about the system is probably going to do better financially than one that doesn't.
Hockey makes a lot of money for the league.
If the Catholics and privates had their own league , the revenue most certainly would be divided.
The Catholics will stay and Class A will stay because of money.
I am OK with that but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that there is some altrusitic goal motivated by a true dedication to competitive balance going on here. The MSHSL doesnt care as long as it sells.
Catholic and Private schools help it sell. So does Class A.[/quote]
Doesn't change the ideal of the high school league. We all know 99% of athletes will never win a state title. The idea of high school sports is participation. Nothing more. And I don't think it should be anything more. What really matters, in the greater scheme, is that kids get to play sports, compete against other kids and create memories to last a lifetime. I'm happy for any kid who gets a chance to play varsity. That alone is suceeding. Your team not being the best is okay, because that doesn't preclude you from being the best you can be. I know, I'm idealistic, but I really think that is and should be the #1 goal.[/quote]
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive, though. There's no reason the MSHSL can't encourage participation without hurting the bottom line. While the ultimate goal may be to make money, the MSHSL isn't filled with soul-less people; they want to see kids succeed too. I'd even argue that a more open, accepting state high school league that gets everyone involved and feeling good about the system is probably going to do better financially than one that doesn't.
