Yet another new state tournament format idea...

[deacon]

The state tournament should be a bracket like the NCAA bball tournament. You keep your class A and class AA for simplicity sake. After the sections are completed in both classes and you are left with 16 teams total from both classes, from here you condense down to one tournament with 16 teams from both classes.

From here you can do a couple of things. You could randomly reseed all the teams or you could seed the top 4 teams, which a lot of cases won't always be AA schools. I would prefer to have four #1's, four #2's, four #3's, and four #4's (voted on by whoever does the seeding now). After the seeding takes place you randomly assign the seeds to a "quarter" bracket. 1 plays a 4 and 2 plays a 3 and you go from there down to the all important ONE state champion. A 1 vs a 4 seed may be a lopsided game sometimes but it almost guarantees that the best teams advance while still making it possible for a yearly cinderella to make a deep run.

It's just a thought that I randomly had and haven't worked out any logistics because I don't know enough about all the little things to make this possible. It would remove all the debate of whether a team should opt up and it wold make the state tournament a lot more interesting.

Thoughts?

[ACTUALFORMERPLAYER]

[HockeyMN1]

[The51]

its a good idea but unfortunately we will never get to see anything different than what we have now, witch is very disappointing because we will have at minimum 3 teams outside the top 10 at state

[GopherPuck15]

The current format is how it should be for the most part, the only change I would make would be to seed all eight teams if four are going to be seeded... Yes, section 3A is generally weaker than most sections, but think of the kids, yes kids, who get to dream of playing in the state torunament because they know they can make the state tournament, without having two teams rule the section for years and years, or private schools, big schools, etc to be the favorites year in and year out. Think of the opportunites for teams like rosemount back in the nineties, who made the state tourney after a dismal regular season, as well as various examples of weak sections performing decently well at state tournaments, century a few years ago, Hutch and Lourdes playing for the consolation title, etc. The current format promotes hockey everywhere in the state, as many people want changes to see a 6 of 8 or 7of 8 metro team tourney at each class. There's not much wrong with the State Tournament right now, as it's always exciting and enjoyable year in and year out.

[Goldfishdude]

The state tournament should be a bracket like the NCAA bball tournament. You keep your class A and class AA for simplicity sake. After the sections are completed in both classes and you are left with 16 teams total from both classes, from here you condense down to one tournament with 16 teams from both classes.

From here you can do a couple of things. You could randomly reseed all the teams or you could seed the top 4 teams, which a lot of cases won't always be AA schools. I would prefer to have four #1's, four #2's, four #3's, and four #4's (voted on by whoever does the seeding now). After the seeding takes place you randomly assign the seeds to a "quarter" bracket. 1 plays a 4 and 2 plays a 3 and you go from there down to the all important ONE state champion. A 1 vs a 4 seed may be a lopsided game sometimes but it almost guarantees that the best teams advance while still making it possible for a yearly cinderella to make a deep run.

It's just a thought that I randomly had and haven't worked out any logistics because I don't know enough about all the little things to make this possible. It would remove all the debate of whether a team should opt up and it wold make the state tournament a lot more interesting.

Thoughts?

IF.. IF... IF.. IF.. there were ever any format changes, this is what Goldfishdude would like to see. Obviously, there are many of us, myself included, that would be fine with just one class, but does enjoy two classes as it is now. Deacon, your concept is similar to mine, but teams like STA and Breck don't move up for the very reason that they have a better chance at state, so combining them takes away the opportunities.

In basketball, the state tournaments are divided to four levels: A, AA, AAA and AAAA. Why? To give more opportunities for state participation. That means 32 teams get a chance to go to state.

The MSHSL needs to adopt the same principles used by Minnesota Hockey, where generally in districts/regions the top 2 teams advance, and similar to the NCAA format.

So, now, in both hockey classes, by allowing the section championship teams to qualify for state, our hockey tournament allows 32 teams into the state tournament, the same as basketball.

All I am suggesting, in an era of equality, why does basketball get more opportunity in "The State of Hockey"?

Same process occurs.

Still Class A and AA.

Four, 4-team regions. Top 4 teams get seeded in opposite brackets, like how it is done now. The other 4 section winners are guaranteed #2 seeds.

All the section runners-up are awarded #3 and #4 seeds, and play in the opposite bracket as the section champion.

Wednesday games are played at Aldrich, Colesium, U of M and ??. One and done. Last I remember, the basketball tourneys do not have consolation brackets.

Then, top 8 advance to X like normal in Class AA, and Class A to The Mooch.

Again, my premise is based on allowing the same amount of participation for us hockey goons as the basketball dweebs get.

Ok.. Ok..... I am selfishlessly suggesting this, because this will be the ONLY way my WBL Bears will ever be able to get to state over H-M more than once every 15 years. And since WBL and H-M are the two best teams in the state year-in, year-out, wouldn't a H-M vs WBL for the state championship game be the best ever??

Here, let me answer my own question;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

[Doc Holliday]

I like some of the ideas and think that "thinking outside the box" with high school hockey is a good thing....but am not holding my breath.

The only IMMEDIATE action that should be taken for high school hockey is, in addition to the MSHSL trophies that are given to the champions, the winner of Class AA & Class A should be given a traveling trophy that they get to celebrate with & get their name inscribed on and is passed from one champion to another.

I'm thinking the "Ikola Cup" for Class AA & "Mayasich Cup" for winning Class A.

[slapshot445]

[quote="GopherPuck15"]The current format is how it should be for the most part, the only change I would make would be to seed all eight teams if four are going to be seeded... Yes, section 3A is generally weaker than most sections, but think of the kids, yes kids, who get to dream of playing in the state torunament because they know they can make the state tournament, without having two teams rule the section for years and years, or private schools, big schools, etc to be the favorites year in and year out. Think of the opportunites for teams like rosemount back in the nineties, who made the state tourney after a dismal regular season, as well as various examples of weak sections performing decently well at state tournaments, century a few years ago, Hutch and Lourdes playing for the consolation title, etc. The current format promotes hockey everywhere in the state, as many people want changes to see a 6 of 8 or 7of 8 metro team tourney at each class. There's not much wrong with the State Tournament right now, as it's always exciting and enjoyable year in and year out.[/quote]


how about you think about the kids who play for the better teams that have worked much harder their whole lives than the players in section 3A, but dont get to go to the state tournament, even though they are much better than the team that advances out of that section.

[wblhockeyfan8]

Yeah this about sums it up.

[codemanh]

The current format is how it should be for the most part, the only change I would make would be to seed all eight teams if four are going to be seeded... Yes, section 3A is generally weaker than most sections, but think of the kids, yes kids, who get to dream of playing in the state torunament because they know they can make the state tournament, without having two teams rule the section for years and years, or private schools, big schools, etc to be the favorites year in and year out. Think of the opportunites for teams like rosemount back in the nineties, who made the state tourney after a dismal regular season, as well as various examples of weak sections performing decently well at state tournaments, century a few years ago, Hutch and Lourdes playing for the consolation title, etc. The current format promotes hockey everywhere in the state, as many people want changes to see a 6 of 8 or 7of 8 metro team tourney at each class. There's not much wrong with the State Tournament right now, as it's always exciting and enjoyable year in and year out.

how about you think about the kids who play for the better teams that have worked much harder their whole lives than the players in section 3A, but dont get to go to the state tournament, even though they are much better than the team that advances out of that section.

this is where i think you are wrong. im guessing you're talking about metro schools? i don't think that they work harder, i think it is just power in numbers. you are bound to have a better team when you have more players to choose from.

[Vinko Bogataj]

how about you think about the kids who play for the better teams that have worked much harder their whole lives than the players in section 3A, but dont get to go to the state tournament, even though they are much better than the team that advances out of that section.

You can make some argument for the idea of switching up the system, but this is certainly not one of them. Please don't tell me that you really believe that a kid from say Hutch or New Ulm doesn't deserve a shot at the tourney because "they haven't worked as hard" as the kid from Benilde or Orono. These kids work every bit as hard, but if you think the playing field is equal, I have some nice oceanfront property just outside Roseau to sell you. In many towns, there may not be the hockey culture, access to year round ice etc... Certainly, numbers couldn't have something to do with it could they? Wait, maybe they could. Numbers in terms of enrollment, players in the youth associations, and just plain dollars spent by either schools, associations and individual families. FWIW, I coach within a large metro association that happens to have its HS program playing at the X next weekend. Our kids work extremely hard, but I also know enough people in other associations around the state who work just as hard with many fewer resources. I think the tourney is great because it offers the chance for kids from Albert Lea to Alexandria to New Ulm to Ely have a crack at coming to St. Paul and play the big boys for a title. I think the tourney would lose its charm/greatness real quick without that. In the end, if your team wins its games the arguments become moot.

[defensezone]

how about you think about the kids who play for the better teams that have worked much harder their whole lives than the players in section 3A, but dont get to go to the state tournament, even though they are much better than the team that advances out of that section.

You can make some argument for the idea of switching up the system, but this is certainly not one of them. Please don't tell me that you really believe that a kid from say Hutch or New Ulm doesn't deserve a shot at the tourney because "they haven't worked as hard" as the kid from Benilde or Orono. These kids work every bit as hard, but if you think the playing field is equal, I have some nice oceanfront property just outside Roseau to sell you. In many towns, there may not be the hockey culture, access to year round ice etc... Certainly, numbers couldn't have something to do with it could they? Wait, maybe they could. Numbers in terms of enrollment, players in the youth associations, and just plain dollars spent by either schools, associations and individual families. FWIW, I coach within a large metro association that happens to have its HS program playing at the X next weekend. Our kids work extremely hard, but I also know enough people in other associations around the state who work just as hard with many fewer resources. I think the tourney is great because it offers the chance for kids from Albert Lea to Alexandria to New Ulm to Ely have a crack at coming to St. Paul and play the big boys for a title. I think the tourney would lose its charm/greatness real quick without that. In the end, if your team wins its games the arguments become moot.

A friend of mine, who heard it from a friend, who heard it from another friend told me in the State of Arizona, their state playoffs are based on some type of power ranking system (wins, loses, strength of schedule, etc.). Top 8 teams in the power rankings are in the playoffs. Does anyone know if that is true? Is this a good idea?

[elliott70]

How about changing it that beer gets delivered to people sitting in club level (by scantily clad, good-looking, college girls).

[slapshot445]

[quote="Vinko Bogataj"][quote="slapshot445"]how about you think about the kids who play for the better teams that have worked much harder their whole lives than the players in section 3A, but dont get to go to the state tournament, even though they are much better than the team that advances out of that section.[/quote]

You can make some argument for the idea of switching up the system, but this is certainly not one of them. Please don't tell me that you really believe that a kid from say Hutch or New Ulm doesn't deserve a shot at the tourney because "they haven't worked as hard" as the kid from Benilde or Orono. These kids work every bit as hard, but if you think the playing field is equal, I have some nice oceanfront property just outside Roseau to sell you. In many towns, there may not be the hockey culture, access to year round ice etc... Certainly, numbers couldn't have something to do with it could they? Wait, maybe they could. Numbers in terms of enrollment, players in the youth associations, and just plain dollars spent by either schools, associations and individual families. FWIW, I coach within a large metro association that happens to have its HS program playing at the X next weekend. Our kids work extremely hard, but I also know enough people in other associations around the state who work just as hard with many fewer resources. I think the tourney is great because it offers the chance for kids from Albert Lea to Alexandria to New Ulm to Ely have a crack at coming to St. Paul and play the big boys for a title. I think the tourney would lose its charm/greatness real quick without that. In the end, if your team wins its games the arguments become moot.[/quote]

if you took the roster from hutchinson varsity and compared it to the varsity for benilde and then you had a sheet that stated the total amount of time their players have spent playing hockey throughout their lives i'm sure you would see much bigger numbers on the benilde side. in face i guarantee that almost if not all the benilde numbers would be bigger than all the hutchinson players' numbers. It should be a bcs format based on record and strength of schedule, this would be the most accurate way to put the best 8 teams in the tournament

[Vinko Bogataj]

How about changing it that beer gets delivered to people sitting in club level (by scantily clad, good-looking, college girls).

elliott70 wins the thread. Of course, that reply pretty much wins any thread!

[codemanh]

how about you think about the kids who play for the better teams that have worked much harder their whole lives than the players in section 3A, but dont get to go to the state tournament, even though they are much better than the team that advances out of that section.

You can make some argument for the idea of switching up the system, but this is certainly not one of them. Please don't tell me that you really believe that a kid from say Hutch or New Ulm doesn't deserve a shot at the tourney because "they haven't worked as hard" as the kid from Benilde or Orono. These kids work every bit as hard, but if you think the playing field is equal, I have some nice oceanfront property just outside Roseau to sell you. In many towns, there may not be the hockey culture, access to year round ice etc... Certainly, numbers couldn't have something to do with it could they? Wait, maybe they could. Numbers in terms of enrollment, players in the youth associations, and just plain dollars spent by either schools, associations and individual families. FWIW, I coach within a large metro association that happens to have its HS program playing at the X next weekend. Our kids work extremely hard, but I also know enough people in other associations around the state who work just as hard with many fewer resources. I think the tourney is great because it offers the chance for kids from Albert Lea to Alexandria to New Ulm to Ely have a crack at coming to St. Paul and play the big boys for a title. I think the tourney would lose its charm/greatness real quick without that. In the end, if your team wins its games the arguments become moot.

if you took the roster from hutchinson varsity and compared it to the varsity for benilde and then you had a sheet that stated the total amount of time their players have spent playing hockey throughout their lives i'm sure you would see much bigger numbers on the benilde side. in face i guarantee that almost if not all the benilde numbers would be bigger than all the hutchinson players' numbers. It should be a bcs format based on record and strength of schedule, this would be the most accurate way to put the best 8 teams in the tournament

As Vinko said, some areas of the state have less resources then others. there are many rinks in the metro that are open year round, run camps, AAA teams etc.. maybe that's not the case in hutch or rochester..

[Vinko Bogataj]

if you took the roster from hutchinson varsity and compared it to the varsity for benilde and then you had a sheet that stated the total amount of time their players have spent playing hockey throughout their lives i'm sure you would see much bigger numbers on the benilde side. in face i guarantee that almost if not all the benilde numbers would be bigger than all the hutchinson players' numbers. It should be a bcs format based on record and strength of schedule, this would be the most accurate way to put the best 8 teams in the tournament

That WHOOSH sound you just heard was the point of my OP going directly over your head.

[Penalty Shot]

Heres the basis of my format. Cures some of the ills of single A , AA. Private school public school.
Take the 4 finalist in each section A and AA and have them play opposite A2vs AA1, A1 vs AA2 ( Section 7 would have had Duluth East vs Virginia and Elk River vs Hibbing, with two winners advancing to St. Paul) and have a 16 team state tourney with the entire tourney ranked by the coaches of participating teams (1-15 you cannot vote for yourself). You would find a much stronger field with certain sections not being penalized for serious strength. Maybe you would have EP and Minnetonka playing for a semi final in state instead of a section final at Target Center.
I have an entire format to support the format and would be happy to share with anyone.
The tourney would be more profitable and you would have a much stronger field while allowing opportunity for deserving teams.