Wisconsin Fire Shut Down

[Quasar]

Well I have been having a bit of fun with some of you about how wound up everybody gets about this stuff. So in all honesty, I will share how I really feel:

If you are good, you will be found, regardless of the development model you are following.

If you possess the talent, drive and passion for the game, that above anything else will propel you to loftier heights. Persistence will get you further in academics, sports and life in general than anything else.

You don't need the Fire to succeed in youth hockey. It may make it easier because the program is close to you, but you don't need them. Now, if you lived in Kansas City, and the team folded, I would have a different opinion. But you live in what is arguably the hockey cradle of the US. There are other options.

If the young man's participation in high end hockey is that critical to the family structure, you could always move. People do it all the time. Now, I understand that's not an option for many due to any number of circumstances.

Look at it this way, with the Fire gone, other doors may now open, you just may have never looked for other doors.

You are correct except for the Wisconsin kids They needed the fire.
They may be close to the Cradle, but they are not allowed to sleep in it..
and for all practical purposes, they might as well be living in Kansas City.

As for the having fun part ..I'm up with that !!

[O-townClown]

You are correct except for the Wisconsin kids They needed the fire.

Now the claim is that the Unclassified AAA program that provided an opportunity for Minnesota youth players to escape their dreaded association was really there for the sliver of rostered players from Wisconsin? I've heard it all now.

Someone from these threads sent me a private message and we've had a back-and-forth discussion. I described your argument as a shell game. It is impossible to follow.

When asked for clarification on any point you direct attention elsewhere. Somehow you construe a bona fide request for clarification as denigrating.

These oppressed, downtrodden souls from Wisconsin will have no problems. In part for the reasons Lord Balty mentioned, and also because the Wisconsin affiliate has proven to be very accomodating. I don't know what form it will take, but if there is a movement requesting consideration it sure seems they'll get it. No idea what form it takes, whether cooperative teams, regional all-star teams to compete at an appropriate level, Tournament rosters like the Southeast, some kind of before/after like Team Wisconsin for the older kids, or something else.

And if there is nothing else and the kids are that good, they'll have plenty of opportunities to play in the unregulated off-season. The best kid representing Minnesota last year at the Brick is from Luverne. How does that happen? The core premise of your argument is that it can't; kids will be irreparably harmed if they aren't playing with other very good players.

You've got A (where we are now) and you've described Z (Minnesota will have in-season Tier I hockey soon). For all anyone knows, you might be right. The problem is that you cannot explain B to C, let alone all the way through to Y.

Andy Walser sponsored teams at Minnesota Made. Minnesota is going to have Tier I hockey in 2012-13! Sorry if I feel I'm missing something here. I'm not alone.

For all we know, maybe he simply said 'yes' when asked to provide jerseys. My son skates in my old jerseys. One is First Bank Systems and the other is Country Club Markets. Other businesses I remember sponsoring youth programs were realtors and Kemp's. Sponsoring a team hardly qualifies as MAHA changing a core tenet.

Until you can fill in the lines here you are just sharing opinions. No problem, but you've expressed it as fact. Oh, there I go again...leading you to dig up the unnamed, anonymous source. No problem with having one of those, only when you don't share what they've said and act like there's rampant ignorance for not hearing the same.

Forgot to mention how noble it is of you to speak for those you don't know that are simply to busy to represent themselves. Proof that people can rationalize anything they do.

[JSR]

Well I have been having a bit of fun with some of you about how wound up everybody gets about this stuff. So in all honesty, I will share how I really feel:

If you are good, you will be found, regardless of the development model you are following.

If you possess the talent, drive and passion for the game, that above anything else will propel you to loftier heights. Persistence will get you further in academics, sports and life in general than anything else.

You don't need the Fire to succeed in youth hockey. It may make it easier because the program is close to you, but you don't need them. Now, if you lived in Kansas City, and the team folded, I would have a different opinion. But you live in what is arguably the hockey cradle of the US. There are other options.

If the young man's participation in high end hockey is that critical to the family structure, you could always move. People do it all the time. Now, I understand that's not an option for many due to any number of circumstances.

Look at it this way, with the Fire gone, other doors may now open, you just may have never looked for other doors.

You are correct except for the Wisconsin kids They needed the fire.
They may be close to the Cradle, but they are not allowed to sleep in it..
and for all practical purposes, they might as well be living in Kansas City.

As for the having fun part ..I'm up with that !!

I disagree with you on the WI kids thing. There is always a way. We are part of a small association and our coaching depth (coaching talent wise) is not any deeper than hose up north Wisconsin kids. We have AAA options available to us within driving distance in both WI and Illinois. We choose not to pursue them because I have found my sons are able to keep pace and be just as good as any of them (better half the time), without needing to spend that money and drive all over the place. We do creative things like Sunday 3on3 where the best area kids are invited to play high level tournament style 3on3 on Sunday late afternoons. (If a kid was willing to play for the Fire he is willing to do this, and trust me they do it gladly and thank you for it too). We also supplement association practice with skating lessons, pond hockey and dryland training. He plays for a AAA team in the spring/summer as well. All told he is better than over half of the kids who play for the area Tier 1 teams and my out of pocket cost is half (or a fifth compared to Illinois teams) of what the Tier 1 kids are playing. Yes I have to commit my time (but I get to be with my kids so it's not a problem) but those folks up north have every opportunity to do those exact same things as i do down here. You just have to be creative and willing to put in a little sweat labor yourself instead of just paying someone else to do it for you. You may not like the choice but please don't act like there are not any choices. And the best part is, he still gets to play with his friends while also developing just fine. My point is the Fire was nice, and I am sorry they are gone, but they were not "needed" anymore than you "need" air conditioningin your house. It is a luxury, not a necessity for getting to where you want to go.

[interestedbystander]

Well I have been having a bit of fun with some of you about how wound up everybody gets about this stuff. So in all honesty, I will share how I really feel:

If you are good, you will be found, regardless of the development model you are following.

If you possess the talent, drive and passion for the game, that above anything else will propel you to loftier heights. Persistence will get you further in academics, sports and life in general than anything else.

I agree only to a point. Read the book Outliers sometime here is a synopsis:

The book begins with Gladwell's research on why a disproportionate number of elite Canadian hockey players are born in the first few months of the calendar year. The answer, he points out, is that since youth hockey leagues determine eligibility by calendar year, children born on January 1 play in the same league as those born on December 31 in the same year. Because children born earlier in the year are bigger and maturer than their younger competitors, they are often identified as better athletes, leading to extra coaching and a higher likelihood of being selected for elite hockey leagues. This phenomenon in which "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is dubbed "accumulative advantage" by Gladwell, while sociologist Robert K. Merton calls it "the Matthew Effect", named after a biblical verse in the Gospel of Matthew: "For unto everyone that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance. But from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath."[7] Outliers asserts that success depends on the idiosyncrasies of the selection process used to identify talent just as much as it does on the athletes' natural abilities.[7]

That is why all kids should have a choice...so that they can get away from diseased programs, and have the opportunity to skate in the Advanced 15's (because they don't look at B players), and try to keep up with those with an "accumulative advantage", before it is too late.

[O-townClown]

I agree only to a point. Read the book Outliers sometime here is a synopsis:

IBS:

Type "relative age effect on youth soccer" and you're bound to get some old papers written about the same phenomenon in Europe. Gladwell's newer version has a better wrapper I guess.

When applying the science to youth hockey, I find most parents don't get it right. The premise he lays out is that your Nov-Dec borns get cut from teams they would have made as Jan-Febs and don't get the same opportunities and same coaching. I am having a hard time following which group of kids we're talking about, so my apologies if I have the wrong group.

Using Outliers logic, we don't have to worry about the kids from small associations in Minnesota and Western Wisconsin. These are the kids that 'need' the Fire depending on who is arguing what point. We should worry about the kids from Edina, Eden Prairie, and Wayzata that are making C teams as a 1st year and B2 as a second. Had they been a month younger they would be B2 players as a 1st year and quite possibly A players as a second.

Part of the story is that when you watch a game the older kids tend to do better, but the real crux of his point is that the younger ones may not make it to the ages where the relative age effect has worn off...typically post-puberty in the late teens.

[the_juiceman]

WAHA killed the unclassified status classification. That is the reason the Fire had to fold.

I'm confused. I thought it was the evil Minnesaota Mega associations that forced this down everybody's throat?

The Minnesota Rule:
Minnesota hockey will approve an interstate waiver request from one of its resident players provided that the player will be participating in a program classified as Tier 1 by a USA Hockey Affiliate and Minnesota Hockey does not offer such a program.

The Wisconsin Rule
Interstate Player Transfer Protocol: The Wisconsin Amateur Hockey Assn., Inc. (WAHA), a duly registered affiliate of USA Hockey, requires that any player who resides in another state and wishes to play hockey with a team in the WAHA program, without changing his/her residence to Wisconsin, must first obtain a properly executed waiver from the player’s resident state.

I believe the argument is that WAHA would not grant Tier 1 status to the Wisconsin Fire. Then they discontinued the “Unclassified” status. Based on the rules of WAHA,, and MNH that’s the end of a program that provided a place for kids from Minnesota a chance to play Tier 1 hockey


Not evil....If your not involved... Why did they have to be shut down? Who were they hurting?

Evil if your established business of many years is terminated because someone some where didn't like what you were doing.

You could make the case that monopolies are evil...

Me... I just think it's sad to see them go

if MH as a rule that to play out of state they must play with a Tier 1 level team--and the Fire was Unclassified--then how could any MN kids get a waiver to play on the Fire?

[crazyhorse]

Well I have been having a bit of fun with some of you about how wound up everybody gets about this stuff. So in all honesty, I will share how I really feel:

If you are good, you will be found, regardless of the development model you are following.

If you possess the talent, drive and passion for the game, that above anything else will propel you to loftier heights. Persistence will get you further in academics, sports and life in general than anything else.

I agree only to a point. Read the book Outliers sometime here is a synopsis:

The book begins with Gladwell's research on why a disproportionate number of elite Canadian hockey players are born in the first few months of the calendar year. The answer, he points out, is that since youth hockey leagues determine eligibility by calendar year, children born on January 1 play in the same league as those born on December 31 in the same year. Because children born earlier in the year are bigger and maturer than their younger competitors, they are often identified as better athletes, leading to extra coaching and a higher likelihood of being selected for elite hockey leagues. This phenomenon in which "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is dubbed "accumulative advantage" by Gladwell, while sociologist Robert K. Merton calls it "the Matthew Effect", named after a biblical verse in the Gospel of Matthew: "For unto everyone that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance. But from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath."[7] Outliers asserts that success depends on the idiosyncrasies of the selection process used to identify talent just as much as it does on the athletes' natural abilities.[7]

That is why all kids should have a choice...so that they can get away from diseased programs, and have the opportunity to skate in the Advanced 15's (because they don't look at B players), and try to keep up with those with an "accumulative advantage", before it is too late.

One thing to think about in the outliers example is that those born from January-June in MH Hockey are always very young players in the two year window at each level. A first year peewee born in June is two years younger that the oldest of the group and as a second year is still a year younger than the oldest. Even a player with elite skills would find this to be a difficult situation in which to play. As a Tier I player, they play with only their birth year and are thus older players in this group which allows for potentially better development due to age, size, maturity. MH should allow elite players the ability to participate in this type of situation and travel to Quebec, Toronto, etc... to play with and against other talented players from other regions versus just Minnesota IMO.

MH and others truly have their head in the sand. Many of these Tier I teams have evolved into great development machines. Check out the website of the Chicago Mission. http://www.chicagomission.com/ Their program consists of a high commitment level by the parents and players, and yes, it costs more than our associations fees but they are much more advanced than many of our associations. Our smaller association teams consist of many A players that don't shoot a puck or work on hockey development at all through the summer. There should be a place for those with a high commitment level in the winter...why is it that most of us have to find it in the summer with some of the AAA programs out there? There is great hockey out there in the winter and we can't even experience it. Small associations with an elite player or two have a difficult time even coming up with practice plans to develop the skills of those on the team. They are either too watered down for the better players or too difficult for the bubble players that made it.

[scoreandscoreoften]

I'm confused. I thought it was the evil Minnesaota Mega associations that forced this down everybody's throat?

The Minnesota Rule:
Minnesota hockey will approve an interstate waiver request from one of its resident players provided that the player will be participating in a program classified as Tier 1 by a USA Hockey Affiliate and Minnesota Hockey does not offer such a program.

The Wisconsin Rule
Interstate Player Transfer Protocol: The Wisconsin Amateur Hockey Assn., Inc. (WAHA), a duly registered affiliate of USA Hockey, requires that any player who resides in another state and wishes to play hockey with a team in the WAHA program, without changing his/her residence to Wisconsin, must first obtain a properly executed waiver from the player’s resident state.

I believe the argument is that WAHA would not grant Tier 1 status to the Wisconsin Fire. Then they discontinued the “Unclassified” status. Based on the rules of WAHA,, and MNH that’s the end of a program that provided a place for kids from Minnesota a chance to play Tier 1 hockey


Not evil....If your not involved... Why did they have to be shut down? Who were they hurting?

Evil if your established business of many years is terminated because someone some where didn't like what you were doing.

You could make the case that monopolies are evil...

Me... I just think it's sad to see them go

if MH as a rule that to play out of state they must play with a Tier 1 level team--and the Fire was Unclassified--then how could any MN kids get a waiver to play on the Fire?

Good question! I believe with the change to "unclassified" status, (which MH offers) that all age groups needed to apply for waivers from their associations. Some of these kids haven't played for their associations for quite a while, and may not of applied or received waivers. They thought the Fire team would be there until they enter high school. If so, some may find roadblocks when trying to go back. I know that some associations and districts can be very strict when applying the rules when they want to. On the other hand, some may welcome these kids back with open arms. It should be interesting.

[InigoMontoya]

Is a waiver a one-time event, or doesn a waiver need to be granted every year?

[old goalie85]

Hudson, River-falls, & sommerset, all play in D2 now. That should give some of those kids some competition!!!

[frederick61]

Hudson, River-falls, & sommerset, all play in D2 now. That should give some of those kids some competition!!!

It this true?

If Wisconsin team plays in a Minnesota league, then they match Minnesota’s two year age window for each team entered. That makes the Wisconsin teams that play in Minnesota Districts ineligible for the Wisconsin State Tourneys. Three Wisconsin Associations (Superior, Hudson, and Onalaska/La Cross) formed teams based on Minnesota’s approach. The rest of Wisconsin associations field USA Tier II peewee teams (single year window) and play about 30 games against modest competition.

Hudson is interesting because I don’t know if the association is rated by USA Hockey and I don’t know if they have teams that play USA Hockey and Minnesota Hockey. But the interest in Raider hockey seems to be there.

In the past few years, Hudson has improved their facilities significantly. And in the past five years, the association has always fielded a tough peewee A team with a short bench. They placed in the top five in D8 two years ago in a 12-team league edging out Farmington and Lakeville North, teams that went to state and regionals last year. Then last year the Raiders placed third in D2 beating White Bear Lake, Mahtomedi, and Tartan teams that made the North Regional tourney.

As a side note, Hudson hosted the Peewee International Friendship Games in Hudson from June 15-24th. Teams from Australia and New Zealand played. I wanted to get over there to watch some games, but couldn’t.

Also this year will be the first year of the US Woman’s Junior Hockey League. Six teams from Wisconsin, Minnesota, and North Dakota are entered in the league. The Wisconsin Pride teams looks like it will be run out of Hudson. Hockey is where you find it.

[Quasar]

Association Vote Results
07/22/2011, 5:48am (CDT)
By Communications Committee

Thank you to all the members that voted on the Proposed Age Cutoff Date Change.

The proposal was approved. HHA will change from the current June 30th cutoff date to the December 31st cutoff date thus returning the Hudson Hockey Association (HHA) back to the USA Hockey and the Wisconsin Amateur Hockey Association (WAHA) age categories, starting this 2011-12 season.

APPROVE - 78
REJECT - 32
BLANK - 1

Hi Fred and OG,
Look's like Hudson is back in the WAHA fold. The other Wisconsin associations never were in D2 like Hudson.. There is a document with the pros and cons before the vote. worth the time to read. It's on the Hudson web site

[frederick61]

Association Vote Results


Hi Fred and OG,
Look's like Hudson is back in the WAHA fold. The other Wisconsin associations never were in D2 like Hudson.. There is a document with the pros and cons before the vote. worth the time to read. It's on the Hudson web site

I went to their web site and from a peewee A perspective disagree with their decision, but I can't comment about the Associations overall rational since they must think about all their teams, not just the peewee A team.

Last year, the Hudson peewee A team played 16 game D2 schedule, won a number of tournaments and played more games and tougher competition then they will see in the WAHA. But from a WAHA perspective, it is a good thing since it will add competition for the existing association teams. If I remember correctly, last year, Eau Claire had to play only one other team to gain the WAHA peewee A tourney. My guess is that Hudson's peewee A level team this coming year will cost more and play less games against less competitive teams.

I believe that in the future, Minnesota Hockey should "regionalize" their brand of hockey. It produces what the USA Hockey is trying to produce by effectively combining in Minnesota what USA Hockey calls Tier I/II.

Minnesota Hockey needs to form a committee to explore how to combine with North and South Dakota to expand and create regional competition. If they did, I believe the Hudson Wisconsin's would want to join.

[Quasar]

Association Vote Results


Hi Fred and OG,
Look's like Hudson is back in the WAHA fold. The other Wisconsin associations never were in D2 like Hudson.. There is a document with the pros and cons before the vote. worth the time to read. It's on the Hudson web site

I went to their web site and from a peewee A perspective disagree with their decision, but I can't comment about the Associations overall rational since they must think about all their teams, not just the peewee A team.

Last year, the Hudson peewee A team played 16 game D2 schedule, won a number of tournaments and played more games and tougher competition then they will see in the WAHA. But from a WAHA perspective, it is a good thing since it will add competition for the existing association teams. If I remember correctly, last year, Eau Claire had to play only one other team to gain the WAHA peewee A tourney. My guess is that Hudson's peewee A level team this coming year will cost more and play less games against less competitive teams.

I believe that in the future, Minnesota Hockey should "regionalize" their brand of hockey. It produces what the USA Hockey is trying to produce by effectively combining in Minnesota what USA Hockey calls Tier I/II.

Minnesota Hockey needs to form a committee to explore how to combine with North and South Dakota to expand and create regional competition. If they did, I believe the Hudson Wisconsin's would want to join.

Amen to the Nd/Sd. I would like to see something like that expanded to incorporate all the border communities. North, South, East, and West.
The Hudson peewee team competed well in Dist 2. They finished 3rd in a fairly tough Dist. The Other teams not so much. I don't think the Bantam A team won a game. Not Good.

If a kid in Somerset wants to take the five minute drive to Stillwater to play hockey, Why not? Same in Fargo, Worthington, Superior or any where else. It would be nice if these choices could be made with out every ones apple cart being upset.

[greybeard58]

In reading the Mn Hockey Summer meeting rules report there was on the last page a proposed change to the Inter state waiver, seems there were a number of problems last year. Here is the page read the last line towards the bottom. I believe this passed.

Changes To Inter-Affiliate Player Transfer Protocol
1. The Inter-Affiliate Player Transfer Protocol was intended to establish a "standard"which we hoped others would adopt. Unfortunately, a nearby USAH Affiliate chooses not to follow any protocol in registering Minnesota players. It seems unfair to force players from that Affiliate to follow our rigorous process if their Affiliate does not reciprocate with our players. Accordingly, it is proposed to add language waiving the requirement to follow the Protocol when dealing with players from non-compliant
Affiliates.
MINNESOTA HOCKEY
Inter-Affiliate Player Transfer Protocol
Minnesota Hockey, Inc., a duly registered affiliate of USA Hockey, requires that any player who resides in
another state and wishes to play hockey with a team in the Minnesota Hockey program, without changing
his/her residence to Minnesota, must first obtain a properly executed waiver from the player’s resident
state.
Conversely, Minnesota Hockey requires that any Minnesota resident wishing to play hockey in another
state, while remaining a resident of Minnesota, must first obtain a properly executed waiver from
Minnesota Hockey, Inc.
This protocol is consistent with the terms and conditions of the USA Hockey Affiliate Agreement that
grants each affiliate the right of “exclusive jurisdiction” within its geographical boundaries.
The Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors will designate one person who will act upon all interstate waiver
requests from those who submit them, using the following criteria:
1. This protocol applies to Youth and Girls programs that are conducted during the Minnesota
Hockey “regular season”, which extends from the date players are permitted to register for a given
your through the end of the Minnesota Hockey Youth/Girls State Tournaments in March. Thos
players in the Adult or Women classifications are excluded from this protocol.
2. Prior to submitting a request for transfer, all players must first register with their resident state. For
players coming into Minnesota, an approved waiver from the player’s resident state must be
obtained, then submitted to and approved by the Minnesota Hockey designee before the player
may be placed on a Minnesota Hockey team roster.
3. Minnesota Hockey will accept approved players from another state who wish to play in Minnesota
because the state in which they reside does not offer a program similar to those offered in
Minnesota.
4. Minnesota hockey will approve an interstate waiver request from one of its resident players
provided that the player will be participating in a program classified as Tier 1 by a USA Hockey
Affiliate and Minnesota Hockey does not offer such a program.
5. Transfer of players who live in contiguous border communities, and desire an interstate residency
waiver based upon geographical proximity of their residence, will be considered on a case-by-case
basis. Approval of such requests will not be unreasonably withheld.

6. If another USAH Affiliate elects not to follow this Protocol, Minnesota Hockey may acceptplayers from that Affiliate without following this Protocol.

[Quasar]

In reading the Mn Hockey Summer meeting rules report there was on the last page a proposed change to the Inter state waiver, seems there were a number of problems last year. Here is the page read the last line towards the bottom. I believe this passed.

Changes To Inter-Affiliate Player Transfer Protocol
1. The Inter-Affiliate Player Transfer Protocol was intended to establish a "standard"which we hoped others would adopt. Unfortunately, a nearby USAH Affiliate chooses not to follow any protocol in registering Minnesota players. It seems unfair to force players from that Affiliate to follow our rigorous process if their Affiliate does not reciprocate with our players. Accordingly, it is proposed to add language waiving the requirement to follow the Protocol when dealing with players from non-compliant
Affiliates.
MINNESOTA HOCKEY
Inter-Affiliate Player Transfer Protocol
Minnesota Hockey, Inc., a duly registered affiliate of USA Hockey, requires that any player who resides in
another state and wishes to play hockey with a team in the Minnesota Hockey program, without changing
his/her residence to Minnesota, must first obtain a properly executed waiver from the player’s resident
state.
Conversely, Minnesota Hockey requires that any Minnesota resident wishing to play hockey in another
state, while remaining a resident of Minnesota, must first obtain a properly executed waiver from
Minnesota Hockey, Inc.
This protocol is consistent with the terms and conditions of the USA Hockey Affiliate Agreement that
grants each affiliate the right of “exclusive jurisdiction” within its geographical boundaries.
The Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors will designate one person who will act upon all interstate waiver
requests from those who submit them, using the following criteria:
1. This protocol applies to Youth and Girls programs that are conducted during the Minnesota
Hockey “regular season”, which extends from the date players are permitted to register for a given
your through the end of the Minnesota Hockey Youth/Girls State Tournaments in March. Thos
players in the Adult or Women classifications are excluded from this protocol.
2. Prior to submitting a request for transfer, all players must first register with their resident state. For
players coming into Minnesota, an approved waiver from the player’s resident state must be
obtained, then submitted to and approved by the Minnesota Hockey designee before the player
may be placed on a Minnesota Hockey team roster.
3. Minnesota Hockey will accept approved players from another state who wish to play in Minnesota
because the state in which they reside does not offer a program similar to those offered in
Minnesota.
4. Minnesota hockey will approve an interstate waiver request from one of its resident players
provided that the player will be participating in a program classified as Tier 1 by a USA Hockey
Affiliate and Minnesota Hockey does not offer such a program.
5. Transfer of players who live in contiguous border communities, and desire an interstate residency
waiver based upon geographical proximity of their residence, will be considered on a case-by-case
basis. Approval of such requests will not be unreasonably withheld.

6. If another USAH Affiliate elects not to follow this Protocol, Minnesota Hockey may acceptplayers from that Affiliate without following this Protocol.

Greybeard,
Do you know who they are talking about?

[greybeard58]

I have not heard who was the reason for the change.

[frederick61]

I have not heard who was the reason for the change.

Could D16, D15, D4 petition Minnesota Hockey to allow Grand Forks, Fargo, and Sioux Falls teams that participate in their regular season play be allowed to play in their district playoffs and be allowed to advance if they win?

This could be done as an experiment for a few years and North Dakota/South Dakota could still have their state tourneys.

[Quasar]

I have not heard who was the reason for the change.

Could D16, D15, D4 petition Minnesota Hockey to allow Grand Forks, Fargo, and Sioux Falls teams that participate in their regular season play be allowed to play in their district playoffs and be allowed to advance if they win?

This could be done as an experiment for a few years and North Dakota/South Dakota could still have their state tourneys.

If I understand what your saying, the teams you mentioned play with the Minnesota teams in their area. Then if they win they could be in the Minnesota State tournament? They have to make that choice at the beginning of the season? I believe that hockey should be played with out a lot of interference from "the regulators" I would like to know more about the situation with North and South Dakota. Would you spell it out for me? Thank's Q

[frederick61]

I have not heard who was the reason for the change.

Could D16, D15, D4 petition Minnesota Hockey to allow Grand Forks, Fargo, and Sioux Falls teams that participate in their regular season play be allowed to play in their district playoffs and be allowed to advance if they win?

This could be done as an experiment for a few years and North Dakota/South Dakota could still have their state tourneys.

If I understand what your saying, the teams you mentioned play with the Minnesota teams in their area. Then if they win they could be in the Minnesota State tournament? They have to make that choice at the beginning of the season? I believe that hockey should be played with out a lot of interference from "the regulators" I would like to know more about the situation with North and South Dakota. Would you spell it out for me? Thank's Q

My view is always focused at the peewee level simply because it is one of the drivers in youth hockey organizationally as well as in player development. As an observer at the rinks watching all sorts of peewee teams play including teams from North and South Dakota, this is what I believe is happening.

D16 hockey is shrinking as the more remote associations struggle over loss of numbers and lack of competition. Moorhead has become too dominant in D15 to the point that last year other D15 teams forfeited their games rather then play the Spuds. D15 needs a competitive "shot in the arm". D4 needs teams at the peewee A level and better competition at the B level and need to find those teams in reasonable driving distance.

So lets hypothesize what could be achieved if it were allowed at the peewee level.

In D16, 7 associations (Bemidji, Warroad, Roseau, TRF, Red Lake Falls, East Grand Forks and Crookston) fielded A level teams last year. Hallock and LOW did not. Grand Fork last year fielded two A1 teams (Seawolves and Greyhounds) and one A2 team (Golden Eagles). Devils Lake and Grafton also fielded A level teams.

Two new D16 leagues could be formed (A and a B1/A2). The A league could have Bemidji, Warroad, Roseau, TRF, East Grand Forks, Crookston, Grand Forks Seawolves, Grand Fork Greyhounds and a Devils Lake or Grafton (or both). That would provide the A-level teams a solid 16-game schedule with good competition for all the teams and shorten driving distance by doubling up on weekends. The Grand Forks and East Grand Forks teams would only be separated by one bridge.

The North Dakota teams entered in D16 and playing a regular D16 schedule would be eligible for D16 playoffs and would be eligible to advance to the regionals as outlined in the current Minnesota Hockey handbook.

Teams like Hallock, LOW, Red Lake Falls, and Grand Forks Golden Eagles can bounce between the A/B levels based on their talent for that year and play either B1 or A leagues, but the B1 level of competition would be tougher and would provide for better player development and more games in a reasonable driving distance.

Moorhead and Fargo are also separated by a bridge. Last year, Moorhead fielded an A and an A2 team. Those two teams played in D15 with Alexandria, Brainerd, Detroit Lakes, Northern Lakes, Little Falls, and Fergus Falls. Prairie Centre (Sauk Centre and Long Prairie), Wadena, and Park Rapids played A in the previous years.

Fargo had two peewee A Flyer teams (Gold and Black), two West Fargo teams, the Fargo Angels and the Fargo Raiders.

I could see two strong, competitive, leagues (A/B1-A1) formed in D15 also. The A level could end up with Alexandria, Moorhead Black, Brainerd, Detroit Lakes, Fargo Gold, Fargo Angels, West Fargo and Fargo Raiders and a 16 game regular season schedule. Associations like Little Falls, Prairie Centre, Park Rapids and Wadena could combine with the Fargo A2 teams (Fargo Black, West Fargo, etc) to form a competitive B1/A2 league.

D4 sits in the southwest corner of Minnesota and had three D4 teams at the A-level last year (Marshall, Redwood Falls, and Luverne). There are three South Dakota border towns that played peewee A last year (Sioux Falls, Brookings and Watertown). There is also an I-90 corridor of D4 associations to the east of Luverne (Worthington, Windom, and Fairmont). D4 also has an associate agreement with Mason City Iowa.

If you use Watertown, Redwood Falls, Fairmont and Sioux Falls as points on a square on a map, the distance on a single side would be 100 miles, corner to corner would be 200 miles.

The potential D4 league would be Sioux Falls, Luverne, Marshall, Redwood Falls, Brookings, Watertown and Mason City. That would yield a 12-game season. The D4 B1 level would have Luverne, Sioux Falls, Redwood Falls, Marshall, Fairmont, Worthington, Windom, Brookings, and Watertown.

This arrangement would fix a number of problems with D16, D15, and D4. D16 has struggled to keep A level team numbers around seven teams. The D16 better teams (four to six) are quality teams and tend to dominate the weaker teams to the extend the weaker team’s associations could start to fail; and the weaker association teams need a better competition fit at the B1 level to improve their programs. North Dakota’s economy is starting to boom and they will have increased interest in the sport and will be looking for better competition.

D15 has been dominated by Moorhead and the addition of the Fargo teams will create better competition for all teams involved. D15 tends to let the weaker associations opt out late between A and B levels (a team will be entered at the A level and drop to the B level as late as December 1). The addition of the Fargo teams will provide those associations better competition at that B1/A2 level.

Finally D4 needs more teams to get their regular season on track. Last year, Marshall and Redwood Falls played a guest D5 schedule and Luverne played a guest D4 schedule. They could have a seven team A league and a larger more competitive B1 league.

Finally, why would North and South Dakota associations want to play Minnesota Hockey? They also need the regular season competition (a 12-16 game schedule plus a 14-16 game North Dakota or South Dakota Hockey Schedule) would give the teams a 45-55 regular season games.

But the big plus would be the year end opportunity to play in the Minnesota A and B tourneys.

The other question to be answered is would the bantams and girls youth hockey levels benefit? My guess is it would for the same reasons, more games, more competitive games, played closer to home.

[Quasar]

Could D16, D15, D4 petition Minnesota Hockey to allow Grand Forks, Fargo, and Sioux Falls teams that participate in their regular season play be allowed to play in their district playoffs and be allowed to advance if they win?

This could be done as an experiment for a few years and North Dakota/South Dakota could still have their state tourneys.

If I understand what your saying, the teams you mentioned play with the Minnesota teams in their area. Then if they win they could be in the Minnesota State tournament? They have to make that choice at the beginning of the season? I believe that hockey should be played with out a lot of interference from "the regulators" I would like to know more about the situation with North and South Dakota. Would you spell it out for me? Thank's Q

My view is always focused at the peewee level simply because it is one of the drivers in youth hockey organizationally as well as in player development. As an observer at the rinks watching all sorts of peewee teams play including teams from North and South Dakota, this is what I believe is happening.

D16 hockey is shrinking as the more remote associations struggle over loss of numbers and lack of competition. Moorhead has become too dominant in D15 to the point that last year other D15 teams forfeited their games rather then play the Spuds. D15 needs a competitive "shot in the arm". D4 needs teams at the peewee A level and better competition at the B level and need to find those teams in reasonable driving distance.

So lets hypothesize what could be achieved if it were allowed at the peewee level.

In D16, 7 associations (Bemidji, Warroad, Roseau, TRF, Red Lake Falls, East Grand Forks and Crookston) fielded A level teams last year. Hallock and LOW did not. Grand Fork last year fielded two A1 teams (Seawolves and Greyhounds) and one A2 team (Golden Eagles). Devils Lake and Grafton also fielded A level teams.

Two new D16 leagues could be formed (A and a B1/A2). The A league could have Bemidji, Warroad, Roseau, TRF, East Grand Forks, Crookston, Grand Forks Seawolves, Grand Fork Greyhounds and a Devils Lake or Grafton (or both). That would provide the A-level teams a solid 16-game schedule with good competition for all the teams and shorten driving distance by doubling up on weekends. The Grand Forks and East Grand Forks teams would only be separated by one bridge.

The North Dakota teams entered in D16 and playing a regular D16 schedule would be eligible for D16 playoffs and would be eligible to advance to the regionals as outlined in the current Minnesota Hockey handbook.

Teams like Hallock, LOW, Red Lake Falls, and Grand Forks Golden Eagles can bounce between the A/B levels based on their talent for that year and play either B1 or A leagues, but the B1 level of competition would be tougher and would provide for better player development and more games in a reasonable driving distance.

Moorhead and Fargo are also separated by a bridge. Last year, Moorhead fielded an A and an A2 team. Those two teams played in D15 with Alexandria, Brainerd, Detroit Lakes, Northern Lakes, Little Falls, and Fergus Falls. Prairie Centre (Sauk Centre and Long Prairie), Wadena, and Park Rapids played A in the previous years.

Fargo had two peewee A Flyer teams (Gold and Black), two West Fargo teams, the Fargo Angels and the Fargo Raiders.

I could see two strong, competitive, leagues (A/B1-A1) formed in D15 also. The A level could end up with Alexandria, Moorhead Black, Brainerd, Detroit Lakes, Fargo Gold, Fargo Angels, West Fargo and Fargo Raiders and a 16 game regular season schedule. Associations like Little Falls, Prairie Centre, Park Rapids and Wadena could combine with the Fargo A2 teams (Fargo Black, West Fargo, etc) to form a competitive B1/A2 league.

D4 sits in the southwest corner of Minnesota and had three D4 teams at the A-level last year (Marshall, Redwood Falls, and Luverne). There are three South Dakota border towns that played peewee A last year (Sioux Falls, Brookings and Watertown). There is also an I-90 corridor of D4 associations to the east of Luverne (Worthington, Windom, and Fairmont). D4 also has an associate agreement with Mason City Iowa.

If you use Watertown, Redwood Falls, Fairmont and Sioux Falls as points on a square on a map, the distance on a single side would be 100 miles, corner to corner would be 200 miles.

The potential D4 league would be Sioux Falls, Luverne, Marshall, Redwood Falls, Brookings, Watertown and Mason City. That would yield a 12-game season. The D4 B1 level would have Luverne, Sioux Falls, Redwood Falls, Marshall, Fairmont, Worthington, Windom, Brookings, and Watertown.

This arrangement would fix a number of problems with D16, D15, and D4. D16 has struggled to keep A level team numbers around seven teams. The D16 better teams (four to six) are quality teams and tend to dominate the weaker teams to the extend the weaker team’s associations could start to fail; and the weaker association teams need a better competition fit at the B1 level to improve their programs. North Dakota’s economy is starting to boom and they will have increased interest in the sport and will be looking for better competition.

D15 has been dominated by Moorhead and the addition of the Fargo teams will create better competition for all teams involved. D15 tends to let the weaker associations opt out late between A and B levels (a team will be entered at the A level and drop to the B level as late as December 1). The addition of the Fargo teams will provide those associations better competition at that B1/A2 level.

Finally D4 needs more teams to get their regular season on track. Last year, Marshall and Redwood Falls played a guest D5 schedule and Luverne played a guest D4 schedule. They could have a seven team A league and a larger more competitive B1 league.

Finally, why would North and South Dakota associations want to play Minnesota Hockey? They also need the regular season competition (a 12-16 game schedule plus a 14-16 game North Dakota or South Dakota Hockey Schedule) would give the teams a 45-55 regular season games.

But the big plus would be the year end opportunity to play in the Minnesota A and B tourneys.

The other question to be answered is would the bantams and girls youth hockey levels benefit? My guess is it would for the same reasons, more games, more competitive games, played closer to home.

Wow !!
Thank you for taking the time to explain the situation. I hope something can be done to provide quality hockey for the most participants. I also think Peewee is where it all starts. I wish everyone was as concerned about all the kids as you seem to be.

In depth analysis what a concept!! Thanks again Q

[greybeard58]

Fred,
Mason City plays a home and home series with both D9 and D4 teams. I found the schedules for the A Squirt and B Bantam the A and B Peewee schedules were not posted.

[Hard water fan]

Marshall creates new program:
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/ ... up/sports/

[Deep Breath]

Jerry DeMeo, a volunteer secretary-treasurer for Minnesota Hockey, said the organization’s primary goal is to ensure every hockey player has the opportunity to play. And since the Duluth Girls Hockey Association, as a branch of DAHA, already provides those opportunities, DeMeo says it was a moot point.

“Minnesota Hockey has no reason to take any action,” he said. “If DAHA chooses not to endorse a team, the only way Minnesota Hockey would get involved is if that meant there was no opportunity for those kids to play.”


What bothers me about this is that instead of the governing bodies asking themselves "Why would these people want to start up a team like this. What are they not getting from their association experience?', they simply say "there is already hockey for them, so we're not gonna even waste our time with it."

Perhaps instead of stuffing their heads in the sand, or ice so-to-speak, and thinking that the way things are is the best way because that's the way they have always been done, maybe they should actually listen to people or better yet, ask a question or two as to why there is even a need for a team like this to be formed.

[Hard water fan]

SPOT ON DEEP! Jump to the girl's HS forum if you want to read more...