A & AA classification starting at Pee Wee in 2012-13

[crazyhorse]

The thing that stinks with this set-up and even the way MH Hockey is set up today is that the 1-4 "A" level players playing on an "A" team in smaller or weaker communities get pummeled by the big boys all year long. They are held hostage to their "home" association due to residency rules and now they will not be able to play versus the top players across the state in the playoffs. Development of these type of players is already hindered and now it would be even more. Wish all the true "A" players could play with those at their level of play somehow.

Only if the hockey world could be perfect and everyone that plays with your son is as good as him

Only have a daughter, thank you. Just posting what I have seen out there. How is the development for an "A" caliber player on a team getting beat by double digits working out? I guess they could move.

[MrBoDangles]

Just heard about this "AA" designation so I had to bump this thread. When I first heard about this, it sounded to me like it would simply be a classification given to associations, and would change nothing at the team level. So Blaine for instance, would still field an A team at their top level, but would be considered an "AA" association so while they might play the Princeton A team during the district season, they would be separated for the state tourney (assuming Princeton is considered an A association).

If they are really talking about adding a new team level I personally think they dropped the ball.

Again to use District 10 as an example, Chisago Lakes did not field an A team at some levels last year (only B1, B2, and C). If an AA team level is added I imagine Chisago would field an A team but not an AA team and then what really changes??? Nothing. If they wanted to add another level they should have required all MN associations to adhere to the B1/ B2 classification (right now some districts just have B teams without the B1 or B2 designation).

Are they getting rid of the B1/ B2 designation or will some associations really field AA, A, B1, B2, and C teams??? If so I don't think it was needed or see the point.

Now there's some common sense... I tried bringing up the same points.

AA will become A
A will become B-1
B-1 will become B-2
B-2 will become C
No need for the C class now..

And then in a few years they'll try to call it AAA when they figure out nothing has changed.

Is the weed handed out at the door of these meetings?

[jBlaze3000]

Just heard about this "AA" designation so I had to bump this thread. When I first heard about this, it sounded to me like it would simply be a classification given to associations, and would change nothing at the team level. So Blaine for instance, would still field an A team at their top level, but would be considered an "AA" association so while they might play the Princeton A team during the district season, they would be separated for the state tourney (assuming Princeton is considered an A association).

If they are really talking about adding a new team level I personally think they dropped the ball.

Again to use District 10 as an example, Chisago Lakes did not field an A team at some levels last year (only B1, B2, and C). If an AA team level is added I imagine Chisago would field an A team but not an AA team and then what really changes??? Nothing. If they wanted to add another level they should have required all MN associations to adhere to the B1/ B2 classification (right now some districts just have B teams without the B1 or B2 designation).

Are they getting rid of the B1/ B2 designation or will some associations really field AA, A, B1, B2, and C teams??? If so I don't think it was needed or see the point.

Now there's some common sense... I tried bringing up the same points.

AA will become A
A will become B-1
B-1 will become B-2
B-2 will become C
No need for the C class now..

And then in a few years they'll try to call it AAA when they figure out nothing has changed.

Is the weed handed out at the door of these meetings?

Ha...sounds like this is a solution without a problem to me.

[Shinbone_News]

Ha ha ha. I see where you all are going with this, but the whole idea is simply to create a system that is parallel to the high school tiers. What is so hard to understand about this and why is it such a problem? Thataway, we double the number of A teams that play post-season tournaments. In season, they can play whomever they want.

Everyone except the most unrepentant crank agrees that two tiers has been great for high school hockey. (See Hockey Hub's recent interview with Mike Randolph for example.)

More kids playing high-pressure post-season games is good, IMO. Just like the high school system, you can opt up or down, you just have to commit for two years. Not sure if that's by association or by level. Probably the latter.

[MrBoDangles]

Ha ha ha. I see where you all are going with this, but the whole idea is simply to create a system that is parallel to the high school tiers. What is so hard to understand about this and why is it such a problem? Thataway, we double the number of A teams that play post-season tournaments. In season, they can play whomever they want.

Everyone except the most unrepentant crank agrees that two tiers has been great for high school hockey. (See Hockey Hub's recent interview with Mike Randolph for example.)

More kids playing high-pressure post-season games is good, IMO. Just like the high school system, you can opt up or down, you just have to commit for two years. Not sure if that's by association or by level. Probably the latter.

Will only turn Minnesota Hockey in to even more of an epic fail. When does a kid become dusted IN THIS SCENARIO when it comes to development?? When he's stuck in an A association, a B-1, or when an association only offers B-2 or C?

Nothing wil change, or the walls of MN Hockey are crumbling.... These are the only two results.

[jBlaze3000]

Ha ha ha. I see where you all are going with this, but the whole idea is simply to create a system that is parallel to the high school tiers. What is so hard to understand about this and why is it such a problem? Thataway, we double the number of A teams that play post-season tournaments. In season, they can play whomever they want.

Everyone except the most unrepentant crank agrees that two tiers has been great for high school hockey. (See Hockey Hub's recent interview with Mike Randolph for example.)

More kids playing high-pressure post-season games is good, IMO. Just like the high school system, you can opt up or down, you just have to commit for two years. Not sure if that's by association or by level. Probably the latter.

If they classify each association AA or A, and then within each association you keep the traditional A, B1, B2, C designations then that makes some sense. An A team from a class AA association can still play an A team from a class A association during the regular season but they would be in different tiers for the state tourney (much like how Warroad and Roseau HS play in the regular season even though they are in different classes).

If all you are doing is adding another level of team then I don't see how this makes sense. You are essentially just re-naming the team levels. Instead of an A and B state tourney you now have an AA and A state tourney with essentially the same teams. Correct me if I'm missing something.

[observer]

the whole idea is simply to create a system that is parallel to the high school tiers.

Except Youth Associations have nothing to do with high schools. Two entirely separate organizations.

I'm sure someone from Minnesota Hockey can come on the forum and explain why this makes so much sense and felt good to them. Wonder what other surprises will come from the fall meeting?

[fastncrash]

Explain how this benefits peewee kids and their development. This year, Eagan and Duluth East had top AA teams and their peewee A's were marginal at best. Those kids could develop by high school, but not by playing AA peewee against the Edinas. Sometimes kids need time to develop and the coaches behind this need to take a chill pill.

Your talking about 4-6 games not a whole season.

No, I am talking about 6th grade kids being compared to 12th grade kids. Why should a high school rule be applied to kids learning to play hockey? As most parents know, the 6th grade kids who are A will immediately feel less of a hockey player then kids who are AA. Further it will split the 100 or so peewee teams playing A level dramatically during playoffs.

At the District level playoffs, the each district will have to split their 5-13 or so A level teams into AA and A, the regionals would have to be replicated at some level just to get to two state tourneys unless one simply seeds the top AA teams into one AA tourney.

And how does this help the kids learn to play hockey? Please answer the question?

Has nothing to do with comparing kids at a certain age level against kids of another age level. Has little to do with development. It's about leveling the playing field (and competition) by POPULATION bases... and a little economic impact as well. Something the MSHSL figured out about 100 years ago, and MN Youth Hockey seemed oblivious to until just the past few years. After Rochester's PW(A?) "Rabbit in the Hat" trick last year, did anyone seriously think there wouldn't be changes coming after that? I'd guess there will be more.

[Shinbone_News]

I heard it directly from Minnesota Hockey last night at my district meeting: "The ONLY reason is to offer more kids the opportunity to play in the post-season." Just like two-tier did for high school hockey.

Saying youth hockey has nothing to do with high school hockey is patently ridiculous. The relationship drives 90% of the conversations on this board, it's why anyone is ever interested in "development" and "tier 1" alternatives, etc.

The other thing that was said: "It is a ONE YEAR PILOT program next year. If it sucks and everybody says so, then it will not be adapted."

I expect a bit of fireworks on this topic at the meeting this weekend.

[Shinbone_News]

If all you are doing is adding another level of team then I don't see how this makes sense. You are essentially just re-naming the team levels. Instead of an A and B state tourney you now have an AA and A state tourney with essentially the same teams. Correct me if I'm missing something.

There is one ADDITIONAL state tournament, due to the addition of a class. That's the simple answer.

There was some chatter that I found silly and confusing about allowing a B1 team to play the A tourneys if the association has just one A team but wants to play AA in the post season. Like I say, silly... confusing. If this sticks, larger associations will probably have two A teams and tier them (like Edina has done in the past?)

[frederick61]

I posted this before and thought it is worthwhile to post again

"The list below should provide some food for thought. It basically says that based on last March’s 32 peewee A regional teams, 21 would be AA teams and 11 would be A teams.

Of the 100 or so peewee A teams last year, 61 teams would be designated AA and the remaining 40 designated A. Based on last year’s high school designation, Dodge County, Sibley, St. Francis, MALM, and River Lakes peewee A teams would become AA teams. In addition peewee B teams Winona, Cottage Grove, North St. Paul, Cambridge/Isanti, and Becker/Big Lake would become peewee AA teams.

Nobody has answered the question as to how this move helps the 6th grade kid develop as a hockey player.

North Regional (3-AA teams and 5-A teams)
Grand Rapids-AA
Fergus Falls-A
Bemidji-AA
Virginia-A
Moorhead-AA
East Grand Forks-A
Thief River Falls-A
Hibbing-A
Note that all eight associations support a single high school.

East Regional (6-AA teams and 2-A teams)
White Bear Lake-AA
Duluth East-AA
Elk River-AA
Tartan-AA
Hermantown-A
Anoka-AA
Blaine-AA
Mahtomedi-A
Note that all eight associations support a single high school.

South Regional (6-AA teams and 2-A teams)
Farmington-AA
Lakeville South-AA
Rochester-AA
Lakeville North-AA
Luverne-A
Owatonna-AA
Northfield-A
Rosemount-AA
Note Lakeville is one association (Lakeville South and Lakeville North). Rochester supports three public AA high schools (Rochester John Marshall, Rochester Century, and Rochester Mayo) and one private school (Rochester Lourdes).

West Regional (6-AA teams and 2-A teams)
St. Cloud-AA/A
OMG-AA
Edina-AA
Sartell-A
Wayzata-AA
Eden Prairie-AA
Burnsville-AA
St. Michael/Albertville-A
Note St. Cloud supports one AA high school (St. Cloud Tech), one A high school (St. Cloud Apollo) and one private school (St. Cloud Cathedral). OMG support two AA high schools (Maple Grove and Osseo)."

With that post as back ground, Does the last years 61 potentially AA teams plus the 5 or so B teams play in their own AA district/regional tourney in 2013? If so what happens to the current A district/regionals already set for 2013 since the number of A teams would be reduced to 40 or so A teams? The A districts would only eliminate 8 teams.

As to applying the idea of equal participation, that is at best a wish because either somebody will have to determine the AA tourney entrants (say select 8 out of the 66 teams or so) or methodology applied (use LPH rankings) all of which will make parents/kids mad. Mad parents/kids mean reduced numbers (participation) in youth hockey.

If Minnesota Hockey's goal is to strive for producing excellent hockey players, then they should decide why the current system is not producing excellent players and fix it. Don't band-ad it. My view is that the current structure encourages "kids in numbers" to participate while providing a path for good players to excel, but the AA idea starts to encourage excellence at the youth age and as a result will discourage "kids in numbers" to participate.

[Shinbone_News]

I posted this before and thought it is worthwhile to post again

"The list below should provide some food for thought. It basically says that based on last March’s 32 peewee A regional teams, 21 would be AA teams and 11 would be A teams.

Of the 100 or so peewee A teams last year, 61 teams would be designated AA and the remaining 40 designated A. Based on last year’s high school designation, Dodge County, Sibley, St. Francis, MALM, and River Lakes peewee A teams would become AA teams. In addition peewee B teams Winona, Cottage Grove, North St. Paul, Cambridge/Isanti, and Becker/Big Lake would become peewee AA teams.

Nobody has answered the question as to how this move helps the 6th grade kid develop as a hockey player.

North Regional (3-AA teams and 5-A teams)
Grand Rapids-AA
Fergus Falls-A
Bemidji-AA
Virginia-A
Moorhead-AA
East Grand Forks-A
Thief River Falls-A
Hibbing-A
Note that all eight associations support a single high school.

East Regional (6-AA teams and 2-A teams)
White Bear Lake-AA
Duluth East-AA
Elk River-AA
Tartan-AA
Hermantown-A
Anoka-AA
Blaine-AA
Mahtomedi-A
Note that all eight associations support a single high school.

South Regional (6-AA teams and 2-A teams)
Farmington-AA
Lakeville South-AA
Rochester-AA
Lakeville North-AA
Luverne-A
Owatonna-AA
Northfield-A
Rosemount-AA
Note Lakeville is one association (Lakeville South and Lakeville North). Rochester supports three public AA high schools (Rochester John Marshall, Rochester Century, and Rochester Mayo) and one private school (Rochester Lourdes).

West Regional (6-AA teams and 2-A teams)
St. Cloud-AA/A
OMG-AA
Edina-AA
Sartell-A
Wayzata-AA
Eden Prairie-AA
Burnsville-AA
St. Michael/Albertville-A
Note St. Cloud supports one AA high school (St. Cloud Tech), one A high school (St. Cloud Apollo) and one private school (St. Cloud Cathedral). OMG support two AA high schools (Maple Grove and Osseo)."

With that post as back ground, Does the last years 61 potentially AA teams plus the 5 or so B teams play in their own AA district/regional tourney in 2013? If so what happens to the current A district/regionals already set for 2013 since the number of A teams would be reduced to 40 or so A teams? The A districts would only eliminate 8 teams.

As to applying the idea of equal participation, that is at best a wish because either somebody will have to determine the AA tourney entrants (say select 8 out of the 66 teams or so) or methodology applied (use LPH rankings) all of which will make parents/kids mad. Mad parents/kids mean reduced numbers (participation) in youth hockey.

If Minnesota Hockey's goal is to strive for producing excellent hockey players, then they should decide why the current system is not producing excellent players and fix it. Don't band-ad it. My view is that the current structure encourages "kids in numbers" to participate while providing a path for good players to excel, but the AA idea starts to encourage excellence at the youth age and as a result will discourage "kids in numbers" to participate.

You are making some big assumptions here. For example, NO association is forced to play up or down. They merely use their feeder high school as a starting point. If they have the strength to compete with Edina, Moorhead, Eden Prairie, Duluth, Rochester at AA they can choose to do that, just as Roseau does at the HS level.

I fail to understand why having an ADDITIONAL state tournament creates a culture of "excellence" that discourages "kids in numbers." It's sort of the latter by definition. How does the AA class in high school make all those Breck and St Thomas Academy kids feel cheated? Giving more kids a chance at a state title devalues the experience for everyone exactly how?

As my MnHockey district folks communicated informally, lots of people seem to be tired of seeing the same old behemoth associations dominate the post season, leaving out some quality programs year after year. This is an attempt to address that, and seems to directly contradict your point.

The whole idea is to allow MORE kids to participate in post-season tournaments.

In my view, it is NOT Mn Hockey's primary goal to "produce excellent hockey players." It's to provide opportunities for ALL players at all levels to excel. Not the same thing.

Nobody has answered the question as to how this move helps the 6th grade kid develop as a hockey player.

Scenario: That 6th grade player has been on a strong Bloomington Kennedy A or B team that has gotten buried by Edina in the first round of districts since he was a squirt. One and done. Now Edina plays AA, and Bloomington Kennedy -- on the rebound as it co-ops with Richfield, say -- plays in the A tournament and actually makes the winners bracket, maybe goes to regions. 6th grader gets additional post-season games and all the pressure and confidence that goes with it.

[BadgerBob82]

Fred is making the assumption the AA and A will be assigned based on the enrollment of High Schools. I was told the AA and A designations will be assigned by association size. Eden Prairie would be AA in youth hockey because it has 150+ PW's in the program. It's not because they feed a high school of 3,000+ students. (Or the fact EP youth hockey feeds 4-5 high schools.

I know Fred thinks David gets better being pounded by Goliath. But Fred really wants a race to the bottom.

[the_juiceman]

Fred is making the assumption the AA and A will be assigned based on the enrollment of High Schools. I was told the AA and A designations will be assigned by association size. Eden Prairie would be AA in youth hockey because it has 150+ PW's in the program. It's not because they feed a high school of 3,000+ students. (Or the fact EP youth hockey feeds 4-5 high schools.

I know Fred thinks David gets better being pounded by Goliath. But Fred really wants a race to the bottom.

Fred is correct--it is based on HS enrollment. Assc. may petition to move up or down.

[elliott70]

There are several 'bugs' within the AA - A model right now but written rules are being done right now.

By January the methodology should be in writing.

Essentially, an association 'tied' to a HS will initially be AA or A for post-season play. If an association wants to be something other than what that category is they will declare sometime around June 1 or July1.

An association can have a AA, A, B team or combination of them (again the cognizant DD has some control over it, but hopefully the locals know what will work).

Based on this declaration AA & A (and probably B, too) play-off will be determined (districts - region assignments). A method of playing throughout the year to seed post season will also be determined. Then two state tourneys will be played. A play-ff game between the two champions??? maybe??

But those are the things that are trying to be anticipated and then put into writing.

Will new participants/champions come out of this???
I don't know, but perhaps a few different associations will show up in the end, or at least have a better opportunity.

[frederick61]

There are several 'bugs' within the AA - A model right now but written rules are being done right now.

By January the methodology should be in writing.

Essentially, an association 'tied' to a HS will initially be AA or A for post-season play. If an association wants to be something other than what that category is they will declare sometime around June 1 or July1.

An association can have a AA, A, B team or combination of them (again the cognizant DD has some control over it, but hopefully the locals know what will work).

Based on this declaration AA & A (and probably B, too) play-off will be determined (districts - region assignments). A method of playing throughout the year to seed post season will also be determined. Then two state tourneys will be played. A play-ff game between the two champions??? maybe??

But those are the things that are trying to be anticipated and then put into writing.

Will new participants/champions come out of this???
I don't know, but perhaps a few different associations will show up in the end, or at least have a better opportunity.

I have several questions.
1. Will all bantam and peewee level AA, A, and B teams be in the playoffs? Will this apply to U14 and U12 levels?
2. Will Minnesota Hockey drop the current regional and state tourney format after this year?
3. Will District playoffs be eliminated (it should for AA and A levels) and as the State High School has done, implement sectionals.
4. Some associations wait until as late as mid-November to decide on their level of play. Often the decision is driven by co-op decisions with neighboring associations. Is it practical to force declaration “around June 1 or July 1” since seeding will likely be the processed used to determine “sectional type of play-offs”? The seeding will be the only distinction between AA and A other than high school play.

Finally, I have some observations. If a large association has AA status and they have a balanced two top level teams, are those teams considered AA. If a large association has AA status, they should not be able to field an A level team even if they have an unbalanced selection process. With an unbalanced selection process, they can field only a B level team.

Since each association’s talent can vary dramatically year to year, it is nearly impossible to write rules that dictate to associations how to judge their current talent especially if a July 1 date is imposed. This AA/A split will eventually requirement Minnesota Hockey to impose itself on a large association's selection process in some way. Is Minnesota Hockey prepared to do that?

[Shinbone_News]

All good comments and questions.

I still haven't heard more about this scenario: A larger association fields 1 A team and 1 B1 team and a bunch of B2 and C teams. The A team plays in the AA tournament. Where does the B1 team play? I've heard they can opt up to A, but don't know if that's true or not. What would the consequences of that be? And if they DO move up to A, do you take the best B2 team and let them play the B state tourney?)

While I have repeated MNH's statement that these distinctions are ONLY for post-season play, invariably associations will have an AA team and an A team. The whole structure shifts up a position, if the association is a big one (as defined by high school feeder).

And finally, while I like this idea -- getting more kids further into a post-season -- I have a sinking feeling that there will be no way to make this one-year experiment actually succeed as intended, due to the complexities others have noted. The high school tier model is probably not a great one for one simple reason: there is no JV state tournament. Good JVs at Edina or Wayzata do NOT play in the single-A state tournament. (I realize that's obvious, but it helps to say it out loud and consider the ramification.)

[MrBoDangles]

Will a kid be able to waive from an A program to an AA program to be able to play at the proper skill level?

Sounds like MN Hockey is the leader in becoming an elite only sport..

Like I said before.......We'll end up with a few dominant programs and the rest will crumble.

[black sheep]

if it was to follow the HS model would you not have...

Class AA - A & B tournaments

Class A - A & B tournaments

Class AA & A associations play there regular season then split for playoffs...

Makes the MOST sense for the B teams, as a Roseau or Warroad "A" team can for the most part compete with the big boys...but their "B" teams cannot due to the limited # of players they have.

[jBlaze3000]

if it was to follow the HS model would you not have...

Class AA - A & B tournaments

Class A - A & B tournaments

Class AA & A associations play there regular season then split for playoffs...

Makes the MOST sense for the B teams, as a Roseau or Warroad "A" team can for the most part compete with the big boys...but their "B" teams cannot due to the limited # of players they have.

This is the only way I see this format making sense. Anything else is just renaming the team levels.

[observer]

There are no A or AA youth hockey associations as there is no connection, structurally or organizationally, between youth hockey associations and high schools. They're separate organizations. Some youth associations send 100% of their players to a single high school and some send no more than 20% to any one high school. No connection.

This discussion should have followed the Wisconsin structure where all youth associations are tiered by the size of the association. Period.

I see nothing but confusion on this one. Way to difficult. Once again, messing with stuff that needs no messing with.

[the_juiceman]

As I understand it, you are either AA or A--according to thye main HS you are affiliated with. You can petition to play up or down. I also believe that an Assc. cannot have an "A" and "AA". There would be a "AA", "A" & "B" state tourney. I could be wrong, but that's how our DD explained it.

[black sheep]

This discussion should have followed the Wisconsin structure where all youth associations are tiered by the size of the association.

Do you think that would be significantly different than the way the MN HS is split? I'm not framiliar with all of the metro associations but don't most of the largest ones feed the AA HS teams.

Of course there will be some gray area in the middle somewhere but that is the case for anything.

[black sheep]

take disrict 16 for example...you have

Bagley
Bemidji
Crookston
EGF
Hallock
LOW
Red Lake Falls
Roseau
Thief River Falls
Warroad

This could easily be divided into AA & A and be beneficial for the associations...it would encourage the smaller associations to field an A team knowing they will be playing equal talent during tournament time.

A = Bagley, Hallock, LOW, Red Lake Falls

AA = Bemidji, Crookston, EGF, Roseau, TRF, Warroad

Now...this of course does not follow the HS AA & A splits, but the HS sections & MN Hockey districts are different geographically.

Anyone care to give a shot to the other districts to see how it would look?

[MN_Hcky_Coach]

D10 is going AA/A/B1/B2 this year and as I understand, it will look something like this

AA - Centennial, Blaine, Elk River, Anoka, Andover, Champlin Park
A - Chisago Lakes, Princeton, Spring Lake Park, Rogers, Irondale, Cambridge, Coon Rapids
B1 - Chisago, Anoka, Elk River, Blaine 1, Blaine 2, Centennial 1, Centennial 2, Spring Lake Park, Andover, Cambridge, Champlin Park, Coon Rapids, Rogers
B2 - Anoka, Blaine, Centennial, Elk River, Spring Lake Park, Andover, Champlin Park, St. Francis, Princeton, Rogers, Irondale

The only problem this year is that the "A" teams will have to play the AA teams to get to regions.