A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

CRMiteHockey · Post by **CRMiteHockey** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 11:36 am

At an average association, what are the differences between the Squirt A, B1, B2, and C levels? I get that the best kids are on the A team and so on and so forth to the C team. My question is why would an association choose to skate a team at the B2 level instead of at the B1 level. What can B1 kids do that B2 can't? Or why would an association choose to skate a team at the C level instead of the B2 level. What can B2 kids do that C kids can't? Trying to understand why we aren't going to have a B1 team at CR this year.

crazyhorse · Post by **crazyhorse** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:48 pm

The talent and depth of associations can vary a great deal from A-C. There are and will be teams classified at different levels that should and shouldn't be where they are. An association that is making a smart decision in D6 is New Prague. They realize they cannot compete at A so their top PW and Bantam teams are B1. They have B2 and C at both levels as well. Shakopee could probably do the same, however, they have A, B2, and C at these levels. Their A teams will likely have a very difficult year. Should they do the same as New Prague? How hard on the couple true A level players, especially in Bantams with checking, will it be? This is where I think there are some associations too small or without depth of talent to compete at some levels. It hurts the development of not only the top end players, but also the lower level players forced to play over their heads. The Puckstopshere will just say, "if only the hockey world were perfect and all players could be as good as the higher level players." Right? What's wrong with playing in D6 and getting pummeled 15-0 and having to go to tourneys in Wadena and Marshall to scratch out a couple wins on the season for morale?

flpucknut · Post by **flpucknut** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:53 pm

CRMiteHockey wrote:At an average association, what are the differences between the Squirt A, B1, B2, and C levels? I get that the best kids are on the A team and so on and so forth to the C team. My question is why would an association choose to skate a team at the B2 level instead of at the B1 level. What can B1 kids do that B2 can't? Or why would an association choose to skate a team at the C level instead of the B2 level. What can B2 kids do that C kids can't? Trying to understand why we aren't going to have a B1 team at CR this year.

I think you answered the question in your first sentence, "average association". I'm guessing CR is Coon Rapids, so you will be playing Centennial, Blaine, Elk River, Anoka, Andover etc. Some of the best and biggest associations in the state. Now most associations have enough skilled players to make an A team, but the drop from high level talent to the next group of players might be so dramatic that the board feels they couldn't be competitive at the B1 level.

I'm guessing most of the kids on Elk Rivers B1 team would make the A team at a lot of associations. Same for Blaine, and Centennial. Having B players playing against what are essentially A players is a good way to have parents stop writing checks for hockey and buy the kid a snowboard. Especially at the squirt level we are still trying to coach these kids up and its impossible to do if they quit because they keep losing 9-1.

crazyhorse · Post by **crazyhorse** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:00 pm

CRMitehockey, if your B2 team is extremely successful (very few losses) and wins games by large margins, you will know that the association made a mistake in evaluating the talent level. If they are competitive with most teams they play in league and tournament play, they made the correct decision. Hopefully, it is the latter example as their development would be much greater playing competitive games versus blowing teams off the ice.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:05 pm

I don't quite understand why you guys are so "rigid" with your classifications for regular season play. I get that you have to have "determined" team for "A or "B" levels when it comes to playoff and/or state tourney time but I truly don't get why a team can't be called an "A" team and play a "B1" team and vice versa if they are a good match for eachother. We do it it all the time in Wisconsin and I don't see any kids or associations suffering for it. So you are on the "A" team in Reedsburg but maybe that means when you play Madison a Polar Caps team you play their "B" teams but when you play say, Tomah, you play their "A" team. Seems like a pretty simple solution, don't see the issue at all. Everyone more or less knows the "capabilities" of the teams, just schedule the teams that will give you the best competition and most competitive games.

MnMade-4-Life · Post by **MnMade-4-Life** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:18 pm

JSR wrote:I don't quite understand why you guys are so "rigid" with your classifications for regular season play. I get that you have to have "determined" team for "A or "B" levels when it comes to playoff and/or state tourney time but I truly don't get why a team can't be called an "A" team and play a "B1" team and vice versa if they are a good match for eachother. We do it it all the time in Wisconsin and I don't see any kids or associations suffering for it. So you are on the "A" team in Reedsburg but maybe that means when you play Madison a Polar Caps team you play their "B" teams but when you play say, Tomah, you play their "A" team. Seems like a pretty simple solution, don't see the issue at all. Everyone more or less knows the "capabilities" of the teams, just schedule the teams that will give you the best competition and most competitive games.

In good spirit and humor I offer this retort as to why we (MN) do things differently than you (WI).

Thanks to a clever marketing campaign we (MN) are widely regarded to as the "State of Hockey." You (WI), make cheese.

JSR · Post by **JSR** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:30 pm

MnMade-4-Life wrote:
JSR wrote:I don't quite understand why you guys are so "rigid" with your classifications for regular season play. I get that you have to have "determined" team for "A or "B" levels when it comes to playoff and/or state tourney time but I truly don't get why a team can't be called an "A" team and play a "B1" team and vice versa if they are a good match for eachother. We do it it all the time in Wisconsin and I don't see any kids or associations suffering for it. So you are on the "A" team in Reedsburg but maybe that means when you play Madison a Polar Caps team you play their "B" teams but when you play say, Tomah, you play their "A" team. Seems like a pretty simple solution, don't see the issue at all. Everyone more or less knows the "capabilities" of the teams, just schedule the teams that will give you the best competition and most competitive games.
In good spirit and humor I offer this retort as to why we (MN) do things differently than you (WI).

Thanks to a clever marketing campaign we (MN) are widely regarded to as the "State of Hockey." You (WI), make cheese.

Thanks for the "good humor" retort. Now how about an actual thoughtful answer

Shinbone_News · Post by **Shinbone_News** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 1:41 am

It's actually written into many district bylaws (and possibly MNHockey rules, I dunno) that A teams and B teams are not supposed to play each other except under special circumstances requiring agreement of presidents and blah blah blah. Not sure why, but my guess is to save the feelings of A team parents who don't wish to be beaten by B teams -- especially those in their own association! (All kinds of headaches for boards of directors, coaches, and evaluators who already operate under a cloud of heavy suspicion.)

As far as the distinction between B1 and B2 -- it's sort of a false distnction. MNHockey recognizes just "B." There is no "B2" state tourney. There is no C state tourney. B2 and C post-season tourneys happen at the district level and go no further.

I think you could make a case for saying most average sized associations should have 1 A team, 1 B team, and the rest coule be C teams -- but the C or "House" league is almost like a leper colony as far as getting respect (and good coaching). B2 teams are kids (and their parent coaches) who want to be on a "traveling team" rather than a "house team," but are not good enough to make their B(1) or A team.

CRMiteHockey · Post by **CRMiteHockey** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:14 am

flpucknut wrote:
CRMiteHockey wrote:At an average association, what are the differences between the Squirt A, B1, B2, and C levels? I get that the best kids are on the A team and so on and so forth to the C team. My question is why would an association choose to skate a team at the B2 level instead of at the B1 level. What can B1 kids do that B2 can't? Or why would an association choose to skate a team at the C level instead of the B2 level. What can B2 kids do that C kids can't? Trying to understand why we aren't going to have a B1 team at CR this year.
I think you answered the question in your first sentence, "average association". I'm guessing CR is Coon Rapids, so you will be playing Centennial, Blaine, Elk River, Anoka, Andover etc. Some of the best and biggest associations in the state. Now most associations have enough skilled players to make an A team, but the drop from high level talent to the next group of players might be so dramatic that the board feels they couldn't be competitive at the B1 level.

I'm guessing most of the kids on Elk Rivers B1 team would make the A team at a lot of associations. Same for Blaine, and Centennial. Having B players playing against what are essentially A players is a good way to have parents stop writing checks for hockey and buy the kid a snowboard. Especially at the squirt level we are still trying to coach these kids up and its impossible to do if they quit because they keep losing 9-1.

Yes, CR is Coon Rapids. I guess I am just a little surprised they initially declared a B2 team at the squirt level. As far as I know only one kid coming off the mite A team from last year is looking like he will make the squirt A team. Plus most of the A mites from last year skated this summer in various summer AAA programs, quite a few kids from last years first year squirt kids skated too. So given that and the idea that none of other 14 kids coming off the A mite team will be playing on the A squirt team, there ought to be enough talent to form at least a .500 caliber B1 team. LOL - Sorry for the rant, I'm sure no one here really cares.

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:35 pm

JSR, they have enough teams to do whatever they want. It isn't like a bunch of teams can't find opponents because of the A/B divide.

blueliner5 · Post by **blueliner5** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 10:47 pm

CRMiteHockey wrote:
flpucknut wrote:
CRMiteHockey wrote:At an average association, what are the differences between the Squirt A, B1, B2, and C levels? I get that the best kids are on the A team and so on and so forth to the C team. My question is why would an association choose to skate a team at the B2 level instead of at the B1 level. What can B1 kids do that B2 can't? Or why would an association choose to skate a team at the C level instead of the B2 level. What can B2 kids do that C kids can't? Trying to understand why we aren't going to have a B1 team at CR this year.
I think you answered the question in your first sentence, "average association". I'm guessing CR is Coon Rapids, so you will be playing Centennial, Blaine, Elk River, Anoka, Andover etc. Some of the best and biggest associations in the state. Now most associations have enough skilled players to make an A team, but the drop from high level talent to the next group of players might be so dramatic that the board feels they couldn't be competitive at the B1 level.

I'm guessing most of the kids on Elk Rivers B1 team would make the A team at a lot of associations. Same for Blaine, and Centennial. Having B players playing against what are essentially A players is a good way to have parents stop writing checks for hockey and buy the kid a snowboard. Especially at the squirt level we are still trying to coach these kids up and its impossible to do if they quit because they keep losing 9-1.
Yes, CR is Coon Rapids. I guess I am just a little surprised they initially declared a B2 team at the squirt level. As far as I know only one kid coming off the mite A team from last year is looking like he will make the squirt A team. Plus most of the A mites from last year skated this summer in various summer AAA programs, quite a few kids from last years first year squirt kids skated too. So given that and the idea that none of other 14 kids coming off the A mite team will be playing on the A squirt team, there ought to be enough talent to form at least a .500 caliber B1 team. LOL - Sorry for the rant, I'm sure no one here really cares.

CRMiteHockey.....Sounds like you are frustrated with the outcome, but have you voiced your concern with the Board? Skating at the AAA level during the Summer doesn't necessarily mean you are guaranteed a spot on the "A" or "B1" team in the Winter. Presently there are numerous amounts of AAA teams (Open/Invite). If, your son skated on an Invite team (Blades, Machine etc.) I would have to say that they should skate at the upper level. CR hockey has been on a slide lately due to players transferring out. The talent level has diminished, but I heard is on a come back at the younger age level which surprises me they went with a B2 team, unless of course the numbers are down. Make a phone call to the President he is a very down to earth individual to get a clear justification on what they based there decision on. If, you ask any 1 of the 2 traveling directors you are wasting your time

CRDirector · Post by **CRDirector** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:55 pm

blueliner5 wrote:
CRMiteHockey wrote:
flpucknut wrote: I think you answered the question in your first sentence, "average association". I'm guessing CR is Coon Rapids, so you will be playing Centennial, Blaine, Elk River, Anoka, Andover etc. Some of the best and biggest associations in the state. Now most associations have enough skilled players to make an A team, but the drop from high level talent to the next group of players might be so dramatic that the board feels they couldn't be competitive at the B1 level.

I'm guessing most of the kids on Elk Rivers B1 team would make the A team at a lot of associations. Same for Blaine, and Centennial. Having B players playing against what are essentially A players is a good way to have parents stop writing checks for hockey and buy the kid a snowboard. Especially at the squirt level we are still trying to coach these kids up and its impossible to do if they quit because they keep losing 9-1.
Yes, CR is Coon Rapids. I guess I am just a little surprised they initially declared a B2 team at the squirt level. As far as I know only one kid coming off the mite A team from last year is looking like he will make the squirt A team. Plus most of the A mites from last year skated this summer in various summer AAA programs, quite a few kids from last years first year squirt kids skated too. So given that and the idea that none of other 14 kids coming off the A mite team will be playing on the A squirt team, there ought to be enough talent to form at least a .500 caliber B1 team. LOL - Sorry for the rant, I'm sure no one here really cares.
CRMiteHockey.....Sounds like you are frustrated with the outcome, but have you voiced your concern with the Board? Skating at the AAA level during the Summer doesn't necessarily mean you are guaranteed a spot on the "A" or "B1" team in the Winter. Presently there are numerous amounts of AAA teams (Open/Invite). If, your son skated on an Invite team (Blades, Machine etc.) I would have to say that they should skate at the upper level. CR hockey has been on a slide lately due to players transferring out. The talent level has diminished, but I heard is on a come back at the younger age level which surprises me they went with a B2 team, unless of course the numbers are down. Make a phone call to the President he is a very down to earth individual to get a clear justification on what they based there decision on. If, you ask any 1 of the 2 traveling directors you are wasting your time

Thanks for the vote of confidence Blueliner.

Numbers are the big issue at CR this year as in the past. The big numbers are still in the mite program. Right now we have 36 skaters registered for squirts (Returning 2-A, 7-B2, 5-C and 2 that played at MM), first year 10-A Mite, 5-B-mite and rest C and D mites). Tought to have an A and B1 team with these numbers in D10.

Last years squirt and mite teams were all under .500. I would be very happy if all of our squirt teams would finish at .500, but that will be a tough one. Initial declarations are just that, but unless a bunch of Finlanders start buying up some of the Foreclosed properties, not much will change.

A lot of the kids have been skating this summer, which is awesome. But what do you think the hockey players are doing across town.

In D10, there is a large difference in the levels of play for Squirts.

If you guys haven't had a chance to see our new arena yet, stop by for a tour. It is a beauty. With the refrigerated outdoor sheet (NHL size with regulation boards, plexi, players boxes, penalty boxes and scoreboard), I am not sure there is a better facility out there.

CRMiteHockey · Post by **CRMiteHockey** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:42 pm

CRDirector wrote:Thanks for the vote of confidence Blueliner.

Numbers are the big issue at CR this year as in the past. The big numbers are still in the mite program. Right now we have 36 skaters registered for squirts (Returning 2-A, 7-B2, 5-C and 2 that played at MM), first year 10-A Mite, 5-B-mite and rest C and D mites). Tough to have an A and B1 team with these numbers in D10.

Thank you for the explanation. I thought there were more kids than that in squirts.

MnMade-4-Life · Post by **MnMade-4-Life** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:50 pm

CRMiteHockey wrote:
CRDirector wrote:Thanks for the vote of confidence Blueliner.

Numbers are the big issue at CR this year as in the past. The big numbers are still in the mite program. Right now we have 36 skaters registered for squirts (Returning 2-A, 7-B2, 5-C and 2 that played at MM), first year 10-A Mite, 5-B-mite and rest C and D mites). Tough to have an A and B1 team with these numbers in D10.
Thank you for the explanation. I thought there were more kids than that in squirts.

D10 returning squirts as a point of reference:
(this information is from parents / coaches / board members of returning squirts in my phone book, could be more could be less)
Andover +35
Blaine +25
Centennial +30
Elk River +30

Again, these numbers could be wrong. I just asked people I know in those organizations.

observer · Post by **observer** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:53 pm

Congrats on the new facility!

It sounds like an A and a B2 is probably where you're at. I believe Bloomington Jefferson and Apple Valley have both used the A and then B2 model. Apple Valley is a small association that has had success with their A teams. There's a distinction regarding commitment in associations the size of yours. It's not uncommon for some of the players to be working hard on year around skill development yet others not skating at all during the off season. Everyone fusses about large associations having all the strength but numbers are only half their story. The more interesting dynamic is because of their size they're also working harder. Families know without summer skating their player isn't likely going to make an A team so not only do they have more bodies but they're also outworking you.

Recruiting is the key to all issues. More skaters, more teams, more revenue and more and better volunteers. It's all about the 5 and 6 year olds. Recruiting is the most important function in your association and now is the time for mite recruiting. Hopefully the CR recruiting committee is working hard. The new facility will help!

CRMiteHockey · Post by **CRMiteHockey** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:01 pm

blueliner5 wrote:CRMiteHockey.....Sounds like you are frustrated with the outcome, but have you voiced your concern with the Board? Skating at the AAA level during the Summer doesn't necessarily mean you are guaranteed a spot on the "A" or "B1" team in the Winter. Presently there are numerous amounts of AAA teams (Open/Invite). If, your son skated on an Invite team (Blades, Machine etc.) I would have to say that they should skate at the upper level. CR hockey has been on a slide lately due to players transferring out. The talent level has diminished, but I heard is on a come back at the younger age level which surprises me they went with a B2 team, unless of course the numbers are down. Make a phone call to the President he is a very down to earth individual to get a clear justification on what they based there decision on. If, you ask any 1 of the 2 traveling directors you are wasting your time

I'm not frustrated, I assumed that kids having graduated from an advanced mite team and having practiced a bit over the summer would be able to form a team at the B1 level in our district, so when I saw that CR was going with an A and a B2 I was surprised.

Now after seeing the returning numbers and reading about a sub .500 record last year, I guess I am a little surprised that they would put an A team out there this year.

blueliner5 · Post by **blueliner5** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:37 am

CRMiteHockey wrote:
blueliner5 wrote:CRMiteHockey.....Sounds like you are frustrated with the outcome, but have you voiced your concern with the Board? Skating at the AAA level during the Summer doesn't necessarily mean you are guaranteed a spot on the "A" or "B1" team in the Winter. Presently there are numerous amounts of AAA teams (Open/Invite). If, your son skated on an Invite team (Blades, Machine etc.) I would have to say that they should skate at the upper level. CR hockey has been on a slide lately due to players transferring out. The talent level has diminished, but I heard is on a come back at the younger age level which surprises me they went with a B2 team, unless of course the numbers are down. Make a phone call to the President he is a very down to earth individual to get a clear justification on what they based there decision on. If, you ask any 1 of the 2 traveling directors you are wasting your time
I'm not frustrated, I assumed that kids having graduated from an advanced mite team and having practiced a bit over the summer would be able to form a team at the B1 level in our district, so when I saw that CR was going with an A and a B2 I was surprised.

Now after seeing the returning numbers and reading about a sub .500 record last year, I guess I am a little surprised that they would put an A team out there this year.

Reading CRDirectors comments it appears to me there was not a B1 team fielded last year since there are no returning B1 players. So maybe there were a handful of players that had to play B2 last year, but would of made the B1 team (just an assumption). If, you take that into consideration then maybe they could compete at the A level. Wondering how long they will be able to retain Jim Hillman. It's tough enough to retain players let alone a knowlegeable/experienced coach that played for the Gophers

blueliner5 · Post by **blueliner5** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:59 am

observer wrote:Congrats on the new facility!

It sounds like an A and a B2 is probably where you're at. I believe Bloomington Jefferson and Apple Valley have both used the A and then B2 model. Apple Valley is a small association that has had success with their A teams. There's a distinction regarding commitment in associations the size of yours. It's not uncommon for some of the players to be working hard on year around skill development yet others not skating at all during the off season. Everyone fusses about large associations having all the strength but numbers are only half their story. The more interesting dynamic is because of their size they're also working harder. Families know without summer skating their player isn't likely going to make an A team so not only do they have more bodies but they're also outworking you.

Recruiting is the key to all issues. More skaters, more teams, more revenue and more and better volunteers. It's all about the 5 and 6 year olds. Recruiting is the most important function in your association and now is the time for mite recruiting. Hopefully the CR recruiting committee is working hard. The new facility will help!

Committee has been working hard on recruitment that's why the numbers at that age level are improving. They have a program in place where they invite younger age skaters to come out and skate even if they don't have equipment CR provides that for them. They also invite High School players to volunteer there time to join in on the fun. The new facility with the addition of the outdoor rink hopefully will attract a few more interests. Cost is a big factor, but with the outdoor refrigerated rink they can help lower those costs with the younger aged teams vs. having to pay for the indoor icetime

the_juiceman · Post by **the_juiceman** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:07 am

blueliner5 wrote:
CRMiteHockey wrote:
blueliner5 wrote:CRMiteHockey.....Sounds like you are frustrated with the outcome, but have you voiced your concern with the Board? Skating at the AAA level during the Summer doesn't necessarily mean you are guaranteed a spot on the "A" or "B1" team in the Winter. Presently there are numerous amounts of AAA teams (Open/Invite). If, your son skated on an Invite team (Blades, Machine etc.) I would have to say that they should skate at the upper level. CR hockey has been on a slide lately due to players transferring out. The talent level has diminished, but I heard is on a come back at the younger age level which surprises me they went with a B2 team, unless of course the numbers are down. Make a phone call to the President he is a very down to earth individual to get a clear justification on what they based there decision on. If, you ask any 1 of the 2 traveling directors you are wasting your time
I'm not frustrated, I assumed that kids having graduated from an advanced mite team and having practiced a bit over the summer would be able to form a team at the B1 level in our district, so when I saw that CR was going with an A and a B2 I was surprised.

Now after seeing the returning numbers and reading about a sub .500 record last year, I guess I am a little surprised that they would put an A team out there this year.
Reading CRDirectors comments it appears to me there was not a B1 team fielded last year since there are no returning B1 players. So maybe there were a handful of players that had to play B2 last year, but would of made the B1 team (just an assumption). If, you take that into consideration then maybe they could compete at the A level. Wondering how long they will be able to retain Jim Hillman. It's tough enough to retain players let alone a knowlegeable/experienced coach that played for the Gophers

the board has allowed hsi kid to move up to PW, so that might keep him around for a couple of years.

Shinbone_News · Post by **Shinbone_News** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:48 am

Again, just to clarify: MN Hockey does not make a distinction between B1 and B2 teams. It's an association conceit -- creating a B2 team with no B1 team is just projecting that you will not compete in regions or state, and that you will generally schedule against B2 teams in your district rather than get hammered by other associations' best Bs.

That's probably a good thing to do, all things considered, if there is a big gap between your As and your Bs and you play in a strong district like D10.

D3 has so many B2s that they've split into two "leagues," each with their own District tourney. (Champs will play each other for bragging rights.)

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?

Re: A, B1, B2, C What's the difference?