MH new AA - A proigram

[MrBoDangles]

As I've stated...this new system helps the Big 9 (Edina, Wayzata, OMG, Stillwater, Moorhead, Rochester, Woodbury, White Bear, and Minnetonka). Their 16-30 players now get a chance to wear an A sweater instead of B1.

It also will reduce the number of blow outs in the Regional tournaments and in theory give more competitive balance at the A and B level regional and state tournaments.

It will have no effect on the middle class AA teams (LVN, LVS, Eastview, Jefferson, Chaska/Chan, Forest Lake, etc). It will be a huge benefit to a few other class A youth associations (Orono, Delano, Waconia, etc).

The positives far outweigh the negatives.

TS

So how the regular season is going to be arranged? Let us say in d6, Edina, EP, and PL field 3-4 A level teams at Peewee and Bantam, Kennedy and others field 1 A team. We all can be certain that Edina, EP, and PL will have one strongest A team (the current A team before this A/AA mess), and the other 2-3 A teams will be their current B teams.

You used to have 10-12 teams at the A level in each district, now you have maybe 20's. Understand B level teams had to deal with the number issues in the past, but we all know we look at A and B hockey differently.

So will Kennedy play Edina's strongest A team, or all the 3-4 teams?

Will Edina A teams play one another? All in the regular season?

How about the association hosted tournament? Guess all the host association will have some good time to determine which team is at what
level?

Will a strong association be allowed to send more than one team to the AA state tournaments?

...but this new system could and I think will really increase the number of lopsided blowout games during the regular season and tournaments because these AA teams will be playing games against teams made up of kids that would have been B1 in the past system.

What's wrong with requiring associations to field a certain number of A level teams based on a number (50 or 80, etc.). That way you are really balancing the playing field for associations and bringing more kids into the top level. The AA/A model just reinforces that Edina/Maple Grove etc. are the best and will always win. A truly balanced system would open championship hopes to many more associations and maintain the top level of play we have today.

[MrBoDangles]

I doubt any association will have more than 1 AA and 1 A team.

Just think of the dream teams that Edina and Wayzata will have by combining all their highly ranked B-1 teams for one A(new B1) team.

Now we will have these AA caliber teams pounding on average B-1 teams at this new A(B-1) level. Brilliance!

Should we engrave the trophies now?

[MrBoDangles]

Bo: My comprehension can't be that bad. I am positive you are a Summer AAA proponent? How many more A's do you want?

My support of the AA-A deal has no impact on my kids. I just have the ability to see past how changes affect my kids. In other words, you only seem to want what is good for MrBoDangles and Bo's kid.

I have lived the A, B1, B2 levels with my kids and my coaching. Now that my kids are in High School, I think I have the ability to see the big picture.

It's a big world Bo, and it doesn't revolve around you and little Bo.

Totally happy(very) with our kid's association and situation. Just don't want to lose any MORE talent to our main rival because of something like this.

We have the talent to be very successful... as long as we keep it.

You know there's a player movement problem when Eden Prarie has half the teams than an ageing Edina has.

[old goalie85]

Good point, it's like Edina never ages. Prior Lake, rosemount,Farmington may become the next E.P. [hockey not football]

[Bleed Maroon and Gold]

If this is truely about getting kids playing at the correct level and also making it more competitive for the smaller associations. Why would Minnesota Hockey allow an the bigger associations that have dominated the A Level and B1 Level now have a AA, A and B1 team. Looks to me this is just the same scenerio that we have with those same associations when the smaller associations play B1 instead of A.

If Minnesota hockey is trying to give the smaller associations a chance at making regionals and the state tournament by adding the AA/A system. I would think it would make sense to give those smaller associations a chance to do it.

Here is what I would like to see and I am sure the people from the big associations will argue with me on this.

AA Big associations
A Small associations
B1 All associations 2nd team or however many you need
B2 all associations 2nd or 3rd team or however many you need.

This will truely give the smaller associations a chance for a regional and state tournament much like Class A does at the high school level.

[BadgerBob82]

As for player movement, allowing kids to join associations based on the school they attend vs. where they live opened the door for problems. Open enrollment allows freedom to attend virtually any school. Attendence in that school allows joining the hockey association. I don't know the dynamics of this in the metro, but hear of alot of movement. (i.e. St. Louis Park Bantams) (Family lives in Richfield, Mom teaches 3rd grade in Edina, so kid attends Mom's school and plays for Edina)

As for EP, with school attendance in Minnetonka, Chaska/Chanhassen and elsewhere has likely contributed to some movement. But not a new issue of suburbs growing rapidly, hockey and other sport domination, then a slow decline. Lakeville could be the next example of that.

[observer]

The AA/A model just reinforces that Edina/Maple Grove etc. are the best and will always win. A truly balanced system would open championship hopes to many more associations and maintain the top level of play we have today.

This hits the nail on the head.

Which Bo summarizes here.

Just think of the dream teams that Edina and Wayzata will have by combining all their highly ranked B-1 teams for one A(new B1) team.

Now we will have these AA caliber teams pounding on average B-1 teams at this new A(B-1) level. Brilliance!

[Jusanothermember]

Would be interested to hear from some, with more knowledge than I, name the teams who are going to be AA, A, etc.

Would love to see your perceptions, of what associations S/B going up to AA or just having an A team.

Curious

[DrGaf]

The AA/A model just reinforces that Edina/Maple Grove etc. are the best and will always win. A truly balanced system would open championship hopes to many more associations and maintain the top level of play we have today.

This hits the nail on the head.

Which Bo summarizes here.

Just think of the dream teams that Edina and Wayzata will have by combining all their highly ranked B-1 teams for one A(new B1) team.

Now we will have these AA caliber teams pounding on average B-1 teams at this new A(B-1) level. Brilliance!

Don't encourage him!!

[BadgerBob82]

What Bo won't tell you is that the "elite" associations historically have fielded only 1-A team per level. Then several of those associations field 2 B1 teams. And then a variety of B2 level teams. Their B1 teams dominate the B1 level and times have been when 1 association has 2 B1 teams in the State Championship game. Due to these "elite" associations raising the bar, some associations have not fielded A level teams hoping to compete at the B1 level.

HOPEFULLY, these elite associations will field their AA team, then at least 1 A level team. The remaining B1 team should remain a strong B1 team.

Also, hopefully, the associations that wouldn't field an A team in the past, will do so under the new format.

What Bo also won't tell you, the top 30-40 B1 teams would compete very well against the bottom 40-50 A level teams.

What could make some people accept this better. Eliminate the Letters, (AA, A, B1,B2 & C) Use colors so parents can say their kid plays Pee-Wee Red Level Hockey. Others could play, Black, White, Gold, Silver. Remove the letter and the egos will go away.

[Bleed Maroon and Gold]

What Bo won't tell you is that the "elite" associations historically have fielded only 1-A team per level. Then several of those associations field 2 B1 teams. And then a variety of B2 level teams. Their B1 teams dominate the B1 level and times have been when 1 association has 2 B1 teams in the State Championship game. Due to these "elite" associations raising the bar, some associations have not fielded A level teams hoping to compete at the B1 level.

HOPEFULLY, these elite associations will field their AA team, then at least 1 A level team. The remaining B1 team should remain a strong B1 team.

Also, hopefully, the associations that wouldn't field an A team in the past, will do so under the new format.

What Bo also won't tell you, the top 30-40 B1 teams would compete very well against the bottom 40-50 A level teams.

What could make some people accept this better. Eliminate the Letters, (AA, A, B1,B2 & C) Use colors so parents can say their kid plays Pee-Wee Red Level Hockey. Others could play, Black, White, Gold, Silver. Remove the letter and the egos will go away.

How does this make the small associations compete at the A level when the big associations that dominated both A and B1 will now dominate at the AA and A level. Why wouldn't the small associations then just play B1 and have a fighting chance at making it to regionals and the state tournament.

If they would do it like they do the High School tournament. This would make the small associations want to play A and not just B1 and be able to have a chance.

[MrBoDangles]

What Bo won't tell you is that the "elite" associations historically have fielded only 1-A team per level. Then several of those associations field 2 B1 teams. And then a variety of B2 level teams. Their B1 teams dominate the B1 level and times have been when 1 association has 2 B1 teams in the State Championship game. Due to these "elite" associations raising the bar, some associations have not fielded A level teams hoping to compete at the B1 level.

HOPEFULLY, these elite associations will field their AA team, then at least 1 A level team. The remaining B1 team should remain a strong B1 team.

Also, hopefully, the associations that wouldn't field an A team in the past, will do so under the new format.

What Bo also won't tell you, the top 30-40 B1 teams would compete very well against the bottom 40-50 A level teams.

What could make some people accept this better. Eliminate the Letters, (AA, A, B1,B2 & C) Use colors so parents can say their kid plays Pee-Wee Red Level Hockey. Others could play, Black, White, Gold, Silver. Remove the letter and the egos will go away.

They field 2-3 B-1 teams that are ranked in the top 10 most years. Their B-2 tems could beat many associations B-1 teams.


What do you think I was just saying when mentioned Edina and Wayzata taking the best from all their B-1 teams? Those associations could have two top teams now and would SLAUGHTER teams that are not AA teams.

"Associations that haven't had A teams in the past" They would still be playing a second tier level and would be slaughtered by the new A pooled all star teams of the mega associations........... that would probably be great AA teams.

Maybe those bottom 40 - 50 A teams should CHOOSE TO play B-1. But they CHOOSE to play A as an association. There is great Hockey played at B-1 but some CHOOSE, as an association, to go against the best out there. What will change if they already CHOOSE to do that?

How bout we go gold, silver, bronze and rusted scrap......... We'll simply forget the levels of play then....

Bob will simply show you he has NO common sense.

[MrBoDangles]

The AA/A model just reinforces that Edina/Maple Grove etc. are the best and will always win. A truly balanced system would open championship hopes to many more associations and maintain the top level of play we have today.

This hits the nail on the head.

Which Bo summarizes here.

Just think of the dream teams that Edina and Wayzata will have by combining all their highly ranked B-1 teams for one A(new B1) team.

Now we will have these AA caliber teams pounding on average B-1 teams at this new A(B-1) level. Brilliance!

Don't encourage him!!

Insert moonwalk smiley here-

[BadgerBob82]

I agree the haves and have-nots will always exist.

But creating the AA level, with no additional A teams serves no purpose. You still will have 20-30 B1 teams that will dominate at the B level. I would HOPE the remaining A teams will be able to give these former B1 teams a competitive game. If you say no, then I totally don't understand your dislike of creating the AA level.

In a perfect (Badgerbob) world, there would not be a B1 team that could compete with many A level teams. Some A teams will be competive with AA teams, which for "development" purposes I'm sure you would encourage to opt up to AA. In other words, there shouldn't be the big overlap where 20-30 B1 teams could be ranked within the top 60+/- at the A level, like I think we have now.

[Mnhockeys]

I doubt any association will have more than 1 AA and 1 A team.

Even you doubt it, Edina's strongest B team, and PL's PWB team from last season could finish top 40's if they played in the A level last year!

Let us just say one particular association with multiple A teams has more than 1 team finish top 40's in the regular season, they might choose to play in A level state tournament, but they might also want to elect to take a shot at AA state tournament. Is that allowed?

[MrBoDangles]

I agree the haves and have-nots will always exist.

But creating the AA level, with no additional A teams serves no purpose. You still will have 20-30 B1 teams that will dominate at the B level. I would HOPE the remaining A teams will be able to give these former B1 teams a competitive game. If you say no, then I totally don't understand your dislike of creating the AA level.

In a perfect (Badgerbob) world, there would not be a B1 team that could compete with many A level teams. Some A teams will be competive with AA teams, which for "development" purposes I'm sure you would encourage to opt up to AA. In other words, there shouldn't be the big overlap where 20-30 B1 teams could be ranked within the top 60+/- at the A level, like I think we have now.

Think about very small association B-1 now thinking they can play A. Now think of the best kids off of 3(large association) top ten ranked B-1 teams, combined, competing at this new A level.....!!!!

Sounds like you're starting to get it.

A kid per level cutoff and then two A teams would give a better balance for all the levels in Minnesota.

This new AA/A will flop hard.

[MrBoDangles]

I agree the haves and have-nots will always exist.

But creating the AA level, with no additional A teams serves no purpose. You still will have 20-30 B1 teams that will dominate at the B level. I would HOPE the remaining A teams will be able to give these former B1 teams a competitive game. If you say no, then I totally don't understand your dislike of creating the AA level.

In a perfect (Badgerbob) world, there would not be a B1 team that could compete with many A level teams. Some A teams will be competive with AA teams, which for "development" purposes I'm sure you would encourage to opt up to AA. In other words, there shouldn't be the big overlap where 20-30 B1 teams could be ranked within the top 60+/- at the A level, like I think we have now.

Read through the last few pages to learn again.

[BadgerBob82]

Yes Bo, I have reviewed many of your posts on the AA-A topic.

Your recurring fear is that big associations will continue to dominate at all levels. Maybe what I can't figure out is if your kid plays A or B1 level in your association? You seem preoccupied about the impact on the B1 level, yet the proposal SHOULD balance the B1 level by removing the A teams playing at the B level?

So I still have a hard time figuring out your true position of this. I don't think you know either?

[BadgerBob82]

Bo: What association is your kid playing in? You call it a 3rd world black hole? I believe you have said in District 10?

You don't like the AA-A proposal due to your tunnel vision on how it might impact your association and your kid specifically.

Looking big picture, entire State, Levels AA-C, I think it could be good. Though I have repeatedly said that I fear MN Hockey could mess it up. (Due to individual District Directors or Associations being squeaky wheels)

[Mnhockeys]

Bo: What association is your kid playing in? You call it a 3rd world black hole? I believe you have said in District 10?

You don't like the AA-A proposal due to your tunnel vision on how it might impact your association and your kid specifically.

Looking big picture, entire State, Levels AA-C, I think it could be good. Though I have repeatedly said that I fear MN Hockey could mess it up. (Due to individual District Directors or Associations being squeaky wheels)

BB82, what does the new AA/A system bring to the table, other than,

1. More kids wear A jersey.
2. More post-season tournaments. And this can be done in many different ways.

It is not about player development .... regular season will be the same old days and post season is only a small portion of the hockey. And by post season, every team plays 1-2 lines of hockey anyway.

[BadgerBob82]

MnHockeys: I think I've stated the potential benefits to the AA-A system. The question is if MN Hockey and All Districts and Associations will "do the right thing".

My opinion is the "mega" associations/Districts have ruined the system (A-B1-B2-C) by having the numbers/ability to field 2-3 A teams. Instead, they field 1 A, 1-2 B1; 1-2B2's etc. To combat that, other associations opted to not field A teams so as to compete at the B1-B2 level. Other associations having B1 numbers and ability levels fielded an A team hoping that getting beat 20-0 would still provide good development. So what I see is a huge disparity at the A level that now is shown at the B1-B2 levels also.

Hopefully, all AA associations will field 1-2 A level teams. Associations that have fielded A level teams that are capable of playing with top 50 teams will opt up to AA. Associations that have not fielded A level teams in the past to compete at the B1 level will now field an A team. If this is done, the B2 and C levels could also narrow the gap of haves/have nots.

What I would hope happens, is during the season tournaments will expand to include AA and A levels. So instead of signing up at say the Albert Lea tournament thinking it will have similar ability teams, then showing up to find Edina who wins each game by 10 or more, the tournaments will provide better competition.

Will any of this happen? Not sure.

[Mnhockeys]

MnHockeys: I think I've stated the potential benefits to the AA-A system. The question is if MN Hockey and All Districts and Associations will "do the right thing".

My opinion is the "mega" associations/Districts have ruined the system (A-B1-B2-C) by having the numbers/ability to field 2-3 A teams. Instead, they field 1 A, 1-2 B1; 1-2B2's etc. To combat that, other associations opted to not field A teams so as to compete at the B1-B2 level. Other associations having B1 numbers and ability levels fielded an A team hoping that getting beat 20-0 would still provide good development. So what I see is a huge disparity at the A level that now is shown at the B1-B2 levels also.

Hopefully, all AA associations will field 1-2 A level teams. Associations that have fielded A level teams that are capable of playing with top 50 teams will opt up to AA. Associations that have not fielded A level teams in the past to compete at the B1 level will now field an A team. If this is done, the B2 and C levels could also narrow the gap of haves/have nots.

What I would hope happens, is during the season tournaments will expand to include AA and A levels. So instead of signing up at say the Albert Lea tournament thinking it will have similar ability teams, then showing up to find Edina who wins each game by 10 or more, the tournaments will provide better competition.

Will any of this happen? Not sure.

Hopefully? so basically it is unclear what will happen, and that is exactly the whole deal is - unclear! Let us just test on this group of kids.

[BadgerBob82]

Much the way they tested the Blue Puck on a group of kids. And the no check Squirt/Pee-Wee on a group of kids. And removing the slap shot on a group of kids, etc. My fear is Mn Hockey doesn't have a plan in place?

Regardless, there is nothing in the proposal that could be detrimental to this group of kids. Unless having more state tournaments is inherently bad?

[MrBoDangles]

I agree the haves and have-nots will always exist.

But creating the AA level, with no additional A teams serves no purpose. You still will have 20-30 B1 teams that will dominate at the B level. I would HOPE the remaining A teams will be able to give these former B1 teams a competitive game. If you say no, then I totally don't understand your dislike of creating the AA level.

In a perfect (Badgerbob) world, there would not be a B1 team that could compete with many A level teams. Some A teams will be competive with AA teams, which for "development" purposes I'm sure you would encourage to opt up to AA. In other words, there shouldn't be the big overlap where 20-30 B1 teams could be ranked within the top 60+/- at the A level, like I think we have now.

Think about very small association B-1 now thinking they can play A. Now think of the best kids off of 3(large association) top ten ranked B-1 teams, combined, competing at this new A level.....!!!!

Sounds like you're starting to get it.

A kid per level cutoff and then two A teams would give a better balance for all the levels in Minnesota.

This new AA/A will flop hard.

Back in May..