Section Realignment ?

[Burnbabyburn]

Because I have way too much time on my hands, I seeded AA from 1-64 and laid out brackets. (Yes, I need a life)

Here's how it would lay out:
SECTION 1

1 Mounds View
64 St. Paul Blades

33 Hastings
32 Irondale

17 Eagan
48 Coon Rapids

49 St. Cloud
16 Robbinsdale Armstrong/Cooper

SECTION 2

9 Hopkins (9)
56 Owatonna

41 North St. Paul
24 Burnsville

25 Cloquet/Esko/Carlton
40 Duluth

57 Rochester Century
8 Buffalo

SECTION 3

5 Edina
60 Minneapolis

37 Grand Rapids/Greenway
28 Chaska/Chanhassen

21 Stillwater
44 Centennial

53 Moorhead
12 Wayzata

SECTION 4

13 Lakeville South
52 Prior Lake

45 Sartell/Sauk Rapids
20 Anoka

29 Maple Grove
36 Shakopee

61 Cambridge-Isanti
4 Eden Prairie

SECTION 5

3 Minnetonka
62 Brainerd/Little Falls

35 East Ridge
30 Champlin Park

19 Cretin-Derham Hall
46 Tartan

51 Woodbury
14 Roseville

SECTION 6

11 Andover
54 River Lakes

43 Bemidji
22 Blaine

27 Roseau
38 Park

59 Spring Lake Park
6 Hill-Murray

SECTION 7

7 Lakeville North
58 Farmington

39 Eastview
26 Dodge County

23 Apple Valley
42 White Bear Lake

55 North Metro
10 North Wright County

SECTION 8

15 Bloomington Jefferson
50 Rochester JM/Lourdes

47 Rosemount
18 Holy Family/Waconia

31 Forest Lake
34 Elk River/Zimmerman

63 Winona
2 Benilde-St. Margaret's

Looks pretty equitable to me.

[Racki2016]

For fun, and you have alot of time on your hands. Break it down for us


SECTION 1

1 Mounds View
64 St. Paul Blades Winner - MV

33 Hastings
32 Irondale Winner - Toss up

17 Eagan
48 Coon Rapids Winner - Eagan

49 St. Cloud
16 Robbinsdale Armstrong/Cooper Winner - RA/C

[MNHockeyFan]

I took a crack at this too, using my suggested format that I offered above. This would essentially leave the three outstate sections based on geography but the five sections in the Twin Cities would be reseeded each year based on some impartial ranking system.

For this exercise I decided to seed the 40 Twin Cities teams using the latest KRACH ratings. I started with Mounds View as the No. 1 seed and paired them with the lowest rated Cities team, then went to BSM as No. 2 and paired them with the second lowest rated Cities team, etc. Here is end result:

Section 1AA (41.1 average KRACH rating)
7 Lakeville North
13 Lakeville South
26 Dodge County
33 Hastings
50 Rochester JM/Lourdes
56 Owatonna
57 Rochester Century
63 Winona
65 Rochester Mayo

Section 2AA (30.5)
4 Eden Prairie
9 Hopkins
17 Eagan
23 Apple Valley
36 Shakopee
44 Centennial
52 Prior Lake
59 Spring Lake Park

Section 3AA (30.6)
5 Edina
6 Hill-Murray
16 Armstong/Cooper
21 Stillwater
38 Park
46 Tartan
55 North Metro
58 Farmington

Section 4AA (30.6)
3 Minnetonka
12 Wayzata
18 Holy Family/Waconia
24 Burnsville
35 East Ridge
42 White Bear Lake
51 Woodbury
60 Minneapolis

Section 5AA (31.0)
1 Mounds View
15 Bloomington Jefferson
20 Anoka
29 Maple Grove
30 Champlin Park
39 Eastview
47 Rosemount
67Bloomington Kennedy

Section 6AA (31.0)
2 Benilde-St. Margaret’s
14 Roseville
19 Cretin/Derham Hall
28 Chaska/Chanhassen
32 Irondale
41 North St. Paul
48 Coon Rapids
64 St. Paul Blades

Section 7AA (36.3)
11 Andover
22 Blaine
25 Cloquet/Esko/Carlton
31 Forest Lake
34 Elk River/Zimmerman
37 Grand Rapids/Greenway
40 Duluth
61 Cambridge/Isanti
66 St. Francis

Section 8AA (39.0)
8 Buffalo
10 North Wright County
27 Roseau
43 Bemidji
45 Sartell/Sauk Rapids
49 St. Cloud
53 Moorhead
54 River Lakes
62 Brainerd/Little Falls

This is a summary showing the highest rated (top) team and the average rating for each section (using KRACH as of today):

Outstate (based on geography)
1AA – Top 7, Average 41.1
7AA – Top 11, Average 36.3
8AA – Top 8, Average 39.1

Twin Cities (seeding of 40 teams, based on KRACH)
2AA – Top 4, Average 30.5
3AA – Top 5, Average 30.5
4AA – Top 3, Average 30.6
5AA – Top 1, Average 31.0
6AA – Top 2, Average 31.0

It was interesting that the average rating of the five Twin Cities-based sections came to within a point of each other.

Doing it this way would:
1. Continue to minimize travel in the outstate areas
2. Continue the traditional rivalries in those outstate areas
3. Continue to give those teams a good chance to advance to the State Tournament
4. Achieve much better balance between the sections and teams within the Twin Cities area on a yearly basis.
5. Would result in a more competitive State Tournament and a higher level of play.

And maybe most important, it might not be too radical of a change for the MSHSL. Who knows, they just might go for it.

Comments?

[sinbin]

Kudos to you MHF for your proposal and analysis, but unfortunately I don't think it will ever work. It just makes too much sense and the final numerical outcome is just too equitable to ever have a chance . . .

I would say that mathematically it's not surprising that the average rankings are all the same for Metro teams, since your methodology basically assured this. E.g., for a simple 8 team model with no teams subtracted out, (1+8)/2 = (2+7)/2 = (3+6)/2 = (4+5)/2.

Keep the ideas flowing and one day our grand-daughters might be playing under one of these equitable systems.

[Bulldog3489]

If we really wanted to make it equitable for our grandkids, schools with more than 2750 students would have their own class, private schools would not be eligible to play in the state tournament and we would eliminate huge cooperatives.

Oops there goes section 6.

[sinbin]

2,750 students certainly seems like the perfect dividing line for such a scenario.

[Bighead]

Simple solution for both Boys & Girls (that will never happen) because it makes too much sense...
Keep Sections as is, take final 16 & re-seed & play down to your 8 for State @ neutral sites on Friday & Saturday before state! Those that deserve to be in St. Paul will be there!

[36Guy]

If we really wanted to make it equitable for our grandkids, schools with more than 2750 students would have their own class, private schools would not be eligible to play in the state tournament and we would eliminate huge cooperatives.

Oops there goes section 6.

Actually I too have a little time....only one school in Section 6 has an enrollment over 2750 kids (Wayzata) and only one is private but very small (BSM). So that leaves Tonka, Hopkins and Buffalo. Which one of your schools would like to tangle with the winner?

I have a better idea Let's blame every good school for being too big or recruiting and give all the bad schools a free pass. What about St. Cloud or Duluth who draw from entire large cites and multiple schools. No blogs or complaints here?? Why not?? Ohhh...they are not really good so you don't care how many students they draw from correct? Or NWC who draws from 3 high schools or Buffalo which draws from 3 high schools all with a combined enrollment of over 4,000 kids. 18 of the "Top 20" schools have very large enrollments and 2 are private. So maybe if you don't like private schools or large enrollments you could start a state tournament for teams who are not in the top twenty. Maybe you could bring a trophy home to your "small" town.

[36Guy]

2,750 students certainly seems like the perfect dividing line for such a scenario.

Only 5 schools in the state have a enrollment over 2750. Eden Prairie, Champlin Park, Wayzata, Blaine and Coon Rapids. It would be a pretty small tournament...I suggest a round robin!!

[burnt toast]

Simple solution for both Boys & Girls (that will never happen) because it makes too much sense...
Keep Sections as is, take final 16 & re-seed & play down to your 8 for State @ neutral sites on Friday & Saturday before state! Those that deserve to be in St. Paul will be there!

They were able to do something with the football sections this year, why not hockey? Get rid of enrollment numbers altogether, they have little or no influence on the size of the program. Wayzata has 3 U14s a full jv and varsity bench coon rapids barley has a jv. Why not just let schools declare A or AA. The A tourney set up to limit cities teams and the AA set up to get the teams that are playing best in February. The A tourney could have 1 team from each corner of the cities and 1 each corner of outstate. 8 teams in A and 8 in AA.

[capitalist]

From 2007-2010 Section 4AA won 3 State Championships. The year they didn't win it the representative from 4AA took eventual champion EP into 2 overtimes before losing 2-1, and then won the 3rd place game.
During that 4 year span the section was 11-1 at state and the conventional wisdom said the section had at least 4 teams each year, sometimes 5, that were deserving of a trip to the state tournament and that any of them could have won a state championship. 4AA fans enjoyed their terrific section tournament without complaining about the injustice and demanding realignment, etc.

OK, that's not entirely true--there was griping. But from what I remember it wasn't nearly as bad as the whining and wailing coming out of the western suburbs this season.

[JJhockeySS]

From 2007-2010 Section 4AA won 3 State Championships. The year they didn't win it the representative from 4AA took eventual champion EP into 2 overtimes before losing 2-1, and then won the 3rd place game.
During that 4 year span the section was 11-1 at state and the conventional wisdom said the section had at least 4 teams each year, sometimes 5, that were deserving of a trip to the state tournament and that any of them could have won a state championship. 4AA fans enjoyed their terrific section tournament without complaining about the injustice and demanding realignment, etc.

OK, that's not entirely true--there was griping. But from what I remember it wasn't nearly as bad as the whining and wailing coming out of the western suburbs this season.

I would go back and pull those posts to the top, as there was plenty of complaining, and much sympathizing. Bottom line is this is the way the tourneys are set up now. I have a good friend who is a b-ball coach, and they think they have a legitimate chance of going to 64 team bracket in the very near future. Which makes sense for b-ball fans to support, but I'm not sure most hockey purists would support it. I think it would be interesting and you could do regions of the state the same way the NCAA does in order to limit travel as much as possible.

[D6 Girls Fan]

OK, that's not entirely true--there was griping. But from what I remember it wasn't nearly as bad as the whining and wailing coming out of the western suburbs this season.

It's easier to gripe now than it used to be.

But the longer that injustice exists, the louder the complaints against it tend to get. They should just fix it.

[MNHockeyFan]

This is a common discussion topic on the boys forum. In the most current thread, goldy313 posted an interesting statistic as it relates to the boys high school tournament, which shows that it has been even more imbalanced - with the 6AA teams winning almost all of their games - than the girls tournament. It makes you wonder how the 6AA runner-up would have done if they had been given the opportunity to advance:

(Boys) State Tournament record from 2007 until present:
1AA 6-9
2AA 9-8
3AA 7-10
4AA 9-8
5AA 4-11
6AA 16-2
7AA 8-8
8AA 8-9

So if the MSHSL ever decides to "fix it" they should do it equally for the girls and the boys!

[Bulldog3489]

2,750 students certainly seems like the perfect dividing line for such a scenario.

Only 5 schools in the state have a enrollment over 2750. Eden Prairie, Champlin Park, Wayzata, Blaine and Coon Rapids. It would be a pretty small tournament...I suggest a round robin!!

According to MSHSL website, just Wayzata, Eden Prairie and Minnetonka are above 2750. Sound pretty close to where the "unfair" complainers live?

[sinbin]

Not sure if everyone realizes that my above comment was facetious. My apologies for any confusion.

[esox101]

I think it goes beyond just section make-up, and I also think basing class solely on enrollment is incredibly deceptive, especially when you look at some of the Co-op programs. .

I realize this is a larger issue perhaps, but I think it still fits in to the conversation - if the conversation is about a fairly balanced league anyhow.

Two good examples: The Minneapolis Novas and the St Paul Blades.

Take the Blades. With players from Como, Central and Highland, the student enrollment is almost 4,000. Central alone has more than 1700 students...

Two of them play varsity girls hockey for the Blades.

With two youth associations to draw from (Como/Johnson and Highland) there is a moderately strong youth program at the base of the pyramid. Highland Central HA's girl's teams are consistently competitive in D2 - not powerhouses by any stretch, but not doormats either. Middle of the pack to upper third depending on the year.

But that talent disperses to multiple HS programs. As near as I can figure, of 15 HS eligible players on Highland's 14U team from last season, 11 went to various private schools (CDH, SPA, Minnehaha, HA). 4 play for the Blades. I'm not sure Como/Johnson HAD a 14U team last season. They may have cooped with another association. Cretin-DH (300 fewer students than Central alone) had I want to say 40-some girls at tryouts. The Blades were ecstatic to have enough for a JV team this season - and most of them are 7th and 8th graders.

I don't know the details for the Novas, but I expect they're similar.

During the regular season the Blades are competitive with the Novas, SP United, Minnehaha (Tri-metro conference teams) and non-conference teams like St Louis Park, Holy Angels, Waseca, etc. They get smoked by Blake and Breck, along with pretty much everyone else in the Tri-Metro conference with the occasional exception of SP-U.

Come sections, Blake, Breck, SP-U, etc, head to Class A, while The Blades and Novas (4th and 5th in the Tri-metro behind Blake, Breck and SP-U) are in 4AA.

Last night the Blades and Novas played a play-in game - an exciting, very competitive 2-1 game that the Blades ultimately won. It was the rubber match for a regular season split between the two teams.

Their reward? Hill Murray. If the final looks like anything less than a lopsided football game, it will be a moral victory for the Blades.

I want to be clear - this isn't a complaint about private schools recruiting, or using enrollment size as a justification for playing in Class A for a theoretically easier path to the state tournament. Nor is it a complaint about having to play tougher teams you might not be able to compete against.

It's to point out that largely arbitrary yardsticks like enrollment don't tell the whole story on either end of the spectrum, whether it's highly competitive teams from small schools like BSM or co-op teams like the Blades or Novas ( or, I suspect, other co-ops.) On paper, a team like the Blades has a far larger student body than a private school like Blake, or smaller (relative term) public schools like St Louis Park. On the ice, the Blades are moderately competitive with 'smaller' programs, but have no business being on the ice with teams like Hill Murray, Edina, Roseville or Minnetonka, and no prayer of being competitive, even though their enrollment size says they should be. Check the score Friday night to see what the result of the current system looks like, and ask yourself if it did either Hill Murray or the Blades' programs any good.

There will always be powerhouses and weaker programs, but if the ultimate goal is to have teams play against teams of at least comparable ability, there has to be a better way to do this than current practice.

[Silent But Deadly]

Well thought out and well said.....and nice first post!

[Racki2016]

Bump

[u12dad]

How about letting the coaches from each section vote on what class a team belongs to base on the upcoming year or two years expectation of strength. They are the ones with the knowledge of the strength and depth of the teams in their conference. School size has less to do with the quality of the program, than the players on the team and where they choose to play for if it is a private school. This would be the great equalizer.