Private School Trash talk thread

[thestickler07]

[rainier]

Rainier you keep saying that STA draws from a huge metro talent pull (Talent pull? Is this when the top hockey players put on harnesses and try to pull 3 tons of bricks 100 ft.?) when with the $20,000 tuition that you pay for STA you could play in any program in the state, because I am pretty sure you can get a nice place up there in Hibbing for 80k because is what four years at STA will cost you (unless you get financial aid, which many students do, especially good hockey players, i imagine.), but these students and families choose to attend STA for more than what their athletics have to offer. (Yeah, I'm sure tons of families can't wait to completely uproot their lives, leaving their jobs and homes behind in the metro to play in Hibbing. You can't pretend proximity isn't a major factor in choosing a school. I'm sorry, but your example couldn't be further from a real-world scenario.) Also if you choose to go to STA you have to take part in the military program which means looking like a mailman everyday and you also have to take college prep classes and not to mention without girls seems like a lot just to play hockey. (So you don't think being in a major metropolitan area is an advantage for metro privates? Tell me how Little Falls or Luverne can acquire access to a larger talent pool? How is it a school can harvest talent from a multitude of surrounding AA-sized communities yet still be considered an A school in any meaningful way? Why do you think metro privates have won 18 of the last 25 Class A boys and girls hockey championships? What are they doing differently than what Virginia or Crookston are doing?)

[rainier]

More cut and paste comebacks? I'd call you a one-trick pony but I think horses actually have IQs higher than that of a small meatball.

And now you got Ogie backing you up? The GED Dream Team! Look out world, here comes a whole lot of everything except actual discussion about high school hockey. Although I suspect there is a reason you guys refuse to have discussions and instead default to shallow criticisms that don't refute my arguments. That's what people do when they have nothing else.

Now how about you add something to the discussion? Why don't you tell me how it is STA came to power and how that blueprint can be applied to outstate communities? You clearly don't think STA has had any type of significant advantage, so go ahead and pull your gerbil out for five minutes and tell me how it can be done. It surely has nothing to do with STA being in a metro area of 2.5 million people, so there must be plenty of other clever innovations they implemented that allowed them to blast by communities that have populations of 10,000 or even less. Wield your logic like the Fleming Saber and slice me up, Colonel.

What do you think about BSM's decision to opt up when they weren't dominant? Do you find it inspiring or embarrassing? Is it weird to think that someone would attempt something without being virtually guaranteed of being the winner? I guess you're okay with your team accepting high school hockey welfare instead of really earning anything.

Why do you think 18 of the last 25 boys and girls Class A hs hockey titles have been won by metro privates? How is it these teams have won 72% of the titles yet only make up 9% of the teams in Class A? I would love to hear your explanation.

Or you can just keep on strengthening my argument by avoiding answering any questions. But given that there is no guarantee you would be successful, I understand why you wouldn't want to even try.

Arguing the principle is important rainier, I won't even charge ya for that nugget of knowledge.

And maybe its better coaching? Or is that too wild of a theory for the pushpin board of yours?

First of all, thank you for actually taking part in the discussion. The next time you are at McDonald's, explain to Ogie and Deacon that doing so is a good way for people to take you seriously, but wait until they're on break, I wouldn't want them to be in jeopardy of losing their dream jobs.

Coaching, eh? Yeah, let's talk about coaching, that's no too wild of a theory for me or my pushpin board. I'll use Hibbing for my example. Let's see who is on the coaching staff at Hibbing:

Head coach-played 4 years for Michigan State
Assistant coach-played 4 years for St. Cloud State
Goalie coach-played for National Development team and was starting goalie for the Minnesota Golden Gophers 2002 NCAA Championship team.

I can't say I know the background of the staff at STA, but I can't imagine they are significantly better than this group.

So, it appears coaching wouldn't be an advantage STA would have over an outstate public school like Hibbing. Do you have any other ideas? Because it still seems like you are having trouble explaining away the 2.5 million person elephant in the room, also known as STA being smack dab in the middle of the 16th largest metro area in the United States. And you haven't made any attempt at the "Rags to Riches" challenge yet, which casts serious doubt on your claim that outstate schools aren't at a major disadvantage to metro private schools.

Just so you know, it would be really hard for anyone to get owned worse than you just did on the whole coaching question. But keep trying, I'm sure you can top yourself.

[rainier]

You clowns keep substituting pre-made images for any actual discussion, so I will keep asking you questions so that everyone knows you are ducking them.

How can an outstate public school can be as good as STA or Breck. I would love to see you make any type of even remotely effective argument that the discrepancy has nothing to do with population.

Time to put on your O'Reilly Factor pajamas, Ogie. Mommy will be in to read you a right wing propaganda bedtime story soon.

[SquirtC'00]

Rainier you keep saying that STA draws from a huge metro talent pull (Talent pull? Is this when the top hockey players put on harnesses and try to pull 3 tons of bricks 100 ft.?) when with the $20,000 tuition that you pay for STA you could play in any program in the state, because I am pretty sure you can get a nice place up there in Hibbing for 80k because is what four years at STA will cost you (unless you get financial aid, which many students do, especially good hockey players, i imagine.), but these students and families choose to attend STA for more than what their athletics have to offer. (Yeah, I'm sure tons of families can't wait to completely uproot their lives, leaving their jobs and homes behind in the metro to play in Hibbing. You can't pretend proximity isn't a major factor in choosing a school. I'm sorry, but your example couldn't be further from a real-world scenario.) Also if you choose to go to STA you have to take part in the military program which means looking like a mailman everyday and you also have to take college prep classes and not to mention without girls seems like a lot just to play hockey. (So you don't think being in a major metropolitan area is an advantage for metro privates? Tell me how Little Falls or Luverne can acquire access to a larger talent pool? How is it a school can harvest talent from a multitude of surrounding AA-sized communities yet still be considered an A school in any meaningful way? Why do you think metro privates have won 18 of the last 25 Class A boys and girls hockey championships? What are they doing differently than what Virginia or Crookston are doing?)

Ok I am going to try to address the points you made.

1. Sorry about the typo on “talent pool” it was an autocorrect
2. The whole point of financial aid to be given to people with financial need not to those who possess athletic talent.
3. We have discussed before players leaving one town and playing for a different town I was simply adding on to the idea that if someone used the same money they spent for STA tuition and moved to a different community say from St. Louis Park to Edina it would be very much possible.
4. Ok now to the meat of your argument what could schools like Virginia, Crookston, Luverne or even Hibbing do to compete? Well the simple answer is that they are already doing it, it’s called CO-OPS. All these schools that you mentioned (you didn’t say Hibbing I understand but I threw it in there anyways) are Co-ops,
Virginia=Virginia/Mountain Iron-Buhl
Crookston=Crookston/Fertile-Beltrami/Fisher
Luverne=Luverne/Adrian
Hibbing=Hibbing/Chisholm
You might not like it but this is the trend to compete. Also you keep mentioning girls class A but that doesn’t have to do with anything but fluff up the stats

[thestickler07]

First of all, thank you for actually taking part in the discussion. The next time you are at McDonald's, explain to Ogie and Deacon that doing so is a good way for people to take you seriously, but wait until they're on break, I wouldn't want them to be in jeopardy of losing their dream jobs.

Coaching, eh? Yeah, let's talk about coaching, that's no too wild of a theory for me or my pushpin board. I'll use Hibbing for my example. Let's see who is on the coaching staff at Hibbing:

Head coach-played 4 years for Michigan State
Assistant coach-played 4 years for St. Cloud State
Goalie coach-played for National Development team and was starting goalie for the Minnesota Golden Gophers 2002 NCAA Championship team.

I can't say I know the background of the staff at STA, but I can't imagine they are significantly better than this group.

So, it appears coaching wouldn't be an advantage STA would have over an outstate public school like Hibbing. Do you have any other ideas? Because it still seems like you are having trouble explaining away the 2.5 million person elephant in the room, also known as STA being smack dab in the middle of the 16th largest metro area in the United States. And you haven't made any attempt at the "Rags to Riches" challenge yet, which casts serious doubt on your claim that outstate schools aren't at a major disadvantage to metro private schools.

Just so you know, it would be really hard for anyone to get owned worse than you just did on the whole coaching question. But keep trying, I'm sure you can top yourself.

Hahahaha you're too much sometimes!

You've boiled your argument down to good players automatically=good coaches now?



If you can't see the fallacy in that I don't know if anything can be done to help you guys.

Why didn't Gretzky bring four straight cups home to the desert when he coached Phoenix? Chew on that one for a bit and then regurgitate your thoughts on this page when you're done with that...



And remember rainier, its about the principle! Heed my advice and you and the Bluejackets will go far!

[rainier]

Here are my thoughts Rainier and i apologize for calling you simple minded earlier in this thread: (No offense taken.)

STA is a tremendous school who should be playing hockey at the AA level. They have proven over the last ten years that by investing in high quality coaches they have been able to raise the bar for hockey succes at the school. The high school was the beneficiary of a rink privately funded basically on their campus which was to also serve the Univeristy of St Thomas mens and womens programs. Prior to 2003 the alumni were not embarassed about playing A hockey, they were just plain embarrased about their hockey program. I believe it was 2002 when the team won 3 or so games. The fact they were able to attract high quality coaches the same year a new rink was built certainly is not a coincendence.
This blue print can not be duplicated in the smaller public schools of Minnesota... I Agree. (Thank you, and it is this fact that I have been trying to get through to the stooges who keep saying that it is possible. But it is important to also mention that their level of success would not be possible if it weren't for them being located in the metro area. The combination of their blueprint and huge talent pool made this rise possible. Moose Lake can build an exact copy of Excel Energy Center and hire Gordie Howe as coach, but they aint beating Breck without having access to the huge number of potential players that the metro area holds. This is a fact.)The move up probably was a couple of years after it should of happened... I Agree. (Thank you again. You seem to be reasonable, as I'm sure most private school alumni are, but the chance to make fools of those who claim otherwise is just too much fun to pass up.) They now have moved up and this will most likely be there final A state tournament. The angst should now be aimed at the Breck Mustangs. (I agree, but for some reason I never seem to hear from Breck fans. It's as if they are embarrassed that their school has played a major part in making a mockery of the Class A tournament and they are smart enough to know that to refute that would only make them look worse. I guess some people know when to quit when they're ahead, we call those people "not complete morons".)
What i have a problem with is your disparaging remarks about the school in general. (I acknowledge I hammer the schools pretty hard too, but the administrators at these places were the ones who decided to throw morality and sportsmanship in high school sports out the window in the name of publicity for their businesses, so forgive me if I feel that schools who loudly claim to be bastions of integrity and leadership and then do the exact opposite in real life deserve to be called out on the carpet, sometimes with rough language.) Just like i am not an expert on the public school system, i question your ability to access STA and what it has to offer its students. (I am not an expert, but I have gathered my info from STA alumni that offer it up on a regular basis. I have also done a fair amount of research about STA, so I feel I know a few things. But you are right, I am not an expert.)

Frankly, the vast majority of alumni agree with your assesment of STA belonging in AA, and if placed in 4aa, i would anticipate great matchups pretty much on a yearly basis with Hill Murray to reach the state tournament. (Yep, and it would have been a great matchup for quite a few years now, but instead of "risking" it, STA chose to beat on community public schools in order to make their brochures more impressive. I'm sorry but I'm just calling a spade a spade. My hometown opted up for 5 years and there are several others that continue to do so today, and I think a grand total of one AA title has come out of all of it. These are all teams that could have had wild success in Class A, but they took the high road, and to see exploitation in high school sports get rewarded turns my stomach. )

Thank you for a well thought out post. I may not agree with everything, but I appreciate that you took the time to address the issues instead of just posting photos that accomplish nothing.

[rainier]

Rainier you keep saying that STA draws from a huge metro talent pull (Talent pull? Is this when the top hockey players put on harnesses and try to pull 3 tons of bricks 100 ft.?) when with the $20,000 tuition that you pay for STA you could play in any program in the state, because I am pretty sure you can get a nice place up there in Hibbing for 80k because is what four years at STA will cost you (unless you get financial aid, which many students do, especially good hockey players, i imagine.), but these students and families choose to attend STA for more than what their athletics have to offer. (Yeah, I'm sure tons of families can't wait to completely uproot their lives, leaving their jobs and homes behind in the metro to play in Hibbing. You can't pretend proximity isn't a major factor in choosing a school. I'm sorry, but your example couldn't be further from a real-world scenario.) Also if you choose to go to STA you have to take part in the military program which means looking like a mailman everyday and you also have to take college prep classes and not to mention without girls seems like a lot just to play hockey. (So you don't think being in a major metropolitan area is an advantage for metro privates? Tell me how Little Falls or Luverne can acquire access to a larger talent pool? How is it a school can harvest talent from a multitude of surrounding AA-sized communities yet still be considered an A school in any meaningful way? Why do you think metro privates have won 18 of the last 25 Class A boys and girls hockey championships? What are they doing differently than what Virginia or Crookston are doing?)

Ok I am going to try to address the points you made. (Thank you for having numbered topics, which makes it easier for us to follow each other's arguments.)

1. Sorry about the typo on “talent pool” it was an autocorrect (I apologize, that was a cheap shot. I've been spending too much time responding to Ogie and I sometimes forget not everyone is an airhead.)
2. The whole point of financial aid to be given to people with financial need not to those who possess athletic talent. (I'm speculating, but I'm guessing that if two students with identical academic records show up at STA needing financial aid to get in, and STA only has enough for one of them, the one that can help the hockey team more is getting the dough. I could be wrong but I doubt it. I would give a major organ to see STAs records on who received what financial aid over the last decade.)
3. We have discussed before players leaving one town and playing for a different town I was simply adding on to the idea that if someone used the same money they spent for STA tuition and moved to a different community say from St. Louis Park to Edina it would be very much possible. (But they wouldn't move to an outstate school, it isn't realistic, which means that they all stay in the metro area, which is enormous.)
4. Ok now to the meat of your argument what could schools like Virginia, Crookston, Luverne or even Hibbing do to compete? Well the simple answer is that they are already doing it, it’s called CO-OPS. All these schools that you mentioned (you didn’t say Hibbing I understand but I threw it in there anyways) are Co-ops,
Virginia=Virginia/Mountain Iron-Buhl
Crookston=Crookston/Fertile-Beltrami/Fisher
Luverne=Luverne/Adrian
Hibbing=Hibbing/Chisholm
You might not like it but this is the trend to compete. (Hibbing could co-op with every school within 60 miles from them and they still wouldn't be drawing from a potential pool anywhere nest the same size that STA does. And at some point, distance becomes too great of a factor to make co-opting feasible. I'm sorry, but there is no way getting around that STAs success in Class A wasn't anything more than a gargantuan advantage in the size of their talent pool.) On a side note, Chisholm is a die hard basketball school and they add almost nothing to Hibbing's hockey program, yet their numbers are added to the enrollment.) Also you keep mentioning girls class A but that doesn’t have to do with anything but fluff up the stats (It's not called fluffing up the stats, it's called strengthening an argument. On the boys side alone metro privates have won 11 of the last 14, and they are winning titles at the same improbable clip over on the girls side. Benilde got the gravy train rolling and everyone decided to hop on, but at least Benilde was smart enough to be the first to jump off and save face.)

Thank you for offering possibilities we could discuss, I appreciate your reasoned arguments.

[rainier]

First of all, thank you for actually taking part in the discussion. The next time you are at McDonald's, explain to Ogie and Deacon that doing so is a good way for people to take you seriously, but wait until they're on break, I wouldn't want them to be in jeopardy of losing their dream jobs.

Coaching, eh? Yeah, let's talk about coaching, that's no too wild of a theory for me or my pushpin board. I'll use Hibbing for my example. Let's see who is on the coaching staff at Hibbing:

Head coach-played 4 years for Michigan State
Assistant coach-played 4 years for St. Cloud State
Goalie coach-played for National Development team and was starting goalie for the Minnesota Golden Gophers 2002 NCAA Championship team.

I can't say I know the background of the staff at STA, but I can't imagine they are significantly better than this group.

So, it appears coaching wouldn't be an advantage STA would have over an outstate public school like Hibbing. Do you have any other ideas? Because it still seems like you are having trouble explaining away the 2.5 million person elephant in the room, also known as STA being smack dab in the middle of the 16th largest metro area in the United States. And you haven't made any attempt at the "Rags to Riches" challenge yet, which casts serious doubt on your claim that outstate schools aren't at a major disadvantage to metro private schools.

Just so you know, it would be really hard for anyone to get owned worse than you just did on the whole coaching question. But keep trying, I'm sure you can top yourself.

Hahahaha you're too much sometimes!

You've boiled your argument down to good players automatically=good coaches now? (Okay, Captain Emoticon, what criteria would you use to compare coaches? I sure hope you aren't planning to say that the Vanellis are great coaches because they have had success in Class A with what is clearly an AA team.)



If you can't see the fallacy in that I don't know if anything can be done to help you guys. (You figure out how a school like Hibbing can get to STA's level without having their huge talent pool yet? You wouldn't be avoiding this question because you know it would trap you in an untenable position, would you? Come on sticky, let's have it.)

Why didn't Gretzky bring four straight cups home to the desert when he coached Phoenix? Chew on that one for a bit and then regurgitate your thoughts on this page when you're done with that...(A little bruised that you got owned so severely on this topic, huh? I'm guessing it stings a little when you think you have someone beat and they comeback with info that makes you look foolish. Although you might be used to it by this point.)



And remember rainier, its about the principle! Heed my advice and you and the Bluejackets will go far!(I'd love to see your advice on how a school like Hibbing can become as good as STA. Funny, another private school fan just told me he also believed it was impossible, go ahead and read it. Do you disagree with him? If not, then why are you arguing with me. If so, then why don't you tell me why you disagree with him? Still waiting on any bit of evidence that lends any credence to your argument. I'm starting to think it will never happen. Probably because no such evidence exists. The emoticons and videos might make you feel better, but they sure don't help your case.)

[eastsideguy]

Here are my thoughts Rainier and i apologize for calling you simple minded earlier in this thread: (No offense taken.)

STA is a tremendous school who should be playing hockey at the AA level. They have proven over the last ten years that by investing in high quality coaches they have been able to raise the bar for hockey succes at the school. The high school was the beneficiary of a rink privately funded basically on their campus which was to also serve the Univeristy of St Thomas mens and womens programs. Prior to 2003 the alumni were not embarassed about playing A hockey, they were just plain embarrased about their hockey program. I believe it was 2002 when the team won 3 or so games. The fact they were able to attract high quality coaches the same year a new rink was built certainly is not a coincendence.
This blue print can not be duplicated in the smaller public schools of Minnesota... I Agree. (Thank you, and it is this fact that I have been trying to get through to the stooges who keep saying that it is possible. But it is important to also mention that their level of success would not be possible if it weren't for them being located in the metro area. The combination of their blueprint and huge talent pool made this rise possible. Moose Lake can build an exact copy of Excel Energy Center and hire Gordie Howe as coach, but they aint beating Breck without having access to the huge number of potential players that the metro area holds. This is a fact.)The move up probably was a couple of years after it should of happened... I Agree. (Thank you again. You seem to be reasonable, as I'm sure most private school alumni are, but the chance to make fools of those who claim otherwise is just too much fun to pass up.) They now have moved up and this will most likely be there final A state tournament. The angst should now be aimed at the Breck Mustangs. (I agree, but for some reason I never seem to hear from Breck fans. It's as if they are embarrassed that their school has played a major part in making a mockery of the Class A tournament and they are smart enough to know that to refute that would only make them look worse. I guess some people know when to quit when they're ahead, we call those people "not complete morons".)
What i have a problem with is your disparaging remarks about the school in general. (I acknowledge I hammer the schools pretty hard too, but the administrators at these places were the ones who decided to throw morality and sportsmanship in high school sports out the window in the name of publicity for their businesses, so forgive me if I feel that schools who loudly claim to be bastions of integrity and leadership and then do the exact opposite in real life deserve to be called out on the carpet, sometimes with rough language.) Just like i am not an expert on the public school system, i question your ability to access STA and what it has to offer its students. (I am not an expert, but I have gathered my info from STA alumni that offer it up on a regular basis. I have also done a fair amount of research about STA, so I feel I know a few things. But you are right, I am not an expert.)

Frankly, the vast majority of alumni agree with your assesment of STA belonging in AA, and if placed in 4aa, i would anticipate great matchups pretty much on a yearly basis with Hill Murray to reach the state tournament. (Yep, and it would have been a great matchup for quite a few years now, but instead of "risking" it, STA chose to beat on community public schools in order to make their brochures more impressive. I'm sorry but I'm just calling a spade a spade. My hometown opted up for 5 years and there are several others that continue to do so today, and I think a grand total of one AA title has come out of all of it. These are all teams that could have had wild success in Class A, but they took the high road, and to see exploitation in high school sports get rewarded turns my stomach. )

Thank you for a well thought out post. I may not agree with everything, but I appreciate that you took the time to address the issues instead of just posting photos that accomplish nothing.

Ranier, do you really believe that a private school who had been around 125 years with little hockey history all of the sudden decided after a 3 win season in 2003, hey its time we build up our hockey program so we can improve our brochure?

The rise as a hockey power was quicker and greater than anyone could have expected. I have already told you, they should have moved up sooner. But IMO to say they opted to stay at class A for the school recognition is not true. The school was around and doing well prior to 2003 and im sure the school will survive and thrive regardless of how it's hockey team does.
Some would argue the move to AA will make the school even more attractive to potential students. If it was all about marketing, publicity and attracting more student/athletes, why not do it sooner?

[Tenoverpar]

Is there any interest in starting a PUBLIC SCHOOL TRASH TALKING thread?

[rainier]

Here are my thoughts Rainier and i apologize for calling you simple minded earlier in this thread: (No offense taken.)

STA is a tremendous school who should be playing hockey at the AA level. They have proven over the last ten years that by investing in high quality coaches they have been able to raise the bar for hockey succes at the school. The high school was the beneficiary of a rink privately funded basically on their campus which was to also serve the Univeristy of St Thomas mens and womens programs. Prior to 2003 the alumni were not embarassed about playing A hockey, they were just plain embarrased about their hockey program. I believe it was 2002 when the team won 3 or so games. The fact they were able to attract high quality coaches the same year a new rink was built certainly is not a coincendence.
This blue print can not be duplicated in the smaller public schools of Minnesota... I Agree. (Thank you, and it is this fact that I have been trying to get through to the stooges who keep saying that it is possible. But it is important to also mention that their level of success would not be possible if it weren't for them being located in the metro area. The combination of their blueprint and huge talent pool made this rise possible. Moose Lake can build an exact copy of Excel Energy Center and hire Gordie Howe as coach, but they aint beating Breck without having access to the huge number of potential players that the metro area holds. This is a fact.)The move up probably was a couple of years after it should of happened... I Agree. (Thank you again. You seem to be reasonable, as I'm sure most private school alumni are, but the chance to make fools of those who claim otherwise is just too much fun to pass up.) They now have moved up and this will most likely be there final A state tournament. The angst should now be aimed at the Breck Mustangs. (I agree, but for some reason I never seem to hear from Breck fans. It's as if they are embarrassed that their school has played a major part in making a mockery of the Class A tournament and they are smart enough to know that to refute that would only make them look worse. I guess some people know when to quit when they're ahead, we call those people "not complete morons".)
What i have a problem with is your disparaging remarks about the school in general. (I acknowledge I hammer the schools pretty hard too, but the administrators at these places were the ones who decided to throw morality and sportsmanship in high school sports out the window in the name of publicity for their businesses, so forgive me if I feel that schools who loudly claim to be bastions of integrity and leadership and then do the exact opposite in real life deserve to be called out on the carpet, sometimes with rough language.) Just like i am not an expert on the public school system, i question your ability to access STA and what it has to offer its students. (I am not an expert, but I have gathered my info from STA alumni that offer it up on a regular basis. I have also done a fair amount of research about STA, so I feel I know a few things. But you are right, I am not an expert.)

Frankly, the vast majority of alumni agree with your assesment of STA belonging in AA, and if placed in 4aa, i would anticipate great matchups pretty much on a yearly basis with Hill Murray to reach the state tournament. (Yep, and it would have been a great matchup for quite a few years now, but instead of "risking" it, STA chose to beat on community public schools in order to make their brochures more impressive. I'm sorry but I'm just calling a spade a spade. My hometown opted up for 5 years and there are several others that continue to do so today, and I think a grand total of one AA title has come out of all of it. These are all teams that could have had wild success in Class A, but they took the high road, and to see exploitation in high school sports get rewarded turns my stomach. )

Thank you for a well thought out post. I may not agree with everything, but I appreciate that you took the time to address the issues instead of just posting photos that accomplish nothing.

Ranier, do you really believe that a private school who had been around 125 years with little hockey history all of the sudden decided after a 3 win season in 2003, hey its time we build up our hockey program so we can improve our brochure? (That's exactly what I think happened. I think they saw the 1999-2002 Class A championships go to Benilde, Breck, Benilde again, and Totino, and they saw all the free publicity these schools gained by winning titles. They saw the brochures these schools could now send out and the tremendous effect that the phrase "MN State High School Hockey Champions" could have in the State of Hockey. Being a business, I'm sure they calculated how much all of the free publicity was worth and decided it was some seriously low-hanging fruit that was too good to pass up. But after they built their program up to a level of being clearly competitive in AA, which I have no problem with, they just couldn't pull themselves away from the Class A teat because it was a veritable golden goose of free advertising, and as long as their competitors were also suckling right next to them they felt it would be bad business to risk an opt up. Only when the shaming became very public and very high profile did they take the risk, which, given they currently have a PageStat rating of 4, is not a risk in any meaningful way. This scenario sounds exactly like what a for-profit institution would do under these circumstances. If the shoe fits...)

The rise as a hockey power was quicker and greater than anyone could have expected. I have already told you, they should have moved up sooner. (Much sooner.)But IMO to say they opted to stay at class A for the school recognition is not true. (Why did they choose to go for it in hockey then? It's by far the most high profile sport in the state. Why did they go to all the trouble and expense of building a hockey juggernaut when they could have built up their wrestling, tennis, and cross country teams for far, far less of an investment and still have achieved their putative goal of improving the athletic environment for their students? Could it be that the wrestling, tennis, and cross country tournaments aren't televised and don't carry 1/1000th the weight when it comes to impressing potential students? To say they didn't do for recognition just doesn't hold water with me, they are a business, thus marketing, advertising, and positive press are extremely important to them.)The school was around and doing well prior to 2003 and im sure the school will survive and thrive regardless of how it's hockey team does. (Yes, but no one outside the school will care, which is why they wanted to become players in the hockey world.)
Some would argue the move to AA will make the school even more attractive to potential students. (Others have said this and given that BSM had been proving it to be true for six years prior to STA's last opt up opportunity, it does make one wonder why they didn't make the move much earlier.)If it was all about marketing, publicity and attracting more student/athletes, why not do it sooner? (STA was at the very apex of Class A and BSM was proving a double AA move was feasible, yet they stayed put. This to me is strong evidence for the trophy-chasing hypothesis. Instead of facing stiffer competition, they decided to stay in the smaller class and dominate. Whether it was greed for glory or greed for publicity doesn't matter, what matters is that they had an ethical decision to make and they chose the path that no one other than themselves or other metro private schools feel was the morally responsible one.)

[elliott70]

Is there any interest in starting a PUBLIC SCHOOL TRASH TALKING thread?

I thought that is what they are doing here.

[Hock1239]

I was not defending whether or not they should have moved up earlier. They are not making a decision based upon what is fair for other teams but what is best for their program. Given that they want to have a hockey program that will be successful now and in the future. They must of thought staying in class a instead of moving up right away gives them a greater chance at long run success. Although at some point they knew they would have to move up because to be considered an elite high school hockey program you have to play in class AA. Their only reason for staying in class a then is they are concerned about whether they could continue to attract the same level of talent.

The statistics were a bad example, but as you have said they do not have a history of being a successful hockey school. The first few years they had success was mainly due to the same group of players. They probably wanted to make sure that kids who would most likely develop into top high school players would still attend the school.


They do gain large advantages from being in the metro area but do not draw from the whole metro area. They compete with other private schools in their area for players. The majority of students who attend private schools either have been in a private school most of their life or have siblings that have or will go to a private high school. For the students that go to a private school to just play hockey it means that they value having a good high school program more than the metro area public school in which they live. Nobody from Edina is leaving to go to a private school just to play hockey unless they are not good enough to make the team. Obviously, most of these students and their families make the decision Freshmen year but the better hockey program a private school has compared to other private schools as well as other differences in the school will cause families to self select a school based upon how likely a player will be able to make the team at the school and how likely the team is to be successful. So the players who have a greater probability at being a top player and really value how much success the team will have will pick the schools that are relatively better at hockey than there peers.

Good point with BSM one reason I think they were able to bypass this is it is located in a more western suburb than most well known hockey private schools. Families from Minntonka and Eden Prairie aren't going to send their kids to Hill Murray or Saint Thomas it is to far of a drive. So them and Breck are the two schools with established hockey programs they are likely to send their kids to.

Also, I agree most kids start playing hockey at three or four before it can be determined whether they are naturally talented but hockey is still relatively more expensive than other sports regardless of age. Families are going to value having their kids playing hockey differently. So there is a different income level for every family where if they make less than that they will not have there kids play hockey. Suburban Incomes are higher than non metro incomes on average. The difference in these incomes will mean more kids on average will play hockey. The more kids that play hockey will increase the probability of having more naturally talented players. It is probably a very small impact but if it means one more first or second line player a year it makes a difference.


I question the low hanging fruit in terms of publicity. A family isn't going to send a kid to a school over another private if they have no interest in playing hockey because the team is good. Also, if they are going to spend a significant amount of money on a private school they will have done a lot of research on STA and other private schools. So they will not hear about STA for the first time at the state tournament. Maybe it is good for alumni relations but I believe the main reason is a member from the board of trustees wanted a good hockey program. The board has much more control over the school than the head master and they are on the board because they have given a significant amount of money to the school. If they want and are willing to donate a significant amount of money to the school for a hockey program the school has to do it.

Hibbing cannot have the rapid success that STA has no public school can, but they can build an elite Class A program. Look at people in Edina the majority of the people who live there clearly place more value on hockey than other sports and activities. So, they have a larger percentage of their kids playing hockey. A kid from Edina has equally as good of a chance to be naturally talented as a kid living anywhere else in minnesota but by having a larger proportion of their youth population playing hockey it increases the odds of them having more naturally talented players than say hopkins which values basketball more than hockey. Also, if these families value hockey more than other activities more public funds will be put into hockey so they will have better facilities and programs at all ages of competition. So a naturally talented player in Edina's program will be better developed than other programs if they received the same amount of training on the side. Obviously, demographics change impacting the number of kids in school each year at Edina so when the size of Edina high school shrinks relative to other metro areas having a higher proportion of youth playing hockey will have a smaller impact. If Hibbing wants to develop an elite high school team than the majority of the population who lives there has to increase the amount they value hockey. If this happens more public funds and a larger proportion of kids will play hockey leading to a higher probability of having more naturally talented players in hockey and having these players better developed.

[HShockeywatcher]

Oh man, it appears my absence is bearing missed dearly by rainier. I hope he doesn't get too lonely when I am away, ya know, at a job and completing other responsibilities. When he had other responsibilities, I was supposed to understand, so I'm glad he can too.

If you'd like to think I'm not quoting the things to help serve some higher purpose, you're more than welcome to. Really, I'm doing it because it saves time. It takes time (that you aren't willing to take) to cut and paste many different quotes from someone else and respond to them all.

When I misread something of yours, it's the end of the world and I'm somehow twisting everything, but when you misread something or misquote me (admittedly) you just cover it up and make excuses. Interesting way to argue.

Ultimately, you are taking first hand accounts of multiple people with them to make and saying they are wrong. If you want my opinion, or Sticklers, Ogie, or anyone else's, ask and be constructive in your response. Most of us are trying to have an informed discussion on the topic. You have a perspective that some of us don't have, and cannot have. If you were able to be more respectful and actually accept our experiences for what they are, you could get much farther in this.

I find it interesting you bring up BSM. From their first Class A title, they spent 6 more years in Class A before going to AA. From STA's first title, they will have spent 7 more years. Very similar.

You also continue to show how little you know about the dynamics at play at private schools. Your recent "That's exactly what I think happened." comment shows this exactly. People are repeatedly explaining many things to you about the operations as they know them and your response is to simply tell them they are wrong. You don't have to agree with them; there are people at the school who don't. But saying they are wrong is just silly.

You are honestly the first person on here to explain/have your rational for why enrollment does matter so much to hockey. Not much disagreement there from a simple numbers perspective.

Rainier's world: You can be in class A as long as you don't win.

This is ultimately what I dislike about the private hating opinion.
If you are going to say that every private school should opt up for various reasons, that makes sense. If, though, it is only bad for successful private school to be in a specific class, then it's not logical.

Had a chance to speak with someone close to the Breck boys hockey team this weekend. And by close I mean employed by Breck, not a random parent. Interesting perspective on staying in A, and probably an indication they aren't moving up anytime soon.

During our hockey discussion (and knowing I'm from Hill) I asked if they have considered moving up to AA. My question was instantly met with disgust. This person informed me that their high school has less than 400 students. How could they possibly compete with schools that have classes double the size of their entire school? How could they compete with the private schools that have nearly double the student body? When I brought up that the school pulls from the entire metro and can't be compared to a small town with similar numbers, they didn't have much of an answer. Just repeatedly referenced their student body population.

Anyway, interesting to see into the mind of a metro private school program in A and thought I would pass it along.

My personal opinion, yours may be different, is that very few people who teach at a school (for example) should have an opinion that carries any weight in an athletic discussion. Being a teacher at a school and being someone who knows anything about the intricacies of the sports are two very different things.

Please continue to besmirch our characters. It looks like it helps with your self esteem. However, like what you've stated before, it adds nothing to this discussion. (You're only hurting your own argument and image)

He's very good at that.
We were PMing for a while, then when I didn't 'cite specifics' he told me it was "cowardly and ineffective." When I responded and asked him to do the same, he told me to wait because he was busy; that was two months ago.

If you had actually been paying attention to the discussion, you would see that all the teams you listed are either not as good as STA or else they are already in AA (or both). HSHW claims that STA has no overall advantage over outstate public schools, so I just want him to explain how an outstate public school can get to STA's level; clearly Hermantown and Warroad are not at that level. If I called the other schools on your list, they would tell me to start by having an AA-sized talent pool, which isn't an option for outstate public schools, yet funnily enough it is exactly what metro private schools have.

You keep repeating this despite my never saying this. I'd be curious if instead of repeating what I have said, find this post and quote it.
My opinion is not that they don't have advantages, it is that those advantages do not always make them better. It is also that they have disadvantages to, ones you will not acknowledge.

You won't accept my challenge? Why not? This is your big chance. There won't be any need to answer any of those other questions as your plan will lay out exactly how a small community can compete with metro privates and will put the matter to rest. I'm being totally serious here, I want to hear your plan.

You do understand what failure to accept this challenge implies, don't you?

Honestly, I'm not sure why I would accept this. Almost every opinion I give you, you turn around and say is wrong. You are asking my opinion here, why would this be any different?

You were holding answers to my questions hostage until I accepted some weird challenge of yours. By not responding, I was simply not letting you ignore everything I say and dictate every direction of the conversation.

If you are actually interested in my opinion on the topic, I'd be happy to share with the board. If you're just looking for something that you can quote, bold and explain to me why my opinion is wrong, then I'll pass.

Your issue continues to be that you want "to be right" and not to gain information.

[Ogie]

Ultimately, you are taking first hand accounts of multiple people with them to make and saying they are wrong. If you want my opinion, or Sticklers, Ogie, or anyone else's, ask and be constructive in your response. Most of us are trying to have an informed discussion on the topic. You have a perspective that some of us don't have, and cannot have. If you were able to be more respectful and actually accept our experiences for what they are, you could get much farther in this.

There is no having any kind of informed constructive conversation with uninformed puerile bigots.....They know it all and you are either an idiot, evil or both.

I'll just stick to pointing and laughing at his rambling incoherent text walls and nutty conspiracy theories, thankyouverymuch.

[deacon]

The look on Gerrard's face is too much.

More cut and paste comebacks? I'd call you a one-trick pony but I think horses actually have IQs higher than that of a small meatball.

And now you got Ogie backing you up? The GED Dream Team! Look out world, here comes a whole lot of everything except actual discussion about high school hockey. Although I suspect there is a reason you guys refuse to have discussions and instead default to shallow criticisms that don't refute my arguments. That's what people do when they have nothing else.

Now how about you add something to the discussion? Why don't you tell me how it is STA came to power and how that blueprint can be applied to outstate communities? You clearly don't think STA has had any type of significant advantage, so go ahead and pull your gerbil out for five minutes and tell me how it can be done. It surely has nothing to do with STA being in a metro area of 2.5 million people, so there must be plenty of other clever innovations they implemented that allowed them to blast by communities that have populations of 10,000 or even less. Wield your logic like the Fleming Saber and slice me up, Colonel.

What do you think about BSM's decision to opt up when they weren't dominant? Do you find it inspiring or embarrassing? Is it weird to think that someone would attempt something without being virtually guaranteed of being the winner? I guess you're okay with your team accepting high school hockey welfare instead of really earning anything.

Why do you think 18 of the last 25 boys and girls Class A hs hockey titles have been won by metro privates? How is it these teams have won 72% of the titles yet only make up 9% of the teams in Class A? I would love to hear your explanation.

Or you can just keep on strengthening my argument by avoiding answering any questions. But given that there is no guarantee you would be successful, I understand why you wouldn't want to even try.

Almost every single post you make begins with an insult. They're unoriginal, dull, and not funny. We're not the ones slinging insults around. To be honest, I'm kind of surprised you're not banned yet.

I never said Hibbing or any other outstate school could become like a St. Thomas Academy. Not once.

As for making a case of rags to riches for Hibbing, I honestly don't care. I couldn't give a rats ass about the Hibbing high school hockey team or their hockey association. Whether or not they win 5, 10, or 20 games does not matter at all to me. The same goes for any school in the entire state except the one I graduated from.

The difference between people like you and people like me is you get hung up and mad about things you have no control over. STA has had success and is moving up, if not a little late. You're most likely a grown man (I'm 28 ) and you sit at your computer all night hammering keys on your keyboard on an internet high school hockey message board insulting people, complaining about private schools, its not fair, blah blah blah. Find a hobby and move on with your life, it's pathetic.

[Hock1239]

I think the real question that needs to be answered is whether or not the MSHL should change its policies about the class system. Obiviously, teams such as STA see an advantage in staying in class A longer than most people consider fair. I am unfamiliar with alternative options but 3 come to mind.

Either privates form their own class. If this were the case it would probably have to happen in every sport. If this happened they would probably create their own organizing body for sports, which would have different rules on the amounts teams can practice and how many games they can play. This could alter not just hockey players decisions but all athletes decisions on how they view private schools. Private schools could drain significant talent from public schools if they organized the structure of the leagues to be geared towards more series players by allowing year around practice and more games. Especially, if it does not impose transfer restrictions if students transfered in after Freshmen year.


The Minnesota high school league develops a fluid system where teams switch classes based upon recent results. This could only work if it happened every year and class a sections were geographically similar to the the class aa sections. Suppose the winner of each section had to move up every year and the worst team in every section would move down. I don't think this would work geographically but even if it did it teams that win sections are most likely to have a lot of seniors on the team. While, teams that finished in last are most likely to be younger. Maybe it will force STA and some other teams to move up right away but in the long run teams dont field consistent talent from a year to year basis. So previous success isn't a garuntee for future success.


The third option is to have the MSHL to force teams to move up based upon past performance and judge them independently. Obviously this is already a polazing issue by adding politics it will only create more divides.

I think the system we have now is the best option. Teams such as STA might stay in class a for too many years, but if they are constantly winning titles it signals they are trying to build an elite hockey program. If they are trying to be an elite program they will opt up to double aa because to be considered elite they have to have success at the higher level. So, in the short run teams like STA might dominate, but they will opt up in the long run. In my mind this is a far less detrimental to high school hockey than the other options.

[Ogie]

Almost every single post you make begins with an insult. They're unoriginal, dull, and not funny. We're not the ones slinging insults around. To be honest, I'm kind of surprised you're not banned yet.

I never said Hibbing or any other outstate school could become like a St. Thomas Academy. Not once.

As for making a case of rags to riches for Hibbing, I honestly don't care. I couldn't give a rats ass about the Hibbing high school hockey team or their hockey association. Whether or not they win 5, 10, or 20 games does not matter at all to me. The same goes for any school in the entire state except the one I graduated from.

The difference between people like you and people like me is you get hung up and mad about things you have no control over. STA has had success and is moving up, if not a little late. You're most likely a grown man (I'm 28 ) and you sit at your computer all night hammering keys on your keyboard on an internet high school hockey message board insulting people, complaining about private schools, its not fair, blah blah blah. Find a hobby and move on with your life, it's pathetic.

^^^
What he said.

[PuckU126]

Almost every single post you make begins with an insult. They're unoriginal, dull, and not funny. We're not the ones slinging insults around. To be honest, I'm kind of surprised you're not banned yet.

I never said Hibbing or any other outstate school could become like a St. Thomas Academy. Not once.

As for making a case of rags to riches for Hibbing, I honestly don't care. I couldn't give a rats ass about the Hibbing high school hockey team or their hockey association. Whether or not they win 5, 10, or 20 games does not matter at all to me. The same goes for any school in the entire state except the one I graduated from.

The difference between people like you and people like me is you get hung up and mad about things you have no control over. STA has had success and is moving up, if not a little late. You're most likely a grown man (I'm 28 ) and you sit at your computer all night hammering keys on your keyboard on an internet high school hockey message board insulting people, complaining about private schools, its not fair, blah blah blah. Find a hobby and move on with your life, it's pathetic.

^^^
What he said.

[HShockeywatcher]

I think the real question that needs to be answered is whether or not the MSHL should change its policies about the class system. Obiviously, teams such as STA see an advantage in staying in class A longer than most people consider fair. I am unfamiliar with alternative options but 3 come to mind.

Why only three?

-How about an enrollment system where the bottom 64 teams are put in one class?
You'd like solve virtually every issue we have now.
-How about an enrollment system where the top half are in one class and the bottom half in the other?
Similar results.
-How about a system where there are no opt ups? I'd also be for something like the same proportion of private schools in the top class as the publics.
The classes are supposed to be about size, not talent. As they are in every other sport/state.
-3 classes?
Not what anyone really wants, but it's the "everyone gets a trophy" generation and this would likely solve many of the current complaints.

I don't know what the answer is, it's a tricky topic. I just don't like a perspective that when a team has success, it's unfair, but when they are unsuccessful, it's okay.

In my mind this is a far less detrimental to high school hockey than the other options.

Agreed.

[Hock1239]

In my mind enrollement size is the best but not the only indicator of how competitive teams will be. Also, how much the geographical area in the public school and the private school value hockey relative to other options impacts it as well.

So if you split the class system equally based on enrollement into two class systems but do not allow schools to opt up. Some schools like STA would desire to opt up after having a certain amount of sustained success because they want to be measured against the class with bigger schools. STA's decision to move up was their own decision. They didn't decide to move up because of a public outcry in fairness. They wanted to compete against the higher levels. The teams that decide to move up will be the ones that have an enrollement figure close to some schools who are in the higher class and value hockey relatively more than other activities compared to other schools. You cannot force these schools to move up but some will want to and they should be allowed to if they so desire.


My problem with splitting the private schools in half between the classes is it is an arbitrary number and many more private schools are currently in class a than double a. But many of these teams in single a belong in single a.

More classes is a possiblity but that would dilute what it means to win state.

[HShockeywatcher]

Although it would be another possibility, I would not suggest splitting the publics and privates in half. I would suggest having the top 64 in AA, which would includes the top proportion of private schools equal to the top proportion of public schools. It would likely end up something like 56/8, 57/7 or so.

Ultimately, this playing up idea comes because people have an idea that success is attributed to size. Which is not necessarily true. We've seen it in MN in the last 10 years in virtually every team sport. In sports like basketball and football, there are teams in lower classes that maintain dominance for years and never go to a higher class.

More classes is a possiblity but that would dilute what it means to win state.

One could argue this for virtually every sport. With the exception of the conundrum of what to do with the top teams in football, there is little reason for class in almost any sport.

[Mailman]

Almost every single post you make begins with an insult. They're unoriginal, dull, and not funny. We're not the ones slinging insults around. To be honest, I'm kind of surprised you're not banned yet.

I never said Hibbing or any other outstate school could become like a St. Thomas Academy. Not once.

As for making a case of rags to riches for Hibbing, I honestly don't care. I couldn't give a rats ass about the Hibbing high school hockey team or their hockey association. Whether or not they win 5, 10, or 20 games does not matter at all to me. The same goes for any school in the entire state except the one I graduated from.

The difference between people like you and people like me is you get hung up and mad about things you have no control over. STA has had success and is moving up, if not a little late. You're most likely a grown man (I'm 28 ) and you sit at your computer all night hammering keys on your keyboard on an internet high school hockey message board insulting people, complaining about private schools, its not fair, blah blah blah. Find a hobby and move on with your life, it's pathetic.

^^^
What he said.

<shrug> I think he has some valid points, going against a "circle the wagons" response it would seem, and his main question has yet to be answered.

[PuckU126]

Almost every single post you make begins with an insult. They're unoriginal, dull, and not funny. We're not the ones slinging insults around. To be honest, I'm kind of surprised you're not banned yet.

I never said Hibbing or any other outstate school could become like a St. Thomas Academy. Not once.

As for making a case of rags to riches for Hibbing, I honestly don't care. I couldn't give a rats ass about the Hibbing high school hockey team or their hockey association. Whether or not they win 5, 10, or 20 games does not matter at all to me. The same goes for any school in the entire state except the one I graduated from.

The difference between people like you and people like me is you get hung up and mad about things you have no control over. STA has had success and is moving up, if not a little late. You're most likely a grown man (I'm 28 ) and you sit at your computer all night hammering keys on your keyboard on an internet high school hockey message board insulting people, complaining about private schools, its not fair, blah blah blah. Find a hobby and move on with your life, it's pathetic.

^^^
What he said.

<shrug> I think he has some valid points, going against a "circle the wagons" response it would seem, and his main question has yet to be answered.

Scroll back a page or two.