AA-A Hockey- who are the cheaters going to be this year?

Jackpinesavage2014 · Post by **Jackpinesavage2014** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:05 am

I heard White Bear Lake and Eagan are going AA-B this year. What other large Associations are cheating the system this year. If what I heard is not accurate please advise

barry_mcconnell · Post by **barry_mcconnell** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:38 am

AA-B is the most common AA configuration so I guess the answer would be almost all of them. They are very few associations that go AA-A.

Also, neither WB or Eagan was dominant at the B levels last year. Did your little all-star get bumped in districts?

spamtownusa · Post by **spamtownusa** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:38 am

I believe that is true with these two and most other AA associations. Curious to hear why you think that's cheating?

Jackpinesavage2014 · Post by **Jackpinesavage2014** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:20 am

If your association has AA designation and you field 5 teams and you skip A level you are cheating the system. If your second 15 from an association with 5 teams feels it needs to battle the third 15 from similar sized and smaller association I guess that's your prerogative. Also to put that same team against smaller association 2nd 15 and maybe their only other team seems like you are more worried about your all-star getting bumped instead of developing players and maintaining the integrity of the league/classification.

barry_mcconnell · Post by **barry_mcconnell** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:32 am

Let's get specific. Eagan is in District 8 (Apple Valley, Cottage Grove, Eastview, Farmington, Hasting, Inver Grove, Johnson, Lakeville, Rosemount, Sibley, SSP, Woodbury). White Bear is in District 2 (Forest Lake, Highland, Mahtomedi, Mounds View, NSP, Roseville, Stillwater, Tartan).

How many of those associations go AA-A? None.

If MN Hockey gives associations the choice and everyone chooses AA-B, how is that cheating the system?

You should be focusing your energy on the fact that the system is broken. Designations should be based on the total number of kids. But that is really a different thread isn't it?

mnhockey2019 · Post by **mnhockey2019** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:44 am

barry_mcconnell wrote:Let's get specific. Eagan is in District 8 (Apple Valley, Cottage Grove, Eastview, Farmington, Hasting, Inver Grove, Johnson, Lakeville, Rosemount, Sibley, SSP, Woodbury). White Bear is in District 2 (Forest Lake, Highland, Mahtomedi, Mounds View, NSP, Roseville, Stillwater, Tartan).

How many of those associations go AA-A? None.

If MN Hockey gives associations the choice and everyone chooses AA-B, how is that cheating the system?

You should be focusing your energy on the fact that the system is broken. Designations should be based on the total number of kids. But that is really a different thread isn't it?

Agreed. What large associations are not going to field a AA team, at either bantam or peewee, that can and should? IMO, these are the associations that are "cheating."

spamtownusa · Post by **spamtownusa** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:44 am

AA associations with five teams don't compare to those with ten or twelve. If your assoc only has two teams you probably have no business playing A-B. A-C, or more likely, B-C would be a better fit for you.

zrman · Post by **zrman** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:23 am

spamtownusa wrote:AA associations with five teams don't compare to those with ten or twelve. If your assoc only has two teams you probably have no business playing A-B. A-C, or more likely, B-C would be a better fit for you.

The goal should be to match the kids up against their ideal level of competition. All the labels do is pigeon-hole teams and bracket them for the sake of an end-of-year tournament process.

The whole system needs to become more dynamic with teams playing into their appropriate class as they reveal 'who they are". We need to maintain the basic structure to guarantee a schedule for everyone but an NCAA style of seeding as we approach tournament season would give anyone a chance of playing into an appropriate level. NCAA, NIT, Class B invitational.... Lots of opportunity for everyone and no one gets stuck above or below where they really belong. Associations should be encouraged to leave 1/2 to 1/3 of their teams game schedules "open" so coaches and team managers can match the kids up to the right competition. All the information is out there. Let's start using it.

57special · Post by **57special** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:33 am

Figure out what the talent level is in your association, then choose your teams accordingly. Year to year adjustments should be normal. Since WBL didn't win State in overwhelming fashion(or in any fashion), then one would have to assume that they were playing at the right level.

zrman · Post by **zrman** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 10:12 am

57special wrote:Figure out what the talent level is in your association, then choose your teams accordingly. Year to year adjustments should be normal. Since WBL didn't win State in overwhelming fashion(or in any fashion), then one would have to assume that they were playing at the right level.

Problem is ... sometimes you just don't know. The whole system makes concrete commitments that aren't necessarily in the best interest of the kids. Shouldn't we desire that as many kids as possible play at the highest level they are capable of??

Team levels are chosen based on "last year". Team levels are chosen and committed to before tryouts. Tournaments are selected before tryouts. We think we know so much and honestly... we don't know much of anything.

Let's recreate the entire system to let the kids "reveal" who they are... accommodate for it and reward them with an appropriate place to prove it at the end.

MNM JMH · Post by **MNM JMH** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 11:52 am

zrman wrote:
57special wrote:Figure out what the talent level is in your association, then choose your teams accordingly. Year to year adjustments should be normal. Since WBL didn't win State in overwhelming fashion(or in any fashion), then one would have to assume that they were playing at the right level.
Problem is ... sometimes you just don't know. The whole system makes concrete commitments that aren't necessarily in the best interest of the kids. Shouldn't we desire that as many kids as possible play at the highest level they are capable of??

Team levels are chosen based on "last year". Team levels are chosen and committed to before tryouts. Tournaments are selected before tryouts. We think we know so much and honestly... we don't know much of anything.

Let's recreate the entire system to let the kids "reveal" who they are... accommodate for it and reward them with an appropriate place to prove it at the end.

ZRMAN for president. You are the only one who has said it so right in si few words.

ERPWA Hockey · Post by **ERPWA Hockey** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:51 pm

Two embarrassments out of D10 this year, Andover and Rogers are not playing Bantam AA they are playing Bantam A.

C’mon Andover and Rogers seriously you are going to play down?

D10 should not allow this but they will. This has turned into something other than what it was intended to do.

Tigers33 · Post by **Tigers33** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:52 pm

Or we stop worrying about wins/losses and we stop worrying about every kid gets a medal...

AA/A is a joke in itself. It was developed to let the smaller associations achieve some success, correct? And I am from a small association, but I am a traditionalist. Go back to the old format...

A
B1
B2
C

edgeless2 · Post by **edgeless2** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:59 pm

It seems to me that common sense would dictate if any association has 5 teams at any level, they should field one team at each level. If this is not happening than it appears gaming the system comes into play. If there is not 5 teams than it really is up to the association to place the teams in the proper slot. This should take place after teams are picked, once again, common sense.

topdawgs24 · Post by **topdawgs24** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 2:55 pm

WBL is going AA and A at both levels

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:52 pm

Tigers33 wrote:Or we stop worrying about wins/losses and we stop worrying about every kid gets a medal...

AA/A is a joke in itself. It was developed to let the smaller associations achieve some success, correct? And I am from a small association, but I am a traditionalist. Go back to the old format...

A
B1
B2
C

100% Agree! Nothing has changed other than some programs being able to sandbag a little more.

Glad we are all able to agree on this now..

hockeydad0930 · Post by **hockeydad0930** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:41 am

Also take into consideration a district like D8 who currently has 8 AA and 4 A teams as of last season. We do not play a separate AA or A district league schedule, rather play all amongst each other. So by teams going AA/A in D8, essentially you'd have AA teams playing their own A teams possibly.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:47 am

hockeydad0930 wrote:Also take into consideration a district like D8 who currently has 8 AA and 4 A teams as of last season. We do not play a separate AA or A district league schedule, rather play all amongst each other. So by teams going AA/A in D8, essentially you'd have AA teams playing their own A teams possibly.

Don't B teams end up playing each other?

DrGaf · Post by **DrGaf** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:20 am

MrBoDangles wrote:
Tigers33 wrote:Or we stop worrying about wins/losses and we stop worrying about every kid gets a medal...

AA/A is a joke in itself. It was developed to let the smaller associations achieve some success, correct? And I am from a small association, but I am a traditionalist. Go back to the old format...

A
B1
B2
C

100% Agree! Nothing has changed other than some programs being able to sandbag a little more.

Glad we are all able to agree on this now..

Last year was a joke. Especially in D10. D10 has forced those Rogers/Andover program decisions (in my opinion).

However, I am very suprised in Andover's decision. And frankly, a little disappointed. I understand Rogers.

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:16 am

Stillwater should have AA/A at both levels.

thespellchecker · Post by **thespellchecker** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:40 am

hockeydad0930 wrote:Also take into consideration a district like D8 who currently has 8 AA and 4 A teams as of last season. We do not play a separate AA or A district league schedule, rather play all amongst each other. So by teams going AA/A in D8, essentially you'd have AA teams playing their own A teams possibly.

Will D8 have any associations with both AA & A at the same age level?

black sheep · Post by **black sheep** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:00 pm

the only times it seems to get real messy is when 16-30 A teams play 1-15 AA teams.

1-15 AA or A
16-30 B1 or opt up to A2 (no AA in season competition but play in A tournaments)
30-45 B2
45-60 C

it just takes some common sense to get the games correct, i'd think with a year under its belt it should be more refined this year.

Marty2013 · Post by **Marty2013** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:33 pm

I thought the original system was put in place to treat it like the high school system ? if your a AA high school skate AA if single A then skate A. ?

in some cases, a program like Mahtomedi. their high school is Class A. but in district 2 the youth teams play Stillwater, White Bear, Forest Lake, Mounds View, Roseville, and I am sure I'm missing someone - These teams are all AA at High school. at the high school level Mahtomedi doesn't play these teams. to me it wouldn't make sense for any of the teams i mentioned to play only A, becuase at the High school level they have to play them all anyway ?

There probably was a better, eaiser way to say that

ogelthorpe · Post by **ogelthorpe** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:31 pm

Marty2013 wrote:I thought the original system was put in place to treat it like the high school system ? if your a AA high school skate AA if single A then skate A. ?

in some cases, a program like Mahtomedi. their high school is Class A. but in district 2 the youth teams play Stillwater, White Bear, Forest Lake, Mounds View, Roseville, and I am sure I'm missing someone - These teams are all AA at High school. at the high school level Mahtomedi doesn't play these teams. to me it wouldn't make sense for any of the teams i mentioned to play only A, becuase at the High school level they have to play them all anyway ?

There probably was a better, eaiser way to say that

Marty you are right that was the original intent and I think those who have stated this over and over have given up. The fact that WBL and Stillwater got roasted for doing AA - B1 and not having an A teams last year and giving in to public pressure this year by going the AA-A route shows that the battle is over. We have a five level system in MN hockey. Small associations be damned!! The title of this post shows the misunderstanding of the tournament only intent.

ThePuckStopsHere · Post by **ThePuckStopsHere** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:18 pm

ERPWA Hockey wrote:Two embarrassments out of D10 this year, Andover and Rogers are not playing Bantam AA they are playing Bantam A.

C’mon Andover and Rogers seriously you are going to play down?

D10 should not allow this but they will. This has turned into something other than what it was intended to do.

Just had lunch with an Andover parent, totally pissed Andover is mailing it in the year and going A.

I guess they can finally display a D10 championship trophey now