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

Marty2013 · Post by **Marty2013** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:44 pm

to me, hearing that Andover is only skating at an "A" level says that - they (as in Associations ??) do not think they have the ability to compete with the bigger programs. which can make sense for some, but unless Andover High School team plans on dropping to High School Class A level, how can this do them any good. after Bantams they no longer get to play Blaine's 15 - 30. they no longer get to play Centennials 15 - 30. to me it will be a huge wake up call now stepping up to play everyones best 15 players. Plus don't you risk losing more of your own players with the better AA ability players now looking to find another program?

i'm not saying i have the answer, i'm just presenting the senerio.

Bleed Maroon and Gold · Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:55 pm

I do not understand how larger associations or any association that can field 4 or more teams at a level not going AA then A and so on or going AA then B1. How is this going to continue to work out if anyone that asks to move from AA to A is granted permission. This was not the intention of the AA/A split. I would like to see some sort of regulations on this and what the thoughts are on who gets to move from AA to A. I can't believe that D10 would allow Andover to go A and not AA. I am not surprised that D10 is allowing this however since they seem to approve waivers without giving them much thought either.

SimplyPut · Post by **SimplyPut** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:02 pm

D10 and D2, the past couple of years, have been fairly lose on waivers.

pioneer · Post by **pioneer** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:56 pm

FWIW, here are the numbers from last year at Bantams:

Code: Select all

# of Teams(# of Associations)	  AA	    A	  AA&A
-----------------------------	 -----	-----	-----
	1(28)			                  0	    9	    0
	2(43)			                  8	   29	    0
	3(22)			                 14	   10	    2
	4(15)                          10	    7	    2
	5(6)		                	   6	    5	    5
	6(4)		                 	  4	    3	    3
	7(1)		                 	  1	    0	    0
	8(2)	                 		  2	    2	    2

e.g., there were 15 associations that fielded 4 bantam teams last year. Eight of them chose to field an AA then B, five of them an A as their top team, and two fielded both an AA and an A.

spamtownusa · Post by **spamtownusa** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:39 pm

pioneer... great info. Do you know who the three 5+ team associations were that didn't field both a AA and A? It does seem that five is the natural break point.

pioneer · Post by **pioneer** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:55 pm

White Bear (7 teams), Eagan (6 teams) and Stillwater (5 teams) were the only 5+ team associations to not field both.[/quote]

barry_mcconnell · Post by **barry_mcconnell** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:12 pm

pioneer wrote:FWIW, here are the numbers from last year at Bantams:
Code: Select all
# of Teams(# of Associations)	  AA	    A	  AA&A
-----------------------------	 -----	-----	-----
	1(28)			                  0	    9	    0
	2(43)			                  8	   29	    0
	3(22)			                 14	   10	    2
	4(15)                          10	    7	    2
	5(6)		                	   6	    5	    5
	6(4)		                 	  4	    3	    3
	7(1)		                 	  1	    0	    0
	8(2)	                 		  2	    2	    2
e.g., there were 15 associations that fielded 4 bantam teams last year. Eight of them chose to field an AA then B, five of them an A as their top team, and two fielded both an AA and an A.

Where did you get the raw data?

pioneer · Post by **pioneer** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:59 pm

From association websites last year

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:47 am

White Bear and Stillwater both to have AA & A.

InThePipes · Post by **InThePipes** » Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:03 pm

pioneer wrote:White Bear (7 teams), Eagan (6 teams) and Stillwater (5 teams) were the only 5+ team associations to not field both.

[/quote]

So WBL and Stillwater and going AA/A this year, any associations moving in the opposite direction (went AA/A last year and are planning to go AA/B1 this year)?

Bleed Maroon and Gold · Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:54 pm

[quote="InThePipes"][quote="pioneer"]White Bear (7 teams), Eagan (6 teams) and Stillwater (5 teams) were the only 5+ team associations to not field both.[/quote][/quote]

So WBL and Stillwater and going AA/A this year, any associations moving in the opposite direction (went AA/A last year and are planning to go AA/B1 this year)?[/quote]

Andover at the Bantam level this year are going A and B1 I believe if D10 allows it.

ThePuckStopsHere · Post by **ThePuckStopsHere** » Wed Oct 09, 2013 2:56 pm

Kudos to Champlin Park for going with a Bantam AA team with only 3 Bantam Teams to pick from, unlike their cowardly neighbors from the North Bendover opps I mean Andover

stromboli · Post by **stromboli** » Wed Oct 09, 2013 10:25 pm

ThePuckStopsHere wrote:Kudos to Champlin Park for going with a Bantam AA team with only 3 Bantam Teams to pick from, unlike their cowardly neighbors from the North Bendover opps I mean Andover

Andover is down to 41 skaters. That's three teams as well. Short rostered at that.

Played Champlin two nights ago and lost 5-1.

This same group of kids from Andover won zero games against D10 teams who are going AA two years ago as peewees, and were swept by Coon Rapids. Against those that are going A, they were an even .500.

It has nothing to do with courage. Or maybe it takes some to put kids at the best level for the majority of the team?

Just trying to keep as many of them playing as possible.

If you'd like to talk directly, just pm me and you can dazzle me with your knowledge of the situation.

Trout · Post by **Trout** » Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:25 am

Looks like Wayzata is going AA and 2B1 and 3B2 teams at Pee Wee's. Major switch from a few years ago when they went two A teams before anyone else did.

Must be a down year in Wayzata among their 8 pee wee teams...

Scout716 · Post by **Scout716** » Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:12 am

Now that we know the facts sounds like Andover made the correct choice.

seek & destroy · Post by **seek & destroy** » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:09 am

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

Couldn't agree more! The old format ALLOWED associations that thought they were strong enough to field multiple teams at any level they chose. So Edina, Wayzata, Eden Prairie and other large associations could choose to field multiple B1/B2 teams OR, if they wanted, field multiple A teams as well as multiple B1 teams.

Under the new system, some teams are forced to play at AA level that have no business playing at that level and then can skip A and field a B1 or even skip B1 and have a B2 team. The old system made it difficult for teams to try and 'avoid' a level of play and MOST associations had too much pride to not play at the highest level they could. The new system encourages associations (and parents) to look at team placement now more than ever which ends up influencing a teams level of play usually for the wrong reasons (we want more wins etc.). Many associations decide to make adjustments downward (even at the B level) when they would never have considered it in the past.

The only benefit I see to the new system is for the associations that were getting pressured to have 2 - A teams that had issues with parents who didn't like the idea of how they would split the teams (equal A or top 15 on one team and next 15 on the other). The new system now tells them how they will split the teams.

Random Sample · Post by **Random Sample** » Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:45 am

The AA/A split is a real problem.
Some had mentioned that the level an association plays at should be determined by numbers of players. At the association youth level that would make sense.
Here is an idea:
If any given association cannot field both an AA as well as an A team at a certain level then they must play at the A level.

Under this scenario, Andover would be an A level team because of numbers this year. Next year that may change based on numbers next year.
Champlin only had around 40? tryout at the Bantam level this year. For them to play AA seems couragous, but it could be a long season. They have some good kids though, so you never know.

Then it would not be a judgement call based on talent or potential wins but rather raw numbers. If you want to play AA, then recruit and retain younger players by having a quality program.
Only having an AA with the next team at B1 hurts the future of the program by having the B1's play AA the following year which is a huge jump. The Minnesota Hockey 2 year model is being tested by the AA/A split.
By having a AA team, and then a B1 is actually a three year model forced into two years.
There will always be good teams in a given year and some not so good teams.

MN Hockey are you there?
New simple rule: if an association can only field 3 teams at any level, then it must play at A, B1, B2. 4 teams and up; play AA, A, B1, B2.

In other words unless you have enough players to get that 4th team you are playing A hockey this year.

My $0.02.

SWPrez · Post by **SWPrez** » Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:27 pm

Random Sample wrote:The AA/A split is a real problem.
Some had mentioned that the level an association plays at should be determined by numbers of players. At the association youth level that would make sense.
Here is an idea:
If any given association cannot field both an AA as well as an A team at a certain level then they must play at the A level.

Under this scenario, Andover would be an A level team because of numbers this year. Next year that may change based on numbers next year.
Champlin only had around 40? tryout at the Bantam level this year. For them to play AA seems couragous, but it could be a long season. They have some good kids though, so you never know.

Then it would not be a judgement call based on talent or potential wins but rather raw numbers. If you want to play AA, then recruit and retain younger players by having a quality program.
Only having an AA with the next team at B1 hurts the future of the program by having the B1's play AA the following year which is a huge jump. The Minnesota Hockey 2 year model is being tested by the AA/A split.
By having a AA team, and then a B1 is actually a three year model forced into two years.
There will always be good teams in a given year and some not so good teams.

MN Hockey are you there?
New simple rule: if an association can only field 3 teams at any level, then it must play at A, B1, B2. 4 teams and up; play AA, A, B1, B2.

In other words unless you have enough players to get that 4th team you are playing A hockey this year.

My $0.02.

I am not sure you grasp the AA rule from MN Hockey. It was put through with the intention that each association would have only one A team that would declare AA or A. The significance of declaring AA or A was for playoff purposes only - outside of that AA and A would play each other during the season District play, as they have done for the last 50 years.. A few Districts apparently didn't get the memo and decided they should have AA and A leagues in district play -- not the intention of the rule. Essentially, by doing that, all they did was give B1 hockey a different name...."A"

Now people are arguing that teams should be playing AA AND A if they are a certain size -- again, not the intention of the rule. If a team has a AA team, they do not need to have an A team and they can opt to play B1 with their 16 through 30 skaters as was intended by MN Hockey from the beginning. Under the rule, however, if an association felt they were loaded with talent, they could also opt to skate two A teams - one declaring AA and one declaring A.

Flin Flon · Post by **Flin Flon** » Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:06 pm

So who is right and wrong here? according to Fredrick Andover and Wayzata Pee Wee AA teams skated to a 3-3 tie? Is Andover AA or A?

helightsthelamp · Post by **helightsthelamp** » Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:24 pm

Flin Flon wrote:So who is right and wrong here? according to Fredrick Andover and Wayzata Pee Wee AA teams skated to a 3-3 tie? Is Andover AA or A?

Andover PW are AA. Andover Bantam are A.

stromboli · Post by **stromboli** » Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:29 pm

Flin Flon wrote:So who is right and wrong here? according to Fredrick Andover and Wayzata Pee Wee AA teams skated to a 3-3 tie? Is Andover AA or A?

Andover is AA at PeeWees and A at Bantams.

I don't see Andover having another A team as it's highest traveling level team at either Bantams or PeeWees again anytime in the near future. There's a wave of both numbers and really good talent coming up in the organization.

stromboli · Post by **stromboli** » Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:30 pm

helightsthelamp wrote:
Flin Flon wrote:So who is right and wrong here? according to Fredrick Andover and Wayzata Pee Wee AA teams skated to a 3-3 tie? Is Andover AA or A?
Andover PW are AA. Andover Bantam are A.

Beat me to it...

helightsthelamp · Post by **helightsthelamp** » Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:51 pm

stromboli wrote:
Flin Flon wrote:So who is right and wrong here? according to Fredrick Andover and Wayzata Pee Wee AA teams skated to a 3-3 tie? Is Andover AA or A?
Andover is AA at PeeWees and A at Bantams.

I don't see Andover having another A team as it's highest traveling level team at either Bantams or PeeWees again anytime in the near future. There's a wave of both numbers and really good talent coming up in the organization.

I agree, unless there are as many move outs as recent move ins!

Ok, strong base outside of move in's. I don't know numbers, but would expect the program is growing at the younger ages (not including move in's)! If I am a second year PW looking ahead of me the future looks pretty bright for playing on varsity at a young age...

betterupnorth · Post by **betterupnorth** » Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:20 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.

And andover's top team was completely dominated by hermantown's second best. Teams like that would get destroyed at the AA level. Not saying it's right just that I can see why they did it

betterupnorth · Post by **betterupnorth** » Sat Nov 02, 2013 2:54 pm

Frankly I'm surprised Denfeld, Moose Lake and Proctor had the stones to even field an A team this year, instead of just a B team.