Smallest Assoc. in the STATE

Johnsonpres · Post by **Johnsonpres** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:30 pm

Does any organization have less players than us.

16 total Bantams ( "B" team)
29 Pee Wee's ("B" team and "C" team
35 Squirts (1 "B" team 12 total players, 2 "C" teams with 11 & 12).

80 Total Boys.

We have girls but they all choose to play girls hockey.

Don't feel sorry for us but don't bash us for not playing "A".

iseepalms · Post by **iseepalms** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:49 pm

Ouit crying and take it like "A" man. Ha Ha Ha

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:49 pm

Johnsonpres wrote:Does any organization have less players than us.

16 total Bantams ( "B" team)
29 Pee Wee's ("B" team and "C" team
35 Squirts (1 "B" team 12 total players, 2 "C" teams with 11 & 12).

70 Total Boys.

We have girls but they all choose to play girls hockey.

Don't feel sorry for us but don't bash us for not playing "A".

Bagley
no bantams
they have to play JV about 10 boys.
peewees about 14 - they play B
squirts good number for them about 16 - play B
mites are doing very well in terms of numbers.

Hallock and Red Lake Falls
very similar

Blackduck
mites only
will send 1 or 2 of their kids to Bemidji for squirts

District 16 biggest associations
Bemidji
Bantam AA with 16
Bantam b1 with 13
Bantam b2 with 10 including 1 from peewees
ONLY D16 assn. with 3 bantam teams

Bemidji, East Grand Forks, Roseau, Thief River Falls
2 pee wee teams

Crookston and Warroad will usually have 2 pw teams but some years only an A team.

Lake of the Woods will have an A and B team some years...
some years just a B team.

Johnsonpres · Post by **Johnsonpres** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:52 pm

Thanks Elliott,
We are not alone, but we live in the middle of the Twin Cities.

massalsa · Post by **massalsa** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:43 pm

Johnsonpres wrote:Does any organization have less players than us.

16 total Bantams ( "B" team)
29 Pee Wee's ("B" team and "C" team
35 Squirts (1 "B" team 12 total players, 2 "C" teams with 11 & 12).

70 Total Boys.

We have girls but they all choose to play girls hockey.

Don't feel sorry for us but don't bash us for not playing "A".

Hopkins has a small association. Especially when comparing us to our Lake Conference rivals in both boys and girls hockey.

2 Bantams (A & B1)
3 Peewee (38 players on 3 teams, A, B2, & C…includes 4 girls on PWA)
3 Squirt (40 players on 3 teams, A, B2, & C)

+

1 U12B team (that is rainbow with SLP)
1 U10B team (that is rainbow with SLP)

Thats it other than mites!

I am guessing that Edina, Tonka, Wayzata, and EP all have more Peewee & U12 teams than are in our entire association.

I don't think that it is a bad thing for Hopkins…it would be great to have a few more players on the boys side and another team at u12 & U10 on the girls side. It is what it is! There is an opportunity for all to play at the HS level with some hard work and dedication. Considering how the girls team did this season with 3 girls on Team USA U18 and being ranked #1 for a large portion of the season that has not been a bad thing yet. Our boys team beat Tonka 2x and tied EP the last time we played them in conference play. All that from a small association in the metro.

Broke · Post by **Broke** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 6:56 pm

I won't fault you for leaning toward B, but perhaps you can see the talent and adjust as they move through the system. Your PWB1 team last year was awesome vs competition and now your bantam b is also great. You could probably play A and do fine. But obviously your call.

The bigger question to me is why you don't merge with another association or associations I know Johnson Como came together, but why do you want to keep running things with such small numbers? Isn't it ultimately better to bring the St Paul area together with numbers and field more and better teams?

Better Dead Than Red · Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:34 am

Don't start crowing about how you can't wait to have your #1 ranked squirt B team play for a state championship next year and it's probably far less likely you'll be bashed for not having an A team.

There are associations in your own district that aren't much bigger. Some of them somehow formed A teams. It looks like Apple Valley has five or six more kids at peewee and about 10 more squirts and went A-B-C. South St. Paul looks to be the same size as your association at squirts and peewee, but you probably won't read anyone bashing them for not having A teams because nobody is bragging about them when it appears they are playing in a level below their capability.

zooomx · Post by **zooomx** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:09 am

In Alexandria we had 34 Bantams, 34 Pee Wees and around 40 or so Squirts. We ran A and B at Pee Wee and Bantams and A, B1, B2 at Squirts. Pee Wee A and Bantam A made state tourney, Pee Wee B just missed going to state. If we have 2 teams we always go A with one, as do all other associations in district 15. Lots of associations up here with less than 70 travelling boy skaters.

Especially now with the AA teams pulled out of A, I don't understand going B with your best of 2 or 3 teams. Challenge the boys at Squirts and they can, and often will, compete by the time they get to Pee Wees and Bantams.
If you always go B with your best teams you limit the ceiling the talent can rise to. Sure we take some lumps against metro teams at Squirt A, but many of District 15 A teams do very well and compete just fine at Pee Wee and Bantam A levels. Just my humble opinion. Set the goal high and with 2 or 3 teams at a level, 12-15 boys will rise to the competition and surprise you.

PuckRanger · Post by **PuckRanger** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:07 am

Johnsonpres wrote:Does any organization have less players than us.

16 total Bantams ( "B" team)
29 Pee Wee's ("B" team and "C" team
35 Squirts (1 "B" team 12 total players, 2 "C" teams with 11 & 12).

70 Total Boys.

We have girls but they all choose to play girls hockey.

Don't feel sorry for us but don't bash us for not playing "A".

You are not the smallest association in the state. All D12 associations except Grand Rapids have very similar or lower numbers. Right now, Virginia is one of the associations that is up in numbers and they only have 89 players in that same age range. Some have less than 50 and still field "A" teams.

I definitely disagree with the way you load up a Squirt team to play in "B". Up here, we play "B" mostly, too, but our teams are all of fairly equal strength and we have no "C" teams... nobody loads up one team at that level. The one that does is Grand Rapids, and they play "A" and equally distribute the rest on 3 "B" teams. In Peewees, with the exception of Ely, everyone does that. One "A" or "AA" team and balanced "B" teams.

You will get little sympathy for not fielding "A" teams from up here.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 7:49 am

The big question is what breeds success?

- being a lower end team at A?
- being a top end team at B?

The Luverne HS team played a B-1 type of schedule and I don't think it hurt them much... Developed a scoring touch if anything.

Johnson is a struggling program that is really trying to build on hype and fun to bring in more kids... So a positive record is almost a must.

Are the kids having fun being a top end B team? I would bet they are...

Hats off to you Johnsonprez! Many folks out here pulling for your proud association. Don't mind the few B dads on here that fear the competition.

barry_mcconnell · Post by **barry_mcconnell** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:04 am

I used to root for the JC boys but its really hard when they are winning every game by 8-9 goals. And then complaining that people aren't inviting them to more tournaments.

You can choose whatever you think is best for your association. And others can choose not to play your teams. I still like them new uniforms.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:31 am

Simply put, young players play to the level of their competition. A team can go out and play an outstanding game and compete well against a team that is more talented than them when they are pushed. Conversely, that same team can then go out and play a complete dog of a game against a squad they should easily handle. It happens all the time.

Challenge your kids to play at a high level against good competition and they will get better. Play down in order to win and you will limit their development. I have witnessed the ebb and flow of this argument in our own association. In the eras where the kids were allowed to play down, by high school age the teams were terrible, in the eras where the kids were challenged throughout their development, by high school the teams were pretty good.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:38 am

MrBoDangles wrote:The big question is what breeds success?

- being a lower end team at A?
- being a top end team at B?

The Luverne HS team played a B-1 type of schedule and I don't think it hurt them much... Developed a scoring touch if anything.

Johnson is a struggling program that is really trying to build on hype and fun to bring in more kids... So a positive record is almost a must.

Are the kids having fun being a top end B team? I would bet they are...

Hats off to you Johnsonprez! Many folks out here pulling for your proud association. Don't mind the few B dads on here that fear the competition.

A few years back I was at a clinic with the Luverne HS coach. He said the first thing he pushed for when he got there was to get the youth association to start playing A level and challenge the kids as they advanced through the association. I'd say his recommendation worked as they are now experiencing success from HS on down to Pee Wees (not familiar with how the Squirts season went).

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:41 am

Johnsonpres wrote:Does any organization have less players than us.

16 total Bantams ( "B" team)
29 Pee Wee's ("B" team and "C" team
35 Squirts (1 "B" team 12 total players, 2 "C" teams with 11 & 12).

70 Total Boys.

We have girls but they all choose to play girls hockey.

Don't feel sorry for us but don't bash us for not playing "A".

First of all, your math is wrong. You have 80 kids if the numbers above are correct. Proctor has less than you and fields "A" teams at all levels. Can't imagine doing it any other way if you want to have any chance of competing at High School.

18 total Bantams ("A" team)
26 Pee Wee's ("A" team and "B" team)
28 Squirts ("A" team and "B" team)

72 Total Boys.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:46 am

SCBlueLiner wrote:Simply put, young players play to the level of their competition. A team can go out and play an outstanding game and compete well against a team that is more talented than them when they are pushed. Conversely, that same team can then go out and play a complete dog of a game against a squad they should easily handle. It happens all the time.

Challenge your kids to play at a high level against good competition and they will get better. Play down in order to win and you will limit their development. I have witnessed the ebb and flow of this argument in our own association. In the eras where the kids were allowed to play down, by high school age the teams were terrible, in the eras where the kids were challenged throughout their development, by high school the teams were pretty good.

Just think of the hundreds of kids in Edina that aren't improving then..

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:56 am

Or the 3 Osseo Maple Grove B squirt teams that are ranked in the top 7

Johnsonpres · Post by **Johnsonpres** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:05 am

I understand all to well about challanging your players. I use to coach the Johnson Como "A" Pee Wee's when all the teams in district 8 use to clober us 8, 9, 10 to 1 or 2. It was real hard to get your heads beat in every game and try to develop talent. I came back to coach last year at the "B" Squirt level and yes this year we have 1 real good line that could play "A" but than what we have after that is mediocure defeseman and the only 1 goalie at tryouts that in any other program would have trouble at the "C" level. So that is why we went "B" and if we knew than what we know now we would have went "A". In district 8 we have a squirt jamboree for the "A" teams but we don't have one for "B" and if we did we could have seen that our team was a little better than we thought. The other problem is you have to declare in September before you pick your teams plus you better book your tournaments otherwise you don't get in.
We scrimmaged the Osseo/Maple Grove Gold team and we played them even but they have three teams and they are all very good not to mention their "A" team is undefeated. As far as not getting invited to tournaments the only tournament that we didn't get invited to is the "Tournament Of Champions" and that was because it is a pilot program started by Minnesota Hockey and only certain districts can participate. Every tournament we attended the areas hosting were all very receptive to us.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:21 am

MrBoDangles wrote:Or the 3 Osseo Maple Grove B squirt teams that are ranked in the top 7

I'm going to bet that if you broke those 3 OMG B teams down and made 1 A team and 2 B teams out of them that the A team would be successful at the A level and the B teams would still be successful. The A kids would then be pushed to compete at a higher level while the B teams would be playing right where they are at.

Again, you are focusing on wins and losses and rankings as a measure of success vs player development.

As for Edina, I've already come out on this site before and said they could easily field a few more A teams and still be very successful with each one of them.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:25 am

Johnsonpres wrote:I understand all to well about challanging your players. I use to coach the Johnson Como "A" Pee Wee's when all the teams in district 8 use to clober us 8, 9, 10 to 1 or 2. It was real hard to get your heads beat in every game and try to develop talent. I came back to coach last year at the "B" Squirt level and yes this year we have 1 real good line that could play "A" but than what we have after that is mediocure defeseman and the only 1 goalie at tryouts that in any other program would have trouble at the "C" level. So that is why we went "B" and if we knew than what we know now we would have went "A". In district 8 we have a squirt jamboree for the "A" teams but we don't have one for "B" and if we did we could have seen that our team was a little better than we thought. The other problem is you have to declare in September before you pick your teams plus you better book your tournaments otherwise you don't get in.
We scrimmaged the Osseo/Maple Grove Gold team and we played them even but they have three teams and they are all very good not to mention their "A" team is undefeated. As far as not getting invited to tournaments the only tournament that we didn't get invited to is the "Tournament Of Champions" and that was because it is a pilot program started by Minnesota Hockey and only certain districts can participate. Every tournament we attended the areas hosting were all very receptive to us.

So when your Squirts roll into Pee Wees, since you now have a good idea how that age group stacks up against their peers, you won't hesitate to field an A team. Correct?

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:34 am

SCBlueLiner wrote:
MrBoDangles wrote:Or the 3 Osseo Maple Grove B squirt teams that are ranked in the top 7

I'm going to bet that if you broke those 3 OMG B teams down and made 1 A team and 2 B teams out of them that the A team would be successful at the A level and the B teams would still be successful. The A kids would then be pushed to compete at a higher level while the B teams would be playing right where they are at.

Again, you are focusing on wins and losses and rankings as a measure of success vs player development.

As for Edina, I've already come out on this site before and said they could easily field a few more A teams and still be very successful with each one of them.

I agree 100%

So why should we ruffle our feathers about a (struggling) Johnson having success when we have multiple Edina/wayzata types pounding other B teams every year??

Johnsonpres · Post by **Johnsonpres** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 11:18 am

SCBlueliner,
I am the ex-president and the Head coach of the "B" squirt team and from what I am seeing I would hope they would have an "A" Pee Wee team next year. It is up to the President and board in the program. Last years "B" Squirts were 22 wins 8 losses and 6 ties and now this exceptional year of 37 wins no losses and 1 ties in my eyes warrants an "A" Pee Wee team next year not "AA", but I am retiring and moving to Mexico so I don't know what they will do.

SCBlueLiner · Post by **SCBlueLiner** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 11:44 am

Johnsonpres wrote:SCBlueliner,
I am the ex-president and the Head coach of the "B" squirt team and from what I am seeing I would hope they would have an "A" Pee Wee team next year. It is up to the President and board in the program. Last years "B" Squirts were 22 wins 8 losses and 6 ties and now this exceptional year of 37 wins no losses and 1 ties in my eyes warrants an "A" Pee Wee team next year not "AA", but I am retiring and moving to Mexico so I don't know what they will do.

Warmer weather!! You can still keep up with all of us here via the interwebs.

My only interest is that players are challenged to the best of their abilities. I'm not throwing stones at JC. I understand, coming from a small association, the struggles you face there.

blainestate2020 · Post by **blainestate2020** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:30 pm

zooomx wrote:In Alexandria we had 34 Bantams, 34 Pee Wees and around 40 or so Squirts. We ran A and B at Pee Wee and Bantams and A, B1, B2 at Squirts. Pee Wee A and Bantam A made state tourney, Pee Wee B just missed going to state.

Zooomx - your info on the pee wee B team is way off. They were 2 and barbeque at regions... District 15 is weak at that level. We out shot the # 1 seed by 35!!!! And crushed your squad worse. So "just missed state" is the preposterous statement of the day.

bestpopcorn · Post by **bestpopcorn** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:45 pm

Someone is going to win the B state tournament.

Should that team have played A?

What about the 2nd place team?

I get so confused.

zooomx · Post by **zooomx** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:00 pm

blainestate2020 wrote:
zooomx wrote:In Alexandria we had 34 Bantams, 34 Pee Wees and around 40 or so Squirts. We ran A and B at Pee Wee and Bantams and A, B1, B2 at Squirts. Pee Wee A and Bantam A made state tourney, Pee Wee B just missed going to state.
Zooomx - your info on the pee wee B team is way off. They were 2 and barbeque at regions... District 15 is weak at that level. We out shot the # 1 seed by 35!!!! And crushed your squad worse. So "just missed state" is the preposterous statement of the day.

1) You are correct, I guess I should have done my homework, based that off a conversation I overheard the other day.

2) You must have a very strong B team that you picked to win state in another thread.

Maybe Blaine should have another A team.

Regardless my point was: with only 2 teams at each level we still sent our A teams to state and they have competed well against strong A and AA teams all season.

Part of the reason District 15 B teams are "weak" is that our 2 larger associations (Moorhead and Brainerd) run AA, A and B teams... and our mid-sized associations run an A and B team....something most metro associations refuse to do. If any of our associations tried to run just 2 B teams at a level, we would be laughed out of the district meetings.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Smallest Assoc. in the STATE

Smallest Assoc. in the STATE

Re: Smallest Assoc. in the STATE

Re: Smallest Assoc. in the STATE

Re: Smallest Assoc. in the STATE

Re: Smallest Assoc. in the STATE